It seems to me that the Democrats and the other statists in Washington have taken control of the language. This gives them a huge advantage in debates about policy and programs.
For example they talk about “health care” or “affordable health care” when they talk about the government taking over the fields of medicine and medical insurance in the country. Who isn’t for “health care?” What politician can possibly be against “affordable health care?” To be against these things automatically puts the persons arguing against a government run system at a huge disadvantage.
If the debate could be changed to whether or not the government should take over the medical and health insurance industries in America, it would put both sides on a more equal footing. Unfortunately this wordy description does not fit well into a newspaper headline or on a TV sound bite.
The right needs a language commission to formulate catchy, short, sound bites to go against those used by the big government types in Washington.
There are dozens, if not hundreds, of examples of the language being usurped by the statist side of things. I have thought of a few just reading the news today.
Cap and trade = a giant new tax on all energy everyone uses. Cap and trade sounds like an innocent clothing exchange program.
Affordable health care (reform) = government provided health care, ala the Post Office, IRS, Amtrak, or the DMV.
Hitler was a left wing socialist, not a conservative.
Affirmative action = government mandated racial discrimination.
Investment = spending your money, mostly to buy votes.
Revenue Enhancement = tax hikes.
Budget Cut = Smaller rate of increase than planned.
Stimulus spending = taking money from one person and giving it to another (after siphoning off 40% or more in administrative costs).
Entitlements = same as stimulus spending.
Special Interests = Someone who gives more bribes campaign contributions to the other side than to my side.