Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Collaborateur! Time to use that word on Republicans?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
grasswire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 11:09 AM
Original message
Collaborateur! Time to use that word on Republicans?
It fits certain members of the press, too.

We have a criminal cabal in power. Supporting that cabal is collaboration.

It's time to ask people whether they are simply duped, or whether they are collaborateurs.

What say you, DU-ers? Do we let people doze on? Or do we ask them to make a choice? I plan to ask an acquaintance that this evening. We've been having heated discussions. He's waffling one way, then the other. I intend to ask him if he considers himself a collaborateur.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
LittleApple81 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 11:10 AM
Response to Original message
1. Do we know how to pronounce this? Do they understand it? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grasswire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 12:33 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. it's a code word -- a loaded word
...especially for people who lived through or have any knowledge of WW2 or the history of totalitarian governments.

It carries a horrible stigma.

You can just say collaborator if that's easier.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sui generis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 11:14 AM
Response to Original message
2. there are simpler things to say
for simpler minds. Our patriotism is questioned at every turn, so I agree. Moore makes the point that the current administration is immoral and corrupt. It's easy enough to ask the question: why do you support immorality and corruption? Why did you support sending our children and brothers and sisters to their deaths? Why are you still supporting immorality and corruption?

Oh they hate that. . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluedog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 11:26 AM
Response to Original message
3. Use these words in things you write
Contrasting Words
Often we search hard for words to help us define our opponents. Sometimes we are hesitant to use contrast. Remember that creating a difference helps you. These are powerful words that can create a clear and easily understood contrast. Apply these to the opponent, their record, proposals and their party.
decay... failure (fail)... collapse(ing)... deeper... crisis... urgent(cy)... destructive... destroy... sick... pathetic... lie... liberal... they/them... unionized bureaucracy... "compassion" is not enough... betray... consequences... limit(s)... shallow... traitors... sensationalists...

endanger... coercion... hypocrisy... radical... threaten... devour... waste... corruption... incompetent... permissive attitudes... destructive... impose... self-serving... greed... ideological... insecure... anti-(issue): flag, family, child, jobs... pessimistic... excuses... intolerant...

stagnation... welfare... corrupt... selfish... insensitive... status quo... mandate(s)... taxes... spend(ing)... shame... disgrace... punish (poor...)... bizarre... cynicism... cheat

from .........Rep. Newt Gingrich...........his buzz words to republicans to describe Democrats..

turn these words on them.....Clinton had some of these in his book!!

http://www.fair.org/extra/9502/language-control.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Old and In the Way Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 11:37 AM
Response to Original message
4. The word "compromised" pertains to this administration.
Given the know "relationship" of the Bush-Saud connection, one has to wonder what personal incriminating evidence the House of Saud has on the Bush family. Remember how GWB promised to drain the financial swamp of terrorists after 9/11? How much draining (or perhaps more to point, how much damming) of swamps has this administration accomplished? I know of no international "win" on terrorist assets or closing money conduits. What about Riggs Bank? Oh yeah, another Bush family member.

What if there is a "quid-pro-quo" with the House of Saud, based on held criminal evidence? That maybe Bush is directed by more than the 7% ownership investment in USA,Inc. that is held by the Sauds. I mean, why would Baker, Botts defend SA against a billion dollar class action suit brought by WTC family survivors?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 05:26 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC