WHAT’S IN A NAME: Liberals’ Abuse of Language Says Alot

What do Warren Wilhelm Jr, Billy Blythe III, Patricia D’Alesandro, and Ann Herring all have in common with Nicole Gochmanosky? Nicole who???

Nicole Gochmanosky is a San Diego community organizer. She got her start in 2010 while unemployed, living with her mom, and unable to to decide whether finding a job or roller-derby practice should be her top priority in life. That’s right, according to local media her inability to choose was so debilitating she sometimes never even left her mom’s house. One day though, she took her lap top to a local Occupy rally and started blogging, sometimes swapping from one lap to another as the batteries ran low.

Like any good rabble rouser she even got arrested once during an Occupy protest. According to the San Diego Union Tribune, the police found her drunk with a male occupier at the local Occupy encampment and busted both of them for public intoxication among other things. A star was born! Kali Katt is what Nicole Gochmanosky goes by nowadays as her stature continues to rise among California progressives.

Warren Wilhelm Jr is more commonly known as Mayor Bill de Blasio. Wilhelm just doesn’t have the ring to it that de Blasio has. De Blasio sounds softer, smoother, and more sophisticated. Really, which name brings to mind the fuhrer – Wilhelm or de Blasio? New Yorkers wouldn’t elect the soft-tyranny of a Wilhelm but readily went for the de Blasio’s version. Coming from a name like de Blasio, uber-regulation of day to day life in the Big Apple comes across as more fashionable somehow.

Billy Blythe III sounds like a double-dealing, womanizing, grifter — the real life version of the Mr. Haney character on the old television show Green Acres. (Mr. Haney was a shamster who used a “woe was me” sales pitch to try and part people, particularly women, with their money). Definitely not the image of a two term President who remains a formidable force in American politics. Is it any wonder Billy Blythe III opted to use the name Bill Clinton?

His wife has frequently altered her name, too. She doesn’t use Diane Rodham anymore. She’s gone by Hillary Rodham Clinton and Hillary Rodham. Briefly she went solely by Rodham just after she tried “Hillary!”, maybe thinking that a singular name would give her dim prospects Oprah-like star quality in her pursuit of high office. “Hillary!” was catchier than “Diane!” and less likely to be confused with a certain NBA star than “Rodham”, but she’s now back to Hillary Clinton — at least for the time being.

Whether Hillary Clinton rehearses each name change with a faux southern African American accent along the lines of her “I don’t feel no ways tie-urd, I’ve traveled too far, to git whar I’m goin” schtick remains unknown. It’s an interesting mental image, Hillary up late at night in front of a mirror reciting new and untried variations of her monicker.

Nancy D’Alesandro and Elizabeth Ann Herring haven’t taken as fluid an approach with their married names. Pelosi and Warren simply adopted their husbands surnames. In Elizabeth Warren’s case it’s probably fortunate that she was able to drop “Herring” and replace with “Warren”. Elizabeth “the Red” Herring carries amusing conotations for her agenda.

It doesn’t stop with personal names. Job lock. Climate change. Sustainable growth. Fracking. Green energy. The 1 percent. The 99 percent. Racism. Sexism. Living wage. Reproductive rights. Marriage equality. Privilege. Pro-choice. Net Neutrality. Lone wolves. Man caused disasters. “The prophet”. Christianists. Tolerance. Co-exist. Inclusion. Undocumented migrants. Big oil. Big pharma. Big box retailer. Big tobacco. The left’s abuse of language knows no bounds — it extends even to how the left describes themselves.

Democrat. Liberal. Socialist. Progressive. Forward-leaning. Centrist. Center left. Third way. No labels.

If the left can’t be trusted to simply be honest with what they call themselves as a movement or as individual public figures, then why should anyone trust them with any matter of substance?

To be fair, some intrepid web surfer will undoubtedly find an example of someone on the right who has altered his or her name. It’s far less common right of center than it is among progressives. And it’s important to note the distinction between public and private figures who engage in this practice. Public figures are voted into office to serve the people that pay their salaries while they hold their positions. Private figures aren’t.

Samuel Clemens for example was a writer who used the pen name Mark Twain. Roger Nelson is a pop star more commonly known as Prince. Entertainment, not political activity, is their output. It’s one thing to be a private figure offering up entertainment for someone willing to pay for it. One can choose to opt out of Huck Finn or a late night showing of Purple Rain after all.

It’s quite another thing to engage in political activism — especially when taxpayers can’t opt out of supporting it — designed to fundamentally transform our country and lives. That progressives can’t do this under their real names is telling. That’s the case whether it’s Kali Katt in California, or a man who was born Barry Obama (and possibly Barry Dunham considering that his parents separated the month he was born), was later Barry Soetoro, and as an adult he proudly went by Barack Hussein Obama but suddenly dropped Hussein when conservatives used it.

For the left It’s all about pretzel twisting the real-world to match a very narrow minded narrative no matter how illogical and impotent that narrative might be. Ideology informs their ideas. In their case, it’s an ideology that dates back to the 19th Century. That’s why progressives remain stuck in a world that ceased to exist more than a century ago, and it’s how they cast themselves as the personification of the future.

Distorting the language, too, helps them avoid intelligible discussion. Things like unemployment, pollution, economic stagnation, wealth creation, embracing an all of the above energy policy to include nuclear (that Iran is building nuke plants and America isn’t is remarkable), economic mobility, true equality, women’s health, keeping government out of the bedroom, respect for life, accomplishment, unregulated internet, radicalized Islam, our Judeo-Christian heritage, illegal immigrants. an industrial base, the value of a robust medical sector to all Americans, affordable shopping options for impoverished Americans, and alternatives for tobacco smokers and growers.

Intelligible discussion can’t happen when idea-starved populist regressives bring their ideological antiques to the public square. So instead they try and re-label themselves and the public square to make their point of view appear as anything other than what it really is.

Or as far-left icon Noam Chomsky said, “propaganda is to a democracy what the bludgeon is to a totalitarian state”. There’s power in names and in words. The left uses that power unforunately well in bludgeoning Americans with their agenda.

Image: http://www.wcvarones.com/2008_06_01_archive.html