Rhetorically Speaking

Rudyard Kipling once said that language was the most powerful drug known to mankind. Well, George W has proven that point. Through his use of skillful rhetoric (crafted by his speach writers, not him) he managed to win a second term in office by taking control of the issues through words, not deeds. Let me pull up just one issue to prove my point.

Dub-ya opposes abortion. It is my opinion that he does so, and does so so vocally, more because it garners Christian votes than because of any deep-seated personal beliefs, but that's beside the point. The point is that he publicly opposes abortion of any kind for any reason. His stated rationale for this draconian stance is that he "favors a culture of life." Now, here is a wonderful little rhetorical ploy. In making this statement, Dub-ya has "framed" the debate on abortion.

Republicans - through their chosen mouthpiece, Dub-ya - have set the defining limits of the abortion debate, at least for this election. Stating that he favors "a culture of life" makes it very hard to argue against the Right's strict anti-abortion position, because they've made the argument about "life," not about abortion rights. That's "life" in general. See, if I say I oppose abortion rights, and you say you disagree with me, then you're simply saying you favor abortion rights. On the other hand, if I say I "favor a culture of life," and you say you disagree with me, then you're saying that you "favor a culture of death." And nobody wants to be painted that way. Ergo, the Bushies win the argument.

But if you take the time to challenge Dub-ya's - and the conservatives' in general - position, it all falls apart. Because the man - and the party - who favors "a culture of life," also favors the death penalty. Hello! And they favor lifting all restrictions on gun ownership. And they started the war in Iraq, which to date has resulted in over 100,000 deaths on both sides. And they oppose embryonic stem cell research which could help save the lives of millions of people worldwide. Yet they maintain that they "favor a culture of life." If that's a culture of life, I'd hate to see the opposite!

Interestingly, Kerry and the Dems never pointed out these inconsistencies in Dub-ya's "culture of life." Had they, they could have rhetorically re-framed the debate and possibly won the election. What Democrats in particular, and liberals in general, need to do is learn to use rhetoric to their advantage, just as the conservatives have been doing for some time now. Dems need to start "framing" the arguments first. In other words, they need to provide America with a linguistic drug that makes them feel better than the one the Republicans have been offering. That's the real challenge for liberals over the next four years.