Time to change the language!

[Sputnik]

Newt Gingrich led the Republican efforts in the 90's to change GOP language, brainwashing Americans with semantics.

It's our turn. I no longer use the term "pro-life" to describe those who oppose a woman's right to choose. They are "anti-choice." I mean, isn't that more accurate? They don't favor life.

They call us "Libs". Hey, we'll call them "Cons". And we should say it with a facial expression that appears as if we've just smelled a rotten potato.

They aren't "oppsed to gay marriage". They are "anti-monogamy".

They aren't for tax cuts. They favor "financially enslaving our children and grandchildren."

Help me make a list here. What words and phrases need to changed and beaten into the heads of Americans by Democrats?

[T Town Jake]

1. You're grasping at straws. What we need is not new "language"...

...but a new vision. And one that doesn't have anything to do with gun control or gay marriage. It's as simple as that. That's the electoral math.

[Sputnik]

2. Who says we can't have both

new language and a new vision?

They've made "liberal" a dirty word. They've convinced the "heartland" that Northeasterners and West Coasters are heathens. (I'm a lifelong Southerner and I have seen the change in attitude.)

We've let them control the language and the dialogue for too long. Words are powerful and we must use them to our best advantage. If you have no suggestions to offer, then you work on the vision part and I'll think about the language part. I won't deride your efforts however because I do think a new vision is important.

[T Town Jake]

3. As a "lifelong Southerner" I assume that you'll agree with me...

...that this gun control nonsense has absolutely ruined the Party. We must abandon it. The Democrats would still be in charge of the House of Representatives were it not for the gun control fanatics in our ranks. And that is the very least of what we might potentially control.

[seabeyond]

5. i agree i dont think we have the right to tell people

they cannot own guns. we have the laws on book that will take care of the gun users who are criminal or irresponsible

[Sputnik]

8. Yes, I am

actually a lifelong Southerner. I didn't make that up. I've lived in the South my entire life, as have my parents, grandparents, great-grandparents, etc., all the way back to when my ancestors came to this country from England and Ireland.

My husband is also a lifelong Southerner, an avid hunter, and a law enforcement officer. We own, probably, as many if not more guns than anyone on this board. My husband is also a certified firearms instructor who could make an excellent side income by teaching firearms classes, but he chooses not to because he believes that our state's concealed weapons law is a POS.

I'm not saying we shouldn't review our party's gun-control stance (and all other stances) but I also don't believe we should automatically adopt all conservative agendas in order to appeal to red-staters because, well, then we'd be Republicans.

If we give in on gun control, they'll attack us on choice. If we become anti-choice, they'll keep screaming about gays. If we oppose gay marriage and civil unions for gays, they'll simply find something else with which to scare their base. They won't stop until there is no longer a definable Democratic Party.

You are very right that we have to think about our message. But I hope we won't have a kneejerk reaction and drastically overhaul our message just to pander to voters in middle America who will still find a reason, any reason, to vote Republican. It may be more about sharpening our message, simplifying it...and yes, changing the language. Having a degree in speech communication, I may put too much stock in words. But the GOP has proven that words and language persuade.

Let's think about this: Young voters favored Kerry over Bush. We must hold on to them and reach even more of them. Minorities favored Kerry over Bush and the minority population is ever increasing. We must hold on to them. Women favored Kerry over Bush and we have to keep their votes.

Healthcare, prescription drugs, jobs, sending our kids to college, a safe and clean America, preserving our civil liberties, peace....these issues were not clearly enough defined to voters in this and the previous presidential election by our party.

Jake, I don't disagree with your take. I just hope we will think carefully, stick together, and not allow different factions in our party to turn on one another. Party unity is more important than ever. We have 48%. We're close. We're not starting from scratch. Let's work to return the Democratic party to greatness. I don't believe that can be achieved by becoming the GOP Lite.

The 2006 midterm elections are crucial. We must focus on gaining back some seats and adding more Democratic governors and state legislatures (the latter of which we did gain in this election.) Our choice of a 2008 nominee will be the most important choice our party will ever make. We, the Democratic voters across this country, need to have more say-so in choosing that nominee instead of having the Democratic National Committee shove a nominee down our throat.

I believe my presidential choice in the primary would have defeated George Bush. That's why I picked him. I still believe it. The leaders of our party have let us down the last three elections. It's time for us to take back the party and return it to the people. It's the only way to take back America away from the regimes that currently control it.

Much work to do. I think we can do it. Hmmm, I guess I "still believe in a place called Hope."

[seabeyond]

4. i like your idea, especially anti choice and cons n/t

[guitar man]

6. "Birth tax"

...to describe massive deficits. And screw the gun control shit. If there ever was a time we needed to arm ourselves, it's now.

[chicagojoe]

7. For some time now I've been calling them The Radical Right.

Anything with the word radical in it has negative connotations.