See other (s)Elections Articles
Title: An Examination of Obama's Use of Hidden Hypnosis Techniques in His Speeches
Source:
pennypresslv.com
URL Source: http://www.pennypresslv.com/Obama%2 ... techniques_in_His_Speeches.pdf
Published: Oct 18, 2008
Author: Unsigned
Post Date: 2008-10-18 21:04:19 by PeteCat
Keywords: Obama, Speech
Views: 3302
Comments: 132
A 67 page pdf. The article seems to be a serious-minded effort rather than a hoax. An interesting read at any rate. It is unsigned and not dated - the contents suggest it was finished within past few weeks.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 39.
#5. To: PeteCat (#0)
As usual, I smell the sweaty stink of desperation. No PeteCat, he is using talent and ability to do what elections are for, to sell oneself as the best candidate for the White House. He's convinced me to an enthusiastic degree. I have deep confidence he will be at worst a very good president. And no, he doesn't wave a shiny watch before his speeches.
If he weren't dark you wouldn't grovel. Would you please tell me what Obama initiatives you consider good for America, and why?
Who's grovelling? Which initiatives do I like from Obama? I have looked at both candidate's health plans, and though it still needs some work, I much prefer Obama's. I also appreciate his willingness to prevent the reemergence of the criminal Taliban regime in Afghanistan and to end the illegal war in Iraq started by Bush. One little known aspect to this which has been under reported is the stated intent of the Obama Administration to go after Bush criminally, and others and I plan on a campaign to put the heat to President Obama to do this vigorously. I have absolutely no intent of reducing heat on Bush. Now he will be leaving office, he must face due process for his high crimes and misdemeanors. President Obama will also be a better environmental president too, McCain is a hypocrite and a liar when he claims to be environmentally minded. I am howling angry at what Bush has done to the environment, and I want blood for this. I am also aware too that in a government with checks and balances to power, the thing to look at is how well do I think the man coming in can get everyone on the same page and make things work. I am voting for Barack Obama because he is the new Great Communicator and he will definitely be a good remedy to gridlock. I admire his consistency and skill he has shown to overcome overwhelming odds to sell himself to the American people. He has passed the hiring interview with flying colors. More then anything I just flat acknowledge he has earned the right to be given this job. The process of selecting candidates and electing a president is hardly a perfect one. But sometime in spite of itself, something good happens and a talented and immensely competent man succeeds in running the gauntlet, and that has happened this year, and his name is Barack Obama, Democratic Senator from Illinois, soon to be President Barack Obama, 44th President of the United States.
yeah, that will happen. just like the bush admin was to go after clinton's. all will be swept under the rug. the mantra will be, as always, time to move on. they have the same masters. the democrats and the republicans are equal criminals and traitors against we the people. the plan is and always has been our enslavement for their enrichment and power. at the least, i would have thought that obama's selection of biden for his VP would have made it crystal clear that his claims for change are incredible.
It sure would be pointless to run with that as a campaign pledge, as McCain would make hay with it. Your concerns are noted, and this is why people must always realize that quite often the people must lead and make the leaders follow them. I am convinced Obama will respond to an energetic campaign demanding justice. I am counting on it.
One more question, Mike. Do you personally believe some speech raises to the level of hate speech, if yes, can it, or should it, be elevated to the level of a crime?
Great Lt. Columbo routine, I am amused. Some things people say are stupid and malicious to the extreme, but I support the First Amendment. The First Amendment is absolutely beyond the reach of federal power to abridge; it says clearly; "Congress shall make no law..." No federal agencies, including Congress and the Court, have power or authority to subordinate speech and press to what they think are more important interests. Where free speech has been muzzled the muzzle needs to come off, I support the U.S. Constitution, not censorship the FCC and other agencies deal in. The First Amendment works with personal responsibility for one's speech as the primary check making it work. For example, you should have the right to tell your boss he is an ignorant asshole and that you'd love to do his wife, but he should still have the right to fire you on the spot for it. Now as far as racist speech goes, I do not support banning it as hate speech. The military and schools should have the right to restrict it in order to preserve the environment to accomplish what they are there to do. But even then, if students wish to meet to belong to a Nationalist party club, or if soldiers on their own time associate to discuss racist material, this should be their right.
So then you condemn the ADL and folks who 'monitor' hate speech forums. I recall you stating some time back that the ADLs work in this area (hate speech) was noble and you supported it.
Well, you are mistaken, because my beliefs concerning the First Amendment are very old ones. I Was Hugo Black when my 400 level Political Science Supreme Court course at the University of Oregon did a mock-up of the court listing to arguments then working out and writing a Supreme Court decision. I chose Hugo Black because he and William Orville Douglas' opinions on free speech are inspiring. I like allot about Hugo Black, but this one area of constitutional law he is largely the epicenter of what I believe free speech should be. Interestingly enough, he did not consider say the burning of the flag to be free speech but conduct that the several states could regulate or ban. I can see his point, but that is one area I might go even farther then Justice Black did to preserve free speech rights. Now I don't know much at all about ADL monitoring of hate speech, but they should have the right to monitor it in open meetings where it is featured, but never should have standing to want to have it banned. That would be unconstitutional, pure and simple.
So you've never said the ADL does good work, or something to that effect. Gotcha.
#44. To: Jethro Tull (#39)
Incorrect. Mike said it on June 5, 2006: "As far as the ADL goes, I support Good work they have done just as I support Israel's right to exist." - Ferret Mike
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#22. To: Ferret Mike (#5)
He's convinced me to an enthusiastic degree.
#23. To: Jethro Tull (#22)
"If he weren't dark you wouldn't grovel."
#24. To: Ferret Mike (#23)
One little known aspect to this which has been under reported is the stated intent of the Obama Administration to go after Bush criminally,
#26. To: christine (#24)
#31. To: Ferret Mike (#26)
#32. To: Jethro Tull (#31)
"Do you personally believe some speech raises to the level of hate speech, if yes, can it, or should it, be elevated to the level of a crime?"
#33. To: Ferret Mike (#32)
(Edited)
Where free speech has been muzzled the muzzle needs to come off, I support the U.S. Constitution, not censorship the FCC and other agencies deal in.
#37. To: Jethro Tull (#33)
#39. To: Ferret Mike (#37)
Replies to Comment # 39.
#46. To: Ferret Mike (#39)
ping to #30 and #39
#62. To: Jethro Tull, Ferret Mike (#39)
So you've never said the ADL does good work, or something to that effect.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 39.
