they are confusing the issues by being internally inconsistent
with each other and with the facts while blaming Obama at
every turn.

They should be called on this strategy by the press.

This is a repost of mine from another thread ......

I bookmarked this site years ago ... maybe it applies here

http://www.cyberparent.com/abuse/double.htm


The Double Message of Verbal Abuse.
Stephen Fox

The double message of verbal abuse makes the abused person feel confused and sometimes even makes the abused person feel crazy. Verbal abuse is the
language of control; it is not the language of love.
Love does not create verbal abuse. Dominance does.

A verbal abuser does not abuse out of love. He/she abuses out of a desire to control.

When a person who is being verbally abused gets the double message of verbal abuse, she/he is confused. The double message is:

I love you (those nice, sweet words of seduction)
I don't love you (the words of abuse)

In any long-term relationship (not limited to but including marriage) the double message makes the person who is being abused feel confused or even crazy.

Why?

A long-term relationship is thought to be loving and safe.

When the abuse starts, two messages are sent at the same time, that old "I love you but..." routine.

The person being abused and getting the double messages is confused because the relationship is a safe, loving place where seduction takes place and the relationship is not a safe, loving place because abuse takes place here.

If you are in an abusive relationship, common double messages might be:

"I love you so much that I.."
"We have problems only because I love you so much."
"Sometimes loving you so much makes me..."
"I love you but..."

Just remember:

Love does not create problems, dominance does.
Abuse is about control, not love.

And...

Verbal abuse always precedes physical abuse.

Again...

Verbal abuse is about control; it is not about love. Double messages are part of verbal abuse. One verbal abuse message says I love you. It is followed by another verbal abuse message that says I don't love you.

Additional information about abuse or being abused.

http://www.cyberparent.com/abuse/double.htm

of hearing the word "entitlement" used for an insurance program overseen by the government. Social Security is not an "entitlement" it is deferred earnings. Fie on the people corrupting our language and limiting our ability to respond.

It should not be used by any liberal, progressive, or Democrat.

It implies someone's sitting around expecting something, as opposed to working decades and then participating in the very system he/she helped support.

However, there are many ways to respond to those who insist on using the word entitlement. In doing battle with tea party types and others, a neighbor of mine deploys the term social insurance when speaking of Social Security.

It's the fight over entitlement reforms that they want to avoid. The chickenshits are just tired of having their asses kicked up and down Pennsylvania Avenue on every issue. Their public opinion polling must be disastrous.

Boo. Friggin'. Hoo. They built this.

That's what rich people feel about their low tax rates.

Start there Mitch, even though you "would love to avoid" reforming that.
It happens to be what the last election was about.

We PAID into the government insurance programs.

as polls show.

As in the Democratic Party, it's the elected "representatives" who meet with lobbyists and campaign contributors who have trouble avoiding...

maybe I could regain a little faith in this corrupt system...

is making a big political mistake letting the Republicans frame the Deficit debate around Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid when the Republicans tried to claim he cut Medicare. They want him to do it so they can use it as a political tool. The President should stick to what he campaigned on to lower the Deficit. He wants to give this impression that he is in the middle and compromising.

Your Base is not as radical as you seem to think. Most Americans do not want Social Security or Medicare cut. That would be calling most Americans the radical Left. I would not let these Media Pundits set the Debate either. Sometimes you have to stick to your principles and this is one time that you have to. Social Security should be off the table period because it had nothing to do with the Debt. If anything, the money that was took from Social Security needs to be placed back even if you have to raise revenues. Let the American people make the final decision in the midterm and 2016 election. The Republican candidates lied period about their intentions in the 2012 election. I would love to see them run on cutting those Programs.

The Pundits and Wallstreet don't want the American people to decide. He is talking about fighting his Party. Well, he can include me in there too. I did not vote for him to cut anything. I know exactly what he campaigned on. And people like Ed Rendell and Joe Scarborough can take a hike. They do not speak for a lot of Americans period. If they want to, then run for office. As far as my representatives, My response to them is ignore the President on CPI. We have your back!

Tell us another one, GOP.

It's not just the Tea Party making a mess of things. It sounds like the GOP isn't exactly enamored of their self-appointed spokespeople, either.

Let the civil war intensify!

With Medicare I could see continuing efforts to control costs as well as increasing the payroll tax from 1.45% to 1.75% to cover the issue of people living longer.

On Social Security I could see raising the cap to $400,000/$450,000.

I think that pretty well solves both problems.

The GOP really, really wants Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid to be cut. They don't want to be the ones who propose the cuts, though, because they fully intend to run "The Democrats Cut Your Social Security" commercials in the next election cycle.