Lakoff - December 1, 2004

Conservative frame requires that some people are wealthier than others.  Yet, rising tide argument is used on both sides.  And then there's trickle down economics.  Rising standard of living.  Right: if the wealthier get wealthier, they'll give jobs to other people and make those people wealthier... the wealthy won't sit on their money.  In fact, for example, they invest in stocks which aren't used to hire more people.  Or the money that they spend is outside of this country.  

KEY: The frame of trickle down economics works because most people have a frame of getting and spending money and so they translate that to the wealthy - what they would spend it on.  

Big corporations are universally perceived as bad.  They lay people off, the ship off jobs, they control what is going on, they don't provide security.  But small business is the answer - personal liberation.  They are the only way that people can have security and certainty.  And if the estate tax is coming in an destroying it, it's destroying the american dream.  

Consider the frame in which you can use the phrase tax loophole.  It assumes taxes are good, because loopholes are bad.  This disrupts the tax relief frame.  

What does it mean that we're all investing together?  We did this in WWII and this is what is happening with stem cell.  Sacrifice, patriotic.  Yeah, it's a tax but we're framing it as a community investment instead.  

Thomas Frank's "What's Wrong With Kansas?"  can be reread to talk about how most "moderate" republicans have strict father structures of economics and nurturant ideas about everything else.  Yet they vote Republican because they are pressured on economic issues.  

Environmental groups are almost 1/2 supported by moderate conservatives.  Environmentalists need not think about being universally progressive, but more specifically so.  When the environmentalists went with labor-based activities, they didn't get much leverage... they saw it as political lack of sophistication on part of environmentalists.  Trust for Public Lands - acquire lands to protect it from private (ab)uses.  Environmental organizations are very very different.

Water and Air are one thing in environmentalism.  Land is a different thing because land is wrapped up in identity and property.  You don't attach yourself to water, air in the same way.  Use the water spread to discuss land.  If you pollute one water, it spreads and affects others.  The same is true for pesticides with land.  Explicate how land spreads.  

Environment has two roots: conservation (conservative Teddy Roosevelt style) and social justice movement (environment is an oppressed person).  These do not sit together easily.

Civil rights.  NAACP is perceived as having dipped into too many different directions.  They are radicals.  As such, they haven't been welcome to the table.  They should just stick to civil rights, right?  Or not... 

Bush: Steward of the environment.  Comes from England - the person who made the thing economically helpful for the Lord.  It means that he's using the environment as a resource.

"Bi-partisanship is date rape"  (?who said this?)  No child left behind.. came together with Teddy Kennedy... we have the same goals... Teddy didn't understand the implications of the testing because the money was coming.  And then the money went away.  

Tax status of NAACP is being reviewed.  We don't have a way to frame why this is a problem because it's so out in the open (unlike Nixon which is secret).  It feels baffling because it's so open.  This is an abuse of power instead of illegal and that's really hard to struggle with.  

Certain branches of the government have a moral mission  (EPA for example).  It's an abuse of power to use these branches to target enemies of the government.  It's not corruption in the tradition sense of making money... it's a form of corruption - using government for your own ends.  It's not technical corruption.  People don't define your ends ideologically, just monetarily.  Not prototypically corruption, more metaphorically corruption.  

"Hang a lantern on your problems"  - when someone is accusing you of something.  make it very open and confessed.  

501(c)3 organizations cannot support anyone in an election.  Because Bond from NAACP supported Kerry, they're going after NAACP.  Of course, Bush got a list of churches.. but they're not going after churches regarding tax status.  It's completely unfair, but it's the way things go. Unfair sounds like you're wining... because it's totally reasonable to assess tax status... it's just unfair.  

This is about honor and our lack of treating people honorably.  

Vilify the IRS could be bad because the right wants to get rid of the IRS anyhow.  Not good to set this precedent (FDA).

How would you frame this issue?  The issue of abuse of the IRS to go after the NAACP.  

They are disempowering the NAACP.  Defunding... can you make that into stealing?  Or talk about it in monetary terms?