Here's a test for you, I'm going to name an animal and you must not think about the animal for 10 seconds: Elephant. Are you still thinking of an elephant? This test itself is a key example of how politicians use rhetoric device called "Framing" to sway you into voting for them. For example, when they say they'll bring “tax relief,” the voter can't help but think of relief as a positive connotation and is more likely to be in favour of it over a “tax cut” ...even though they're the same thing. In a society that responds to short snippets of headline news, the wording of a bill or message is enough to sway many voters' opinions. That's the theory by George Lakoff, a linguist professor of Berkley, and he's managed to sell it to many powerful people on the left-wing that are putting it into use in their messages. Dr.Lakoff didn't invent the technique, he's observed it being used and repackaged it for the left-wing. This type of rhetoric, regardless of which party is doing it (all of them do it), is disingenuous and needs to be looked out for by the common voter.

When the common voter does realize rhetoric is being used on them, they get angry and the politicians rhetoric backfires. Here's a video clip of Penn and Teller, two magicians, realizing their methods of trickery are being used in polling by Frank Luntz. Luntz uses this technique of "framing" rhetoric on the American people. However, from the video it's apparent that when people find out that this rhetoric is being used, like Penn and Teller, they will respond negatively.


Ok, last test I promise, which sentence sounds like better reasoning for having a cellphone: “I keep my cellphone on me to stay out of trouble” or “I keep my cellphone on me to stay safe.” Most people prefer the second sentence too. By using key words like “safe” people are more drawn to a certain type of reasoning. So when Mr.Harper's party claims that the Liberal's new green policy, The Green Shift, will be “risky business” it won't just be said once, it will be hammered into your psyche; The term has been repeated like a meme by different sources from the conservative side. There are also advertisements planned to follow with the “risky plan” theme as a focus. There will be little explanation for the “risky” aspect of the plan and most importantly Harper probably won't offer a better counter-plan in his ads (judging from the fact that he's held back on releasing a platform to the media for so long). Harper is more fixated on telling you not to take a “risk,” because no-risk-Harper is better than risky-Dion during a time of recession, right? It doesn't matter what the risk is, it's the repetition of the word “risky” itself that is meant to effect you; like the Spanish Water Torture of fixing a prisoner's head below drops of water until each following drop creates a resounding headache. Layton, Dion, and Harper have all used this annoying rhetorical device. For example, I've found that the left keep characterizing Harper as “cold-hearted” and “out of touch” which doesn't really say anything about Harper's policy but just the man himself. And we as voters are left to look out for it and cut through it. That's why we as citizens need to be aware of such trickery.

Rhetoric will always exist in language, for example I've referred to the new-rhetoric of our politicians as trickery throughout this article. But it also needs to be recognized by the recipients; Especially, when rhetoric has evolved into almost a science.