If a "bailout" for the banking industry sounds like a giveaway, call it a "rescue" and it might attract more support. If a "pullout" from Iraq sounds like a retreat, just call it a "drawdown."

And if the financial crisis leads to a temporary takeover of some big banks, "nationalization" would be a scary way to describe it — so try "receivership."

These days in Washington, the battle over policy and political advantage often comes down to words, labels and marketing. After eight years of a president known for mangling the language, the Obama administration is showing a keen understanding that whoever succeeds in framing an issue in words that resonate with the public is way ahead of the game.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, no slouch in the marketing department, lamented that spending on the nation's infrastructure did not have more support because "the word means nothing to a majority of people."

"We have to come up with a sexier word than infrastructure," the governor said on a recent trip to Washington.

President Barack Obama is having no problem getting his message out in a smart way, say analysts across the political spectrum.

"Words matter," Obama often said during the campaign. As president, he laces his speeches and policy statements with themes of responsibility, accountability and reform — even as he's putting off some goals, such as reforming the use of earmarks, the pet projects of members of
Advertisement
Congress.

In his speech on ending the war in Iraq, Obama told an audience of Marines that he honored their sacrifice and achievements. He spoke of "achievable goals" during a "drawdown" of U.S. forces. He did not use the word "victory" or anything like George W. Bush's "mission accomplished" language.

"The president is the best political communicator of our age," said George Lakoff, a linguist, author and professor at the University of California-Berkeley who has advised Democrats and liberal groups.

"He was saying the war in Iraq is over, and telling the military they achieved their goals," Lakoff said.


Obama's ambitious agenda on energy, education and health care — with a big boost in federal spending — has Republicans warning of "European socialism." That labeling has not worked, even some GOP strategists concede.

"Socialism was a big bugaboo maybe 15 years ago, but it doesn't have much impact now," said John Feehery, who worked for former House Speaker Dennis Hastert when the GOP controlled Congress.

"Obama is masterful in his use of language to push his agenda," Feehery said. "He's so far above the field right now it's like Tiger Woods in golf."

But he couples that with a complaint: "He talks the talk of a centrist, but walks the walk of a liberal."

Lakoff, who has studied the cognitive development of the brain, says conservatives learned long ago to use language that has deep-seated emotional appeal: "family values," "pro-life," "tax relief."

But now Obama is countering with the language of progressive values: empathy, empowerment, national service. Lakoff said Obama is trying to redefine patriotism, a word that conservatives once thought was theirs.

Language battles

On Capitol Hill, the language battles are usually more specific, such as how to sell a bill or focus attention on a target.

When Rep. Ellen Tauscher, a Walnut Creek Democrat, introduced a bill last week to repeal the "don't ask, don't tell" policy barring gays from serving openly in the military, she argued passionately that it was a civil rights issue. But she also stressed that the policy has kept thousands of talented Americans from serving — and she called the bill the Military Readiness Enhancement Act.

When Taxpayers for Common Sense, a watchdog group, tried to shed light on abuses in earmark spending several years ago, they learned they had a problem.

"When I did a network interview I was told not to use the word 'earmark,' and just call it pork," recalled Steve Ellis, the group's vice president. "We realized that if you put people to sleep before you've started, you've lost."

Then the group's chief investigator, Keith Ashdown, looked into an earmark for a $300 million-plus bridge in Alaska linking a small town and an airport. He "had a couple of beers, got creative," and came up with a classic catchphrase: the "bridge to nowhere."

"That was a beautiful metaphor," Lakoff said, that captured the essence of wasteful spending.

"Earmark was kind of a goofy, wonky word, but now it's known, and has become a pejorative term," Ellis said. Under pressure, Congress now requires earmarks in spending bills — and their sponsors — to be identified.

Just don't look for the word "earmark" in a bill. Congress now calls them "congressionally directed spending items.