Snap Out of It - Obama is using Clinical Hypnosis on You!

reply to post by BO XIAN


"He's also not honest enough to declare openly--STEP-RIGHT UP, FOLKS, GET YOUR KOOL-AID HERE!"

Perhaps...

Goodwin's law, it's addendum, debate rule application, explanation and proposal could all be said to apply in some fashion to Obama. It serves to illustrate the complexity that is Obama.

en.wikipedia.org...

Originally posted by pexx421
i am actually a licensed hypnotherapist, and i have seen no NLP or hypnotic technique in Obamas rhetoric.

HOORAY!!
Intelligence found in this thread!

I think intelligent people like Obama scare simple Americans. Fear makes them say the lamest things.

reply to post by gnosis111


Uhm, isn't this statement racist in itself? I am not afraid of any race, but am afraid of anything too good to be true. As they say, if it seems too good to be true, it probably is.

speeches and mesmerizing, ok so let's look at it from another angle.

All great speakers had to have learned some sort of technic coupled with a dissatisfied population.

So we could do a comparison of great speakers and leaders and dictators and see what they had in common.

reply to post by Stormdancer777


www.youtube.com...

Not much substance there.

reply to post by ballast


I'll try to embed it:



Wow, it worked! There are english subtitles.

[edit on 26-10-2008 by ballast]

Hmm the strength of the nation lies with its people.

I'm thinking..

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
Hmm the strength of the nation lies with its people.

I'm thinking..

Thank you. That is a good summation of what I have been trying to tell people with this post, to be an informed electorate, to read all the literature, and to make your mind based upon a list of factual investigations. In my thoughts this post is to challenge people to do their own thinking, to respond to the challenge "Snap Out of It - Obama is using Clinical Hypnosis on You!" Then you would want to inquire "are other politicians doing this?" "Where else is this happening and pushing my buttons?" An uninformed electorate cannot preserve freedoms.

Keep asking questions, and do not consent totally to anything regardless of your own clear readings of books, the media, the internet and your repertoire of ideas. Question authority by all means, and with discernment.

[edit on 27-10-2008 by SkipShipman]

Thoughtful of the literary merits of the Lincoln - Douglas Debates one could recognize by comparative text the difference between contemporary campaigning then and today.

It is difficult for me to detect any kind of hypnotic process in the
Lincoln - Douglas debates, while today's politics of one-liners inter-spaced by declarative anchor points is different. It occurs to me that people listened over a century ago to some very complex policies, and that nothing was decided for them in advance and distilled into an emotional attraction. There were issues, they were complex, and you have a sense of history. Rather today there seems a notion of instant gratification, Tax-cuts for the middle class making less than $250 thousand, and other things that of course would have been impossible in that day since they had no income tax.

Look a bit at the depth here:

MR. LINCOLN'S REPLY.

Mr. Lincoln then came forward and was greeted with loud and protracted cheers from fully two-thirds of the audience. This was admitted by the Douglas men on the platform. It was some minutes before he could make himself heard, even by those on the stand. At last he said:

MY FELLOW-CITIZENS: When a man hears himself somewhat misrepresented, it provokes him-at least, I find it so with myself; but when misrepresentation becomes very gross and palpable, it is more apt to amuse him. The first thing I see fit to notice, is the fact that Judge Douglas alleges, after running through the history of the old Democratic and the old Whig parties, that Judge Trumbull and myself made an arrangement in 1854, by which I was to have the place of Gen. Shields in the United States Senate, and Judge Trumbull was to have the place of Judge Douglas. Now, all I have to say upon that subject is, that I think no man-not even Judge Douglas-can prove it, because it is not true. [Cheers.] I have no doubt he is "conscientious" in saying it. [Laughter.] As to those resolutions that he took such a length of time to read, as being the platform of the Republican party in 1854, I say I never had anything to do with them, and I think Trumbull never had. [Renewed laughter.] Judge Douglas cannot show that either of us ever did have anything to do with them. I believe this is true about those resolutions: There was a call for a Convention to form a Republican party at Springfield, and I think that my friend, Mr. Lovejoy, who is here upon this stand, had a hand in it. I think this is true, and I think if he will remember accurately, he will be able to recollect that he tried to get me into it, and I would not go in. [Cheers and laughter.] I believe it is also true that I went away from Springfield when the Convention was in session, to attend court in Tazewell county. It is true they did place my name, though without authority, upon the committee, and afterward wrote me to attend the meeting of the committee, but I refused to do so, and I never had anything to do with that organization. This is the plain truth about all that matter of the resolutions.

Now, about this story that Judge Douglas tells of Trumbull bargaining to sell out the old Democratic party, and Lincoln agreeing to sell out the old Whig party, I have the means of knowing about that; Judge Douglas cannot have; and I know there is no substance to it whatever. Yet I have no doubt he is "conscientious" about it. I know that after Mr. Lovejoy got into the Legislature that winter, he complained of me that I had told all the old Whigs of his district that the old Whig party was good enough for them, and some of them voted against him because I told them so. Now, I have no means of totally disproving such charges as this which the Judge makes. A man cannot prove a negative, but he has a right to claim that when a man makes an affirmative charge, he must offer some proof to show the truth of what he says. I certainly cannot introduce testimony to show the negative about things, but I have a right to claim that if a man says he knows a thing, then he must show how he knows it. I always have a right to claim this, and it is not satisfactory to me that he may be "conscientious" on the subject. [Cheers and Laughter.]
www.nps.gov...

In any event I hope this contributes to a matter of historical distinctions that an informed electorate ought to demand. That's my argument concerning the difference in intellectual depth then and today as being oversimplified, persuasive like offering candy to children, while neglecting if you will "the elephant in the room," in the form of the Federal Reserve system, income taxes, and the massive spending we face from a Federal Government in some sense out of control.

[edit on 27-10-2008 by SkipShipman]

This is funny. The same people who ridicule '9/11 conspiracy theorists' (as another poster pointed out) are trying to convince us all that Obama is essentially putting us all under some spell as if he's a warlock.

I'm not saying that this hypnosis technique is a bunch of hub-bub. What I'm saying is some of the people on here are acting like, if he's actually using this, he's an extremely sinister man who wishes to warp our minds and make us do things we would otherwise NEVER EVER do!

This is quite ridiculous. For one, if this was such an effective technique then anyone who ever listens to him would fall under his evil spell and we'd all be voting for him next Tuesday. This is obviously not the case and it doesn't make you special just because you refuse to succumb to his nefarious ways. Did you ever think that John McCain could be using similar techniques and that's why you support him?

If there was never any chance you were going to support Obama/McCain then no amount of hypnosis can make you do so.

If he is using this technique then it's only to get people that already support him become fanatical about him and guess what...there's crazy fanatical people on both sides of the campaigns.

It's like the experiment where they hypnotized a man and told him that another man in the room had become invisible. The man under hypnosis still saw the man. This doesn't mean it didn't work. They concluded that it was because the man under hypnosis never believed in the first place that people could go invisible. So the tried another experiment only this time they told him that the other man had left the room and even opened and closed the door. The man that was supposed to have left the room started picking up books and other items and the hypnotized man started freaking out because he thought there was a ghost in the room making items float in the air.

You can't MAKE someone believe someone believe something they never would have believed in the first place.

I just think it's funny that you guys are freaking out that Obama might be trying to force you to vote for him but you won't even consider the fact that John McCain is probably doing the same thing to you.

They all use different techniques...

reply to post by seejanerun

He gives me the creeps as well. He does not speak from the heart. He is very polished, manufactured, very much like an actor. He speaks from ideals, lack of soul. He lies without flinching and his supporters and the mainstream media overlook it each time. Is it white guilt that people just let him get away with so much BS? Just that he keeps lying about who he knows, that he really doesn't know them, but so much information is out there to show how well he knows everyone he denies knowing... just that he has no problem as a candidate lying repeatedly is someone who has shown his colors early on. If he wins, people are going to be very sorry later on. And you can't blame him for being the creep and liar that he is because he has not hidden this about himself.

People rather ignore this. So should he win, and when the honey moon wears off, blame yourselves for making him the POTUS. He has shown us that he is a liar, bends many rules for his advantage, is arrogant, goes after people who make him look bad, tries to ruin their lives, has an imbecile for vp, wouldn't pass FBI security if he wanted to be in the FBI or any high level of the military. For God sake what the heck do people see in this smooth talking creep?

I was listening to him the other day, It was so boring. His words become an incoherant mass of monotone pitches. I couldnt hear a word he said just the tone he used. It was so fake.

People are tired of Bush, and want somthing different, as do I. I just cant help to think of all the blacks who are voting thinking this lone half-black man is going to "save" them from hundreds of years of the white-mans opression. Its sickening. I never use to feel racist, but if your so quick to call people that your even more racist.

If Leeroy down the street gets capped by your nieghbor because he has a nice car, what makes you think this bra man is gonna help yo ass out?
Help yourself, god forbid there wasnt a 7-11 on the corner to feed your simple asses.

the Association of American Physicians & Surgeons took a good look at, and analyzed his speeches and concluded that he is using hypnotic technique
www.youtube.com...

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy


Interesting that anything negative implied or overtly stated towards Obama is "unethical" whatever happened to critical thinking or free speech-just an observation and hopefully not a sign of what we can expect if Obama wins.

I didn't think to much of this theory until today. However, you can not deny, it does not seem to matter what Obama says. People just cheer and are voting for him.

He said he is going to bankrupt the coal industry and the people reply by cheering and hooting and hollering.

He said that the price of electricity will sky rocket under his presidency and the people reply by cheering and hooting and hollering.

I think he could say that he is going to impose islamic law on the USA and the people would cheer and hoot and holler.

It is downright scary. Like mass hypnosis. Doesn't anyone else see this?

Originally posted by SailorinAZ
I didn't think to much of this theory until today. However, you can not deny, it does not seem to matter what Obama says. People just cheer and are voting for him.

He said he is going to bankrupt the coal industry and the people reply by cheering and hooting and hollering.

He said that the price of electricity will sky rocket under his presidency and the people reply by cheering and hooting and hollering.

I think he could say that he is going to impose islamic law on the USA and the people would cheer and hoot and holler.

It is downright scary. Like mass hypnosis. Doesn't anyone else see this?

It may it under the terminology "cognitive dissonance," when people consent to the less informed choices in policy or other things, when confronting an option or opinion.

It seems that the audience is listening to the "I stand before you," anchor points and since that is obviously true, they take others things as true or valid, while they cheer the obvious NLP programming having no substance or in your case a counter effect.