Oratory—or hypnotic induction?

October 25th, 2008

Is Barack Obama a brilliant orator, captivating millions through his eloquence? Or is he deliberately using the techniques of neurolinguistic programming (NLP), a covert form of hypnosis developed by Milton Erickson, M.D.?

A fundamental tool of “conversational hypnosis” is pacing and leading—a way for the hypnotist to bypass the listener’s critical faculty by associating repeated statements that are unquestionably accurate with the message he wants to convey.

In his Denver acceptance speech, Obama used the phrases “that’s why I stand here tonight,” “now is the time,” and “this moment” 14 times. Paces are connected to the lead by words such as “and,” “as,” “because,” or “that is why.” For example, “we need change” (who could disagree?)…and…that is why I will be your next President.”

Techniques of trance induction include extra slow speech, rhythm, tonalities, vagueness, visual imagery, metaphor, and raising of emotion. Hypnotists often have patients count. In a speech after the primaries closed, Obama said: “Sixteen months have passed (paused)…Thousands (pause) of miles…(pause)…Millions of voices….”

Hypnotists call this a distraction technique: sending the dominant hemisphere on an assignment involving linguistic processes, thus opening the nondominant hemisphere to suggestion.

Hand gestures can be used as hypnotic anchors, or to aid in hypnotic command implantation. They can be difficult to distinguish from innocent gestures used for emphasis. Obama, however, uses some gestures extraordinarily often and for very specific words such as “believe” and “chose.” His characteristic thumb-and-forefinger gesture looks like a hand holding a pencil—as if you were in a voting booth. The gesture of pointing sends the subconscious message that a person in authority is giving a command.

Obama actually said at one time: “a light will shine down from somewhere, it will light upon you, you will experience an epiphany, and you will say to yourself, ‘I have to vote for Barack.’”

You will not choose to vote for Barack: you will “have to.” It is not a logical choice, but rather one directed by a mystical (subconscious) force. What purpose would a politician have for making such a statement? Obama used it only once. Perhaps he stopped either because he realized it was too obvious or because Hillary Clinton and John McCain ridiculed him for it.

Obama’s logo is noteworthy. It is always there, a small one in the middle of the podium, providing a point of visual fixation. Unlike other presidential logos, one looks through it, not at it. It might just be the letter “O,” but it also resembles a crystal ball, a favorite of hypnotists.

Obama is clearly having a powerful effect on people, especially young people and highly educated people—both considered to be especially susceptible to hypnosis. It is also interesting that many Jews are supporting a candidate who is endorsed by Hamas, Farakhan, Khalidi, and Iran.

While some believe that hypnosis is not real, others believe that it is very powerful, and very dangerous in the wrong hands. Dr. Erickson, father of modern hypnosis, was adamant that his techniques should only be used by physicians. In 1954, the U.S. Supreme Court decided in Leyra v. Denno that a confession obtained using hypnosis could not be used against the suspect in court.

A 66-page, extensively footnoted but unsigned article “An Examination of Obama’s Use of Hidden Hypnosis Techniques in His Speeches” is available at: http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Find-Freedom.htm?At=039963&From=News

The discussion should have broad applicability in analyzing political speech in general. Comments by those with knowledge of hypnotic techniques are especially welcome.

Additional information:

99 Responses to “Oratory—or hypnotic induction?”

  1. Maria Chang, Ph.D. says:

    @Ed Whitney MD:

    Of course there are rational reasons to vote for Obama-Biden, as there are for the McCain-Palin ticket. I don’t believe Dr. Horton’s 67-page document is saying that ANY and all who vote for Obama has been hypnotized.

    About the youtube video that discusses this AAPS article: I’m in total agreement with you that the video seems to me, untrained in NLP, to be employing some of the same hypnosis techniques that Horton & co-author claim Obama to be using. Shame on whoever made this video.

    That said, I still want to know if Obama or any politician–including McCain & Palin–is resorting to manipulative mind-controlling techniques, such as NLP. And I hope you do as well.

    Peace.

  2. [...] at: http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Find-Freedom.htm?At=039963&From=News Clip Source: http://www.aapsonline.org Is Barack Obama a brilliant orator, captivating millions through his eloquence? Or is he [...]

  3. Patricia G. Chaffin says:

    I completely agree with Dr. Maria Chang’s analysis in this matter. I would also refer you to a documentary on television, entitled, “Body Language” which I recently watched that was most fascinating, which in part, analyzed the voice and techniques of Obama as well as McCain. The experts and/or professionals in this subject indicated that Obama uses hypnotizing methods in his voice and the timing of his verbalizations, wherein what he says really doesn’t matter, the substance of it didn’t matter, the words didn’t matter, but how it was verbalized tending to mesmerize listeners, versus McCain, who was referred to as being akin to a technician, wherein he is very matter of fact, and that the words he communicated had meaning, not using a hypnotic and/or non-thinking and/or mesmerizing technique.

    I am absolutely amazed at the ranting hostility, rage and sarcasm garnered and expressed by Obama supporters, “Me thinketh the lady doth protest too much,” – does that ring a bell? Of course, Shakespeare had a great handle on human nature, didn’t he? Not only have I encountered Obama supporters as vicious in their opposition, but downright unprofessional and mean, such as Mr. Jax’s communication to Dr. Chang.

    As a retired administrative law judge, I have been trained to carefully review and weigh documentary evidence, as well as testimony, and use logic, common sense. We also were taught to observe body language in litigants. When I look at Obama’s eyes, I find them literally blank, “no one there” because throughout his entire campaign, he has not allowed anyone to understand who he really is and what his true intentions are, because he changes with the wind, pursuant to whom he is addressing. His former friend of many years, such as Mr. Wright, whom he has known for at least 20 years, he now denounces as though he did not know him. Mr. Ayres is just somebody in his neighborhood, even though they collaborated together on various Boards, were friends, notwithstanding that evidence has been presented that Mr. Ayres also had significant input into his book publications. And, in the ACORN organization, Obama taught seminars on “power.” Interesting! I bet Obama does know something about hypnotizing and mesmerizing-POWER! Yes, Obama says he only represented them as their counsel. Look at the facts and the background of Obama, and you will find deception, subtlety (which is the opposite of being honest and straightforward), inonsistencies, changes in representations pursuant to whom he speaks to or with and deliberate vagueness. As a matter of fact, I have never, never listened to anyone who is so good at saying nothing, notwithstanding his lack of substance and his ability to twist to his own advantage. Obama has devoted his entire life to his personal success – this is what he is interested in-have you ever heard of narcissism?

    Frankly, do you really believe that Obama could withstand the torture and horrific treatment in a prison camp as Senator McCain has endured, on behalf of the United States of America and its citizens? Never! He is so in love with himself that he would never be able to sacrifice himself and show such love.

    Finally, as a devout Roman Catholic, I will never, never vote for someone who advocates for the slaughter of the innocents which is on Obama’s agenda. He is on par with Herod who slaughtered the innocents to insure in his demented and horrible mind that he killed the Christ Child, which of course, he failed at doing. He is the most liberal proponent of abortion, the act of killing unborn human beings. Ask youself, how could anyone vote against the Infant Protection Act that insured proper care and medical treatment be given infants who survived abortions? This is beyond demonic! Even the most liberal individuals in the Senate, such as Nancy Pelosi, et al, voted for this Act.

    Ask yourselves the question, using common sense, how does someone who is unaccomplished and experienced as Obama, an alleged “community organizer,” someone who has alligned himself with domestic terrorists, enemies of this country, someone who has voted “present” in the Senate for the majority of his career, someone who has voted to kill innocent babies advocating against the Infant Protection Act, someone who finds his greatest inspiration from advocates of communism, someone who was virtually quite unknown, rise to such a potential position of power in such a short time? Think about who is behind this man. There were many other individuals in the Democratic party much more accomplished and worthy to be their nominee. Clearly, doctors and other professionals as well as non-professionals (I am in this latter category since I am currently disabled and am a wife, grandma and homemaker), why would you rule out the possibility of hypnotism, the effect of body language and voice, as possible chosen techniques of Obama? NLP is certainly a possibility, given Dr. Horton’s scholarly and logical commentary.

    I have been praying daily that Our Lord help our country, as well as Our Blessed Mother, Mary, for our country is consecrated to her. I hope that all of you pray to Our Lord for our country, in your various religious traditions, at this important time in history, to help us vote correctly, to vote for LIFE, not the culture of death, not a culture embracing the dictatorship of relativism.

    Sincerely,

    Patricia Chaffin

  4. Philip Ralabate says:

    I read the 66 page PDF file and I ended up speaking to a friend in Tampa today who voted yesterday. My friend is an avid McCain supporter and as I was telling him about the article I heard this long silence on the phone. He then asked if I was joking, because as he was standing in line he began to question his vote. He described it as a very strong feeling or doubt about voting for McCain and maybe he should vote for Obama. He said he finally came to his senses and voted for McCain as he originally intended. He was pretty spooked as this was the first time he was hearing about NLP being used in Obama’s speeches. I’ve read through the above responses and have yet to hear credible evidence from those opposed to this article as to why its flawed specifically.

  5. Maria Chang, Ph.D. says:

    Toby Harden, U.S. editor for the UK’s Telegraph, writes, Nov 3, 2008:

    “Adulation of the Democratic nominee is building to a crescendo. Offering a prayer before a rally in Columbus, Ohio today, Cornal Garnett Henning, an AME bishop for parts of Ohio, West Virginia and Pennsylvania, compared him to Moses and Martin Luther King in the same breath….

    As I left the rally, there was a man chatting into his cell phone while selling clothing that offered a modified version of the national motto of the United States, substituting the candidate’s name in place of that of the Almighty. “In Obama We Trust”, proclaimed his t-shirts.”

  6. Yoshee says:

    Obama is CREEPY. There is no other rational explanation for the Obamamaina. He is unknown, unqualified, untested, and has radical associations. His speeches only mention things we all ready know as true to overload the conscious mind and tells the subconscious mind to vote for Obama. His speeches allows the listener’s imagination fill in the blanks of what he will do. What else explains his cult-like following? His speeches contain 60% hypnotic language; Hitler’s speeches only contained 45% hypnotic language. SCARY!

    Outside his stump speeches, he says he will socialize healthcare, increase income taxes, increase the gas prices to decrease our demand for foreign oil, increase cost of electricity, bankrupt clean coal companies, increase corporate taxes, increase abortion funding (already at $700 million), sign a bill to legalize all abortions (including late term and partial birth abortions), negotiate with terrorist, etc. He will destroy our economy and weaken our military. We will no longer be a superpower These policies are NOT good for America.

    PLEASE,PLEASE save our American FREEDOM and Vote MCCAIN! Vote for anyone else is a vote for Obama.

  7. Ed Whitney MD says:

    Obama’s skills as a communicator seem to be generally agreed upon by contributors to this thread. There continues to be a discussion about the NLP and “hidden hypnosis” techniques that Obama uses in his speeches. The general implication is that Obama, like Hitler, is mesmerizing an entire nation with these techniques, and that only a nefarious politician would ever use such covert techniques.

    Page 19 of the pdf file we are examining refers to Obama’s use of “pace and lead.” The “pace” is a statement that is expected to be agreed upon by any listener; the “lead” is the statement linked to the pacing statement, for which the hypnotist is attempting to secure agreement.

    We could find many examples of pacing and leading in political speech; Obama and Hitler are not the only examples. Consider the beginning of Franklin Roosevelt’s first fireside chat of his second term, delivered in March of 1937:

    “Tonight, sitting at my desk in the White House, I make my first radio report to the people in my second term of office. [pace]
    I am reminded of that evening in March, four years ago, when I made my first radio report to you. We were then in the midst of the great banking crisis. [pace]
    Soon after, with the authority of the Congress, we asked the Nation to turn over all of its privately held gold, dollar for dollar, to the Government of the United States. [pace]
    Today’s recovery proves how right that policy was. [lead]”

    Three statements which were unarguable to his audience were connected to a fourth, namely the vindication of the policies of his first term. NLP had not been invented at the time he gave the speech, nor had John Grinder and Richard Bandler been born. Roosevelt was simply a gifted communicator, whose techniques would later be modeled by NLP.

    FDR was also adept in another technique of Ericksonian hypnosis, namely that of metaphor. Erickson was well-known for his ability to take common, everyday experiences and connect them to other situations in which a particular kind of response was desired. For example, when he was getting the nation to agree to Lend-Lease, he used a metaphor of a garden hose:

    “Suppose my neighbor’s home catches fire, and I have a length of garden hose 400 or 500 feet away. If he can take my garden hose and connect it up with his hydrant, I may help him to put out his fire. Now, what do I do? I don’t say to him before that operation, “Neighbor, my garden hose cost me $15; you have to pay me $15 for it.” What is the transaction that goes on? I don’t want $15 – I want my garden hose back after the fire is over. All right. If it goes through the fire all right, intact, without any damage to it, he gives it back to me and thanks me very much for the use of it.”

    Lend-Lease was unpopular at the time with many of FDR’s detractors, including Father Coughlin and the isolationists in Congress. But it helped keep Great Britain in the war at a time when the US was still totally unprepared for conflict. It made a difference in the outcome of the war.

    FDR did not conceal the cost of war; he warned that wars cost money and that this meant taxes and bonds and sacrifice. This would be a good example for others to follow.

    (Note to Republicans: If you don’t like taxes, don’t launch wars. Don’t embark on utopian ventures to remake the world. )

    No amount of documentation of Obama’s communication techniques will determine whether he bears greater resemblance to Franklin Roosevelt or Adolf Hitler. Nor can a catalogue of his less savory associations, omitting his respectable associations, determine how a voter should vote. Rashid Khalidi, for example, is mentioned on page 65 of the pdf document. Khalidi has been attacked in recent days, as has Obama for having helped fund his work to the tune of about $80,000. But McCain, as chair of the International Republican Institute, donated $448,873 to Khalidi’s group. There was nothing improper in this; Khalidi was a well-known severe critic of Arafat as being a corrupt and disastrous leader of the Palestinian cause.

    We are being asked to be very afraid of the outcome of this election; we are being encouraged to think that we are losing our democracy. The same things happened when FDR was President. We are not electing a Messiah. We are not electing an Anti-Christ. We are electing a President of the United States. There are mechanisms to preserve our liberty if he proves to abuse his power.

    For decades, there has been an increasing concentration of political power in the Oval Office. Secret prisons, illegal wars, and “signing statements” on legislation that subvert the authority of the legislative branch, have been tolerated by all too many people, especially conservatives who should have known better. But political overreach is eventually punished. Fear is not warranted. We are not that deeply asleep. Alertness is warranted, but it can be a relaxed alertness. Hyperbole and worry of a new Hitler only interfere with the kind of attention that is needed. For goodness’ sake, let us not fret about what some t-shirt slogan says! Let’s focus on policies and their implementation, holding Obama to a strict interpretation of “preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

  8. Denise Corcoran says:

    I have just scanned the many comments and would like to sset the record straight about a few things.

    I am trained in both NLP and Ericksonian hypnosis and use it extensively in my work with business leaders, organizations and professionals to help them achieve more of what they aspire and to realize their untapped potential.

    Within organizations, I help them develop strong interpersonal communications that moves them beyond conflict, political agendas and workplace abuse to fostering teamwork, learning and cohesiveness.

    NLP or hypnosis are techniques, tools and processes that address how we/our brains process information through our 5 senses, which defines our view of the world and drives our perceptions, states and behaviors. And ultimately our outcomes in life.

    What determines whether NLP falls under the category of “mind control” has to do with 2 main criteria: intention and consent/agreement.

    Ie., NLP becomes manipulative depending on the intentions of the person using it as being solely for personal gain. NLP is also manipulative the person using it has not made their audience aware of their use of such techniques or are not aware such techniques exist, and are being influenced beyond their consent. NLP or hypnosis is NOT necessarily mind control (although it can be based on those 2 criteria).

    I have read only a small amount of the article mainly because I had already observed from the beginning of this election, Obama was using many NLP oriented techniques (regardless of whether he was trained in them or not). I have had deep concern to the extent that so many people look to Obama as almost a messiah type figure. Yes,

    Given what this country has been going through for the last 8 years (9/11, Iraq, corporate corruption, economic hardship, etc.), it does not surprise me that so many people are feeling vulnerable and frustrated and have hooked into the message of change in an almost cult-like fashion.

    Obama’s ability to deliver that message in ways that do bypass the rational mind and influence them at the unconscious level is critical to be aware of. The techniques Obama is using is no different than the techniques of advertising which is notorious for sending subliminal messages that motivates (in many cases manipulates) people to buy products that has nothing to do with logic.

    I have stopped listening to Obama, as well as the media, because even I who is trained in such techniques know how persuasive they can be and you are not even consciously aware of their power. It is almost impossible to make a truly rational decision if you have exposed yourself to the hypnotic media coverage … which will after awhile take control of your mind.

    As the saying goes, “buyer beware.”

  9. Philip Ralabate says:

    Dr Whitney, could you point an FDR speech in which he comes close to stating saying something like this?

    “a light will shine down from somewhere, it will light upon
    you, you will experience an epiphany, and you will say to yourself, ‘I have to vote for Barack’”

    I believe Obama was using his thumb and forefinger while saying “I have to vote for Barack” which would be the anchor.

  10. Johnny says:

    Oratory? Absolutely.

    Hypnotic? Absolutely. It is apparent and clear that Obama uses the techniques as mentioned in the report. The fact that he uses so many, so often, so well means one thing–it’s purposefully trained and executed. (For those who wonder if that type of thing is possible, read a little about persuasion by Cialdini, Kevin Hogan, etc. Or think back to a time when you felt happy buying something, only to wake up later and wonder what in the world you did and why… The comment by Philip Ralabate was a perfect example.)

    Want a clue about claims of hypnosis/ conversational hypnosis/ covert persuasion? Look at the rationality/ irrationality of the comments.

    After this and the past few presidents (both Democrats and Republicans), there is little need for any American to wonder any more about how people in other countries could have chosen communism, etc. over constitutional freedom.

  11. Patricia G. Chaffin says:

    Ms. Corcoran, I really appreciate your opinion and have learned from your comments, which should be taken very, very seriously given your professional experience.

    Dr. Whitney, a fireside chat given by FDR over the radio, is radically different than the visualization allowed by television and the Internet, which visualization is much more friendly to hypnosis techniques-body and voice language; it is a much different context, and to make such a comparison is a stretch, at best, notwithstanding that your quotations of FDR’s speeches must also be taken in proper context.

    As Mr. Ralabate has stated, there is nowhere that you will find a Messianic comment like the one that Obama made, “a light will shine down from somewhere, it will light upon you, you will experience an epiphany, and you will say to yourself, ‘I have to vote for Barack.’” No wonder the lady recently interviewed said she is voting for Barack now because she does not have to worry about making her mortgage payment, and she knows that Barack will now pay for all of her gas, et al. Give me a break!

    Let us all pray to Our Lord for our country tonight, and may we all vote for a culture of life, not of death!

    Patricia Chaffin

  12. Maria Chang, Ph.D. says:

    @Ed Whitney, MD:

    You wrote “For goodness’ sake, let us not fret about what some t-shirt slogan says!” You missed the point of my highlighting U.S. editor for the UK’s “Telegraph” Toby Harden’s report of a vendor hawking T-shirts that say “In Obama We Trust.” I was pointing to that as a frightening example of the irrational adulation that Obama induces in too many people. Too many look at Obama as their god & messiah. And you’re telling us not to “fret” about this? What happened to the liberal mantra of the “separation of church and state”?

    You also wrote “Let’s focus on policies and their implementation.” Yes, let’s do that.

    How about Obama’s own statements revealing his radical policy agenda, including:

    1. A radical pro-abortion and effective pro-infanticide policy. (Obama voted against the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. As a physician, you are sworn to the Hippocrates Oath. Doesn’t that bother you, Dr. Whitney?)

    2. Wealth, not just income, redistribution. (Remember that the threshold of tax increase has gone from $250,000/year to $120,000/year!)

    3. The formation of a “civilian security force just as powerful and fully funded” as the U.S. military today. (Since each state in the U.S. already has a militia, Obama must mean some separate “security force” along the lines of the Brown Shirts, Red Guards, or the Gestapo SS?)

    4. The further degradation of our education system, already ranking low in science & math achievements compared with other countries, by Bill Ayers’ “educational reforms” of class warfare (euphemistically renamed “social justice”) politicization.

    5. An environmental policy so radical that Obama vows (to the San Francisco Chronicle) he will “bankrupt” the U.S. coal industry.

    6. A naive and misguided worldview of sitting down without preconditions with the world’s dictators & madmen. (Does it not concern you just a tad that Obama is endorsed by EVERY country and political leader hostile to the United States?)

  13. Patricia G. Chaffin says:

    I believe Dr. Chang has made a brilliant summary of the important issues and positions of Obama. Remember this analysis when you vote. We have much to “fret” about in light of these facts, and we have no time for patronizing and condescending comments.

  14. P Moshay says:

    Dr Whitney (and all) – Doesn’t it concern you that apparently Obama has little regard for the Constitution? He’s said intends to appoint Supreme Court Justices based on their degree of ‘empathy’.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122515067227674187.html

    In his ‘01 WBEZ-FM interview he laments, the Warren Court.. “It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution…”

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck

    I suspect Obama’s version of Clintons most famous quote, would be “There is nothing right with America, that can fix what’s wrong with America.”

    Paul Moshay

  15. Andreas says:

    As an NLP and Hypnosis trainer I have to admit that I am fascinated by Obama’s speeches and the impact they have.

    More fascinated than the speeches by Bush, or McCain or Palin, for that matter, even so they also use hypnotic suggestions and linguistic spin to get voters to buy in their agenda.

    Looking around the world, talking to many people in my environment in Malaysia, I know that many in Asia and Europe await change and that change is not coming from the old guard in Washington.

    Now, when you say that only Obama uses hypnotic or whatever language patterns, I have to apologise but we all are hypnotised and use hypnotic language all the time.

    Hypnosis is nothing more than relaxation and a state of heightened awareness.

    The moment you listen to TV, to politicians, to advertisements, to professors in the university, heck, to teachers, your wife and husband, you are going into a trance, and you become suggestible and hypnotised. Go to the church, mosque, temple and you get hypnotised. Listen to music and you get hypnotised. Eat too much, get kind of sleepy, and you are hypnotised. Daydream during a conference and you are hypnotised. Visualise your goals, your vision and your outcomes, and you are hypnotised.

    It is a normal state of living. Otherwise, how do you drive your car? Ride a bicycle? Do you do it consciously? I hope not, because you most probably drive a car consciously only when you sat in it the very first time. You were concentrating and took a conscious effort to use all the gears and pedals, adjusting the rear mirror and more. A week later, you drove it unconsciously, without even thinking about what you are doing. You are in a hypnotic state more than, I don’t know, 80-95% of the time!!

    We are all suggestible to hypnosis all the time. The question is only, are we in a good trance or in a bad trance. Or – do we listen to good news and suggestions or bad suggestions. Are we living in our own trance or in someone else’s trance. If we live in someone else’s trance (and we mostly do), is it a positive or a negative one.

    And it is good to be hypnotised if there are positive suggestions in the message. How about losing a phobia, gaining confidence, elimiating procrastination, managing stress to relaxation?

    Cool, isn’t it, and hypnosis and NLP makes it possible. Let me write a bit about NLP -I actually believe that NLP is very, very similar to Emotional Intelligence, but even deeper. It is the “how-to” to success, and how do you go about creating certain outcomes. How do you manage your emotions, and how do you influence others, positively, at best. Don’t we always need to influence someone, anytime of the day? NLP helps to create win-win situations. Ecology and win-win outcomes are a big thing within NLP trainings.

    In fact, it is my belief that we all use NLP al the time, at least those with a brain. Hm!!

    Now, to end with to an observation that is pointing out something that disturbs me in the article mentioned:

    “Obama is clearly having a powerful effect on people, especially young people and highly educated people—both considered to be especially susceptible to hypnosis. It is also interesting that many Jews are supporting a candidate who is endorsed by Hamas, Farakhan, Khalidi, and Iran.

    While some believe that hypnosis is not real, others believe that it is very powerful, and very dangerous in the wrong hands. Dr. Erickson, father of modern hypnosis, was adamant that his techniques should only be used by physicians. In 1954, the U.S. Supreme Court decided in Leyra v. Denno that a confession obtained using hypnosis could not be used against the suspect in court.”

    Now this is a strange statement. The brain learns by association. What happened in these two little statements is that it easily links Obama with terroristic organisations. The brain does this automatically. Is it positive to link someone or associate someone to such organisations? You decide.

    Is hypnosis dangerous in the wrong hands? Sure it is – but when I hypnotise you and ask you to stand on your head, would you do it? Only if headstands are part of your daily life – if not, you would reject it. You cannot do anything to somebody in hypnosis, what they don’t like and what is against their values and beliefs. What about those who dance on tables under the influence of hypnosis? Well, they are probably the ones who also dance on tables when they are drunk. Same relaxed feeling.

    Sure hypnosis is dangerous, just like a gun. It can be used positively and negatively. Similar, ask yourself, what happens to knifes? It can be used to cut bread or to kill people. What about cars? It is used to bring me to my destination, but happens to kill a lot of people as well.

    But if you were to ask me, what actually is the intention article? Wouldn’t it be great if Obama can hypnotise people and then creates peace? I prefer this over the past eight years of turmoil and war. So I look at results and expectations. Ask me again in one years time, after Obama has been president for one year. And then, I can decide if I still like him or not.

    Any question, just check via my website!

  16. Philip Ralabate says:

    I have one more example to add to the many fine examples made here by some absolutely intelligent and rational folks who seem to get it (Maria Chang, Patricia Chaffin, Johnny, etc). Why would any professional qualified and respectful individual make obscene gestures to both Hillary Clinton and just recently John McCain. Please see example below:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XBMdWxcFXQg

    Would FDR act this way? It can be easily proven that Obama does try to slip these gestures (as pointed out in the article) past the conscious mind. This is an insight into this man’s character, and I fear your checks and balances will disappear once the likes of Obama and a similar minded far left Congress takes over those checks and balances. Using mind control on the masses is not something out of the realm of imagination for Communists. You did point out, but glossed over the fact that Obama has ties to “less savory associations”. Let me be more specific, Bill Ayers, who is a known Communist sympathizer, and rumor has it is on the Khalidi tape sitting at the same table as Obama, the tape that the LA times refuses to release. His ties to Bill Ayers are a fact, and I believe he may have been introduced to the concept of NLP during his community organizer days via Bill Ayers. I still have not been given a satisfactory explanation of how all of these “less savory associations”, obscene gestures, plus a vast amount of video that clearly shows Obama as a left wing extremist that somehow now has a cult like following (after 4 short years in the Senate) by in some cases otherwise rational and intelligent people. My question is he just a good Orator, or a very well trained Hypnotist.

    One last example, let’s take a look at Derren Brown:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=befugtgikMg

    One last example, I have a friend that I have known for years. My friend is one of those folks who is extremely honest, and is a legal consultant for my employer. I spoke to him yesterday morning, and told him about this article. There was a long silence on the phone, and he asked if I was joking with him. He told me he voted the day before (for John McCain) but said as he stood in line to vote, he felt a very strong doubt about casting his vote for McCain, and couldn’t understand why. He had no idea of this article, and it was not just a passing thought. He came to his senses and voted as he originally intended. When I told him of this article and that the subliminal command is supposed to manifest itself while voting, he became very concerned. How many folks who do not have deep seated beliefs, and who are leaning McCain will change their minds while voting? We will find out today, but we do see tight polls, and if we see large breaks for Obama by independents, or Republicans, or a landslide (most polls show a tight race) we may need to ponder the possibility that this article needs to be taken a bit more seriously.

    Regards,
    Philip Ralabate

  17. [...] battle is just beginning. Obama has used a toxic soup of obfuscation, lies, and even hypnotic suggestion/NLP to win his irrational army of voters. However, once he removes the mask of benignity and reveals [...]

  18. Ed Whitney MD says:

    Just have time for a couple of quick points in response to the above.

    The Hippocratic oath in its original form forbade the physician from administering a pessary to induce an abortion. Other methods of abortion known to the ancients were not forbidden by the oath. The version of the oath administered in US medical schools in recent decades is so nonspecific and bland that abortion is not mentioned at all. No physician can be bound by the oath to vote for or against a particular candidate for President. It does not apply to conduct in the voting booth.

    In 1973, when Roe was decided, I recall predictions that very soon there would be dire consequences for the mentally retarded and other “defective” citizens, who would be euthanized or confined to the equivalent of concentration camps. In fact, the rights of the retarded have expanded since 1973. “Sterilization of the feeble-minded” and similar routine pre-Roe practices have nearly disappeared. When I was staff physician at a state home for the developmentally disabled in the early 1980s, there were medical charts from the late 1940s on some of the older residents. At one time, any male resident who crossed a certain line on the grounds three times at that facility lost his testicles automatically. That kind of thing would not likely happen today.

    In addition, although Obama’s record shows a determination to keep Roe as settled law, it does not mean that he is an advocate of infanticide. At the time he recorded his vote in the Illinois legislature against the bill in question, Illinois law already required that medical care be rendered to infants born alive after attempted abortion. He cannot be compared to King Herod without considerable use of the imagination.

    I stick to my assertion that we need not fret about what someone puts on an Obama-worshiping t-shirt. I have no doubt that this happened where it was described to have happened, but it is in the nature of an anecdote: an observation of an event that proves nothing about the big picture. I do not think that most of the support for Obama amounts to deification, any more than I think that the opposition to Obama is motivated by racism. I have heard anecdotes about extremist hatemongers going after Obama on racial grounds, but I assume that most people voting against him do so because they think he is wrong on the issues or is the wrong man for the job, not from racial prejudice. Similarly, I think that most of the votes Obama gets are from citizens who are simply voting for a promise of change. They are likely to be disappointed when President Obama is not able to deliver that change of direction nearly as quickly or effectively as they wish for. But that is a discussion for another day.

    68 comments now. This is an amazing level of interest!

  19. Stephen says:

    Wow, just wow. The fact that such nonsense get published astounds me. The fact that so many people believe or support these ideas is beyond words. The reason why so many people have flocked to the Obama side or had doubts about McCain while at the polls is because the Republicans represent gun toting, anti-abortion, creationist, war mongering right wing extremism. This hypnosis or doubt in what you are calling otherwise intelligent people are their consciences finally kicking in. For years the Bush administration has been using these kinds of techniques of repetition to create fear and thus control you. How many times did you hear the words WMD, terrorist, Al Qaida repeated like a mantra to make you afraid. In your fear, Americans have handed over the freedoms that used to make this theoretically secular nation such a beacon in the world.

  20. Cathy says:

    I’m fascinated by the possibility that Obama makes use of hypnosis. I’m no expert, but I don’t think Palin can really be compared to Obama in the same way because they are two very different personalities. Palin is very charismatic. Obama doesn’t have the same natural “magnetic personality” and doesn’t say anything paricularly inciteful or profound in his speeches but has a very persuasive pattern of rhetoric nonetheless. This is my personal opinion; perhaps he is charismatic to some who are attracted to his character and style. I’ve spent more than one occasion scratching my head, thinking, how does he resound with people by saying so little? I’m looking forward to reading the paper in-depth! By the way, I don’t suppose anyone has noticed how McCain’s and Bush’s voices sound strikingly similiar. I’m willing to bet that hurt McCain’s chances as well.

  21. P Moshay says:

    Stephen – regarding “For years the Bush administration has been using these kinds of techniques of repetition to create fear and thus control…”

    Though I’m a layperson with a mere B.A. and work in this field, it’s not simply a repetition of words, much more is involved; pacing, gestures, inflection designed to suspend rational thought and implant feelings in the subject. As we all know GWB seldom has the ability to deliver a six word sentence without committing malapropisms.

  22. Philip Ralabate says:

    I think Stephen’s response is more than enough proof needed to validate this article.

  23. P Moshay says:

    this is the single best discussion thread in the history of the internet. wish i were able to have all (even you Stephen) over for dinner.

  24. Maria Chang, Ph.D. says:

    I have two postings to contribute, the first in humor, the second in all seriousness. Here’s the first!
    ………………………………………
    The Invasion of the Pod People
    By Old Grumpy Guy on November 6, 2008 at 12:15 PM in Current Affairs

    This election’s have had a profound and disturbing effect on me. After it
    became clear Obama was going to win I was so depressed that I lay awake most of the night with a feeling that I was surrounded by alien forces trying to break down my door.

    I felt like I was in one of those movies from the 50s and 60s where people’s identities are taken over by alien forces and the central character is the only sane and uncorrupted person left on earth.

    I thought of the central figure in the 1950s classic The Day of The Triffids, fighting against giant plants that were taking over people’s bodies and turning them into Pod Creatures. In my imagination I saw America being
    overtaken by Pod People, some wearing Obama masks and some having the faces of Louis Farrakhan, The Reverend Jeremiah Wright, Khalid al Mansour, Puff Daddy, Nancy Pelosi and Howard Dean.

    Although I tried to warn everyone of the danger, nobody took any notice.
    Including my wife, who was and is a great Hillary Clinton supporter and felt
    it her duty to vote Democrat, which she’s done all her life. It seemed as if
    she had also been taken over by the Pod people and I suddenly felt I was
    living with an alien who would let the Pod People get me given half a chance. She wants me to be a Pod Person like all the other people who voted for Obama.

    Memories of other scary movies came flooding into my mind, like The Omega Man, in which Charleton Heston finds he is the last defender of humanity and western civilization after people start turning into vampires.

    I saw the population of America turned into zombies by Barack Obama’s
    rhetoric, and everyone being forced to listen to nothing but rap music and
    Obama broadcasts.

    I thought of The Invasion of The Body Snatchers, where a small town doctor realises that his friends and neighbors are being turned into mindless automatons by an alien life force that is using them like puppets.

    People from the Night of the Living Dead were banging on my bedroom window and shouting obscenities at me, calling me a douchebag and other names favored by Obamabots. There seemed to be no escape from them.

    I was also reminded of the movie The Creature Walks Among Us. I wonder why? And who the creature might be? I leave that for you to decide.

    When I finally forced myself out of bed in the stark light of day, I was so
    depressed that I almost didnt upload my second video on prejudice,
    imaginatively entitled PREJUDICE 2: The Sequel (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GtQRN6v7VNc). I thought it might be a little frivolous under the circumstances. In the end I decided to upload it anyway, and Im glad I did because quite a few people commented that it helped to lift their spirits.

    But what about my spirits? Here I am living with an alien (who is upstairs
    as we speak, probably eavesdropping on everything I do and say so she can report it to her Pod Masters). Here I am witnessing the end of western
    civilization as we know it, and wondering if I’m the only person left to try
    to save our cultural and spiritual heritage for future generations.

    But I draw some comfort from the fact that I have met some wonderful people on my Youtube channel (and here on No Quarter), who come from all walks and all political parties and who share a love of decency and civilized behavior.

    To them and everyone else I say: Keep fighting, for God’s sake! Don’t let the Pod People win!

  25. Maria Chang, Ph.D. says:

    Here’s the second serious one:
    ………………………………..

    Obama Building White House Team
    by Christopher Wills, David Espo, & Nedra Pickler
    AP

    WASHINGTON (Nov. 6) – Barack Obama is signaling a shift in tactics and temperament as he moves from candidate to president-elect, picking sharp-elbowed Washington insiders for top posts.

    His choice Thursday for White House chief of staff — Rahm Emanuel, a fiery partisan who doesn’t mind breaking glass and hurting feelings — is a significant departure from the soft-spoken, low-key aides that “No-Drama Obama” surrounded himself with during his campaign. And transition chief John Podesta, like Emanuel, is a former top aide to Bill Clinton and a tough partisan infighter, though less bombastic than the new chief of staff.

  26. P Moshay says:

    Off topic, and this piece may be over-reaching a bit. There’s seems IMO to be strong enough evidence presented to seriously consider it’s conclusion. Wondering what others appraisal might be.

    http://www.faithfreedom.org/obama.html

  27. Ed Whitney MD says:

    With respect to http://www.faithfreedom.org/obama.html, I invoke Dodd’s corollary to Godwin’s Law.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwins_law has the details.

    This applies to analogies between Obama’s proposed expansion of AmeriCorps and the Peace Corps (a position also supported by McCain) and the Brown Shirts or the Gestapo SS.

    I was asked about Obama’s alleged endorsement by dictators who hate us. But Obama’s support was strong among those who can help us in the years ahead. His election has been welcomed in many countries.

    With respect to America’s image abroad, its dramatic change in the last few days has implications far beyond the fact that people in Europe have been having the Stars and Stripes painted on their faces. It improves national security in a variety of ways. This includes the fact that widespread American popularity weakens recruitment to radical Islamic movements, increases the likelihood of getting human intelligence in certain locations, and makes life easier for pro-American political leaders, especially in democracies abroad. Good will towards the US across the world is necessary for our own safety. We cannot get it by force.

    For years, American foreign policy was guided by a vastly exaggerated estimation of the efficacy of force to achieve political purposes. The Global War on Terror was not adequately debated in the campaign. Neither candidate seriously asked whether the GWOT could be continued for decades. The GWOT is a failing experiment in trying to manage history and shape the world in our image. The Constitution was made to provide for the common defense, not to project power across the globe. Both candidates, unfortunately, were in the same deep trance state when it came to the idea that we need to invade other countries and change their governments; their disagreement was conducted at a superficial level over operational priorities. For McCain, it was Iraq; for Obama, it was Afghanistan.

    I am indebted to Andrew Bacevich for formulating these thoughts; he was West Point class of 1969, served 23 years in the Army, taught at West Point, and now teaches at Boston University. His book, The Limits of Power, is short and is composed in elegant prose that is a pleasure to read. He was on neither candidate’s payroll or Rolodex. But he is a clear and eloquent thinker.

    Bacevich points out one thing about the GWOT that bears mention with respect to the issue of taxes. The burden for the war has fallen on one half of one percent of the population, namely on the active military. The Bush doctrine was that the rest of us did not need to make sacrifices to pay for the war. We needed to go shopping and go to Disney World. We ought to pay for the war if we want it, not borrowing from foreign countries. No political leader has required Americans to modify the way we live in order to underwrite the war.

    Obama’s leadership is still being defined. We need to watch for his ability to seize the moment and use the surge of world-wide optimism to create a better approach to matters of war and peace. We do not need to look for him to seize all power for himself and make himself absolute master of the United States. I have seen nothing reminiscent of Nuremberg rallies or torchlight marches. History deserves our respect. Inappropriate Nazi analogies cheapen history and weaken our need to be vigilant for the real thing, if ever it recurs. We owe it to the victims of that era to remember what it was that they actually lived through.

  28. Ed Whitney MD says:

    I nearly forgot. A free sample of the Bacevich eloquence can be seen at http://aep.typepad.com/american_empire_project/2008/10/expanding-war-c.html.

    He is in no hypnotic trance regarding anything. On 9-11 of this year, he posted http://aep.typepad.com/american_empire_project/2008/09/911-plus-seven.html where you can see his sober and even delivery of his analysis.

    His vote for Obama was made with eyes open about the limitations of what Obama is likely to accomplish. I only wish that his voice were more widely heard. A perusal of these two links may make it clear why I hold him in high esteem and put him forth as a role model for political discourse in the future.

  29. P Moshay says:

    Thank you for the Bacevich blog pointer, will look up his book. Agreed about the Godwin’s law dynamic in play in the narcissism piece. The author cited behaviors one might classify as narcissistic, overshot absurdly aiming for that diagnosis. I wish O. had been on the playing field sooner for I would have been sold. These days, Dr Ron Paul’s liberty message seems to ring truer IMHO, ontologically.

  30. As a professional hypnotist, I would like to point out that this article is extremely misleading and absurd, containing many inaccuracies and a tremendous amount of “magical thinking” itself.

    This article is beneath the dignity of a group devoted to men and women of science.

    The Obama logo a “crystal ball?” Come on! Right there that should consign this article to the dustbin. But if that’s not enough…

    First, NLP was not created by Dr. Milton Erickson. It was created by two non-doctors- John Grinder and Richard Bandler. They consulted with numerous change agents, among them Erickson, Virginia Satir, Fritz Perls and others. Here is the first factual error, in the second sentence. It only gets more ridiculous from there.

    I won’t address each silly assertion individually but the simple fact of the matter is that Milton Erickson and most other professional hypnotists would agree that there is little difference (or none) between effective persuasive speech and hypnosis. That is simply what hypnosis is.

    This anonymous and unscrupulous author is trying to equate the general tools of good oratory with hypnosis. And since hypnosis is equated by the hysterical religious type with occultism, mysticism, magic, dark arts, it then immediately becomes something scary and dangerous.

    The idea that hypnosis can somehow cause people to behave like “automatons” is utter poppycock. This irrational and superstitious view of hypnosis is completely degrading to both hypnosis and this group.

    If we are going to convict people in the court of public opinion for using “hypnosis” let us begin with commercial advertisers, then move to political commentators, radio talk-show hosts, and then finally all politicians in general.

  31. Ann Evans says:

    i think it’s important to explain that the references to NLP are highly misinformed. First of all, NLP is used by doctors and politicians, salesmen, advertising agencies, government PR agencies, preachers, etc. Yet the techniques cited in this are the same ones used throughout history by ministers and orators, long before NLP was developed. Moreover NLP was not developed by Milton Erickson. It was developed through the study of Milton Erickson by Bandler and Grinder, who used their understanding of his work to create NLP. They published the study so that anyone who is at all interested can learn to do it themselves. http://www.amazon.com/Patterns-Hypnotic-Techniques-Milton-Erickson/dp/1555520537/ref=pd_bbs_sr_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1226250112&sr=8-3 Yet Bandler and Grinder went further, showing that all people are under hypnosis from the time they are born, for that is how we learn to function in society. In fact we are so susceptible to suggestion under the right circumstances that we can watch a TV commercial and go out and buy something we not only cannot afford but also know is unhealthy, and do it repeatedly. It is our individual responsibility to take care of our own health, and therefore make sure we take care of our actions and not blame others for being able to hypnotize us. That said, I’m extremely glad to see someone like Obama being smart enough to use oratory techniques and succeed. I believe this country needs someone who can rouse people to action at home and away from war in the Middle East, and he seems capable of doing that. For those who say he’s inexperienced, well so was JFK.

  32. Ann Evans says:

    This is just to add that I started reading the paper, and it uses many of what it calls hypnosis techniques. I don’t even need to list them because as you’re reading, it tells you exactly what they are! The fact that we are even discussing it is a comedy –

  33. Thanks to hypnotist Jason Newcomb above and others for clarifying limits of hypnosis–and NLP.

    Much more importantly we should pay attention to Obama’s words and understand that he will unconsciously chose words to communicate revealing unconscious messages. Literally he may be saying one thing but symbolically (how the unconscious mind communicates) between the lines another. The unconscious mind is far more brilliant and communicative than we have ever realized as recent research shows.

    For example, I described Obama’s unconscious Muslim identification in above article from my website. (Americasstrugglewithsuccess.com) This article will also take you to my other website ina

  34. To continue, among other warnings Obama is unconsciously warning us about his Muslim identification which could threaten America and come into play in his handling of confrontations/negoitations with Muslim countries where he suggests excessive sympathies.

    The understanding of unconscious communication is a vital new part of psychology in general and explained on my additional website deeperintelligence.com.

    It has proved very useful both in therapy and in forensic profiling as well as profiling leaders.

  35. Nancy Huckle says:

    I really would have to question if some of you are actually doctors and if you are not trained or educated in the Psycho-Science areas, then you have no more idea of this science than a lay person like myself.
    I have, however, read much in respect to mind control techniques that have been implemented and used perennially over the past century in many areas, INCLUDING politics.
    Perhaps some of you are Democrats who wanted to see a Democratic government instead of a Republican government or perhaps and even more startling: Perhaps you have been mind controlled yourselves by Obama.
    In any case, I personally believe that this is legitimate and would support this theory based on my own research.
    Has it even occurred to any of you opposing this that perhaps you are part of the problem instead of being a part of the solution?

  36. Andrew says:

    There will be many who will want to disregard this paper but they will at their own peril. While the paper may go a bit far in analysis it is not too far off.

    I analyze political speeches and marketing campaigns. Obama’s techniques are a bit extreme.

    Instead of talking issues, he talks emotions to get his listeners emotionally committed to him. The result is, regardless of where he stands on the issues, his supporters will defend him no matter what because they have committed their emotions to him.

    The technique is similar to what is used in marketing. Coca-Cola can’t tell you over the television what it tastes like, so they create an emotional bound with their product, such as having Santa Claus or polar bears drinking Coca Cola. Television is notorious for making illogical comparisons and associations stick. The technique works very well with music. Ever had one of those commercial songs get in your head when you did not want it there?

    In politics, flags designate nations or political parties. We are aware of the donkey for Democrats and the elephant for Republicans. Symbols allow for a quick emotional association. It is used in sports also. However, in extreme parties, the Nazis used the swastika and the communists used the hammer and sickle to rein terror over people. The symbols became a focus of intense emotional commitment. This allowed people to be ordered about to do things they normally would not do.

    What is truly disturbing about Obama is his use of the red white and blue Orb, and his empty appeals to emotions and his vast marketing techniques. You can read an Obama speech and find it filled with empty fluff. His statements of policy are contradictory, hypocritical and often just plain useless. However, his soaring speeches catch many people off guard and cause a readiness to listen. Try to get just two Obama supporters to name three things Obama will do, and you will get a confused response, but attack Obama and they will immediately come to his defense. This is dangerous because defending Obama’s power becomes more important than the issues. Obama appears to have been elected in the same way someone wins on American Idol.

    What is needed is a comparison study. Are Obama supporters’ heavy television watchers? Are they heavier impulse buyers than other people? Are they prone to be emotionally disturbed and need assurance? The topic deserves further study.

  37. Maria Chang, Ph. D. says:

    http://www.howobamagotelected.com/
    Zogby Poll of 512 Obama Voters 11/13/08-11/15/08 MOE +/- 4.4 points
    97.1% High School Graduate or higher, 55% College Graduates

    Results to 12 simple Multiple Choice Questions:

    *57.4% could NOT correctly say which party controls congress (50/50 shot just by guessing)

    *81.8% could NOT correctly say Joe Biden quit a previous campaign because of plagiarism (25% chance by guessing)

    *82.6% could NOT correctly say that Barack Obama won his first election by getting opponents kicked off the ballot (25% chance by guessing)

    *88.4% could NOT correctly say that Obama said his policies would likely
    bankrupt the coal industry and make energy rates skyrocket (25% chance by guessing)

    *56.1% could NOT correctly say Obama started his political career at the home of two former members of the Weather Underground (25% chance by guessing).

    And yet…..
    *Only 13.7% failed to identify Sarah Palin as the person on which their party spent $150,000 in clothes

    *Only 6.2% failed to identify Palin as the one with a pregnant teenage
    daughter

    *And 86.9 % thought that Palin said that she could see Russia from her
    “house,” even though that was Tina Fey who said that!!

    *Only 2.4% got at least 11 correct.
    *Only .5% got all of them correct. (And we “gave” one answer that was
    technically not Palin, but actually Tina Fey)

  38. [...] View JayRodriguez: You don’t REALLY like Obama, he’s just CONTROLLING YOUR BRAIN: http://www.aapsonline.org/newsoftheday/0089 . I need to learn hypnosis. 2008-11-06 16:54:03 · Reply · View NurtureU: Fountain [...]

  39. Maria Chang, Ph. D. says:

    To sign a petition to the Electoral College, Congress of the United
    States, Federal Elections Commission, U.S. Supreme Court, President of the United States, other controlling legal authorities, for public release of
    Obama’s birth certificate, go to
    http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=81550

    For article on this: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=81943

  40. [...] Oratory—or hypnotic induction? – Or is he deliberately using the techniques of neurolinguistic programming (NLP), a covert form of hypnosis developed by Milton Erickson, MD? A fundamental tool of “conversational hypnosis” is pacing and leading—a way for the hypnotist … [...]

  41. Zjeraar says:

    The complet Zogby poll was negatively-oriented towards Obama and Obama-voters. Of course a lot of people didn’t and don’t know most questions regarding negative details about Obama’s career. Of course Obama-voters tend to believe ‘McCain’ should be the answer to these questions.

    And of course Obama-voters associated Palin with clothes, a pregnant teenage daughter and such. Really, did you need this so-called ‘poll’ to tell you that? A similar poll oriented towards McCain-voters would likely have the same effect.

    One question in particular seemed to be manipulative: the one where ‘Tina Fey’ was the answer. How could the majority have answered this question erroneosly when it was supposed to be multiple choice?

    Talk about hypnosis… You people are being insincere.

  42. [...] From Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, Inc. [...]

  43. E Kramer says:

    I just checked out this article, as well as the AAPS’ website, after a friend sent me the link to the positively laughable online video that was spawned by it. Though it’s now months after it’s first appearance, I find myself compelled to comment.

    This trash article, though it links to a full 66 page version, is unattributed – a typical ploy of Right Wing smear tactics:

    ” A 66-page, extensively footnoted but unsigned article “An Examination of Obama’s Use of Hidden Hypnosis Techniques in His Speeches” is available at: http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Find-Freedom.htm?At=039963&From=News

    Would a legitimate and supposedly scholarly website that hopes to maintain any sort of professional credence dare to publish such an unsigned piece-of-crap as this?

    Although the AAPS claims to be ‘a non-partisan professional association, the vast majority of articles and postings on your website clearly demonstrate an extreme reactionary and right-wing bent, an analysis that’s again reinforced by the majority of other comments at the end of this foolish ‘Obama hypnosis’ article, which just happened to appear on the AAPS website barely a week prior to last November’s presidential election.

    Coincidence?? I don’t think so.

  44. Bryan says:

    What about when subliminal and hypnotic imagery and mantra like chanting are used to push the unknowing publics fear buttons.
    this could obviously become a much longer more in dept post.
    I was particularly amazed by how much effort and messaging was found in this official campaign video. just freeze framing showed what the campaign was REALLY up to stirring.
    check it out.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYlI0fHJrB0

    thanks and take care

  45. Prashanth says:

    Are you guys nuts….and some bolts thrown in together, maybe? What kind of a pseudo-scientific analysis you present here. Be proud you have a thinking human as a President after a bumbling dimwit among apes as the previous one.

  46. rac says:

    As a retired psychologist, I was brainwashed by the same psuedo-science theorizing which brought you to believe the B.S. of this obsessive-compulsive drivel…Common sense suggests this is entirely Republican-driven theorizing and terrorizing….Obama? He is a most refreshing return to intelligence, sanity, and cool in your country…

  47. [...] Oratory—or hypnotic induction? Is Barack Obama a brilliant orator, captivating millions through his eloquence? Or is he deliberately using the techniques of neurolinguistic programming (NLP), a covert form of hypnosis developed by Milton Erickson, M.D.? [...]

  48. NLP or not all the points made are standard for speech writing, public speaking, and most of all sales. In sales we are taught always to ask questions that a person responds yes to. Never a question one might say no to. For instance looking at a luxury car the salesman may start with “that’s a great car…” who could disagree. “we need change” absolutely. Deliberately using the technique of NLP to me seems like there is an underlying motive. I think we all try to manipulate each other through emotions.

  49. a says:

    I think the fact that this article is cited by Conservapedia should be enough to prove that the information on this page is bullshit. Obama hasn’t hypnotically made people vote for him, Sarah Palin and John McCain were simply both demonstrated to be imbeciles, and the fact that you’d write like he’s capable of mind tricks when his wording is pretty much the same used by anyone in any election campaign just smacks of the usual Republican stupidity we’ve come to see recently.

Leave a Reply