You are here

Republican to English Dictionary

Often, some Republicans say things that sound a bit odd to those of us with other political persuasions. Here is a list of English words, accompanied by what many Republicans seem to think that they mean:

activist judge
a judge who actively reads the Constitution before making a judgment
person who refuses to deny global warming
see: terrorist
a person who hates God
supported by the entire Republican Party, plus Joe Lieberman
Beltway Journalist's Common Wisdom (as seen on Megacorporate TV)
Truth is always exactly halfway between whatever the Republican Party and the Democratic Party are currently saying. Making conclusions by objectively judging the facts which differ from the current center is yucky and is to be avoided at all costs, because that is what all regular everyday Americans want. If we ever reported objectively, we would lose our eternal nonpartisanship, the one thing that makes us special and better than everyone else (especially the dirty fucking hippy bloggers).
Christian (fundamentalist a.k.a. “born again”)
a member of the Republican Party
Christian (other)
closet atheist
civil liberties extremist
person who supports warrants
any person who supports George W. Bush (e.g. Joe Lieberman, Ann Coulter, Zell Miller)
Democratic Party
see: Democrat Party
Democrat Party
Al Qaeda fan club
warmer, fuzzier word for prisoner
faith-based initiative
government initiative respecting an establishment of religion
electorally viable liberal Democratic presidential candidate
the enemy
varies; please see today's civilization-threatening enemy bent on our total annihilation at
fair and balanced
biased as fuck
family values (a.k.a. moral values)
person who supports warrants
fertilized human egg
A person with inalienable personal rights (as long as it is eventually born and he or she doesn't end up gay)
hatred of America
hatred of the Republican Party
a conscious choice to spit directly in Baby Jesus' face. Though no one is naturally gay, many people are tempted into homosexuality by the lures of soul-crushing social stigmas and the loss of equal protection of the law.
giving aid and comfort to the enemy
opposing illegal warfare and domestic spying
person who eventually reincarnated into Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
I don't recall (link nsfw)
I recall, but if I told you, you would probably send me to prison for a long time
The Internets
The Internets is not something you can just dump something on, it's not a big truck. It's a series of tubes, invented by Al Gore and pluralized by George W. Bush
legal immigrant
white person who has moved to America to build a better life and live in freedom; rarely, a non-white person with American family members.
illegal immigrant (pronounced gawd dam uhh-lEEguhl)
Mexican criminal who has moved to invaded America to steal our jobs, sell drugs to our kids, rape and shoot at people indiscriminately, leech off of our welfare programs, and reduce the value of our property.
immigration reduction
getting rid of the Mexicans
Terrorist religion; Islam was the official religion of Nazi Germany. Don't look that up.
the Nazi-like followers of Islam
Ancient white Jewish male who personally founded the Republican Party. He preached the virtues of theocracy, homophobia, sexism, racism, and tax cuts for rich people. Worm-like, Jesus is known to sometimes reside inside the hearts of some humans, usually preferring those from poverty-stricken areas with substandard levels of education.
broadcast of Republican talking points
less conservative than Ronald Reagan
any person who does not support George W. Bush (e.g. Ron Paul, Pat Buchanan, and Dennis Kucinich are all very liberal)
liberal media
any media outlet with an insufficiently conservative bias. Everyone knows that the mainstream media has a liberal bias. It's science.
Neville Chamberlain
A British politician who attempted to prevent Nazi Germany from taking over other European countries by giving Nazi Germany control of other European countries. All comparisons of anti-war Democrats to Neville Chamberlain are totally accurate and in no way retarded.
New York Times
Newspaper company run by Al Qaeda
a person who supports creation of a domestic police state and endless warfare
perjury (Democratic)
a high crime warranting impeachment and removal from office
perjury (Republican)
a pretend crime that should never be prosecuted, because the REAL underlying crime has yet to be disposed (because the Republican lied to cover it up). This would merely waste precious taxpayer money that could otherwise be spent paying for 30 seconds of the Iraqi War.
against workers rights, fair wages, and taxation of upper-income individuals
very anti-gay
Favoring government-sponsored killing though warfare and capital punishment, while opposing the destruction of living human tissue not part of a person.
Republican Party
Jesus' favorite party; composed of all patriotic Americans who want to Win The War at any cost, no matter how much political framing and distortion of reality is required
Ron Paul
a sneaky liberal Democrat posing as a Republican
small government conservatism (a.k.a. limited government conservatism)
support for a massive government police state, in a continuous state of war and with unlimited power to monitor and regulate the activities of the people
special interest group
organized group of people who don't vote for Republicans
states' rights
states' rights to criminalize abortion and oppress minorities
stay the course
deny error when caught making a mistake; continue mistake and redouble efforts/resources
strict constructionist
judicial philosophy involving a strictly constructed fictional reality where America is a Christian Nation founded by people who hated gays, women, and foreigners; who seceded from Great Britain because the King did not have enough executive power over them.
strong on national security
weak on liberty, rule of law; cowardly
supporting the troops
Forcing the troops to remain in service beyond their contracts, while reducing their pay and health care benefits; sending them to invade foreign countries for bogus reasons while refusing to buy them adequate body armor; compensating for this by buying yellow ribbons while filling up the S.U.V. and accusing other people of not supporting the troops.
The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a (non-Republican) person or organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.
War On Terrorism
Republican attempt at stopping groups of people from unlawfully intimidating or attacking other groups of people for political/ideological reasons, by making threats and using violence to intimidate and coerce them (for ideological and political reasons.)
I do not believe I can provide a definition of torture, because I believe it is wise for us not to describe precisely what illegal, excruciatingly painful techniques our government is using in interrogating people we don't like. As long as we don't officially admit that we are waterboarding prisoners, terrorists will have absolutely no idea that we are doing so. If they knew, they could prepare by growing gills or an extra set of lungs, thus rendering our precious torture technique as quaint as the Geneva Conventions.
any person who voices opposition to Republican foreign policy
uniter, not a divider
an amoral, hyper-partisan politician who encourages polarization on a national scale by repeatedly insinuating that one half of the population are traitors, without regard to what the consequences might be beyond the next election.
unlawful enemy combatant
prisoner held unlawfully in custody
a special right for terrorists attempting to destroy America
an extreme sport popular among surfers on Middle Eastern beaches. Republicans sometimes secretly arrange for super-duper bad guys to get to go waterboarding, in hopes of winning them over. People who go waterboarding tend to always provide completely accurate information, which is definitely not random bullshit made up on the spot in an effort to end the waterboarding. These people, like all other torture victims, foster a deep-seated love for all Americans. They go on to spend the rest of their lives not dwelling on their immense hatred for us, and especially not plotting to take violent revenge on us at any cost.
Winston Churchill
A principled, stubborn politician who stood up to belligerent foreign nations that started unprovoked wars of aggression and refused to stop fighting when the situation looked grim. Churchill is a direct parallel to George W. Bush and the other war advocates of our time, except for the small difference that this time the stubborn leader who refuses to give up is actually in charge of the country starting unprovoked wars of aggression.


OMG that was SOOOOOO funny. I was laughing really hard!

Funny...but false...sorry.

So funny and true.

As a dual citizen, British/Canadian, I have grown up next door to you, the United States, I would say "of America"; but; I'm not sure, is it of "Vietnam", "Central America","Iraq"? Oh well I will get it straight; sooner or later. In the mean time my partner is watching television behind me, and I can just hear the program,something about $7,000,000,000 (now I think thats right, numbers that big are hard to get my head around). Seven billion on a war that is not a war. ~Forget it; yep the above article has some humour. After a re-read I must say you have achieved a good satirical approach to a sad situation.

Funny and so, so true.

I must admit that I am amused and concerned by the ignorance and stupidity displayed by "Left Wing" people.

"Left Wing" meaning SOCIALIST by nature and attitude.

You talk down to those people who wish to see the United States stay free.

They wish to look down on those people who are trying to keep the "Terrorist" OVER in their own countries. They talk and write like petulant children who attack with emotion rather than logic.

The SERIOUSLY slanted definitions I read were exactly what I would expect from Childish, ignorant people.

I don't suppose you would happen to know how many terrorist plots have been disrupted and/or terrorist have been captured since the 911 situation happened eh?

I don't either. I do however know that there have been several.

When Mr Bill was in office why didn't he take Osama Bin Laden when he had the chance? (NO BALLS thats why) (Bin Laden was wanted for the FIRST World Trade Center bombing)

If you people want to act like there isn't any problem, try this...

Go to Saudi Arabia (the country that most of the 911 Terrorist came from by the way) and try to get into their country with a King James version of the Bible. IT WON'T happen.

Look I don't agree 100% with the Republican party or the President. But I damn sure don't like Socialist, OR light weight punks in charge of our country.

We were founded by a group of Rebels. Think about this too. The Islamic fascist want to dictate policy to us and the rest of the world. Their law is STRICT (Women do you want to be forced to stay at home, unable to go out when you wish? Do you want to do without school? How about wearing a rag over your face to keep yourself Chaste?

Yeah, just keep thinking they don't want to do that to us...

Trust me they do. AND they will if we give them a chance.

ROFL!!! You mean there are still paranoid right wing conspiracists out there. Thanks for the laugh--keep your head in the sand--and keep wondering why the right wing is getting kicked in the ass by the left-and maybe consider some antipsychotic medications and counseling. Yeah, it's time to take that metal colander with aluminum foil fittings off your head!

Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
(Usually attributed to Benjamin Franklin)

Well John, I guess we can see the truth of some of the definitions given above just from your extreme reaction to the article.

A while back (in the 1980's or 90's), there was supposedly a study by the United Nations on the freedom percentage of various nations.

The U.S. ranked around 14 or so.

Do you think we've gotten better or worse since Shrubya has been in office?

There's another report, one I can find. It's from Privacy Internaitonal and can be found off their website at . In it, they show that the U.S. dropped from an extensive surveillance society to an endemic surveillance society.

And you are applauding this change?

I want you to tell me something also.

First I will answer your points.

My extreme reaction first. I am a RETIRED soldier. I will fight the enemy of my country be it foreign or domestic.

Guess what? Right now there are enemies of our people here and we don't have a means of recognizing them readily. So the President and his advisor's have had to use drastic means to accomplish this. So yes I know that the Intelligence community is being used in the United States. I don't like it but I would prefer that to being blown all to hell by a bunch of psychotics.

I actually laugh at this.
ANY study done by the United Nations would be tainted simply because the United Nations is being run by people who don't care for the Untied States.
The United Nations is run by a bunch of cowardly bastards who look upon the United States Government as a Cowboy Nation. They are more concerned in the possibility of making the United States look bad than they are in helping countries and peoples that really need it.

If you don't believe it look at what is happening on the African Continent and tell me that they shouldn't be calling for Military action to get the Genocide under control. (If it happened here they would be cheering)
What I am applauding is the destruction of groups, countries, or peoples that want to see the United States policies and / or it's people harmed.

By the way I don't go looking for crap to talk down about my country. Call me over zealous but you know something? I don't care. If studies are conducted by people who are looking for ways to make the United States Government look bad there had better be some seriously good reason for it.
Also, If you look for something bad you can usually find it. Honestly, NO ONE is perfect. And we are a NATION of PEOPLE.

You and others can look at me and shake your collective heads.(Socialist slight (JOKE?)) I really don't care. Our country needs to be protected internally and externally.
Some people say we have a suspension of legal rights. NOT TRUE. Not only have we still got those "Rights" but we have to recognize that some flexibility must be put into place at times to allow for Security.

  • There is no way in hell any rag-tag group of foreign religious wackos could conceivably be able to invade and occupy the U.S., which they would have to do to force sharia law on the population. Not possible. No way. Will. Not. Happen.
  • Besides, we already have a group of domestic religious wackos forcing their religious beliefs on us, many of which are remarkably similar to the foreigners you speak of
  • "You talk down to those people who wish to see the United States stay free." I talk down to the people who have made Americans less free by passing the Patriot Act, the Protect America Act, the Military Commissions Act, by suspending Habeas Corpus, by denying the accused the right to a fair trial, by spying on the American people without judicial oversight, by taking a huge shit on the rule of law and wiping their asses with the Bill of Rights.

You are obviously not the sharpest knife in the drawer.
You said:
There is no way in hell any rag-tag group of foreign religious wackos could conceivably be able to invade and occupy the U.S., which they would have to do to force Sharia Law on the population.

Their goal was NOT to occupy the United States. Their goal was to cause the United States people to have fear for the lives of not only themselves but their families.

The did that.
THEN the United States people got PISSED. The President took the OFFENSIVE. He took the OFFENSIVE and attacked the stronghold of the people who attacked the United States. The Military destroyed that, then they turned their sites on Iraq.

The reason for Iraq was far more simple than people understand.

From this link:

Saddam Hussein has repeatedly violated sixteen United Nations Security Council Resolutions (UNSCRs) designed to ensure that Iraq does not pose a threat to international peace and security.

He, Saddam Hussein, attacked people in his own country and Iran with WMD's. Do you think that he would hesitate to arm people who would do the United States, it's people, friends, or it's interests harm? are you naive enough to think he would NEVER do such a thing if he had already done so to his own people? I mean AFTER the United States had already beat the hell out of his army before?

I don't like that we have had to change and bend the laws to get what we need done for the security of our country but you know something?
We need to do more. We need to post some of the things that were accomplished by the manipulations of those laws that were put in place and adjusted.

There is an old saying, "Freedom isn't FREE!", and it's true. We have to do things that we don't like sometimes.
I am a Retired Soldier and I don't like the things that we have to do sometimes.

Think about this though, because we are a "Free" society and have HUGE numbers of people in our country that we can't track easily we MUST find a means to protect our people.
If you don't think that we will be attacked again you're an idiot or just plain stupid. ( I would say a fool but I don't like the term)

Our freedoms indeed are not free. They must be defended from any tyrants, including those who would usurp them in the name of fighting eternal wars against foreign enemies.

James Madison warned that "if Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy" and that "no nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare."

You do know that the WMD Saddam Hussein had were sold to him by the United States, right? The Reagan Administration sold him chemical weapons with the understanding that they would be used against Iran during the Iraq-Iran War (which they were).

And if you really think Bush, Jr. invaded Iraq because he gives a crap about U.N. resolutions (an invasion the U.N. Secretary-General himself said was not authorized by the resolutions), I'd love to hear you explain why he hasn't invaded Israel. They've broken their share of U.N. resolutions, and they actually DID develop nuclear WMD.

I love it when arm chair generals who more then likely do not possess any formal knowledge on the issue of national security make gracious statements. Such statements like:

“There is no way in hell any rag-tag group of foreign religious wackos could conceivably be able to invade and occupy the U.S., which they would have to do to force sharia law on the population. Not possible. No way. Will. Not. Happen.”

You see this sophomoric comment stems from the idea that the only way to successfully coerce an open / free, representative republic style state actor is via the use of military force. This is of course not true. During the bluffing and bullying game of international politics, representative republics are inherently vulnerable to “external meddlers” such rogue regimes, transnational terrorist organizations or would be peer competitors states funding and supporting “internal political dissidents” (like the left wingers found on this website) with the goal of undermining “national will” – support of policy in peace or wartime, of a policy the external meddler deems undesirable. (1)

Such a strategy is formulated on the observation that the decision making stratum found within representative republics are by definition dependant on what is commonly referred to as the “social contract” all one need do is change the polis viewpoint on said issue (say like adopting Sharia law). One can readily observe the historical implementation of this strategy by Americas’ previous adversaries as well as their contemporary counterparts. Historical adversaries such as the Soviet Union formulated what was known as the “Marxist Military Doctrine”. Marxist Military Doctrine from a reverse perspective of Clausewitz strategy viewed peace as only a alternative means for war. Soviet statecraft operating under this conclusion implemented what are in effect lesser forms of war such as subversion, sabotage, encouragement of colonial aggression – commonly referred to as bait and bleed, and satellite aggression- bloodletting. One can find may different books – ones that I will not name here - that define the contemporary versions of this strategy. One only has to look at the current trends within the United Kingdom to see examples of how said strategy is being utilized by Islam to hijack western cultural mores.

So you see silly boy foreign religious wackos do not need to “invade or occupy” United States soil via military force to obtain their goals. They only need to immigrate and via support by
uniformed left wing regurgitate goofs like yourself change the laws from within. I could go on and deconstruct the sophomoric comments you made about the Patriot act ect but I feel this is enough for you to chew on at the moment.


“U.S. Hegemony Without End…… Amen”

1. “Puzzles of Demographic Peace, Theory, Geopolitics and the Transformation of World Politics” by Rastler and Thompson, Chapter 1, Page 16, Paragraph 2- 5.

"So you see silly boy foreign religious wackos do not need to “invade or occupy” United States soil via military force to obtain their goals. They only need to immigrate and via support by
uniformed left wing regurgitate goofs like yourself change the laws from within."

The only thing you're correct about is that the threat will come from within. But it hasn't come from external forces moving here or anyone on the left. No terrorist need move here when they can just sit back and watch a Republican administration undermine our laws and Constitution for them. That's exactly what has been happening these past 7 years. Bush & Cheney & Co. are doing a better job of bringing down our country and changing its fundamental nature and values than any terrorist could ever dream of doing.

Actually, John - although I expect that your real name is Cockbag - your country was founded by a bunch of religious extremists, slave traders, and genocidal donkeyfuckers. Check out your own assberry of a legalitarian neofascist regime before getting so fervent about oppressive monotheistic regimes elsewhere. You think America got rich by respecting other cultures and ways of life? Look at how BMW, Mercedes, and IBM made good, and stretch that sort of moral approach to corporate enrichment over 300 years. Then you might have something worth reading to say. Cockbag. Hugs.

I am omitting some of your "Colorful" language. You said:

Your country was founded by a bunch of religious extremists, slave traders.

True statements. I must admit that Religion was involved in the writing and beliefs held by the Founding Fathers. Some of whom were in fact Slave Owners. (If you check your history you will find that a fair portion of the representatives were in favor of ending slavery at that time but the only way that they could get a 100% consensus for the vote was to keep slavery)

We ended up fighting a BLOODY Civil War over it too.
By the way Slavery is still going on in Africa and other countries today. ALSO more slaves were sent to other countries during the time period to which you are referring.

We are in fact a "Representative Republic" not as you so quaintly put it: ass berry of a
l egalitarian neofascist regime.

I must have hit home on the comment about the Saudi's for you to have gotten so bent out of shape and said:
oppressive monotheistic regimes elsewhere.

What would you call a culture that is so uptight about a religious document that they won't even permit it to be brought into their country?

It sounds like an: oppressive monotheistic regime.

Thanks to whoever composed this list. Extremely humorous.

On a serious note, though, I think the important thing about this list is that it exposes many of the terms that extreme neo-conservatives use to deceive the uncritical American citizen and make their shameful and often criminal actions seem acceptable. Complacency is the issue at hand -- when an individual does not stop to consider what someone actually MEANS with a particular word or phrase, merely taking it at face value, it becomes infinitely easier for the speaker to twist reality to their own advantage.

Why shouldn't we call the individuals at Guantanamo Bay "prisoners"? That is what they are, aren't they?

Why should we balk at defining "waterboarding" as torture? It clearly fits the definition.

Why shouldn't we question the notion that the word "patriot" can be far more complex and varied than the idea that it has come to represent?

If one could get a truthful answer out of the Republicans in the White House (and elsewhere), they would say:

"Because we are afraid that if we call things what they really are, our attempt to hoodwink the people of the United States into accepting a reality of fear and blind obedience will fail."