Changes

It is used to make the person lose confidence in what they are doing. "Ha, ha, you're [[stupid]]! Give up! You'll never succeed!" The idea is to bring someone down to one's own level, i.e., a "do nothing".  

It is used to make the person lose confidence in what they are doing. "Ha, ha, you're [[stupid]]! Give up! You'll never succeed!" The idea is to bring someone down to one's own level, i.e., a "do nothing".  

Mockery is also used to create confusion. Each of the books on Bushisms published during the 2000 and 2004 election campaigns was a subtle blend of [[gaffe]]s and digs. The gaffes were just verbatim transcripts of the sort of error any [[politics|politician]] makes when replying too quickly to a reporter's question. "One of my concerns is that the health care not be as good as it can possibly be." (Obviously by ''not be'' he meant ''is not'') There is no reason to collect and show these for one politician while never showing the same kind of error made by another politician, unless you are trying to make the '''false point''' that your candidate is infallible and your opponent is incompetent. The digs were [[grammar|grammatically]] correct statements of fact, which the author of the book simply disagree with. The point of including them among the [[malapropism]]s and slips of the tongue is to insinuate that these statements were indications of incompetence. Actually, they only reveal the [[prejudice]] of the author.

Mockery is also used to create confusion. Each of the books on [[Bushism]]s published during the 2000 and 2004 election campaigns was a subtle blend of [[gaffe]]s and digs. The gaffes were just verbatim transcripts of the sort of error any [[politics|politician]] makes when replying too quickly to a reporter's question. "One of my concerns is that the health care not be as good as it can possibly be." (Obviously by ''not be'' he meant ''is not'') There is no reason to collect and show these for one politician while never showing the same kind of error made by another politician, unless you are trying to make the '''false point''' that your candidate is infallible and your opponent is incompetent. The digs were [[grammar|grammatically]] correct statements of fact, which the author of the book simply disagree with. The point of including them among the [[malapropism]]s and slips of the tongue is to insinuate that these statements were indications of incompetence. Actually, they only reveal the [[prejudice]] of the author.

==References==

==References==