Page 67

Paragraph 1:

The effects of his hypnosis...

This statment presumes several things - that the reader has swallowed the author's case, and even if one believes that Obama attempted to utilize common contemprary techniques of persuasive rhetoric, that it was successful in creating effects in the reader, as opposed to failing to do so.

This can be used in a technique known as "skewing the middle." Normally, it involves getting your opponent to come to the center while one promote one's fringe - defining a new center. In this particular case - the rhetorical generation, rather than the conflict-and-advocacy generation - it can be attained by asking a person, who presumably has a "middleish" point of view, to compensate for a nonexistant effect... by moving one's self closer to the demands of the person making such request.

Furthermore, the term "his" was explicitly used, despite the fact that he is not the only PR-managed public figure by a long shot. This has implications with skinnerian conditioned association; the term "hypnosis" was likely used over other, more legitimized terms due to its perjorative connotations from pulp fiction of about a century ago.

must be

We note that the author is assuming that, by page 67, the author is a position to give explicit orders to the reader.

A more normal choice would be "can be," defining a methodology should a reader wish the information to take a course of action, rather than commanding them to obey the author.

cancelled out

See "skewing the middle," above. Compensating for the nonexistant is the introduction of a bias.

by people starting to take a rational look

Note that agreeing with the author is defined as "rational," while disagreeing is "irrational." Since most people want to be "rational," there is a threat of punishment reinforcing the unquestioning acceptance of anything the author says.

at who he is, including the media.

At this point, 67 pages have been linked into associating Obama with the Antichrist - at times, even literally.

The enthymeme that the media has not investigated "who he is" is also inserted, without supporting evidence.

It is certainly a concern that this type of hypnosis is so effective that even after learning what Obama is doing, many may still not believe and accept that Obama is hypnotizing them and that they might not otherwise vote for him.

This is providing what is called a "narrative," in this case an explanatory story. This is used to provide an explanation to those who did not blindly swallow the author's agenda as to why they did not do so - and one which demands they do so. To those who have already swallowed the author's assertions hook, line, and sinker, it provides an answer to why not everyone is exactly like them in their opinions - an explanation which allows them to dismiss objections without having to critically evaluate it.

It is my hope that the effects of all of Obamas hypnotic and
subconscious tactics are wiped away and neutralized completely...

It certainly seems to assume that these "effects" have been established - which is for the reader, not the persuador, to decide.

that everyone now be allowed to think and make logical and rational decisions.

See the part about "threats for noncompliance," above.

The author is also using simple association to cast their argument (and belief) in terms of a positive desire - everyone wants freedom of thought. It's a generic, positive thing. The ironic truth that the author seems to be denying is that freedom of thought, by definition, does not require one to think a certain way - unlike the author's claims.

But... mostly, threats for noncompliance.

Personal notes, "Mr. Obama"

Mostly, this is just the raising of extreme emotional states without much or any substance.

Personal notes, "to my friends"

Mostly, this is a well-phrased command to action.

There are, however, one or two interesting things... namely...

sending it to friends and posting it on websites in its entirety, so that everyone could judge and understand for themselves the real Obama phenomenon.

Note that to "judge and understand for themselves," in the author's usage, means propagating the author's speech, and not others' speech.

I would also like to thank all the psychologists, hypnotists, and other experts who come out and help confirm the substance of this document.

Note that those who critique the substance of this document are... not thanked. Positive rewards are contingent on compliance.

You are all part of this victory over deception, and for democracy.

"Surrender of individual identity to group identity" has long been a propaganda technique; usually, the group identity (christianity, the nazi party, whatever) is given near-mystical attributes in an apocalypse narrative of a victory of the "righteous" forces against a wholly evil "other."

It's not quite unheard of, and this sentence wasn't exactly any exception, IMO. Just to earn "thanks" from the author... the exact same technique defined Obama's "Coalition of Change" - except for one thing.

He skipped the part about vanquishing evil others.

Nonetheless, in either case, it's theorized to be about the self-esteem boost as the individual absorbs by reflection the power and positive qualities of the group they give their identity to. People can be made to do a lot - including "vanquishing" innocent scapegoats by unholy means.

People like us, for instance...

This concludes page 67.