Obama’s technique of head turned to the right side in interviews described by body language expert as one of the most powerful subconscious manipulation techniques possible by a speaker’s body language Notice how Obama has his head tilted to the right in interviews such as the Fox News interview with Chris Wallace April 27, 2008, his ABC News Nightline interview, as well as the August 16, 2008 meeting with Rev. Rick Warren, and many others.
It is undeniable how Obama significantly tilts his head to the right in these and other interviews, but not when Obama is giving speeches. According to Tonya Reiman, Author of “The Power of Body Language,” such a head tilt to the right is “one of the most powerful manipulation tools of body language. Tonya Reiman describes how there is no difference between what such gestures and manipulation. Barack Obama is actually manipulating you subconsciously by tilting his head without you even consciously realizing it. The reason is that tilting your head to the right specifically is a sign of vulnerability, a very effective one. Per our animal instincts, a head tilted to the right exposes an animal’s jugular vein, their weakness, and in turn, causes us to lower our defenses subconsciously as a counter-measure, without even being consciously aware of it. This is a clear example of Obama intentionally using a subconscious technique for gaining trust and lowering the subconscious guard and resistance of his audience, using one of the most powerful manipulation tools of body language.
See also Obama can be seen with his head tilted to the right in many interviews where he faces the camera. Google “Obama head tilt” - See “Watching the Saddleback Church Forum with Pastor Rick Warren interviewing Senator Barack Obama on Saturday August 16, I was struck by the marked and obvious tilting of the Senator’s head Forum. The tilt is to the right side. This phenomenon has not been widely written about from a medical perspective.” at http://www.drnoahklein.com/blog/35/senatorbarak-
As an example http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,232960,00.html
As an example http://lifeisanongoingprocess.com/imageshome/obama_mtp.jpg
This is not just confident body language. When Obama lowers his head to the right as he often does, he is not convincing us logically, he is manipulating us without our knowledge. We may say, “oh, well this doesn’t seem so bad, his head tilted to the right doesn’t make me vote for him any more so.” You may feel none of these tactics do. In fact, because they are subconscious tactics, we do not realize how effective they are. Only after November fourth can one be sure they are unaffected. We are subconsciously tricked into trusting him more and liking him more, not logically, but in our internal feelings to vote for him.158 This goes beyond deceit, and is in fact mind-control. People watching him listen to him, and like him, and trust him, they genuinely feel it, and it is artificially induced. Now a single tactic like this head tilt by itself has effect. However, it is when Obama combines it with hundreds of other gestures, techniques, language patterns, and other aspects of hypnosis. There is an “Obama phenomenon” of millions of people who call him JFK, or Jesus reincarnated, and nobody can explain why. We are ready to turn over the united States of America to this largely unknown man and nobody can explain why. This is why. His arsenal of hypnotic and subconscious manipulation brainwashes causing an unstoppable grade school-like crush on him in some cases, and in others, simply pushes us over the edge, overpowers our logical concerns, to supporting him when we otherwise wouldn’t. Much of Obama’s body language may be considered beyond confident, to actually manipulative. As another example, when appearing with his opponents Hillary Clinton and John McCain, in debates and elsewhere, notice how, when he shakes their hand such as after the debate, Obama does an additional touch on the arm or shoulder of his opponent. He is not being friendly here. He does this to purposely appear “commanding” and “in charge” to his audience. He is showing that he has the right, power, and authority and confidence to touch this person. This is all conscious and intentional. He even makes sure that after every debate, he takes the forefront walking across the stage at the end, to the front center, and meeting the moderator or other people up in the front and center, so people are left with the end thought of him being at the forefront.
Obama’s manipulative body language is so perfected, that you actually have to consciously detach yourself from it to try to not be influenced by it. He never shows a hint of nervousness in his body language, and is always commanding in his presence. He is so strategic in his body language, that when he is on stage with Hillary after primaries or Joe Biden talking about and praising him, he actually consciously sits slouching a little hunching his shoulders, with his back arched in his chair, as if to put the other person as the perceived leader while they speak well of him so their message is more effective.
Interview of Professor of Psychiatry on CNN in which Dr. comes close to hinting of her suspicion that Obama is using covert subconscious techniques throughout his campaign.
Excepts from an interview of Dr. Gail Saltz by Erica Hill, Professor of Psychiatry, New York Presbyterian Hospital, on Anderson Cooper 360, CNN June 7, 2008 22:00 EST speak for themselves.
“Obama used words like “change,” “hope,” “action.” They have high emotional valence, particularly at this time. Clinton used words like “conversation” and “leader,” and they didn’t have the same emotional valence. And in addition, Obama delivered them with a tremendous inspirational tone. That also affected things greatly. So yes, I think actually it did play a big role.
If you think about it, a campaign is really about PR and marketing. And interestingly, the father of public relations was the nephew of Sigmund Freud. He used those same concepts of the subconscious.
And that’s what we’re talking about here. It’s not the conscience meaning of the word: it’s the unconscious emotion it evokes. Because when it’s out of your awareness, it has the ability to make you behave and do certain things that you wouldn’t if you knew it was present.
I do think Obama really has a special talent in this arena of deciding what words to use with a particular valence.”
Dr. Saltz seams here to strongly suggest that Obama is indeed using subconscious hypnosis techniques in his campaign. However, she only scratches the surface of Obama’s techniques and does not put together the ethical issue of how deceptive and immoral his tactics are.
Hypnosis/NLP expert discusses Obama’s use of mind control techniques on radio
Dr. Horton, who has been working in the field of hypnosis and NLP for 25 years has called Obama’s methods clearly the use of hypnosis and effectively “Mind control.” The discussion on this radio program describes Obama’s use of the 48 Laws of Power, by Greene, a treatise on mass deception, total absence of emotion. Obama is often referred to as detached emotionally, and not just “cool” but in fact so detached as to be of concern to some people. Discussed is Obama’s ability to project people’s hopes and dreams onto him, and Obama’s use of hypnosis to get masses to view him as the vehicle to get whatever he wants through Obama’s vague “yes we can”,“change” and “we are the ones we have been waiting for” speeches.
The discussion addresses Obama’s cadence rhythm and speaking tone, taking breaks after 5-8 word phrases, and how he cleverly uses pauses such as “together, …as we look to the future,” to send subconscious messages we are not even aware of.
One specific hand gesture being used by Obama discussed was Obama’s rousing emotion from the audience, and then touching his face, or tie, as a method of subconsciously transferring those emotions onto him by bringing the person’s focus back to him while in that elicited state. Also discussed is how Obama morphs into a different person with different voice depending on which group he is talking to.
Website analyzes Obama’s use of hypnosis in speeches
A website looking at the hypnotic aspects of Obama’s speeches and comparing them to other candidates, and Hitler, who was well-known to use hypnosis, provided the following commentary (http://www.nfnlp.com/ )
Barack Obama: Democratic candidate, Feb 5, 2008, remarks on Super Tuesday 58% hypnotic language. Complete mastery of the language, including highly abstract pacing and leading language for creating emotion and motivation. In addition to the language patterns, he is fantastic at going higher up in level of abstraction beyond details, while still managing to sound relevant. He uses Ericksonian-style language patterns, including presuppositions and nominalizations extensively.
This is only a sample of 500 words from a single speech, but as you can see, Obama tops the crowd using nearly 60% hypnotic language patterns. In my opinion, this is purposeful language, likely written by a very skilled speech writer — perhaps someone trained in Neuro-Linguistic Programming or Hypnosis.
Obama uses hypnotic command to dismiss the Rev Wright questions .
Regarding Rev. Wright, Obama in an interview with Chris Mathews on MSNBC, simply says, with his amazing hyper-confidence, “three weeks from now, everybody will have forgotten..” He doesn’t even say, I hope this will be forgotten. He clearly states it as a command. That easily, for millions of Americans, the question of why he sat in a racist, anti-American church for 20 years is unimportant.
When Obama faces any attack or issue that hurts him, he simply says this is the old politics, and that this issue doesn’t solve the people’s problems. He calls it a“distraction.” A word that clearly has a very powerful message, to be overlooked. When the idea of a distraction is commanded hypnotically, in can, as we see, sometimes be more powerful than all the logic which says, “wait, Obama’s character is relevant.166 He groups everything that hurts him politically, from his empty record to his connections with Farakhan and Hamas, to his elitism, and all the questions about his character and patriotism under his magical umbrella of issues that “distractions” or what he calls “fear tactics.” The rational part of one’s mind should realize that Obama’s connections to these people, combined with how little we know about Obama disqualify him from the Presidency, but as emotional beings, many are driven by simply wanting him as President.
Obama’s speech on race March 18, 2008 Philadelphia – hypnotic storytelling throughout
This speech is symbolically in the “city of brotherly love.” Notice how he carefully plans venues for such speeches, Berlin to be like JFK, “Unity” when he and Clinton are trying to get along. Has any candidate before ever paid this much attention to such small symbolisms?
Obama is using hypnotic storytelling techniques from the start of the speech, when Obama is talking about a different time, “221 years ago…in a hall that still stands across the street….farmers, scholars” in his slow rhythm, through to the end. As discussed above with regards to the California Convention 2007 Speech, hypnotic storytelling is a fundamental of hypnosis. The stories in this speech are countless, practically throughout. Through much of Obama’s speech, what is a story and what is not are completely blended and intertwined. He takes you through a host of emotions starting with guilt about slavery, to all types of stories about brotherly love and togetherness, meanwhile using his thumb and forefinger anchoring technique almost throughout, and implanting messages hidden within the stories into your subconscious. He gets your imagination prevail over your rationality, and you find yourself feeling the heartwarming tales that the people in all these stories felt, andassociating those with him. He consistently paces throughout, “This presidential campaign” or “I chose to run for president – at this moment (in history)” just two of many pacing statements with anchors, and “this moment”, “this election”, and “this time” (repeated nearly half a dozen times).
He builds warm emotions with generic statements like “We all want to move in the same direction…towards a better future…for our children and grandchildren.” The way he dismisses the whole Rev. Wright affair without discussing how he could have not known Wright was racist and anti-American (which he denies) is by saying he is “not the most conventional candidate.” Notice how you have to agree with it because you do not have time to dissect what part of nonconventional is due to his race, and what part is due to something improper that he has done for twenty years.
At 4:56 he says “A story that has seared into my genetic makeup the idea that this nation is more than the sum of its parts, that out of many, we are truly one”, meanwhile pointing down as if to command almost the whole way through that statement. Notice how many times he talks about being one with his audience. This is building and reinforcing a subconscious connection with his audience, often by using his hypnotic anchor hand gesture. In fact, such stories are designed to “sear” their way into your subconscious with the message that he and you, the subject, “are truly one.” More include “let us all find our common stake in one-another”, and “we can come together.”
He describes children of different races getting along at multiple times throughout the speech. He tells stories containing embedded all the warm feelings that he in fact places into the subconscious minds of the audience, which warms, or at least thaws the outrage over Wright.
He beautifully plays the audience like a violin taking positions on both sides, and criticizing from all angles and perspectives. In the end, we forget that he fails to address what he calls “nagging questions” because he cannot. They aren’t “questions”, they are impossibilities for which there is no answer, but which he dances around and dodges beautifully. It is impossible that he could not have know his pastor’s true views and character for twenty years. It is impossible that someone who says “g-d.d-mn America” loves this country in the same way as someone who is shocked by these words. It is impossible that Obama had he good and strong character, would have stayed in that church. It is impossible, that had Obama possessed good judgment, that he would have stayed in that church. It is impossible, that had Obama not agreed with such views, would have stayed in that church.
In the end, he convinces many on emotion and warm feelings driven through to the subconscious through continuous hypnotic storytelling, telling hypnotic story after hypnotic story each with a theme about how he wants the audience to feel. Obama ends up slipping out of the consequences of a personal history what would rationally have destroyed any candidate.
Obama’s hypnotic logo
Obama adds to this by giving a visual point of fixation – his logo. No doubt that one intended meaning, of many, is that the circle is also an “O” for “O”bama. By itself that is not all that significant. Obama’s logo is highly hypnotic, because unlike any other logo in presidential history, you do not look at it, but through it. One subconsciously looks though the circle to the light inside, like the light at the end of the tunnel, without consciously realizing it. This visual point of focus is helpful in multiple ways to focus one’s attention, as well as to distract the critical factor. Notice how it is always there on the podium – a small one in the middle, just enough for your conscious mind to miss, but for you to see subconsciously.
Additionally, Obama’s logo looks very much like a crystal ball. Notice how it looks like it is shining brightly. Crystal balls are used by hypnotists as one of their favorite focus points for aiding in trance induction.
Also notice how Obama’s podium messages are never something like “country first” like McCain has, which needs conscious interpretation. Obama’s podium messages are always simplistic hypnotic commands including the words “Need” or “Believe” or “Change.” A common Obama podium message is the word in large letters “CHANGE”, and beneath it “WE NEED.” The reason this is hypnotic, and part of his hypnotic trance induction, is because the message is vague, and has two meanings because it can be read both as “change we need”, and as “we need change.” Per the discussion on trans-derivation in this document, as your mind tries to figure out which meaning is intended (and cannot resolve it because both are in fact intended) your mind is subject to trance induction and distraction, while your subconscious mind becomes more accepting of suggestion.
Obama’s strange hand gesture & hand-holding conversation with Senator Lieberman
In a very unusual report, Obama is reported to grab another Senator with whom he is in a disagreement with, Sen. Joseph Lieberman, and lead him by the hand across the Senate floor and then speak to Lieberman in a passionate manner with strange had gestures.
The reason this is strange, is, besides the investigation of Obama for use of hypnosis in his speeches and other aspects of his campaign, is that the description of this“heated conversation” sounds somewhat like some very specific hypnotic induction techniques, including one hand and handshake instant induction techniques.
Patterns of the Hypnotic Techniques of Milton H. Erickson, M.D. Volume 1, p189 re use of crystal balls in trance induction.
Obama in heated Conversation with Lieberman http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/04/lieberman-carriesmccains_n_105179.html
The Handshake Induction (from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milton_H._Erickson)
Confusion is the basis of Erickson’s famous hypnotic handshake. Many actions are learned and operate as a single “chunk” of behavior: shaking hands and tying shoelaces being two classic examples. If the behavior is diverted or frozen midway, the person literally has no mental space for this - he is stopped in the middle of unconsciously executing a behavior that hasn’t got a “middle”. The mind responds by suspending itself in trance until either something happens to give a new direction, or it “snaps out”. A skilled hypnotist can often use that momentary confusion and suspension of normal processes to induce trance quickly and easily.
By interrupting the pattern of a “normal” handshake in some way, the hypnotist causes the subject to wonder what is going on. If the handshake continues to develop in a way which is out-of-keeping with expectations, a simple, non-verbal trance is created,
The article states:
“Obama In Heated Conversation With Lieberman, June 4, 2008 12:24 PM, Sam Stein, The Huffington Post: Furthermore, during a Senate vote Wednesday, Obama dragged Lieberman by the hand to a far corner of the Senate chamber and engaged in what appeared to reporters in the gallery as an intense, three-minute conversation. While it was unclear what the two were discussing, the body language suggested that Obama was trying to convince Lieberman of something and his stance appeared slightly intimidating. Using forceful, but not angry, hand gestures, Obama literally backed up Lieberman against the wall, leaned in very close at times, and appeared to be trying to dominate the conversation, as the two talked over each other in a few instances. Still, Obama and Lieberman seemed to be trying to keep the back-and-forth congenial as they both patted each other on the back during and after the exchange. Afterwards, Obama smiled and pointed up at reporters peering over the edge of the press gallery for a better glimpse of their interaction. Obama loyalists were quick to express their frustration with Lieberman’s decision and warned that if he continues to take a lead role in attacking Obama it could complicate his professional relationship with the Caucus.”171 It sounds more unbelievable than to even suggest seriously, but certain aspects of the “conversation” just have hypnotist written all over it. This report is not inconsistent with the absurd-sounding possibility that Obama tried to use hypnotic techniques on Senator Lieberman right there on the Senate floor. This includes the motive, Lieberman’s recent criticisms of Obama, and Obama’s alleged method of grabbing Senator Lieberman by the hand and leading him by the hand across the Senate floor (see handholding as part of instant induction techniques), the forceful hand gestures, backing Lieberman up against the wall, and leaning in very close, appearing to try to dominate the conversation, the patting on the back, all until being apparently interrupted by reporters.
Obama’s use of a fake presidential seal
Obama at one speech had on the front of his podium a fake presidential seal which he created, which looked like the Presidential Seal of the United States, except with a few modifications such as “Obama” written on it, and his hypnotic logo in the center. This was likely an attempt at another subconscious message which may then be reinforced or utilized by the hypnotist. All these responses happen naturally and automatically without telling the subject to consciously focus on an idea.
The various descriptions of Erickson’s hypnotic handshake, including his own very detailed accounts, indicate that a certain amount of improvisation is involved, and that watching and acting upon the subject’s responses is key to a successful outcome. The most important thing is that the “normal” handshake is subverted in such a way to cause puzzlement, which may then be built upon.
Richard Bandler was a keen proponent of the handshake induction, and developed his own variant, which is commonly taught in NLP workshops. Any habitual pattern which is interrupted unexpectedly will cause sudden and light trance. The handshake is a particularly good pattern to interrupt because the formality of a handshake is a widely understood set of social rules. Since everyone knows that it would be impolite to comment on the quality of a handshake, regardless of how strange it may be, the subject is obliged to embark on an inner search (known as a transderivational search, a universal and compelling type of trance) to identify the meaning or purpose of the subverted pattern. (see also “instant induction techniques” online, such as “one handed induction”)
Looking Presidential, that, like the light shining down statement described above, was caught and ridiculed because of its impropriety. Both probably without went without anyone’s conscious awareness of their small role in Obama’s broader hypnotic efforts. Both were simply ridiculed because of their impropriety. This could be argued to simply have been an effort by Obama to appear Presidential, but why the subtle modifications then and why his logo in the middle?
Assorted other points:
Obama often uses a variety of other subconscious verbal tricks. At 4:55 pm on September 24, 2008, in a response to McCain suspending his campaign as a show of non-partisanship to work on the economy, Obama made a statement about how in this crisis, there are some immediate aspects, and also some long term aspects that the net administration will have to deal with. Then he says in the next few sentences “we”…”we” several times, and then follows up with how “we” will have to deal with those long term issues down the road. He separated it so he was not obviously saying that he will be the next administration, but subconsciously, that is probably an intentionally sent message.
There are too many issues to address, and too many hypnotic techniques to look into even in a single speech. However, here are a few miscellaneous points.
Notice how often he starts his turn speaking with the words “Now look…” Not just once or twice, but repeatedly, especially when he is in trouble in an interview or conversation. When Obama first introduces Biden as his vice president to take the stage with Obama for the first time, Obama announces Biden as, “the next president of the United States” and then corrects himself to say vicepresident, as if he misspoke. It is difficult to know whether Obama did this on purpose to make people who are uncomfortable with him feel more at ease as though Biden would be running the show. Perhaps he misspoke, but then again, how often does Obama misspeak? …As compared to his proven prior acts of misspeaking purposely as part of subconscious tactics.
Notice Obama’s sparkling eye-shadow makeup.
On Hannity and Colmes, Mary Matalin said Obama was “attacking McCain subliminally”, calling McCain “confused.” In another Obama ad, when McCain was criticized for not knowing how many houses he owned, the voice slowly paused before saying “he cant remember,” in a deep powerful voice. Clearly this was a similar tactic to get people to be concerned about McCain’s age.
When Hillary had lost the nomination, Obama came to meet with her. As the story was relayed, Obama had all journalists board his plane to cover him, and then, in an unbelievable move, Obama sent his plane, without him, to another city to intentionally do away with the press so Obama could talk to Clinton privately without journalists there.
Regarding the lipstick on a pig comment, it is hard to know whether Obama intended this to be subconscious or not. However, on Wednesday September 10, 2008 in what appeared to be a small library, Obama did try to cover it up. He said, “nobody actually believes…” that the McCain camp is offended.
Notice how much emphasis he puts on his favorite programming word “believes” – and the huge pause thereafter. That is not (supposedly) the end of the idea nor the sentence. Why a huge pause and emphasis if that were not the end of the idea? Notice how the whole statement is made as if it were a command, “nobody actually believes!”
Notice how Obama copies and piggybacks the popular points of every candidate he is going against. This is so people will look at him as equal to every issue logically, and only differentiate Obama on the issues where he chooses to, where he is strongest. It allows him to appropriate the best of the other candidates without ever taking a position. Look at how he does this even in debates. He would allow Hillary to answer a question with her wealth of experience, and then he says that he would have given the same answer, sometimes even using a metaphor like “dovetail” but he is also Barack Obama. Remember how starkly different he was than John McCain? What issues can one name where he is even describably different than McCain on?