The language in which we discuss public issues and public officials subtly evokes problematic beliefs about the nature of social problems, their causes, their seriousness, our success or failure in coping with them, which of their aspects are remediable, which cannot be changed, and what impact they have on which groups of people. Social cues rather then rigorous analysis also evoke widespread beliefs about which authorities are competent to deal with particular problems, and the levels of merit and competence of various groups of people. Individuals acquire often conflicting cognitive structures regarding controversial problems. One such pattern of political myth typically defines authorities as competent, those who suffer from the problem as themselves responsible for their troubles, and the political system as sound. The alternative pattern depicts authorities as supportive of elites, those who suffer from the problem as victims, and the system as exploitative. A metonymic or metaphoric reference to any theme in such a pattern of beliefs evokes the entire structure; and syntactic forms can also evoke belief patterns. The fact that a conflicting set of beliefs is also present in the culture and in the mind helps people to live with their ambivalence and to accept public policies they do not like. (Author/JM)