He Who Lies First, Lies Best

February 9, 2010

– by ‘tamerlane’

The Lie We Remember

Studies have shown that people tend to remember the first piece of information told them, even if it’s later proven to be false.  Even when corrected in as little as 30 seconds, the false information is still given at least partial, permanent credence by the recipient.

So, when Sean Hannity tells you that 2008 was one of the coolest years on record, and I later prove that it was actually one of the warmest,  Hannity’s lie is still stuck in your head.

When Shrub spoke in ominous tones of proof that Iraq was purchasing uranium in Africa, your fear lingered even after learning the “proof” was a crude forgery.

When Chris Mathews waves a piece of paper he insists is an original birth certificate, then you later learn it was only a recent computer printout … well, you get the picture.

For fun, let’s play this trick right here.  First I’ll tell you a lie:

Scott Brown’s victory in Massachusetts proves that Americans

have had enough of Obama’s crusade to force a multi-trillion-dollar health-care “reform” on America, replacing private healthcare with a government-run system that will empower federal bureaucrats to make life-and-death decisions about your medical care.

Now, count to thirty before reading the following:

82% of Obama supporters who voted for Brown support the public option, as do 86% of Obama voters who stayed home.

57% of Obama voters who stayed home support the Senate health care bill or think it doesn’t go far enough.

Of Obama voters who cast a ballot for Brown, nearly half (49%) support the Senate bill or think it does not go far enough.  Just 11% think it goes too far.

The first statement (lie, to-the-point, emotional) came from an Human Events email.  The second (truth, long-winded, dry) came from MoveOn.  Which version have you heard most?

Propaganda War

Many liberals think the GOP is in for a shock because they’re misinterpreting the message behind the Brown victory.  Guess what  —  the GOP doesn’t care what the real message was.  They created their own false message — ‘the voters rejected socialized healthcare’ — and broadcast it loud and long until it is now the generally accepted “truth.”

Not only have the Democrats said nothing to refute this lie, they’ve helped reinforce it.  Throughout Coakley’s campaign, the Dems joined the GOP in proclaiming the special election a referendum on health care reform.  Then, lending credence to the GOP lie that Brown’s victory signaled the voters’ rejection of real health care reform, Obama gleefully lopped off the few remaining useful components of his bill.

The Brown victory spin capped a masterful GOP propaganda campaign that began months ago with the astroturfed protests of the Dems’ town meetings on health care reform.   Faced with a substantial majority of Americans favoring universal health care with a public option, the GOP didn’t even bother with changing actual opinion.  It’s enough to simply give the impression that most Americans just adore their current private health care, counting on people go along with the “majority” (sic).  This is known as the “bandwagon” technique :

“Bandwagon is an appeal to the subject to follow the crowd, to join in because others are doing so as well. Bandwagon propaganda is, essentially, trying to convince the subject that one side is the winning side, because more people have joined it. The subject is meant to believe that since so many people have joined, that victory is inevitable and defeat impossible. Since the average person always wants to be on the winning side, he or she is compelled to join in.”

The bandwagon is just one of several propaganda techniques identified and given names in the late 1930’s by the Institute for Propaganda Analysis.  The term propaganda originally meant any form of persuading of large numbers of people as to the veracity of a statement, but modern propaganda techniques are considered devious. Their messages are brief, simple, and target basic human emotions, and therefore powerful enough to override logic and reason.

To counter deceitful propaganda, simply telling the truth is not enough.  Your message needs to be brief and touch people’s emotions ….OK, also propaganda, but true.  In marketing terms, you need to talk benefits and not features.

How to Make Friends and Influence Voters

Even though their ideals aren’t shared by most Americans, Republicans consistently defeat Democrats because, while the Democrats give dry, albeit veracious, minutiae, Republicans use propaganda.  In 2000, 60% of voters agreed with Al Gore’s positions, yet only 51% gave him their vote.  That means over 9 million people were tricked into voting for the wrong person.  Why? Because most Americans felt Bush would be more fun to have a beer with.

Democrats used to be quite good at “messaging.”  JFK’s innovative use of an advertising “jingle”, with a chorus of voices chanting “Kennedy, Kennedy, Kennedy!”, was classic bandwagon.  The 1964 “daisy” attack ad, aired only once, was devastatingly effective in tapping into a primal fear that Goldwater’s bellicose stands, coupled with his notorious explosive temper, would lead to nuclear armageddon.

But when Nixon returned to the game, he’d learned his lesson on propaganda — the False Assertion that he had a “secret plan to end the war” was a key component (along with some criminal and treasonous acts) of his ’68 campaign.

The nadir of Democratic propaganda effectiveness came in 1984, when Mondale was so desperate for a marketing message he had to bum a line off a Wendy’s ad.

It was Bill Clinton’s personal charisma that won over the common folk, but his mojo could not be bottled for the rest of the party.  And, so, the Dems were powerless to resist the Glittering Generalities of The Contract on America.

In 2000, when, despite Donna Brazile’s hardest efforts, Al Gore still won the election, Republicans astroturfed a protest of the Florida recount to plant the meme that most Americans wanted to ‘move on’ and ‘seek closure’, lest a count of every vote cast precipitate a frightening ‘constitutional crisis’.  In a bold counterattack to recapture public opinion, the Democrats droned on about wonky legalisms.

The Circus Left Town

There’s no need to describe here the massive propaganda circus staged for obama’s nomination, or to enumerate the many, egregious lies it propagated.  For the first time in decades, the Democratic Party ran an effective presidential campaign employing all the tools, including terse, emotion-stirring propaganda, but it was against a fellow Democrat.  Once that victory had been secured, the whole show pulled up stakes up in the middle of the night, leaving only some flattened grass to indicate it ever existed.

And now the Democrats are back to their impotent ways, standing mutely by while the GOP convinces Americans that they don’t really want the healthcare reform they say they want.  Most peculiar.

(c) 2010 by ‘tamerlane.  All rights reserved.


Trash Talk

February 4, 2010

Democrats are slowly waking up to the fact that the dope in the White House is not their ally, much less their leader.

AP reports today that House Dems publicly and wisely “trashed” Obama’s proposal to give businesses a $5,000 tax credit for each job they create, noting that:

1) businesses can’t hire people if there’s no work for them to do;

2) the credit will reward companies that laid off workers and can now rehire,while stiffing employers who struggled to keep their workers.

They could have also mentioned that:

3) companies flush enough to hire now don’t need the $5,000;

4) $5,000 is not enough to induce a new hire when times are tough.

What nobody seems willing to say out loud is:

5) Not only is this particular idea dumb, it’s not even part of a bigger plan, because

6) There is no plan.

The hiring credit is yet another example of Timmy Geithner sticking his thumb in his ass, pulling out a plum and saying ‘what a clever boy am I!’   And the cacophony to rid Obama of Geithner and his other terrible advisors and handlers has risen another few decibels.

But don’t we elect a president to lead, not to be led?   The Hopeless One has zero leadership qualities.  Nor does he have any concept of the big picture, no comprehensive strategy, no inspiration.  Obama’s no leader; he just plays one on television.

Talking trash is a good start, but Democrats will be sorely disappointed if they expect Obama to heed their chiding.   From now on, they need to treat him as the opposition.  Or they could replace him.

(c) 2010 by ‘tamerlane’.  All rights reserved.


Get Smart

February 3, 2010

John Smart (aka John South of Melrose), the brilliant creative force behind the political blog Liberal Rapture, has relocated his blogging endeavors to:

http://johnwsmart.com/

Seems John didn’t get his renewal notice for the URL, and either a malevolent entity or a speculator scooped it up.  Yet another instance of the Invisible Hand of Capitalism giving you the finger!

JSOM hasn’t missed a beat, so stop by his new blog to catch all the latest and greatest!


The Definition of a Liberal

January 24, 2010

What about Liberals make them liberal?

How do we differ from non-liberals?

Are Liberal, Progressive and Left distinct entities, or is there overlap?

Is Liberalism just a political alignment, or a broader philosophical outlook?

Share your thoughts!


Wild Horses Can Be Dragged Away

January 22, 2010

by ‘tamerlane’

In response to widespread public protest, the Bureau of Land Management has put the brakes a controversial plan to relocate 32,000 of a total 59,000 wild mustangs and burros from their protected Western ranges to private lands in the Midwest and East.

The BLM had claimed that, because the range could support less than 27,000 horses, the relocation was necessary to: 1) prevent devastation of the fragile desert ecosystem; 2) spare the horses slow deaths from starvation; 3) reduce the mustang program’s costs, which had risen from $39 million to $50 million in the past year.

Living Symbols

Under the Wild Free-Roaming Horse and Burro Act, passed unanimously in 1971, wild mustangs were granted protection “from capture, branding, harassment, or death” and were “to be considered in the area where presently found, as an integral part of the natural system of the public lands.”

Mustangs were deemed worthy of this special protection as “living symbols of the historic and pioneer spirit of the West” that “contribute to the diversity of life forms within the Nation and enrich the lives of the American people.”


A Thriving Natural Balance

The Director of the BLM  was charged with ensuring the mustang’s protection, but was given broad powers “to achieve and maintain a thriving natural ecological balance on the public lands. He shall consider the recommendations of qualified scientists in the field of biology and ecology.”  Relocation, contraceptives, and the destruction of diseased animals was sanctioned, but sales, direct or indirect, to slaughterhouses were forbidden.

Every year, ostensibly to control overpopulation and range degradation, the BLM holds auctions of captured mustangs & burros.  Helicopters are used to stampede the horses toward wranglers with lassos, who load them onto trucks.  In each roundup, a significant number of horses are injured, break legs, or are trampled.

“Own a Piece of Our Western Heritage!”

You can adopt a mustang for $125.  With a typical, domesticated riding horse costing anywhere from $1,500 to $15,000, that’s a great deal.  ‘Cept your new mustang comes untrained, panicked, liable to smash through fences, and near impossible to handle, much less to ride.  In other words, wild.

I’ve handled numerous mustangs, and am just finishing up a months-long (and successful) retraining of a client’s mustang.  In my opinion, they aren’t worth the effort.  Granted, they have a compact, well-proportioned conformation, good stamina, and strong hooves.  Their exotic look and mystique bring a certain cachet to the owner, especially here out West.  Show riders and advanced amateurs appreciate their brio.  On the down side, their extreme sensitivity demands expert skills and eternal patience, neither of which most horsemen possess.

Sadly, the two types of owners a mustang is most likely to get are the ones he’ll respond worst to: either a so-called “cowboy” with their method of “breaking” a horse through aggression and fear, or a soft-hearted amateur who coddles the horse, expecting it to respond in appreciation for being “rescued”.  Isolated success stories exist, but on the whole, the BLM adoption program has been a dismal failure.  Even with the recent introduction of a pre-adoption training service, the number of takers, never high, keeps dropping.  Many of the captured horses cannot be placed, and those that do often end up passed from one disappointed owner to the next.

Necessary or Just Evil?

“But even with all its drawbacks”, you’re probably thinking, “adoption is a better fate than starvation or culling.”  I’d always thought so, too.  Because the mustangs are overpopulated and will starve if nothing’s done, right?  And, as a non-native species, they destroy the fragile terrain, right?  The news of the proposed mustang relocation led me to do a little research, and what I uncovered belied the BLM claims, and revealed a nefarious motive.

• Through frequent removals, the BLM has reduced the original 55 million acres of mandated mustang range to 35 million, and has leased 95% of that to cattle and sheep ranchers;

• The BLM claims that herds quickly expand beyond a size supportable by their ranges.  Yet the GAO and the National Academy of Sciences found the BLM had intentionally exaggerated the true growth rate by 250%, and that conditions actually worsened on ranges where horses had been removed;

• Mustang numbers largely stabilize without any interference.  Any overpopulation issues that do exist could be resolved by reintroducing the large predators which were exterminated to appease ranchers;

• The vegetation on the designated ranges is more than adequate to support the mustang, but the BLM restricts their water access to as little as 7% of what is available;

•  Field research has shown that ecosystems are actually enhanced and strengthened by the presence of mustangs;

• The wild horse has been a harmonious component of the ecosystem for over 300 years;

• The 28% jump in operating costs was due entirely to the unprecedented capture of 33,000 horses in one year.  Three-quarters of the program costs are now due to caring for the captured horses.

Range War

If the mustang is in no real danger, and poses no threat to the ecosystem, why is the BLM working so hard to remove them?   It’s a battle of numbers and of money.  The 60,000 mustangs have Cheryl Crow, Viggo Mortensen, and Kevin Nealon on their side, plus a few biologists, environmentalists and horsemen.  The 1,000,000 cows and sheep that denude BLM land, for a monthly fee of $1.35 a head, are supported by the wealthy ranchers and their cronies in Congress and the BLM.  The ranchers, along with oil & gas drillers, are eager to get their greedy paws on even more of that practically-free federal land – but the mustangs are in the way.

Via loopholes in the original Wild Horse Act, the BLM is abusing its power to regulate the mustang population, aided by a 2005 amendment, snuck through Congress by Conrad Burns (R-Montana), and signed by President Bush.  The Burns Amendment forces the BLM to sell off every horse 10 years or older, or any horse passed over for adoption three times.  It also revokes the ban on selling mustangs for slaughter, and BLM employees admit off-the-record that as many as 9 of every 10 captured mustangs end up on the killing floor.


Farewell to Mustangs

While public outcry has stalled the massive mustang diaspora, the issue may soon be moot.  Every year, the BLM removes horses from ranges it declares temporarily unable to support them.  The mustangs are never returned, but the cows and sheep are allowed to stay.  In this way, 20 million acres of federal land, which Congress bequeathed in perpetuity for wild horses, has been handed over to private ranchers.

The BLM also has plans to swap most of the remaining 27,000 free-roaming horses with geldings and with mares injected with contraceptives.  Experts note that the wild numbers are already too low, and the herds too isolated, to support a viable population, ensuring the eventual extinction of the wild mustang.

(c) 2010 by ‘tamerlane.’  All rights reserved.


They’re Shooting Hostages

January 21, 2010
by ‘tamerlane’

The liberals just shot their first hostage.  The candidacy of Martha Coakley, a solid if nondescript Democrat, was ceremoniously marched out and executed in broad daylight by the voters of the most liberal state in the Union.  Their demands had been very clear:  pass a real public health care reform bill, not a sham private health insurance mandate.  But the Democrats in Congress, and the fraud in the White House, refused to heed the warnings.  They thought they could put lipstick on a pig, call it “health care reform”, and we’d all be duped like we were in the Spring of ‘08.

Massachusetts was a bad place to test this assumption.  Bay Staters embrace their legacy of political defiance, dating back to when the original Patriot Act was enacted in 1775 on Lexington Green.  Despite being predominately Democrat or democrat-leaning, half of registered voters there are independents.  This is also an electorate with a habit of periodically placing conservatives in high office to course-correct its leftward drift.  Mitt Romney and Bill Weld were governors, and in the 1996 senate race, Bay Staters were toying with electing the conservative Weld until Kerry, in an unforgettable debate, woke up himself and the voters, then put on the afterburners.

There’s no denying that Coakley, a backroom player who figured she’d already done all that was required by maneuvering her way into the nomination, mismanaged her campaign.  Anyone who can’t identify Curt Schilling is unfit for office in Massachusetts.  But as any Gloucester fisherman will tell you, red skies in morning:  sailors take warning.  The clouds of this brewing red storm were ominously apparent for months, yet Coakley, the state party, and the DNC all were caught asleep at the wheel.

The Dems knew — and openly proclaimed — the symbolic and tangible significance of this race, of the need to replace Teddy, the longtime public healthcare champion, with someone who would ensure passage of Obama’s bill.  Did they not think the GOP was cognizant of that significance, too?  Unlike Democrats, Republicans have practical experience getting things done, like earning annual bonuses, outsourcing jobs, and running effective campaigns.  The RNC marshaled its forces and invested in Brown’s campaign at the critical moment.  The GOP correctly judged the tide, and deftly plotted a course toward the open berth at Kennedy Bay.

In a bizarre twist, the Democrats now had to play catch-up in a race they were leading.  Their response:  appeal to the voters’ desire to support Obama and to pass his health bill.  The Dem leadership must have been tippling off some left-over barrels of kool-aid, because all the polls showed that Brown’s surge was due solely to a backlash over Obama’s joke of a bill.  Coakley’s only salvation would have been to publicly distance herself from it, to declare “when I get to the Senate, I’ll won’t vote for any health care reform bill unless it contains a public option!”  But Coakley is a mundane party hack.

Massachusetts is Clinton country — Hillary won the primary by 15 points.  So in desperation, the DNC dispatched Bill to point out how repulsively rightwing Brown was.  But then they also sent in Obama, and made a last ditch appeal to “save health care.”  And that’s what the voters of Massachusetts, in their minds at least, did.  They shot a hostage to save real health care reform.

Unfortunately, once you start shooting your hostages, things can only end one of two ways:  either your demands are met, or you end up dead, too.  The rightwingers are crowing loud and mighty that the Brown victory proves that Americans hate “ObamaCare” for being too “socialist.”  In Massachusetts, which has its own limited public health insurance program, ObamaCare was not socialist enough.  As this plays out, liberals would do well to remember that the enemy of my enemy is usually still my enemy.  Extreme measures may be necessary to break the obots’ hold.  Electing Republicans simply to punish the Democrats might feel good in the moment, but it won’t do good in the long run.

So who’s the next hostage to go?  The Dem incumbents already considered the most vulnerable were: Blanche Lincoln, AK; Michael Bennet, CO; and our dear, old Harry Reid, NV; plus Dorgan’s seat in ND. Barbara Boxer had been considered a lock.  Democrats like to think of California as one big, smooth-sailing cruise ship for them.  The Poseidon was a cruise ship, too.  Boxer, an ardent Obama supporter who’ll likely face the dynamic political outsider Carly Fiorino, is already starting to sweat.

These senators, and a large portion of Democrats in the House, should have the image of the Massachusetts hostage shooting burned into their retinas.  Instead of trying to pass Obama’s sham bill, they ought to jump ship ASAP.  All politicians have a keen sense of self-preservation, but most don’t possess the brightest of minds.  Nor will the obot bolsheviks who hijacked the Party relinquish power without a fight.  So there’s no guarantee the Democrats will right their ship before the full storm hits.  And with a capsized Democratic Party, we’re at the mercy of the GOP.

Coakley would have made a competent, liberal senator.  Brown will be a horrible, extreme conservative one.  Losing the sixty-vote majority, which failed to yield any real results, (and which in any case was dependent on the DINO Lieberman) is no real loss.  Still, handing the enemy a solid liberal seat was an expensive way to send a message.  Let’s hope our demands will now be taken seriously.

(c) 2010 by ‘tamerlane.’  All rights reserved.

The Junk Drawer

January 20, 2010

The Junk Drawer will be a regular feature at True Liberal Nexus.  A blank post, where readers can comment with whatever is on their mind.