The Wiz

Barack Obama, April 6, 2008 Private fundraiser at the Getty Mansion, San Francisco.

Speaking about unemployment in Pennsylvania.

"They get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."

This was said before a houseful of San Francisco millionaires, who understood what he meant.

His comment was the type a sociology professor might make to his students.

Obama was raked over the coals for this comment by both the right and the left, as an example of how out of touch he is with average Americans.

Hard times do in fact spur people to cling more fiercely to their faith, and become more nationalistic, militaristic, and more xenophobic.  The people in the room all understood that.  If Obama had phrased it that way, in a more academic language, he probably would have gotten away with it.

But Obama committed the unforgivable sin.  He let the people peek behind the curtain, and catch a glimpse of the Wizard of Oz with his hands on the levers.

People don’t want to know that they are pawns.  They want to think that they control their destiny.  They resent being shown the truth of how easily they are manipulated by those in power.  They resent being analyzed by the elite.

Any hint of this manipulation arouses their most reptilian fears.

Those who would rule have known this for millennia.  They don’t let on that they are exploiting the fears of the masses.  Quite the contrary, they claim they are protecting them from all the dangers that they and their ilk are only too willing to visit upon them.  

Hermann Goering to Gustav Gilbert, 18 April 1946 in Goering’s cell at Nuremberg Germany

“Why, of course, the people don’t want war.  Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece?  Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship.”

Gilbert: “In a democracy the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars.”

Goering: “Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”

We intellectuals (real and pseudo) all know this is how the world works, but the poor slob on the farm doesn’t.  After all, we all sat through Soc 101, and farmboy didn’t.  He thinks if he obeys the law, and works hard, tomorrow will be better than yesterday. Woe betide the person that argues with him.

Realpolitik or Machiavellian intrigue?

I think my favorite line from Primary Colors (a seriously underrated movie), is when campaign Manager Henry Burton questions candidate Jack Stanton’s hypocrisy. The reply.  “You can’t help anybody if you don’t get elected."

Part of Obama’s problem is that the dangers the Democrats warn us about are less immediate and tangible than the terrors that the Republicans have made into a political catechism.

Bush talked of the yellowcake that Saddam Hussein sought.  (A lie, but it worked nonetheless).

Condoleeza Rice warned of a smoking gun in the shape of a mushroom cloud.

Democrats warn of eroding civil liberties, foreclosures, cost of medical care, loss of world prestige, global warming, environmental catastrophe, etc.

Now, the latter may be more imminent, and more certain if the Republicans hold onto power, but the former, (nuked US cities) is so horrifying that it trumps the weak sister arguments of the Democrats.  If Republicans convince voters that President Obama's warnings about the dire consequences of Neocon policies are the results of simplistic elitist thinking, the abuses of the Bush administration will return with a vengeance.

August 21, 2008

Reply to an RN

         Thank you for your confidence.  I hope I can live up to it.  Before I reply I want to share with you something my brother Jack wrote a while back.

Other than being able to read a tele-prompter very well, what has Obama DONE?  Basically, he ran unopposed for his Senate seat (Jack Ryan scandal), and has done nothing in the Senate except run for president. 

See his hilarious attempt to speak off the cuff and try to explain why paying up front for wellness was better than paying to cure someone after they got sick.  At least I THINK that's what he was trying to say.  Also note that it is the liberals that in most cases have passed laws barring insurance payments for preventive medicine.  (See New York)

OK.  Jack is obviously referring to the same Bristol, Va. tape.  I mention this because I don’t think Jack, or millions of others that despise Sen. Obama, normally follow his speeches.  They get propaganda pieces like this one in their e-mails, and this information becomes incorporated into their persona.  (More on that later.)
          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48LS-Z3Wdhs

         Read his attached: note that that it is the liberals that in most cases have passed laws barring insurance payments for preventive medicine.

         He provides no documentation for this statement other than a cryptic See New York.

        

         As a health care professional, are you aware of any laws barring insurance companies from paying for preventive medicine? I know this is true for Medicare (which is reimbursed by the government), but it does not forbid HMO’s and other insurers from authorizing screening if they want to.  My insurance pays for a full physical, two dental cleanings with exams, and one eye test per year.  My primary care physician can request additional tests based on risk factors for a person my age.

         I point this out to illustrate how conservatives hold on to so much false information.

Semantic memory refers to the memory of meanings, understandings, and other concept-based knowledge unrelated to specific experiences. The conscious recollection of factual information and general knowledge about the world,[1] generally thought to be independent of context and personal relevance.

The illusion-of-truth effect states that a person is more likely to believe a familiar statement than an unfamiliar one. In a 1977 experiment participants were asked to read 60 plausible statements every two weeks and to rate them based on their validity. A few of those statements (some of them true, others false) were presented more than once in different sessions. Results showed that participants were more likely to rate as true statements they had previously heard (even if they didn't consciously remember having heard them), regardless of the actual validity of the statement.

As the illusion-of-truth effect occurs even without explicit knowledge, it is a direct result of implicit memory. Some participants rated previously heard sentences as true even when they were previously told that they were false.[4] The illusion-of-truth effect shows in some ways the potential dangers of implicit memory as it can lead to unconscious decisions about a statement's veracity.

Implicit memory is a type of memory in which previous experiences aid in the performance of a task without conscious awareness of these previous experiences. It is debated whether implicit attitudes (that is, attitudes people have without being consciously aware of them) belong under the category of implicit memory or if they are a related but different phenomenon. In some ways, implicit attitudes resemble procedural memory as they rely on an implicit, unconscious piece of knowledge that was previously learned.[7]

        

Experiments on the hippocampus reveal that if a person receives information that is questionable, they may not fully accept it at the time.  However, with each subsequent exposure, the skepticism disappears, and the memory becomes as real as it were recently experienced.

         To be sure, everybody does this, but this is why so many conservatives are incapable of accepting facts that are staring them in the face.  Many believe that “cutting taxes increases revenues”, and that the fix for unemployment is to make the tax cuts permanent, and the cure for the housing mess is less regulation of banks and mortgage brokers!  (McCain actually said both these things recently!)  Conservatives keep shouting that US healthcare is the finest system in the world, and that all the other systems are miserable failures.

        

         Now to the e-mail.  First, let’s call a duck a duck.  This email is not an information piece.  It is a propaganda tract to discourage voters from voting for a Democrat.  It is written by Republicans to sway independents and undecided voters.  My cousin Bill and my brother Jack would never, under any circumstances, vote for Barack Obama, but they send this type of material out claiming it is logical proof of why they hold their opinions.

         The video clip shows Barack Obama losing his train of thought on one occasion, after he admits not having much sleep in the last 24 hours.  This is after 18 months on the campaign trail!

         This email attempts to prove that Barack Obama cannot speak a coherent sentence without a teleprompter.  It makes a broad sweeping statement about a man’s abilities, and backs it up with a carefully selected 1 minute 13 seconds of videotape.

         It does not show the thousands of instances when he answers impromptu questions eloquently.

         It does not mention that the audience loved his speech, and barely noticed the clumsy handling of the example of preventive medicine.

         The conclusion is that Obama is not qualified to be President because he can’t speak unless he is reading a script.

         In my opinion, it proves none of the above.  The only thing it proves is that even Barack Obama can lose his train of thought during a speech, something that happens to all public speakers, then, take a minute to recover.

         As you mention in your letter, the implication is that he is as bad as George W. Bush.  This is 1:13 min.  Bush has hours and hours of nonsense on tape. There is no logical connection between this and the malapropisms of George Bush. This point is without merit.

         As to explaining why he has turned down debates with John McCain, it does not address that issue at all, it only seems to.

         You mention that it brings back your memories of past debates.  I don’t know what those memories were, but let me say this.

         There were no debates.  A debate is “a formal discussion on a particular topic in a public meeting or legislative assembly, in which opposing arguments are put forward.”  The candidates were pilloried in front of a bunch of no-nothing, primping fools that were out to practice gotcha journalism to make themselves look smart at the expense of people that were their intellectual and moral superiors.  I give this as an example:        

Note:  orange and blue are my comments.  Black and red are the questions posed by Brian Williams, NBC News anchor, at the Democratic debate April 2007.  I have selected these questions.

These are real questions asked of Democratic candidates at the debate:

Senator Clinton, your party’s leader in the United States Senate, Harry Reid, recently said the war in Iraq is lost.  A letter to today’s USA Today calls his comments “treasonous” and says if General Patton were alive today, Patton would “wipe his boots” with Senator Reid.

Do you agree with the position of your leader in the Senate?

Gee, Hillary, are you and Harry both traitors, or is just Harry?

MODERATOR:  Senator Obama, you have called this war in Iraq, quote, “dumb,” close quote.  How do you square that position with those who have sacrificed so much?  And why have you voted for appropriations for it in the past? Senator Obama, you go first. 

Obama called the war Dumb before the invasion, but I guess it just proves he doesn’t care about the troops over there. And wow, is he ever the flip-flopper!

You’ve promised in your campaign a new kind of politics, but just this week the Chicago Sun-Times reported on questionable ties you have with a donor who was charged last year for demanding kickbacks on Illinois business deals.

Aren’t you practicing the very same kind of politics that many of the others on this stage have engaged in?

There was no wrongdoing, and the moderator, the nightly anchor for NBC news, knows this perfectly well.

And, incidentally, all you other Democrats are just as crooked as that gangster pal of Obama.

Senator Clinton, recent national polls indicate the majority of the general public has an unfavorable view of you, right now, at this point in time. 

Not true, and Williams knows it.

Why do you think Republicans are looking forward to running against you with so much zeal?

Are they?  And how do you know they are?

MODERATOR:  Our most recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll indicated a majority of Americans approved of last week’s Supreme Court decision to make so-called partial birth or late-term abortions illegal. 

“Partial birth abortion” is neither a legal nor a medical term.  It is an inflammatory term guaranteed to evoke a negative response.  This is a classic example of “push polling”.

Late term abortions are not “partial birth abortions”.

According to a Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll, 53% of U.S. residents support the Supreme Court's ruling to uphold the partial-birth abortion ban. The poll also found that 55% of respondents think abortion decisions should be "left up to the woman and her doctor"

Most of the people on this stage put out statements and criticized the ruling.  A lot of American families find this just a hideous topic for a discussion.

Do American families discuss this at all?  Or is it only you baby murdering Democrats that enjoy speaking out about this “hideous topic”?

Is this case, do you think, of the Supreme Court and the public with opinions in one place, and yet a lot of elected officials in another?

The majority of Americans support a woman’s right to abortion, 65% believe the decision should be between a woman and her doctor.

MODERATOR:  Time is up, Senator.

Senator Biden, from the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, what three nations, other than Iraq, represent, to you, the biggest threat to the United States?

Gee, I thought we were allies with the Iraqi government.  Our leaders go to Baghdad, and their leaders come to the White House.

MODERATOR:  Governor, thank you. 

We are all out of time. 

Senator Clinton, a friend of yours from back home, said this week:  Quote, “the Democrats do not understand the full nature and scope of the terrorist war against us.” 

Another quote:  “America will be safer with a Republican president.” 

How do you think, Senator, that it happened that that notion of Republicans as protectors in a post 9/11 world has taken on so?

Rasmussen poll:  49% of Americans think Democrats are better on national security than the Republicans  (42%.)

It happens because lying hacks like you say it on national TV  --  DS

I can assure you that the Republicans did not get any leading and loaded and false questions at their debate.  They might as well have been on “Larry King Live” - DS

As you can see, the last thing reporters get to are items of substance.  (They eventually did.)

Clearly, it would be suicide for a candidate to call our so-called press what they really are, a gaggle of clowns and buffoons.  That’s why Obama won’t “debate”, and why he can’t give the real reason.  (By the way, Obama did quite well in this TV appearance.)

      

       I have noticed that the “news” shows are interviewing stand-up comics for their take on events and people in the news.  The “real” news shows are looking more and more like The Daily Show and the Colbert Report.  And get this; these comedy shows actually get more facts across to the public than the “real” news shows.

       So, no, this snippet of tape does not prove that Barack Obama is dumber than George Bush, or that he is incapable of forming a coherent sentence unless he is reading from a teleprompter, or that he is afraid of facing John McCain in a fair debate.

       So why do Republicans stick to the same script to the bitter end.  Because it works.  It put a moron in the White House twice!

         This email follows the script started by the Republicans back in 1989. This is the script that conservatives are incapable of recognizing as a propaganda ploy, no matter how many times they are shown it, or how the evidence is presented to them.  "There are none so blind as those who will not see".  It goes like this:

1.   Big government can’t fix anything.  Big government is the problem, not the solution.

2.  All Democrats are elitists, and have only contempt for people not like them.
(Credit to Bob Somerby)

I remember the old saying; “You’re going to learn this if I have to beat it into your head!”  Well, the right wing has been beating these lies into our heads for decades.

To be sure it is not just the Republican propaganda hacks that regurgitate this script.  The media has been piling on just as vigorously, and many of the script followers purport to be liberals

From Neal Gabler: And it is the liberal politicians who continue to pay the price for the liberal journalists' self-promotion cum self-preservation. Beating up on well-educated, well-spoken liberals is probably the surest means of proving one's Everyman credentials and protecting one's personal brand without also, by the way, losing one's Beltway bona fides. Going on about faith and religion is another.
http://articles.latimes.com/2008/jun/29/opinion/op-gabler29

Paul Krugman had this to say a few days ago. (8/07):

What I mean, instead, is that know-nothingism — the insistence that there are simple, brute-force, instant-gratification answers to every problem, and that there’s something effeminate and weak about anyone who suggests otherwise — has become the core of Republican policy and political strategy. The party’s de facto slogan has become: “Real men don’t think things through.”

www.nytimes.com/2008/08/08/opinion/08krugman.html?th&emc=th

       I hope this answers your question.  Feel free to share this with anyone else.  (Except Karl Rove.)

      

       August 2007