The Dem Party must launch a frontal attack on the battlefield of truth

[Q]

- According to newspapers read by CSPAN hosts and a surprising number of Right Wing callers...the Democratic candidates are 'Bush Haters' and their attacks against him equate to 'hate speech'. One 'Bush* supporter' after another said they support him in 'everything he does'....especially in Iraq.

- None of them seem to care that Bush* lied about the reasons to invade or that Iraq has become a quagmire and killing field. Many reminded 'liberals' that George had previously warned Americans that his war would last 'generations'. Some Neocon callers noted the Dem 'hypocrisy' of voting for the 'war' and now 'changing their minds' and attacking Bush*.

- Democrats must get off their asses and realize that Bush* has control of the most powerful propaganda machine ever seen in America. Dems need to be aware that many Americans believe anything the Bushies and their media tells them...without the need for messy facts or uncomfortable questions.

- Too many Democrats and DUers don't seem to quite understand what they're up against in 2004. Conservative Americans have been brainwashed for decades about the 'need' to hate liberals and everything they represent. Bush* can do no wrong for these people. They equate Bush* with America and an attack against him is an attack against 'their' country.

- The Conservative Faithful will vote for Bush* even if grows horns and his eyes glow red. They don't care if he lies or abuses the power of his office. All they care about is that one of their own is in power and that he hates Dems and liberals as much as they do.

- We can't fight the Bushies on their own turf. He owns the political landscape and has cowed, intimidated and frightened too many Americans into blind obedience. The corporate media covers up his every mistake and miscalculation...and labels everything Democrats say as 'partisan posturing' and 'hate speech' against someone THEY still refer to as the 'greatest wartime president' in history.

- The Democratic PARTY must launch a frontal attack against the Bushies on the battlefield of truth. No more leaving brave Dems and candidates swinging in the wind without the support of the ENTIRE party. We're fighting against a fanatical right wing that has absolutely convinced the GOP party faithful that Democrats are the enemy of George and his 'war on terrorism'. We must work together as a PARTY to bring the truth to the American people and restore Democracy in America.

[JHB]

1. "Bush Hater" is the current Rove/RNC talking point

They rolled it out a couple of weeks ago, and it's had time to filter down to the squawktroopers.

[Q]

5. My point is that the 'Bush* hater' rhetoric is working...

...and this could mean trouble in 2004. We must keep in mind what the opposition is all about...and that we're fighting them on THEIR turf.

- This means that we can't use 'politics as usual' to defeat him. We have to attack his credibility and character...the very things the corporate media has covered up for over three years.

- Many Dems are still waiting and wondering why the Democratic party doesn't use the TRUTH to defeat Bush*. In a country without a free press and a government literally ruled by Neocons...the truth is the only thing we have left to use against them.

- I see too many Democrats being lulled into believing that Bush* will implode without the help of the opposition. This is simply not true.

[sendero]

11. maybe....

... but I see it as the usual Repugnicant projection. They dogged and hated Clinton for 8 years for *nothing*, so naturally they "see" that behavior in their opposers. 30% is a lot of people. But not enough to win elections, and NOBODY in the "swing" category will fail to notice that they are simply accusing us of what *they* are guilty of.

[Q]

12. Their 'hatred' of Clinton may seem like 'nothing' to us...

...but for them it was a crusade. That crusade continues as they blindly support Bush* The Conquering Hero.

- Bush* is an invention of the American corporate media. As a party...we MUST find a way to smash the facade of Bush's* perceived legitimacy and credibility the corporate media has worked so hard to maintain.

[JHB]

14. Bingo!

I'm sure this "deluge" of commentary on the dems hasn't been completely spontaneous.

I've listened to Pat Robertson declare his followers to be the "mainstream of America" for 20 years. Just because they believe it doesn't make it true. (it does give them electoral clout, but they're not undefeatable)

[meti57b]

I agree with your every word! That is exactly the situation.

[sendero]

2. I agree with you....

...but I'm not sure it is quite as bleak as all that. I subscribe to Mike Malloy's theory, paraphrased "30% of the population of the US *wants* an authoritarian leader and will follow him/her blindly".

There will always be a core of such people, and there are a lot of them. They are not going to change based on the facts, the facts are not what drives their decisions, their own personalities drive them.

Nothing that will happen, and I mean *nothing* will get to these people. However, the true majority, the "swing" voters can and do shift allegiances. I think we are doing well with them so far, and the prospect of continuing to do well is very good, though not guaranteed.

[sventvkg]

3. There are still less of them then there are of US...That why we will win

And we as a party, are more energized than I have personally ever seen and I believe we need 1/2 of 1% more votes than we had in 2004 to take the election..And I believe we will have a larger voter turnout then ever and we will get the votes...He lost last time and will lose bigger this time...Also, DEAN and CLARK are in FULL Attack mode and I hear Kerry and the others are stepping it up..This will be a BITTER Partisan election and Bush will LOSE based on demographics..I have never been nor have I ever seen dems more fired up to get the worst, and most DISPISED President in history, out of office...

[Q]

6. Yes...the Neocons are a 'minority'....

...but they're a minority of zealots who also happen to control our media and government.

- We're going to be overwhelmed with RWing BS in 2004 if we don't find a way to fight them as a united front.

[Brucey]

4. Absolutely right,

there are many reasons people support Bush, prolife, greedy, corporate-lovers, etc. One big reason is the macho, war-mongers that are in the majority in the US, weaned on WWII movies, who think Bush is tough. I think a good strategy would be to make him look like a wuss. Play up what a weakling he's been in so many ways. Now crawling to the UN, afraid of terrorists, hiding whenever there's trouble, etc. Need to poke a hole in the idea that he is aggressive - people love that.

[Q]

7. Reality: Bush* supporters hate our guts...

...and have been convinced that WE represent everything bad about America.

- To my way of thinking...the Democrat's biggest problem right now is that we don't speak as ONE VOICE. This makes it easy for the conservative corporate media to single out Dems for character assassination and call them 'bush haters', unpatriotic and worse.

[Q]

8. Sept, 11th, 2003: Neocons will honor Bush* as a hero...

...and anyone that speaks against him as traitors to his great war on terrorism. Bush* will ride this lie right back into the White House IF we don't work harder to get the truth to the American people.

- Investigations. Hearings. Prosecute Bush* wrongdoing. The truth will set America free.

[meti57b]

9. the Democratic candidate has got to have the ability to confront the

republican smear campaign and it's every lie. This was something that Al Gore seemed notably to lack the ability to do. In addition, the Democratic Party leadership has to take a role in doing this. I don't think our candidate should be expected to take care of all of it, alone.

[Q]

10. The American media outright lied about Gore and his politics...

...and they'll do it again in 2004. You can count on it.

- It doesn't help that certain conservative elements within the Dem party are helping Bush* by trashing other candidates and actually agreeing with Bush* policy.

[rwork]

13. The single biggest lie

that needs to be corrected. That Saddam was responsible for 9-11. According to poll 70% of Americans think Iraq was responsible.

[Q]

15. How is it that so many Americans believe that lie?

- The simple answer is that the Bushies repeated that lie over and over again in different forums...and the pliant media repeated it without correction.

- We can learn from history and the opposition. Republicans were able to impeach Clinton because they spoke as one unrelenting voice against him.

- Democrats don't need anything more than the truth to win against the Bush* Lie Machine.

[dennis4868]

17. People believe that....

the war in Iraq is a war on terrorism.....NOTHING COULD BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH. Our commander in thief has stopped the war on terrorism to fight the war for OIL.

[Kanola]

23. I agree

All the candidates need to do what both Dean and Kucinich were doing last night at the debate, stating that Saddam and 911 are not linked together on the war on terror. They need to pound that fact out over and over to get this into the 70% skulls.

[prolesunited]

16. Here's an interesting article

on rhetoric that explains how Bush's speeches help reinforce some of the characteristics that have been pointed out about his supporters.

George W. Bush is generally regarded as a mangler of the English language.

What is overlooked is his mastery of emotional language -- especially negatively charged emotional language -- as a political tool. Take a closer look at his speeches and public utterances and his political success turns out to be no surprise. It is the predictable result of the intentional use of language to dominate others.

Bush, like many dominant personality types, uses dependency-creating language. He employs language of contempt and intimidation to shame others into submission and desperate admiration.

If you look at the language that has been employed by Bush and others, particularly as we approach the anniversary of 9/11, you certainly can see this technique being employed:

Catastrophic words and phrases are repeatedly drilled into the listener's head until the opposition feels such a high level of anxiety that it appears pointless to do anything other than cower.

Psychologist Martin Seligman, in his extensive studies of "learned helplessness," showed that people's motivation to respond to outside threats and problems is undermined by a belief that they have no control over their environment. Learned helplessness is exacerbated by beliefs that problems caused by negative events are permanent; and when the underlying causes are perceived to apply to many other events, the condition becomes pervasive and paralyzing.

Bush is a master at inducing learned helplessness in the electorate. He uses pessimistic language that creates fear and disables people from feeling they can solve their problems.

The author's conclusions point out why we are losing the battle against Bush and his supporters. We are arguing with logic and they are being manipulated by fear. In a hierarchy of needs, which is going to dominate? People want to feel safe — sometimes at any cost. I think it also explains some of the appeal of Dean, who is appealing to people's optimism and empowering them through the belief that they can take their country back.

Bush's political opponents are caught in a fantasy that they can win against him simply by proving the superiority of their ideas. However, people do not support Bush for the power of his ideas, but out of the despair and desperation in their hearts. Whenever people are in the grip of a desperate dependency, they won't respond to rational criticisms of the people they are dependent on. They will respond to plausible and forceful statements and alternatives that put the American electorate back in touch with their core optimism.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/130534_focusecond13.html

It's a very interesting article that I would encourage others to read in full.

[Q]

19. Extremely relevant article...

...thanks for posting it.

[DrBB]

18. It's not about facts, it's about NARRATIVE

The narrative is Our Warrior President. The facts are selected to fit the narrative; anything that doesn't fit is filtered out--denied, denigrated or ignored.

The press has finally, feebly, belatedly started to resist this master narrative. But the contradicting facts won't carry any force until they can be assimilated to a contradictory narrative. IraqNam is one, and it's making some real headway. But what's really needed is a Dem candidate who carries the kind of authority, charisma and momentum to coalesce a new narrative line powerful enough to break the magnetic pull of the existing one. Having truth on your side in such a narrative is an advantage, but it's not enough. Election politics provide the dramatic framework if you can find a candidate.

So far Dean seems to be building some of that--The Voice Crying In The Wilderness might be one title for his meme. But I'm skeptical whether it will be magnetic enough. Especially in the south.

Increasingly--despite the misgivings I've seen voiced around here, some of which are well taken--I'm coming to think Clark may be the only one who could really do it. I've heard him telling the truth about Bush in the most concise, authoritative, factual way. He has stood up to Hannity and the rest better than anyone, largely b/c he has been in that game himself long enough. And yada yada. But your point is about a Truth War, and I think General Clark has the goods to wage it more effectively than anyone else.

I wish he would at least decide to run. I think having him IN the race will give us a big narrative push in the right direction, ramp up the amplitude and authority of our meme, give it credence among those subscribing to America At War Needs A Tough Leader, etc., even if he doesn't end up being at the top of the ticket.

[Q]

20. "The facts are selected to fit the narrative..."

- As was done for Reagan and Poppy Bush. We haven't had anything close to a free press since at least the 80s.

- The Dem party has good candidates...but will that be enough to defeat the Bush* regime when they're holding most the cards?

[MuseRider]

21. It could be enough

if we manage to nominate someone who is a fighter, who doesn't waffle, who is certain of the way to lead this country. I see several who have that potential. If we don't get that we are sunk. I think the media will have no choice but to cover the dem candidate, after all, it is a national election. I think right now they are just playing with them. Once we have one they will not be able to shut them up so easily. They will get their points out and even if the media makes the choice to make fun of them some people will eventually see through that. I don't believe yet that we are at the point that this country wants a one party system.

[DrGonzoLives]

22. Damn straight

We need to be able to counter-spin the lies and propaganda that the GOP is sure to unleash.

[prolesunited]

24. I think this is a very interesting and important discussion

:kick:

[Terwilliger]

25. yeah, but they're not going to do that Q

my first impression of that was when I woke up one morning and all of the sudden, his Niger uranium lie was just an "oops" (so saideth Da Big Dawg) and that it wasn't important that we didn't find WMD's coming from folks (fucks?) like Joe Biden and John Kerry.

George Bush will be re-elected in 2004 and there will be NOBODY ELSE to blame THIS time!

[Cocoa]

26. our only hope is to follow Q's incoherent advice

we MUST support Al Gore, for some unknown reason, and when the dems successfully filibuster Miguel Estrada, we MUST downplay the victory.

This approach is the ONLY way to win, never mind that it makes no sense.

[opihimoimoi]

27. Bush Hater? UnPatriotic? Un American? Distractive attempt

at covering the Loser's ass. Pub Propaganda/pysops.

Must be countered ASAP.

Ramming Speed.

Come, we go below decks, give ice water to the oilers and wipers in the engine room.