Who Shut Down The Government?

[merjet]

Article by Thomas Sowell.

[BaalChatzaf]

It was Lord Protector Obama's doing. The executive branch can shutter the offices.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

This has nothing to do with shutting down the government.

As Sowell says, facts are facts.

And he notices, perplexedly (from the article linked in the opening post):

None of this is rocket science. But unless the Republicans get their side of the story out — and articulation has never been their strong suit — the lies will win. More important, the whole country will lose.

I don't believe any of the people involved in the polemics are so stupid they don't know the facts. The liars know they are lying.

Sowell used the wrong phrase, "their side of the story." The correct phrase is "story," period.

This is a propaganda war.

You have to tell a better story to win it. And facts only come in after the story is digested. In other words, every fact has to be illustrated with a story, a compelling, heart-wrenching sob-story, preferably one that creates outrage against bullying. A victimization story.

Obama & Co. are taking advantage of this issue to create mini-crises that they can later spin and blame the Republicans for.

Veterans can't see the memorials? Gawd, how awful! That will become a talking point. Damn Republicans!

Little kids can't go to parks and are crying at the closed gates? Gawd, how awful! That will become a talking point. Damn Republicans!

It will always be because the Republicans shut down the government.

How can they get away with this? Simple. Let the Rebublicans keep hammering facts as they, the liars, tell the stories--one after another, all day long, every day. Just ignore the facts and keep repeating the stories.

Obama & Co. are using the government shut-down to create "mental real estate" to use a Hollywood term for evaluating what movies should be made. These mini-crises are the mental real estate of future Progressive talking points. When these talking points are released, the public imagination, which has a very flawed memory, will feel the familiarity of the issue, but will digest the spin--the message of the stories it already knows from constant repetition.

Granted, facts always win in the end, but they take a long time to penetrate the different core storylines in the culture enough to change them. And who has a few centuries to wait?

btw - Has anyone noticed that the term "government shut-down" is actually an aberration of the English language if we are talking about the current American government? It hasn't shut down at all.

Unless conservatives, libertarians, etc. learn how to blame disappointed veteran grandpas and bawling kids on Obama for all the unfair bullying and make it stick, they will ultimately lose this story war.

To be clear, this is not a war of logic and reason. Those are important, but they are the infantry you send in after the bombing (story-bombing) has softened the enemy up. If you send them in first, they will be blown to smithereens.

This war (or phase of the war) deals with the "System 1" mind (to use Kahneman's term from Thinking Fast and Slow). The automatic mind. The fast-thinking mind--which is error-prone and doubt-free. The subconscious.

That's what propaganda addresses.

Michael

[Samson Corwell]

Whenever I hear the words "shut down":

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

John Stewart knows what I am talking about.

 

The best he can do right now is poke fun at Fox for using the victimization storyline. But it sounds awfully lame coming from him--the liberal side--since that is their favorite propaganda technique. (Sorry, the video doesn't embed.)

 

Daily Show Mocks FOX News' Coverage Of Shutdown

Real Clear Politics Video

 

These victimization stories work. That's why Stewart has to do something, even if it is not very good. He knows this stuff is working.

 

Harry Reid is now apologizing for harsh language. That's a sure sign it's working.

 

 

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

(I hope that C-SPAN2 video isn't too distorted. I tried to find a YouTube video, but none is out, yet.)

[merjet]

The most recent Time magazine's cover shows Majority Rule scratched out. The cover story article includes: "Polls have been clear for weeks that the majority of Americans have no interest in flirting with financial disaster."

What a laugh. Whether those at Time magazine know it or not, federal government decisions are not made by opinion polls. I have little doubt that the folks at Time mean we are now under minority rule and the minority is a few Republicans in the House of Representatives.

Hogwash. If we want to talk about minority rule, let's talk about a few Democrats. In the House of Representatives (435 members) there are 232 Republicans. In the Senate there are 52 Democrats (100 members). If 52 Democrats can have their way over 232 Republicans, that is way more "minority rule." An even smaller "minority rule" would be 2 -- Barack Obama and Harry Reid.

[BaalChatzaf]

The most recent Time magazine's cover shows Majority Rule scratched out. The cover story article includes: "Polls have been clear for weeks that the majority of Americans have no interest in flirting with financial disaster."

What a laugh. Whether those at Time magazine know it or not, federal government decisions are not made by opinion polls. I have little doubt that the folks at Time mean we are now under minority rule and the minority is a few Republicans in the House of Representatives.

Hogwash. If we want to talk about minority rule, let's talk about a few Democrats. In the House of Representatives (435 members) there are 232 Republicans. In the Senate there are 52 Democrats (100 members). If 52 Democrats can have their way over 232 Republicans, that is way more "minority rule." An even smaller "minority rule" would be 2 -- Barack Obama and Harry Reid.

But who and how many put the Democrats in office?

[Robert Baratheon]

MSK - Stewart's performance in that episode is noticeably different from his usual, more lighthearted shtick. He's a lot meaner and more pundit-like. One could easily imagine Maddow or Olbermann delivering most of the lines. It's nice to see Stewart rattled and on the defensive for a change, getting a taste of his own progressive medicine.

In chess, if you spend all your time responding to the opponent's moves, you might as well tip the king and leave because you'll never have the opportunity to enact your own plan of action. This holds true in politics as well. Every day the Daily Show responds to the other side's narrative is a day it isn't advancing its own narrative. These small victories add up over time until one side has an overwhelming positional advantage, then things can break down very quickly.

[merjet]

But who and how many put the Democrats in office?

A minority of eligible voters. Obama get 51.1% of the popular vote, but only 57.5% of eligible voters voted.

[jts]

But who and how many put the Democrats in office?

A minority of eligible voters. Obama get 51.1% of the popular vote, but only 57.5% of eligible voters voted.

Also the voting machines don't necessarily vote the same way you vote.

[BaalChatzaf]

But who and how many put the Democrats in office?

A minority of eligible voters. Obama get 51.1% of the popular vote, but only 57.5% of eligible voters voted.

Those who chose not to vote (as opposed to being prevented) have taken themselves out of the process. I cannot blame them overmuch, but still it was their choice.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[Robert Baratheon]

Those who chose not to vote (as opposed to being prevented) have taken themselves out of the process. I cannot blame them overmuch, but still it was their choice.

Ba'al Chatzaf

I don't vote because I believe it legitimizes the outcomes. If the Constitution were being upheld properly and more political actions were off-limits, then I might consider it.

[BaalChatzaf]

Those who chose not to vote (as opposed to being prevented) have taken themselves out of the process. I cannot blame them overmuch, but still it was their choice.

Ba'al Chatzaf

I don't vote because I believe it legitimizes the outcomes. If the Constitution were being upheld properly and more political actions were off-limits, then I might consider it.

You are a person of principle.

By the way, why do you work for the government. Perhaps I am mistaken and you do not work for the government.

[Robert Baratheon]

You are a person of principle.

By the way, why do you work for the government. Perhaps I am mistaken and you do not work for the government.

The principled explanation is I occupy a fixed spot as a regulator that would otherwise be filled with yet another progressive-type who despises American business, and in doing so, my participation makes government less oppressive as a whole.

The less principled explanation is it pays well and the job market sucks.

You can decide how much credence you wish to assign to each.

[BaalChatzaf]

You are a person of principle.

By the way, why do you work for the government. Perhaps I am mistaken and you do not work for the government.

The principled explanation is I occupy a fixed spot as a regulator that would otherwise be filled with yet another progressive-type who despises American business, and in doing so, my participation makes government less oppressive as a whole.

The less principled explanation is it pays well and the job market sucks.

You can decide how much credence you wish to assign to each.

I am in no position to judge you.

I had a similar problem in 1968. That year and every year there after until I retired I refused to work for any government or any contractor working on a government funded project. I worked strictly for the private-sector. That way I had no occasion to excuse my choices.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[Darrell Hougen]

Unless conservatives, libertarians, etc. learn how to blame disappointed veteran grandpas and bawling kids on Obama for all the unfair bullying and make it stick, they will ultimately lose this story war.

Stories of the uneven and often ridiculous treatment of various people and groups are making it through. That is where the stories are and I hope they continue to get through.

Here is one, for example. I know there are many others, such as the closings of private roads, etc.

Darrell

[caroljane]

The Reps story is, a less=privatized health care system is the gravest threat faced domestically by the US, and any legal measures are justifiable to prevent it. This is a hard sell to the undecided or uninformed sector of voters, but not an impossible one.

[Selene]

Now this is too much!!

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Darrell,

Yup. It's actually happening the way it's supposed to for propaganda.

Now we're getting Occupy Vet Street.

POLICE REPORTEDLY ARREST VETERANS AFTER THEY REFUSED TO LEAVE VIETNAM WAR MEMORIAL IN NYC

TheBlaze

And don't forget the visuals:

Michael

[BaalChatzaf]

Now this is too much!!

Is this a Daily Onion thing?

[merjet]

Is this a Daily Onion thing?

No. The image URL is http://www.wnd.com/files/2013/10/mount-rushmore.jpg.

The Onion on the shutdown: link1, link2.

[BaalChatzaf]

Is this a Daily Onion thing?

No. The image URL is http://www.wnd.com/files/2013/10/mount-rushmore.jpg.

The Onion on the shutdown: link1, link2.

Is it a spoof?

[Selene]

Is this a Daily Onion thing?

No. The image URL is http://www.wnd.com/files/2013/10/mount-rushmore.jpg.

The Onion on the shutdown: link1, link2.

Is it a spoof?

Yes, Bob

[jts]

The government shutdown won't last long. They are terrified shitless that if the government shutdown lasts too long, the people will find out that they don't need government.