"Up until Ronald Reagan it was Democrats who talked about the undo influence “special interests” had on the Republican Party. What the Democrats meant by special interests were large corporations, the Chamber of Commerce, and the large financial institutions (you know, the people who crashed the economy in 2008). Reagan turned that issue on its head by re-defining “special interests” to mean labor unions, environmental groups, etc. (you know, the people who fought for living wages, safe work places, and the preservation of a beautiful place to live, work and play)."
What brings this to mind is Rachel Maddow's discussion of attack ads that are not what they appear to be. The first example she cited was an advertisement Clair McCaskill ran for/against Todd Aiken. Senator McCaskill designed the advertisement to look like she was attacking Mr. Aiken when her intent was actually to promote the nomination of someone she considered to be a weak opponent. I was very amused by the fact Ms. McCaskill's ploy worked. The Republican's nominated Todd Aiken to run against her, and she handily defeated him. Anyone who has paid any attention to what politicians say and how they said it would not have been deceived by Senator McCaskill's ad. No where in that ad. was Mr. Aiken described as an extremist, a wing nut, or the tool of the plutocracy. Instead, he was portrayed as “a true conservative.” Today “True Conservative” has been perverted to indicate a reactionary twit, but base Republican are not sophisticated enough to know what that means or how undesirable it is. So someone who is portrayed as an avowed defender of “true conservative” values tingles the Republican G-spot. It is not terribly surprising that McCaskill's false attack worked!
Another good example cited by Ms. Maddow is an ad financed by a super pac founded by former TD Ameritrade Executive, Joe Ricketts. This ad tries to give the appearance of attacking Bernie Sanders while actually promoting him. Once again the language reveals the real intent of Mr. Ricketts and his super pac. The Republicans constantly villainize big government, and their most feared bogey man is socialism. Bernie Sanders actually describes him self as a democratic socialist, yet no where in this ad is he described as a socialist. Believe me, no Republican would ever leave their favorite bogey man out of an ad attacking a Democrat; this is particularly true when that Democrat actually adopts the bogey man's name. So why did they fail to mention the bogey man? The answer is because they are far too impressed with their own fears. They actually think Bernie is a weak candidate because of the socialist label, and that even Democrats share their unreasonable fear.
While I am on the subject of buzz words, did anyone else notice how many times the questions posed to Bernie Sanders by Chris Cuomo during the Democratic Iowa Town Hall contained the words “Big Government,” and that “big government” was used in a pejorative manner. It is no wonder that Bernie stood up and got feisty! He did well. In fact, I think Mr. Ricketts and the Republicans should be careful about what they wish for. Just ask Hillary; I'm sure she knows Bernie is a competent candidate! If Mr. Sanders is nominated the Republicans are more likely than not to get burned by the Bern! This is particularly true if the Republican candidate is a fascist bigot like the Trumpster or the Canadian Texas Turd.
What brings this to mind is Rachel Maddow's discussion of attack ads that are not what they appear to be. The first example she cited was an advertisement Clair McCaskill ran for/against Todd Aiken. Senator McCaskill designed the advertisement to look like she was attacking Mr. Aiken when her intent was actually to promote the nomination of someone she considered to be a weak opponent. I was very amused by the fact Ms. McCaskill's ploy worked. The Republican's nominated Todd Aiken to run against her, and she handily defeated him. Anyone who has paid any attention to what politicians say and how they said it would not have been deceived by Senator McCaskill's ad. No where in that ad. was Mr. Aiken described as an extremist, a wing nut, or the tool of the plutocracy. Instead, he was portrayed as “a true conservative.” Today “True Conservative” has been perverted to indicate a reactionary twit, but base Republican are not sophisticated enough to know what that means or how undesirable it is. So someone who is portrayed as an avowed defender of “true conservative” values tingles the Republican G-spot. It is not terribly surprising that McCaskill's false attack worked!
Another good example cited by Ms. Maddow is an ad financed by a super pac founded by former TD Ameritrade Executive, Joe Ricketts. This ad tries to give the appearance of attacking Bernie Sanders while actually promoting him. Once again the language reveals the real intent of Mr. Ricketts and his super pac. The Republicans constantly villainize big government, and their most feared bogey man is socialism. Bernie Sanders actually describes him self as a democratic socialist, yet no where in this ad is he described as a socialist. Believe me, no Republican would ever leave their favorite bogey man out of an ad attacking a Democrat; this is particularly true when that Democrat actually adopts the bogey man's name. So why did they fail to mention the bogey man? The answer is because they are far too impressed with their own fears. They actually think Bernie is a weak candidate because of the socialist label, and that even Democrats share their unreasonable fear.
While I am on the subject of buzz words, did anyone else notice how many times the questions posed to Bernie Sanders by Chris Cuomo during the Democratic Iowa Town Hall contained the words “Big Government,” and that “big government” was used in a pejorative manner. It is no wonder that Bernie stood up and got feisty! He did well. In fact, I think Mr. Ricketts and the Republicans should be careful about what they wish for. Just ask Hillary; I'm sure she knows Bernie is a competent candidate! If Mr. Sanders is nominated the Republicans are more likely than not to get burned by the Bern! This is particularly true if the Republican candidate is a fascist bigot like the Trumpster or the Canadian Texas Turd.
No comments:
Post a Comment