posted on January 22, 2004 09:24:05 AM new
ELECTIONS 2004
THE HIT IS ON - INSIDE THE RIGHT-WING'S STRATEGY
There Is Only One Issue In This Upcoming Election: It Is Not Iraq, It Is Not The Economy, And Unless Certain Candidates Deal With It Immediately They Will Be Done In Short Order
by Samuel A. Stanson
JANUARY 21, 2004 – In this story written on December 8, 2003 (http://www.moderateindependent.com/v1i16clarksurge.htm ), we informed you of the right-wing’s election strategy. The basic idea is to push Kerry and Edwards early on, then turn on them. The goal is to bury Clark – who they are worried is the best candidate to beat President Bush – and ensure that Dean wins – the person they consider easiest to beat.
Here is an excerpt from the December 5 entry on the right-wing site polipundit:
"The rationale is simple:
1. We still want Dean to be the nominee so that President Bush can crush him and have long coattails.
2. The biggest threat to a Dean nomination is no longer Dick Gephardt, John Kerry or John Edwards. It's Weasel Clark, for all the reasons outlined below.
3. To help Dean, we have to bring down Clark's vote totals in the crucial states of New Hampshire and South Carolina.
4. In New Hampshire, donating to neighbouring-son John Kerry will help ensure that Clark won't surpass expectations by finishing ahead of Kerry.
5. In South Carolina, Clark can be stopped by neighbouring-son John Edwards.
In addition to reporting this a month and a half ago, we reported last week in this article (http://www.moderateindependent.com/v1i18rightwing.htm) that the right-wing was about to launch an all out smear assault against General Clark.
And we have had confirmed by an inside source that this is indeed the marching orders – in fact, you don’t have to look far to see this. Just listen to AM radio or watch FOX News and you will see nothing but the same handful of dishonest smears and innuendo about Clark repeated and repeated – every time he comes up, every time, they will be sure to mention the two dictated lies of the moment - and praise for Kerry and Edwards.
We summed things up in this article www.moderateindependent.com/v1i18soumedia.htm last week, telling how the lynchpin to the Bush/Limbaugh hold on power is their complete domination and control of the entire non-Moderate Independent American media.
All good M/I readers already know all this stuff – and in reality, anyone who is not living with their head up Limbaugh’s oxycontin bottle is aware of this.
But, for some reason, no one in the Democratic Party gets the extent of it yet. On Thursday night, just days before the New Hampshire primary, the Democratic hopefuls are set to walk back into yet another FOX News-hosted debate.
So let us be clear: there is only one issue that will determine the outcome of the upcoming election. It is not Iraq, it is not the economy. The issue is the right-wing’s domination of the media, and if the Democratic Party and candidates do not realize this and make coming up with an aggressive, effective strategy to deal with it proactively a top priority, they have no chance of winning.
Make no mistake, the right-wing’s domination of the media message is a virtual science at this point. They used it to get President Bush elected the first time, they used it to get Schwarzenegger elected. As far as two years before the 2000 election, while America was basking in peace and prosperity and almost no one had heard of Governor Bush, the media around the nation was already dubbing Bush “unbeatable.” Schwarzenegger was unanimously and constantly referred to as the “frontrunner,” despite the fact he was in not in the lead at all but behind by much as fifteen points in the polls and, in fact, never led until the very last week. We document the Schwarzenegger story here www.moderateindependent.com/v1i12puppet.htm .
Right now, Kerry and Edwards think the press is, at last, on their side. How naďve can they be.
Look above – we told you as of December 8 that the media was going to chew them up just so they can spit them out. Kerry and Edwards are not considered threats to win the nomination nor to beat President Bush. Clark is.
The Democrats see President Bush unleash teams to Iowa and New Hampshire right before the primaries and still they don’t get it.
The Bush re-election strategy is simple – and nothing like America has ever seen before. They are not concerned so much about how they will portray the President, as all traditional campaigns are. For the Bush/Limbaughians, this election is a practical matter and a ground war.
The media machine they have set in place marches lockstep, taking talking points directly from the RNC. It spans every corner of the nation, covers the airwaves above every wheat and cornfield in America, sits within the newspaper on the doorstep of every suburban household. While the Democrats spend millions to buy 30 seconds of airtime here or there, the Bush teams dispatched to Iowa and New Hampshire simply snapped their fingers and got 80 spots lined up on talk radio stations – each a twenty minute (or longer) unrebutted campaign commercial, which then goes onto 24 hours straight of echoing the same campaign commercial talking points – all free of charge and widely broadcast.
And they know how the game works: they can lie all they want and no one will do anything about it. Gingrich first perfected the routine. They start by telling a lie – like the one we caught Drudge and RNC Chairman Ed Gillespie telling the other day. The media may call them on it – as we did, the Washington Post, and the NY Times did.
But that doesn’t stop them. The thing they learned is to tell a lie, tell it big, tell it often. And this works because the Democrats let them get away with it. The media will call them on it once, but then consider their job done. They will not write again and again that, “Despite us pointing out they are lying, the RNC Chair won’t stop.” They won’t do it, and the Bush/Limbaughians know it.
Unless it is the RNC pushing the buttons. When Moveon.org had a couple of videos on their site that compared Bush to Hitler – which isn’t necessarily dishonest or inaccurate to begin with - RNC Chair Gillespie had it all over the news. It went on for days, hit the front of all the major news sources. Moveon.org apologized and pulled the videos, and it was done.
However, when just a few days later Gillespie himself was caught red-handed intentionally lying to smear a Democratic presidential hopeful, it got almost no media play, no apology, and right this very second the lies are being repeated and repeated – despite a mountain of clear evidence and a few article showing them to be lies – repeated all across the country, from talk radio to TV to the print media.
And no one in the Democratic Party makes it an issue. They think they can ignore it, think it won’t affect them.
And so again and again the message is being reinforced, subtlety, that Kerry’s okay, Edwards is good, but fear Clark, smear Clark.
For now they are bashing Dean as well. But don’t let that confuse you. They still are pulling for Dean. The plan is to push Kerry through New Hampshire, then start assailing him as an unelectable Northeast liberal as they move to the South. Then they will briefly continue their push of Edwards, trying to get him to knock off Clark in South Carolina.
If they can get a Kerry win in New Hampshire and an Edwards win in South Carolina, they will feel they have neutralized Clark, at which point they then turn on Edwards as well as Kerry, and start pushing Dean like they had before.
They pushed Dean early on, pushed Dean, and Dean rose. Everyone saw this. They decided they want to push Edwards and Kerry and guess what? Edwards and Kerry are at the top. When they decide to bash them and push Dean again, he’ll be back up. Their absolute control of the media is that good… if left unchallenged and not made a central issue.
And so we are now a few days before the New Hampshire primary. Talk radio is spreading the same two-specific smears about Clark and trying to make Democrats nervous that they maybe can’t trust him while giving compliments and a free ride to Kerry and Edwards. And Clark’s campaign has not made a major issue of it yet.
And on Thursday, the Bush/Limbaughians are in control, as their puppet station, FOX News, hosts a debate. We know what to expect, we have seen it twice already this year. They will be sure to work in the same two dishonest smears that they are echoing on talk radio. They will instigate to try and get Clark angry and infighting, and insult him directly by citing the lying smears they have been echoing for over a week now as “conventional wisdom.” And after the debate they will do their “analysis,” repeating the same lying talking points and casting as much doubt on Clark as possible, while talking nicely about Kerry and Edwards – more so in praise of Kerry at this point since New Hampshire is what’s next.
We know this. This is simple fact.
In the Iowa caucuses, caucus sites were flooded as never before, and the big story was all the new people, many of who were Republicans, who took the cue from talk radio and went heavily for Kerry and Edwards.
People say this election will be close – that is not the case. This election will be a landslide. Which side it will go for will come down to one thing: will the Democrats challenge the Republican’s amoral, dishonest media domination?
If the answer is no, whoever is their candidate will be trounced. If the answer is yes, they will win by a landslide.
One of our readers wrote us yesterday. He heard a talk radio host in LA talking about the Iowa caucuses, and he was heaping praise on Kerry and Edwards. So he called in to voice his support for General Clark. As soon as he mentioned Clark’s name, our reader told us, the host went right into the exact lying smear we had debunked just a few days ago.
The M/I reader told us because he had read the articles on our site he was able to simply and easily point out how dishonest the host was being and take him on on a moral basis. “What you are saying is clearly not true,” he said he told the host, “you must know that, so you obviously have something against General Clark. Why are you smearing a decorated four-star American General by intentionally spreading the same lies Drudge and the RNC were caught spreading last week? Why would you so dishonestly smear a good American like that?”
This is why M/I exists. The days of the lies holding supreme reign are over – the truth is now here. And we have already developed a small army who is out there fighting back . And, as our reader who made this call told us, it is amazing how easy it is to humiliate, degrade, and point out the amorality of these people when you have the proper information for your rebuttals. (In this case, when our reader cited Richard Perle’s clear comments stating he knew Clark was opposed to the war, the radio host was lost . You see, they just take the talking points lies - when you have the whole truth, you have the upper-hand.)
Yes, our readers realize how serious this issue is, and by reading M/I they are taking steps to combat it. They bring this information out into the world and begin to change the national conversation.
However, it is up to the Democratic candidates and party to do the same. The last two FOX News debates were absurd, and only helped President Bush. Thursday night, with so much on the line, General Clark – and the other candidates who are so happy to be getting free dope from the scumlord dealer – better show up with a strategy. And the best strategy is to anticipate the obvious and make it an moral issue.
President Bush has a lot in store for the upcoming election, but it will be like his version of the War on Terror – covert, and on offense. He will not simply present himself and try to win support. There will be interference at every turn, every tactic used to make sure the Democrats don’t get heard, complete use of their media machine to personally attack and smear while the President seems to have nothing to do with it.
If the media is not dealt with, every argument on every subject will be twisted and, indeed, become irrelevant, and personal characterizations, like the ones being insinuated now about Clark, are what will determine the election.
This is the strategy. The good news is that, if you realize the predominance of this issue, it is a straightforward one to combat.
So far, by the fact that the Democratic Party scheduled all of these debates to be hosted by the clearly biased right-wing puppet FOX News channel, it is obvious the party doesn't get it yet. It is sending its troops out into a booby trapped field - for the third time this election cycle.
Thursday the Democratic candidates walk into the Lion’s den for a debate that may very possibly determine the outcome of the entire primary season. I hope they have learned from the Roy Horn tragedy and bring more than just a microphone with them.
For General Clark in particular, the hit is on. He has to go in there knowing it is a setup, a planned character assassination attempt.
Of course, as a four-star General, he might be well aware and have strategized as any good planner should. If he is prepared to make fun of the FOX News channel if any absurd or loaded questions are asked, asserting he is the candidate who won't let FOX News and the right-wing media steer this election, he might just pull another perfect act of jujitsu and leave his would-be assassins the injured party.
posted on January 22, 2004 09:50:22 AM new
The problem is that Fox news is not alone in their support of Bush. What media is not a conduit for Bush propaganda?
posted on January 22, 2004 08:36:56 PM new
It has crossed my mind a time or two that the Democratic party brass may be willing to sacrifice the next election to Bush in order to ensure Hillary's presidency in another 4 years. There won't be any Republicans strong enough to beat her, being as wildly popular as she is, she couldn't win against a Democratic incumbent, and will be too old by 4 years after that...
___________________________________
Mi abuelita me dijo "en boca cerrada no entran moscas".
posted on January 23, 2004 02:23:49 PM new
Egad, Profe, say it ain't so!
I had my period of admiring Hillary and it dissolved when I realized she was just another entrenched politician who'd do or say anything to attain her next public office.
(I used to admire Dianne Feinstein, too; I was living in San Francisco the day Dan White went on his rampage and I well remember her shakily -- humanly -- announcing the tragedy. I was proud to be one of those who elected her to the U.S. Senate but I've since been chagrined by her waffling on [republican] issues that receive national attention. }
While I don't hold with the right-wing notion of Hillary as "evil" , I have lost faith in her as someone who'd appeal to me as president. Frankly, I'm not wild about her as a U.S. Senator.
I predict a disaster of the first water (in the form of a republican landslide win) if she is to be the democratic presidential nominee in 2008; I won't vote for her, and neither will millions of similarly disillusioned men and women who would've been disposed to do so before they'd been exposed to her limp voting record on key issues and her periodic off-the-cuff "humorous" remarks...
posted on January 23, 2004 04:25:23 PM new"The Republicans would hold fund raisers for a Hillary run."
Of course. They were the source of all those bogus reports that she was running for president -- .even though she made it perfectly clear that she was not.
posted on January 23, 2004 05:25:37 PM new that is VERY funny profe.....There won't be any Republicans strong enough to beat her, being as wildly popular as she is....even democratic strategists have admitted her chances of beating this President would be low.....too many DISlike her too much. In 2008? Any republican running would win against Hillary.....hands down.
posted on January 23, 2004 08:31:10 PM new
I was kidding...I think...
but Linda,
Any republican running would win against Hillary.....hands down.
I suspect you'd say that about any Republican, running against any Democrat, in any year..
___________________________________
Mi abuelita me dijo "en boca cerrada no entran moscas".
posted on January 27, 2004 11:33:16 PM newfrom the article Skylite posted:
"The basic idea is to push Kerry and Edwards early on, then turn on them. The goal is to bury Clark – who they are worried is the best candidate to beat President Bush – and ensure that Dean wins – the person they consider easiest to beat."
If, indeed, they "turn" on Kerry, it will be with Kerry's full compliance. It wouldn't surprise me at all to learn that he's in on "the fix" to retain Bush in the White House for another four years. Kerry and Bush are both Yalies and, far more importantly, both members of the elite and ultra-secretive Skull & Bones Society. If you think that's just a "senior frat house", go read up on Skull & Bones. George has "tapped" his buddy John to do him a favor, and I'm sure John will be amply rewarded when George is sworn in for the second time.
