Home » This is the way the left argues

Comments

This is the way the left argues — 44 Comments

  1. They [Klein, Crowley and rhe MSM in general] count on the fact that we should just take their word for it, and they are right–for the most part we (the American public) will.

    IMO this is in great part because the MSM still relies on the appearance of being a non-partisan reporter of the facts; you know, the old “Walter Cronkite as the most trusted man in the U.S.” canard.

    I suggest that this tradition is at least in the beginning stages of breaking down; it doesn’t happen overnight. The first crack in the dyke was Fox News which has been perpetuated and enlarged by the conservative blogosphere. Now, with the Koch brothers possibly also buying into the MSM we may see a widening of that crack.

    With each of these steps it becomes more and more difficult for the MSM to perpetuate its myth and this myth’s destruction will eventually even reach many low-information voters.

  2. The right wing fringe has always been around and always made these ridiculous arguments. You people never quit trying, do you? Even though no one pays attention you just keep trying! Oh well! I guess you serve as a reminder of why common core education is so necessary.

  3. It’s funny. My once fairly liberal boyfriend was watching Fox News the other night. He said “Look!” and pointed to Mara Liasson. I had to let him know that Fox News has always had people from the Left on their channel.

    The Left lies. It always has. They wear blinders on their eyes, like their refusal to look at the Gosnell case. You would think they would be in favor of having abortion clinics meet the same care quality standards as any clinic (or at least as good as your local tattoo parlor). The truth is that they don’t care, they don’t want to read anything that contradicts their closely held beliefs. And that is exactly what they are doing now on Benghazi. It would matter only if there was a Republican president. It’s exactly why Mark Stanford’s infidelity matters and Clinton/Weiner/etc’s infidelities don’t.

  4. Teri Pittman: the excuse usually given about the different standards for the infidelities is that the Republicans are hypocrites because they’re violating their own stated morals and the Democrats are not.

    Pretty sad, if you think about it. Democrats given a pass supposedly because they have no moral standards.

  5. America’s inner dialogue:

    I have embraced my new self. What? No you haven’t. Oh, yes I have. Have not. Have to. Have not. Have to.

  6. It’s past time, actually. It’s time to go after them for what they are- a part of a political machine.

    Defunding the comfortable sinecures of Academia and the host of government supported nonprofits would be next.

  7. First step was public sector Unions, and with 30 R governors, that is already en route. Won’t happen in NY or California, but they’ll be bankrupt before long anyway and miserable.

  8. The absurdity is not in the questioning nor in the events themselves, nor anything in between. The absurdity is in the ether, the vibes, the zeitgeist. The absurd has become the norm. How does one even identify the absurd with nothing rational available with which to make a comparison?

    The banking system of corruption is absurd but we go on. Quantitative easing to infinity is absurd but the easing continues. Same sex marriage is absurd but… Islam is absurd and is even more absurdly a “religion” and nearly beyond absurdity, one of “peace” — but it is ascendant. It is absurd that a nation would, in two generations time, kill off 50+ million of its children and, within that same time frame, replace them with 50+ million third world-people of color-low IQs-even lower understanding or acceptance of Western culture, immigrants. Is it not absurd that we think ourselves free while living under the vigilance of CCTV cameras, DHS, TSA, the Patriot Act, the extended Patriot act, NDRP executive orders, militarized police, and drones?

    Hell, Obama himself, in his persona, is absurd.

    The absurd has become the new status quo ante, the new ‘previous state of affairs’. All previous notions of absurd are hereby and henceforth normative.

  9. Sharpie,

    Are you opposed to the hearings?
    Are you opposed to the facts coming out?
    Do you believe what happened was a protest because of a video?

    What part of Susan Rice’s statement on 5 networks 5 days after 9/11/2012 was true?

    Was their any part of Susan Rice’s statement that was not true to you?

    Did the secretary of state act appropriately either during 9/11/2012 or during the hearings afterwards? Was she forthcoming?

    Will you answer these questions Sharpie? 🙂

  10. Don’t rebut baseless smears like the ones Sharpie proposes with rational thought. It’s pearls to swine.

  11. I am still dumbfounded that a civil servant actually had to tell Congress that it DOES MATTER when Americans are killed and the government lies about it. I would never have imagined that we could come to this point. But here we are.

  12. Here’s what I’m afraid of: We’re losing our sense of humor. When that happens it shows we’ve lost some perspective which is probably needed.

    Folks (if I can borrow that word from Obama, but have you noticed he stopped using it after the election) who frequent this site should know I’m a right wing nut, at least by progressive definition. I’m the tea partinest, red neckest, yahoo this side of the Pecos. So, when I write a fairly obvious parody and it’s mayhaps taken seriously, well, I hope it shows we’re ready for perspective, some relief.

    We’re all suffering from anger, anxiety, frustration, loss and sorrow. We can’t even talk or argue with the idiots taking away our country, our freedoms, our children, our future . . .

    But let humor, let the enemy camp hear laughter, let the ordinary joys resume again–that’s the answer or at least a prelude to one.

  13. I was in the Navy and if I declined to rescue people who were under attack and then lied about it, I would have been up on charges of moral turpitude and pusillanimous conduct in the face of the enemy. Lying to the public is a betrayal of trust but that obviously doesn’t bother this administtration.

  14. “…the way the left argues”

    The modern left, that is to say the postmodernist institutional-niche occupying types that set the political tone for their client class dependents, don’t in fact argue. Not as argument has traditionally been understood, anyway.

    We all understand that by now, don’t we?

    They instead emit what are intended to be behavior modifying noises at some targeted audience. Any incidental reference to a particular state of affairs implies no commitment on the part of the speaker to adhere to some public canon of accurate representation.

    As you note, that kind of cynicism is not anything particularly new in politics and ideological disputes.

    But what once was merely a preferred tactic – that of making the opposition appear ridiculous rather than laboriously engaging its reasoning – is, since the entire notion of truth as something objective and “out there to be discovered” has been abandoned, now the only tactic that makes any sense to them.

    Naked narrative, arbitrary framing, and reiterated perspective structuring stories, are on their view the only real language game that there is.

    Why then would anyone expect a leftist that doesn’t believe in the concept of truth as “something to be found independent of our minds” in the first place, to “tell the truth” as if the phrase meant “tell what really happened”?

    What can “truth” as traditionally understood, even mean in the mental universe of a modern liberal or leftist post the 1980s?

    Do we imagine that while mocking the notion of representational truth, they would somehow and nonetheless, say, out of consideration for their ‘fellow citizen’s’ sensibilities, try to make their behavior shaping statements as accurate as possible?

    What again, exactly, is the point of their explaining to the herd of producers whose lives they are busily appropriating, what they eventually intend for it?

  15. Ace has a post up right now in which he declares war on NBC:

    [two pieces by two liberals on #Benghazi, one by Michael Hirsh and one by Marc Ambinder] simply [refuse to mention the smoking gun evidence of a cover-up] and therefore they have nothing at all to spin away.

    If no one knows, then no one will notice the omission.

    This ends it for me. This is the end of things.

    It is time to put Voltaire’s observation into action: It is good in this country to hang a admiral [who fails] from time to time, to encourage the others.

    You don’t have to hang every admiral to make your point to all admirals. You just have to hang one.

    We have to hang Admiral NBC. We have to get Levin, Limbaugh, everyone on this.

    I don’t mean NBC News. No one watches that and it’s a rounding error in their operation.

    I mean NBC itself– Entertainment Division.

    I mean Comcast.

    And I mean, as a secondary matter, an end to the practice of linking the media.

    We can attribute quotes. We can rewrite stories– all fair use. We can note from where this information comes from.

    But we can do that without a link.

    They have declared war on the truth.

    It’s time we all understood we in a war and stopped giving aid, comfort, and traffic to the enemy.

    Sounds like a good plan, but will there be steadfast warriors?

  16. T,

    I’ve been trying to figure out if you figured my post out. I believe you did.

    QED, indeed!

  17. sharpie,

    All you needed was the “/sarc” tag. The sarc tag is your friend. It has saved many a deadpan humor post of mine being taken the wrong way.

    I knew your post was deadpan but that’s only because I’ve seen your other posts here. Ah, the Internets, their bare textual splendor is so captivating…

  18. Thank you, Ziontruth, and my apologies to all for leaving it off. Muchas apologias.

  19. I’m not suffering from anger.

    I simply asked some questions and got no answers. 🙂

    I won’t do that again!

  20. Ha, Sharpie!

    Sorry, I thought something was amiss, but only had time to browse quickly.

  21. And thus has sharpie inadvertently demonstrated the principle of “Beyond Parody”; the modern Left has reached, and indeed long surpassed, the point where you could possibly make up anything more absurd than what they would actually say.

    The reason it’s so difficult to show a sense of humor about them is that the moment you think you’re joking about their views, they proceed to demonstrate that, no, that really is what they think. It’s not that we can’t take a joke — it’s that there’s nothing left to joke about.

  22. I’m down with the Ace boycott. We’re cancelling our cable post haste.

  23. Anytime, Sharpie. Kudos for not taking my comment as condescending. 🙂

    holmes,

    Mine’s been a zero TV home for nearly seven years. The MSM in my country isn’t much different from America’s, so eventually I got fed up and now the big screen operates solely on an HDMI feed from my Wi-Fi connected laptop computer.

    It’s enough for me, sure, but the lingering question is always the same: Will the Resistance attain critical mass quickly enough?

  24. I’ve been a life-long newspaper reader. In Chicago we received 2 a day and 3 on Sunday. My dad was a television engineer so we had a TV in all the common areas of our home and our bedrooms long before that became normative and news was on all the time. Slow but sure I’ve given up on the MSM. I’ve been getting my news from the internet for years. During Hurricane Katrina I was watching but Shepard Smith took care of that. I haven’t watched television news since. Once Obama was elected I gave up both papers (Daily News & LA Times) and haven’t looked back. I refuse to support these enemies of the Republic with my time or money. There is enough out there now to do just as Ace proposes. That’s how I roll.

  25. Barry Rubin at PJM also has a good article on Benghazi. Hetakes it back to a serioisly flawed outlook on foreign policy.

    One thing that has become clear to me is that this administration is incpable of recognizing or learning from mistakes. But then what can you expect from a bunch of politica maneuverers with no experience.

  26. Sharpie,

    You might want to start posting as Sharp Tongue in Cheek to avoid future misunderstandings. 🙂

    I read Ace’s call and agree. I refuse to click on links to places like the NYT or politico for example. I already know how they ‘think’ and how they spin. May their revenue streams dry up until even Soros denies funding.

  27. CABLE NEWS RACE
    WED., MAY 8, 2013

    FOXNEWS O’REILLY 3,383,000
    FOXNEWS THE FIVE 2,937,000
    FOXNEWS BAIER 2,638,000
    FOXNEWS HANNITY 2,628,000
    FOXNEWS GRETA 2,363,000
    FOXNEWS SHEP 2,240,000

    CNNHN GRACE 1,576,000
    CMDY DAILY SHOW 1,450,000
    CNN COOPER 1,391,000
    CNN BLITZER 1,382,000
    CMDY COLBERT 1,250,000
    CNN PIERS 1,085,000
    CNN BURNETT 944,000
    CNNHN DR DREW 940,000

    MSNBC MADDOW 877,000
    MNSBC O’DONNELL 826,000
    MSNBC MATTHEW 703,000
    MSNBC SHARPTON 624,000
    MSNBC HAYES 573,000

  28. This is the way the left argues.

    The main problem with trying to get them to change is that their method is very successful for them, and is supported by most of the other mainstream institutions. Essentially, they don’t have any good reason to change how they debate, function, or release information, or whether they tell the truth. That is a personal problem for those who attempt to counter them.

    As well, the method seems to parallel the criminal justice system. Any defense lawyer will highly recommend the client to shut up, if required to speak then to say as little as possible, and to remove as much clarity as possible. More so when the client is probably guilty.

  29. How to argue with them: Show them your backside.

    The Left, aka the progressives, started as a social class around the last of the 19th century comprised of Criticizers-of-the-middle-class. They were defined by being the “outsiders” not only because they held themselves philosophically aloof (better), but also by the fact they were a small minority. Gradually, they become greater in number by the nationalization of education and by defining any minority as a part of their culture/group. Therefore, their cohesiveness and identity come from those two generators: 1) I am a critic so I belong with the critics, and 2) I am a minority so I belong with the minorities.

    This makes them vulnerable not to persuasion but to decreasing returns. In other words, as critics and persecuted victims, they are immune to persuasion. That’s why persuasion and education is a waste of time. (Not education per se, but re-education)

    But here’s the part where it’s okay to play patient: they plant their own seeds of destruction. Because their identity as “the other” will implode when they swell to the point where “the other” is gone and when they criticize each other. Like the Muslims need a host, so do progressives.

    Not a good good strategy, you say, this patience! Is that it. Well, maybe so. We all live on the same planet and I don’t see anyway of getting around that.

    For now. Could be that Mars or some other place may be the “New England.”

  30. >>> In the short term it forces the MSMBC audience to confront the possibility that their heroes President Obama & Hillary Clinton left Americans to die in Benghazi & lied about it for political reasons. It gives a story they have been able to dismiss MSM credibility, that’s bad.

    I predict…. nothing.

    Why?
    The Liberal Midnight Reset Button, of course.

  31. LIV’s are signaling the failure of the American Experiment …we’re not self-correcting anymore.

    There’s too much proudly stupid in the electoral mix.

    Ooh look: Kool Aid.

    It’s time to change the franchise, the charter, the privilege, the patent, whatever. The constitution.

    Something.

  32. I’ve said it before … in order to gain traction to criticize Obama’s foreign affairs, solve the source of the problem: rehabilitate Bush’s legacy.

    For the public, any immunity the Obama administration is granted on foreign affairs is founded on the vilification of Bush and the GOP by extension. That is the basis for the perspective that anything Obama does *in contrast* is better than the alternative of Bush and the GOP. Or more starkly stated, if Bush/GOP was categorically wrong, then Obama/Dems are diametrically right *in contrast*.

    Recall that Obama’s Libya strategy was explicitly positioned as the anti-Bush Iraq strategy. That means in the public’s mind, the 4 dead for the better and right alternative strategy is still cheap compared to the thousands lives and billions (trillions by critics’ extrapolated costs!) lost on the worse and wrong Iraq strategy.

    If, however, Bush’s Iraq strategy and broader post-9/11 foreign policy are rehabilitated in the public’s perception, then Obama’s Libya strategy and broader foreign policy can be criticized with public traction.

    As long as you allow the false narrative, misinformation, and propaganda against Bush, OIF, the Freedom Agenda stand as the historical truth, you can do no better than spin your wheels with the public perception of Obama’s foreign affairs.

  33. Eric,

    I do not disagree with you strategically. In practice, however, this is a very difficult assignment because the MSM still controls most of the national narrative. As I mentioned above, I believe that this is beginning to change, but it will not happen overnight and I’m certain not in the remaining tenure of the Obama administration (more’s the pity).

    Still, your call is a necessary one. Without such calls to action as your’s to drive such change it might never happen at all.

  34. Sharpie,

    I did, but responded as I did because it works on so many levels. As sarcasm it is a clear demonstration of Neo’s point.

    As a “troll response” it is a clear demonstration of Neo’s point. Kind of like John Kerry proclaiming that in America we have the right to be stupid; QED.

  35. Lisa Myers of NBC has said that dems are calling her, trying to undermine and discredit the hearing’s witnesses.
    That’s another way the left argues.
    Amazing that it’s so blatant that even an NBC reporter would, 1, notice it, and, 2, SAY SO on the air.
    The desperation must be as visible as a brick wall coming at you–to strain a metaphor.

  36. T,

    Tactical application of strategy: two birds, one stone. You do it practically by using Bush as the positive comparison to the negative contrast of Obama in current foreign policy critiques of Obama.

    The media is designed to use provocative, adversarial, yet also simplified dichotomous frames. They won’t be able to help themselves if the BushvObama frame is pushed with enough volume, clarity, and momentum.

    An example of the MSM opening the door to the BushvObama frame – Richard Engel, NBC News chief foreign correspondent:
    http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/09/07/13686562-the-arab-spring-is-dead-and-syria-is-writing-its-obituary

    Engel compares the anti-terrorist effect of US intervention in Iraq favorably to Obama’s disastrous ‘lead from behind’ approach to the Arab Spring, which of course, encompasses Benghazi and Libya, as well as Syria. Engel doesn’t clarify and push BushvObama – doing so is not his job. However, Republicans could and should widen that opening and drive through the gap with the BushvObama frame.

    What happens when Bush’s legacy isn’t upheld and it’s not used to critique Obama in current affairs? This happens:
    http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/23/opinion/zelizer-bush-library/

    Obama’s failures are assigned to Bush. They get it away with it because Republicans run away from Bush’s legacy. Republicans seem to think the damage can be contained to Bush and fail to recognize that the attacks on Bush’s record are calculated to discredit the whole GOP.

    The Republicans could and should have been using the BushvObama frame as soon as Obama’s tissue-thin mystique was punctured by his real-world failures. The problem is Republicans – led by short-sighted IR realists (Saddam revisionists/nostalgics) and libertarians (isolationists) – accepted and even endorsed the BDS frame, seemingly ignoring the self-inflicted political wounds from their doing so.

    The Republicans should have spun the BDS strategy against the Dems once Obama’s real-world record opened the door, but instead, the GOP upheld the Dems’ BDS frame and absorbed the GOP-discrediting hits. The Dems’ reliance on BDS could be turned against them if Bush’s legacy is rehabilitated and the better/worse, right/wrong polarities are flipped in the frame. Flip the Bush legacy to a positive in public perception and the whole Dems/GOP political balance will flip if the Republicans can follow through.

    BushvObama is a time-sensitive strategy. It will work now. Wait too long and it’ll be too late to make a difference.

  37. Richard Aubrey,

    I disagree. That’s not desperation. ‘Mean girl’ politics is their MO and SOP. Desperation isn’t needed in order to use a proven front-line strategy.

    Their goal is not to be awarded power for winning policy debates on merit. Their goal is to take and hold power by defeating their domestic political competition. There’s a difference.

  38. In short:
    Rehabilating Bush’s legacy in public perception via the BushvObama critiquing frame does 2 things: GOP replaces Dems on the high ground while the Dems are knocked down to the low ground they made with BDS, and removes Obama’s I’m-rubber-your-glue armor.

  39. Eric,

    “They won’t be able to help themselves if the BushvObama frame is pushed with enough volume, clarity, and momentum.”

    I do not disagree. My point is that it is difficult (not impossible) because their leftist meme controls their narrative. Furthermore, what is important is that you have an audience that first at least hears such a comparison; second, eventually an audience that listens to it.

    Again, not impossible, but a tall order when the enemy contols the communication.

    I repeat, however, that this makes it even more necessary to raise such a call to action as yours.

  40. T,

    They don’t control events, though. And events are spun. As events have unfolded poorly under Obama, there hasn’t been much spin from them. More like minimal attention and reliance on the public perception backdrop that no matter what, Obama is better/right in contrast to Bush’s worse/wrong.

    Take away the BDS backdrop and they are very vulnerable.

    The opportunity is there right now to change the rules of the game. In the spin arena – ie, the decisive narrative arena – there’s a vacuum right now. A vacuum is an invitation to any usurper who’s bold and smart enough.

    Step firm into that vacuum, seize the initiative, seize the frame, seize the spin of current events and the narrative, use the media’s nature to broadcast the new narrative, and thereby bend the public perception to your frame. Keep up the momentum and stay ahead of the competition, and you’ve just reprogrammed the political environment.

    Activism works for the right just as well it works for the left. It can be done if the GOP has the activist skill, swashbuckling cajones, commitment, and imagination to do it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>