Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

They're All Talking About Newt vs. Megyn
Rush Limbaugh.com ^ | October 26, 2016 | Rush Limbaugh

Posted on 10/26/2016 6:32:18 PM PDT by Kaslin

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-49 last
To: svxdave

Howard Stern “coaxed” her into “locker room talk” before an audience of millions.

As Newt pointed out, she’s obsessed with sex.


41 posted on 10/27/2016 1:04:12 AM PDT by a fool in paradise (A rigged debate is a rigged election. More was made of the "Twenty-One" gameshow scandal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I remember Neat not cooperating with the impeachment of William Clinton. He made rude comments about Bob Barr. Glad Newt has stepped out of the telephone booth with a Superman Uniform, but where has he been.


42 posted on 10/27/2016 2:50:05 AM PDT by Freedom of Speech Wins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Principled
Agree - newt smiled while she became unhinged and incredulous that newt would question her motives.

#2 and/or #7


Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation

Note: The first rule and last five (or six, depending on situation) rules are generally not directly within the ability of the traditional disinfo artist to apply.
These rules are generally used more directly by those at the leadership, key players, or planning level of the conspiracy or  coverup.

1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil.  Regardless of what you know, don't discuss it -- especially if you are a public figure, news anchor,  etc. If it's not reported, it didn't happen,  and you never have to deal with the issues.
2. Become incredulous and indignant.  Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus  on side issues which can be used show the topic  as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the  'How dare you!' gambit.
3. Create rumor mongers.  Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method which works especially well with a silent press, because the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such 'arguable rumors'. If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a 'wild rumor' from a 'bunch of kids on the Internet' which can have no basis in fact.
4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent's  argument which you can easily knock down to make  yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges.  Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.
5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule.  This is also known as the primary 'attack the messenger'  ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as 'kooks', 'right-wing', 'liberal', 'left-wing', 'terrorists', 'conspiracy buffs',  'radicals', 'militia', 'racists', 'religious fanatics',  'sexual deviates', and so forth. This makes others  shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.
6. Hit and Run. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet  and letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain criticism, reasoning -- simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent's viewpoint.
7. Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could be taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal  agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.
8. Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough 'jargon' and 'minutia' to illustrate you are 'one who knows', and simply say it isn't so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.
9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues except with denials they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.
10. Associate opponent charges with old news. A derivative of the straw man -- usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with - a kind of investment for the future should the matter not be so easily contained.) Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually then be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues -- so much the better where the opponent  is or was involved with the original source.
11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions.  Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the 'high road' and 'confess' with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made -- but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities which, 'just isn't so.' Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later, and even publicly 'call for an end to the nonsense' because you have already 'done the right thing.' Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for 'coming clean' and 'owning up' to your mistakes without addressing more serious issues.
12. Enigmas have no solution.  Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to lose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.
13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards or with an apparent deductive logic which forbears any actual material fact.
14. Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best with issues qualifying for rule 10.
15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions.  This requires creative thinking unless the crime  was planned with contingency conclusions in place.
16. Vanish evidence and witnesses.  If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won't have to address the issue.
17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys  listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can  'argue' with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.
18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can't do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how 'sensitive they are to criticism.'
19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the 'play dumb' rule.  Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant  and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon.) In order to completely avoid discussing issues, it may be required that you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.
20. False evidence. Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations -- as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications.
21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other  empowered investigative body. Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when properly handled. For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can insure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is sealed and unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed. Usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a victim.
22. Manufacture a new truth. Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively.
23. Create bigger distractions. If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable  events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes.
24. Silence critics. If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of theircharacter by release of blackmail information, or merely by destroying them financially, emotionally, or severely damaging their health.
25. Vanish. If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid  the issues, vacate the kitchen. .

How to spot the professional disinfo players by one or more of seven (now 8) distinct traits:

 
 

43 posted on 10/27/2016 3:45:52 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Freedom of Speech Wins
I was going to ask you first who Neat was, but then it dawned to me that you meant Newt.

I believe the reason why he did not cooperate with Bob Bar on the impeachment of William Jefferson Clinton was that Al Gore would have become president. That was also the reason why the senate did not convict him.

44 posted on 10/27/2016 3:58:19 AM PDT by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Megyn on a number of occasions, on her own program, said that the audience should know that she does not always look like this (her present appearance) and that it take an army of people to make her look like she does!

Why would all those people expend so much effort to make her look like a 42nd Street HOOKER?

She surely does not look like ROSIE THE RIVETER!
45 posted on 10/27/2016 5:52:46 AM PDT by leprechaun9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: leprechaun9

Why would all those people expend so much effort to make her look like a 42nd Street HOOKER?
______________________________

Because without all that effort she’d look like a Lincoln Tunnel tranny bj-queen at 3 AM.


46 posted on 10/27/2016 5:55:23 AM PDT by Covenantor (Men are ruled...by liars who refuse them news, and by fools who cannot govern. " Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Covenantor

You’ve described her perfectly!


47 posted on 10/27/2016 5:56:46 AM PDT by WashingtonSource
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

My spell check is changing his name to Neat. He is neat now. Guess I should preview.


48 posted on 10/27/2016 9:47:43 AM PDT by Freedom of Speech Wins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: AnthonySoprano
Yes, I shook my head and cut off the radio yesterday--"and it's tough. I know these people. It's tough when you know these people"---made me sick how he kept repeating it. Rush is talking to his social set most days, not his audience. I don't care about the emails he gets from A. McCarthy. He keeps talking up Rubio--

It's like he's been out to lunch most of the election cycle.

49 posted on 10/27/2016 10:20:51 AM PDT by Mamzelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-49 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson