Replies

This is not adding to the list but simply adding a note of clarification.

Obama learned by watching Jeremiah Wright that there is money and power in seeking followers who can be emotionally manipulated.

Emotional people offer Obama a great advantage over rational followers.

First, their enthusiasm and energy can be easily manipulated by empty, but specious arguments.

Second, emotional people are more easily hypnotized than rational thinkers because they not only permit but even hunger for speakers to appeal directly to their unconscious, uncritical minds (if done so with "emotional" arguments and suggestions that satisfy their need for emotion expression).

Obama doesn't just want to appeal to emotional followers, he has expanded his army by appealing to the emotional side of otherwise rational people and whipping up that personality aspect (mass meetings are great for this) until the emotional aspect of a person overwhelms their critical thinking (call this process conversational hypnosis...because these sorts are wide awake when they drink the Kool-Ade).

We've seen it all before (Jeremiah Wright and Father Pfleger are masters at it), but never has anyone done it as well as Obama.

Even Hitler was working with a cohesive group (Germans) and appealing to their singular cultural iconography (Germanic myth and nationalism).

Obama has deceptively coalesced a wide swath of extremely different American cultures...he has pulled together a group that consists of Jewish intellectuals, poor blacks and hispanics, radical feminists, union thugs,atheists, black militants, college kids, Satanists/Luciferians, college professors, etc.

One would not normally think such a group would have a common thread (and I don't believe they do).

What Obama has done (though fallacious/specious argument, lies, trickery, and hypnosis) is appeal to the purely emotional commonality of this wide range of potential followers.

He has created an army of zombies.

The big question is not how to we combat this army...the BIG question is "how do we wake them up?"

BTW, all this raises the question of how Obama came by this ability...it makes one wonder if this is what the Prophet Daniel meant by "understanding dark sentences" (Dan 8:23).

The Obamatons have managed to co-opt one major political advantage:

They have been able to convince America that they are "harmless." But that came after years of practice in the political killing fields of Chicago.

I get my biggest laugh when David Axelrod or Valerie Jarrett come before the TV cameras-----looking so coy and innocent----playing their "harmless" act to the hilt. Really makes my day.

I, for one, am not willing to admit Ohaha is that smart---that, he alone, can dupe millions of people.

He HAS managed to adopt a convincing speaking facility.....but the fact that he always speaks with a teleprompter says a lot.

"Professor Ohaha" from the getgo was manipulated by two arch connivers.....Chi/mobsters Rahm Emanuel and David Axelrod (a conniving PR man).

These two had their Maoist candidate dupe voters by having Ohaha say things like "I want to be another Reagan."

This led voters to believe they were going to live the glory days of Reagan if only Ohaha was elected. Needless to say, that's not what we got.

Even his opponent---the stupid McLame---was wont to say, we had nothing to fear if Ohaha was elected.

One more thought (~~not as long-winded this time~~ oops!)...

As the article points out, Obama relies almost exclusively on "fallacious" arguments in his communications. That, in and of itself, is a powerful point.

But there is another, more subtle aspect to Obama. He lies and uses deception when there is absolutely no (apparent) reason to do so.

This speaks volumes about the kind of person he is and the kind of character he has.

Most folks draw psychic energy (internal or psychological energy--unrelated to psychic phenomenon) from doing a good deed, telling the truth in difficult circumstances, doing a good job when no one is looking, helping someone less fortunate.

At the polar opposite end of the moral continuum, there are people who gain psychic energy from causing pain, from stealing, from lying...from destruction.

These people seek or become addicted to a different kind of energy and from an entirely different source.

Ted Bundy, in his pre-execution video interview with James Dobson, spoke of this energy as so powerful it, it was like a demonic or alien possession.

IMO, Obama's rampant, perhaps compulsive use of lying and intellectual dishonesty is bad enough as it is...but there is something even more depraved about him.

It isn't that he lies for effect. But the glee and abandon with which he lies--and the absence of visible remorse or moral conflict--tells us of the depth of his depravity.

His conscience is dead to truth (think about it...that statement is much more profound that it seems on the surface).

BTW, watch the Dobson interview with Ted Bundy and see how you think Bundy compares with Obama.

I think you'll find that Bundy is refreshingly honest compared to Obama!

From the article (in summary:)

1. Self-Righteousness
This fallacy claims if someone is “morally pure,” or has the “right” motivations, then their actions cannot be questioned.

2. You’re Another (Tu Quoque)
Here’s the famed “you too” fallacy, which states an action is acceptable simply because another person has previously performed it.

3. Personal Attack (Ad Hominem)
This fallacy is committed when a person is insulted for delivering criticism.

4. Damning the Origin (Consider the Source)
Damning the Origin is an Ad Hominem fallacy claiming defective sources cannot express truth.

5. The “Good Reason”
The “Good Reason” is a fallacy where something unacceptable is made agreeable after substituting a “good reason” in place of the actual purpose for which the thing was done.

6. Appeal to Pity (Argumentum ad Misericordiam)
This fallacy is another Special Pleading argument, stating pitiable groups should receive unique status and ala cart rules.

7. Condemnation of Hypocrisy
A fascinating error which is again Special Pleading, is the Fallacy of Condemning Hypocrisy. This error claims the worst and maybe only moral failure is claiming to stand for a rule, then violating it.

8. Appeal to Anger
This fallacy suggests anyone truly angry over a subject must be correct, or they couldn’t have become furious.

9. Purified Opinion (Appeal to Political Correctness)
A fascinating recent Western development is the rise of Political Correctness (PC). Generally, PC contains a number of formerly verboten activities and groups; having gone from rejection, to protected, and now morphed into representing unassailable truth.

10. After This, Therefore Because of This (Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc)
This fallacy says that a second event occurring after a first event must be caused by the first.

There's the false argument fallacy. I've notice quite a few columns written by libs who think the underlying basis of the Tea Partyers is wrong. These libs think we're protesting high taxes when taxes aren't nearly as high as they used to be (thank you Reagan and Bush) according to the libs. They further claim without taxes we won't be able to fix or build new roads, bridges, etc. As if Pubbies and Tea Partyers don't know that basic fact.

Of course, what the TPers are protesting is the enormous growth in government and planned future tax hikes leading to control of private industry and health-care to a never seen before depth. These lib scribblers completely ignore that argument and substitute a straw man.