Posted on 01/29/2012 10:23:25 AM PST by Sioux-san
It would be perverse to suggest the recent Matt Drudge-delivered blitzkrieg against Newt Gingrich was anything but a massive, coordinated propaganda campaign to incinerate his candidacy to cinders and ash. Of course, it would also be unfair to insinuate Newt is anything but the father of many of his own current struggles. But, be that as it may, it is hard to see how such a scorched earth policy against a lively and talented Republican with vast leadership experience helps the GOP or harms Obama.
Such propaganda campaigns are not unknown in politics, but are rare in healthy democracies. That such a firebombing maneuver is being waged within the GOP against a viable member in order to transparently benefit Mitt Romney—the most progressive candidate—cannot possibly bode well for the future state of the party or of our union as a whole.
Jacques Ellul wrote one of the great modern works on Propaganda, tapping deeply into the psyche of the masters of political mischaracterization and mass manipulation. He observed one added aspect to the traditional dark arts of the propagandist – making the goal of propaganda the moving adherents towards a mystical ideology and false religion. According to Ellul, the purpose of propaganda is to exhaust man’s freedom, and so to make him directable in all his words, thoughts and deeds. The subject of modern propaganda is the topic of this essay.
(Excerpt) Read more at canadafreepress.com ...
I expect it will be settled before it reaches my state. I further expect that California will go for Obama, despite my vote against the Obamanation.
I see Mitt as having an edge in demonstrated management experience.
I see people who pretend that somehow Newt is an outsider as laughable, almost as laughable those who see Ron Paul who has never authored critical legislation as a hard hitting executive.
Perjury and obstruction of justice, to be precise. another count of perjury and abuse of power didn’t make it out of the house.
I don’t see Newt, former speaker, former lobbyist, as an outsider.
Just saying...
I figure the OWS jerks have lost all credibility. They are even getting rousted in San Francisco now.
You mean as Governor of my state?
People can make arguments on both sides as to whether he was a good Governor, but I can tell you one thing for sure, after doing his time, he not only abandoned the state, he made fun of it while doing so. He did absolutely nothing to help Lt. Governor Healey campaign against Deval Patrick, Obama's good friend. The Governorship amounted to nothing more than lines on a resume for him, and you think that gives him an edge over someone who not only supported Reagan, which Romney didn't, but carried those principles to the House of Representatives, which in itself was an historic achievement.
What has Romney ever done to further conservatism in any way. Who has he voted for and supported that would indicate he has any core conservative principles.
What has he ever done or said that would lead you to believe he could articulate...clearly, concisely, and agressively...the distinction not only of himself to Obama, but the distinction of people like you and me.
Whomever you vote for, you are going to be voting for a naked candidate, and by that I mean, regardless of how much money the candidate has behind him, or how many people there are to assist him, he will inevitably be left to his own devices and wit when presenting their case to the American public via debates.
I would rather have a warrior for that role, and I can not for the life of me understand why people just don't get that. I want someone who, when asked whether the factual statement they just made was offensive to certain people, will say no without beating around the bush and while looking you straight in the eye.
When has Romney ever displayed the will that will lead you to believe he will resist being hampered and handicapped by political correctness.
This is a war, which isn't over yet, and we need a warrior. At least with Newt, I know for a fact that he at least was a conservative. Contrary to what Mitt Romney says about himself now, when was he ever a conservative?
They old saw is “They taught Mr. Ed to talk.”
I submit that we have an orator now. I don’t like it. I don’t want to vote for an orator. The TOTUS apparently manages by getting position papers that have two extreme positions and a middle position. He checks the middle box.
e.g.
Position 1. Murder all the Jews.
Position 2. Encourage Iran to Murder half the Jews.
Position 3. Encourage Israel to murder all non-Jews.
And he checks the middle box EVERY TIME.
Of course the guy who writes the middle position has wide latitude in building that ‘middle position’.
I would vote for Mitt over Obama. I would vote for Newt over Obama. I would vote for a syphilitic camel over Obama.
Romney with a Republican House and Senate would be more conservative.
We need more conservative house members, to stop the crazy spending. We need more conservative Senate members to stop the crazy spending.
With that, the Republic might just be saved. I keep my wookie suit ready anyways.
Making fun of Mass? I am guilty of that myself. Insulting Mass? I find that beyond my poor powers.
Romney seems to be a good manager. I don’t think much of Obama or Gingrich as managers.
So do I, but it's unbecoming a State Official, especially Governor. I've known Romney's a political chameleon for a long time, and if he gets the nomination, the rest of the country will soon find out also. Don't say you weren't warned.
Romney seems to be a good manager. I don’t think much of Obama or Gingrich as managers.
You're entitled to your opinion. Truth be told, I've lived under both of their management styles, and I stand behind Newt Gingrich.
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.