Mar 13, 2013

Overview Of The GOP - Comedy, Satire, Politics & Wealth

Background - Proven: GOP-Republicans Support Rape & War (Includes Scriptural Proofs)
                                        11 Videos & 2 Images Illustrating Rick Santorum's Primary Run                                                Paul Ryan's War On Oldsters, Poor Families & Children 

Lets begin...


1. Republican 'purity test' is basically 'anti-Obama',

2. Republicans believe unsubstantiated rumors,

3. No compromise on the debt ceiling,

4. Republicans have a record of re-naming things (called 're-frame' - see interview with Frank Luntz below).

1.A GOP purity test? The "Resolution on Reagan's Unity Principle for Support of Candidates" outlines 10 conservative principles the group of signees wants potential candidates to abide by. The principles include support for: (1) Smaller government, smaller national debt, lower deficits and lower taxes by opposing bills like Obama's "stimulus" bill (2) Market-based health care reform and oppose Obama-style government run healthcare; (3) Market-based energy reforms by opposing cap and trade legislation; (4) Workers' right to secret ballot by opposing card check (5) Legal immigration and assimilation into American society by opposing amnesty for illegal immigrants; (6) Victory in Iraq and Afghanistan by supporting military-recommended troop surges; (7) Containment of Iran and North Korea, particularly effective action to eliminate their nuclear weapons threat (8) Retention of the Defense of Marriage Act; (9) Protecting the lives of vulnerable persons by opposing health care rationing and denial of health care and government funding of abortion; and (10) The right to keep and bear arms by opposing government restrictions on gun ownership "President Ronald Reagan believed, as a result, that someone who agreed with him 8 out of 10 times was his friend, not his opponent," the resolution states. But if a candidate disagrees with three of the above, then the group wants the RNC to withhold financial assistance and an endorsement from that candidate.

Context to understand the effects of the GOP on actual politicians is reflected in the following interview: This interview is with the ex-GOP president, notice how different he is...

Notice Michael Steel's use of the word 'establishment republicans' and that there was a change in republican party from the 1850s (from individuals to institutions)... i.e. the official (or rather unofficial) party direction is to help business over the individual which, over time, naturally came to be corporations. That's how the republican party became what it is today (also read True Republicanism)

2. Stephen Colbert, "Unsubstantiated rumors about people you don't support become majority beliefs"
Proof - Article Extract: To get to the data, our April 20-23 USA Today/Gallup poll showed that 9% of all Americans say that Obama was “definitely” not born in the U.S. Another 15% say that Obama was “probably” not born in the U.S. That’s about a quarter of the U.S. adult population, 24% who have doubts about Obama's being "natural born," the constitutional requirement for a president. That contrasts with 38% of Americans who say Obama was “definitely” born in the U.S. and another 18% who say he was “probably” born in the U.S. Another 20% said that they didn’t know enough to say or refused to answer. Who were those 24% who suspect Obama was not born in the U.S.? Beliefs about Obama's birthplace are certainly related to education . Although 13% of those with post-graduate educations say that Obama was probably or definitely not born in the U.S., that’s half the 28% of those with some college and 26% of those with only a high school education or less who believe Obama was not native born.  Beliefs about Obama’s birth are strongly related to partisanship: 43% of Republicans say that Obama was not born in the U.S., including 15% who are definite in their beliefs and another 28% who say “probably.” Of some concern to the White House and Obama’s 2012 re-election strategists is the fact that 20% of independents believe Obama was probably or definitely not born in the U.S. Nine percent of Democrats agree.  Naturally enough, this partisanship connection means there is a connection between beliefs in Obama's place of birth and intent to vote for Obama. Seventy-five percent of registered voters who say Obama was born in U.S. would consider voting for him. Fifteen percent of those who say he was not born in the U.S. would consider voting for Obama, while 85% say they definitely would not.
3. On the debt ceiling = [Case Study] Political Nonsense of the Debt Ceiling "Debate"

4. Renaming things...

Tips on the following topics from above video:

1. Body language tips,
2. Handling audience tips,
3. Creating a more positive phrase for 'drilling for oil' became 'energy exploration'. (inaccuracy doesn't matter as long as there is a sliver of fact - KISS principle, i.e'. keep it simple stupid),
4. 'climate change' as opposed to 'global warming' ,
5. 'simple truth' (not a lie as it contains a sliver of fact!),
6. 'you decide' to lock in the last manipulative phrase (most of the viewers decisions are based on the views of who they trust... even the books they read ),
7. 'buzz words' - words that people focus on opposed to facts,
8. Use 'simple truth' only once in a discussion or article ?,
9. A criminal getting caught should apologize 3 times, "I'm sorry, I made a mistake, forgive me'
10. Uses the sighing gesture in an interesting way... separating interview reality from fox news manipulations realities,
11. Frank Luntz is marketing a book, which is why he is exposing fox news/tea party secrets... we should get more fox news 'analysts' to write books! . [fox news interview is here - Learn from this book for political success. Words like 'imagine' and 'real time' and other words/tactics used by Frank Luntz above, I first encountered when I started studying hypnosis about 13-14 years ago. Some further research links...
From Wikipedia "The Milton Model lists the key parts of speech and key patterns that are useful in directing another person's line of thinking by being "artfully vague", and in principle the model states that larger chunks (more general use of language) can lead to more rapport, while smaller chunks, (more specific language) is more limiting and has a greater chance of excluding concepts from a person's experience."
From my website "Hypnosis is one of the most misunderstood methods in the world. Hollywood movies have created an impression amongst most people that a hypnotist can control minds. That is simply not true." - [Note: controlling mind vs. manipulating minds using various social factors is a different phenomenon but studying hypnosis and NLP helps us understand them - about NLP].

Related blog posts about Republicans/GOP:
Establishment Republicans
Class Warfare
Union vs. Corporations

The Daily Show Correspondents explain the establishment republicans...

?"Thier main problem with Ron Paul... is because he won't pre-agree to start a war with Iran" - Jon Stewart What is Jon Stewart talking about? Well, as Ron Paul put it, "preposterous"...

Or as the Pentagon put it...

Pentagon says Iran concerned primarily with deterring an attack The Iran question is often posed, as it was in last week's debate to Ron Paul, as a hypothetical. If Iran was proven to have a nuclear weapon what steps would be taken by the US to assure they did not attack Israel? The establishment media is skillful in the presentation and structure of the debate. The question assumes it is the responsibility of the US to protect Israel from a strike by Iran. But more importantly it assumes that Iran has the ability and strategic desire to attack Israel. This unclassified assessment of Iran's military capability by the US Department of Defense clearly states that "To ensure regime survival, Iran's security strategy is based first on deterring an attack." The document goes on to make this key statement, "Iran's nuclear program and its willingness to keep open the possibility of developing nuclear weapons is a central part of its deterrent strategy." But what if the unpredictable Ahmadinejad and company in Tehran suddenly changed their strategy and decided to go on the offensive? Fortunately they would not have the capability according to the DoD which states, "At present Iran's forces are sufficent to deter or defend against conventional threats from Iran's weaker neighbors such as post-war Iraq, the GCC, Azerbaijan or Afghanistan but lack the air power and logistical ability to power much beyond Iran's boarders or to confront regional powers such as Turkey or Israel." Stated simply Iran wants to obtain the necessary weapons to defend itself in a bad neighborhood where it finds itself surrounded by a global superpower. The hyping of the potential nuclear program in Iran is Washington's attempt to establish a pretext that would garner public support for a strike/destabilization campaign on Iran. The obvious goal would be regime change. Or as another writer put it... Ron Paul's rise has the War Party frothing at the mouth Why is war pushed so much when even the Pentagon (see above) doesn't eblieve Iran is a direct threat to the United States? Answer: Because war is a large part of the US economy (in terms of wealth and, if the draft is re-instituted while a war is going on then, in terms of employment as well)...
Tax Dollars At War...

Tax Dollars At War from Softbox on Vimeo.
War profiteers escalate their war on jobs...

How can Romney put his dog on his car roof for 12 hours?
How can Newt Gingrich leave his sick wife for another woman?
How can Rick Santorum say he would like to put Judges he disagrees with in jail...
Rick Santorum's New Hampshire Roadshow: Terrorist Judges, "Snookered" Reagan, and Fidel Castro On the Ninth Circuit, a favorite punching bag for conservatives, Santorum said he supported its abolishment—"What the Congress creates, it can uncreate"—or at least tossing out its most liberal judges and replacing them with new ones. He acknowledged there might be some Constitutional problems with just firing the Ninth's judges. His solution: "Maybe we can create a court that puts them in Guam or something like that," a jab that earned him more than a few laughs. Why so much insensitivity? Well, it kinda goes with the territory of most non-self-made millionaires or billionaires... As economic inequality in the United States continues to increase, a new study offers some discouraging news for anyone expecting the rich to spontaneously help those who have less. (A full explanation is here) And... how do we find the person who is likely to have to most concern for citizens who are not super rich? ... CNN's Kate Bolduan takes a look at GOP presidential contenders' pricey homes...
Notes: Ron Paul is also the ONLY candidate to actually give his congressional pay AWAY! "What is clear is that members of Congress are getting richer compared not only with the average American worker, but also with other very rich Americans. "While the median net worth of members of Congress jumped 15 percent from 2004 to 2010, the net worth of the richest 10 percent of Americans remained essentially flat. For all Americans, median net worth dropped 8 percent, based on inflation-adjusted data from Moody’s Analytics. Going back further, the median wealth of House members grew some two and a half times between 1984 and 2009 in inflation-adjusted dollars, while the wealth of the average American family has actually declined slightly in that same time period, according to data cited by The Washington Post...."
Mainstream press sniggers at Ron Paul’s antiwar message Not one of these people said a respectful word about the antiwar agenda of Ron Paul. And this is a demonstration of the moral wanting of the left. Occupy Wall Street has done very little to push the antiwar issue; and here comes a politician with populist charm raging against the Patriot Act and drones and saying Muslims are angry at us because we're bombing their countries, and the liberal Establishment won't go near him. For the same reason that the Republican Jewish Coalition didn't invite him to its forum: he is considered out of the mainstream on the Israel issue. When this is actually a matter of life and death for some people. North Carolina Congressman Walter Jones went from a warmonger to a war-opposer during the Iraq war because of the condolence letters he was signing to soldiers' families. Again, this story is about the complete detachment of the Establishment from the true costs of a disastrous war. During Vietnam the privileged young were at risk of being dragged off to Vietnam and they occupied university presidents' offices. This time they don't care.
Whistling to set off a nuclear bomb (from a movie? I remember this scene) ...and getting solitary confinement (unusually harsh and nonsensical punicshment cause if that's possible we have a bigger problem than this one guy).
Rand Paul Calls Rick Santorum A War-Mongering Moderate Rand said his father’s view has been distorted and explained that the real question on foreign policy isn’t about who won’t attack another country, but rather who will. And Santorum’s anti-Iran talk is downright dangerous, Rand said. “Ron Paul does not want [Iran] to have a nuclear weapon, but the question is do you want someone who’s trigger happy to be your commander in chief?,” Rand said. Santorum is “a little over-eager to drop bombs,” Rand said. He’s also someone who never served in the military. Ron Paul served in the military, will use force against our enemies if it’s required and if Congress approves of it, but I’m a little concerned about someone who didn’t serve in the military like Santorum, who’s a little over-eager to bomb countries because I don’t think he’s maturely thinking through the process and the consequences of war.
Perspectives from the left (i.e. the peaceful majority)
After Jimmy Hoffa Jr. warms up the crowd at a Labor Day rally, the Tea Party and conservatives suddenly develop an allergic reaction to violent rhetoric...

The failure of gunboat diplomacy...

No comments:

Post a Comment