Obama & Media vs. “Thinking America”

Cult Obama & The Media

vs.

Center Left, Center,

Center Right, Right

“Thinking” America

America came together for a brief time after 9/11. What a good feeling that was during such a tragic time. I think most of America remains regretful that that feeling did not last. So what happened? Why didn’t it last? Well – it seems to me that the far left, with their hallowed mission to impose their view on America, realized that they needed to cool it until a situation arose that they could exploit. What was it? It wasn’t Afghanistan. The mood of America supported that action. Was it the invasion of Iraq? I don’t really remember it that way. I seem to recall the House and Senate speaking strongly in unison for President Bush’s action. I remember hearing over and over, from almost everyone that WMDs existed and action was required; further, most were very worried that if too much time elapsed before invading, Saddam Hussein would move the weapons to Syria. (Surprisingly, just a week or so ago, I read a news article that quoted the former head of Iraq’s post invasion prison system as saying numerous prisoners had told him that that was what had happened.) So what was it?

Looking back now, it seems that the far left’s opening was provided by four very unfortunate decisions which were made and/or carried out after the Iraq invasion; and the emerging reality that no WMDs were being found. The decisions of the Bush Administration and Pentagon regarding how many boots to keep on the ground post invasion and the decision to cull the Ba’ath from the Iraqi military created fertile soil from which to grow an insurgency. The military’s ineffective post invasion planning regarding the need to establish a functioning government created conditions of lawlessness that quickly discouraged the Iraqi people. Lastly, President Bush landing on the aircraft carrier to a waiting “Mission Accomplished” banner created the visual that could keep on giving, and giving, and giving.

So the opening appeared and the far left undertook to exploit the situation to the best of their ability. The media, appearing to have harbored a firm disapproval of President Bush even before his first days in office, found itself in the position that if they played their cards right the vilification process could begin in earnest. First they needed to sell the public on the idea that everything about the Iraq war was a failure. Somehow, the media decided that they would present as little positive news from Iraq as they could get away with. The far left and the media were a match born of resentment of someone who they both considered beneath themselves. The media eagerly embraced their new found role of leadership. The rule was the art of leadership consists in consolidating the attention of the people against a single adversary and taking care that nothing will split up that attention. President Bush and his administration is that adversary. The rhetoric of no WMD, cowboy diplomacy, Rumsfeld, we were misled, the plan was flawed, humvees, IEDs, unjust war, our losses, started as whispers and slowly became a chorus shaping the public imagination. The broad masses of a population are more amenable to the appeal of rhetoric than to any other force. Then Katrina occurred and gasoline was thrown on the fire.

I believe the media, the far left, and the Democratic leadership saw the path to their return to power was by the defeat of President Bush in Iraq. The fact that a defeat of President Bush would also mean a devastating defeat for our military and possible genocide in Iraq was of little consequence. As soon as by one’s own propaganda even a glimpse of right on the other side is admitted, the cause for doubting one’s own right is laid. That is why there was such opposition to “the surge”, no doubt could be entertained that victory was a possibility. Sen. Reid even said the war in Iraq is lost and the media shook their heads in unison.

The American people were being worn down by the media and the Democratic leadership’s constant barrage of negative news and analysis about Iraq. The portrayal of Katrina as solely a function of the Bush administration’s incompetence worked almost flawlessly. They were fully aware of the adage that if you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed. By the skillful and sustained use of propaganda, one can make a people see even heaven as hell or an extremely wretched life as paradise. The public was never forcefully reminded by the media that we had not been attacked since 9/11, that numerous terrorist attempts had been thwarted, that the economy was recovering from the recession that President Bush inherited and which was further pounded by Afghanistan and Iraq. The somewhat blue sky of reality was being painted with a brush of doom and gloom on a daily basis. It still is.

Fast forward to 2005-2006 and we see what the media did to put a spotlight on all of the shortcomings of some members of the Republicans in Congress. While at the same time, they downplayed the same or worse offenses committed by Democrats. The media is fully aware that the general public is too busy to investigate the truth for themselves and must rely on them for information. The leader of genius must have the ability to make different opponents appear as if they belonged to one category. With today’s 24 hour news cycle they had more than enough ability to shape the news to fit their own narrative. The media made every attempt to turn every Republican into President Bush. Entertainers such as John Stewart, the news source for many younger Americans, joined in with humor and slick productions. Most of Hollywood also joined in to support the message. I must admit, they have been very successful.

Evidence today, Obama and the Democratic leadership are not really running against Sen. McCain, they are running against the mosaic painted about President Bush. Do you really think it is fair, or is it calculated, to use rhetoric such as McSame and McBush? (I suppose it is also reasonable to point out the second front with this tactic: the vilification and identification of opponents with “big oil.”)

Consider for a moment how the press coverage differed for the Republicans, Mark Foley and Larry Craig, when compared to the coverage of Democrats. A major Presidential candidate, John Edwards, is alleged to have a love child with a former staffer and was caught by the Enquirer visiting late her late at night – the media has done all that it can to quash or ignore this story. Sen. Obama is alleged to have used cocaine and engaged in gay sex with Larry Sinclair – the media has refused to report or investigate this story. Rep. W. Jefferson caught with $80,000 dollars in his freezer – the media has downplayed and tried to move on.

Shortly after the Democrats took control of the House and Senate, the Presidential race began in earnest. The efforts of the Democrats and the media to facilitate our defeat in Iraq continued, with the polls still reflecting a loss of public support for the war, that (loss of support) the media had created. There are those who argue that the public’s support was so easily swayed because the public had not been asked to sacrifice for this endeavor. There was no real public ownership of the war. The military and their families were basically the only ones really impacted by the violence of war; and they have always been in favor of staying until the job was done. It seems that the public view was swayed partly because many just wanted to get the negative images out of their living rooms. (It is interesting to note that the public now believes that we are winning in Iraq and the numbers are increasing for those who say we should stay until the job is done.)

Senator Barrack Obama threw his hat into the ring. The media had identified a foe for blame and painted a world of gloom and despair that had infected most of America. Obama came with his bumper sticker chants of Hope, Change, Change We Can Believe In, let’s move away from the Old Politics. The population was ripe and a movement started. The movement grew and the words resonated. Finally, the media started believing that history could be made, the Clintons defeated, and they could be a part of making it happen. They too got on board. All great movements are popular movements. They are the volcanic eruptions of human passions and emotions, stirred into activity by the ruthless Goddess of Distress or by the torch of the spoken word cast into the midst of the people.

Even though the world is very dangerous today and our economic reality is fraught with vulnerabilities and complications, many appear willing to suspend their reason to be engulfed by the emotion of Obama’s message. I believe. When Obama used emotion for the many and reserved reason for the few an interesting phenomenon started to develop – a sense of faith began to grow within Obama’s supporters. Words built bridges into unexplored regions, regions where hope in a seemingly hopeless world arises. And remember this: he alone, who owns the youth, gains the future. Many of Obama’s supporters are the young; and they have not experienced many real hardships through their short lives and many have not been taught the sacrifices that are necessary to keep our freedoms. The youth have mainly the images from the television; and messages of distress and vilification coming from all corners that shape their view of the world. The world sucks because of America, Bush and Republicans. Unfortunately, the great mass of people will more easily fall victim to a big lie than to a small one.

History has shown over and over that faith in one person can portend the establishment of the cult mentality – just as Jim Jones had the faith of his followers so does Obama. As a result, main stream America is learning that it is always more difficult to fight against faith than against knowledge. My charge is that Senator Obama has been irresponsibly held up as the one, the messiah. The media, which have supported this illusion by not reporting early on about the many legitimate issues which surround Obama, are responsible. They, the media, allowed the blind faith to set in. When support turns into faith, reason goes out the window; and now, I’m not sure if Obama’s hard core supporters would bat an eye at anything that could be revealed. However, there are those Obama supporters who have backed him for various other reasons such as party identity or that it just feels good to be part of history, etc.; but who have not put their thinking to bed.

Senator Obama and the media know that propaganda has to be popular and has to accommodate itself to the comprehension of the least intelligent of those whom it seeks to reach. Who’s not for Hope, Change We Can Believe In, or Peace? The use of only one or two simple words is to convey meaning is why the bumper stickers work so well. Everyone can have their own personal understanding of the words without actually knowing the details of Senator Obama’s policies and beliefs, or his planned change in direction of this country towards socialism. He’s for Hope, Change and No Old Politics. Once the faith is firmly established in his followers, facts don’t matter and Obama is able to brush aside most criticism as either old politics or racism.

However, we are now beginning to see a shift occur which is being reflected in the polls. It seems as though the ones who have not become fully infected by “faith” in a flawed politician are starting to reassess their decisions and priorities. This may be occurring because the media has overplayed its hand so much that everyone can see the bias. The media’s bias is being shown brightly by their lack of coverage of the John Edwards scandal and their treatment of Senator McCain. The three news anchors going with Obama to Europe and at the same time barely covering Sen. McCain’s trips overseas violates all sense of fairness. The tingling running up the leg of the host of a prominent media person when Obama speaks boggles the mind.

As Edward R. Murrow wisely stated:

To be persuasive we must be believable; to be believable we must be credible; credible we must be truthful.”

Today’s media is neither truthful nor credible.

Thankfully the Center Left, the Center Right, the Right, and the Center of “Thinking” Americans are waking up and beginning to consider this election as it should be – on the basis of who is the best candidate for America (Not for Europe).

For point of reference, the dark red text in the body of this article are quotes of Germany’s Adolf Hitler. It just illustrates that the art of propaganda is well known around the world and throughout history. However, I do agree with following quote of Hitler – if the U.S. media is going to be allowed to dictate the outcome of this election:

Sooner will a camel pass through a needle’s eye than a great man be “discovered” by an election.
Adolf Hitler

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

2 Responses to “Obama & Media vs. “Thinking America””

  1. jeanniejo Says:

    Thanks, Zach –

  2. Ridgeliner Says:

    Zach, check out this pic logo, and grab it if you want!

    http://ridgeliner7.wordpress.com/posts/home/obamanationblogrolllogo/

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 90 other followers

%d bloggers like this: