House of Cards advisor, Jim Kessler, is leader of Third Way. Note Underwood's stance on Soc. Sec.

[madfloridian]

There are all kinds of ways to get your message out to the public when you have big money behind you. Richard Eskow's article is referring to this season's episode one about entitlements.

Real-Life Frank Underwoods: Netflix, ‘House of Cards’ and Third Way


Underwood continues: “This (the number $32,781, displayed on a flip chart) is what the average senior gets in one year from entitlements …This money is a job we could be giving to a single mother or a student just out of school. Now at the moment, 44 cents of every tax dollar goes to pay for these programs. By 2030, it’ll be over half, 62 cents.”

“Entitlements are bankrupting us,” he concludes.

If you’re like me, “House of Cards” has been a binge-watching guilty pleasure, a chance to set aside the burden of idealism for a dark but engaging worldview that is half Machiavelli and half telenovela.

But who knew that the show itself – not the characters, but the show – had a hidden agenda? It’s already taken on teachers. Now comes the anti-“entitlement” tirade from Frank Underwood in Episode One of the new season. Frank, despite his evil ways and means, has an ambitious dream, which is introduced during a lengthy scene in which he lectures his staff, and the audience, on some highly misleading “facts.”

How did that happen? How did the “AmericaWorks” fictional plot point come to be built on real-world lies?

....Here’s a clue: Episode One’s credits list Jim Kessler as a consultant. Kessler is, as his IMDB biography notes, the co-founder of Third Way. That’s a Wall Street-funded, so-called “centrist” Democratic organization with a mission: to promote neoliberal economics and make the world safe (at least financially) for its wealthy patrons.

Kessler and his co-founder of the Third Way are the ones who lashed out at Elizabeth Warren in the Washington Post in December.

Eskow says he would like to think the producers used a Third Way consultant because it suits Frank Underwood's character. But he's skeptical.

As an audience we’re asked to believe that Frank Underwood has been liberated from the petty restrictions of conventional minds and sees the “truth.” But it’s a lie, packaged as truth and peddled by “House of Cards.” Why? A wise politician once spoke of a “conspiracy of shared values,” and that may be all there is to this story.

Whatever the motivations, it’s a deception nonetheless. And since everybody in Washington watches the show, it’s a potentially destructive one.

[trumad]

1. That's OK---

It's being pushed by a murderous thug.

[madfloridian]

3. Yep, it is.

Maybe that will matter.

[stevenleser]

6. You beat me to it. Anything being said by Underwood in that show is hopelessly tainted. In fact

you can use it as an example of what people think a murderous, soul-less psychopath would say and think. If that's not discrediting to a policy, I don't know what is.

[msanthrope]

29. Francis Urqhart wept. nt

[TDale313]

35. Well, yes.

Frank Underwood is spouting third-way talking points. One would certainly hope that wouldn't have people (particularly those in power) suddenly thinking that made those policies a good thing.

[stevenleser]

45. He's not spouting "third way" talking points. He's spouting pure Republican talking points. nt

[sabrina 1]

58. Third Wy policies on Economics and on Forever War, plus on the Privatization of SS, Education, HC

and every other public fund they can get their hands on, differ from Republican policies? How?

[Enthusiast]

69. Precisely. Sabrina, you weren't supposed to notice that.

[sabrina 1]

85. Apparently the Third Way is not to be mentioned. I didn't know that, I thought this was a

Democratic forum where Democrats were supposed to support Democrats. What does that mean I am beginning to wonder? I always assumed the if you supported a Democrat you were automatically doing so because of their policies.

NOW we are told policies don't matter, just vote or stfu. Well, that isn't going over very well, and some people find that surprising.

I can't imagine why ANY Democrat would be surprised that Democrats want Democrats because of their POLICIES. That Third Way does NOT stand for Democratic policies. And whether they like it or not, that is a fact.

[Enthusiast]

95. Policies are the only thing that matters.

If Republicans espoused the correct policies I would be a Republican.

When Democrats no longer support my policies I will no longer be a Democrat.

[sabrina 1]

99. Exactly! 'if Republicans espoused the correct policies I would be a Republican'. It is so logical

you wonder why it has become so 'controversial' to insist that Democrats 'espouse the correct policies'.
'

[madfloridian]

97. Apparently not.

[upaloopa]

103. Nobody has control over how you vote but you

Maybe you won't even vote.
You are not a victim here no matter what people are saying to you
We don't know who is going to be on the ticket but we do know you can chose how you participate if at all

[sabrina 1]

104. I KNOW I am not 'a victim'. Did someone say that?

And I never doubted that no one can control how people vote. Did anyone say that also? In fact, my point has been and still is that the current policies regarding electoral choices by the Leadership of the Dem Party are NOT going to get voters to just 'go along' because voters will vote for their own interests.

So I'm not sure what your comment was intended to convey.

Maybe YOU won't vote. Though why anyone should add that to a discussion on a forum which probably has among the highest % of people who not only vote, but donate and actively get involved in the process.

DUers will vote, they always do. They are not who needs to be convinced to go to the polls.

Convincing the huge bloc of non-voters to go to the polls should be a priority, not attacking those who do and are concerned that unless they feel they will be represented they will not go, see the Mid Terms eg, the leadership lost the House and the Senate after all the work done by VOTERS to get that power for Democrats.

Voters are not to blame when a party loses. To do that, will guarantee more losses. Those choosing candidates and policies are to blame when a party loses elections.

[upaloopa]

105. Here is how I see it

We are not going to get a real progressive candidate to vote for. Even if we did the rest of the country would note vote for them. So from yesterday until Nov 2016 this board will get bombarded with the thoughts that we don't have a good choice so why bother.
I am tired of that.
My guess is we will have Hillary and a Dem Senate come 2017. That is what we will have to work with.

[sabrina 1]

106. To begin with. You say that even if we get a progressive candidate 'we won't win'. Why do you say

that? Obama won overwhelmingly running on a Progressive agenda. Kerry did not win, Hillary did not win. To get voters to the polls they have to be enthusiastic. That is what happened in 2008. Dem voters, young voters, left leaning Independents and even some moderate Republicans clearly liked the Progressive message Obama delivered and they came out enthusiastically to give Dems the WH,, Senate and the House.

In the two mid terms I just mentioned, voters ONLY supported Progressive Candidates AND Progressive ballot issues, and WON.

So where is this notion that Progressives can't win when in fact it was ONLY Progressives who held their seats in two Mid Terms now. Conservo Dems lost, both times.

On ISSUES, it has been proven over and over again that this country supports, across all demographics, Progressive Policies.

Analysis of the two mid term losses concluded that the reason Dems lost is because they DID NOT deliver a progressive message and in many cases, progressive candidates.

THAT is the thinking that is going to cause even more losses.

[L0oniX]

75. LMFAO ...yeah ...sure

[TDale313]

77. The character is...

A Democrat on the show. I get people may not like that, but it's a fact. The RW talking points are accompanied by self-congratulatory comments indicating how brave and cool and edgy he is for screwing over his own party and trying to undo everything good the Democratic Party has accomplished over the last century. I stand by my description.

[stevenleser]

89. The character is a character. You can make a character anything. Saying he's a Democrat is

meaningless.

[TDale313]

90. Really? That's what you're going with?

Thing is, there are real life self-identified Democrats spouting basically the same crap. Apparently some even advise for the show. And we can bury our heads in the sand and tell ourselves they're no true Dems, but we have a battle for the heart and soul of our party going on, and some of that means acknowledging that these ideas sadly are being given voice in our own party, and it must be fought. Frank Underwood may be a fictional character, and that character's a murderous thug, but his political views are not unheard of in the Democratic Party.

[stevenleser]

91. What I'm going with? Hey, you can make as big a deal over a fake character that you want.

I have no problem if you want to believe Superman and Thor really exist too, because you saw them on a screen.

But I'm not going to take you seriously if you try to make judgements on the real world because you saw a fake character on TV act a certain way.

[TDale313]

92. I don't care much about the character.

I just don't agree that those particular views haven't wormed their way into the party. But I've wasted enough of your time on this, and I think unfortunately we are probably just talking past each other at this point.

[sabrina 1]

100. Good post especially 'his political views are not unheard of in the Democratic Party'. I wonder why

there any resistance to this fact at all, especially from Democrats?

[TheKentuckian]

87. That is what they said.

[stevenleser]

88. No, it isnt. nt

[Scuba]

96. "He's not spouting "third way" talking points. He's spouting pure Republican talking points."

They just sound the same, that's all.

[awoke_in_2003]

98. there's a difference?

[ND-Dem]

65. but is anyone in the show going to rebut it in any way?

[FSogol]

2. LOL at "And since everybody in Washington watches the show..."

Gosh someone used a real life political consultant to give political consultant type advice to a tv show! Should they have used a pool installer or bus driver instead?

[madfloridian]

4. Not just any political consultant...

But then I think my point was clear.

[FSogol]

7. The scariest political consultant of all?

Only on DU does third-way have such power. They probably hired him since he wasn't doing anything else important at the time

[madfloridian]

10. That is the policy our party was using until people organized against it.

But it's still on the table, lurking, waiting for a time when we won't notice.

[FSogol]

13. Ok, if that's what you believe.

[madfloridian]

16. People put on tin foil hats around here now for anything.

What a strange place it's becoming.

[ND-Dem]

66. +100. any bit of information people don't like now = tinfoil.

[Art_from_Ark]

76. And they use the rofl smilie

in lieu of an actual counterargument.

[madfloridian]

81. Yes. It's a rather juvenile form of baiting and irritating.

No matter what is posted here now...it is ridiculed.

[sabrina 1]

102. That rofl guy is because there is no actual counterargument. It's interesting how much is said

with a little emoticon.

[Art_from_Ark]

107. Yeah, nothing says "I lost the argument but still claim victory"

like the rofl guy.

[msanthrope]

21. Thread of unintended hilarity......nt

[FSogol]

86. Hee-hee. Third-way's gonna git ya, Third-way's gonna git ya!

[Enthusiast]

70. +1 You nailed it.

Maybe they'll change the name from Third Way to Milky Way, or something.

You know, they will try some PR damage control.

[1StrongBlackMan]

11. I wonder if the show 24 used real life political consultants ...

as people clearly get their political cues from fictional TV shows.

Now excuse me while I work on being "the most interesting man in the world." https://www.youtube.com/user/dosequisbeer

[madfloridian]

53. You may be joking, but 24 did influence people.

[1StrongBlackMan]

54. I know; but weren't those influenced people ...

generally, laughed at by those on this message board?

[Mnpaul]

82. How about the people not on this board

that now have the belief that torture actually works?

Q: As best you can tell, do you think the CIA treatment of suspected terrorists did or did not produce important information that could not have been obtained any other way?

Yes, it produced important info - 53%
No - 31%

http://www.washingtonpost.com/page/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2014/12/16/National-Politics/Polling/release_376.xml

[SickOfTheOnePct]

5. I love the show anyway

Please don't tell me that we're supposed to boycott it now.

[madfloridian]

8. Uh, no? Just showing where policies on entitlements tend to originate.

I don't boycott stuff.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

17. No offense intended

My comment was meant as a joke about how often posters on here call for us to boycott something over a real or perceived slight.

My apologies - I meant no disrespect.

[madfloridian]

60. I agree with you on the calling for boycotts.

[trumad]

12. Don't think Mad is saying that...

I want to throw a glass at the TV every time I hear Underwood say entitlements are killing us. I know it's horse shit and was wondering where the hell they were getting that horseshit from.

Now we know.

[madfloridian]

18. Thanks for getting it, trumad.

Now we know.

[yeoman6987]

32. I love the show too

The 3rd season wasn't as good as the first 2 but I hope the 4 is the best of all.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

33. I agree

I swore I wasn't going to binge this year...and I did OK...until this past Saturday.

[yeoman6987]

36. I binged the first 2 seasons in basically a day.

Season 3 took me 4 days to get through. I even shocked myself. Lol.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

39. Same here n/t

[CincyDem]

9. Yep - and it will become the cornerstone of his demise

By the time this plays out next season, I think we're going to see that like Macbeth, Frank is going to lose it all. Without going into specifics (in case anyone is still watching), he's already lost a lot at the expense of his America Works program. He'll lose more.

The moral of the story - ruthlessness may win the short game but the long game requires caring for the common good.

[madfloridian]

14. That would be great.

Hope so. I agree with you about the long game.

[nashville_brook]

15. yep, and now you have articles showing up asking if the "Underwood Plan" would work.

what the DU third way noise machine doesn't understand is that for most political watchers of HoC...it's ASPIRATIONAL, not a morality tale.

[madfloridian]

19. Lordy, am I part of the DU Third Way Noise Machine??

[Bluenorthwest]

20. Um, no, as an audience we are shown a Frank Underwood who is corrupt, murderous, deceptive,

self serving, greedy and willing to do great and terrible things for the slightest bit of personal advantage. The literary models would include Shakespeare's Richard the Third which employs the very same conceit of direct address to the audience as an 'aside' during the action. Nothing about that show suggests that Underwood is even casually interested in the 'truth' much less that he is some character to be admired.
The UK version ends with the Frank character committing another murder just prior to becoming Prime Minister.
It is troubling that this author sees Underwood as some liberated truth speaker. He is Richard killing and cheating his way to the throne.

[madfloridian]

22. WHICH author sees Underwood as a "liberate truth speaker"?

I have no idea what you are saying??

[trumad]

26. See what happens when you throw out an interesting tidbit like this....

I've always said that at DU you could post that water is wet and a huge debate would ignite.

[madfloridian]

28. I am sitting here with my jaw dropping in disbelief. lol

I guess we have to laugh at it, or cry, or leave, or go to FR.

[notadmblnd]

57. would you believe that I've actually had that conversation with someone here?

She actually denied that water was always wet.

[madfloridian]

59. lol

I believe it.

[Bluenorthwest]

31. Eskow or whoever says this:

"As an audience we’re asked to believe that Frank Underwood has been liberated from the petty restrictions of conventional minds and sees the “truth.”

I could not disagree more about what the audience is asked to believe about Underwood. We are asked to believe he is a sociopath with great power.

[madfloridian]

37. I think you are misunderstanding Eskow's words.

I really do.

[Bluenorthwest]

44. Then explain to stupid little me what he means when he directly says the audience is asked to

believe Frank is liberated from petty things and seeing the truth. I do not agree with his statement, you say I misunderstand it. Explain it to me.

[madfloridian]

47. You are NOT stupid at all. It's such a long piece, and can only quote a few in OP

Here are the preceding paragraphs which might help. Eskow is definitely not fond of Underwood. I was not being critical of you by the way...I have had to ask a bunch of questions here through the years.

Sociopathic Politics

Don’t turn your back on Frank Underwood. Everybody knows he’s a murderous sociopath. But he’s portrayed as someone who is capable of telling the political truth because he is a sociopath. Only he can see that our old people are spending us into oblivion, because only he is unafraid to take on the “special interests” and think the unthinkable.

I’d like to think that the producers used a corporate “Third Way” Democrat as a consultant because it suits Frank’s character. He’s amoral and incapable of empathy, after all, which does arguably make for a good fit. That doesn’t seem to be their motivation.

As an audience we’re asked to believe that Frank Underwood has been liberated from the petty restrictions of conventional minds and sees the “truth.” But it’s a lie, packaged as truth and peddled by “House of Cards.” Why? A wise politician once spoke of a “conspiracy of shared values,” and that may be all there is to this story.

[Bluenorthwest]

62. Yeah, that does not really change my mind. I don't think he is portrayed as speaking the political

truth at all, I think he is portrayed as saying whatever the fuck serves the interests of Frank Underwood. With great conviction he says it. I think that is clear, repeatedly demonstrated in every area of Frank's life.
To claim the writers of HOC are telling audiences that Frank has been liberated from petty restrictions of conventional minds and sees the truth is a hell of an accusation. I don't think that view is supported in the actual work at all. Sorry.

[madfloridian]

63. Yes, he is portrayed as serving his own interests.

Sorry I could not help. I tried.

[Hoyt]

23. If implication is we need to cut SS, etc., that's wrong. If it's that we need to increase taxes,

etc., that's a different story.

[closeupready]

24. Yep. There we go. K&R Popular entertainment is a powerful vehicle

for disseminating propaganda. I mean, it's obvious to most thinking, intelligent people, but it's important to explicitly point it out when it's being candy-coated and dolled up for easy consumption by the voting masses.

[Baitball Blogger]

25. Erm, Underwood was a real sleazebag.

Even the people that were benefitting from that program did not like him.

i.e. Freddy.

[trumad]

27. Disagree...

I think Freddy likes Frank... hell Frank even got him a job at the White House.

[Baitball Blogger]

30. I guess you missed the scene where he tells Remy

to cover for him as he slips away into the White House lawn. He told Remy that when he had the barbecue restaurant he could at least make an excuse to get away from Frank by telling him he was needed in the kitchen.

Things aren't always what they seem.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

34. Yep

And last season, Freddy basically told Frank that he was just another customer.

[Baitball Blogger]

38. Them Southern gents love to hold onto their illusions,

while everyone they trounce tries to find a way to survive without losing too much of themselves.

[trumad]

40. not that far along in the show.

[Baitball Blogger]

42. Well, then. There's that.

Lots of fun ahead as some storylines wind down and others don't before the race is over.

[tammywammy]

49. I thought the scene after Freddy & his grandson go to the Oval Office shows how Freddy feels.

He tells the kid that the president is a liar.

[Baitball Blogger]

52. I missed that particular exchange, but, yes.

The writers are definitely providing enough breadcrumbs. If House of Cards is someone's idea of planting the idea that Frank Underwood's America Works project is viable, there's enough fodder in the series as a counter balance.

[BlueJazz]

41. It doesn't matter WHO says that bullshit (Aka Frank)..there's always a large share of the TV...

...audience that will be talking among themselves. and buying it hook, line and Stinker.
"He brings up some damn good points" !
"Yea, I heard the SS funds will be gone in 13 years".

[madfloridian]

43. Now that I agree with.

[BlueJazz]

48. Always nice to read your threads.

[Drunken Irishman]

46. I don't get the point...

Frank Underwood is a murdering sociopath who is widely despised and portrayed about as evil as one could make an American president. If this the Third Way's way of getting out to the American people entitlements should be cut, well, boy, I'm confused.

Nothing gets people on your side I guess than having a spokesperson who'd literally kick a dog - and then probably burn it alive just for the hell of it.

[madfloridian]

51. Counterproductive to many, but all too many will believe it.

I had an accidental and disturbing conversation with a teaparty person last week. She quotes stuff from right wing radio without even understanding it. She thinks the elderly are going to crash the economy with SS and Medicare. She spouts stuff with no understanding.

[doxyluv13]

50. A show biz perspective.

The technical advisor on any show has no power and no more influence on the script than the show runner (last name of the front credits) wants him or her to have. The position is an amenity to the SR and usually is only heeded when they say something like "such-and-such would never happen in Washington."

[stevenleser]

109. Yep, shame not more attention has been given to your post. Some folks want to apply a spin to this

and no amount of facts firmly against their position will dissuade them

[iandhr]

55. It FICTION for crying out loud.

It's like people watched the West Wing who thought it was real. People then got the idea that a President can use to the bully pulpit and everything works out.

[madfloridian]

56. Oh wow, now you tell me.

Of course my point was not that at all.

[Curmudgeoness]

73. The problem is

that fictional TV shows do have impact on people's opinions and world view. In fact, it is probably the most powerful influence. I have seen racism put out of the mainstream because of TV shows. Gay acceptance has been pushed by TV shows. Don't consider this to be a big yawn.

[stevenleser]

108. Sure they do. And when a character is portrayed as the scum of the earth like Underwood

Anything they do or believe tends to be discredited

[PeteSelman]

61. The other half of Underwood's plan is great.

If he took the money from defense everyone would love it. But there's no chance Underwood is a liberal so he has to be a benefit cutter.

[ND-Dem]

64. wtf?

[Enthusiast]

67. Kicked and recommended! This is what I am saying about Third Way Democrats.

They suck! They're Republicans!

[MissDeeds]

68. +1000000. n/t

[demwing]

71. So Frank Underwood plays for the 3rd Way?

He's also an asshole and a criminal, coincidence?

[Chef Eric]

72. When are we going to get smart and stop using right wing terminology?

They're not "entitlements." They're EARNED BENEFITS.

[daredtowork]

74. Figures from a guy who killed to get the job he wanted.

Third Way centrism is the Me Generation on hyperspeed.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

78. Never watched the show.I'm more of a Nurse Jackie and Ray Donovan guy./NT

[NYC_SKP]

79. "This money is a job we could be giving to a single mother or a student just out of school"

So they're pitting one underserved group against the other???

How very republican of them.

Where's Hillary on this?

Oh, never mind.

Kicked and Recommended.

[zeemike]

80. I take it it is a TV show...I don't know because I don't watch.

One that trains the audience in the sociology of "free market" principles.
Well why not, 24 trained us to accept torture, it should be a snap to train us to accept privatization of anything they want.

[madfloridian]

83. Good points. Thanks.

[MisterP]

93. "Yes, Minister" also kept teetering into neoliberalism

[madfloridian]

94. Third Way Board of Trustees. Graphic.

Not about the people, but about investment bankers,CEOs.

[Octafish]

110. That's the rub.

People with a lot of money already have a political party that advances their interests. It's called the Republicans.

Now with two parties to advance their interests, the rich will keep on getting everything they want, no matter who wins what election.

One thing both parties agree on: Who gets to enjoy the privilege of picking up the tab.

[jwirr]

101. Entitlements are not the cause - try looking into overstretch by the MIC Empire.