Typical Repig Tactic: Try to turn their opponent's positives into negatives in the voters eyes...

[Triana]

I wrote a version of this in response to MiaCulpa's post about scumbag Ron Fournier in Latest Breaking which illustrates this tactic perfectly, and which everyone should read and rec! I think this creepazoid was on NPR yesterday but it may have been another Repig. They're all using the same tactic. Read on..
_ _ _ _ _

They're doing what they always do - trying to turn a positive for/about Obama into a negative. Repigs are out there saying Obama's pick of Biden "proves he knows he doesn't have enough foreign policy experience!!!"

Oh dear. Oh my. *gasp!*

Repigs and their yapping-head media had previously defined Obama as "too arrogant" (ie: uppity) to admit his shortcomings. So, NOW they are now saying "Ooh see there!! He won't admit his shortcomings but by picking Biden you KNOW he is lacking in experience on foreign policy!". Well boogity-boogity-boogity. Pfft! All the flapping is damn near palpable.

Obama has incredible wisdom, reasoning ability and instincts on foreign policy and a great many other issues. He's been right multiple times in regards to those issues - experience or not. COMMON SENSE (which has been sorely lacking in the bu$hit Crime Ring) goes a LONG WAY whether someone has experience or not in a particular area.

But you'll never hear the slimebags mention that.

Anyway, here's how this little propaganda game of theirs works:

First of all, Obama was WISE to pick a VP that 'fills in' where his experience is lacking. Believe it or not, presidential candidates OFTEN do that. It's the SMART thing to do and Obama is smart. Nothing new there. But it's a positive so they're going to try to turn that into a negative in the eyes of many voters.

But - notice that they are debasing Obama based on THEIR prior erroneous definition of him ("arrogant"). Their definition is WRONG. Therefore the subsequent criticism of him is WRONG.

Obama is not arrogant. He is WELL AWARE of what his shortcomings as a candidate are. And ALL PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES HAVE SHORTCOMINGS - none of them are perfect. Obama has acknowledged that - openly and otherwise. And UNlike McCain, he didn't DENY it later.

Obama did what any WISE candidate would do. He picked someone who basically has the same beliefs about the major issues and where this country needs to be headed, AND who can help with any areas where he lacks experience and who balances him out - AND who can take over if something were to happen and that is needed.

Obama made a WISE and VERY UNarrogant choice. If Obama was arrogant, he'd have never EVER chosen Joe Biden. He would NOT have wanted such a prominent, outspoken, experienced person as a running mate. That he chose Biden speaks to how arrogant Obama IS NOT.

The Repigs are trying to turn a VERY POSITIVE thing Obama did - and a VERY POSITIVE thing he IS (honest and aware about himself and his abilities) into a NEGATIVE.

THAT is why we call them Repigs/Repugnants. That elephant only knows a very few tricks and it uses the same old tired ones over and over and over and over. Turning a Democratic contender's positives into negatives is one of them.

And this is how they do it: set up the negative definition, then proceed to debase and build criticism based on that negative definition all through the campaign.

The defintion is wrong, inaccurate, a lie. And it's usually one that seeks to turn a very positive trait or action of their opponent into a negative one.
The criticism is therefore subsequently, wrong, inaccurate, and a lie. But this part is the little black bow that wraps it all up nicely for the misinformed, gullible voter.

Garbage in. Garbage out. It has always been thus.

We can know where our candidate's strengths are by looking at what the Repigs choose to attack him on - by looking at what things about Obama they're trying to turn into negatives.

This is a nasty little package of disinformation lobbed at the voter who might not be paying attention to the crap they're being fed by the slimy likes of Corsi and that little weasel on NPR yesterday - could have been Fournier (I don't remember his name) - but he was on right after the Obama/Biden rally.

They're all out there using this same tactic. Watch them.

ONE way to deal with this tactic is to call them out on it. OUT THEIR ASSES. Let them know we KNOW what they're doing. Start with their erroneous DEFINITIONS. That's the beginning of it all.

The PROBLEM with Obama's pick of Biden is - that is was a DAMN FINE one. So all those nasty little mis-definitions of Obama they previously set up will be nicely wrapped up with little black bows of criticism based on them in regards to this.

[Triana]

1. DeepModemMom also posted about this creep ...

... DeepModemMom's Post

[treestar]

2. Their very use of this tactic proves how friggin' evil they are

Attacking someone's good points shows a serious character flaw - that is not mere jealousy, it's evil.

And of course their double standard will mean they cry about it if done to them.

[Triana]

3. Thing is, it's not done to them. We don't need to do that to them. We only need to tell the truth!

Like - was it Ann Richards or Molly Ivins - said:

"If they'll stop telling lies about us, we'll stop telling the truth about them!"

No need to lie about 'em. They're disgusting right out of the box - no re-definition necessary. Telling the truth about them is what makes 'em mad. 'Cause it exposes them. They don't like anyone telling the truth.

That's why McSame got mad at the media recently - 'cause they were telling the truth about him for once. Pfft!

[bain_sidhe]

4. it may be a character flaw...

but it's worked, at least until now. I started worrying about this tactic with their "celebrity" attack. Because really, what's a bigger strength in a political contest than the ability to inspire millions of people?

I was *extremely* pleased to see that it only worked to a limited extent. Yes, it did raise some doubt in the "non-inspired" portion of the electorate. But it appears that by and large, those who are "non-inspired" are just as hungry for change as those who are inspired.

I suspect a large portion of those low-info "swing voters" have become somewhat innoculated to this tactic by the declining quality of their lives since the last time they got snookered by it.

I.e., I can just see Joe and Jane America talking to each other--over the kitchen table piled with bills they can't pay in a house they're about to lose, probably--and saying, "you know, maybe that Kerry didn't do all that he said he did in 'Nam, and he sure looked dumb in that wind-surfing outfit, but damn... Maybe that wasn't the most important thing to be thinking about, huh?"

[AndyTiedye]

5. It Works For them Because The Repiglicking Media Works With the RNC to Make it Work

A few $billion worth of FREE airtime works wonders for a campaign.

[Triana]

6. Oh yea. NO DOUBT - the lame$tream corprat-pwned media is a GOP propaganda machine...

....that's the other part of it - or one of them. Totally agree.

Have I said today how much I H8 the media?

:grr:

[goodgd_yall]

7. Let's see----McCain

He showed INCOMPETENCE by getting himself in a situation that the North Vietnamese could capture him. He showed DISLOYALTY by voting against the Bush tax cuts.

and so on...

[Triana]

8. Yep. That's the tactic. n/t