Mary Annette posted:

'Donald Summmp'

Mary Annette posted:

'Donald Summmp'

bigtom posted:

Dumbass Talent/Board Opp:"Hey...um...yeah...I know we have this $10,000 NexGen for audio playback and recording...but can you make it so that I can play my iPhone thru the board??? Takes too long to load stuff...and I'm lazy."

And that's how you get a channel on the board dedicated for use with someones iPhone.

Intel&Sebastian posted:

Wow, I had no idea the "war on whites" was an actual GOP talking point making all the official rounds. I thought that was some Rush Limbaugh poo poo he made up on the spot.

Intel&Sebastian posted:

Wow, I had no idea the "war on whites" was an actual GOP talking point making all the official rounds. I thought that was some Rush Limbaugh poo poo he made up on the spot.

Intel&Sebastian posted:

Wow, I had no idea the "war on whites" was an actual GOP talking point making all the official rounds. I thought that was some Rush Limbaugh poo poo he made up on the spot.

Mr Ice Cream Glove posted:

Anytime Donald Trump comes up this needs to be posted

BrandorKP posted:

I thought Roger Ales had a meeting every day to disseminate the days talking points and narrative framing for Fox (and thus often indirectly the GOP). Another guy who got his start with John Birchers, btw.

Intel&Sebastian posted:

Oh I'm not doubting that happens I'm just surprised they would deploy one as stupid as "the war on whites", even just as a strategy what's the play there? Do they think their base is insufficiently concerned about the state of white people? Do they think there are white people out there who voted for Obama who are going to become race warriors all of a sudden?

N. Senada posted:

Intel&Sebastian posted:

Wow, I had no idea the "war on whites" was an actual GOP talking point making all the official rounds. I thought that was some Rush Limbaugh poo poo he made up on the spot.

BrandorKP posted:

I think that they think they have slowly and successfully altered the story of, the narrative of, this country enough that this type of talk is acceptable in public again.

BrandorKP posted:

I thought Roger Ales had a meeting every day to disseminate the days talking points and narrative framing for Fox (and thus often indirectly the GOP). Another guy who got his start with John Birchers, btw.

Pope Guilty posted:

So what exactly is the mechanism by which suddenly every single right-wing pundit is talking about the same issues using the same words and phrasing? Who's the patient zero? Who's the brain telling the tails to wag?

Pope Guilty posted:

So what exactly is the mechanism by which suddenly every single right-wing pundit is talking about the same issues using the same words and phrasing? Who's the patient zero? Who's the brain telling the tails to wag?

Pope Guilty posted:

So what exactly is the mechanism by which suddenly every single right-wing pundit is talking about the same issues using the same words and phrasing? Who's the patient zero? Who's the brain telling the tails to wag?

BiggerBoat posted:

I mean, Christ. Glen loving Beck wrote a book called "The Overton Window" for crying the gently caress out loud. That's probably the first time that half the loving country ever even heard the term and now all of them attribute it to leftism.

Mr Ice Cream Glove posted:

Anytime Donald Trump comes up this needs to be posted

ErIog posted:

On the establishment side it probably takes the form of a press release from the RNC that's subscribed to by the right wing pundits who are happy to agree with it and write op-eds making the case for whatever the press release said. There is no brain on the tea party side, and that's why their messaging is more scattershot than the establishment's version.

The buzzwords get honed because the system is a feedback loop. Drudge/Breitbart/Fox News report a thing -> GOP politicians talk about it in interviews or on the floor of congress -> Drudge/Breitbart/Fox News cover those politicians responding to their reporting -> oblivion.

People really like dumb zingers and clever labels. So the ones that the GOP'ers think are most clever get used more often, and become the vocabulary that's used. Look at how Netanyahu's characterization of "we protect civilians with missiles, and they protect missiles with civilians" got repeated over and over again. I highly doubt there was some Israeli directive to pundits telling them to use that phrasing, but it got picked up by every anti-Palestinian pundit on the left and right because they felt it was a clever crystallization of the situation. The media world we live in where pundits and officials only speak in soundbites also reinforces consistent shorthand phrases because it's a way to save time.

The Rokstar posted:

Another one I hear all the time is "If Hamas laid down there weapons there would be no more war, if Israel laid down their weapons there would be no more Israel." I have no idea where that one got started but some pundit somewhere had to have said it.

The Rokstar posted:

Another one I hear all the time is "If Hamas laid down there weapons there would be no more war, if Israel laid down their weapons there would be no more Israel." I have no idea where that one got started but some pundit somewhere had to have said it.

Idran posted:

On that topic, I remember seeing a post somewhere on SA ages back debunking that "if Palestine is a country then answer these questions about it" forward. Does anyone happen to have a link to that handy? Google wasn't giving me anything.

Edit: Oh, whoops, mixed up tabs and thought this was the right-wing forwards thread. My mistake!

Monaghan posted:

It's particularly infuriating that Trump expresses no remorse for calling for the death of 5 innocent black teenagers. He still calls them thugs.

He was also pissed off they got a cash settlement as a result of the police's gross misconduct.

Slo-Tek posted:

I suspect it only looks unified because you catch it late in the game. There are dozens or hundreds of national figures trying to get outrage traction every day, but only one or two stories a day have legs for the week. I think most of the posts on politics websites are made imagining that this post will be the golden ticket, that the sheeple will wake up, and that they will be the Thomas Paine that finally kicked off the rahowa.

quote:

RUSH: Now, there's a very upsetting story out of the Afghanistan war today. Headline: "United States Army Major General Killed by an Afghan Soldier -- A United States Army major general was shot and killed at close range on Tuesday by a man dressed as an Afghan soldier at a training academy on the outskirts of Kabul..." By the way, you might hear it pronounced "Kah-BOOL," but it isn't. It's "KAH-bull," K-a-b-u-l.

"The officer was the highest-ranking member of the American military to die in hostilities in the Afghanistan war. The coalition official, who spoke on condition of anonymity and would not release the name of the major general, said an unspecified number of other service members of the American-led coalition and Afghan soldiers, including a senior Afghan commander were also shot."

Now, do you remember Fort Hood, the massacre at Fort Hood, where a member the Army stood up and shouted, "Allahu Akbar," and just let loose and killed and wounded a number of people? Do you remember what that was called? It was called "workplace violence." It was "workplace violence." It was anything but what it was. They never were gonna call it "terrorism." No way.

It could not have been the result of militant Islamists infiltrating the US Army. "Hell, no! That couldn't happen. Our security is too tight; that could never have happened. It's somebody that just cracked, just like in your office. It's just 'workplace violence.'" Well, I don't know what President Obama is going to say, if anything, about this major general killed in Afghanistan.

But I wouldn't be surprised if the way he describes it is, quote, "An Army general was a victim of workplace violence today. It seems there was a little trouble with some of the folks over in Afghanistan. I'll have more about this after I save the country from the Tea Party Republicans." (interruption) No, I doubt that he would say it. I wouldn't be surprised, is the point. (interruption) One thing is an act of war and another one's not?

Workplace violence! See, even workplace violence is political. This is the thing. All these people -- average, ordinary Americans, some of them low-information -- talking about how much they hate politics, have no idea how everything they care about or are interested in, has been politicized. They don't see it. As such, they don't see the Democrats as political.

The Democrats are the ones that politicize all these things. The Democrats. Google, Facebook, Twitter. Who are these people? They're all liberal Democrats! They all donate, they all promote, they all vote liberal Democrat. Everything they do is political. But since these people don't see "politics" in all that is political, and they know these people are all Democrats, why, then it's not political -- and why do they hate politics?

Well, you reduce it down to they hate politics because of the Republicans. "The Republicans are the ones that make everything political," and the poor old sap Republicans, they're just sitting around. They get up in fear every day wondering what the hell is gonna be thrown at 'em that day. The Republicans haven't been on the aggressive warpath in I don't know how long.

The Republicans aren't doing diddly-squat, except sitting there getting blamed for everything and being told how they're haters and they're racists and they're bigots. And the guys that are making everything political escape any association with politics, which these low-information people claim to hate. So therefore who's political? Republicans are! This is how it all works.


This is why my quest to get everybody possible, as many as possible, to see the politics in everything. Right now when you're a person that sees "politics" in everything, you're an extremist to people that don't get it. "That's crazy. You're just crazy. You're tinfoil hats. You find a conspiracy theory behind every simple little occurrence."

quote:

RUSH: What is the number one enemy of the American left, as formalized, call it the Democrat Party or the liberals, socialists, whatever you want to, what is their number one enemy in the country right now? (interruption) Well, it really isn't conservatives and the Tea Party. That is where the manifestation of their opposition appears and reveals itself.

Their real enemy is the Constitution. The Constitution is that single little dangling thread that's the only thing right now that's keeping us a representative republic. The Constitution is something that the vast majority of professional leftists -- now, I'm not talking about these, you know, average yokels posting comments on websites. These, to me, are just the robots on the left. They're not thinkers. They're just reactionary liberals and support whatever their heroes believe.

But the people on the left, the college professors, the teachers, the opinion makers, the elected Democrats and so forth, their number one enemy, the obstacle, the biggest obstacle in their way right now is the Constitution. And it has been, for many of them, since the Constitution was ratified. It certainly has been their number one obstacle in my life. And you can see evidence of it everywhere.

What is Roe v. Wade? Roe v. Wade is basically the left getting judges in positions of power to interpret the Constitution as they want. They would prefer there not be one, it's very simple. The Constitution expressly limits the power of government. Well, that right there is a huge obstacle because what they want is as much government, as big a government, and as powerful a government as they can secure. And the Constitution, the very essence of this country, says that cannot happen.

So why do they oppose the Constitution? What is it about the Constitution they hate aside from that? That is the biggie, the fact that it expressly limits government. But it's deeper than that. For people like Obama and Eric Holder, I believe -- and there will never be any way to prove this because they would never admit this -- but I believe that there is a genuine, long held, deeply felt contempt for the Constitution. And it's all about slavery.

The Constitution, this great document of individual liberty and freedom and all that, was ratified during the days of legal slavery. What has happened since does not lessen or reduce the amount of anger they feel over that. All of the things that have happened in this country from the Civil War to the 14th Amendment, everything, equal opportunity laws, whatever has been done to address that problem does not count. It does not ameliorate. It does not soften them. It does not lessen their anger. They can't get over the fact that it was ratified when slaves were legal, slavery was legal. And it animates them to this day.

I think in the case of Obama and Holder and quite a few others, it is what provides the fuel of their rage, their contempt for this country. How can anybody sing the praises of that drat document? How can anybody sing the praises of a drat country that would separate itself from tyranny and come up with a Constitution that spells out human rights and freedom and liberty while black people could be owned? They can't get past it. They don't want to get past it.

No matter what we've done in this country to get past it, it doesn't count, because they don't want to let go of the rage. Just like someone told me about Sonia Sotomayor. She got where she is because of rage and anger at the system. It's productive to be rageful and angry at the system. They don't want to give that up. That rage and that anger is animating. It's what fuels them. They'll never express it, that would be too risky. But it's in there.

And, as such, this country is not anywhere near what everybody believes that the textbooks of history say. "The land of the free and the home of the brave" and all that's just a crock as far as they're concerned. This country, therefore, became a big powerful superpower, rich and so forth, but it's unjustified, undeserved, a stacked deck. This country needs to pay a price for doing that.

The Founders and their descendants who maintained power and wealth as a result of the founding of this country, are the targets of people like this that I'm referring to. I think if you're able to get people to be honest, if you could drill down deep enough, you would find... I mean, the Constitution in and of itself is enough. Even without the fact it was ratified during slavery, the Constitution in and of itself is enough for these people to oppose it.

They don't believe in liberty and individual freedom 'cause they think that's a stacked deck and they think that's unequal and unfair and things aren't evenly distributed and it's just not good. "We need a fair government distributing everything equally and fairly so nobody's better than anybody else," and all this crap. But you throw in the fact it was ratified during slavery.

I think this is one of the things that fuels people like Obama and Holder today who are hell-bent on transforming this country and getting even with it, whatever. That's the chip on their shoulder.

reuters posted:

'Liberty Kids' shake up L.A. Republican Party, look to other states
Reuters
By By Sharon Bernstein 17 hours ago

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Amir Zendehnam passionately supports marijuana legalization, same-sex marriage, abortion rights and the Republican Party.

He is not alone. The 26-year-old aspiring restaurateur and chairman of the party's West Los Angeles central committee, is one of a raft of ethnically diverse young libertarians who hold seats in L.A. County’s huge GOP apparatus, injecting youthful energy into its operations at a time when the state’s Republican Party is nearly moribund.

After winning control the executive board of the Los Angeles County Republican Party in December 2012, the “Liberty Kids,” as they call themselves, are seeing the fruits of their activism. This year one of their own is running as the Republican nominee for Congress from the San Gabriel Valley, with Zendehnam serving as policy adviser.

The Liberty Kids are challenging the party's social conservatives and are drawing the attention of Democrats, who see liberal youth as part of their base. And in what could be a harbinger for the GOP, they have begun campaigning in other states, aiming to increase their influence beyond California.

"I want you to look around the room," Zendehnam said at a meeting last week, "because this is what the face of the Republican Party is going to look like."


The Liberty Kids hold four of seven seats on the local party's governing board and dozens of spots on its 200-person central committee, representing a county that is home to 10 million people.

Raised during the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and excited by the non-interventionist philosophy of Ron Paul, the former Texas congressman and presidential contender, many registered as Republicans to vote for Paul in the 2008 and 2012 presidential primaries and then stayed on in the party.

The group is making its presence felt as the GOP struggles to reinvent itself in California, where Republicans make up 29 percent of registered voters and Democrats control both houses of the legislature and all statewide offices.

"The party is a little bit out of touch, and they need a fresh view of things," said Calvin Lee, 27, whose strategy helped spur the Los Angeles board takeover after the party's losses in the 2012 elections.

'THEY CURSE AT US'


Despite personal politics that might seem more in tune with Democrats - world peace, ending the war on drugs and addressing global warming top the list of concerns for many - these millennials say they are more comfortable with Republicans' emphasis on freedom than Democrats' penchant for regulation.

"I used to be very liberal," said Carey Wedler, 25, at a recent meeting of the group. But she sees government as oppressive, authoritarian and warmongering, and says Republicans are the ones skeptical of government. "Everything the government does is backed up with a gun."

The newcomers have clashed with Tea Party libertarians, who skew more conservative on social issues. Many Tea Partiers bristle at the newcomers' views on abortion and immigration, and their deep distrust of the National Security Agency.

"They curse at us," Zendehnam said.

Los Angeles County Republican Chairman Mark Vafiades, himself nearly defeated by a Liberty Kid candidate for the chairmanship, said he tries to avoid conflict, instead focusing on supporting Republican candidates, a strategy aimed at integrating the youthful members and harnessing their energy.


"The party infighting isn't so much about the local issues - it's about the national issues," he said. "The Liberty Caucus is anti-military, and we have a lot in the Republican Party who are national security conservatives."

Some Liberty members plan to propose a resolution declaring concern for war victims in Gaza at the next caucus meeting, which Vafiades said would run counter to the traditional Republican position on the Middle East.

Democratic strategist Steve Maviglio, who advises candidates and elected officials, said the young libertarians are evidence of a "civil war" within the Republican Party, as moderates, Tea Party adherents, neoconservatives and now libertarians vie for influence.

But Vafiades said the Liberty group has brought youth and diversity to the party, and energy that has helped with campaigns.

"When I took over in 2012 the party was in debt, we had no paid staff, and the office was closed," he said. "We were a non-functioning party."

INTO THE FOLD

The Republican Party does not keep figures on how many libertarians have joined, according to Republican National Committee spokesman Raffi Williams. But Matt Nye, national chairman of the Republican Liberty Caucus, said his mailing list increased by half, to 30,000, during Paul's 2008 campaign.

"You see a lot more libertarians coming into the fold nationally in the Republican Party," Williams said. "It's our job to make them feel welcome."

Libertarians, many of them young, have recently sought spots on local party boards in Minnesota, Louisiana, Maine, Washington and Idaho, according to supporters and local media reports. But neither the newcomers nor the national party could pinpoint specific victories. In Iowa, Republicans recently voted libertarians off the statewide party board.

In Los Angeles, the group’s efforts paid off with the nomination of Arturo Alas, the son of Democrats who immigrated from El Salvador, for Congress in the blue-collar suburban area where he grew up. Alas, 33, recently won the support of mainstream Republicans, including Senate GOP leader Bob Huff.

Many hope to nominate Paul's son, Kentucky Senator Rand Paul, for president in 2016. But it will be difficult for them to push their liberal social agenda across the Republican Party, said University of Georgia political scientist Keith Poole.

"You can't influence a political party unless you start electing members of state legislatures and members of Congress. That’s the real test," he said.