Reply #4: Never repeat or deny their accusation [View All]

[pat_k]

We are firmly on their turf when we deny or defend against their accusations and labels.

When we respond by denying or arguing THEIR bogus accusations, we do them a service, because we are actually reinforcing the accusation in people's minds. When we go after them with accusations/labels/slogans of our own, in a sense we are responding, but we're not doing it in a way that reinforces their crap. We are moving the game to our turf, and dragging them with us.

To be effective, our labels/slogans must not only capture core truths, they must not be denials of their labels/slogans.

For example, after the 2005 election theft, "No Mandate" started showing up on bumper stickers and signs.

"No Mandate" is a classic "Don't think of an elephant" denial. Even people who never heard Bush's claim to a "mandate" get the notion that Bush could have a mandate planted in their heads when they see "No Mandate."

The way to effectively counter the "Bush Mandate" notion is to label the election a STOLEN ELECTION or to call Bush an ELECTION THIEF.

When we accuse, and they deny, they are doing us a favor. Every time they deny the election was stolen, they are actually giving the idea legs.

Regarding their "Dems just want to cut and run" accusation

If we mention/deny the accusation, no matter how logically or well we think we can do it, we are on their turf, squarely in "Don't think of an elephant" territory ("Don't think we are cutting and running"). We must ignore the accusation, and just go after them with one of our own. Something like:

The Republicans are determined to



"Stay the Off Course" may not be the best, but whatever we say, we must go on the attack in a way that keeps us out of a "Cutting and running or not?" argument. "Stay the Off Course" is a salvo that takes it back to our turf, where we can talk about:

• How horribly far "off course" they have taken the nation;


• How "holding firm" to lunacy is lunacy;


• How deploying American military power as an occupying force has been disastrous. How it is long past time to change course and defuse the situation by becoming in reality what we say we are -- not an occupying force, but rather, a powerful ally with sufficient military muscle deployed in close proximity to deter aggression and support critical air or ground operations.

Moving the debate from "cutting and running or not?" to the more meaningful "On or off course?" is a productive move, but the BEST way to fight them is to get on the Impeachment bus -- full speed ahead. Impeachment IS Our Positive Agenda. Committment to True American Principle is Our Turf and Impeachment takes us there (for more, see 22-Apr post and 25-Jun post).

Folks who are people-focused, not idea-focused, are most vulnerable to fascist propaganda. Instead of seeking solutions, they look for people to blame. They attack ideas by attacking the people who promote those ideas, not the ideas themselves. "On or off course" is a debate of ideas, and as such will not be as effective as a personalized accusation ("cut and run" is in essense and accusation that Dems are cowards). With Impeachment, you are going after INDIVIDUAL wrong-doers -- something that grabs the "people-focused" folk.

------------
BTW, many people on our side are so lousy at labels and catch phrases because they assume others think the same way they do. That is, they firmly believe that conclusions always follow a process of reasoning from a set of premises, so, if they present a set of premises, others will draw a logical, knowledge-based, conclusion. The assumptions about how others think make many incapable of just asserting a conclusion, absent of the premises.

The problem is that there are a whole bunch of people who simply don't reach conclusions in that way. See belief -people v. knowledge people