It's the "framing" Republicans use that dominates political discussions.

[Tennessee Gal]

Read everything you can by George Lakoff.

This is old, but well worth the read.

Framing the issues: UC Berkeley professor George Lakoff tells how conservatives use language to dominate politics

http://berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2003/10/27_lakoff.shtml

Keep in mind the Rockridge Institute mentioned failed for lack of funding. Republicans don't have that problem.

This book is exceptional:

"Don't Think of an Elephant: Know Your Values and Frame the Debate"

[CTyankee]

1. I remember that the nonprofit I worked for the year before I retired (2004)

had its management team run around carrying this book and talking it up. We were going to "frame" our way to success! I suspect my organization wasn't the only one doing this. I know some national organizations that were doing it. It was the liberal "thing" at the time. We thought we were so smart.

Big surprise when Kerry lost the 04 election! We had done our framing, so what happened? Why oh why?

It's only gotten worse since Lakoff wrote this thing. I don't hate him but following his nostrums didn't do diddly for us in 2004.

We're not doing any better now either. In fact, we're worse off...

[Tennessee Gal]

3. Not enough financial support for Lakoff's ideas is the problem.

Republicans have spent money on their "framing" for years and years. They have invested in media outlets to get their messages out. They invest in think tanks for this sole purpose. They employ consultants totally devoted to this. Frank Luntz is masterful at this.

There is no organized effort like this on the left.

[ljm2002]

14. Well for one thing...

...the Republican framing has taken place over the course of the last 30 years or more. It was not instant. Also they have the advantage of the media bullhorn. It's not that Democrats never appear on the media, but we all know that the media outlets tend to spout the conservative lines. And then of course there is the right wing radio, which has dominated talk radio over the same time span.

Put all that together, along with some very savvy media and advertising sorts on their side, and you get framing that sinks into people's hind brains and becomes second nature. The framing seems like truth, and trying to chip away at it with one's own framing just seems like you're fighting the truth itself.

Take the phrase "personal responsibility". That one has been a favorite of conservatives for many years now. They get everyone to buy in. I mean, who can be against personal responsibility, right? The next thing you know, all of the woes brought to us by the banksters are turned around and we are told it's our own fault for decisions we made, that we need to take personal responsibility for buying houses that lost half their value. Or in the area of health care, if one could not afford health insurance, well then you just did not take personal responsibility so if you end up with emergency-room-only medical treatment, oh well too bad for you. Should have been more responsible.

Add that to the punitive mindset of many Americans, and you have a perfect formula to keep the plebes down. In fact they'll do it for you: they'll point fingers at one another, based on ideas like personal responsibility, while completely ignoring systemic issues. In fact, they are extremely reluctant to tackle systemic issues, because that implies there is such a thing as society, or collective actions, and that in turn implies socialism, another idea which has been demonized. Apparently the only time collective action is a good thing is when it is practiced by our military or our corporations, but never when it is practiced by mere citizens.

Finally, Republicans are willing to take their talking points and shout all of them in unison. These days, every Republican will use the term "class warfare" anytime you attempt to raise taxes on the rich from their historic lows. They didn't all wake up one morning and think of this retort, it is coordinated. Democrats are not nearly as coordinated, nor as mindless. It is a disadvantage in this particular war.

I believe framing is important, but it's not a magic bullet that will work over a single electoral season. It won't work if only one candidate practices it. It really needs to be worked on for the long haul. Right now, in my opinion, the right wing framing has poisoned our debate and has made Americans think less like Americans and more like corporate drones, which is quite tragic.

One day I hope we will all wake up and see how we have been manipulated by the corporate messaging machine. Well, a girl can dream...

[Tennessee Gal]

22. You got it. I am not suggesting the Democrats can win any

impending elections by turning this around. As you say, it took the Republicans decades to become so adept at this. I am only saying that Democrats need to educate themselves on how the Republicans are using this to their advantage and forcefully point it out as quickly as possible.

[CTyankee]

29. The Republicans did themselves a huge favor by picking up the white Southern

racist vote after the Dems rightfully threw them out of the Party. That more than any single thing shaped the vision of the Republican Party, which is racist at its core. The Tea Party is an unsurprising outgrowth of this.

It is a mindset that is far more malleable than the liberal mindset. The RW can manipulate their people more easily than we dems and progressives can. We "had" it for a while back in the 30s but it didn't last. Racism, again, coupled with McCarthyism set a bad tone for what we see today.

[Tennessee Gal]

37. All that is true. However, this "framing" issue has

been developed over the last 40 years. I believe it is rooted in rumblings beginning during Nixon/Agnew as evidenced in the recent revelation that Roger Ailes of Fox News began developing a plan for right wing slanted news while working for Nixon.

And remember that Agnew used the phrase "nattering nabobs of negativism" to describe the media back then. Of course he would say that since both he and Nixon were crooks and investigative reporters were uncovering the evidence.

[CTyankee]

48. I don't disagree on that point at all.

I'm just saying our problem goes beyond simple "framing" at this point. We've been trying to "boil it down" for as long as I can remember in my work with nonprofit, politically oriented organizations. Or at least since the Reagan era (before that we had the labor unions and so we got a bit lazy).

What I am saying is that our message is more Enlightenment and the RW's message is more atavistic. Guess who wins?

[Tennessee Gal]

2. This "framing" convinces Americans to vote against their own interests.

When a tax cut is called "tax relief" the average voter is all for it! They know they need tax relief. They do not comprehend that it vastly benefits the wealthy and the end result will starve funds for needed social programs. They do not "get" that it really is a redistribution of wealth to the richest Americans.

[CTyankee]

30. Even in the face of overwhelming evidence that tax cuts for the rich do NOT create jobs.

I believe it is dormant racism at work, but no amount of "framing" is going to really work against it. We keep trying all these tricks and strategies and they never, ever work. Lakoff is looking at this as a social scientist. He needs to call a spade a spade and tell us we are facing deep rooted racism that is ugly and as virulent as a deadly cancer. No "framing" will cure it, unless he thinks we can put forth a "frame" that appeals to the racists' sick minds and I'm afraid I wouldn't even want to SEE such a frame!

[PoiBoy]

4. Thom Hartmann's "Cracking the Code"...

..is another good read on this very important subject.

Highly reccommended...!

[Tennessee Gal]

7. Thanks. Excellent!

Found this:

Millions of working Americans talk, act, and vote as if their economic interests match those of the megawealthy, global corporations, and the politicians who do their bidding. How did this happen? According to Air America radio host Thom Hartmann, the apologists of the Right have become masters of the subtle and largely subconscious aspects of political communication. It's not an escalation in Iraq, it's a surge; it's not the inheritance tax, it's the death tax; it's not drilling for oil, it's exploring for energy. Conservatives didn't intuit the path to persuasive messaging; they learned these techniques. There is no reason why progressives can't learn them too. In Cracking the Code, Hartmann shows you how. Drawing on his background as a psychotherapist and advertising executive as well as a national radio host, he breaks down the structure for effective communication, sharing exercises and examples for practical application.

[Agony]

5. and he was right when he said this as he closed the door to the Rockridge Institute

"But… we have not done the Big Job, not even close. The conservatives’ Big Ideas about government, taxes, security, the market, and the rest still dominate political discourse. Democrats in Congress still cringe at attacks based on these Big Ideas, and many have been intimidated into voting for conservative policies–on funding for Iraq, on government spying without a warrant, on taxes, on bankruptcy, and on and on. The Big Idea intimidation is still working. Changing that is the Big Job."

[Exilednight]

6. This is one of the worst kept secrets in politics. Sadly, we keep electing leaders that either

allow Republicans to frame the debate, or they're incapable of framing the debate on liberal terms.

I'm not sure which is worse. Agreeing with conservative messaging or looking incompetent when compared to conservatives messaging tactics.

[Tennessee Gal]

8. It would require an all out effort and financial investment

to turn things around. Some on the left are aware of the problem, but no effort seems to be on the horizon to make a difference.

[Exilednight]

10. This is why the White House has a communications team. n/t

[Tennessee Gal]

11. That is not nearly enough.

Republicans have been working on this for 40 years. They train consultants who train their candidates. They form and financially support think tanks for this very purpose. They buy into media outlets. They employ people like Frank Luntz who owns a company fully devoted to teaching "framing" the issues.

The White House cannot counter this alone.

[Exilednight]

15. You're partially right.

The White House is where this has to start. Obama has to have a strong and consistent message.

The main reason Republicans are so good at messaging is due to the Reagan White House. I thought the left had it's own liberal version of Reagan in Obama, but he starts out strong and then quickly fades out of view. This jobs bill is the first thing he's taken to the people and really pushed.

At times, Obama shows flashes of good messaging and leadership, but he often fails in follow thru.

[Tennessee Gal]

17. This is far bigger than any president.

Republicans have perfected this for years and trained their candidates from the president on down to the local levels.

[Exilednight]

18. Yes, but it starts at the top. We elect leaders to lead. n/t

[Tennessee Gal]

19. No, that is not how Republicans have succeeded at this.

They have invested in this for 40 years and their candidates from the lowest levels up are trained in talking about issues through "framing" them in ways to convince voters to support them even though their policies only benefit the wealthy.

Their skills at this allow them to say the most despicable things by using sweet sounding "framing" terminology that the average voter does not see beyond.

That is why we can ride down the road and see a beat up old vehicle with bumper stickers in support of Republican candidates. Even though they may be struggling financially, they still vote against their interests because they have bought into the myths fed to them through Republican "framing." They don't understand that while Republicans may be promising "tax relief" they are really transferring wealth to their rich political contributors. And the Republicans are also using this transfer of wealth to starve the very programs that benefit the most needy among us.

[Exilednight]

35. I disagree. Dems have operatives that are just as dedicated as Republicans. The fact is that Obama

by his own words, stated that he wanted to be a transformational president. Sadly, he's been everything but. Not only has Obama failed to win converts, he's managed to isolate many liberals and progressives from the Democratic party.

[Tennessee Gal]

39. What operatives are those?

Who on the left is comparable in influence to Frank Luntz? What think tanks focus on promoting left wing policies similar to the right wing think tanks like the long list I found?

American Enterprise Institute
American Conservative Union (David Keene)
American Legislative Exchange Council
American Political Action Committee (Alan Gottlieb)
American Spectator
Cato Institute
Center for Individual Freedom
Center for Libertarian Studies (Lew Rockwell)
Center for the Study of Popular Culture (David Horotwitz)
CNP Action (Gary Aldrich)
Coalition on Urban Renewal & Education
Coalitions for America
Conservative Leadership PAC (Mornton Blackwell)
Conservative Victory Committee (Brent Bozell)
ConservativeHQ.com (Richard Viguerie)
Citizens United (David Bossie)
Free Republic Network
Heritage Foundation
Leadership Institute (Morton Blackwell)
National Center for Public Policy Research (Amy Ridenour)
National Review Online
New York State Conservative Party
Southeastern Legal Foundation
Townhall.com
Tradition, Family, and Property

Free Market
Citizens for a Sound Economy (Dick Armey)
Competititve Enterprise Institute
Frontiers of Freedom
James Madison Institute
Landmark Legal Foundation
National Conservative Campaign Fund
Radio America

Anti-Tax
Alliance for Retirement Prosperity
American Shareholders Association (Grover Norquist)
Americans for Fair Taxation
Americans for Tax Reform (Grover Norquist)
Association of Concerned Taxpayers
Maryland Taxpayers Association
National Tax Limitation Committee
National Taxpayers Union
NoInternetTax.org
Republicans United for Tax Relief
Tax Foundation
Taxpayhers Network
U.S. Taxpayers Alliance (Howard Phillips)

Anti-Government
Arkansas Policy Foundation
Capital Research Center
Citizens Against Government Waste
Club for Growth Advocacy

Anti-Regulation
Allegheny Institute for Public Policy
Institute for Policy Innovation (Dick Armey)

Anti-Environmental
American Council on Science &Health
Blue Ribbon Coalition
Center for Individual Rights
Center for the Defense of Free Enterprise (Alan Gottlieb)

General Religious
American Center for Law and Justice
American Family Association
Campus Crusade for Christ
Center for Reclaiming America
Christian Coalition of America
Christian Film and Television Commission
Christian Voice (Gary Jarmin)
Eagle Forum (Phyllis Schlafly)
Family Research Council
Public Advocate
Traditional Values Coalition

Right-Wing Catholics
Cardinal Mindszenty Foundation
Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights
Catholics United for the Faith
Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute
CatholicVote.org

Anti-Abortion
American Life League
Americans United for Life
National Right to Life Committee

Anti-Gay
Americans for Truth Project
Center for Military Readiness

Corporate Fronts
60 Plus Association
Small Business Survival Committee
United Seniors Association

Direct-Mail Fundraisers
American Target Advertising (Richard Viguerie)
Bruce W. Eberle & Associates
Eberle Communications Group
Richard Norman Company
Squire & Heartfield Direct

PR Firms
Craig Shirley & Associates
Shirley & Banister Public Affairs

Anti-Immigrant
American Council for Immigration Reform
American Immigration Control Foundation
Center for Equal Opportunity
English First
United States Border Control

Anti-Affirmative Action and Black Astroturf
American Civil Rights Institute
Black America's PAC
Institute for Justice
Project 21

Pro-Gun
Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (Alan Gottlieb)
Gun Owners of America (Larry Pratt)
National Rifle Association
Second Amendment Sisters

Anti-United Nations
American Policy Center

Pro-Defense
High Frontier (Star Wars)
Freedom Alliance

Anti-Liberal Media
Accuracy in Media (Reed Irvine)
Media Research Center

Youth and Academia
Accuracy in Academia (Reed Irvine)
Clare Booth Luce Policy Institute
College Republican National Committee
Intercollegiate Studies Institute
Students for Academic Freedom (David Horowitz)
Young America's Foundation (Ron Robinson)
Young Conservatives of Texas

[Exilednight]

40. Sadly, many of those same names are the same groups that

the centrist DLC types listen to. When the WH press secretary goes on camera and quotes the Heritage Foundation, CPAC and the CATO Institute, I know we as a party have serious problems with messaging.

Let's not forget that Obama and company have kicked aside the liberal groups that helped get him elected. Instead of helping grow groups like MoveOn, Emily's List, ACORN, and the slew of other liberal leaning groups, they backhand them and tell them to stay in place and not to raise a fuss and threaten them with being ostracized from the west wing.

[CTyankee]

57. Do you think it is because he truly wanted to be a "transformational " president?

That is, a president who could bridge the differences between the parties, heal the divide, and bring peace among the people of the United States?

[Exilednight]

59. No. He stated he wanted to be like Reagan, which means he wanted to

win parts of the opposition party to the Democratic party. Reagan didn't look for ways to bridge the divide, he looked for ways to exploit it.

[CTyankee]

60. So you believe Obama "conned" us?

[Exilednight]

62. In a sense yes. During the debates he called

Hillary, Republican Lite. After winning the nomination he began to adopt many of Hillary's policies. We ended up with Hillary's HCR bill. He adopted HIllary's foreign policy stance, after the primaries he separated himself from his primary economic advisers and surrounded himself with Hillary's economic advisers when he geared up for the general.

If Hillary's policies were Republican Lite during the primary, what makes Obama's actions during his presidency?

[CTyankee]

63. So you are saying that he is a Republican Lite and always has been?

Because if that is true, then it explains to me how he could put forth some of his programs to appeal to the republicans on the Hill. It also means that you think he pulled a fast one on the liberal Dems who supported him. Is that the case as you see it?

[Exilednight]

67. I'm not convinced that he was always Republican Lite, but he is now and probably

has been since entering the Senate. I think Rouse, who was his Chief of Staff of his Senate office, and his interim WHCos, had a huge influence on Obama. I do believe during the primary that he pulled the wool over the eyes of liberals. And I admit that I fell for it.

Fooled me once.

[CTyankee]

69. I don't know what to believe at this point. I thought he was a sincere liberal.

I could not envision him otherwise, even tho I read one of his books cover to cover. I thought I knew what he stood for. It wasn't flaming Liberal but then he wasn't writing it in the days before the big crash and recession. He made sense.

Then on the campaign trail he suddenly transcended the rest of the contenders. He had been unable to be more specific about his policies but Hillary and others forced him to be. He stepped up and set forth his ideas and we all fell into line behind him for President.

I must admit I don't know what has happened to him. I don't understand at all. I am in despair.

[CTyankee]

31. The problem, as I say above, goes deeper than any "message" framing.

The RW appeals to a deeply ingrained stain of racism in this country. The progressive "framing" cannot come near to rivalling the strength of the right wing propaganda unless WE tap into the stain ourselves and as progressives we are not going to do that.

So we lose and wonder what happened to our magic formula. We lose because we are set up to fail...

[Exilednight]

36. Republicans tap into that stain, but they also managed to win a small handful of

moderate Democrats. They take their hate stained message and manage it to a point of moderation.

[CTyankee]

43. But "somebody" let it happen! That's my point here!

How did we, or anybody, let it happen that way? We keep saying "That's not the American way" but then we are proven wrong when people vote against us?

If it were the American way to be tolerant and accepting then we wouldn't be in this fix to begin with. The "point of moderation" would have taken care of it. But there wasn't a "point of moderation."

and that's what I am saying, sad and awful as it is...

[Tennessee Gal]

44. What you are saying is proof that Republican "framing" has succeeded.

[CTyankee]

51. Sadly, yes. I have seen this thing played out and I am getting depressed.

They have cleaned our clock with the media...all the RW stuff on radio and on Fox...and we can't seem to respond or react. Yes we have Rachel and she is great but not exactly in everyone's home and car like Rush.

If you listen to Rush (ACK) you know what poison it is we face. He gets people at their gut, we try for their intellect. Guess what wins?

[Exilednight]

54. It's only succeeded because leaders like Bill Clinton, Obama, Reid

Rahm, and the rest of DLCers allowed it to happen. People want to forget that as much as elected officials are government officials, they are also political leaders.

[Tennessee Gal]

56. This issue is far deeper than you imply.

[Exilednight]

58. No they're not. It's failed attempts at triangulation that have gotten us into this mess. Leaders

of the party have shut down liberal groups one by one and at every turn.

[CTyankee]

61. I have to agree in one way or another on this point.

We have seen a thinning of our ranks in the mistaken belief that we cannot rise again thru sheer strength of numbers in government. We could have had people who would have put in strong measures against the RW. Sure, Wall St. would object. If we had real strength we could go to the mat rebutting that use some of our own strong arm methods to bring them into line. But that didn't happen, in favor of some kind of Kumbaya...

[Exilednight]

65. It's not only Kumbaya, Republicans have managed to ge Democratic leaders to do their

dirty work for them. Look at what Rahm is doing to the teacher unions in Chicago. Obama's former chief of staff is attempting to strip teachers of certain bargained rights in exchange for more work hours and minute bonuses.

Compare that to what Finland did when they reformed their education system. They increased teacher pay, reduced the number of hours in a school day and decreased the number of pupils per class. In exchange they moved into 2nd place in reading and math and 1st place in science. In the past five years they've moved up over 7 spots. In the late 70s and early 80s Finland was ranked near the bottom of industrialized nations and the achievement gap between rich and poor was THE worst in the industrialized world. Now they top list.

Students also receive free health care and free lunches and no longer have standardized national testing.

[CTyankee]

66. Oh, don't talk to RWingers about Finland. I already tried.

They say that Finland had "only" white students in their "homogenous" society and it was easier to manage (of course, because they're "white"). But the reality is that these changes took place in highly diverse schools as well, so that shoots that theory down!

I'm sick of trying to make sense to these RW people. They are pretty far gone over the edge. I sure can't retrieve them. I'm not sure we should even try any more...

[Exilednight]

68. And as long as the Democratic party allows Republicans to frame that message, then we

are going to continually slip down the educational rankings. Finland's education system is something we should be striving for, not knocking around. Yet, I have yet to hear a Democrat open their mouth and say we need to do what Finland did. And if a Democrat did, it was probably Bernie Sanders and I'd be willing to be he was ridiculed for it.

[CTyankee]

70. Go ahead and try. I'm all for it if it can help. It's just that I didn't have that much success with

my RW friends. There was always an "excuse".

On a larger level, do we really want to try to talk to the American people about Finland? I mean, really? Do we really believe they will listen about a country that they couldn't locate on a map?

This is where our "messaging" breaks down: Americans don't know sh*t about world geography...

[Exilednight]

71. And the reason they don't know shit about geography is due to our poor education system. Catch 22.

[CTyankee]

72. You are so right!

The RW never neglects a chance to exploit the weaknesses in our voting populace. We don't know crap about science, geography, world history, sociology...makes it easy for exploiting vulnerable, ignorant people doesn't it?

[Exilednight]

73. Sadly, yes. n/t

[treestar]

9. And we can't do it, because we don't have simplicity on our side

Keep it simple, stupid, as they say, works much better for Republicans.

Along with the fact that Republicans have no shame.

[Tennessee Gal]

12. It doesn't have to work better for Republicans.

What if tax cuts that primarily benefit the wealthy were called what they really are? "Tax Relief" as framed by Republicans is in reality "Welfare for the Wealthy" in that it allows the wealthy to grow the wealth gap.

We know that Republicans have no shame because we study the issues. The average American voter does not know that because the Republicans are winning through "framing" the issues with lovely sounding terminology.

[CTyankee]

34. I must disagree with your last sentence. Republicans win through appealing to

the hateful, meanspirited, suspicious natures in voters. We're the ones with lovely sounding terminology, IMO. We talk about what the true American spirit is and voters get suspicious that we're trying to lead them down a path to socialism which they "know" is some kind of totalitarian state. The republicans have used messages to appeal to hatred and deep fears that go back to the time when we were cave men and women. I don't see how progressives, whose ideas are steeped in the Enlightenment, can ever win in the debate between these two poles of difference. When you pit rational versus irrational, irrational wins every time!

In other words, we've lost the battle before we even open our mouths with whatever new framing Lakoff thinks we can use. Take the "socialism" argument, for example. Republicans know that many, many Americans have never set foot in a foreign country, much less one in which socialism reigns supreme. So they get away with weaving a Big Lie out of whole cloth as to what it is and we don't want. We don't want to be like France. Why? Ever try to argue with a RWinger on this? They'll tell you flat out that the French don't have good health care. They "know" that because Socialist health care denies you health care. It's a big lie, of course, but since most RWingers don't know much about France, much less travelled there themselves, they believe the lie. I've had these arguments and say to them: why don't all these people in countries with socialized health care flock into our country for OUR system of health care? They have no answer. But I still lose the argument...

[Tennessee Gal]

42. Yes, but they get those votes by using terms that allow those

voters to think they are doing the right thing. They disguise their motives.

Tax cuts for the wealthy are called "tax relief" and the voter loves the sound of that phrase. They fail to understand that the truth behind "tax relief" as far as Republicans are concerned is simply a shifting of wealth to their prominent donors resulting in retaining power.

[CTyankee]

45. Even if we get the message out about the true nature of "tax relief" do you

think the voters will believe us over the republicans?

[Tennessee Gal]

46. Not immediately, but it has to begin through simple explanations

repeated over a period of time.

[CTyankee]

50. I am hopeful that Obama's latest push with Warren Buffet will pay off.

We'll see.

You have to remember of course that RW radio is on for many more hours than our president is...

[Tennessee Gal]

53. Yes, the Republicans very much control the airwaves.

They have been planning that for 40 years also.

[nenagh]

13. It's as if the Repubs have cascades of frames..

and the low info voter votes with his gut instinct, it would seem.

It's morphed beyond framing.. into a Pavlovian response frame for different interest groups.

[CTyankee]

33. Yes, and the RW plays deeply into the Politics of Resentment.

It is ugly and vicious at its very root. It blames all the "people" that are to blame for the problems, the black, the immigrant, the union member, the government worker...all of them are "the Other."

This is nasty stuff. It's pretty hard to combat it with our choruses of Kumbaya and "we're all Americans." They don't believe that for one minute. We shouldn't waste our time trying to appeal to the angels of their better nature...

[Cool Logic]

16. Rs and Ds are continually searching for new ways to influence voters.

They poll, they employ focus groups and other qualitative research methods in an effort to best market their ideas.

[Tennessee Gal]

21. Rs are far more heavily invested in this than Ds.

Think about this:

Roger Ailes’ Secret Nixon-Era Blueprint for Fox News

The memo—called, simply enough, "A Plan For Putting the GOP on TV News"— is included in a 318-page cache of documents detailing Ailes' work for both the Nixon and George H.W. Bush administrations that we obtained from the Nixon and Bush presidential libraries.

http://gawker.com/5814150/

Ailes, Nixon and the Plan for 'Putting the GOP on TV News'

This is an astounding find. It underscores Ailes's early preoccupation with providing the GOP with a way to do an end run around skeptical journalists. More important, it links the plot to create what would become Television News Incorporated – the Ailes-helmed "fair and balanced" mid-1970s precursor to Fox News – to the Nixon White House itself.

As I reported here, the distribution and production costs for the project were ultimately bankrolled by the beer magnate Joseph Coors.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/national-affairs/ailes-nixon-and-the-plan-for-putting-the-gop-on-tv-news-20110701

[ThomWV]

20. This is a very important point- and good post too - K&R

[Tennessee Gal]

23. Thanks. I consider this to be the reason Republicans get

away with their crappy policies.

[msongs]

24. "austerity tax cuts spending cuts more bombing & security & secrets" - the republican parrot speaks

[Zorra]

25. A quote from Prof. Lakoff on how Centrist Democrats assist republicans

in the framing of issues:

"When a Democrat "moves to the center," he is adopting a conservative position - or the language of a conservative position. Even if only the language is adopted and not the policy, there is an important effect. Using conservative language activates the conservative view, not only of the given issue, but the conservative worldview in general, which in turn strengthens the conservative worldview in the brains of those listening. That leads to more people thinking conservative thoughts, and hence supporting conservative positions on issues and conservative candidates. Material policy matters. Language use, over and over, affects how citizens understand policy choices, which puts pressure on legislators and ultimately affects what policies are chosen. Language wars are policy wars."
- Professor George Lakoff

Great post, Prof. Lakoff really, really gets it.

[Tennessee Gal]

26. Professor Lakoff also states:

"It's one thing to analyze language and thought, it's another thing to create it."

Republicans create language to suit their manipulative purposes.

Republicans practice political tactics as shaped by Machiavelli, the first great political philosopher of the Renaissance or more specifically from his work entitled The Prince. Karl Rove and the late Lee Atwater, George H. W. Bush's political strategist, followed the teachings of Machiavelli.

For Machiavelli, politics was about one and only one thing: getting and keeping power or authority. Everything else, religion, morality, truth, honor, and integrity, that people associate with politics has nothing to do with this fundamental aspect of politics, unless being moral helps one get and keep power. The only skill that counts in getting and maintaining power is calculation. The successful politician knows what to do or what to say for every situation, no matter what it takes. It is only about winning and keeping power.

Republican Machiavellianism is cunning in that it takes some investigating to understand their true motivations. They are quite adept at masking their real intentions with moral imperatives.

These tactics have led to American citizens growing accustomed to being lied to and/or misled about gravely serious matters.

[CrispyQ]

27. It started 30 years ago when the right attacked the word 'liberal'

& the dems acquiesced by calling themselves 'progressives' instead. Democrats should have challenged the right's attack & embraced our liberal values. Instead, the dems have been steadily backing away from the liberal label & liberal values, since.

[Tennessee Gal]

28. Yes, Democrats have allowed themselves to be backed into a corner.

They have not understood what the right wing was doing or invested in countering the manipulative "framing" of the issues.

[gulliver]

32. Democrats/liberals frame framing as bad.

We are literally pathetic. We want to say everything in the most annoying way possible, and then we wonder why we lose.

Aristotle on rhetoric is good too for the basic fallacies and mechanisms that are available. We appear to accidentally use them in the cause of self-sabotage.

[Tennessee Gal]

41. Not all framing is bad. There needs to be an element of honesty.

There is no honesty in the Republican framing. It is an all out attempt to gain and retain power with a total disregard for what is best for the nation.

The following quotes are excerpts of Republican tactical strategies from documents published on line by Free Congress Foundation, Center for Cultural Conservatism, The Integration of Theory and Practice: A Program for the New Traditionalist Movement.

"Making a good-faith effort and being ideologically sound will be less important than advancing the goals of the movement."

"We will maintain a constant barrage of criticism against the Left. We will attack the very legitimacy of the Left. We will not give them a moment's rest."

"We will use guerrilla tactics to undermine the legitimacy of the dominant regime. We will take advantage of every available opportunity to spread the idea that there is something fundamentally wrong with the existing state of affairs."

"The movement must be willing to appear obnoxious."

"We must be feared, so that they will think twice before opening their mouths."

"We must learn to treat leftists as natural disasters or rabid dogs. If we act as if this were in fact true (of course, it is not), we will not needlessly expend our energy on being upset with our opponents."

"This is not to discount the importance of reminding ourselves on a regular basis why we ought to hate leftist ideology, in order to keep ourselves motivated to better fight it."

"We must reframe this struggle as a moral struggle, as a transcendent struggle, as a struggle between good and evil."

"For example, we will go to public lectures given by leftists and ask them "impolite" and highly critical questions. We must, of course, be fully prepared beforehand for these sorts of excursions, and we must also be prepared to embarrass ourselves, especially at first."

"Our people must learn to have contempt and scorn for the wider society, and reject it in all ways."

If there are quotes from an organized left leaning entity comparable to these, I would like to see them.

[gulliver]

47. Absolutely.

That's a good list.

Honesty and truth themselves are just frames. We Dems/liberals tend to trap ourselves in our own frames. We set high standards of honesty and good will toward our fellow, hoping that people will judge both us and Republicans by our standards. It just backfires.

Calling Republicans heartless, for example, isn't effective. George W. Bush (who must have been a very sneaky little scamp in his youth) easily twisted that in debate with Al Gore. You see, it's heartless and offensive to call someone heartless. Bush was able to act hurt and offended while at the same time taking credit (with Republicans) for some heartlessness. And the beauty of it was that Bush wasn't even accused of heartlessness outright. Gore merely insinuated it. Bush, probably with Rove's tutelage, was a maestro. He elevated Gore's insinuation to an outright accusation and then defended himself with hurt outrage. It was beautiful...in the same sense that Ebola and great white sharks are.

We Dems/liberals need to frame the truth well. It can't be a ramshackle of old ethical nostrums and sentiments, however true they might be. It can't be passive, wheedling the audience to draw conclusions and administer justice. It has to be robust and resilient, not quixotic and self-martyring. It needs to be logical and inspiring, not appealing only to sentiment but to the logic of sentiment, not appealing only to guilt and love of our fellows but to our love of ourselves.

Anyway, I see quite a few signs that we are getting it more and more, so I am hopeful.

[Tennessee Gal]

52. Good post. I agree.

Bush was a master. I posted earlier in this thread about Rove and Atwater following the teachings of Machiavelli.

For Machiavelli, politics was about one and only one thing: getting and keeping power or authority. Everything else, religion, morality, truth, honor, and integrity, that people associate with politics has nothing to do with this fundamental aspect of politics, unless being moral helps one get and keep power. The only skill that counts in getting and maintaining power is calculation. The successful politician knows what to do or what to say for every situation, no matter what it takes. It is only about winning and keeping power.

[nadinbrzezinski]

38. Kick and recommend

more and you will get a lock...

[Fly by night]

49. Obsessing about Lakoff is for losers. One-trick ponies are for circuses.

Our problem isn't that we're holding our mouths wrong. It's that we have precious little access to megaphones and no access to the programming of our unverifiable voting machines.

Too many over-paid "consultants" here in Tennessee keep beating this very tired "messaging" drum, while we keep racking up losses from one end of our state to the other, in the home of Andrew Jackson and the birthplace of the blues. In a state where 5-8% more voters self-identify as Democrats than Republicans, a fact that these same consultants seem incapable of grasping.

In this environment, all this emphasis on framing only accomplishes making us sound more like Republicans. Reinstate the Fairness Doctrine and eliminate proprietary, secret software in our elections. That's what is needed, not more recommendations to say "tomato" instead of "to-mah-to".

Don't think of a "to-mah-to"; eat the rich. Unrec.

[Tennessee Gal]

55. It is far more complicated than you imply and Lakoff has addressed that fact.

He is no one trick pony and this is a very complicated issue.

Thanks for the unrec after I have posted many, many other comments involving details.

[CTyankee]

74. OK, I just rec'd your post. I'm glad we are having this discussion.

Thank you for the opportunity!:hi:

[Fly by night]

75. I believe you and I met face-to-face once ....

If you are who I think you are, it was shortly after the Rove-orchestrated theft of the 2004 Presidential election. The TN Democratic Party held a post-election meeting to discuss WTF had just happened, and you were the guest speaker. By that time, my group (Gathering To Save Our Democracy) had already staged public protests at the state capital re: the stolen election and we were in the process of planning the National Election Reform Conference. So both you and the TN/Dem chair at the time (can't remember his name, he will always be Little Lord Fauntleroy to me) knew what my concerns were. During the Q&A session, you steadfastly refused to call on me, even when I stood up and got directly in your line of sight (i.e., in your face). Finally, another Democrat had to be recognized and defer to me to allow me to speak.

Here we are seven years later, the TN/RICO party (formerly branded as the TN/GOP) and its flying monkeys have eliminated verifiable voting methods from all but two TN counties, they have placed titty-baring Hooters girls in our legislature (just how do those "frames" resonate with the Christian right, I wonder?), they are doing everything possible to dismantle the Constitution ... and here you are still talking about framing. Still.

My Goddess, read something else, would you. Or watch "UNCOUNTED: The New Math of American Elections", "STEALING AMERICA: Vote by Vote", "Secrets, Spies and Voting Lies" or any one of a dozen other documentaries on how the flying monkeys are gaining ascendancy by manipulating the innards of the voting machines that they build and program in secret. It has NOTHING to do with our messaging. It has EVERYTHING to do with how our votes are being counted, here in Tennessee and in most other states (thanks, in part, to the Bush appointees who are still in our USDOJ and who are still pushing for implementation of HAVA, their principal weapon in this coup).

Thank you for thanking me for my unrec. To be clear, I wasn't calling Lakoff a one-trick pony. He is just the pony trainer.

We don't need any more well-paid poodle-and-pony shows here in the birthplace of the blues. We need some blue Tennessee mules kicking ass and taking names to take our portion of the country back. The sooner the better. Any time you and the other reality-challenged TN/Dems want to discuss this, you know where to find me. (Bernie Ellis, Trace View Farm, 5985 Fly Hollow Road, Santa Fe, TN 38482. 931/682-2864).

BTW, Chip Forrester is not one of the reality-challenged. That's probably why he receives so little support from what passes for Dem leadership and consultant expertise (sic) here. In closing, I will concede that we do need a sturdy frame on Legislative Plaza these days. It's to hold the guillotine to dispatch the treasonous bastards who have destroyed the democratic ideal here. Almost anything short of that is just sound and fury, and even you should know what that signifies, seven years on ... and counting.

Bernie Ellis
(Tre Hargett's favorite "domestic terrorist". Tell me, how'd that frame work for him?)

[WillyT]

64. K & R !!!

:hi:

:kick: