Replies

Again and again, as Clinton often points out, the GOP has proved painfully adept at taking compelling, carefully honed meta-narratives and blowing them to pieces.

Since when? The "Bush lied, kids died" meme went utterly unrefuted - and when a few feeble gestures were made to counter it the MSM simply ignored them.

The MSM is the real creator of meta-narratives, and the only one that's going to matter is "The Democrat will pay you cash money...but the Republican is 'The (old, white) Man'." People aren't scared enough this year to run and hide under McCain's skirts - they'll be enticed into the van by the nice but wrinkly lady who is handing out free candy. ;)

In any event, I have a fondness for the term ‘meta-narrative.’ It’s so chic, so in, so … meaningless.

THANK YOU !!! I always cringe when I read stuff which begin with 'meta-', 'beta-', 'theta-', and the all encompassing 'alpha-'

What the hell is a Meta-something anyways? /laughs

It seems obvious to me that the public goes through engagement disengagement cycles.

From the moment the planes hit the towers, I knew a strong disengagement cycle would come from the public. 911 caused an incredible degree of engagement not just on domestic agendas but on international agendas.

The public is hungry to forget 911 and put the head back in the sand.

Change is a euphemism for refusing to discuss issues. Barack embodies the change Meme in the same way Clinton did in 1992.

All efforts to compel a discussion of relevant issues will be meet by public anger and frustration over “politics as usual.”

Even among alleged conservatives, there is a national security meme that seeks to protect us from illegal Mexican immigrants bombing us again. Though this is a false meme, it covers up the fundamental neo conservative struggle that the public is doomed to confront: Islamic radicalism.

The distant hope — dont give up on hope— is that the public will accelerate the cycle and wake up before November. It seems unlikely.

Metanarratives, memes — the whole article is steeped in post-modern babble. That alone guarantees that the article is devoid of any actual meaning that can be communicated — but, they top it off by using the terms incorrectly.

If they fed the terms “Obama”, “Clinton”, and “Democrat” into a random jibber-jabber generator; they would have come up with as insightful an article.