Posted on 07/14/2008 6:53:23 PM PDT by jazusamo
In an election campaign in which not only young liberals, but also some people who are neither young nor liberals, seem absolutely mesmerized by the skilled rhetoric of Barack Obama, facts have receded even further into the background than usual.
As the hypnotic mantra of "change" is repeated endlessly, few people even raise the question of whether what few specifics we hear represent any real change, much less a change for the better.
Raising taxes, increasing government spending and demonizing business? That is straight out of the New Deal of the 1930s.
The New Deal was new then but it is not new now. Moreover, increasing numbers of economists and historians have concluded that New Deal policies are what prolonged the Great Depression.
Putting new restrictions of international trade, in order to save American jobs? That was done by Herbert Hoover, when he signed the Hawley-Smoot tariff when the unemployment rate was 9 percent. The next year the unemployment rate was 16 percent and, before the Great Depression was over, unemployment hit 25 percent.
(Excerpt) Read more at jewishworldreview.com ...
The thesis of John T. Flynn The Roosevelt Myth (1948).
Conservatives for Obama?
Cocky Ignorance
Obama and McCain
Irrelevant Apologies
Success Built on Work Ethic
An Old Newness
A Living Lie
Obama’s Speech
Race and Politics
Non-Judgmental Nonsense
They sure seem to be.
Good one, Phil! :)
obsolete??? don't know... but they are sure irrelevant where the RATS are concerned.
I believe that Dumbassocrats are suffering from a form of the Stockholm symptom
I uh, er, I think, it’s uh, something that you know, wait a minute now, uh, really, I know....you know, uh, and WE NEED TO CHANGE IT!
LOL! That’s a dead ringer for BO without the teleprompter.
People in Germany felt the same about Hitler.....look where that got them.
Exactly. Tax, spend and regulate is NOT "change". It's just more of what has driven America into the ground.
Kinda shows what Obama’s appeasement policies may be worth. Nada. As always, Mr. Sowell is on the money.
It is still amazing how many people are blinded by the false promises of socialism, communism...
ping
Recently I’ve been reading Daniel Flynn’s “A Conservative History of the American Left”, and if you want to talk about the sheer number of ways that the Left has simply proceeded to muck things up from the early days of America...the only one that gave it up for good was William Bradford. What a shame more of that thinking didn’t endure on the Left.
30+ years of brainwashing as many as possible into hysteria when specific, charged, words as "racism", "homophobia", "sexism" has guided a mentality which is equivalent to the creation of the Pavlov's dog.
The bell word "CHANGE" rings, and the people salivate. The word "change" has a specific collection of meanings and visuals to those indoctrinated with the meme of the word being chanted.
The fact here, is, that people are exhibiting classic brainwashing behavior. The politician has been handed the rings to the kingdom of those special "words" which will bring round the salivating dogs, if you will, created by educators and media, and some businesses also.
The reason "facts" do not matter to this specific politician nor his supporters is because when the charged word rings, they are unable to hear or see anything other than the clamoring of the "specific" charged word.
In the real world, we'd call this a cult.
Insert all stories of cults and cult behaviors, here. And because, sadly, it really does apply.
Facts do matter, they always do, they always have, they always will.
Mr. Sowell is being most polite in using real instances of political past campaigns to make his point.
I'm just cutting to the chase.
To vote for a person purely on the basis of a word, or a personal manifestation (e.g., sex, skin color) is to exhibit "cult behavior".
I admit to the few times I've voted for someone, and because I'd not known at all (no thanks, media) about that specific election -- based upon their name and what memory cells I have which might pertain to that name. In this matter, I know that I'm not using facts; I'm being entirely subjective and in a way which has absolutely no bearing on who would or would not be the better candidate.
I know I am doing this. I don't think Obama's supporters are even aware they are doing this.
And that's the worry.
Bump for this evening. :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.