Skip to comments.United States of Propaganda Unleashes Unholy War Against Newt Gingrich
Posted on 01/29/2012 10:23:25 AM PST by Sioux-san
It would be perverse to suggest the recent Matt Drudge-delivered blitzkrieg against Newt Gingrich was anything but a massive, coordinated propaganda campaign to incinerate his candidacy to cinders and ash. Of course, it would also be unfair to insinuate Newt is anything but the father of many of his own current struggles. But, be that as it may, it is hard to see how such a scorched earth policy against a lively and talented Republican with vast leadership experience helps the GOP or harms Obama.
Such propaganda campaigns are not unknown in politics, but are rare in healthy democracies. That such a firebombing maneuver is being waged within the GOP against a viable member in order to transparently benefit Mitt Romneythe most progressive candidatecannot possibly bode well for the future state of the party or of our union as a whole.
Jacques Ellul wrote one of the great modern works on Propaganda, tapping deeply into the psyche of the masters of political mischaracterization and mass manipulation. He observed one added aspect to the traditional dark arts of the propagandist making the goal of propaganda the moving adherents towards a mystical ideology and false religion. According to Ellul, the purpose of propaganda is to exhaust mans freedom, and so to make him directable in all his words, thoughts and deeds. The subject of modern propaganda is the topic of this essay.
(Excerpt) Read more at canadafreepress.com ...
May 14, 2007
Some campaign aides have suggested that Drudges personal relationships have played a role in what oppo leaks he posts on the site. I think its clear that Romney has gotten fairer treatment from Matt Drudge than any other candidate. There is a lot less negative Romney stuff, said the senior Republican campaign aide. It stems back to what many people believe is a very good relationship between the Romney team and Matt Drudge.
In particular, Matt Rhoades, Romneys communications director, has a long history as the source for Drudge headlines, having previously served as the research director for the Republican National Committee during the 2006 campaign. In their book The Way to Win, Times Mark Halperin and the Politicos John Harris recount that Rhoades traveled to Florida for a friendly steakhouse dinner with Drudge when he took the research director job in 2005. Attempts by e-mail and telephone to ask Drudge about the allegations of favoritism were not successful.
Matt Drudges Crusade Against Mike Huckabee
By Steve Kornacki 12/11/07 8:47pm
Something to keep in mind as Matt Drudge continues his effort to take down Mike Huckabee: Huckabee poses the most immediate and serious threat to Mitt Romney.
As John Harris of the Washington Post first reported in October 2006, Drudge has an unusually close relationship with a senior Romney strategist, Matt Rhodes:
Last year, a delegation of RNC officials flew to Miami Beach, where Drudge lives, for a dinner at the Forge steakhouse to introduce the Internet maven to Matt Rhodes, the partys new opposition research director.
During his time at the RNC, Harris suggests, Rhodes was the G.O.P.s main conduit for funneling potentially damaging research on Democrats to Drudge.
A year ago, Rhodes signed on to Romneys campaign. Since then, Drudge-watchers have noted Drudges consistent refusal to hypeand in many cases to even mentionnegative stories about Romney. But now Huckabee threatens to blow Romneys nomination strategy. Since last week, Drudge has unleashed a torrent of screaming, anti-Huckabee headlines, culminating in todays “exclusive” (which cites one unnamed Democrat) about the Democrats supposed hope that Huckabee will emerge as the G.O.P. nominee.
In a Republican primary packed with highly flammable candidates who have taken turns at self-immolation, Rhoades is the organizing force behind Romneys safe and smooth campaign. An expert at manipulating the news cycle with a coveted connection to the elusive media power broker Matt Drudge, Rhoades is particularly well suited to run a campaign that Romney himself characterized this weekend as employing a confidentiality of strategy.
When you see the intense focus and discipline of the Romney campaign, Griffin said, you are seeing in large part Matt Rhoades.
And that is about all you will see of him. Rhoades, who almost never travels with the candidate, came of political age in the dark recesses of the opposition research universe and, either by career coincidence or design, has rarely appeared in the media. One exception: A 20-something blowup when he shattered a computer screen with his fist.
Years operating off the radar have given Rhoades a reputation as one of the Republican Partys most shadowy tacticians.
People always ask, So what does Matt Rhoades look like?; said Kevin Madden, a friend and former Romney spokesman. I always say, When he wants to meet you, he will call you. He is Keyser Soze.
For Rhoades, this mystique is politically useful, and he’s not about to dispel it.
Now that he has a job that he could get famous in, said Steve Schmidt, his old partner in the Bush-Cheney war room, its the furthest thing from his mind.
Want it to end? Then quit providing social and familial support to liberals.
Bye bye, life long friend, bye bye, sis. You may love them but they hate you and want you (and me) dead. Walk away or count yourself as complicit.
Instead, pray with faith.
Communist Goals (1963)
CURRENT COMMUNIST GOALS
15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.
20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policy making positions.
21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.
29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.
36. Infiltrate and gain control of more unions.
37. Infiltrate and gain control of big business.
They (the media, and Reb establishment) have come out and waged war on Newt to have their boy Mitt win. They do not give credit to the voters to not see this for what it is...character assasination. They prey on the uninformed that will just believe whatever they see on TV and the media who is suppose to just report the facts influence the vote by what they report. They tried it with McCain too but it failed, they tried it with Bush but it failed. The voters will once again vote the candidate of their choices not the one that has been chosen for us.
Are there any patriots left in the Mafia? If so, they may be our only hope.
I would be happy to have Newt thump Obama. I would also be happy to have Romney thump Obama. Romney may have an edge in management experience.
I note the difference between unconstitutional federal action by Obama, and constitutional state action by Romney. I further note the difference between the various health care acts that make Obama’s bad and Romney’s good.
It is important that we elect someone who will fire a bunch of people, and close down several cabinet level positions.
Again, Romney and Christie are former or current governors with a base and accomplishments outside Washington DC.
Newt seems to be a Washington DC phenomenon, making him an insider.
An of the above would be vastly preferable to Obama.
It wasn’t the ethics charges that did Newt in. It was his adulterous affair while Clinton was being impeached for obstruction of Justice regarding lying about an affair.
Really now. The House impeached Clinton. It was Spector a play actor Republican that saved Clinton when he uttered the words 'Scottish law'. The Senate refused to hold a 'trial' and show the American public the goods on Clinton. Newt's personal life had nothing to do with the Senate's unwillingness to perform its Constitutional duty.
And from the 'gossip' I have been reading and news stories since it does not sound like Newt was the only one in the House with personal problems. WHY did Paxton leave?
That’s pretty lame though. Clinton didn’t get impeached (and almost convicted) over sex, even loopy perverted sex. He got impeached about telling lies under oath about it. Newt wasn’t ever in such a circumstance.
What saved Clinton was the constitutional provision that you need two thirds of the Senate to vote for conviction in order to convict. He was never close to that. Spectre’s disingenuous vote meant Clinton didn’t get a majority for conviction, but the difference between not getting a 50% majority for conviction and not getting a 2/3rds majority is moot.
Spectre converted to Republican to run for office because it made it easier, and converted to Democrat later. I didn’t care for him, but Pennsylvania voters elected him many times.
I find with amusement that this season, a purported Catholic is working on his third wife, and the purported Mormon has only 1.
Not much of a Mormon with only 1 wife.
I find many people in DC and out have affairs, even some of my close friends.
That doesn’t mean I have to vote for them.
It really is hard to convict someone if the 'Senate' court refused to present the evidence, notwithstanding the Constitutional provisions. Why is Newt held to a higher standard than disingenuous play actor Spectre? The visceral hate for this guy is rather curious because it sure is not only about adultery.
He got the third wife — THEN joined the Catholic Church, which although being an extreme stickler about marriages, apparently didn’t say he had to walk out on her as a condition of being there.
The 'subject' is not about requiring you to vote for anyone. It is the misrepresentation about the facts that occurred. Double standards sure do keep appearing when it comes to Newt.
I don’t hate Newt. In fact, I rather like him. I don’t see him as presidential, I find the notion that he is an outsider as laughable.
I see Romney as having an edge based on having been a governor. Hey, is the governor’s job of Georgia open? Perhaps there is time for Newt to buff up his management resume?
My understanding is that Newt resigned, based on his affair being revealed during the impeachment of Clinton. I recall thinking that Newt did the right thing, and I hoped that Clinton would follow his example.
I recall that another Speaker resigned for the same reason soon after.
Newt’s edge is that he seems, based on evaluation of what he’s done, to be the most daring challenger to Barack Obama. That’s what it is going to boil down to. Hard knuckles will be necessary. Other candidates might theoretically be able to put a better finesse on the presidency once there. But one has to get there, first.
I think the higher standard is because of the higher office. Newt is running for President. Spectre is dead.
Why are you whipping a dead dog?
He didn’t — because sex was never the issue. It was telling lies about sex, under oath.
You try to revive that pack of dogs and it’ll get whipped back. You’re being rather disingenuous, pal.
You rather like him.... Geeze, What part of the Romney campaign of deceit do you play.
What deceit? Romney has management experience. Newt has demonstrated he has trouble balancing his checkbook.
Not to mention zipper problems.
IF Romney wins the nomination the liberals are going to clean his 1% bain clock. Not even Romney is able to explain why his business created jobs. He claims his business was just like Obama bailing out the auto industry.
Why do you think the liberal set in motion 'occupy wall street'? Fiscal conservatives do not want to have the discussion either, they bashed Newt over the head before he could help Romney defend himself. You think Newt's lack of management experience haunts him more than Romney appealing in this economy to those independents?
Anybody, like Mitt Romney, who has such power and money behind them, will not be a candidate of conscience...but rather, that conscience, will be beholden to others. That's a very dangerous person to vote for because their words are idle and without meaning. Barack Obama may harbor principles that are entirely contrary to mine, but at least he has principles. Mitt Romney has none. He always was, and always will be, the quintessential political chameleon.
Who is behind Newt?
I understand that a couple of billionaires bought him a few years ago.
By contrast, Romney inherited a lot of money, and gave it away.
Open your eyes my friend and watch the campaigns. If you can’t see what’s going, then there’s nothing I can say that will help you.
I expect it will be settled before it reaches my state. I further expect that California will go for Obama, despite my vote against the Obamanation.
I see Mitt as having an edge in demonstrated management experience.
I see people who pretend that somehow Newt is an outsider as laughable, almost as laughable those who see Ron Paul who has never authored critical legislation as a hard hitting executive.
Perjury and obstruction of justice, to be precise. another count of perjury and abuse of power didn’t make it out of the house.
I don’t see Newt, former speaker, former lobbyist, as an outsider.
I figure the OWS jerks have lost all credibility. They are even getting rousted in San Francisco now.
You mean as Governor of my state?
People can make arguments on both sides as to whether he was a good Governor, but I can tell you one thing for sure, after doing his time, he not only abandoned the state, he made fun of it while doing so. He did absolutely nothing to help Lt. Governor Healey campaign against Deval Patrick, Obama's good friend. The Governorship amounted to nothing more than lines on a resume for him, and you think that gives him an edge over someone who not only supported Reagan, which Romney didn't, but carried those principles to the House of Representatives, which in itself was an historic achievement.
What has Romney ever done to further conservatism in any way. Who has he voted for and supported that would indicate he has any core conservative principles.
What has he ever done or said that would lead you to believe he could articulate...clearly, concisely, and agressively...the distinction not only of himself to Obama, but the distinction of people like you and me.
Whomever you vote for, you are going to be voting for a naked candidate, and by that I mean, regardless of how much money the candidate has behind him, or how many people there are to assist him, he will inevitably be left to his own devices and wit when presenting their case to the American public via debates.
I would rather have a warrior for that role, and I can not for the life of me understand why people just don't get that. I want someone who, when asked whether the factual statement they just made was offensive to certain people, will say no without beating around the bush and while looking you straight in the eye.
When has Romney ever displayed the will that will lead you to believe he will resist being hampered and handicapped by political correctness.
This is a war, which isn't over yet, and we need a warrior. At least with Newt, I know for a fact that he at least was a conservative. Contrary to what Mitt Romney says about himself now, when was he ever a conservative?
They old saw is “They taught Mr. Ed to talk.”
I submit that we have an orator now. I don’t like it. I don’t want to vote for an orator. The TOTUS apparently manages by getting position papers that have two extreme positions and a middle position. He checks the middle box.
Position 1. Murder all the Jews.
Position 2. Encourage Iran to Murder half the Jews.
Position 3. Encourage Israel to murder all non-Jews.
And he checks the middle box EVERY TIME.
Of course the guy who writes the middle position has wide latitude in building that ‘middle position’.
I would vote for Mitt over Obama. I would vote for Newt over Obama. I would vote for a syphilitic camel over Obama.
Romney with a Republican House and Senate would be more conservative.
We need more conservative house members, to stop the crazy spending. We need more conservative Senate members to stop the crazy spending.
With that, the Republic might just be saved. I keep my wookie suit ready anyways.
Making fun of Mass? I am guilty of that myself. Insulting Mass? I find that beyond my poor powers.
Romney seems to be a good manager. I don’t think much of Obama or Gingrich as managers.
So do I, but it's unbecoming a State Official, especially Governor. I've known Romney's a political chameleon for a long time, and if he gets the nomination, the rest of the country will soon find out also. Don't say you weren't warned.
Romney seems to be a good manager. I dont think much of Obama or Gingrich as managers.
You're entitled to your opinion. Truth be told, I've lived under both of their management styles, and I stand behind Newt Gingrich.