Like Tim F, I think it is smart for Democrats to make Rush Limbaugh the face of the Republican party. It’s smart because Rush is an unBurkean cancer on the Republican party, or whatever it is Brooks likes to say, because disliking Rush is one of those 80/20 propositions Patrick Ruffini likes so much, and because the Republican party does in fact seem to take its marching orders from El Rushbo.
I wasn’t surprised that the people at the Politico think Democrats should cower in fear of Rush and his silly-putty-mailing army. I was surprised, though, to see that George Lakoff, author of Don’t Think Of an Elephant and the father of liberal “framing” thinks Rush-baiting is a bad idea too:
The effectiveness of the conservative message machine led to Obama making a rare mistake in communication, the mistake of saying out loud in Florida not to think of Rush Limbaugh, thus violating the first rule of framing and giving Rush Limbaugh even greater power.
I don’t buy this at all. Rush already has complete power in the Republican party and I don’t see how he’s going to expand that to include independents and Democrats. Anyway, blaming it on the Limbaughda is just calling it like it is.
When I read Lakoff’s book, I thought it was brilliant. But it also seemed a bit pie-in-the-sky — winning the environmental battle by making voters think of Mother Earth and all that.
Is this framing stuff the liberal answer to Burkean bells? Just some high-brow nonsense that gives an intellectual veneer to a half-baked PR strategy? I don’t know the answer, but I’m skeptical of any philosophy that opposes using an oxycontin-addicted egomaniac as foil.
TenguPhule
Us Liberals don’t know this guy, honest.
DougJ
I had to leave the first liberal blog I wrote for because the framing stuff was shoved down my throat so much. (This didn’t convince me it was a bad idea, politically, but I did learn that I have a hard time with partisan propaganda of any kind.)
Marshall
I think its smart and I think the idea that republicans should view Reagan’s idea’s as somehow the truth for all time is great. I wrote about his on my blog. There’s something to be written though on the intersection of catholic theology with republican policy centering around the objective relativist consideration First Things always goes on about.
Conservatively Liberal
Ben Smith notes that Erick the RedNeck at RedState joins El Rushbo in hoping Obama fails. Smith’s piece is short but sweet, the choice line being:
But somewhere, Brad Woodhouse and Rahm Emanuel are smiling.
Same here, from ear to ear.
Joshua
You clearly haven’t been following the repeated framing kerfluffles at ScienceBlogs, have you? That’s fine, it’s a niche site.
Long story short, there’s a disciple of Lakoff there who routinely goes around telling people who have far more influence and site traffic than him that they’re marketing themselves wrong and "hurting the cause" of science by being openly atheist or for that matter doing anything short of embracing Ray Comfort and Ken Ham with open arms and giving them deep, meaningful kisses (no doubt with tongue). Needless to say, he gets rightfully mocked by nearly everybody now, even the ones who initially supported him when he first started going on about this framing crap. That’s when anyone can be bothered to check his blog to find out what he’s ranting about, which doesn’t happen very often.
It is somehow refreshing to see that Lakoff himself is following the same worthless concern-troll trajectory as the other guy.
El Cid
I dunno, I think if I could choose who framed what for whom, I’d be pretty happy hanging the entire GOP within Rush’s enormous frame.
In this case, the enormous power of the right wing noise machine is finally used for the forces of good.
cyntax
Like so much academic writing that I’ve read, Lakoff’s use of the idea of framing tries too hard be an over-arching principle that "explains everything," when its usefulness seems to me to be as one rhetorical consideration of many.
It’s like asking students to write a paper that’s solely compare and contrast when that’s really just one technique of many that are blended within a paper.
But western thought does love the idea that explains everything; though if Kant couldn’t pull it off, I wonder why others try.
MikeJ
Excellent title.
When the routine bites hard
And ambitions are low
And the resentment rides high
But emotions wont grow
And we’re changing our ways,
Taking different roads
Then Rush, Rush will tear us apart again
joe from Lowell
Lakoff doesn’t get it: Obama WANTS people to think of Rush Limbaugh. He wants them to think about him, because he knows that most of his will reject him.
I mean, the "effective" Republican message machine, that "allowed them to stonewall the stimulus bill," was the implement of political suicide for the Republicans. Barack Obama wants as many Americans as possible to hear the Republicans announcing their opposition to his economic policies.
kindness
Issues have to be presented in a manner which makes them important to it’s target audience. Different peoples will require different points of view to give an issue relevancy to them.
As long as you aren’t lying, framing in this manner is fine. It’s salesmanship.
Joshua Norton
There’s a difference between empowering someone by accepting how they frame their argument against you and telling said same person they’re full of shite.
When there was a major debate on the floor of the House about "cut and run" the Dems were proving themselves weak by accepting and using the repugs specious words against themselves. This was the whole concept to "Don’t Think of the Elephant", as I recall, and which I agree with whole-heartedly.
But to tell people to never confront their enemy is as lame-brained as telling them never to confront cancer.
The wingnutz are perpetually outraged, like someone running around screaming "I’m so mad – give me something to throw." Rush puts the words in their potty mouths because they’re too weak brained to come up with any of their own. Then they’re off and running – barfing them back on every phone-in AM radio show. Not challenging their tripe is considered acceptance as far as they’re concerned.
DougJ
@MikeJ
Thanks. The other alternative was “Do think of an elephant.”
calipygian
Lakoff is wrong. Just plain wrong. Just let Rush run his mouth and the 65 percent of the country that loathes him won’t vote Republican for another generation.
The curtain has been pulled back on Rush Limbaugh and the shrivelled soul and lack of ideas has been revealed.
He can’t coast on his AM radio shtick anymore.
nylund
I love Rush. He threatens any semi-reasonable Republican. He is pushing for Jindal, a man America is not impressed with (and threatens anyone who dares suggests otherwise). He is making it so that in order for anyone to consider themselves a Republican they must hate democrats, poor people, minorities, gays, feminists, scientists, secularists, environmentalists, teachers, professors, college grads, etc (and continually adding to the list!). He’s doing a fantastic job of shrinking down the GOP.
The GOP had a lot of success as a "Big Tent" party, and I am very happy to see them voluntarily shrink that tent down to the size of an outhouse. Soon enough, the only place left for them to go will be directly into the crapper.
Heck, the other day I was reading through the comments on Little Green Footballs and they were all talking a lot of crap about Rush, O’Reilly, Hannity, Fox News, and Glenn Beck, calling them blow-hards and crazies.
When the GOP starts losing the LGF crowd there really can’t be all that many of them left.
tom p
There is nothing "Burkean" about Rush.
Starfish
Framing is a linguistic trick and agnostic when it comes to party affiliation. Frank Luntz was the guy responsible for much of the framing that happened in the Republican party. Don’t think of it as deforestation, think of it as the healthy forest initiative!
Graeme
Man… No one thought Obama could take out Hillary. He did.
No one thought Obama could take out the ‘GOP Attack Machine.’ He did.
Limbaugh is going to be an easy target by comparison. Why? Because he’s not a debater. He sells his personality and pretends to have ideas. He doesn’t hold up well when he has to debate, and he consistently tries to fall back on the tropes that work on his program.
He only really ‘works’ when he gets the last word.
The best thing to do is to draw him into situations where that doesn’t happen. Make him debate. Make him elaborate on his points. Make him think on his feet. He’s just not good at it.
That blimp is going to go down like the Hindenburg.
calipygian
To use a Lakoffian frame – We want people to associate the Republican party with opiates addiction, making fun of Parkinson’s patients and "Barack the Magic Negro".
That’s a good thing.
Conservatively Liberal
Obama is the one who put Rush front and center and he was damn smart in doing so. He drew the attention to what Rush has been saying, the press jumped on it and the Republicans have been fighting about it ever since. Fucking brilliant strategy, if that is what it is. The wingnutz are basically without a leader and are desperately casting about trying to find "Their One". By drawing press attention to the Fat Bastard, Obama was able to get the gas bag to go full throttle wingnut.
Now that Rush has laid down the law as to who is in charge, any Republican who disagrees with him is going to be eviscerated by his minions. They are eating their own, leaving Obama free to move forward. If the Repub pols line up with El Rushbo then the real Republican voters who are not enthralled with Fat Bastard are going to walk. Or better yet, be pushed out by the purity police.
The wilderness is going to be full of wingnutz real fast. Lonely wingnutz. Obama was questioned on the wisdom of calling out Rush and once again Obama comes out on top.
Chess player indeed. Check.
Joshua Norton
More like "Berserk-ean".
cyntax
@tom p:
Maybe you just haven’t listened to "Tom Sawyer" in a while…
Though his mind is not for rent,
Dont put him down as arrogant.
His reserve, a quiet defense,
Riding out the days events.
AhabTRuler
@cyntax: Just reading that made me want to Botox Geddy Lee’s vocal cords.
Awesome: apparently one can pimp as much Botox as one might wish without tripping the am-spay ilter-fay.
Zzyzx
I keep thinking that during the Bush years when I saw the potential disasters looming, I kept saying, "I hope I’m wrong about this. I’d rather eat crow about being right than have to deal with these consequences."
It’s good to know that Red State and Rush would rather have their opinions validated than the country helped.
John Cole
In fairness to Lakoff, he is used to the usual politics and is used to dealing with really bad Democrats. In a sense, he is suffering from the same thing that the Republicans are suffering from- he doesn’t seem to understand that the same old rules don’t apply anymore because we aren’t even playing the same game. I promise you, the Republicans really do think they are on to something by yelling socialist. They honestly don’t recognize most of the country is laughing at them.
People are focused right now. Losing half or more of your retirement and spending every day worried you might lose your job tends to do that.
Comrade Stuck
Remnants of the democrat politics by grace. Rise above those heathen wingnuts and ignore them and everything will work out fine. The American people will recognize their douchebaggery for what it is and choose us.
Though republicans themselves have pretty much screwed themselves with respect to their image with voters, dems like Lakoff miss the point entirely on why it is a good idea to at least call the right wing on their bullshit. I think many AMericans know Liimbaugh and his followers,( which is the bulk of the current GOP when you add in those who hate him but fear him more) are full of shit. The problem is, imo, many voters are more interested in the fact that liberals at least stand up to the wingers, regardless of the content of the argument. Call it the wimp factor they are gauging, and they don’t want wimps representing them.
Mazacote Yorquest
I think Lakoff is a little out of his range. In his view, any framing that starts with "Don’t think of" is wrong, because he assumes it’s a sincere attempt to get people not to think of something. But I think Obama’s folks know this stuff already. Their fliers in the Midwest about Obama’s Christian identity were all positively framed. That is, they said "Is Obama a Christian? Yes!" not "Is it true Obama is a Muslim? No, that’s just right-wing lies’ etc. etc. If everyone hates the guy, of course you want to think of him as the alternative. And yet by saying "Don’t think of him" you are also dismissing him on a conscious level. Best of both worlds: the guy is beneath us but you better watch out.
cyntax
@AhabTRuler:
Botoxing Geddy Lee’s vocal cords: sweet, sweet silence.
DougJ’s title left me wondering what it would have been like if Rush had covered Joy Division, which spun me off momentarily into the kind of fugue state BOB must live in permanently… [shudder].
The classic commentary on Rush
kid bitzer
lakoff? didn’t he already have his 15 minutes back in 2000 or so?
Jon H
It’s great that the GOP politicians don’t realize that Limbaugh’s incentives are not aligned with their own. Limbaugh may have similar preferences, but he doesn’t need for the GOP to win. It might even be better for him if they lose.
sgwhiteinfla
Look at it this way, President Obama has put most of the Congressional Republicans in a terrible bind. If they want to get on Tee Vee then they are now almost assuredly going to face questions about Rush and whether they agree with him. No comment just won’t do, so which way do they go? Do they repudiate Rush and risk alienating the base and thus (in their mind) risk getting a serious primary risk OR do they embrace Rush whom overwhelmingly the country at large loathes which might concievably help them get past a primary challenge but pretty effective ensures that they are going to get their ass kicked in a general? Choices choices. And all the while their party gets fractured with those who think Rush is the bees knees and those who know Rush is going to bring them down come election time.
I don’t see even a possible downside to this for President Obama.
TR
All the reason I need to hear to do the exact opposite.
Litlebritdifrnt
I am going to be a ditto head here and agree that highlighting Rush is another brilliant move on the part of Obama. Just this week Rush was playing clips from Tweety where he was asking a Republican whether or not he agreed with Rush the response was "he’s an interesting guy" whereupon Tweety laughed and said "you won’t answer the question". Rush is now saying "ha see how afraid they are of me every week they are asking another Republican if they agree with me" Rush is daring the Republicans to disagree with him so he can set his willing band of ditto heads upon them and call them out, he is forcing his views onto not only the leaders of the party but it’s rank and file, the repubs know this and therefore are terrified of going up against him, ergo repubs all agree with a guy that the majority of the country despises. Pretty soon every elected member of the republican party is going to be marching in lock step with Rush and the destruction of the party will be complete. Sometimes I think that Rush is actually an undercover democrat, I mean deep, deep undercover because nothing else could explain his actions to be honest.
El Cid
There is an extent to which we really are lucky that, given the absolute power possessed 2002 – 2006 by a crazy authoritarian criminal right wing movement, they were as stupid as they were evil and greedy.
A smart ultra-right wing would have kept power for another decade or so, maybe forever.
Can you imagine if a smart, shrewd person who had in mind long-term power had been in office instead of Bush Jr. letting the craziest of crazies have him do whatever they wanted, how screwed we might have been for nearly ever?
Cat Lady
@John Cole: "People are focused right now. Losing half or more of your retirement and spending every day worried you might lose your job tends to do that."
A close friend who is always teetering between being a conservative and a progressive said "let’s just tax everyone 50% of their income and give everyone free health care, retirement and higher education, and let’s get it over with". People are reaching their limit on worrying about everything. Obama is going to have an open field to run in soon, and the wingnuts will be left behind talking gibberish to each other.
myiq2xu
That’s wrong on so many levels – my eyes want to puke just from reading it
DougJ
I aim to please.
John Cole
Honestly, the only downside I see with making Rush the focal point of the GOP is that he is in no way constrained by facts, honesty, or the truth, so engaging him will sometimes be a pain in the ass. As long as you know that going in, you should be fine.
Comrade Scrutinizer
Uh. Who’s been talking about bukkake—Myiqie is back.
Conservatively Liberal
@
myiq2xuGoatBoy:I get that way reading your shit. Now go play with your goats. Also.
Martin
He’s a narcissist. He doesn’t give a shit about conservatism or the GOP or whether the country survives or not. He’s so desperate to be seen as ‘the voice’ that he delivers whatever message gets him that title. His syndication is so strong that he doesn’t need to win other people’s attention for media time – he just needs to get them to talk about him.
Obama has his number though, because the only thing Rush needs is to be proclaimed ‘The One’ and Obama has the power to do that – so he does it. And because Obama has that power, Obama can also drive Rush’s message by calling him out on the topics that Obama knows Rush will drive off the rails on, which only reinforces the sanity of Obama’s position. Obama whistles and Rush dutifully barks on command.
And Obama marginalizes every elected Republican by constantly calling out the blowhard on the radio with a lower approval rating than Bush rather than any of them – and those guys need the media, so Obama is actually starving them for what they need. There’s nothing but win here.
Keith
I still think Rush will inevitably get busted with pills again, and it that happens after the GOP base just dumped all their other potential leadership in favor getting behind Rush 100%, the fall will be hi-freaking-larious.
On the other hand, as much as I’d like to see this drama unfold over 5-6 years, if the GOP takes more losses in 2010, I don’t think they can pretend any longer that the country as a whole doesn’t have some innate desire to support the GOP brand just because.
sgwhiteinfla
John Cole
But the beauty of it is you never actually have to directly engage Rush Limbaugh. What has happened and what will continue to happen is he will trumpet out some falsehood and then the Rethugs in Congress will dutifully repeat it and then at some point someone like David Shuster or Rick Sanchez (perhaps with an assist from the White House) will call them out for being full of shit. And that just further delegitimizes them. But what are they going to do, stop parroting Rush? Yeah that will be the day. Pretty much right now anybody who gives a damn about politics at all in this country knows that Rush Limbaugh said he wants President Obama to fail and if Obama and his people can get people to think Rush Limbaugh when they see and hear from McConnell, Boehner, Cantor et all then it will be mission accomplished. Notice that in all this time nobody in Obama’s administration has debated anything Rush has said except to continue to remind the public that Rush wants Obama to fail. I think they almost want Rush to make up more and more outlandish shit just to see how long the Republicans will go along for the ride.
El Cid
I think it’s probably worthwhile to point out that the administration isn’t trying to ‘engage’ or debate Rush; they’re just saying, ‘hey, look, we’re trying to work with the opposition but they’re all busy listening to this crazy guy.’
That’s different than setting up Limbaugh like some important target.
What they’re doing is saying that in their view, Rush appears to be important to the Republican Party, and he’s a crazy guy, so, maybe you people who are wondering why the GOP seems so crazy can check into why that might be.
Chuck Butcher
Lakoff is a smart guy and I’ve had his political presentation and from others of the same school and there is a lot there. All that said, these folks are not functioning politicians and sometime seem to miss the difference between a tactic and a strategy.
The strategy of presenting the party in positive non-reactive terms is quite reasonable and a long term project. The tactic of compare and contrast doesn’t go away, particularly if you don’t legitimize a view by stating it. Obama did not pick one piece of Rush’s crap and "oh no we’re not." That sort of step is validating of the other party, you descend to their argument on their terms. This is a case of making the other side define themselves in the way you want them to. If you like, it is Lakoffian judo.
BoB would like you to believe that Obama has made a mistake, Obama has made almost no negative statements, other than we will not repeat these mistakes, his message is positive. He forces the Republicans to take the negative and embrace their loon in front the public. And they do, they crawl lickspittle to his boots to fix any "no we’re not" statement they make.
Somebody postulated the other day that in a battle between Newt and Rush that Newt would win. In the backrooms he would, in a public dust up Rush wins. Rush is the brightly painted noisy public face, Newt is just some pol. I doubt such a thing happening, Newt knows better. But why would Obama dignify Republicanism with someone with credentials like Newt, Rush is the cartoon face and shooting fish in a barrel, particularly since the fishy pulls the trigger for you.
The "just an entertainer" worked for quite a long time, now the smell is leaking out and the entertainer is relishing setting up vs the President. How could you ask for a more happy circumstance?
Comrade Stuck
@John Cole:
Not wise to get deep with him , that’s for sure. Swimming with the sewer fishes will only make you stink . Just say he’s a lying fat bastard and move on. Done in diplomat speak, of course/
ksmiami
Obama’s really helped frame the caricature of the right. He made the symbol of today’s GOP a drug addled, loud mouthed, limp dicked elephant man. Effin brilliant indeed.
Hillary Rettig / www.lifelongactivist.com
I’m a huge fan of Lakoff, and quote him at length in the section of my book (The Lifelong Activist, in case anyone hadn’t guessed!) dealing with effective strategy and communication. Lakoff has been proven right again and again and again.
If you want to know a huge reason why the Democrats were in the wilderness for so long, it’s because when Lakoff rose to prominence during Kerry’s campaign he was treated like some awesome new revelation. But in other contexts, the things Lakoff teaches are called…Marketing and Sales 101, and are widely known and accepted. Framing is based on fundamental principles of persuasion and psychology that have been around probably for as long as people have been selling stuff to each other.
Look, Coke doesn’t go around saying "Pepsi sucks." It doesn’t say "Pepsi" at all. Because of exactly what Lakoff says – name the opposition and you do give it strength and credibility / legitimacy. Particularly if you name it / frame it in its own language. Yeah, I’m sure there’s the odd exception out there, but generally speaking you don’t mention the competition by name.
JWW
I see you have the best excuse,
Rush has total commnad of the party. You really should find another line of "reading and research" you put all your marbles on everything you blog. Like John, you believe and bet the bank on somebody elses research. That is because it is the answer and the only answer you are looking for.
If you think or believe Rush controls anything you are a just as sold as anything President Obamai puts his signature on.
I say until 2075, it’s Bush’s fault.
JoyceH
@John Cole: Honestly, the only downside I see with making Rush the focal point of the GOP is that he is in no way constrained by facts, honesty, or the truth,:
But there’s an up side to that. Most people ALREADY distrust Limbaugh, so when he says something, they already wonder if it’s true. That would take a while to happen with some new face like Cantor or Jindal. (Though Jindal will sure be fact-checked quickly now!)
I’m in the camp of thinking that it’s great that the GOP has been tagged as the Party of Rush. When Obama first mentioned Limbaugh, all the Great Thinkers went all frowny and said it was giving him stature. No, it gives him visibility. Now the national argument we’re having is represented by two faces – Obama’s and Limbaugh’s. The popular, brilliant, warm and vibrant young president versus… Limbaugh. Who do you think is going to win THAT compare-and-contrast?
And the best part is that Limbaugh has stepped up, and willingly assumed the role of Spokesman for Conservatism. HE believes he has enhanced stature, and man, has it gone to his already swollen head! The guy just gave a speech that was twice as long as most SOTUs!
That ego is going to lead him to a massive eruption, and the GOP is going to be too afraid of his dittobot army to repudiate him until it’s far too late.
myiq2xu
Why are you reading my shit? My HMO really sucks.
bayville
Breitbart outdoes himself in tomorrow’s WaTimes column on Limbaugh. My favorite stanza:
Polish the Guillotines
All this framing talk drives me nuts. It always reminds me of Billy Wilder’s admonition to "hide your plot points."
There are a slew of posters at the GOS who just can’t shut up about framing. Fine. Talk about it as an academic exercise. But when it comes to putting it into practice, the best of the best are so smooth at it that you never see or predict the "plot points." (Which is to some extent why Obama is so damn good.)
When the Dems come flat out and announce that the game plan is to make Rush the bogeyman (as deserved as that may be), they’re screaming at the top of their lungs "PLOT POINT."
Fucking unprofessional. No sense of craft.
Wankers.
TenguPhule
In other News, Moneypit AIG is a Moneypit.
In China, they’d have shot a couple of people already.
Hillary Rettig / www.lifelongactivist.com
All activist movements are ecosystems. We need the "extremists," who push the boundaries of what’s imaginable (and occasionally score big victories, but at the very least create a space for the moderates to make incremental progress in), and we need the moderates to make the incremental changes that can add up to big change, and present that change more palatably to the mainstream. Think Martin Luther King, Jr., and the Black Panthers.
They’re both vital roles, and they don’t really have anything to do with framing. It is possible to be a moderate or extremist and use framing effectively.
I agree with El Cid #6 that it would be great to hang the entire GOP around Limbaugh’s enormous, corrupt, morally diseased frame.
skippy
obama did even better than saying "don’t think of rush limbaugh," he said "stop listening to rush limbaugh," thus effectively making everyone think of rush limbaugh, while at the same time dismissing limbaugh’s importance entirely.
DougJ
@bayville
Link?
The Moar You Know
Republicans love their entertainers – Reagan was one. Limbaugh is no Reagan. He’s a 21st century Fatty Arbuckle; a fat, sweaty, addicted, perverted, disgusting pig whose bullying is only matched by his cowardice.
Rush claims to think he has won something by Obama calling him out. The truth is that even Rush knows better – Obama picked the most powerless person (what does Rush have save a microphone and lower approval ratings than George W. Bush?) and by calling him out, put him in de facto charge of the GOP. Rush can’t introduce legislation. Rush can’t muster votes. All Rush can do is muster outrage – and nobody gives a shit about outrage anymore, we’re too busy trying to find work.
bayville
Bretibart:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/mar/02/rush-to-judgment-a-media-hopelessly-divided/
radish
For Obama personally, no. Putting Limbaugh’s name in lights is an obvious win from the partisan/electoral point of view.
But from a slightly different angle legitimizing Limbaugh is playing with matches next to an open bucket of gasoline. The problem with pushing Limbaugh as a legitimate and official leader of the GOP is that even though Limbaugh and Coulter and the like will alienate more voters than they’ll attract, their followers — the real crazies that they don’t alienate — will increasingly control the GOP infrastructure and what remains of the brand. And that’s still a shitload of people and resources and opportunity.
Meaning the real crazies will be inheriting more and more rolodexes and exploitable secrets and empty-but-refillable slush funds, plus whatever crappy veneer of respectability and social capital stays with the brand. When the average craziness of the GOP goes up, the average craziness of the people you see on your TV will go up too, as will the openness with which people will be calling for violence, sedition, insurrection, etc. You can count on it. Yeah, sure the people on your TV already seem totally crazy to you, but it could be a hell of lot worse. "BTKWB Limit" wouldn’t be funny if it weren’t also dark and scary. That’s how humor works.
Barry and Rahmbo are betting that over the course of the next 2-12 years the benefits of a smaller, weaker GOP will outweigh the problems created by having a smaller, weaker, completely radicalized, openly violent, explicitly racist and possibly secessionist GOP. From a purely electoral standpoint they’re almost certainly right. But there are other ways and longer timespans in which they could easily be wrong, and in which they could be making things a lot worse for all of us.
KCinDC
Patrick Poole at Pajamas Media found CPAC insufficiently crazy on the subject of fighting Islamofascists, so he weeps for the future of conservatism.
Xecklothxayyquou Gilchrist
@bayville: Only talk radio with its emphasis on Socratic debate over raw emotionalism and with Mr. Limbaugh in the driver’s seat has escaped the left’s clutches of pure media dominance.
Damn, that *is* rich.
I don’t remember Socrates using call screeners to keep disagreeing people away.
Chuck Butcher
@Polish the Guillotines:
Oh horseshit. I could send Rush a long detailed analysis of the Democratic advantages of making him the target and he’d say, "c’mon pussies." There isn’t the least reason to tell the McConnels and Cantors what it’s about, they know what it’s about and can’t do shit about it. This is damned chess game between people who understand it and can see ‘mate six moves coming fast but the pieces are where they are and what you should have done six moves ago doesn’t mean anything.
Unprofessional? Explain to me exactly how they counter this move? Nothing detailed, just one idea.
Some of this is the result of circumstance, some of smart politics and a whole bunch of it is smart opportunism. Some of you say the GOP should make some changes, I say they’re trapped until after 2010 elections at soonest. Republican Governors are trying a bit harder to avoid being stuck, but they are anyhow. A Charlie Crist may have dodged the bullet, but this is their hole. I wrote and even linked a short analysis I won’t try to repeat in less word here.
El Cid
Socrates’ first shows were broadcast via pottery paintings, so callers were a very select group.
Brachiator
This kind of thing is a waste of time, and will backfire for many number of reasons. I don’t understand boutique liberals whose lives are going so well that they don’t have to worry about losing their jobs or their homes, and so can dedicate themselves to the idea that their lives are incomplete unless some conservative is punished for whatever it is they did or thought during the Bush Administration.
Limbaugh is not a government official, or even an original thinker. He is a glib showman and mouthpiece for conservatives. Making him a target only makes him sympathetic in the eyes of his radio audience, and is totally irrelevant to what goes on in Washington and elsewhere. Besides, Rush has been around long enough that he can easily rebuff the earnestly lame attacks of his critics with his oily sophistry.
It’s no wonder that a lot of people behind this stupid "Must Hate Rush" crap also think that the Fairness Doctrine must be brought back. These people are addicted to political theater and symbolic gestures.
Definitely high-brow nonsense. People who are high on "framing the issue" are desperate to be left-wing Rovians. And they are just as arrogantly cynical as Rove on his best worst day. These people believe that they know best for the American people and merely need to "frame" their solutions correctly so the suckers eat it up. This bunch of lefty goons find it inconceivable that anyone require that they make even the smallest effort to, you know, like, attempt to convince people that their views and proposals are correct, or that they have a need to listen to ideas, even progressive ideas, that have not been pre-approved by their own coterie.
The right wing Taliban believe that if you are a God-fearing real American, you know exactly how to think. The lefty Taliban believe that they are so evolved and spiritual, that they know exactly what’s right for you, and all that remains is the framing.
Punchy
What the fuck is all this "Burke" bullshit? I have no idea who/what it is, yet seemingly every post makes at least 3 refs to it. Am I the only one in the dark on this?
Conservatively Liberal
Because you keep spelling words with it. Regarding the goat, I am sure you have trained it to like peanut butter. Also.
Comrade Stuck
@Punchy:
By now. Yes
Dougj has educated us so we’ll never forget.
Would you like a Burkean Bell?
flounder
@John Cole
Anytime the guy get too up on himself, you just have to remind everyone of this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0o6yrdInw6s
Anointing Rush was a brilliant stroke by Obama. The best part of it is Limbaugh’s particular brand of mental illness won’t allow him to sideline himself.
Hillary Rettig / www.lifelongactivist.com
I hope Lakoff would never say just to ignore RL, and if he does, that would not jibe with what I know of his work. That would be strategically naive and suicidal. Lakoff is for strong, decisive responses to the opposition – he’s just suggesting specific linguistic strategies.
to JC – I would be very very very surprised if "things have changed" the way you described. New technologies open up new possibilities, but people (meaning psychology) remains basically the same. Don’t forget that despite the manifold incompetences of both W and the McCain campaign, Obama didn’t get a decisive lead until the economy tanked in such a way as to hit people in their pocketbooks (as you put it, focused their attention). All the massive Republican fail didn’t matter until peole got hit personally. This implies that "yelling socialist" really does work.
The great thing is that the new technology, however, is that it’s inherently democratic and power distributing, and thus ultimately acts against despots and demagogues whether the Chinese communist party, Burmese generals, or Rush Limbaugh. A savvy opposition can use the technology to punch holes in the propaganda bubble that Arendt said was essential for these types to maintaining power. (Do I get some Arendt bells now? :-)) I didn’t think it would happen this fast, though!
cleek
no.
fuck Burke, whoever he was.
burn down the disco
hang the blessed Burkeans
because the philosophy they constantly bray
says nothing to me about my life
Hillary Rettig / www.lifelongactivist.com
El Cid I think you get it exactly right, and with a flair for language!
flounder
@Brachiator
I think the point is to concede Rush his 22 million dittoheads, (i.e. the ‘Bush is awesome’ 22% dead-enders) and make the Republican party absolutely toxic to everyone else by tying them to Rush’s hateful sexist, jingoist, racist hiijinks.
Having the dead enders get even more unhinged is simply bonus on this strategy.
Hillary Rettig / www.lifelongactivist.com
Back in 2004, when I was depressed over the political situation, this woman tells me that "George Bush is there to model for us all what we don’t want, and he’s going to provoke a counter-reaction" and even though I myself tend to be an optimist, I thought she was insanely optimistic, if not delusional. But she was exactly right. Too bad the price was so high – but you’re right, it could have been way worse. Look what’s happening in Britain right now, vis a vis surveillance, for instance.
El Cid
Is something eating my posts?
KCinDC
Isn’t he already sympathetic to his audience?
This strategy is supposed to be good for the Obama and the Democrats. It’s also likely to be good for Limbaugh, since Democratic success increases demand for rants against it among those who don’t like it. What helps Limbaugh, however, is not at all the same as what helps the Republican Party.
Wisdom
Rush has been at the forefront of battling liberal claptrap for nearly two decades. That the mainstream media and the seminar bloggers are hitched to their messiah is no surprise to us. As one hopeful stimulus bill after another fail, Americans will realize who is the charlatan and who is speaking the truth.
The truth always find a way.
Xecklothxayyquou Gilchrist
@flounder: I think the point is to concede Rush his 22 million dittoheads, (i.e. the ‘Bush is awesome’ 22% dead-enders) and make the Republican party absolutely toxic to everyone else by tying them to Rush’s hateful sexist, jingoist, racist hiijinks.
Agreed. Another added bonus is that Democrats can distance themselves from the rabid right and no longer have to think they have to modify their policies to appease a bunch of blood-flecked-foamers who would never vote for them in a million years anyway.
Chuck Butcher
@radish:
This is a freeze move, Republicans look at a coming fork if they move – a position where they have to pick a piece to lose. They can’t lose Rush and they can’t lose what of the Party regulars thay haven’t. They can’t afford to get Primaried from the right but they can’t drift off into complete lunacy and lose the regulars. They are frozen in place and that’s where you want them. They are ineffectual and fear ridden and can’t change it. If the Democrats succeed somewhat by 2010 election the bloodbath will require a re-tooling and they’ll have 2012 staring them in the face for impetus. You’re not going to see a responsible R party without an absolute bloodbath, the safe CDs and safe Sen seats going. Timeline the Sen, 2010 is for 04 Bush coattails, 2012 is 06 survivors.
Xecklothxayyquou Gilchrist
@Wisdom: Rush has been at the forefront of battling liberal claptrap for nearly two decades.
And so bravely has he taken it on that whenever someone mentions the phrase "Fairness Doctrine" he loses his shit.
Piefilter!
jcricket
How did we get all this way and not talk about Rush’s master stroke of making fun of Michael J. Fox. That worked out great for Republicans, didn’t it.
Seriously, the pill-addled, loud-mouthed, likely-child-prostitute-visiting, thrice-divorced idiot can talk as loudly as he wants. When you hitch your ride to Father Coughlin, you don’t end up winning the people.
We don’t need 100% (and never will get it), but if you turn your opposition into an American version of the Taliban or one of those right-wing Israeli parties, you’ll get 60%+ no problem. That works for me.
El Cid
The Democrats will pay severely in November of 2008 for failing to treat Sarah Palin with the respect due to the Commander in Chief of the Alaska National Guard.
Comrade Jake
See I don’t think they’re actually pushing Limbaugh as legitimate. I think they’re pushing him as wingnut. They’re pointing to him and the way the GOP treats him and basically saying "Look, the inmates are running the asylum".
I think this is lethal, lethal stuff from Obama.
flounder
@jcricket
I linked to a youtube video of the the Michael J. Fox story.
I would get a kick out of some CNN or MSNBC host getting a loyalty oath out of some Republican, then playing the video of Rush mocking Michael J. Fox 5 seconds after. First one to pull this off can do lame traditional media stuff for a month afterward and I will still think they are awesome.
Polish the Guillotines
@Chuck Butcher: Look, I’ve got ZERO quarrel with the substance here, just the style. There’s simply no need to advertise. Just do it. Just connect the dots and step out of the way.
I really don’t see the point in bludgeoning the electorate with the contents of the playbook. Not out of any sense of hiding the magician’s tricks, mind you, but just because it’s unnecessary and distracting.
A well-crafted message, well-delivered, does NOT need anyone to diagram the sentences.
Comrade Stuck
Too many variables at work in the 2008 POTUS election to make the claim that massive GOP fail and yelling socialist works. Of these variables, race is likely the main reason Obama didn’t win by much more, imo. I would look at the congressional races of 2006 and 08, and the unprecedented locked bad poll numbers of Bush for three solid years. I think there is a greater dynamic in play geographically relating to ideology. The Bush presidency and the overall ideological tone coming from elected national repubs reached a threshold right around Bush’s SS privatization push, Terry Schiavo and later in 05 Katrina, that turned the worm once and for all for moderate Goppers and blue collar dems in the NE and midwest. The exclamation point was the financial collapse before the election. Southern wingnuts yelling socialist won’t turn that worm back any time soon IMHO.
Chuck Butcher
@Comrade Jake:
The caveate is that things better not be going in the shitter in 2010 or you’ve let loose the Genie.
DougJ
I agree they’re stuck until after 2010 at the earliest. That’s why they should start making changes now. These ships take years to turn around.
JWW
You guys call others wingbats and what not!
Read your own posts and comments. Nothing like a rat in a corner. The entire bunch of you couldn’t put together enough sperm to get a basic fertility sample. You fear everything you can’t put your hands on"most of all your own dicks".
I’m afraid of Moby Dick, I think.
Ash Can
I think Chuck Butcher @ 44 has nailed it with his differentiation between tactic and strategy. One of the assumptions underlying the belief that focusing attention on Limbaugh is a bad thing is that a significant number of people having their attention thus drawn will like — or, at least, respect — what they see. Obama, however, is assuming that enough of the huge number of people in this country who know little or nothing about Limbaugh will take a closer look at him and be not just unimpressed but repulsed by what they see, and by extension look at the GOP in a new and less favorable light as well. In short, in Obama’s view, he’s not legitimizing Limbaugh, he’s de-legitimizing the Republican party. And I think he’s right.
Comrade Darkness
And so bravely has he taken it on that whenever someone mentions the phrase "Fairness Doctrine" he loses his shit.
At $400 million his hazard pay is off the charts. I feel so sorry for him…
Unprofessional? Explain to me exactly how they counter this move? Nothing detailed, just one idea.
They could pull a Clinton. I’m not sure who would do it . . . maybe Gingrich, hell Buchanan is mostly sane, some of the time. They need to co-opt the expected dem position. Using the message of responsibility, but this time aimed at the corporations whose f*ckupedness is currently bringing down the country. Obama, in his panic to patch up the works has NOT addressed accountability. I think this is huge hole that could be exploited.
Chuck Butcher
@Polish the Guillotines:
The pols aren’t really doing any diagraming, it is MSM or being done in places like this. MSM has to look like it has a clue sometimes and here is pretty damn safe unless you think the electorate in general is lurking. I do this kind of thing all the time at my site, my readership is quite small. I also know who reads it and some are players at serious level and yes I do mean at least one person who is regularly noted as a leading light in Congress by national media. I don’t have Balloon Juice stats at hand but I’d bet one day exceeds my monthly. The electorate won’t learn anything from us, some from MSM, mostly they’ll look at the show and laugh at Rush/Republicans.
(I took this individual’s field rep to the side and laughed about his assertion he read me, the rep asked me if I’d known him to lie for political edge and I should check my ISP records, that connected some dots for me) Cole is a better writer and more fun than I am.
Conservatively Liberal
@Polish the Guillotines:
At this point I am sure that some of them are starting to figure it out for themselves. Pointing out the obvious right now will only make them furious if they realize it’s the truth and even if they don’t they will still be furious that we think they are eating each other at the behest of Obama.
I really think Obama knows what he wants but he has to play it as it unfolds, just like a real chess match. You can’t move until your opponent does, so what he does depends on how things unfold. Playing the ‘they listen to Rush’ card when he did helped to make things unfold as they have. I am sure that Obama will adapt his strategy to however it unfolds on the ground. I would not expect many repeats of the same tactic since each move on his part is still dependent on which move they make.
Granted, it is dangerous in some respects but caution hasn’t done much for us in the past and I have to admit that Obama has the right falling apart much faster than I thought possible.
DougJ
@JWW
Your comments aren’t doing much to convince me that conservatives aren’t batshit crazy.
maya
As more and more of Limbaugh’s fan base lose their jobs, homes and wives to present economic realities, the reality of the $400,000, 000 man, who isn’t providing any new jobs, except call screeners, housemaids with street connections, and pharmacy prescription clerks, will start to sink in.
All Obama has to do is compare the tax savings of Americans with $250k or less incomes with the present tax and future tax differences of Rush’s income with his plan and the math will speak for itself. Rush is simply looking out for himself.
Shouldn’t be too hard to pie graph.
Comrade Stuck
@JWW:
Your afraid of the little green men kicking your ass day in and day out. Go away nutball!
Chuck Butcher
@Comrade Darkness:
That’s the point of a freeze move, a fork takes a piece, a freeze denies position. Dems don’t need either the Rush or the regulars, they need the indies and light weight Rs and this is that move. Besides, accountability kills their plutocrat and wannbe plutocrat hold. But that’s not the point, by trapping them into publicly holding the Rushies you deny them the middle, you deny them access to make ‘reasonable’ reaches to them.
I’ll say again that this is pretty much a confluence of circumstances and opportunism rather than the outcome of long term strategy other than Obama’s likeableness as strategy.
Ash Can
@Wisdom:
Which is exactly what’s happening now. It amazes me how many people can’t figure that out.
Mike in NC
He’s done such a magnificient job hasn’t he? But it’s really all about the payoff. Laughing all the way to the bank while the rubes lick their sores.
Chuck Butcher
@Ash Can:
See CPAC on national media, wow. Tucker Carlson says something reasonable and gets booed, you know about facts. This is what is getting air time. Rush gets "national address" and if that’s not gold. This is the stuff of LTEs and neighbor conversations. It is the stuff you dream of. It is better than the R hanging of the Brady HGC and god and gays around D necks (and bjs).
You all have a newspaper, use the LTE to tie Rush to their necks, tightly.
Leo
I don’t think they could do that yet. By the time Clinton ran in ’92 Democrats had been out of the White House for 20 of the previous 24 years. The liberal base had a long time to come to terms with the fact that the ’60s were over. They were desperate to win one and were willing to make ideological compromises to do it.
The conservative base isn’t where the liberal base was in ’92. They haven’t accepted that they need to compromise to win. Any Republican who tries to co-opt the Democratic agenda right now simply won’t be accepted.
nylund
Cleek. The Smiths reference made me smile. Thanks for that.
Martin
Precisely. Look at Specter, Snow, Collins. Obama is inviting them to be moderates, and they’re getting pilloried from the right for participating. Threats of primary challengers from the party and withholding party money for their re-election. Any Republican Senator from a state that Obama carried and anyone in a house district that Obama won that are up for election in 2010 are stuck.
Obama will keep specifically inviting those Republicans to play. It’s an easy bipartisan play for Obama that has a reasonable chance of working, and if it doesn’t, that just puts the spotlight on those people with the voters at home. Plus it marginalizes the GOP leadership by suggesting that they have no real power. With a closer margin in the senate, that’d be much harder to do, but Obama is just picking off pawns here – reducing the GOP power bit by bit.
And for those that think Rush is skilled at this – he’s not. Obama isn’t attacking Rush. Obama is actually amplifying Rush’s message and building him up. He’s not trying to silence Rush but to give him even more power. That’s something Dems haven’t tried before.
Martin
2004: Permanent Republican Majority
That was the promise to the GOP rank and file. They still want it – and you don’t get it through compromise.
Polish the Guillotines
@Chuck Butcher:
Fair enough. I can accept that premise.
Chuck Butcher
This reminds me of the French looking at the Civil War and WWI and building the Maginot Line. The Republicans are watching Obama’s mechanized infantry sweeping around them and trying Lee v Grant – again.
Chuck Butcher
@Polish the Guillotines:
Thanks PtG, I also should amp myself down a bit in saying no, no. Horseshit was gratuitous and extraneous.
BombIranForChrist
I think we should give Rush as much power as possible.
Lakoff’s book was fine, but it’s just so much mental masturbation. Obama didn’t need it to win and he doesn’t need it now.
Comrade Jake
@Chuck Butcher:
What genie would that be Chuck? We’re talking about the same dude who pushed Sarah Palin to the top of the VP list. If events allow Rush to say "see, I was RIGHT" in 2010 (and let’s face it, he’s going to say that no matter what happens), then what genie has Obama let out?
Rush has good instincts for conservative radio, not national politics. You want that asshat calling the shots for the other team. That’s the whole point.
Wile E. Quixote
@Keith
I don’t know. The last time that Rush got busted for pills the wingnutteria fell all over themselves talking about how mean liberals were for making fun of Rush because of his drug problem and how horrible it was that Rush had chronic pain problems and how this just showed what horrible hypocrites liberals were because they said that they were compassionate but then turned around and made fun of Rush because of he was taking these pills for his chronic pain problem. If Limbaugh falls off the wagon again his audience will be chock full of sympathy for him and say that Rush had to do the drugs because he’s in such pain about what Obama and the liberals are doing to America.
What gets me about Rush’s Oxycontin abuse is how he was doing. I know that everyone has different tolerances for pharmaceuticals, but Oxycontin is a seriously powerful drug. When I got out of the hospital six years ago after having my leg amputated below the knee the most I ever took in a day was 10, 5mg tablets. This basically turned me into something resembling a large, pink, one legged houseplant, "It’s OK, just vacuum around him, he won’t mind". I was either in bed asleep or on the couch zoned out in front of the TV, and I’m not a small guy. According to the woman who was selling him the stuff he was popping up to 30 a day. It’s amazing to me, and depressing, that the fat bastard is still breathing.
Chuck Butcher
Oh, Obama used it. He didn’t allow himself to get caught in defensive positions, he proposed, he offered, he defined himself. His campaign spent little time or effort on "no I’m not" things, it was "I believe, I will."
There was plenty of defensive thinking being done, mostly in the pre-emptive catagory, I was a part of some of it. Half a national press release was taken from an outline of mine that was designed as a pre-emptive defense. You have to do it all, you can’t get caught up in being frozen. Lakoff’s stuff is for what it’s designed for, other pieces are for other things. Democrats failed horridly for years at framing, Obama did it wonderfully. The nay sayers who point to the economic meltdown forget that it was that framing that made the inexperienced black guy more trusted than the old white guy POW.
Polish the Guillotines
@Chuck Butcher: No harm, no foul. I was on whiskey sour #2 when I originally posted.
Chuck Butcher
@Comrade Jake:
Oh that would be the genie of we don’t have a fucking clue. We had better be pretty much right because we’re making big bets we are. The genie would be that the Sarah Palins are right.
I’m an advocate of the tactic of using Rush for all he’s worth because I simply don’t see another course that will keep us out of the shitter than the one we’re using (oh I have my disagreements) and we might as well double down. I’m an advocate of beating them until they’re reasonable or dead, but playing rough has risks. We now own the fixing of this mess.
I want at least two meaningful parties and what we’ve got now are the enablers of the plutocrats and theocrats versus everybody else and that’s bad for the Republic.
JasonF
What Lakoff doesn’t seem to understand or doesn’t seem to want to acknowledge is that Rush is the frame. Previously, we were talking about the Republican Party — the party of Lincoln, of Teddy Roosevelt, of Ronald Reagan. The party that saved the union and defeated communism. It’s a concept with enough built-in gravitas that they could come out and say that the solution to our economic woes is giving more tax breaks the richest 1% of our country, and because it’s coming from THE REPUBLICAN PARTY, it is taken seriously. But reframe the Republican Party as the Rush Limbaugh Party, and suddenly the gravitas of 150 years of history is replaced with the idea of a political party beholden to a sweaty drug addict who makes fun of Parkinson’s patients.
Sure, Coke doesn’t run commercials that say, explicitly, "Coke is better than Pepsi." But if they could get away with it, you can bet your bottom dollar that they would air ads explicitly comparing "Coke" to "Pissy," because if Pepsi has an ounce of common sense, they do not want to be rebranded as "Pissy." And if the GOP has an ounce of common sense (the jury is still out on that one), they do not want to be rebranded as the Rush Limbaugh Party.
MNPundit
That’s the point though. You want people to think Rush has the most power for the right because he is an unpopular and offensive person. The POINT is to associate that with the GOP. Emmanuel knows exactly what effect telling people not to think of Rush will be–he’s counting on it.
JGabriel
DougJ:
While I’m in agreement with that sentiment, especially as it relates to Limbaugh, we would be remiss not to keep an old adage in mind as well: Never argue with oxycontin-addicted, egomaniacal, pedophiliac, sex-tourist fools; people might not know the difference.
.
Conservatively Liberal
@JGabriel:
I think that there is no need to argue with Limpballs directly, nor do I see anyone on the left doing so. When the media asks why the Republicans are not playing ball with Obama, all Team Obama is doing is pointing at Rush. The press has taken it from there, as expected. Right now a Repub can’t get in front of a camera without being asked about Rush. That makes it pretty hard for them to get the message out and I see it is working beautifully.
Why argue with the addict and his minions when they can argue amongst themselves? Obama pulled it off and the press is on it. I expect this week is going to be pretty interesting to see unfold.
Hell, I can’t believe this has been happening over the weekend. Next week ought to be nuts.
JGabriel
@Conservatively Liberal:
CL, I agree. I’m just reminding us to bear it in mind.
.
Comrade Baron Elmo
Many good points in this thread, but I must play the film snob and object to the above slur on the great Fatty Arbuckle… who was both a comic genius and a real sweetheart of a guy, and whose career was unjustly wrecked by a ginned-up scandal that William Randolph Hearst (a far better model for Rush, by the way) relentlessly pimped for newspaper sales.
Fatty deserves far better than casual comparisons to the porcine shitbucket that is Rush Limbaugh. So there.
Napoleon
Baiting Rush is the smartest thing the Democrats have done politically in the last 70 years. The only thing I wonder is why it took this long.
chopper
that’s the thing. rush’s biggest weakness is his biggest strength – he says whatever he wants to. he’s not a politician, he’s a peanut-gallery critic. this has worked well for him for a long time, but now that there’s a serious power vacuum in the GOP the dems are smart to stoke his giant ego into thinking he can be the titular head of the party.
i mean, come on. if obama pulls this off he’ll have redefined the GOP as led by a 13 year old kid and a radio shock jock. how unserious would that party look?
exactly. he’s like billo, he always sounds good when he controls the mic. remember when he went on letterman for the first and only time? letterman cleaned his clock with one line and rushbo decided to never do an interview like that again. he’s only good when he controls the medium, and open politics aint a medium he controls.
JGabriel
Chopper:
Wait, you mean Rush can’t handle Socratic debate? I’m crestfallen.
.
Panurge
The ’60s, they say, are over, but the ’50s just won’t die. Why not?
Hillary Rettig / www.lifelongactivist.com
I think Obama is a natural framer. His most flagrant error, the "clinging to guns and gods" thing, was an unusual and egregious deviation from the framing principles which otherwise come naturally to him.
btw, one big difference between liberal (or Obama) and conservative framing is that the former is grounded in empathy, or at least an empathetic world view, whereas the latter is just manipulation. I suspect that even the manipulator Clinton really meant it, at least somewhat, when he said he felt people’s pain – whereas Bush/Rove/Cheney are, to quote Vonnegut, psychopathic personalities who care about no one but maybe themselves and their immediate circle.
Hey, do I get some Vonnegut bells now? :-)
Comrade Darkness
@Panurge, un-stoned minds remember things better?
Hillary Rettig / www.lifelongactivist.com
i think gabriel had the answer to this one: that if Coke tried that, it would risk itself being categorized or framed as also being Pissy. And why do you say Coke can’t run ads comparing itself to Pepsi? They might not be able to use the other company’s name, but they could surely do comparison ads. Companies used to do that all the time, and it’s still a downmarket approach, but it’s not considered quality or effective advertising as it degrades the entire industry. If it were, you would see those ads at the SuperBowl.
Oldnovice
I am SO in agreement, Doug, on your statement about Lakoff thinking it a mistake for Barack to call out Rush. Rather than accept Lakoff’s "frame", looks to me like Barack is starting his own "frame".