Bush and nuance. Bush and math. His ploy.

[gulliver]

Plainly stated, Bush does awful things but leaves himself a plausible argument -- not a good argument, mind you, a plausible argument. Then he simply disparages all counter-argument as too nuanced, as bean counting, as fuzzy math. Thanks to Bush's all-too-successful ploy, ignorant or deceptively simplistic arguments now count as plain-spoken, while careful reasoning is dismissed as nuance.

Do we owe this to "Slick Willie" Clinton? Rather, do we owe this to the fact that we had a president whose enemies could do nothing but disparage his solid reasoning as "slick?"

The Republican movement against government seems to apply not just to the federal government but to the rules of thought itself. An ignoramus for a president? Why not? There is no difference between an ignoramus and a wise leader that isn't just a matter of nuance.

[shockingelk]

1. Where's the logic in his main campaign claim

His battle cry is that he's made America safer. The only evidence he can provide is the vast number of times he's made the claim.

[gulliver]

2. "Evidence? What are you? A bean counter?..."

...Bush might say. "Americans know that they are safer! They don't need some government bean counter to tell them they are safer!"

(See what I mean. Bush's style is just raw poison and demagoguery, but it works.)

[unblock]

3. it's the right-wing media, stupid

actually, it's still the economy, stupid.

but my point is, bush's entire political life has depended on, and takes full advantage of, the media being fully in the pocket of the right-wing.

of course, he nurtures this very effectively. he gets buddy-buddy with members of the press, the better to bias their views. he punishes those who print unkind stories. he spoon-feeds them easy stories. he makes their jobs easy and enjoyable, as long as they don't go looking for the scoop of the century.

but throughout his career, and most notably from the 2000 campaign forward, bush has relied on the press doing his bidding by dwelling on trivia when it comes to his opponent, and holding his opponent to impossible standards of perfection, while glossing over glaring flaws and mishaps when it comes to bush.

it's quite obvious to anyone hanging out at du that there's more than enough out there to BURY bush, politically, 100 times over. that this doesn't happen is compelling evidence of the right-wing control over the media.

they are toying with us. the only reason we see negative stories at all in the more popular press is because the media does want a bit of excitement in the campaign. no doubt the bush campaign would prefer to play the role of the underdog anyway. let's just hope they have misunderestimated kerry and edwards....

[gulliver]

4. There is no way to know who to trust.

Clearly, part of the allegedly unbiased media is completely in the hands of right wing. Fox News and the Washington Times are the best examples.

CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, WashPo, and the NYT are probably not controlled by the right wing directly, IMO. That is, they don't take marching orders from the right wing. But they do refuse to play referee, fact checker, and investigator.

I believe that is partly market driven. People show interest in conflict, not in education or in taking responsibility as citizens. It is cheap to report that one person said the Earth is flat and another "disputed it." It is expensive and dicey to stand up for the round Earth argument.

IMO, it isn't so much that the reporter's right wing boss ordered that the round Earth argument be "balanced" as a matter of "fairness" with flat Earth argument. Rather, the reporter simply does not want to risk offending or boring readers by attempting to educate them.

I think the media is starting to get a sense of itself again. I don't think the legitimate media really knew what to do with a monstrosity like Fox News. Attack it? But it's the press! I might want a job there some day. Maybe Fox is not an aberration but the wave of things to come. I better leave it alone for a while...

Now I think the cat is starting to come out of the bag, and Fox is heading for some well deserved tough sledding.

[Cleita]

5. Read the importance that Hitler placed on propaganda and

how it should be spread in "Mein Kampf". He actually said that the English and Americans knew how to spread propaganda because they didn't try to present a logical argument, but just picked a few resonant slogans, repeated them over and over and eventually the weak-minded would accept them. Yes, he praised the British and Americans for being better at this than the Germans.

[TrogL]

6. You nailed it

That's what he's gonna do in the debates. He'll accuse Kerry of ivory-tower-ism and trot out his home-spun, black and white gibberish.