Bush-bashing never goes out of style — 11 Comments
Neo,
A good read. In your quote from Updike:
Cambridge professors and Manhattan lawyers and their guitar-strumming children thought they could run the country and the world better than this lugubrious bohunk from Texas.
It’s interesting to note that this is still the motivating imperative of the left.
Also IMO a good companion piece to yoiur article is Janice Fiamengo’s The Black Book of th4 Left: Volume II which reviews David Horowitz’s latest publication.
We on the right don’t help ourselves when WE bash Bush. I rarely see a rightist thread critical of Obama and/or the Democrats that doesn’t include “but of course Bush was bad about such-and-such” or “and our Republican brethren aren’t better.”
On the other hand, I rarely read a leftist thread that has any critical comments about the current administration or other Democrats.
We aren’t exactly helping ourselves.
OldFert (4:16 pm),
Many-to-most of us have the ability to be honest and self-reflective, and are willing to engage in honest conversation. Advantage *them*.
M J R (4:24) — Advantage *them*.
Sadly, yes. The left has learned well the benefits of using stonewalling, half (or non-) truths, obscuring the facts, or just not answering the question posed.
I think we’ll see a lot more of that when/if investigations into Benghazi, IRS, etc. really get moving. We already know how successful it was with fast and furious, Whitewater, the 900 files, and oh-so-many things.
I call the Alinsky Rule 12-based “of course Bush was worse” practice by Democrats their pegging (like currency evaluation) defense strategy.
As you explain, it works. Therefore, as long as the pegging defense strategy is effective, the social-political effect of criticizing Obama (and Democrats by extension) on issues like the Benghazi killings falls short. The contextual frame is wrong. The Democrats’ pegging defense needs to be broken in order for criticisms of Obama to find enough purchase to be effective in the narrative contest for the zeitgeist.
The way I’ve proposed to break the Dems pegging defense is by rehabilitating Bush’s legacy in the popular narrative with a 3-prong counter-attack formula that flips the script on the Democrats. Again:
1. Lay the foundation that Bush was right and justified.
2. From that baseline, set that the Democrats bamboozled America for the sake of self-interests that have harmed the nation and American leadership.
3. In comparison to rehabilitated Bush, Obama is wrong and harmful.
If the counter works, you not only break the pegging defense, you flip the script so now the pegging works against Obama and the Dems, aikido-style.
What’s the best pressure point for the 3-prong counter-attack to flip the script?
Easy: Obama’s foreign affairs and the false narrative of the Iraq mission.
Why: There’s greater cross-spectrum common interest in foreign policy, the obvious failure of foreign affairs under Obama is a hot-button issue which opens the door to revisit the popular narrative of the Iraq mission, the truth of the Iraq mission is open source and straightforward, and the false narrative of the Iraq mission is the foundational, fundamental lie that the Democrats used to gain advantage over the Republicans.
More, the false narrative of the Iraq mission is heightened in relevance because it’s been used to guide Obama’s foreign policy, with predictably disastrous result.
The sharp contrast makes for an effective re-frame.
It’s not a magic cure by itself, of course, but if the Right can re-frame by turning that one switch in the zeitgeist, the lynchpin can be pulled and the rest can follow – assuming the necessary activist capability is developed to follow through.
OldFert: “We on the right don’t help ourselves when WE bash Bush.”
Indeed. In the same way that Democrats have used the anti-Bush propaganda to further their partisan ambition, elements on the Right have deliberately chosen to piggyback on the Dems/Left in a bid to ideologically purify the Right the way they desire.
The anti-Bush people on the Right who work in tandem with the Left need to be addressed as well.
Contra leftists, the Truth is the only thing that matters. Or, at least the most important thing.
The truth is that Bush had good and bad points. He wasn’t our best president, but he wasn’t our worst. The worst, of course, is Obama. (TeeHee)
As far as leftist credulity goes, there’s no fixing stupid. There’s also no fixing the willfully ignorant. “Forget it, Jake. It’s Chinatown.”
Leftists are always eventually hoist on their own petard because what they believe isn’t true.
Thank you for this piece, N-Neocon. That good and great man deserves defense. He won’t—even yet—answer the midget twits who bash him and his ACCOMPLISHMENTS. It has long been an SOP LIE of the Democrat-Lib-Left that GWB handed the ‘Bama two huge War problems. that is lying bull***t in the extreme. He gave His Infantile Majesty a MASSIVE VICTORY in Iraq. Yes, it was hard fought and costly, but it was WON and a fledgling republic was taking hold. It only required solid back-up and follow through. As in Korea and Germany. Duuuhhhhh…!!
Instead The Boy King ABANDONED our Victory and Iraq is living through Hell as I write this.
LOATHSOME.
Many-to-most of us have the ability to be honest and self-reflective, and are willing to engage in honest conversation. Advantage *them*.
They put aside their differences to fight their foe, we don’t.
Also, I think there is some on our side who try to distance themselves from Bush, or whatever.
And there is a “pox on both houses” attitude among many.
So Updike was on the “wrong side” of the war. By which I read, the US side; therefore, the NVNs were on the “right side” of the war. What self-deluded fools these Leftists be!
The Leftist alliance wouldn’t be an alliance if they didn’t come together to fight a common foe. They’d just be a bunch of Islamo child rapists and slave traffickers.
The only person talking about an anti Left alliance is that guy from New Zealand, the all star party ticket person.
Leave a Reply
HTML tags allowed in your
comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>
Neo,
A good read. In your quote from Updike:
It’s interesting to note that this is still the motivating imperative of the left.
Also IMO a good companion piece to yoiur article is Janice Fiamengo’s The Black Book of th4 Left: Volume II which reviews David Horowitz’s latest publication.
We on the right don’t help ourselves when WE bash Bush. I rarely see a rightist thread critical of Obama and/or the Democrats that doesn’t include “but of course Bush was bad about such-and-such” or “and our Republican brethren aren’t better.”
On the other hand, I rarely read a leftist thread that has any critical comments about the current administration or other Democrats.
We aren’t exactly helping ourselves.
OldFert (4:16 pm),
Many-to-most of us have the ability to be honest and self-reflective, and are willing to engage in honest conversation. Advantage *them*.
M J R (4:24) — Advantage *them*.
Sadly, yes. The left has learned well the benefits of using stonewalling, half (or non-) truths, obscuring the facts, or just not answering the question posed.
I think we’ll see a lot more of that when/if investigations into Benghazi, IRS, etc. really get moving. We already know how successful it was with fast and furious, Whitewater, the 900 files, and oh-so-many things.
Neo,
Your column appears to expand on your reaction, in response to Ymarsakar, to this exchange:
http://neoneocon.com/2014/05/09/the-times-whips-up-its-partys-fury/#comment-773217
I call the Alinsky Rule 12-based “of course Bush was worse” practice by Democrats their pegging (like currency evaluation) defense strategy.
As you explain, it works. Therefore, as long as the pegging defense strategy is effective, the social-political effect of criticizing Obama (and Democrats by extension) on issues like the Benghazi killings falls short. The contextual frame is wrong. The Democrats’ pegging defense needs to be broken in order for criticisms of Obama to find enough purchase to be effective in the narrative contest for the zeitgeist.
The way I’ve proposed to break the Dems pegging defense is by rehabilitating Bush’s legacy in the popular narrative with a 3-prong counter-attack formula that flips the script on the Democrats. Again:
1. Lay the foundation that Bush was right and justified.
2. From that baseline, set that the Democrats bamboozled America for the sake of self-interests that have harmed the nation and American leadership.
3. In comparison to rehabilitated Bush, Obama is wrong and harmful.
If the counter works, you not only break the pegging defense, you flip the script so now the pegging works against Obama and the Dems, aikido-style.
What’s the best pressure point for the 3-prong counter-attack to flip the script?
Easy: Obama’s foreign affairs and the false narrative of the Iraq mission.
Why: There’s greater cross-spectrum common interest in foreign policy, the obvious failure of foreign affairs under Obama is a hot-button issue which opens the door to revisit the popular narrative of the Iraq mission, the truth of the Iraq mission is open source and straightforward, and the false narrative of the Iraq mission is the foundational, fundamental lie that the Democrats used to gain advantage over the Republicans.
More, the false narrative of the Iraq mission is heightened in relevance because it’s been used to guide Obama’s foreign policy, with predictably disastrous result.
The sharp contrast makes for an effective re-frame.
It’s not a magic cure by itself, of course, but if the Right can re-frame by turning that one switch in the zeitgeist, the lynchpin can be pulled and the rest can follow – assuming the necessary activist capability is developed to follow through.
OldFert: “We on the right don’t help ourselves when WE bash Bush.”
Indeed. In the same way that Democrats have used the anti-Bush propaganda to further their partisan ambition, elements on the Right have deliberately chosen to piggyback on the Dems/Left in a bid to ideologically purify the Right the way they desire.
The anti-Bush people on the Right who work in tandem with the Left need to be addressed as well.
Contra leftists, the Truth is the only thing that matters. Or, at least the most important thing.
The truth is that Bush had good and bad points. He wasn’t our best president, but he wasn’t our worst. The worst, of course, is Obama. (TeeHee)
As far as leftist credulity goes, there’s no fixing stupid. There’s also no fixing the willfully ignorant. “Forget it, Jake. It’s Chinatown.”
Leftists are always eventually hoist on their own petard because what they believe isn’t true.
Thank you for this piece, N-Neocon. That good and great man deserves defense. He won’t—even yet—answer the midget twits who bash him and his ACCOMPLISHMENTS. It has long been an SOP LIE of the Democrat-Lib-Left that GWB handed the ‘Bama two huge War problems. that is lying bull***t in the extreme. He gave His Infantile Majesty a MASSIVE VICTORY in Iraq. Yes, it was hard fought and costly, but it was WON and a fledgling republic was taking hold. It only required solid back-up and follow through. As in Korea and Germany. Duuuhhhhh…!!
Instead The Boy King ABANDONED our Victory and Iraq is living through Hell as I write this.
LOATHSOME.
They put aside their differences to fight their foe, we don’t.
Also, I think there is some on our side who try to distance themselves from Bush, or whatever.
And there is a “pox on both houses” attitude among many.
So Updike was on the “wrong side” of the war. By which I read, the US side; therefore, the NVNs were on the “right side” of the war. What self-deluded fools these Leftists be!
The Leftist alliance wouldn’t be an alliance if they didn’t come together to fight a common foe. They’d just be a bunch of Islamo child rapists and slave traffickers.
The only person talking about an anti Left alliance is that guy from New Zealand, the all star party ticket person.