Every time there’s a tragedy the Democrats trot out sympathetic looking people to stand behind them as they declare how they will violate our rights to make us all safer, or more secure. The media eats it all up, and our liberties are eroded at the same time our children are saddled with more debt. The Democrats, commies that they are these days, are quite skilled at agitprop. If the Republicans want to have any chance to win elections in the future they might want to take notes.
Presidents figured out the utility of a prominent, unelected spokesman about 80 years ago, when Stephen Early did it for Franklin Roosevelt. The current incarnation, Jay Carney, may be the most phlegmatic White House spokesman ever. But on any given day on any issue, he commandeers airtime across the cable TV and media universe. With a personality flatter than a cold pancake, he simply states the president’s position. Reporters for media outlets around the world restate that position for their audiences. You don’t have to believe it or like it. But from Jay Carney’s lips to your screen, inbox and RSS feed, you get it.
Past presidents had Tony Snow, Mike McCurry, Marlin Fitzwater, Jody Powell, Pierre Salinger. These presidential press secretaries became personages in their own right, conveying institutional credibility without being a political challenge to the leaders they serve.
Mitch McConnell and John Boehner have been trying to serve both functions—leader and spokesman. It can’t work. I can think of virtually no other walk of life other than Congress in which the leaders of organizations assume the job of stating their institution’s position on everything. Cabinet secretaries, CEOs, generals, university presidents, cardinals—nobody does that anymore. A leader speaks when the stakes or moment require it.
Read the whole thing if you can. Obama has his current “Baghdad Bob,” also known as Jay Carney. The GOP needs their own version, unless they really want to become the completely irrelevant Democrat-lite party that will sit by as they watch this republic destroyed. Maybe if they had their own “Baghdad Bob” they could get a message across, rather than caving at every opportunity.
There’s only so much bloggers can do here. Then again, maybe the GOP could learn a thing or two from The People’s Cube. Oh, and hey, at least conservatives would have the truth on their side. Then again, why shouldn’t they just lie? The Democrats do it every day.
Update: Linked by Big Pulpit – thanks!
[...] The GOP Should Become Versed In Agitprop – Lonely Conservative [...]
Like or Dislike:
0
The Brits have been playing the public for fools for a long time.
Here is a simple fact. If guns had anything to do with crime then rural and suburban white people would have the highest crime rate. But instead, they have the Lowest crime rate. The Highest crime rate is in cities with over 500,000.
Malcolm’s “guns and violence” on page 233:
“The results of a study on race and crime that Scotland Yard undertook more than twenty years ago ‘are closely guarded.’ … In July 2000 … Scotland Yard broke with precedent and disclosed that shootings in the black community accounted for nearly THREE QUARTERS of gun crime in London … mostly in disputes over drugs.” Gee. I suppose I never would have known that unless Scotland Yard broke with precedent. Just like I never would have known that Gangs are not spread evenly over Chicago unless the NY Times told me that.
Allow me a general remark: The most effective subversives are the ones you think you can trust. You know, they are a bit conservative, they don’t run off at the mouth about the Dictatorship of the Proletariat; they don’t make intemperate remarks, and keep their nose clean. Sorta like KIM PHILBY and ALGER HISS. Sometimes the worst enemy looks OK. That is why the gun control issue is not about Hitler or Stalin … instead, it is about what the English did to totally disarm everybody. They are the ones who push the idea that ‘the state should have a monopoly on the use of force’. Well – if that was American policy, then how come Americans have hundreds of millions of guns ? I want to know where each politician or bureaucrat stands on this issue, and that, if they are for state monopoly, it should be grounds for Instant Removal From Office, and disqualify running for office, since they can not adhere to the Constitution.
Keep that in mind when these politicians get up there and claim that guns are the problem. But what about all those who throw out a lot of irrelevant distractions, and say nothing about what is actually relevant ? That too is part of how the little English game is played. Like how to get people to spin their wheels at a critical time.
Like or Dislike:
1
check out the NY Times OP ed by the supposedly conservative Australian Prime Minister John Howard ” I went after guns, Obama can too ”
Keep your eye on the bouncing ball. While y’all blabber about how many rounds, these clowns – under the GUISE of BEING CONSERVATIVE – disarmed Australia.
Do you smell a rat ? Did the Aussies smell a rat ?? Did the Brits smell a rat ???
Like or Dislike:
1
Always remember that the Sullivan Act, New York City’s highly touted restrictive gun law was written by one of history’s most corrupt, dishonest, and foul politicians. The purpose of the law was to leave law abiding people helpless, as the worst gangs, allies of Sullivan, were armed to the teeth with arsenals of guns. This was under the guise of making the city safer. Fooled you again, you law abiding fools.
Like or Dislike:
2