I glanced at CSPAN and noticed that the House is in session and members are currently making one-minute speeches. I’ve been in and out walking around with the baby on this fine spring day, so I’ve haven’t paid close attention. But it appears that the Republicans are giving a series of short speeches on the procedural decision to have one vote on the health care bill rather than two. They are saying this option was never mentioned in Schoolhouse Rock, that it violates the Constitution, that the Founding Fathers are overturning in their graves, and Tom McClintock gravely warned that generations of Americans have defended the Constitution and that we shouldn’t think this generation will be any different (meaning what?).
I do believe the Republicans have outdone themselves in the hypocrisy department since they are much more fond of using the procedure than Democrats. That goes for reconciliation, too.
I should not have to point out that IOKIYAR. I mean, really Booman.
Every day is a personal best for the Reps. And bonus points for “forgetting” that their bestest friend ever, the filibuster, is never mentioned in the Constitution either. Any bets on how many “journalists” will be mentioning that they’re telling nonstop lies again?
Ummm. Rachel? Keith? That’s about it. CNN will go to their new guy Eric the Red for unbiased reporting from the best political team in the business.
Sometimes I wonder if the craziness of right-wing ideology is intentional: as though it triggers a particular brain area, causing a kind of fugue-like trance. The mind is forced to grapple with a tendency of magical thinking which most people have hardly mastered in themselves. There’s a kind of permanent mindfuck in every attempt at self-righteousness.
Yglesias’ description of the manifold contradictions in neo-con rhetoric about Israel is characteristic:
“On the one hand, the United States shouldn’t try to boss Israel around. But on the other hand, the United States should make Israel its largest recipient of foreign aid. On the one hand, Israel is blameless because of the implacable hostility of the Arabs. But on the other hand, America’s relationship with Israel in no way imperils our relationship with these very same Arabs. On the one hand, America shouldn’t care about the broader regional implications of the US-Israeli relationship. But on the other hand, America should seek military hegemony in the whole Persian Gulf region.”
Whatever persuasive power these people have depends on airtight authoritarianism. Any attempt to spell out the reason of their arguments is fruitless. Any contextualization (the “critical thinking” taught in high school), or memory of past statements is hopelessly lost in a welter of extreme and schizophrenic rhetoric. What they call arguments are simply pernicious, manipulative blather.
Of course it’s intentional. It’s a sucker punch to the logical brain, which then thinks “I can’t believe they said that.” It leaves the opponent as flustered as Al Gore facing Bush’s blatant lies.
I agree, but it’s not just a sucker punch. I’m also trying to explain why republican rhetoric is weirdly fascinating to me, and perhaps many others, totally apart from the emotional manipulation. It has a mesmerizing quality, which I guess is obvious in a way. It’s an attempt to psychologically dominate the audience, in the manner of abusive relationships, cult-organizations, interrogations, etc. So, the absolute refusal, for instance, to recognize exploded lies. It’s orwellian of course but it is not maintained by any overt organization. There is no meta-theory of state as explained in say “1984”. So it’s a complex and very interesting psychic phenomenon.
Probably related to the genetic reasons we’re drawn to big eyes in big heads (ie Japanese animation, baby animals, and most “cute” dolls and such). We’re programmed to be attracted to whatever triggers the set of responses that says “child”. An interview with Palin, for example, is pretty exactly the same as quizzing a 4-year-old.
Since she, and her kind, are not 4-year-olds, a kind of cognitive dissonance sets in as conditioned reflex battles with reality. Hence the fascination. Hence Homer Simpson (who is, I believe, taken seriously by many of the teabagger kind).
.
(TIME) – Across the country, groups on all sides of the health care reform debate have been targeting swing members of Congress with costly ad campaigns. Over the coming week, as the House gears up to take a final, deciding vote on reform, issue-ad spending by corporations, trade groups, unions and advocacy organizations may top $24 million, adding to the estimated $200 million that has already been spent on health care advocacy ads.
The ad running in Smith’s district, which was paid for by an offshoot of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, is part of a 17-state campaign slated to cost between $4 million and $10 million. Another conservative group, the American Future Fund, is running ads in 18 House districts that compares health care reform to a pig wearing lipstick before flashing a phone number. America’s Health Insurance Plans, the industry trade group, has its own television campaign. Another secretive group called the League of American Voters, which works with former Bill Clinton adviser Dick Morris, is running additional ads targeting Democrats who may support “[President] Obama and [House Speaker] Pelosi’s health care takeover.”
Top 10 Health-Care-Reform Fight Ads
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."
Heard some Republican yahoo on the news today screaming about a government takeover of health care. What nonsense! If it were a government takeover of health care, I would support it instead of opposing it. I bet Kucinich would support it too.
Boolean Algebra for analyzing Republican speeches:
Let R be a Republican talking point.
Let T be the truth.
Then
T=~R