[Cross-posted in comments at Open Left, where Paul Rosenberg wishes the Dems would take the counsel of the one-time authority on political framing.]
For the sake of argument, let's accept the Creative-Class consensus that Hillary Clinton is an egocentric, party-destroying, racist she-monster that needed to be stopped at all costs.
Still, Lakoff's fawning assessment of Obama and his nouveau-triangulation remains one of the most idiotic posts written in the course of the campaign.
I'm surprised he stopped short of pointing out that there are two "I's" in "Hillary Clinton," and none in "Barack Obama."
Luntz and Rove — plus Lee Atwater's ghost on steroids — couldn't have done a more vigorous job of re-legitimizing the Reagan-Republican brand during its historic down year than Obama did. And there's Mr. Framing cheering like a David Cassidy fan in 1972, as the Overton Window
gets a big, hopey shove to the right, and the greatest orator since Aaron blows a two-year opportunity to sell real progressive agendas -- like the single-payer healthcare he once claimed to support -- to an American public hungry for real change.
Sorry, I think Prof. Lakoff has a little 'splaining to do before he's accepted as a clear-eyed expert on such topics anymore.
- vastleft's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Front page
Comments
And now
many of "the precious'" boosters are thinking off to the right to stay in line with "the precious"
This really is a nightmare.
Cal, any linky goodness to examples of what you're referring to?
?
No links
the boosters who are going along, against their own core values, are people in the county party who were shameless supporters and who implied that people like me were unable to understand the strategy for change, the evilness of HRC, etc. Throw in hints from time to time about racism and a picture of local support in my neck of the woods comes to light.
Now I hear statements like: .. well the banks are too big to fail and health coverage reform is really, really complicated after all and we can't just up and leave Iraq and squander all past efforts there, etc.
All personal experience.
Yep. I hear the same stuff.
Had dinner with a liberal journalist tonight.
"Obama has done more in 5 months that Bush did in 8 years."
"He had to bail out the banks or unemployment would have gone even higher."
"The problem isn't just the banks but greedy people that took out mortgages they couldn't afford."
"Even if it's not the ideal solution, at least he's being totally transparent about it."
This is a smart woman and this is what she was passionately saying during dinner.
"If we have to have a dictator, who better than Obama"
- progressive blog commentator
Some Linky Goodness
for your "liberal" journalist friend
Angelo Mazilo article that your friend should read to get some real perspective.
making this statement:
tells me that he/she has the analytical "skills" of the typical Obama supporter.
No offense to your friend intended.
I'm not a fan of the construction
"typical Obama supporter."
Do we know what the typical Obama supporter is like? Is there a typical Obama supporter?
However, perhaps we know a thing or two about what the typical Obama fan is like, if you appreciate the difference. And I hope you do!
In reality
Lakoff has snookered the neediest among us: those that have such little confidence and such inept social skills that they cannot frame their own thoughts and ideas.
There are many ways of communicating but the most important and basic premise in framing is that it must be authentic. Even a small part must be authentic. The commitment to words, ideas and completion is about integrity; my words are mine and I take ownership.
Communication is connection. Obama has connected but it appears that he lost the most important part, authenticity. ...and maybe ownership.
Communication is really not so much of a game but a means to get what you need....but it must be connected to integrity and ownership.
If not, it is just a game of self serving manipulation and it harms everyone.
Well, two things have been well proven by now
That "liberal" and "journalist" don't count for as much as one might hope. And put them together and that's pretty reliably a whole lot of nothing. See Somerby on "career liberals."
I used to doubt Somberby on "career liberals." No longer.
I have long been an admirer of his (since 2000), but I remember when he started blasting Rachel Maddow prior to the '08 campaign and I thought, "No, he's wrong about Rachel." No, he wasn't. She sold whatever principles she had to smear Clinton as a racist, no matter how brazenly obvious (e.g., injecting race into a generic Clinton answer at the LA debate). And for what? A TV show (He called that as well).
And now we're living in this reality where the flat-out lies about what happened last year have calcified into "facts." On a host of other issues, you see push back from media "progressives:" health care reform, investigating Bush criminality, indefinite detention, etc. But last year remains the third rail for them and a cancer upon any hope for a path forward.
Now onto the subject of Lakoff: it reminds me of the "Theory of Change" article. Everyone around me was, like, "You've got to read this!" and my first thought was, "Huh?" To me, it didn't subvert the right, but dared to entrench it--especially since it depended blindly on the good-faith of Obama, even contrary to his actions (By late 2007, Obama had already joined the MSM bashing of Clinton, agreeing that she played the magical "gender card,"* and had given his August speech on threatening Pakistani sovereignty upon "actionable" intelligence).
*Does no one understand that it's basically a phantom card since society would have to consider misogyny to be serious, treating it like it's bigotry rather than rudeness, for it to work?
I hear ya
Good comment. I'm with you all the way, except I never did get into Rachel Maddow.
I take comedy pretty seriously, and her lame jokes were always a barrier to me listening to her radio show, and every time I did catch her on TV she was catapulting the CDS, so she was always someone else's Great Progressive Hope.
I devoured MORAL POLITICS
after the 2000 election.
I was starved to understand what the hell drove the 2 tribes.
At the time, his book put everything into perfect order for me - patriarchy vs matriarchy.
Top down communication vs empathy and negotiation.
HAH! What a crock of sh*t that turned out to be.
"If we have to have a dictator, who better than Obama"
- progressive blog commentator