The ONE thing Repugs have going for them

[Eloriel]

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
LIES.

That's it, that's all they've got. For many years now (since at least Gingrich if not longer), they have had ONLY lies to offer.

Because if they told the truth about who they are as candidates, as politicians, as a party, Americans wouldn't be interested. Ralph Reed, when he was head of the Christian Coalition, trained CC-backed candidates to enter their races as "stealth candidates," not revealing their true agendas. That means they were lying about who and what they were. Just as George Bush has always lied about who and what he is, and always will.

They have to lie about their policies, dress them up in faux populist, faux Dem-sounding language. They have to name their bills using Orwellian titles that are usually diametrically opposed to what the bills do.

Bush is adept at promoting some wonderful-sounding policy, and then refusing to fund it, or underfunding or outright defunding that same policy initiative. In some cases, he's done the promoting on one day and the defunding the very next day. His photo-op promos get media coverage, the defunding doesn't. (One case I'm thinking of was a couple of years ago where he visited a special school in Oregon -- helped kids get off the streets IIRC -- and talked up their work and mission, then went home to Washington and the very next day cut its funding.)

We applaud people like John McCain primarily because on occasion he has been willing to tell the truth. WHY SHOULD TELLING THE TRUTH BE SO RARE AND UNUSUAL THAT THE PEOPLE DOING IT GET APPLAUDED AND CHAMPIONED? Or villified and demonized in the case of folks like Michael Moore, Cynthia McKinney, which only goes to further demonstrate that the rightwing literally can't stand the Truth being told.

I was reminded of all this by a post I made to the Clinton Daily Show thread, something Clinton said on the show, in edited form:


A Republican (did Clinton say "friend" of his?) told him that the Repugs HAD to go after him in every conceivable way, because if they didn't he'd win everything all the time. IOW: they can't win on the truth and their policies. It's still true, too.

It's all they've got. Outright lies, plus distortions and secrecy (also forms of untruth). And dirty tricks, of course.

[tom_paine]

1. One might consider this to be contained under the overall rubric of lies

but, they also have

The finest, most power, best financed, most subtle (could sell a sandbox to a person stranded in the desert) Party-Loyal Sub-Media & Lie Laundry that has ever been envisaged or constructed by the Mind of Man.

It makes the Nazi and Soviet medias look like the hamfisted machination of Third Graders.

Who could have guessed that Amerikan Totalitarianism would come in the form of the Ultimate Used Car Salesman Con?

(I know, I know, Henry Wallace guessed in 1944 and perhaps dozens of others)

[Eloriel]

3. Well, yes, of course

They couldn't get away with their lies without a complicit press, now, could they? That ours has gone just a little (or a LOT) further than merely complicit is also true.

I am a firm believer in the people. If given the truth, they can be depended upon to meet any national crisis. The great point is to bring them the real facts. -- Abraham Lincoln

And of course, a free press is imperative for the condition Lincoln specified in his proclamation of trust in the people.

[Laura_B_manslaughter]

2. Repugs also control the media

And they have a timid "opposition" party.

[Eloriel]

4. True enough, in spades, BUT

let's not let the Repugs off the hook by sidestepping the fact that the lies start with them. The press should do its job, it's true. But why are we allowing the Repugs to LIE to us in the first place? And not just get away with it, but prosper because of it? A Party of Lies should be made to cease to exist. Period.

[xfundy]

5. You're not giving them enough credit!

They also have FEAR and HATE.

[Eloriel]

6. So true.

But in a (much) larger sense, those are lies too.