LITEROTICA PODCAST
LIT CAMS (200 Free Tokens)ADULT TOYSVOD MOVIES

The Anger Of The Left

I'm just shocked and impressed anyone on this board reads Sowell.

Carry on.
 
SeanH said:
Would you care to name one of these gentle souls that has felt the wrath of the "left"?
Click to expand...

http://www.poster.net/reagan-ronald/reagan-ronald-photo-xl-ronald-reagan-6234801.jpg

“[T[here is another area where the Federal Government can play a part. As an older American, I remember a time when people of different race, creed, or ethnic origin in our land found hatred and prejudice installed in social custom and, yes, in law. There is no story more heartening in our history than the progress that we have made toward the "brotherhood of man" that God intended for us. Let us resolve there will be no turning back or hesitation on the road to an America rich in dignity and abundant with opportunity for all our citizens.

“Let us resolve that we the people will build an American opportunity society in which all of us -- white and black, rich and poor, young and old -- will go forward together arm in arm. Again, let us remember that though our heritage is one of blood lines from every corner of the Earth, we are all Americans pledged to carry on this last, best hope of man on Earth.” Ronald Wilson Reagan (Jan 21, 1985)
 
Lawler said:
I'm just shocked and impressed anyone on this board reads Sowell.

Carry on.
Click to expand...
I need to read more of him.

It helps me to predict the next big psychotic meltdown of the Right. :)
 
Karen Kraft said:
http://www.poster.net/reagan-ronald/reagan-ronald-photo-xl-ronald-reagan-6234801.jpg

“[T[here is another area where the Federal Government can play a part. As an older American, I remember a time when people of different race, creed, or ethnic origin in our land found hatred and prejudice installed in social custom and, yes, in law. There is no story more heartening in our history than the progress that we have made toward the "brotherhood of man" that God intended for us. Let us resolve there will be no turning back or hesitation on the road to an America rich in dignity and abundant with opportunity for all our citizens.

“Let us resolve that we the people will build an American opportunity society in which all of us -- white and black, rich and poor, young and old -- will go forward together arm in arm. Again, let us remember that though our heritage is one of blood lines from every corner of the Earth, we are all Americans pledged to carry on this last, best hope of man on Earth.” Ronald Wilson Reagan (Jan 21, 1985)
Click to expand...

"We begin bombing in five minutes." - Ronald Reagan
 
Karen Kraft said:
http://www.poster.net/reagan-ronald/reagan-ronald-photo-xl-ronald-reagan-6234801.jpg

“[T[here is another area where the Federal Government can play a part. As an older American, I remember a time when people of different race, creed, or ethnic origin in our land found hatred and prejudice installed in social custom and, yes, in law. There is no story more heartening in our history than the progress that we have made toward the "brotherhood of man" that God intended for us. Let us resolve there will be no turning back or hesitation on the road to an America rich in dignity and abundant with opportunity for all our citizens.

“Let us resolve that we the people will build an American opportunity society in which all of us -- white and black, rich and poor, young and old -- will go forward together arm in arm. Again, let us remember that though our heritage is one of blood lines from every corner of the Earth, we are all Americans pledged to carry on this last, best hope of man on Earth.” Ronald Wilson Reagan (Jan 21, 1985)
Click to expand...
Um, yeah, he was a fan of fuck-the-poor politics, tried to have ketchup declared as a vegetable and shut down mental health facilities in California. Just because someone's "really nice" in person doesn't mean their immune to criticism when they fuck up.

I bet George W. ain't all that bad when you get to know him, but the fact is that he doesn't have the oratory capabilities or the mental faculty to be president of the United States.
 
I'll be back in the morning to see if any of you right wing liars and cowards have any courage left in your downtrodden, yellow bellied souls to point out even one instance of me being wrong here.

I've only just begun to grind Sowell's bullshit into the dirt.
 
More hate and intolerance and calls for VIOLENCE AND MASS MURDER by Thomas Sowell:

(Not to mention he calls for the overthrow of the Government)

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YmU0NGQ0ZTQzZTU4Zjk4MjdjZWMzYTM4Nzk2MzQ0MGI=

Don’t Get Weak
Random thoughts on the passing scene.

By Thomas Sowell

Sometimes it seems as if everybody is trying to rip off his own little piece of America, until we are all torn apart.

A reader writes: “Liberals hold us individually responsible for nothing but collectively responsible for everything.”

The last time I saw a Republican express outrage was 1991, when Clarence Thomas told the Senators what he thought of the smear tactics used against him. Before that, it was Ronald Reagan saying, “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!” Before that, it was probably Teddy Roosevelt.

Too many people in positions of responsibility act as if these are just positions of opportunity — for themselves. The ones who simply steal money probably do less harm than teachers who propagandize their students, media who slant the news, or politicians who sell out their country’s interests in order to get reelected.

A reader wrote: “Have you ever noticed that opinion polls ask the opinions of people who have no expertise in the subject on which they are being polled and publish these opinions as if they were gospel truth instead of group ignorance?”

Judging by the polls, Republican voters’ memories do not seem to be as short as Senator John McCain may have thought. Judging by press coverage, the media’s memory does not seem to have been as long as he may have thought when he played to that gallery.

A sign of the times: A full-page ad for an Alaska cruise in the left-wing New York Review of Books says, “See Alaska’s Glaciers Before They’re Gone!” Shipmates listed include Ralph Nader and the editor of The Nation magazine.

The people who are scariest to me are the people who don’t even know enough to realize how little they know.

A reader sent the following message, quoting his nephew: “Calling an illegal alien an ‘undocumented worker’ is like calling a drug dealer an ‘unlicensed pharmacist.’“

Some of the biggest cases of mistaken identity are among intellectuals who have trouble remembering that they are not God.

Our education system, our media, and our intelligentsia have all been unrelentingly undermining the values, the traditions, and the unity of this country for generations and, at the same time, portraying as “understandable” all kinds of deviance, from prostitution to drugs to riots.

The home run records that made Babe Ruth famous have been broken but one of his records will probably never be broken — pitching the longest shutout in World Series history, 14 innings. Few pitchers go even nine innings these days.

“Global warming” seems to be joining “diversity,” “gun control,” “open space,” and a growing list of other subjects where rational discussion has become impossible — and where you are considered a bad person even for wanting to discuss it rationally.

Is your employer poorer by the amount of money he pays you? Probably not, or you would never have been hired. Why then should we assume that a corporation or its customers are poorer by the amount paid to its chief-executive officer?

A review of one of the many environmentalist books says that even if you can’t do all you would like toward “living green,” you can at least “congratulate yourself on taking small steps to improve the planet.” That is what environmentalism — and much else on the political Left’s agenda — is really all about, self congratulation.

Just watching Suze Orman for a few moments while channel surfing is enough to make me feel exhausted.

When I see the worsening degeneracy in our politicians, our media, our educators, and our intelligentsia, I can’t help wondering if the day may yet come when the only thing that can save this country is a military coup.

In his book Income and Wealth, economist Alan Reynolds says that people often form “strong opinions” based on “weak statistics.” Unfortunately, that is also true of a wide range of other issues, from “global warming” to “gender bias.”

I am so old that I can remember a Democrat, at his inauguration as president, say of our enemies: “We dare not tempt them with weakness.”

© 2007 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.
Click to expand...
 
More Right Wing hatred and intolerance toward dissenting opinions:

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NzRiYWRlMWM4YWQyYTY4OGIyNTY4MTc0YjFlZWI3NTk=

May 1, 2007 12:35 PM

If It’s Not Lost, How Can We Win?
War buzz from Lt. Col. Patterson

An NRO Q&A

Retired U.S. Air Force Lieutenant Colonel Robert “Buzz” Patterson is author of the upcoming book War Crimes: The Left’s Campaign to Destroy Our Military and Lose the War on Terror (Crown Forum, June). As the president prepares to veto Congress’s timetabled war-funding bill, Lt. Col. Patterson took some questions from NRO editor Kathryn Lopez about the Democratic congressional majority, war reporting, and more.

Kathryn Jean Lopez: Your upcoming book begins with a quote from Cicero about how a nation “cannot survive treason from within.” Surely you’re not calling Democrats traitors. Or are you?

“Buzz” Patterson: I am. They certainly are if their behavior during our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is held up to the light of the U.S. Constitution. Article III, Section 3 defines treason against the United States as “adhering to (our) enemies, giving them aid and comfort. Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Dick Durbin, and John Murtha, amongst others, are guilty of exactly that. When a government official stands on the floor of Congress and declares the war lost; or travels to Syria, a state-sponsor of terror, and meets with the leadership that is funneling insurgents into Iraq to kill Americans; or, publicly compares our military men and women to Nazis, Soviets in gulags, and Pol Pot; or refers to our Marines as “cold blooded killers” before an ongoing investigation is completed and charges filed, they have crossed the line and have taken their politics to the battlefield. These are behaviors that give aid and comfort to our enemy.

It’s not just the Democrats though but many on the Left — its faculties and administrations on college campuses, big media, Hollywood, and left-wing organizations such as the Ford Foundation, Moveon.org, United for Peace and Justice, etc. What is particularly disturbing to me is that these Americans are doing it while their fellow citizens are fighting and dying in combat. The best ally that al Qaeda has these days is the Democrat Party leadership. It’s reprehensible.

Lopez: Is it fair even to say “The Left has declared war on the U.S. military and the global War on Terror”? And your title! The Left doesn’t want to destroy the military, for Pete’s sake.

Lt. Col. Patterson: Not only do I absolutely believe that Democrats have declared war on an American victory in the War on Terror but that’s generally been the case since 1968. They’re opposed to all uses of military force unless one of their guys is in the White House. In 1968, it was Vietnam and President Lyndon Johnson was too hawkish for them. The New Left adroitly turned a military victory overseas into a humiliating national defeat which the Democrats successfully parlayed into political capital, winning Congress and the White House. Now, it’s Iraq and the War on Terror. Different war, same game plan. Democrats win if America loses.

By facilitating defeat against Islamo-fascism, Democrats have placed the U.S. military squarely in the cross-hairs as well. But, again, this is nothing new. For decades liberals have attempted to emasculate the armed forces. In my years serving as military aide to President Bill Clinton, I gained an intimate understanding of how he and the Left regarded the military. Take a look at the Department of Defense budget over the last 40 years — when a Democrat is in the White House the military and our intelligence agencies take huge hits in terms of funding and support. When a Republican president is in office, the military and intelligence organizations receive the necessary funding for procurement, pay, and logistics. Fortunately, we’ve only had two Democrat commanders-in-chief over that span, Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton. In my opinion, arguably the two worst military leaders in our country’s history, certainly within the last 100 years. Not only doesn’t the Left understand military culture, but in fact they regard it with utter disdain.

Lopez: But don’t we all support the troops?

Lt. Col. Patterson: The Left’s “support” of our military consists of constant undermining or ignoring of the successes in Iraq and Afghanistan (and there have been many), legislation calling for outright defeat, grossly exaggerating or embellishing the misdeeds of a few miscreants at Abu Ghraib, championing baseless claims of torture at Guantanamo Bay, and staging antiwar rallies across the country. Our troops certainly don’t need or deserve those sorts of support.

How can somebody claim to support the troops while they demean them publicly (as John Kerry has done routinely since 1971) and not support the combat that we, as a nation, ordered them into? The reality is the Left doesn’t understand the military, in many cases finds military service distasteful and beneath them, and apparently doesn’t nearly understand the threat we face.

Lopez: Democratic defeatism wasn’t born yesterday. Is there anything the White House or someone else could have done to avoid the showdown we’re seeing today over funding? Well, other than winning.

Lt. Col. Patterson: Absolutely. The endgame, of course, is victory, not only in Iraq but more importantly in the global struggle we face. One thing I hold the Bush administration accountable for is having done a very poor job of communicating the global nature of the threat that is Islamo-fascism and the many reasons for America being in Iraq in the first place. Aided by a poor communications strategy on the part of both the White House and the Pentagon, the Left seized control of the national discourse and morphed the facts into all sorts of falsehoods and bumper sticker slogans.

Let’s remember that when Congress voted for military action in Iraq in 2002, both sides of the aisle overwhelmingly supported it. The vote was 77-23 in the Senate and 296-133 in the House for military intervention in Iraq. And four years earlier, under President Bill Clinton, 90 percent of the House and a unanimous Senate approved the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998, which established that the policy of the United States was regime change in Iraq. But nobody remembers that vote any more or the fact that the authorization for force was not based on “stockpiles of WMDs.” The Left has done tremendous damage to the war effort by obfuscating the realities on the ground in Iraq in a war that they voted for.

Lopez: What’s so wrong about timetables? Guide-dates are good, aren’t they?

Lt. Col. Patterson: There’s never been a war won when timetables for withdrawal were set prior to an outcome being determined. That’s the kiss of death in combat. If the president and Congress want to establish timelines and plans for withdrawal and keep them classified, that’s one thing. When politicians do it for purely partisan purposes and announce it to the world, that’s damaging and deceitful. Every time someone like Reid or Pelosi makes a damning statement in public, it immediately airs on Al Jazeera and Al Arabiya. That fuels the terrorists’ ambitions, depresses our military’s morale and leads to more death and destruction. If I’m bin Laden or Zawahiri, I’ve got my Dayplanner out and I’m circling the dates. The message that announced timetables sends to our enemy is “don’t worry, you’ve won, we’re weak, just wait us out, we’re leaving and here’s the date.”

Lopez: I take much of what you say about the Left and the war, but in terms of relatively short-term politics: If Iraq does not improve, can John McCain win the presidency in 2008 — can ANY Republican now in the race win if Iraq doesn’t make a real turnaround?

Lt. Col. Patterson: In my opinion, it’s highly doubtful that a Republican candidate can win in 2008 if Iraq is the central issue. That being said, the American people don’t like losing and if Democrats force a premature conclusion in Iraq it will come back to haunt them at some point. Many experts have said, and I agree completely, that if we pull out of Iraq prior to ensuring the political and security infrastructure is in place, we will witness a bloodbath similar to what transpired in Vietnam and Cambodia after we withdrew from that conflict. Not only will tensions escalate in the region but we would de facto be handing over Iraq to Iran and al Qaeda. Is that what we want to deal with down the road? If the Democrats think Iraq is a mess, how are they going to deal with that scenario?

The Left was very successful wiping their hands clean of their involvement in what happened after Vietnam. I don’t see them getting away with it again.

Lopez: Is Chuck Hagel in a good position, comparatively?

Lt. Col. Patterson: Maybe for a position in a Democratic administration of 2008.

Lopez: Remind me why elections matter. Things seem pretty bad right now, don’t they? How would it be worse under John Kerry?

Lt. Col. Patterson: I shudder to think where we’d be today if we’d elected John Kerry. And, contrary to popular public sentiment, it could be a lot worse than it is right now. One of the major problems with how the war in Iraq has been portrayed in the U.S. is that media, politicians, and most citizens consider Iraq an entity in and of itself. It’s not. It’s a theater in a much greater global war where we are taking the fight to our enemy and killing terrorists. Whatever one thinks of President George W. Bush, he’s been an excellent commander in chief and the overwhelming majority of the troops love him. He has the strategic vision to see the importance of victory in Iraq within the framework of the overall struggle against the evils of Islamo-fascism. The very successful elections in Iraq in 2005 are an indication of where we need to get to in the region. The president understands that we are faced with either killing all the terrorists in the world (which would be impossible) or giving the people in these regions another option, freedom. I spoke with many Iraqis on my trip there and they want it — they want what we have.

Kerry, and the Democrats in general, either can’t make that connection or choose to put their political careers ahead of the greater good. These are the same people who were clamoring for us to get involved in Bosnia and Kosovo for humanitarian reasons but now want us to abandon Iraq and give rise to what will be a huge human tragedy if we do.

Lopez: What makes a “Dhimmicrat” and how can one be unmade?

Lt. Col. Patterson: Democrats would rather attack the current administration and undermine the war effort than acknowledge that we are engaged in the fourth great ideological battle of the last 100 years. Just as we faced the evils of Nazism, fascism, and communism in the last century we are trying to prevent Islamo-fascism from destroying the freedoms of Western civilization.

The term “Dhimmi” refers to a non-Muslim living under Sharia law who is forced to acquiesce to a Muslim government, pay a tax for being a non-believer, and is relegated to second-class status. British writer Bat Ye’or defined “dhimmitude” as “a behavior dictated by fear, pacifism when aggressed, rather than resistance, servility because of cowardice and vulnerability.” Dhimmicrats are Democrats who would rather give in to or appease the nation’s enemies rather than fight to preserve the liberties and freedoms we have.

Unfortunately, I don’t see much opportunity to unmake them. They’ve had several opportunities to step up and do the right thing since 9/11 and they’ve chosen to retain their failed ways. The days of the strong pro-military Democrat leaders of the past, Roosevelt, Truman, JFK, and Scoop Jackson, are long gone. Joe Lieberman is the only one I see on their side that understands the threat and is willing to speak to it.

Lopez: Would you really bring back the House Committee on Un-American Activities?

Lt. Col. Patterson: No. That title in War Crimes was used tongue-in-cheek to illustrate how far left Hollywood and our popular culture have moved since World War II. It was in fact the backlash from the House Committee on Un-American Activities during the early 1950s which helped fuel Hollywood’s move to the left even though a large majority of those identified as being communists actually were.

In the book I point out that during World War II filmmakers and actors not only rallied to the nation’s cause by making several patriotic movies but many of the stars signed up for action in combat — Jimmy Stewart, Clark Gable, Gene Autry, and Tyrone Power to name a few.

Immediately after 9/11, the Bush administration asked Hollywood for some help with the war effort and was denied. Not only were the filmmakers unwilling to put out products that accurately depicted the courageous efforts of our military and the evil of our enemy, but they kept churning out the tired post-Vietnam stereotypes of our veterans being drug-addled psycho-killers. Instead of standing up for the cause, today we have “stars” such as Sean Penn, Martin Sheen, Michael Moore, and Woody Harrelson aggressively opposing the administration and our military’s efforts overseas at every turn. Besides, I can’t see any of those guys with anywhere near to courage to put on a uniform and fight for their country.

Lopez: Are there any good reporters on this war?

Lt. Col. Patterson: A few from big media but not many. I greatly respect those that actually leave the comfort of the Green Zone in Baghdad and get out and see for themselves which, these days, isn’t happening much. CNN’s Arwa Damon has done a very nice job maintaining a reasonable balance. Most of the honest reporting has come from new media types however, folks like Michael Yon and Bill Roggio, who embed themselves with a unit and stay for awhile. The military bloggers such as Blackfive, Mudville Gazette, Dadmanly, and LT Smash are where I go to for my information. They’ve been there and done that and they’re talented writers.

Unfortunately, most of Western big media types stay hunkered down at the bar at the Al Rashid or Palestine Hotels in Baghdad’s Green Zone. They send out Iraqi stringers and pay them based on the nature of the story. Bombs and blood win out over positive reports every time.

Lopez: If the war is not lost, how can we win?

Lt. Col. Patterson: By coming together as a country and supporting the efforts of our commander-in-chief and our troops. The war is not lost, we are winning. I’ve seen it for myself. We have, however, allowed a Fifth Column comprised of Democrat politicians, big media, academia, popular culture, and nongovernmental organizations to control the discourse and negatively affect public opinion. Nobody beats the U.S. military, but American wars since World War II are won and lost in Washington, D.C. If we allow the Left to continue to undermine the nation and our military, we will not only lose in Iraq but future confrontations that may occur with Islamo-fascism in places like Iran, Syria, and the Philippines will be made doubly difficult and more bloody. The stakes are very high. We have to resist the urge to take the easy way out and quit what is a valiant and necessary struggle which would lead to Iraq becoming another Vietnam-type national humiliation. That, sadly, is exactly what the Left is banking on.
 
Still having a hard time with reading comprehension are ya LT?

Ishmael
 
Today, 02:46 AM
Remove user from ignore listLovingTongue
This message is hidden because LovingTongue is on your ignore list.

View Post Today, 02:50 AM
Remove user from ignore listLovingTongue
This message is hidden because LovingTongue is on your ignore list.

View Post Today, 02:54 AM
Remove user from ignore listLovingTongue
This message is hidden because LovingTongue is on your ignore list.

View Post Today, 02:55 AM
Remove user from ignore listLovingTongue
This message is hidden because LovingTongue is on your ignore list.

View Post Today, 02:59 AM
Remove user from ignore listLovingTongue
This message is hidden because LovingTongue is on your ignore list.

View Post Today, 03:00 AM
Remove user from ignore listLovingTongue
This message is hidden because LovingTongue is on your ignore list.

View Post Today, 03:03 AM
Remove user from ignore listLovingTongue
This message is hidden because LovingTongue is on your ignore list.

View Post Today, 03:27 AM
Remove user from ignore listLovingTongue
This message is hidden because LovingTongue is on your ignore list.
 
Sowell has something to learn from Frank Luntz. He's much more adept at the baiting than Sowell ever has been. This entire thread is a con, incite someone to anger by insisting that they are angry, then dance in the aisles as if you've won.

by: Jeffrey Feldman

A "con," a "scam," a "grift," a boo-boo, a bunko, a flim flam. All these are synonyms for what street crime experts call the "Confidence Trick." I will add one more synonym to the list: The Luntz.

The Confidence Trick has many names: Three-Card-Monte, The Spanish Prisoner, The Protection Scheme, The Free Pet Scam, Pig-in-a-Poke, Lottery Fraud by Proxy, The Pigeon Drop, Psychic Surgery.

The list is long long, but the lure of the Luntz is always the same: easy money. Relieve the mark of his cash. And it works just about every time.

This weekend, Bill Maher was the mark and HBO's Real Time was the venue for a scam being run coast-to-coast by the grand master grifter of American Politics: Flim Flam Frank, who runs this scam under the name "Frank Luntz."

The name of the Luntz? Let's call it the "Advice to Democrats Scam" or even better: "The Angry Dem Flim Flam" Posing as a expert on winning elections, give advice to Democrats about winning elections by not being "angry." Insulting by nature, the advice leads to contentious arguments the end goal of which is to create a ruckus that drives book sales.

Other grifters who work the Angry Dem Flim Flam on TV include Bunko Coulter (a.k.a. "Ann Coulter"), Boo-Boo Bill (a.k.a. "Bill O'Reilly") and a shadowy figure known on the street simply as
"Scamsouzah" (a.k.a. "Dinesh D'Souzah"). They all work the same Luntz, but nobody does it better than Flim Flam Frank.

Like any good Luntz, the key is to realize that the mark cons himself. Once a good Luntz is up and running, the only way to get out of it is to stop playing. You can't beet a flim flam artist at their own game. If you are in their game, you are losing.

Ultimately, then, the only way to prevent more and more people from becoming the next victims of the Angry Dem Flim Flam is to spread the word on how it works. Warn your children. Tell your friends. If you see this scam or someone pushing it, do no't bite. Do not play along. Keep your hands and your money in your pockets. Stop talking, keep walking.


Anatomy of a Luntz - Spotting the Sleight of Hand
Ultimately, anyone can spot the Angry Dem Flim Flam if they just take a minute to think about these basic tricks and how they work. Just like a sleight-of-hand magician does not really make that lit cigarette disappear into the palm of his hand, none of these statements used in the Angry Dem Flim Flam are actually what they appear to be. They are key acts of misdirection designed to lure the mark away from the end goal: money.

"Democrats Are Angry":
It may be hard to see at first, but when Luntz says this he is not actually giving advice to Democrats. He is lighting a fire. It is the heart of the scam. Remember the vacuum cleaner salesman who starts his presentation by throwing a bag of dirt on his customer's clean white carpet--all so he can show how well his vacuum removes dirt? "Democrats are angry," is the bag of dirt in the Angry Dem Flim Flam. Say that line to any Democrat and the end result is always the same: they get angry. Works like a charm. "Democrats are angry," always elicits the same reply, "We are not!!"

Remember: The Angry Dem Flim Flam cannot begin unless somebody takes the bait and debates the line "Democrats are Angry." That is the door you have to walk through. Walk away and there can be no game.


"I Listen To People":
But let's assume for a second that we fell into the trap: we took the bait. We heard "Democrats are angry," and now we are in an argument. The next sleight-of-hand in the Angry Dem Flim Flam is for the Luntz to establish authority, to make the con artist look like an expert whose advice everyone should buy. The Angry Dem Flim Flam is not about "listening." It's about buying: cash for books. The key is for the flim flam artist to say something along these lines, "I know what I'm talking about because I listen to people and you don't." The trick here is to see that this is just a tactical lie. By "listening," the Luntz artist means the he paid people to sit in a room and then elicited their reactions to political language using deceptive marketing techniques. The Luntz does not listen. The Luntz pays cash for conversation that he uses to find trigger words that he can use to run the grift. The Luntz listens not to understand, but to learn how to deceive.

Remember: The Angry Dem Flim Flam uses the "I Listen to People" gimmick to create authority. When we hear this con, we cannot respond. Just keep walking.

"I Only Take Money From People I Believe In":
There comes a time in every grift--in every Luntz--when the con man tells the mark, "I do not want your money." In fact, that is all he wants: your money. But the con is built on that tension between the true goal of the con and the script. A street con will say, "Do not give me any money. I don't want it. Take this for free and if you want to pay for it, pay me what you think it's worth." In the Angry Dem Flim Flam, this line typically comes near the end of the con: after an angry spat has been sparked, after the authority of "I listen to people" has been set. At this point, the Luntz then says, "I am not saying this to make money...I only work for people and causes I believe in." Slippery, but easy to spot. The truth is that the Luntz believes only in the Luntz--takes money from anyone. Money, money, money. Every scam, every flim flam, every Luntz is about the cash, the dough, the cheddar. You have it. He wants it.

Remember: The Angry Dem Flim Flam is about one thing and one thing only: money. So when the Luntz says, "I only take money from people I believe in," do not listen. Walk away.

Follow the Lady:
Now, the heart pumping in every Luntz is misdirection: we are asked to look here so we do not notice the scam going on over there. Three-Card-Monte is the classic. "Watch the lady!" shouts the Luntz. The end result is that we do not think that everyone standing on the street is in on the game, that we cannot win even if we appear to be winning. That is the game. In the "Angry Dem Flim Flam," the conversation about politics is "the Lady" we are supposed to watch. In fact, the game is about book sales. We are not supposed to think about why the Luntz is on the talk show or why the Luntz is talking about politics in the first place, which is: to make money. Lots and lots and lots of money. We are told the flim flam is about truth, honesty, understanding, issues, clarity--and that is what we want to believe. Because we really believe in a politics that is about truth, honesty, understanding, issues, clarity. We even work to make it so. But the Luntz is not concerned with any of that. The real subject? Book sales. Want to know what number really concerns the Luntz, head over to Amazon.com and check out the sales rank following the Maher scandal.

Remember: The Angry Dem Flim Flam is not about what the Luntz says it is about. It is about selling not communication.

Get 'Em Off The Street
The tricky truth about flim flam artists is that they inhabit a world we firmly believe they should be free to roam. We believe that laws should protect citizens from scams, but ultimately we also believe that citizens must educate themselves so as not to be suckers. So flim flam scam artists cannot just be banned by law. We have to make the choice to walk away from them.

So that is what we should do.

We hear the Luntz, we keep walking.

Money stays in our pockets.

But even if we walk away, we have to stay on guard. The Luntz is good at what he does and the next con, the next scam, the next boo-boo, the next flim flam--is always just around the corner.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

1
Please, please get rid of the politics board.
2 3 4
Replies
98
Views
1K
MostHated
MostHated
stickygirl
What did people do in the 1970s, before the internet?
2 3 4
Replies
90
Views
2K
JimDee676
J
L
A mature man's enjoyment of sex is a priority in the USA; a mature woman's is not. Gross.
Replies
2
Views
115
LMWM321
L
LargoKitt
Something for the ladies
Replies
1
Views
322
Biglibido99
Biglibido99
DanOkeffie
R.I.P. the music industry---will you miss live bands? Compaq disks...?
Replies
4
Views
51
J_Bone
J_Bone
Back
Top