Sep 17 2010

Obama Doesn’t Get “Message Control”

We all know politicians spin and poll-test their phrases so as to best hide the truth of their plans by suckering the American electorate into seeing what they want, versus what the true intent is. We saw this in spades with Obamacare. It will not expand service for less money. It is a government power grab which will turn our health care plans into a different version of the DMV or Post Office. But Obama used all sorts of misleading phrases to sell it.

Then came the war on terror and our two war fronts in Iraq and Afghanistan. In true Orwellian form, team Obama decided to recast our efforts to stamp out radical Islamo Fascism as ‘overseas contingency operations’ against ‘man-caused disasters’. It’s like listening to some 3rd grader trying to hide the truth of his mistakes with lame cover stories.

Recently, when Obama realized his first ‘stimulus’ package did not stimulate anything except runaway deficits and massive national debt levels, his minions went out and demanded the press not call his second stimulus package a ‘stimulus’ plan. Even though stimulus II uses the exact same limp approach to job creation as the first round of wasted pork. The so called independent press was lectured on how to properly use the white house propaganda in public! Joseph Goebbels would be proud at the audacity I am sure.

Now Obama’s czar of stupid phrases has hit again. This time regarding the nearly debunked of human induced global warming:

From the administration that brought you “man-caused disaster” and “overseas contingency operation,” another terminology change is in the pipeline.

The White House wants the public to start using the term “global climate disruption” in place of “global warming” — fearing the latter term oversimplifies the problem and makes it sound less dangerous than it really is.

What a bunch of crappy propaganda. The theory is human industrial activity, along with the population explosion, is pumping more CO2 into the atmosphere than Earth’s climate can handle. This is of course demonstrably false since we are experiencing one of the LOWEST CO2 levels Earth has been through. And that also includes many species of plants and animals who survived those periods to this day. Even the polar bears have survived periods of little to no arctic ice before, otherwise they would not be here now.

The theories assume (but have yet to prove) that a feedback cascade will occur in the atmosphere causing temperatures to rise. Not climate to disrupt, but temperatures to rise. That is the theory, which has been destroyed by independent outside scrutiny for years now. That scrutiny – also known as the scientific method – has discovered unscientific claims, unreported mass uncertainty in the claims, poor scientific practice and outright misleading representations (such as the theory tree rings track global climate – except for the last 40 years of course which was the decline so famously hidden by the Hockey Stick graphs).

But here is the White House demanding people use a term of their choosing to put lipstick on their pig of a policy. Is this free speech? Or is this juvenile attempt to misdirect and mislead really what has become of American leadership? Looks more like the worst of American incompetence to me.

The worst part of this propaganda stunt is the context. It has been proven with universal ‘consensus’ that all the doom & gloom claims in the IPCC’s last report are FALSE! For example, the Amazon is not at higher risk to drought at the moment, Holland is not sinking under the ocean surface, Africa’s food supply is not shrinking (but growing) and the Himalayan Glaciers will not be all melted away in 25 years. All these ‘end of the Earth’ claims in the IPCC report on the ‘science’ of global warming were debunked. All the claims of ‘disruptive’ effects have been proven to be wild exaggerations. There were not more severe hurricanes impacting America after Katrina (the number actually dropped). The number of polar bears continue to grow, and the Earth has experienced a decade of cooling.

Do these ‘czars of propaganda’ inside the Obama administration take us all for morons? Or are they the morons for thinking a few word changes and they will magically look like they have a clue as to what they are doing?

Don’t even get me started on the latest claims that embryonic stem cell research will save lives. After 100′s of millions of dollars embryonic stem cell research has not produced any cures. That is because we can’t control the cellular mechanics which control the transition of a stem cell into a specific type of cell. The combinations of factors and timing that must be controlled to succeed is astronomical. Simple math shows it will take decades, if not a century, to learn how to control the genes to create the desired results.

Adult stem cell research, on the other hand, has had 100′s of successes. This field is going crazy, and in need of more funding. We are wasting money because a bunch of people who struggled through High School science don’t understand the challenges and mechanics of the problem. Which is why you get crude fools like John Edwards standing on stage with quadriplegics like Christopher Reeves promising he would walk again if John Kerry was elected.

We all know how well that promise turned out.

17 responses so far

17 Responses to “Obama Doesn’t Get “Message Control””

  1. oneal lane says:

    AJ,

    In the case of this administration instead of “czar, ” “commissar of current climate truth” is more appropriate.

    OL

  2. TomAnon says:

    Remember, if a couple of clever words strung together give people a pause to consider what is said, the reigns of Goverment Control have time to tighten that much more.

  3. Highlander says:

    I think they hope the name change moves the goalposts sufficiently to allow them to re-focus the environmental clamor on every weather event that falls outside the norms that they themselves set. Ignoring, of course, the big picture of global weather over the course of decades and longer.

    It presents the additional opportunity and benefit of a more immediate impact on and response from, a public traumatized by the latest tornado outbtreak, or the more powerful than usual hurricane.

    Further, it provides them with the manuverability to better answer critics pointing to colder than average temperatures and heavier than average snowfalls, as man-made “climate disruptions”. A flexibility the term “global warming” did not give them.

    Tyrants always subvert language in pursuit of their aims. And these are, before all else, tyrants we are dealing with here.

  4. Frogg1 says:

    White House Insider on Obama: “the President is Losing It.”
    http://newsflavor.com/opinions/white-house-insider-on-obama-the-president-is-losing-it/

  5. Wilbur Post says:

    Frogg1, that is definitely an interesting piece but totally believable. I think many of us who were not blinded by the MSM’s narrative about Obama’s god-like stature have noticed that the man is simply not up to the job.

  6. oneal lane says:

    Frogg

    Great post. It is the most interesting thing I have seen in the political news in a while. Although of us figured this out a while back. All the vacations and golf etc. The first lady hates the job etc.

    Hillary will kick his but next go around. Sadly the republicans have no viable candidate. I like Sarah but she is not Presidential yet. Shes a great “cheerleader” and shes good at just what she is doing now.

    thanks

  7. WWS says:

    great find, Frogg! What’s most fascinating is this insider agreeing that it’s better for the country if Obama does NOT run again.

    It’s not difficult to read inbetween the lines and see that the “Draft Hillary in 2012!!!!” movement is already up and running among the Democrat insiders. Of course I’ve beleived that we’re headed there for about 18 months now.

    Try this on for size: Campaign 2012: Sarah vs. Hillary!

    (I can hear the chants now: “2 WOMEN ENTER! 1 WOMAN LEAVES!!!! 2 WOMEN ENTER! 1 WOMAN LEAVES!!!! “)

  8. WWS says:

    Oneal, we’re thinking along the same lines but think about it – do you REALLY think Hillary can win in 2012? After all of THIS? HILLARY????

    If you have any doubts, let me remind you of a little Time Bomb that Obama himself has planted for any Dem that wants to run against him. For several elecion cycles now it’s been widely noted that Democrats can’t win nationally without a massive turnout of black voters. Clinton took advantage of this in ’92 and ’96; Obama inspired the greatest levels of minority turnout ever seen. And Obama is the man they are more proud of than anyone – he is the man they have spent their whole lives waiting for, he is their dream come true.

    They are not going to stand for ANY White Democrat that bumps Obama out of what they see as the Second Term that the party Owes Him, and Them. If the Dem’s run ANY White candidate in his place in 2012, even if Obama endorses her, they are going to drop out en masse. Without Obama on the ticket, Democrat turnout is going to drop to 50 year lows, and there’s nothing Hillary can do to change it. (well, she could run Charlie Rangel or Maxine Waters as VP, I suppose. Al Sharpton will be available, too)

    There’s no way around this trap they have set for themselves.

    live by the race card, die by the race card.

  9. Whomever says:

    Last night I heard Bush’s tax cuts renamed Obama’s Middle Class Tax cuts.
    They do not appear to realize this kind of antic is transparent. Ah, there’s the transparency.

  10. [...] singing to feds? – hotair.com 09/17/2010 Just in time for the midterms. more… Obama Doesn’t Get “Message Control” – strata-sphere.com 09/17/2010 We all know politicians spin and poll-test their phrases so as [...]

  11. oneal lane says:

    WWS,

    I was not too clear back there. I think she will beat Obama for the nomination, but am not sure she can win the office. But do not entirely rule her out! She has some real world experience now and Bill is a smart cookie. Centrists may long for the good old days of the Clintons. If the Republicans run another weak candidate, its her race to loose.

    Perhaps one of the strong conservatives senators or governors will come to the the rescue. Personally I like Michelle Bachman a great deal, but is a house member electable?

  12. WWS says:

    I can’t even think of the last time a House member was elected President. Gerald Ford came from the House, but he was never elected in his own right.

    Meanwhile, it looks like Lisa Murkowski is going to follow in Charlie Crist’s footsteps and try to sabotage Republican chances in Alaska with a 3rd party write-in campaign.

    Question for the night: Who’s working harder to destroy Republican unity and gives Dems a chance this fall? Conservatives or “Moderates”?

  13. oneal lane says:

    Looks like Palin is going to run. Will someone tell the two ladies from Alaska to sit this one out!

  14. oneal lane says:

    WWS,

    You make an interesting point about Blacks Obama and Hillary.

    If the Dems can paint Obama as a “put upon” and sabotaged by the Republicans, it would inspire black voters. But yes you make a good point it could be tough going for any Democrat but the Obama.

  15. lurker9876 says:

    wws, the moderates.

    Did you hear Christine O’Donnell’s speech tonight? The people at this “Value” event apparently loved her speech…”We ARE the country!”

    The question is: if the Republicans get back a strong majority in both houses, what are the odds that they will seriously reform the tax code, social security, Medicare, and Medicaid? Get rid of the Department of Education? Get rid of the Department of Energy?

    I read a post somewhere today about those people working in WDC for these democrats that may lose their jobs in November.

    I say….tough luck!

  16. WWS says:

    I hate to say this, Lurker, but the odds are Zero as long as Zero is President. He will veto everything and it is not possible to get the numbers to override. The most they can do for the next 2 years is to stop Zero from doing anything more. Now they can pass reform bills and make Obama veto them, and then they will make a great statement for the 2012 campaign. But unless Obama pulls a Clinton (he won’t) none of it will be enacted in the next two years.

    Now after 2012, who knows! But we will need at least 60 seats in the Senate to do what you say.

  17. lurker9876 says:

    So many see 2010 as the stepping stone to 2012, then 2014. The “new” Republican Party need to prepare themselves for the onslaught of the vitriolic attacks from the Democrats to continue to convince the Americans that this “new” Republican party is sensitive and caring to everyone.

    The Republican Party says that they won’t be able to repeal this or that so they will work to reform and defund bils. Heck, they should repeal and repeal and repeal and let Obama veto bill after bill to convince the Americans how insensitive and callous Obama is!