JOHN
PAUL II
intended, and goes unheard by others. Covers subjects that raise levels of xenophobia, fear
of terrorism, homophobia, or polarises debate around the right to life, that kind of thing".
| Priority News |
| Look Around |
| MQAblog |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
This weeks' accident reveals threat to Refuge
political epiphany. I read a fellow bloggers' report
of an article in The Economist about a political
tool frequently used but never really noticed.
Not noticed by design. Like all epiphanies this
one answered a nagging question. How do so
many diverse groups on the fringe of America
end up siding with the Republican party?
Common sense would say that they would not be
involved in the political process at all since their
ideas are well outside the mainstream - yet time
and time again they team up with the GOP -
feeling that the party is really on their side
Well, my Economist arrived later that afternoon
(thanks to a gift subscription I received for
Christmas) and I read the article in question. It
is fascinating. In a nutshell 'dog whistle' issues
are those narrow issues crucially important for a
few, but too controversial (and often under the
radar) for the mainstream.
How does this happen? One way is through
churches. Another is through the conservative
(or neo-con, or Red) media that not only spreads
a consistent spin of pro Republican bias. They
also criticize ALL other media and information
sources (Newspapers, network TV, CNN, Public
Libraries, Universities) in such a vile way as to
unconditionally dismiss anything they say. When
this type of separation occurs unique language
develops. Code words and phrases are
developed and brought out later to disguise
harsher, less palatable ideas.
Political pandering has been done since the
beginning of time. Usually it is out in the open -
but with the 'dog whistle' strategy it is done
covertly. We are just beginning to learn how, by
using certain key words, conservative politicians
worldwide have been pandering to fringe groups
without ever being noticed by the mainstream.
I witnessed first hand an early U.S. example
while doing talk radio in the early 1990's. Back
then there was a growing group of politically
frustrated 'gun nuts'. Holdovers from old
Confederate or Cowboy times who possession of
guns were unusually important and who trusted
no politicians would defend their desire to bear
arms. True, few politicians wanted to be seen as
partnering with Militia types who used very
inflammatory rhetoric. But suddenly venues like
talk radio laid a foundation for politicians by
flattering gun lovers with grand talk of
Constitutional Rights.
The second amendment was sold as the bedrock
of the U.S. Constitution and now the "gun nuts"
had become "patriots" ready to defend that
sacred document. Republican politicians began
carrying and displaying pocket versions of the
constitution and heralding the importance of the
2nd amendment. You see, arguing for the
"constitution" is much more tolerable than arguing
for unlimited weapons proliferation on the streets
of America. So, when a politician reached into
his breast pocket to retrieve the mini Constitution
it looked innocent enough to the vast majority of
Americans. But to these fringe types it meant
everything in the world. This Dog Whistling
helped the GOP take power of congress in 1994.
More recently, with the Schiavo case, President
Bush called for a "culture of life". A phrase that
sounds original and is actually quite pleasant.
But in reality it is a term developed by
fundamentalists as a justification for harassing
women outside abortion clinics (and worse).
Again, most of us hearing "culture of life" for the
first time held no great historical meaning. But
for them Bush's use of it reassures them that the
GOP understands what they are doing. Few of
us knew of the deeper meaning behind the
"culture of life" phrase. Nor were we meant to
know.
One of the bloggers investigating this recalls
Bush's referral to the "Dred Scott' decision
during a Presidential debate against John Kerry.
As I remember it, the dropping of the name Dred
Scott came at an unusual and seemingly
inappropriate time. I assume most people wrote it
off as a Bushism. Some random phrase that just
slips out when he strays from the script. But in
fact the Dred Scott referral was a direct sign to
these "culture of life" voters who have tied in
everything they believe into that phrase. 'Dred
Scott' had become a code word getting heavy
mentioning in churches and on talk radio as a
parallel to abortion. Bush knew that just saying
the phrase would send the sign that he believed
what they believed - even if he couldn't say it
openly.
(More recently 'Dred Scott' has been used to
fan outrage for Terri Schiavo.)
So Bush had sends fringe elements in Americans
a subtle sign that he is on their side. A verbal
wink of the eye while the rest of us remain
oblivious.
With the exposure of payola to Red media types
(and Karl Rove's history) it is frankly impossible
to believe that dog whistle tactics have not been
used for years. (Reminds me of those subliminal
messages Bush got caught for early in the 2000
campaign.) I will follow those researching this
and do some on my own. It is important not only
for those of us in the mainstream - we need to
know whose side the President is really on - but
those single issue voters should know this too.
After all a verbal wink means a lot less if
everyone gets one.
=========
Real briefly on the other stuff...I was flipping
through the TV Thursday evening and almost fell
out of my chair when I saw Randall Terry stroll
over to a keyboard and sing at the Terry Schiavo
memorial. Fortunately after falling out of my
chair seeing Jesse Jackson and JEB Bush
standing side by side for Terri on Wednesday I
installed a seat belt system in the La-Z-Boy. We
are living in some very strange times.....What
more can be said about the intelligence report?
Complete incompetence by intelligence agencies,
manipulation of their information by
Administration officials and a war killing
thousands launched under false pretenses.
Culture of life wink wink
========
I heard about the spill in Alaska by some
bloggers from that state. They were complaining
about the lack of national exposure. It is very
curious that a spill of oil and water mixture in
Alaska while we are planning for even more
drilling there doesn't make national news.
Very sad to see the news about the Pope.
Drop me a line folks...I'm open to all
compliments suggestions, tips or complaints
Thanks for looking in!
"Conoco Phillips, which runs Kuparuk, said
the estimated size of the spill remains at
111,300 gallons. That ranks as the
third largest industrial spill ever recorded
in the North Slope oil fields"
Bush requires department heads to meet
with communication staff weekly
INTELLIGENCE
FAILURE
intelligence on Iraq was ‘dead wrong’
Randall Terry sings at Schiavo Memorial
| Top Picks |
K
G
