Deception, Divisiveness, Diversion, and Dependency
I am certain that somewhere out there exists a handbook on how to be a politician in the Democratic party. In that handbook, there are probably four chapters. Those four chapters are the Four D’s of how to succeed as a democrat. Below I provide you with an idea of what that handbook might look like.
The truth is irrelevant. And a good democrat will take advantage of another “D”, “deny”. If you speak it often enough, a lie will become a fact. You believe it and they will believe it. Repeatedly use expressions like:
“With Obamacare we will reduce your insurance premiums by $2,500, per family per year.”
“I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base.”
“With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night decided to go kill some Americans? What difference, at this point, does it make?”
“But I want to say one thing to the American people. I want you to listen to me. I’m going to say this again: I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky. I never told anybody to lie, not a single time; never. These allegations are false.”
“It depends on what the meaning of ‘is’ is.”
Divide and conquer. Achieve goals by creating controversy between people, religions, races, and inanimate objects. Preach tolerance, but don’t practice it. Selectively exploit tragedies that could pit individuals against one another. Below are a few practical examples:
Interject yourself into local issues like the Mike Brown shooting and the Freddie Gray case in Baltimore, but purposely ignore attacks against law enforcement.
Demand tolerance of a specific religion while telling another religion they have no right to act in accordance with their beliefs.
Use tactics of diversion to achieve goals. Never admit to being wrong when faced with facts. When faced with an opposing view from someone, call them “bigots”. Take advantage of the media to divert attention away from controversial actions. Examples below:
When faced with opposition against Planned Parenthood atrocities, call their acts a “War against women”
When a university student acts disrespectfully towards another student, demand a “Safe Space” on campus. Hold rallies and blame the student’s actions on the administration or any other party with whom you disagree. Hold anyone accountable, except the individual.
When someone believes in traditional marriage, label them as “homophobic”.
When you face opposition to allowing refugees into the US, call it a “War on Women and Children”, “Racist”, or “Islamophobic”
Give, give, give, and don’t stop giving. Create an environment of dependency so immense, that the switching costs are great. Providing an environment of opportunity is problematic. Create a sense of entitlement so vast that the line between what is a “right” and what is a “privilege” is blurred. Let the conservatives call for a stop to spending. They will be the bad guys who will be seen as wanting to take away those “rights”. Don’t worry about spending. If you face opposition, refer to Chapter 3, Diversion.
If one exists, this might be what the handbook looks like. Now that should clear up a few things, don’t you think?