[Ed. note: We break into our countdown of top videos for a few notable videos of the past 24 hours]

Here we have Republican Newt Gingrich tearing up as he recalls times with his mother, who struggled with mental illness and died of cancer in 2003 - or - here we have Republican Newt Gingrich desperately trying to save his floundering campaign by crying a couple of days before voting starts. Your call.

"You'll get me all teary-eyed, Callista will tell you, I get teary-eyed every time we sing Christmas carols. My mother sang in the choir and loved singing in the choir," Gingrich said, referring to his wife, as he fought back tears.

"But I identify my mother with being happy, loving life, having a sense of joy in her friends, but what she introduced me to, is late in her life she ended up in a long-term-care facility. She had bipolar disease, and depression, and she gradually acquired some physical ailments, and that introduced me to the issue of long-term care, which I did with Bob Kerrey for three years, and that introduced me to the issue of Alzheimers, which I did with Bob Kerrey for three more years, and my whole emphasis on brain science comes indirectly from dealing with the real problems of real people in my family," the former House Speaker continued, at moments stopping to cry.

The audience sympathetically cheered for Gingrich as he spoke about his mother.

"I do policy much easier than I do personal," Gingrich joked.

Republican pollster Frank Luntz asked how his mother would react if she was at the event Friday, Gingrich said she would have been working the crowd.

"She'd be talking to all these people, and she'd be telling them how nice I was," Gingrich said to laughter.

[Video via TPM]

enlarge

Luntz' talking points are widely adopted by media, politicians and AstroTurf groups almost as soon as they're written. Consider his 2005 immigration memo (PDF), framing the entire issue and demonizing immigrants as a scourge and drain on the country. Or his 2009 memo (PDF) characterizing the Affordable Care Act as a "government takeover of health care."

I assure you we will hear these talking points on Fox News and CNBC immediately. So here are some of the top points. Read the entire list at Yahoo! News.

1. Don't say 'capitalism.'"I'm trying to get that word removed and we're replacing it with either 'economic freedom' or 'free market,' " Luntz said. "The public . . . still prefers capitalism to socialism, but they think capitalism is immoral. And if we're seen as defenders of quote, Wall Street, end quote, we've got a problem."

2. Don't say that the government 'taxes the rich.' Instead, tell them that the government 'takes from the rich.'"If you talk about raising taxes on the rich," the public responds favorably, Luntz cautioned. But "if you talk about government taking the money from hardworking Americans, the public says no.Taxing, the public will say yes."

[...]

4. Don't talk about 'jobs.' Talk about 'careers.'"Everyone in this room talks about 'jobs,'" Luntz said. "Watch this."He then asked everyone to raise their hand if they want a "job." Few hands went up. Then he asked who wants a "career." Almost every hand was raised."So why are we talking about jobs?"
[...]

6. Don't ever say you're willing to 'compromise.'"If you talk about 'compromise,' they'll say you're selling out. Your side doesn't want you to 'compromise.' What you use in that to replace it with is 'cooperation.' It means the same thing. But cooperation means you stick to your principles but still get the job done. Compromise says that you're selling out those principles."

7. The three most important words you can say to an Occupier: 'I get it.'"First off, here are three words for you all: 'I get it.' . . . 'I get that you're angry. I get that you've seen inequality. I get that you want to fix the system."

That last one sounds really condescending to me, like a little pat on the head or something. I don't know, maybe it's me, but telling a student facing huge tuition increases while they owe thousands in student loans already "I get it" will likely not earn any points for empathy, particularly from those defending the 1 percent.

The Occupy movement has the momentum. Their message resonates because it's true. Frank Luntz can try to rewrite a job search into a career search, but tell that to someone who can't even get a job at Walmart for minimum wage and they'll laugh. At the same time, our corporate media will take these very, very seriously and attempt to use them to marginalize and even demonize the Occupy participants.

Beware.

DOWNLOADS: (347)

PLAYS: (1044)

Embed

Until about 2 months ago I never, ever watched Fox News. Never. What little I knew about them came from the clips here on C&L in posts (I've been a C&L reader since 2005). I knew they were horrible because of those clips.

But a few months ago I decided the time had come to face the Fox beast head-on and really see if it was as bad as I thought it was. I discovered it was worse. And the Frank Luntz/Sean Hannity special on the "real voters of America" has to be one of the worst examples of it.

In this Hannity propaganda piece special, they claim to have compiled an audience of voters who are a blend of Obama voters and conservatives. They're careful to note that they're Obama voters, not Obama supporters. There is a difference. Assume the audience is a group of ultra-conservatives, conservatives, and conservative independents who crossed over to vote for Obama.

The premise is to deal with why people hate government, feel disconnected, have no confidence in Congress. The true goal, in my opinion, was to reinforce why people hate government. To bring on Eric Cantor and Paul Ryan and their insane plans for this country under the pretense of understanding voter anger is absurd. To bring on 18 tea party freshmen Congressmen just makes them bigger lying liars than they already are. And to cap it off with Jeb Hensarling and Rob Andrews just proves that it's not about any sincere effort to bring "government and the people" together. It's about giving Republicans free air time to sell their odious plans with Frank Luntz guiding the discussion with handheld meters of approval or disapproval. Suffice it to say, whenever a Republican opened his or her mouth, the HappyMeter went up to 100%.

If a casual viewer were to flip through channels and land on this special, they'd think that every American on the planet stays awake at night wondering how their precious little babies will pay off the national debt, that there's only one party in Congress, and there are no alternatives other than to lower taxes on the rich and end Medicare and the entire social contract which has worked so well up till now.

Which is, of course, exactly what these evil men want people to think. I don't often call people evil, but what is going on right now in the media at the hands of Fox News is evil. Pure, bold, propaganda.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (358)

PLAYS: (1935)

Embed

If you need any proof that John Birch is alive and well and running the GOP all you have to do is watch this Frank Luntz focus group comprised of Iowa Republican caucus members on Hannity. It's stunning in its twisted belief system. Even Frank Luntz in my opinion was taken back by what they were saying because they weren't asked specifically what religion Obama belongs to.

Bill O'Reilly is still obsessing over his ratings from his Super Bowl interview with Obama which I will talk about in another post, but Luntz's Road to 2012 focus group was asked to comment on Obama's response to BillO's question about the Muslim Brotherhood.

Luntz noted his group’s extremely negative reaction when, in his interview with Bill O’Reilly, Obama did not say he didn’t want the Muslim Brotherhood as part of a new government in Egypt. Then, feigning non-partisan curiosity, Luntz deliberately elicited a slew of condemnation by asking his group, "The reaction was so negative, so overwhelming, what’s the problem?”

But I wonder if Luntz knew what he was in for when one member of his group piped up with, “I believe that Barack Obama’s religious beliefs do govern his foreign policy.” When Luntz pressed her to explain what those “religious beliefs” were, the woman replied, “I believe that he is a Muslim.” “You do,” Luntz said. How many of you believe that here?” The majority of the group’s hands went in the air.

Up until that point, I was suspicious that Luntz knew his group's beliefs in advance and had begun the Muslim Brotherhood discussion with an eye toward steering the discussion that way. But then Luntz sounded a bit dismayed as he said, “Now, do you understand the implications of what you’re saying here, what the media’s gonna say about this group and about Iowa caucus voters in the future? You realize what you’re opening up here?”

He quickly tried to walk them back by saying, “Now, do you understand the implications of what you’re saying here, what the media’s gonna say about this group and about Iowa caucus voters in the future? You realize what you’re opening up here?”' I expect Republicans to dislike President Obama, but the religious fantasies they embrace is as terrifying as the first time you saw Linda Blair's head spinning around in The Exorcist.

It doesn't surprise me all that much after a Pew Poll showed 30% of Republicans believe Obama is a Muslim back in 2010. However, their religious fantasies are getting much worse as we approach the 2012 election. The Tea Party has had two years to gather their conspiratorial forces together and they will continue with the onslaught of Bircher type lunatic fantasies that the Koch Brothers were founded on.

UPDATED: Think Progress clipped Phillip Dennis of the Texas Tea Party from a segment on Hardball saying Obama might be a Muslim.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (537)

PLAYS: (945)

Embed

Frank Luntz and Sean Hannity were all appalled last night at the vicious and harsh language being used by those eeeeevil liberals this week in describing poor, put-upon conservatives as "hostage-takers" for merely holding up unemployment insurance payouts for poor people in order to force tax cuts for the wealthy down everyone's throat. It was heart-wrenching.

Of course, when your scenario is a heavy-duty fantasy like this one, it means that you're going to be doing a lot of projection. Sure enough:

HANNITY: Let me disagree with you. This is the liberals doing this. This is Obama attacking Republicans as hostage-takers. This is the Democratic Party saying, you know, the president f'd up, f him, screw him, he betrayed us, he's betraying other - give me the example of where are conservatives using this rhetoric?

LUNTZ: But nobody is listening. The problem is that the right isn't listening to the left. The left isn't listening to the right.

HANNITY: I'm talking about the harsh vitriol and rhetoric is coming from the left.

LUNTZ: I don't disagree with the rhetoric, but I'm out with the public and I'm doing this now almost every other night and in all of the focus groups even when it is done for corporate clients or media clients.

People aren't listening to each other and they don't want to hear what each other says. They are taking their news based on what affirms them rather than what informs them. They don't even share the same basic facts and basic understanding. Sean, this country is more divided now than it has been since Vietnam.

HANNITY: I see that, but -- if I were to call President Obama the things that he's calling conservatives, or that liberals are calling him, I probably would be, you know, victim of a boycott or firing.

Hmmm. No small irony in Luntz observing that people are now "taking their news based on what affirms them rather than what informs them" on Fox News, of all places.

And goodness, where could this disparaging rhetoric be coming from? Certainly it couldn't be inspired by right-wing talkers like Sean Hannity, could it? After all, his rhetoric is always calm and reasonable and respectful, right?

Well, maybe not so much ...

HANNITY: Because they are so harsh in their rhetoric, is this going to backfire? In other words, does this hurt the Democrats? Forget about the disagreement, which I think we have two very fundamental different views of which direction the country ought to go. I think Obama has failed as president, but this language, this incendiary rhetoric does that come back to hurt them?

Pretty funny, isn't it, how utterly un-self-aware these right-wing fanatics are. They can utter their own self-contradiction in the same sentence and not even recognize it.

And when it comes to Obama, only Glenn Beck outdoes Hannity in terms of vicious and incendiary rhetoric on Fox.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (2451)

PLAYS: (6307)

Embed

(h/t Heather)

This clip of Anthony Weiner going ballistic on the House floor is one for the ages -- it should be watched again and again and again, and not only because he was angry and frustrated, but because he spoke a truth that all of us expect from our representatives. It's really quite simple: "If you believe that it's right, you vote yes. You don't hide behind procedure and give cover to your pals."

It's really that simple, but here's the backstory. The House has been trying to re-open the 9/11 Victims Compensation Fund through 2031 for 9/11 responders whose health has been affected.

When it became apparent that the Republicans were going to attach "poison pill" amendments to the bill that had nothing to do with 9/11 and everything to do with their political agenda, Democrats shut down the possibility of amending the bill by moving it to the suspension calendar, where a minimum 2/3rds vote is needed for it to pass.

Republicans applied the same old talking points, calling it a "massive new entitlement program". Actually, that's not quite right. They called it a "massive job-killing new entitlement program", because that's the Frank Luntz mantra of the week. (I was monitoring the Senate at the same time, and somehow the Small Business Jobs bill also became another "massive job-killing new entitlement program.") Of course, that's nonsense too, given that it had been structured to be paid for by closing a tax loophole for foreign corporations.

If you believe it's right, you vote yes.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (719)

PLAYS: (1231)

Embed

Sen. Bob Corker appeared on Hardball yesterday to talk financial reform and Mitch McConnell's amazing verbatim spew of the Frank Luntz talking points designed to kill any meaningful Wall Street reforms. He took care to point out that he has "never used those Frank Luntz talking points...", confirming the not-too obscure fact that Mitch McConnell has memorized them all and IS using them. (Full text of Luntz memo)

He optimistically predicts final passage of Dodd's bill with 70 Senators voting for it. Of course, Dodd's bill doesn't really have much in the way of derivatives reform. That's Senator Blanche Lincoln's bill.

In fairness to Sen. Corker, he has been the one single Republican who actually tried to find a bipartisan solution to financial reform before the GOP leadership shut down the entire effort.

Joe Conason:

Corker’s conduct exemplifies the Republican strategy (which, in fairness, he may not have fully understood until last week). Having spent months working on the bill with committee chairman Chris Dodd, D-Conn., Corker suddenly found himself vowing to support a filibuster over provisions in the bill that he had helped to write.

If Senator Corker isn't filibustering the bill, then who is the 41st vote? Let me guess...maybe Ben Nelson?

As anyone who watches Mythbusters can tell you, you really can buff a turd. Why, GOP pollster and messaging strategist Frank Luntz does it on a regular basis! And this time, he's targeted financial regulatory reform.

I wonder what this amoral hack sees when he looks in the mirror - besides the bad wig, I mean:

In addition to tying regulatory reform to a massive government takeover, Luntz's memo includes several other data points and messaging suggestions as a blue print for the legislation's defeat. Opponents, he writes, would be well served to link the package to the financial industry bailout (which, it should be noted, is fundamentally not part of the legislation). According to accompanying polling data, 52 percent of voters said they would be "much less likely" to vote for their member of Congress if they voted for a financial reform bill that contained a fund to bail out banks and Wall Street.

"Public outrage about the bailout of banks and Wall Street is a simmering time bomb set to go off on Election Day," Luntz wrote. "Frankly, the single best way to kill any legislation is to link it to the Big Bank Bailout."

Another effective strategy to kill the bill, according to Luntz, is to make the case that it was written in secret by lobbyists.

"The American people are tired of add-ons, earmarks, and backroom deals - but they are mad as hell at 'lobbyist loopholes,'" Luntz wrote. "You must put proponents of the legislation on the defense, forcing them to attempt to justify the 'lobbyist loopholes' and exemptions placed in the bill... Highlight the exemptions. Broadcast them. Remind them, 'The legislation is filled with lobbyist loopholes that exclude certain wealthy, powerful industries from regulations.'"

On the specific issue of a Consumer Financial Protection Agency, Luntz argued that opponents should stress the high-cost of creating an additional regulatory body in addition to the damaging effects it will supposedly have on "small business owners" (as opposed to, merely, small businesses).

"Owning a small business is part of the American Dream and Congress should make it easier to be an entrepreneur," wrote Luntz. "But the Financial Reform bill and the creation of the CFPA makes it harder to be a small business owner because it will choke off credit options to small business owners."

These lines or arguments are similar to the ones used by regulatory reform opponents in the past, often with some success. What's telling is that they are being trotted out again in this type of economic environment.

DOWNLOADS: (970)

PLAYS: (2680)

Embed

(This video is from 2005)

Conservatives will once again try to pull a scam on the America people which is known as "The Luntz"

Frank Luntz has drafted the new GOP playbook to try and stop Financial reform and it's not going to be pretty.

Nine months after he penned a memo laying out the arguments for health care legislation's destruction, Republican message guru Frank Luntz has put together a playbook to help derail financial regulatory reform.

In a 17-page memo titled, "The Language of Financial Reform," Luntz urged opponents of reform to frame the final product as filled with bank bailouts, lobbyist loopholes, and additional layers of complicated government bureaucracy.

"If there is one thing we can all agree on, it's that the bad decisions and harmful policies by Washington bureaucrats that in many ways led to the economic crash must never be repeated," Luntz wrote. "This is your critical advantage. Washington's incompetence is the common ground on which you can build support."

Luntz continued: "Ordinarily, calling for a new government program 'to protect consumers' would be extraordinary popular. But these are not ordinary times. The American people are not just saying 'no.' They are saying 'hell no' to more government agencies, more bureaucrats, and more legislation crafted by special interests."

...read on

Republicans are ahead of the game once again. Chris Dodd is possibly backing off of the agency too. Bloggers were screaming at the administration to take more of a populist approach in their dealing with the economy, but we were ignored and then FOX News created the Teabaggers and that was that.

Digby has more:

Marc Ambinder reports how the Democrats plan to fight back now:

Continue reading »

alicublog: Gun Nuts

The Anonymous Liberal: The mistake of assuming the existence of GOP core principles, much less, intelligence

the Big Mattress: To the Tea Party People

The Reaction: It's called the free market and it's turned on Glenn Beck

Bob Minor: Will what professionals say about LGBT people finally matter?

OFF THE BEATEN PATH: KroydBlog, Paul Krugman Like a Father to Me, No Smoking in the Skull Cave, Manifesto Joe's Texas Blues