But that doesn't mean the rest of us can't use the "T-word." CALL 'em on it. MAKE 'em deny it.

Like LBJ did back in the day when he accused an opponent, early in his career, of sleeping with pigs. He knew it wasn't true. But that wasn't the point!!!

THE POINT WAS: Put It Out There And Make Him Deny It.

It's like - "don't think of a pink elephant." Um... well, that's now been put out there, in public, and for many, that's all they'll be thinking about - for WHATEVER reason and frankly, in psy-ops, you don't care about the reason. The reason is irrelevant. You just want it going through their minds. You want to poison the well. Muddy the waters. Muddy the thinking. The GOP does this all the time. I don't understand why our tribe doesn't fight that way more often, too.

It's like - "when did you stop beating your wife?" Subject at whom this is aimed usually has never raised a finger against his wife. But that question is now out there in the public arena, and you've just planted a seed and made a correlation that will poison the image of that hapless target. There'll be enough people who heard that, and it doesn't matter whether it's true or not. They just remember that, along with the mention of that person's name. Every time that name comes up in the campaign, SOMEBODY's gonna associate it with "...beating your wife."

It's shitty. Absolutely. But so is the world of politics. Nobody ever promised or guaranteed that politics would be immaculately clean and fair and upright and moral and all that other good stuff. It isn't. It's about winning. Winning at all costs. Like it or not, that IS the game. And if we don't play that way, we're gonna get rolled.

So I don't have any hesitation about throwing the "T-word" around. Hopefully enough seeds will be scattered and spread that one or two of 'em will finally take root. Cue the drumbeat argument. (Oh crap, calimary and that drumbeat thing that never works and maybe is technically not 100% perfectly accurate and is useless and we shouldn't even bother and blah-blah-blah... - as I've seen elsewhere on here.) And then you wind up with that starting to seep into some reporter's questions to the opponents about what appear to be accusations of treason. And then they have to address it and speak of it and thereby validate it, and you have now framed the issue in such a way that they are immediately on the defensive.

And you have thereby dealt that campaign a possibly fatal blow.

I think it's time we started questioning THEIR patriotism. I think it's HIGH time we do so. Hard. Viciously. Without mercy. And relentlessly. Nothing like throwing the "T-word" around to make that point.

Man, no kidding!

Sigh... okay, fine. Do nothing. And miss the point. It is your right.

I believe in drumbeats. And I believe in sending signals that eventually somebody picks up on. And trying to figure out how many different ways to attack the problem. Like the CONS have done - scheming and analyzing and trying to find ANYthing that will bore a hole in the wall, or chip even a small chunk in it, or cause even a hairline crack in it. And eventually they succeed rather mightily, don't they.

Rather than just sitting on, and obsessing on, that which one believes cannot be done, and therefore why try making ANY noise about it. As many of our Dems are still inclined to do. Call it a loss at the get-go and give up, before you even try to figure out how to suit up for the fight.

What a great point she makes!

There's backbone for ya! Even taking a risk of not joining a very worthy public action. I agree with her. It was tainted by that war criminal's presence. I wish he'd stayed away. It's his policies, his negligence, and all his little pals from from his side of the aisle - that makes demonstrations like the Edmund Pettus Bridge event necessary.

I too hate that he was there. AND that he walked around pretending he was in agreement. His presence was a blight on an otherwise beautiful and noble event. I tried to ignore that he was there.

The whole over-arching point here is to add to the drumbeat.

The more of this kind of point we can make, from ANY AND ALL sides, from ANY AND ALL strategies, from ANY AND ALL directions, just adds to the drumbeat.

That's how you build to a critical mass. What we WANT - is for this kind of action, THIS issue, THIS complaint in particular, to start coming at its targets FROM ALL SIDES. FROM ALL DIRECTIONS. We want to create a climate where the targets are simply worn down and give up. Like the FCC finally did after it was besieged from seemingly EVERYWHERE on net neutrality. The head of the FCC had balked. Kept saying no, kept denying and defying, kept leaning the wrong way. Wasn't listening. Well, we finally got to him, and we got net neutrality through. Because we assaulted from every direction, every resource, every vehicle, every approach, every strategy, every EVERYTHING.

It becomes cumulative. Like the amount of radiation one body can take over long periods. Pretty soon you reach critical mass and the levy finally fails, the barricades finally break, the resistance finally gives up.

THAT is what this is about. THAT is what this is all about!!!

Stack the Legos, guys. Stack the Legos. Little bits. Every little bit. EVERY. LITTLE. BIT. Every one of those little Lego bricks eventually stacks up to a very tall tower. Every little drop of water is just a little drop of water until it combines with all the other little drops of water - and then you have an ocean.

YES. They need to be classified differently.

If they call themselves "Fox", or "Fox Entertainment" or "Fox Propaganda" then seems to me they're okay. The whole truth-in-advertising thing steps in here. They are simply NOT qualified to call themselves a "News" channel. It doesn't fit with the product they serve 24/7/365.

Thank you for making this supreme sacrifice, trumad!

You have a lot more fortitude and high tolerance levels than I do.

Welcome back to the safety and the light. AND the intellect a lot higher than square-root-of-negative-one.

Wasn't that great?

And I LOVED what Congressman Lewis said, leaning into the mic and almost conspiratorially said (paraphrasing) "can you believe it - 50 years later I'm introducing the first black President of the United States?!?"

He was visibly floored by the very thought. What a great moment!

Kicking!!!

Fot THIS post alone!!!! Let's all keep this firmly in mind ANY time he's out there in public, moralizing and running off at the mouth.

darrell issa speaks with a HUGELY forked tongue. Has for a LONG time. He's about the last guy on earth who can accuse ANYONE else of impropriety or violating the law.

My first thought!

To boldly go where no bald man has gone before - to the height of sexiness!!! (Or maybe - "few bald men have...&quot