The Bishop and the Butterfly: Murder, Politics, and the End of the Jazz Age
    Wattree's picture

    THIS IS WHY I DON'T TRUST HILLARY CLINTON - SHE'LL DO ANYTHING TO WIN, AND SHE THINKS WE'RE DUMB

    BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE

    THIS IS WHY I DON'T TRUST HILLARY CLINTON - SHE'LL DO ANYTHING TO WIN, AND SHE THINKS WE'RE DUMB
    (BELOW IS A REPRISE OF AN ARTICLE I DID ON MAY 26, 2008)
    *
     
    IS HILLARY ENGAGED IN SUBLIMINAL MESSAGING?
    .

    *

    Beneath the spin has never been more meaningful than it has become during this political season, because it’s beginning to look like Hillary Clinton has taken it’s meaning to a new and very insidious level. After her comment regarding Robert Kennedy’s assassination, I began to consider all the “gaffes” that both she and Bill have been involved in during this campaign, and I’ve found strong evidence that points to the possibility that Hillary has been engaged in the practice of subliminal messaging throughout this campaign. If this is indeed the case, it makes her latest misstatement much more serious than many of us would like to believe.

    Subliminal messaging involves sending messages to the subconscious mind that are not picked up on a conscious level. This technique is often used in advertising–sometimes overtly, but at other times very covertly. An example of the overt use of subliminal messaging in advertising is to have a beautiful woman caressing a new car that’s being advertised for sale. Having the woman there caressing the car sends a subliminal message to the subconscious of perspective male buyers that if they buy this car, it will draw beautiful women to them. Another example of overt subliminal advertising is in the use of Michael Jordan to advertise tennis shoes. It sends the message that if you buy these tennis shoes, it will help you to play basketball like Michael Jordan. Neither is necessarily true, but the beauty of subliminal messaging is since the message goes directly to the subconscious, it circumvents the scrutiny of logical thought.

    That’s what makes the use of covert subliminal messaging so ominous. I remember studying one case in college involving a group of moviegoers who were subjected to the technique. In that case, while the group was watching a movie, one frame of a juicy and delicious-looking, cheese burger was spliced into the reel. the moviegoers never even noticed it on a conscious level, but the subconscious doesn’t miss a thing. Later, when they became hungry “out of the blue” and flocked to the concession stand, they never realized that they’d been manipulated.

    This technique can also be applied in a political context. But instead of one frame in a reel during a movie, it becomes one word in a sentence, a paragraph, or even an entire speech. I suspect very seriously that this technique was being employed when Bill Clinton mentioned “Jesse Jackson” while discussing an Obama win in the South Carolina primary. By doing so, it was Bill’s intent to implant a subliminal message in the mind of the voter associating all of Jesse Jackson’s baggage, or perceived baggage, on the back of Barack Obama. The beauty of such a strategy is that it doesn’t matter what the context, as long as the statement is graphic, and mentioned while discussing Obama, it serves to implant itself in the mind of the voter.

    Another example of subliminal messaging at work was in Bill’s post-Iowa remark that, “This whole thing is the biggest fairy tale I’ve ever seen.” He said that during a time when the Clintons thought that they still had a chance of getting the black vote, so by implanting “fairy tale” in the mind of black voters, it sent the message that they were wasting their vote, because Obama’s candidacy was a fantasy.

    Hillary’s comment regarding John McCain having more experience than Obama is another example of this type of manipulation at work. Hillary said, “He’s [McCain] never been the president, but he will put forth his lifetime of experience. I will put forth my lifetime of experience. Senator Obama will put forth a speech he made in 2002.”

    In this case, Hillary was trying to implant two messages. First, by saying, “He’s never been president, but . . .” She was attempting to implant the subliminal message that she had been president. Then, by aligning McCain and herself on the one hand, and Obama on the other, and saying Obama only had a speech, she was contrasting the white experience with the presidency, against that of a black man--and then dismissing Obama by saying all he could bring to the table was a speech.

    That was the primary reason that no one could figure out why Hillary had aligned herself with the Republican candidate–it had to do with race, clear and simple. Notice her phrasing–McCain “will put forth his lifetime of experience. I will put forth my lifetime of experience.” She emphasized, and then re-emphasized the word “lifetime”. So she wasn’t talking about governmental experience, or even legislative experience–she was talking about white experience. So the message she was actually trying to implant was, What experience could a black man possibly have that would prepare him to be president?

    Then on May 8th she went there again when she said, “Sen. Obama's support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again, and how whites in both states who had not completed college were supporting me." The reason she stuttered after the first comma was because on her first attempt, she forgot to implant the word “white.” The message? Vote white.

    In addition, the implication of her remarks left the message that white people are the only one’s who work hard. So the subliminal message is, if many black people are poor, yet, don’t work hard to remedy that condition, what does that say about them–and through extension, what does it say about Obama?

    Now we come to her latest “gaffe” about the assassination of Robert Kennedy. She claims that her words are being taken out of context, but she could have made the very same point by using other examples. In fact, that would have been the prudent and compassionate thing to do considering Sen. Ted Kennedy’s condition, and what the Kennedy family was already going through. But for some reason, Hillary deemed it absolutely necessary to implant the word “assassination.”

    And this was clearly not an issue that hadn’t been considered within the Clinton camp. On May 11th while appearing on Meet The Press, Hillary’s campaign chairman, Terry McAuliffe, made the same kind of statement to Tim Russert. He said that in order for Hillary to win the nomination "something big" would have to happen. Then Russett asked, "An act of God, or something catastrophic?", and he said, "Yes, something big would have to happen–absolutely."

    So let there be no doubt about it, the Clintons know exactly what they’re saying--and it behooves us to listen very carefully to every word. Because these two are desperate, and they want to get back into the White House bad–real bad.
    .

    .
    Eric L. Wattree 
    wattree.blogspot.com
    .
    Religious bigotry: It's not that I hate everyone who doesn't look, think, and act like me - it's just that God does.

    Comments

    It's November, 2015.  Since then, Barack Obama has won the presidency twice, Hillary became his Secretary of State and served him well.  A lot of water has gone over the dam.  Thought you should know.


    Ramona,
    .
    But character, or lack thereof, doesn't recognize bridges. She was desperate at the time and, essentially, the message that she was sending out to the wingnuts in America was, if somebody - ANYBODY - doesn't kill this coon, you're going to end up with a Black president. So, oh no - I'm not going to let that kind of water flow under my bridge. Obama was just smart, and wanted to heal the divide in the Democratic Party, but I'm not like Obama.  I'm not prone to forgive and forget. If a person shows me their colors once, they don't get a second chance. I've been trying to teach that lesson to Rita for the past five years. And by the way, she wasn't serving Obama; she was serving her own ambition, which Obama was smart enough to know she would do.

         


    This is as insane as your theory that Hillary has been a covert republican mole for 50 years because she worked for Goldwater as a teenager. Not surprising as you're not a very clear or deep thinker despite your bragging about how you're an expert in epistemology.


    Ocean-Kat,

    Show me where I said I was an "expert" in epistemology. I'd like to see the quotation. I'll be awaiting for your response.


    I am not a supporter of Hillary Clinton. I am still really pissed off about choices made by her decades ago.

    But this rehash of what went down in the last election cycle is just politics.

    Nothing subliminal about it.


    Nothing at all. He's looking for a fight ... yawn.


    And he's been "trying to teach that to Rita for the past five years".  Caught that, right?  

    Misogyny, it's so. . .misogyny.


    Trying, but apparently not succeeding. ;-)


    Leaving now.  Won't be back.


    Wattree - at some point one has to read one's audience.  The majority of folks here are solidly in the Clinton camp and are not prepared to accept negative assessments or analyses of her.


    "...not prepared to accept negative retro attacks and hatchet jobs on her" - there, fixed that for you. Hal almost had a friend, so sad.

    Wattree and "subliminal messaging" - sounds like the CIA and some psych-ops deal from the 60's, or maybe it's a Frank Sinatra movie. Or both!!!


    Hal,

    As writers and journalists, we should never tailor our opinions to appease our audience.  That's one of the problems that we have in our political environment now, political pundits and politicians are only telling the people what they want to hear. That's why America is so uninformed. Writers should ALWAYS say what's on their minds. If you don't, you serve no useful purpose.  Admittedly, I support Bernie Sanders, but if I know of, or find, something negative in his background, I'll write about it, because that's what I do.  That's why at one point or another I anger everybody - Blacks, Whites, Jews, and Gentiles. The only people I haven't offended yet are Eskimos. And this thing with Hillary is a serious issue, because it goes directly to character, and character is what both journalists, and progressives are suppose to be all about. Only wingnuts and idiots place blinders on to support their favorite candidate. 
    .
    In 2011 I wrote the following to Obama cheerleaders:

    OBAMA SUPPORTERS VS. CHEERLEADERS

    "There are two types of people who support President Obama. There are his supporters who want to see him be a success, and then there are the cheerleaders who simply go along with everything that he does and deeply resent his supporters who don't.
    .
    "The president's supporters understand the importance of remembering that in a representative democracy the president, and all politicians, are elected to serve the people, and not vice versa. They understand that all politicians are employees, and their primary job is to represent and protect the interest and principles of those who hired them. Thus, when we place the importance of any one man above our own principles, we create a dangerous situation by corrupting the intent of our founding fathers, and turning the democratic process on its head." (http://wattree.blogspot.com/2011/01/obama-supporters-vs-cheerleaders.html)

    .

    So, no, I'm not going to just fluff this issue off regarding Hillary as "water under the bridge," because again, it goes directly to Hillary's character, and it's much too serious.

    Hillary Clinton's Assassination Gaffe: Bad Idea In January, Worse Idea Now
    .

    "Is there a better time to drop a gigantic campaign gaffe than on a Friday before the first holiday weekend of summer? No — but if it's really big, it won't matter. Such was the case with Hillary Clinton's bewildering statement Friday to the Sioux Falls Argus Leader expressing confusion at calls for her to leave the race, since primary fights had stretched into June before:
    .
    "My husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right? We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California. I don't understand it."
    .
    "The statement invoking Kennedy's assassination touched a nerve when it was picked up by the New York Post and then blared across the Drudge Report, understood to invoke the spectre of another potential assassination in this campaign. Considering that fears for the safety of Barack Obama have been circulating among black supporters for some time, and that threats have reportedly been received, the statement was widely held to have been a reference to him, conscious or unconscious on Clinton's part. . .
    .
    "By now many outlets are pointing out that Clinton has made similar comments before — to Time managing editor Rick Stengel on March 6th (almost to the word), as well as her JFK/LBJ comment back in January. The lack of response may have lulled her into thinking the analogy would fly; alas, all it takes for something like this to flare into a major issue is for someone to notice. When someone finally does, watch out — even on a holiday weekend."

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/25/hillary-clintons-rfk-gaff_n_103...
    .
    And this was clearly not an issue that hadn’t been considered within the Clinton camp. On May 11th of 2008 while appearing on Meet The Press, Hillary’s campaign chairman, Terry McAuliffe, made the same kind of statement to Tim Russert. He said that in order for Hillary to win the nomination "something big" would have to happen. Then Russett asked, "An act of God, or something catastrophic?", and he said, "Yes, something big would have to happen–absolutely."
    .

     

      


    "The only people I haven't offended yet are Eskimos." - they're called "Inuit", so yes, you just did.

    Yes, I remember going on summer vacation in June and hearing Bobby Kennedy'd been shot as we piled into the car, so funny me, I thought she was remembering that primaries lasted into June (and primary fights for the nomination lasted into July/August when the convention happened).

    But these are Clinton rules - if a Clinton says it, it must be evil - not only have we always been at war with East Asia finished the primaries amicably and decisively by April or May with the opponent fighting like Ted Kennedy up through the convention nobly dropping out for the good of the team, any mention of a Kennedy or Lincoln will obviously be trying to get the black candidate assassinated (and mention of FDR would be trying to give him polio), just as mentioning Jesse Jackson Sr's 1984 and 1988 campaigns including South Carolina was a terrible horrible racist comment beyond the pale.

    (unless you're the now-incarcerated Jesse Jackson Jr, who stated "Once, South Carolina voted for my father, and sent a strong message to the nation,...Next year, you can send more than a message. You can launch a president."). Clinton rules - it's easy - if Bill said it, it's a lie and by the way Monica; if Hillary said it, she's a conniving backstabbing bitch and by the way Monica and Bill.

    PS - Wattree - re: "The message? Vote white.", do you think when Jesse Jackson Jr "described Obama as the first "successor" of Martin Luther King, Jr. to use the thoughtful and careful approach to language to frame social debate in a way that is unlikely to alienate whites and noted his ability to get various factions to agree with him and his political positions", he *wasn't* saying "Vote black."??? When Oprah WInfrey declared, "Dr. King talked about the dream. Now we get to vote that dream into reality. You gotta step out of your box! We can dream America anew! " she *wasn't* saying "Vote black."??? well I must be some dumb ol' cracker then, cause somewhere between my ears and my cranium I get a major cognitive distortion.


    Sanders supported the 1994 omnibus crime bill with mandatory minimums and "three strikes", ushering in mass incarceration. He also voted for No Child Left Behind, a program that increased privatization of urban schools and resulted in increased racial disparities.

    Sanders tapped Cornel West as a point man to his outreach to the black community. Independent Sanders previously indicated that he would have like to have Obama primaried in 2012.

    http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-11-13/bernie-sanders-and...


    Hal

    You imply that we don't accept negative assessments because we support Hillary. It's insulting and that's one of the reasons you get insulting push back. We don't accept your assessments because we don't find them credible and many have explained why.

    Here's one example I'll choose because it's so clear. Hillary takes large donations and pac money, Sanders doesn't. You think that's a good thing, I don't. When Sanders makes a symbolic gesture that hurts democratic election prospects I don't cheer. I see it as unilateral disarmament. It's foolish and makes me like him less not more.

    Obama took large donations and super pac money. He's doing super pac fundraisers now for the upcoming elections. His reasoning is the same as mine. He's argued that Democrats can't afford to play by different rules than Republican groups whose donors were flooding the super PAC zone.

    It's a question of how to fight the republicans. We simply disagree on the best way to do that. I'd still support Hillary if she turned down pac money. And I'd still call it a stupid move.



    What a self-righteous blowhard Olbermann was. Maybe he has a kids show now as the equivalent to Mr Greenjeans helping the younguns play pin the tail on the donkey, or the pirate for the entrance of some theme-based restaurant. Aaaargh ye maties, I'm the insufferable Pirate Roberts.

    Peracles,
    .
    Get out the sandbox and address his argument.  I don't understand why people find it so hard to simply deal with issues.  


    The 2008 Primary was a knock down drag out fight. Hillary had people trying to block an Obama appearance in SC. It was bloody. However, Obama made her his Secretary of State. She has been sanitized. When you observed her at the Benghazi hearing, you saw strength. At the end of the day, many conclude that it would be a good idea to unleash Hillary on the Republicans.


    I addressed this then and now - search for "Clinton Rules". Ted Kennedy is a saint for SCHIP, Hillary's part is deflated to nil. Lots of hopeless candidates hung on to the convention to fight - someone reminded me of Humphrey in '72 - but when Hillary tries waiting to the last primary, she's racist. Etc, etc. Again, I like her as Marie Antoinette - "Let them eat shit". And it pleases me to no end that she's pretty inevitable at this point (short of assassination or heart attack) so that your scraping the dregs of your 2008 attacks to regurgitate one more time is just so much futility. I'll teach you this tune to help you through these troubling times - "Tough titty said the kitty" - has pretty easy chord changes, you should be able to keep up.

    Peracles, 

    Please address the issue! This is so childish and immature.  I think I'm just going to start posting and leave it at that. I am so sick of having to deal with little boys with whiskers. I'm done with this comment thing. It's not worth the time.

     


    I said elsewhere - I remember getting in the car for a summer vacation trip and hearing Bobby Kennedy was shot, early June (near my birthday) so like Hillary, I know bloody well that the primaries last until June. So Keith Olbermann is just being a pompous asshole stretching remarks to be interpreted in the worst possible way possible - not mind reading, but intentional mind misreading. What the fuck else do you want me to say? They came to do a hatchet job and succeeded. Hillary conceded, didn't become VP, she campaigned for the big O and became SOS, we got boring Foot-in-mouth Joe Biden as VP , and here we are 7 1/2 years later and she's pretty much a shoo-in. What's new with you?

    Hillary was actually winning the popular vote when the pundits were calling for her to drop out. She'd go into a state, win the popular vote, and Obama would come away with more delegates. Axelrod just knew how to play the game better. It was a benign comment choosing a few races famous enough that people might remember them, meant to remind people that often primary fights extended long into the summer. For political purposes it was spun into a call for assassination. It was nonsense than, as many of the attacks on Hillary were, it's nonsense now.

    It's a fantasy and Wattree wants us to have a serous conversation about it. He consistently runs from the playbook illustrated by the ancient and probably apocryphal story of Lyndon Johnson instructing his campaign manager during an early congressional race to spread a rumor that his opponent, a farmer, was in the habit of enjoying carnal relations with his barnyard sows. “Hell, Lyndon,” the campaign manager replied. “You can’t call him a pig-f*****!” Nobody’s going to believe that.” “Yeah,” LBJ supposedly replied. “But I want to hear the SOB deny it.”


    Hal,

    Do you really want to sign on to the charges being made here? Will you support them yourself by presenting more evidence and making arguments yourself?

    If not, you are just riding shotgun on somebody else's hit job.

    Passengers don't steer the wheel.