Sponsors

'Boldness' as a Political Tactic Email Print

Facing loud criticism, and even mainstream talks of impeachment regarding domestic spying, President Bush, rather than adopt a defensive stance, has moved to reassert the validity of his decision.

The White House "will this week step up efforts to defend its policy on the Patriot Act as well as its controversial decision to conduct domestic surveillance on US citizens without a warrant from a judge, in the face of mounting concerns from civil liberties groups." On Tuesday, Bush "will take part in a meeting on the Patriot Act," and on Wednesday, "he will make a statement on the 'war on terror' at the Pentagon." As "part of a coordinated approach, Dick Cheney, vice-president, will also give a speech about terrorism."

Although his own party is set to investigate the scandal, while the traditional media writes that the controversy "may have put a crimp in Bush's plan to climb back on top of the agenda as the new legislative session begins.", and that Bush and Cheney never thought twice about ignoring the U.S. Constitution (i.e. that 'Goddamn piece of paper'), the administration plods forward, never bothered by the technicality of potential consequences.

They begin by ensuring they never apologize or admit mistakes.

They continue by foisting a 'spin' campaign upon the masses.

They conclude by attacking the accuser.

This cycle continues regardless of truth -- regardless of consequences.

Not so long ago, during one of President Bush's numerous, spectacular, prime-time press conferences, this classic exchange took place:

QUESTION: Thank you, Mr. President.

In the last campaign, you were asked a question about the biggest mistake you'd made in your life, and you used to like to joke that it was trading Sammy Sosa.

You've looked back before 9/11 for what mistakes might have been made. After 9/11, what would your biggest mistake be, would you say, and what lessons have learned from it?

BUSH: I wish you'd have given me this written question ahead of time so I could plan for it.

John, I'm sure historians will look back and say, gosh, he could've done it better this way or that way. You know, I just - I'm sure something will pop into my head here in the midst of this press conference, with all the pressure of trying to come up with answer, but it hadn't yet.

I would've gone into Afghanistan the way we went into Afghanistan. Even knowing what I know today about the stockpiles of weapons, I still would've called upon the world to deal with Saddam Hussein.

See, I'm of the belief that we'll find out the truth on the weapons. That's why we sent up the independent commission. I look forward to hearing the truth as to exactly where they are. They could still be there. They could be hidden, like the 50 tons of mustard gas in a turkey farm.

Well, I'm sure something did pop into Bush's head eventually, but it probably had little to do with any 'mistakes' he might have made. Perhaps instead, he was able to focus on the lessons of brain-crutch confidant, Karl Rove, "Never admit mistakes. Be unapologetic and be bold!"

In fact, such boldness has been the hallmark of the Bush administration, a tactic fully driven by Karl Rove, the master political tactician who fully realized the power of 'boldness' when he targeted former presidential candidate John Kerry's ultimate strength using the 'Swift Boat Vets' in a full frontal, if not disingenuous, assault on the Kerry war-hero fortress.

These same brutal attacks were implemented in the 2002 Senate race when Republican Senatorial candidate Saxby Chambliss accused wheelchair-bound war vet Max Cleland of being soft on defense.

Take it straight to their heart. Take away their perceived strength and do it with uninhibited force.

These are lessons to take to heart, and though you might not be able to stomach many of the ways this tactic has been enacted over the years, there's little doubt that it is effective.

Fortunately, being bold as a tactic does not require that you lie, cheat, steal, or annhiallate someone's character.  Boldness in and of itself can work magic.

Indeed, such audacity seems to have become commonplace in politics. However the recent extent to which politicians have used the vehicle of brazen boldness to steamroll critics seems mind-boggling.

Remember the original $1.2 trillion Bush tax cut to the wealthy (This was moderated by the senate from $1.6 trillion)? Many people were outraged by its passage.

Being a 'uniter' and not a 'divider', Bush reached out and... tried to rail through an additional $100 billion tax cut to the wealthy. This time, however, he took it one step further and mustered up the nerve to label the cut a "stimulus package". I'm sure that divisive extra step tore the fabric of Bush's 'uniter' mentality. Somehow he endured.

As if that weren't enough, Bush then proposed a $674 billion additional tax cut to the wealthy, once again under the guise of stimulating the economy. Problem is, 358 economists, including 10 Nobel prizewinners have officially condemned the tax cut as a hindrance, not a help to the economy.

Bush's response? "I think this is best for the country." In addition, he continues to fight for a repeal of the estate tax, dividend tax, and capital gains tax all of which heavily favor the wealthy. Any mention of cutting the payroll tax? No way! In fact, Republicans actually want to shift the tax burden back to the poor.

Enough. What's going on? Bush executes a brazen act. Then, after some public castigation, he follows up with an even more brazen act, and somehow gets away with it.

Q: How does he do it?

A: The underlying phenomenon that allows Bush to get away with all this is pure, unadulterated, brazen BOLDNESS.

It's true, being bold might piss off some people (like you and me) but the reality is that audacity has some very powerful effects.

Here are some things that you should know about being BOLD:

  • The bolder the lie, the better: The bolder it is, the more convincing it becomes and the more confident and truthful the liar appears. The sheer audacity distracts from the story's inconsistencies. Bush and Blair have truly taken this to heart.

  • Nice guys finish last: When a person senses a weakness (niceness?) in another person, they instinctively lose respect for that person as a viable opponent. They start scheming, even if subconsciously, on how to take advantage of that weakness. This is one of those things that sounds terrible but fits perfectly into reality. I might be projecting a bit here. Nevertheless, Milquetoasts rarely have their day in the sun.

  • Never Compromise: The bold never bend. It's not about being stubborn. It's about being confident in your position. People who are bold show a rigid strength, unwavering in the pursuit of their agenda, confident, unwilling to give an inch. The bold make the rules. The timid follow them. If someone senses your willingness to negotiate, compromise, back down, retreat or go on the defensive, they will instantly and instinctively enter the mode of the attacker. They will then have the upper hand.

  • Boldness instills fear: Is it good to instill fear? Certainly in your opponents it is. Often in your subordinates. Rarely in your friends. Bold moves make you seem more powerful than you probably really are. It also casts an aura making you appear larger than life. Executed quickly and by surprise, the bold move instills fear and intimidates, setting a precedent that will automatically put people on the defensive in subsequent encounters. (Note: Not recommended for use in love-life)

  • Enter the Room Boldly: Enter into every action with all fires burning. Enter timidly and you will inevitably fall to the demons of confusion and indecisiveness. Entering boldly creates clarity of purpose, vision for the future and focus on the objectives.

  • Never Hesitate: The bold never hesitate. They work quickly and act decisively. Your hesitation is their time to think. Once they perceive your awkwardness, embarrassment and doubt, their sense of confidence instantly rises and their sense of respect for you instantly falls.

  • Boldness separates you from the herd: It gives you presence while the timid fade into the background. Boldness draws attention. Those with attention have power. People stand in anticipation of what your next bold move might be.

Most people are not bold. For when bold acts are executed, there are consequences. Often negative. In reality, we may think of bold things but rarely bring them to fruition. Why is that? Generally, people want to avoid tension or conflict and be liked by everyone. People are concerned with what others will think of them. Often, the mere anticipation of criticism is enough to thwart any attempts at boldness.

How do the timid become bold? No one is born bold. It is a quality that must be developed. The only way to become bold is to act bold. With each act of boldness, it becomes easier and more natural. Once the power of boldness has been experienced, it becomes a growing taste within.

Be bold. Do something bold today.

As an experiment, engage someone in debate. Tell them that they are wrong (you choose the subject). Tell them why they are wrong and tell them that they should be embarrassed for thinking what they think. Be unapologetic. Be Bold.

As you boldly move forward, remember these things:

  1. Whatever the consequences are of being bold, the consequences of being timid are worse. Timidity lowers your value and creates doubt and obstacles.

  2. Problems that arise from bold moves can be hidden with even bolder moves.

In addition, it is important to note that timidity is not completely worthless. Strategically feigned, timidity (or "folksiness" in Bush-Speak) can build trust. This trust can be used to lure people in where you can then pounce on them with boldness.

You're not in Kansas anymore.


KEYWORDS: , , ,

Sign up for a Complimentary Member Account... Join the community! It's fast. And it'll allow you to take advantage of all this site's great features!

< GO TO THE LIGHT! | Entrain to Cliff >
 Display:
fault with the suggestion that we use 'boldness' as a political tactic -- but only because they might confuse that with the boldness/slime combination used by the GOP.

I'm arguing that 'boldness' alone can offer the Dems some mighty benefits and thus suggesting that we use the 'boldness' minus the slime.

Political Cortex -- Brain Food for the Body Politic

by Tom Ball on 01/03/2006 01:15:34 PM EST

will always be a part of politics. The issue is that the Republicans flood the entire arena with the slime to a point where it's difficult to see anything else.

Thanks for this.

by Captain Marvel on 01/03/2006 01:41:46 PM EST

[ Parent ]
that boldness is a preferred weapon, particularly when we're dealing with such obvious hypocrisy, lies, and arrogance.  We could use more Boxers, Durbins, and Reids pounding out the message as loud and clearly as necessary.

Funny thing is, how difficult it's become in these times to distinguish between bold truth and bold deception.

Ironically, it's now a lot more difficult and time consuming to prove bold deception than to demonstrate simple truth.

As Bill Moyers put it, "the greater the secrecy, the deeper the corruption."

Taxes shall be levied according to ability to pay. That is the only American principle. FDR

by btyarbro on 01/03/2006 04:25:50 PM EST

[ Parent ]
behind boldness IMO for better or for worse. Being bold gives the impression of certainty and expertise. It creates a facade of confidence that nearly always defeats those who are less sure.

So true or false? Either way, boldness makes it seem 'more truthful' thus bold deception can often overtake the simple truth. Sad but true;)

Political Cortex -- Brain Food for the Body Politic

by Tom Ball on 01/03/2006 08:34:17 PM EST

[ Parent ]
One of the bold things we should do is go straight at these arguments.  Never let them make these claims without jumping on them immediately.  Don't let them cloak their efforts in the flag, and motherhood, and apple pie.  Go for the throat before they get a chance to frame the argument.

I listened to John McWhorter spewing his nonsense on race relations over the last few days and noticed how skillful he was at defining the scope of the argument.  Whenever someone pointed out something he was ignoring, he just danced around it, declared it a side issue, and moved on.  What no one had the guts to do was to smack him right between the eyes with the errors at the heart of his argument.

by Devilstower on 01/04/2006 09:54:13 AM EST

[ Parent ]
God.

And I can't tell you how many times I've seen extraordinary opportunities to take a decisive stand on something...anything....and they blew it.

Makes me sick.

Political Cortex -- Brain Food for the Body Politic

by Tom Ball on 01/04/2006 10:22:03 AM EST

[ Parent ]
I would have thought that the growing number of outrageous crimes and corruption and embarrassments would have shrunk the administration's arrogant positioning.

But it seems to be empowering them instead.

by Embolden on 01/03/2006 01:31:15 PM EST

It's like the knight in Monty Python's 'Holy Grail'. The guy's arm is cut off and he declares that he will trounce his opponent. Another arm lost, and another declaration of imminent victory by the now armless man. Off goes a leg, and victory grows closer. No limbs left must mean the limbless one has finally won.

What kind of thought process is that? Does Monty write the script for Bush?

by Captain Marvel on 01/03/2006 01:39:56 PM EST

[ Parent ]
It isn't like the GOP haven't opened up some doors for bold talk! They've obviously demonstrated that they are beholding to special interests, and grovelling at the feet of the Oil Business. They've shown they are perfectly capable of doggedly following behind any lobbyist who'll drop cash in front of them. And, they're so weak they can't admit that the highly touted reconstruction plan for Iraq is now in total shambles. I'd like to see some Democrats swagger through some of these openings and make some noise! Murtha seems to have gotten off to a good start this year, and I hope others follow.

by greatbasin2 on 01/03/2006 02:02:47 PM EST

stepped up to the plate at one point or another:

Barbara Boxer
Harry Reid
Henry Waxman

To name a few.

by Captain Marvel on 01/03/2006 02:50:26 PM EST

[ Parent ]
take a look at Paul Hackett.

If we're lucky, his moxi will be indicative of the entire congress-taking, Democratic class of 2006.

Let us pray.

Political Cortex -- Brain Food for the Body Politic

by Tom Ball on 01/03/2006 03:17:29 PM EST

[ Parent ]
and yeah, you would think the Dems would be lining up to pound these openings with their bare-fisted boldness.

Unfortunately, if they were doing such things there would be no need for this post and probably no inspiration to write it.

Political Cortex -- Brain Food for the Body Politic

by Tom Ball on 01/03/2006 03:43:09 PM EST

[ Parent ]
He stepped up, said what needed to be said -- boldly, mind you -- but he didn't come across as foaming at the mouth.

He also kept his retorts short, biting and to the point -- and very bold.

I think (I'm hoping) that boldness will seize the Democratic Party during this election year. I think one of the things we can do is WRITE boldly, and keep constant contact up with our reps to take a step out into boldness. I recall reading that FDR asked people to make a ruckus -- to force him to do what he wanted to do, but wanted to appear reluctant in doing. I think we need to give our Democrats that kind of cover -- get so wild and bold ourselves that they will have to shrug and "give in" to us.

We owe giving them that cover. I'm tired of ragging on them. This is a year for change, and we need to do everything we can as citizens to embolden them.

by SusanG on 01/03/2006 09:53:38 PM EST

And one thing we have to differentiate between is:

1) being bold (which is a good thing)

and

2) being arrogant, obnoxious, stubborn, etc.

The line is thin, but everyone knows the difference. Be careful not to stray. Murtha, as you said, Susan, is a great model!

Political Cortex -- Brain Food for the Body Politic

by Tom Ball on 01/04/2006 10:26:29 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Very timely...

Here in Massachusetts, some would like considerably less boldness dealing with those driving efforts to put an anti-same-sex-marriage amendment on the 2008 ballot. In particular, knowthyneighbor.org's publishing the names and addresses of those who signed the petition has brought pleas for restraint from some.

The argument is along the lines of we'll only make them mad and we'll let the anti-gay/anti-SSM people claim they are victims. Several blogs have lengthy threads going back and forth on it.

This is not the time for playing Uncle Tom. On one hand, we mustn't put posters up suggesting that anyone hurt someone as the anti-choice people did about abortion doctors. On the other, anyone publicly pitching hate needs to know that they might get called on it, particularly when their statement and signatures are matters of public record.

The right-wingers have played both warrior and victim as it suits them for a long time. I vote for bold for us.

Thanks, Tom.

The greatest way to live with honor in this world is to be what we pretend to be. --Socrates

by massmarrier on 01/04/2006 11:01:51 AM EST

That's certainly bold. In fact it's downright aggressive. Maybe I should post something about "Agressiveness" as a political tactic.

Heh!

Political Cortex -- Brain Food for the Body Politic

by Tom Ball on 01/04/2006 09:05:02 PM EST

[ Parent ]
 Display: