The Obama website — fightthesmearsDOTcom (not looking for to create a link here) — launched only a few days ago and within hours it was both mimed and impersonated and also pretty thoroughly inspected and many bumbles found afterward. But those smears, hey, they are still out there milling about among humanity, if we are to believe the premise of this latest Obama-site.
I was wondering if but what these “smears” that allegedly exist are the result that one has when wishing intensely enough (for something) and then finding that something only when someone else asks if you found them. The materialization, sort of, of a thing based upon the social attitudes of another or others, like, say, performing to suit an audience.
Because, aside from various opinions and even informational misunderstandings among millions of people (that’s our human population, it’s what happens when a hundred million+ human beings all talk at once — aspects of stories get confused and remain confusing ), there’s nothing supernatural or nefariously “planned” necessarily in those results, it’s largely just how information percolates through populations, and when not offset by strong original statements, it remains percolating until it reaches it’s own myth or informational setpoint. People have opinions and draw conclusions as they can and will; it’s called thought process and reasoning.
Deeming all of that “smears,” however, is placing negative motive, if not cryptic motive, on others where there may just not be motive at all, and, slips he/she who asserts such motive out of responsibility for the dubious accusations.
- you project a negative assumption (“this bad thing is”);
- you assign responsibility for that “bad thing” on someone else;
- you project a negative motive to that someone else;
- you then blame that someone else as being responsible for that “bad thing” due to their “bad motive”…
- while all of that rests with you who launched the volley.
It creates, despite in a fictional realm, the false reality that someone’s thinking, doing, aspiring, planning or “plotting” “against you.”
That’s what Obama and campaign are doing here with this “fightthesmears” website of theirs, they’ve essentially insulted humanity by accusing the opinions of others as being negating of and about Obama, as if opinions are “smears” and not thoughts of others meriting basic human respect — it suggests a reduced consideration of the very power or privilege of thought itself by others when and as it may be perceived by a politician (in this case, Obama) as threatening to his political objectives.
But this, then, also establishes a bleak characteristic about Obama, and that is, to discuss the man — air one’s opinions, talk with others about what has been heard, read, seen, what assumptions are formed from all that — is to “smear” the man. And in doing so, this both insults and harasses voters into an anticipated silence, or, some minimizing of teir capacity such that they’re not fully confident they can even “think” or function as to ideas with this one man’s (Obama’s) “permission”: his website, his truth, his acceptance or not.
It’s called suppression of public opinion when and as it does not suit another individual’s purpose (in this case, Obama, et al.). It’s also very, very creepy political method and human behavior.