- You are major strategist for a large government program.
- You know you will meet strong resistance.
- You review your plans to pinpoint where you are weakest so as to know where your opposition should attack.
- You discover that your weakest point cannot be adequately fortified.
- So, might there be there some way to blunt your opponent's attack?
- One strategy, a priori to widespread disclosure so that opponents lack time to ally and amass into too big a number, is to select an opponent -- preferably a hot-head -- who you fully expect will initiate an attack under circumstances controlled by you.
- What sort of circumstances would you choose, and what kind of opponent?
- Arrange a forum where you choose the moderator and only comments and not debate are permitted.
- Choose an opponent who has a checkered past or questionable connections and with whom other opponents would not choose to be allied.
- Expect that the reports of the interchange will be limited.
- Expect that your allies will connect all who attack your weakest position with the initial attacker whom you chose because others do not wish to be associated with him.
- Expect dissipation amongst attackers on your weak position as they labor around the obstacle of that opponent you picked.
- Expect opponents to bicker amongst themselves over whether or not his being there is good or bad or matters or doesn't matter.
- Expect many big names from whom you otherwise expected opposition to now exempt themselves from the battle. They've positions of respect to protect, and will not risk their reputations by attacking an obvious point that is closely tied to that pariah you had the foresight to pick.
Fully expect MSM to tar with a Lyndon LaRouche label all who point out the many ways ObamaCare really does resemble something out of the Third Reich.
No comments:
Post a Comment