Moms Demand Action: Or instant movement, just add crisis

[GodFearinGunTotin]

I just ran across this and haven't had time to fully digest this but thought I'd throw it out there for your consideration.

Moms Demand Action: Or instant movement, just add crisis | Tavern Keepers

 

[KellyinAvon]

Interesting read. It does bring up one very good point: no one can go from a thought to 50 organized "chapters" in 7 days. Stay at home mom in a yoga class? Former democrat PR-type doesn't focus-group as well.

 

[MrsGungho]

thanks for sharing. this is interesting

 

[ViperJock]

More thought police. SW can go (you know) but people second guessing this sort of thing is both pointless and ridiculous. I will say, I am impressed with the number of clairvoyant people out there. Just because they can't get anything done quickly they think no one can.

As for the "no emotion" thing. I thought her words were clearly representative of an Angry Mom. The fact that she doesn't send prayers or anything to the families is completely irrelevant to the hypothesis and does nothing except to attempt to draw ire from readers.

Until conservatives dump these cheap tactics (omg if I get one more group email about Obama being anti American...) we will fail to inspire an EFFECTIVE movement to combat all this liberal BS. Focus on the things that matter, not second guessing the irrelevant possibility that MDA was simply waiting for a chance to spawn. I for one think it probably was spontaneous and that there are enough anti 2A idiots and dollars that a grassroots start up on Facebook could become enormous very quickly. A former PR person would know exactly how to pull this together quickly.

No offense against the OP. My /facepalm at the article though.

 

[jamil]

Someone needs to start a new .org. Mom's Against Fake Moms With Hidden Agendas.

Really though, with all her PR skills, she had to pick "Mom's Demand Action"? She may well have called it MILFs demand action. Maybe that's what Bloomberg had in mind all along.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

More thought police. SW can go (you know) but people second guessing this sort of thing is both pointless and ridiculous. I will say, I am impressed with the number of clairvoyant people out there. Just because they can't get anything done quickly they think no one can.

As for the "no emotion" thing. I thought her words were clearly representative of an Angry Mom. The fact that she doesn't send prayers or anything to the families is completely irrelevant to the hypothesis and does nothing except to attempt to draw ire from readers.

Until conservatives dump these cheap tactics (omg if I get one more group email about Obama being anti American...) we will fail to inspire an EFFECTIVE movement to combat all this liberal BS. Focus on the things that matter, not second guessing the irrelevant possibility that MDA was simply waiting for a chance to spawn. I for one think it probably was spontaneous and that there are enough anti 2A idiots and dollars that a grassroots start up on Facebook could become enormous very quickly. A former PR person would know exactly how to pull this together quickly.

No offense against the OP. My /facepalm at the article though.

Need a Snickers?

 

[IndyDave1776]

More thought police. SW can go (you know) but people second guessing this sort of thing is both pointless and ridiculous. I will say, I am impressed with the number of clairvoyant people out there. Just because they can't get anything done quickly they think no one can.

As for the "no emotion" thing. I thought her words were clearly representative of an Angry Mom. The fact that she doesn't send prayers or anything to the families is completely irrelevant to the hypothesis and does nothing except to attempt to draw ire from readers.

Until conservatives dump these cheap tactics (omg if I get one more group email about Obama being anti American...) we will fail to inspire an EFFECTIVE movement to combat all this liberal BS. Focus on the things that matter, not second guessing the irrelevant possibility that MDA was simply waiting for a chance to spawn. I for one think it probably was spontaneous and that there are enough anti 2A idiots and dollars that a grassroots start up on Facebook could become enormous very quickly. A former PR person would know exactly how to pull this together quickly.

No offense against the OP. My /facepalm at the article though.

If there was that much spontaneous movement, then why did Bloomberg have to pay people to come to Indianapolis to protest? You may have missed it, but one of our members posted an encounter with such a paid protester who was forthright about this being the case.

 

[ViperJock]

Need a Snickers?

Heh. Maybe so. It's funny how a certain moment can affect the way you respond to something. Anyway like I said nothing against you or you posting it. It would definitely be irritating if she was waiting to pounce. I just think resources would be better spent constructively deconstructing her argument through our own PR than to attack her for the reasons in that article.

 

[ViperJock]

If there was that much spontaneous movement, then why did Bloomberg have to pay people to come to Indianapolis to protest? You may have missed it, but one of our members posted an encounter with such a paid protester who was forthright about this being the case.

I'm certain the moment she started, she was snatched up and made a part of the larger machine. I'm not even going to pretend to have doubt about where the group has gone since birth. My point is really this; "who cares how she/MDA got started. It's irrelevant. The fact is that she is here and must be countered intelligently, not with straw men and emotional outbursts. These articles only appeal to the folks that already disagree with MDA. Stop preaching to the choir. We need to recruit fence sitters to our point of view. Articles of that nature will not help us.

 

[ATM]

Heh. Maybe so. It's funny how a certain moment can affect the way you respond to something. Anyway like I said nothing against you or you posting it. It would definitely be irritating if she was waiting to pounce. I just think resources would be better spent constructively deconstructing her argument through our own PR than to attack her for the reasons in that article.

She doesn't have any argument, she's simply the willing figurehead for another strategically planned group of moms to identify with and rally around emotionally such that they may be touted and steered by the existing gun control movement.

Deconstructing and exposing their basis for existing will do more to free the useful idiots from their ranks than attempting to refute their purposefully vague and misleading "talking points". I doubt most of their "members" have any real concept of their useful purpose beyond being a large group of emotionally charged followers.

 

[IndyDave1776]

I'm certain the moment she started, she was snatched up and made a part of the larger machine. I'm not even going to pretend to have doubt about where the group has gone since birth. My point is really this; "who cares how she/MDA got started. It's irrelevant. The fact is that she is here and must be countered intelligently, not with straw men and emotional outbursts. These articles only appeal to the folks that already disagree with MDA. Stop preaching to the choir. We need to recruit fence sitters to our point of view. Articles of that nature will not help us.

You don't think being a complete fraud in self-representation is an issue? You don't think it is relevant that this woman has worked for a long list of corporations her most likely supporters would consider 'evil'? You don't think it is relevant that she is drawing people in by falsely leading them to believe they are joining with like-minded moms and not Bloomberg Enterprises?

You also have to account for the fact that contrary to your argument, this cannot be countered intelligently. MDA is based solely on EMOTIONAL responses. YOU CANNOT COUNTER EMOTIONS WITH LOGIC. It simply does not work. Failure to understand this has been the central problem to the pro-gun movement for decades. You also have to account for the fact that politically men will generally gravitate toward freedom and women will generally gravitate toward security, and we know what Franklin had to say about that. Benjamin notwithstanding, the only way you are going to reach these people is to find a more effective way to give them the warm fuzzies, and exposing the fact that they are basing their sense of security on the efforts of a complete fraud contributes toward, not diminishes, that effort.

I will agree that you can't take the uninitiated and dump too much on them too fast, but at the same time, denial of the truth strengthen the other side, not yours.

 

[jamil]

I'm certain the moment she started, she was snatched up and made a part of the larger machine. I'm not even going to pretend to have doubt about where the group has gone since birth. My point is really this; "who cares how she/MDA got started. It's irrelevant. The fact is that she is here and must be countered intelligently, not with straw men and emotional outbursts. These articles only appeal to the folks that already disagree with MDA. Stop preaching to the choir. We need to recruit fence sitters to our point of view. Articles of that nature will not help us.

Straw man? The article? I think it points out some glaring inconsistencies. It's an artificial movement. It is smoke and mirrors to promote the idea that the antis are stronger than they are. In other words, MDA is itself made of straw.

Is it irrelevent? Practically speaking, probably. But that's because the only people who will ever think to question the origin of orgs like MDA are not the people whose job it is to inform people in the main stream. This won't go anywhere, not because it's not a legitimate point, but because the fence sitters getting their news from Good Morning America won't hear it. All they hear is the "facts" of how this "soccer mom" miraculously started an anti gun .org in 6 days. Apparently, she then rested on the 7th.

 

[brotherbill3]

I'm certain the moment she started, she was snatched up and made a part of the larger machine. I'm not even going to pretend to have doubt about where the group has gone since birth. My point is really this; "who cares how she/MDA got started. It's irrelevant. The fact is that she is here and must be countered intelligently, not with straw men and emotional outbursts. These articles only appeal to the folks that already disagree with MDA. Stop preaching to the choir. We need to recruit fence sitters to our point of view. Articles of that nature will not help us.

I agree whole heartedly, 100% about reaching - AND ENGAGING - the fence sitters,
Althought really it is those SHEEP ... in the field between the fences on MdA side and our side (and most are closer to our side).

Having stood toe to toe, face to face w/ her and her minions for the last year I still feel these articles are important to have available.
But these article are need to be kept in perpsective.
They expose the other side for the propaganda and mis-information they spread.

It make the question: "Do you 'mr fence sitter' want your life controlled by someone making up stories and propaganda or by facts?"

We ALL need to be energies about this. I don't epxect this story on its own to turn someone in the middle against them. but it might make soemone pay attention to what is being said more., if presented in the proper context.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Heh. Maybe so. It's funny how a certain moment can affect the way you respond to something. Anyway like I said nothing against you or you posting it. It would definitely be irritating if she was waiting to pounce. I just think resources would be better spent constructively deconstructing her argument through our own PR than to attack her for the reasons in that article.

I certainly think that's an important part of the counter-attack. However, we should also know our "enemy" (our political opponent). We should know why they're in the battle, who's funding them, who's pulling the strings, etc.

You're right about your point in your earlier post, in that if the only goal of articles such as this is some sort of superficial, internet chatter-preaching to the choir, then it serves little use. I don't know about the veracity of the assertions made. They may be as artificial as MDA's stated goals. But I have wondered how this lil'-midwestern-stay-at-home mom was able to gain so much traction, in such a short amount of time. I think that is only what this article is trying to frame for the reader.

 

[jamil]

I certainly think that's an important part of the counter-attack. However, we should also know our "enemy" (our political opponent). We should know why they're in the battle, who's funding them, who's pulling the strings, etc.

You're right about your point in your earlier post, in that if the only goal of articles such as this is some sort of superficial, internet chatter-preaching to the choir, then it serves little use. I don't know about the veracity of the assertions made. They may be as artificial as MDA's stated goals. But I have wondered how this lil'-midwestern-stay-at-home mom was able to gain so much traction, in such a short amount of time. I think that is only what this article is trying to frame for the reader.

I thought the same thing since I heard of how quickly she organized her "movement". I think the apathetic (I can't call them "fence sitters" as that implies, incorrectly, that they know what's going on and actually care beyond casual mention, and just can't make up their minds) especially real soccer moms, would give less regard to this group if they knew that it was a fraud.

 

[IndyDave1776]

 

[cobber]

What would/should the Left make of her tenure with Monsanto? No issues there for them I'm sure...

 

[IndyDave1776]

Here is the basic argument being presented by the other side:

Now, explain again please, how are we supposed to counter this 'intelligently'? I don't think rational arguments worthy of the greatest among statesmen would get the job done.

 

[ViperJock]

You guys care. But the people we need to reach don't. And it's all association. You have no proof. I could not use that article to convince anyone who can run more than 2 brain cells together that gun control is wrong because this MDA lady was waiting for an opportunity to make a statement. It doesn't matter. What matters is that she is out there and we will not win this fight by trying to use conspiracy theories (be they right or wrong) to discredit her.

However, if you show this article to someone who is genuinely a fence sitter or anti-gun and they change their mind, I will be happy to reconsider. Otherwise, it's just more blah blah blah.

all this article serves to do is outrage gun owners.

 

[ViperJock]

Here is the basic argument being presented by the other side:

Now, explain again please, how are we supposed to counter this 'intelligently'? I don't think rational arguments worthy of the greatest among statesmen would get the job done.

A battle of feelings can't be won. Was that Sun Tzu? Hmmmm.... You are correct though. If you can't get them past the emotion you can never change their mind.