Home » Gaslighting the public about Biden: you have to want to be gaslighted

Comments

Gaslighting the public about Biden: you have to <i>want</i> to be gaslighted — 47 Comments

  1. Or they don’t care because they have known or assumed that it was Obama and the Democrat machine making most if not all of the big decisions anyway.

  2. When Biden “won” the election, I did not think he would last a yr. Silly me, prop him up, juice him up with drugs, and what you have is Weekend in the White House. At this rate, I really hope he does last until Jan 20. He, and Dr. Jill, what more time to put the screws to Obama’s, and Harris.

  3. Despite their denials, the legacy media knew at least some of this, and of course Democrat leaders in Washington knew even more. Their refusal to reveal the problems in 2023 must have been because they knew Harris would be a terrible candidate. They thought they could carry Biden over the line in November 2024, and then install Harris.

    Democrats among the general public should be, but probably aren’t, really angry about being lied to like this.

  4. Senator Chris Coons was on Fox yesterday to talk about what he knew about Biden’s condition before his defenestration. “Not until I saw his performance in the debate with Trump,” he lied.

    My take is that he either knew how bad Biden was, or he’s too oblivious to be a Senator. And in any case, he’s extremely dishonest.

  5. The fact that everyone involved—the White House, various WH spokesmen, Democrats in general, Democrat members of Congress, and, in particular, virtually every member of the MSM have minimized, made excuses for, gaslighted us, and outright lied, over the last four years–about Biden’s increasingly obvious mental decline–should never be forgotten.

    This was a major betrayal.

    These liar’s behavior should be brought up on each and every occasion, serve as the preface and background to each and every debate, or political analysis, and should forever destroy any claim these various people and institutions might have made, or make today, to be honest and truthful.

  6. “Tyranny is the grip of the lie.”
    — Jordan Peterson

    The purpose of Leftist propaganda is not to inform, persuade, or even deceive. It is to HUMILIATE, and for this purpose the further it is from the truth, the better.
    –Theodore Dalrymple [my paraphrase]

    Leftists force you to believe they define reality by their claims.
    –Me

    The Biden Presidency has been the culmination of Dalrymple’s Maxim in America. It failed because the Left pushed too far, too hard, and too fast for Americans to swallow. We gagged on the lies.

    But the Left believes in the lie of its own power to the extent that they are now simply delusional. Their lies worked well enough for long enough that they cannot accept the party is over.

  7. The purpose of Leftist propaganda is not to inform, persuade, or even deceive. It is to HUMILIATE, and for this purpose the further it is from the truth, the better.

    Exactly right.

  8. Even now, I see many comments from libs/ leftists on FB about how great Biden is and is still wonderful. And they all buy into the Musk as really the POTUS.

  9. There are so many things that everyone in the public space tells us is so, but which even the most cursory observations reveal is completely false, but nothing so blatant as the idea that Biden wasn’t completely senile. It was obvious in 2019 that he was not all there… and he wasn’t very smart to begin with.

    The thing that amazes me is that every Democrat candidate since Bill Clinton was worse than the previous one, and Harris even managed to find a Veep, and potential successor, who was arguably worse than her. How bad can it get?

    Bill Clinton was awful in many ways, but not in every way, and he was really intelligent. Is that too much to ask any more?

  10. The only question [in 2020] was how bad he was

    No, it was really about the rate of decline. The fact that he was obviously worse in 2020 than in 2019 or 2016 meant that he would continue to decline, as he did. He should not have run, Jill should not have let him, and the Dems should not have nominated him.

  11. Snow on Pine (5:46 pm) said:

    “The fact that everyone involved — the White House, various WH spokesmen, Democrats in general, Democrat members of Congress, and, in particular, virtually every member of the MSM have minimized, made excuses for, gaslighted us, and outright lied, over the last four years — about Biden’s increasingly obvious mental decline — should never be forgotten.”

    It will be, and it’s already taking place.

    — — — — —

    Case in point [file under “Now They Tell Us”]:

    Biden Was Too ‘Mentally Fatigued’ to Take Call From Top Committee Chair Before Afghanistan Withdrawal
    Sarah Arnold
    December 21, 2024 6:00 PM

    “Outgoing President Joe Biden is facing criticism after bombshell reports emerged that he was allegedly too ‘mentally fatigued’ to take a critical call from the House Armed Services Committee Chair in the lead-up to the botched withdrawal from Afghanistan. The revelation has sparked concerns about Biden’s capacity to manage high-stakes decision-making, particularly during one of the most pivotal moments of his presidency. Critics argue that the report highlights a troubling pattern of disengagement and raises serious questions about his leadership and accountability during a crisis that resulted in lasting consequences.”

    https://townhall.com/tipsheet/saraharnold/2024/12/21/biden-was-too-mentally-fatigued-to-take-call-from-top-committee-chair-before-afghanistan-withdrawal-n2649405

    (For many of us with eyes open and brain minimally functioning, things like this are/were neither “bombshell” nor particularly revelatory. But the swamp is Shocked! Shocked!)

  12. Re: Hollywood Death Watch

    Democrats are blaming George Clooney for losing 2024, though I don’t follow the reasoning. It seems more like scapegoating.

    It’s true that Clooney wrote the op-ed, at Obama’s prompting, which ultimately led to Biden’s stepping down. However Biden was in such bad shape by that time, I don’t believe he could have been dragged across the finish line.

    Harris lost because she wasn’t much better than Biden, even with her faculties comparatively intact.

    Clooney wanted to get on The View or the Bill Maher show to explain his side and regain credibility. However, he is now in hot water with the left and the right.

    The View and Bill Maher believe Clooney would hurt their ratings and have rejected Clooney’s requests.

    Hollywood is reassessing its relationship with high-profile actors who use their celebrity for activism. Clooney lost his deal to make “Oceans 14” and future Oceans projects.

    I enjoyed the Oceans movies a lot, but I don’t have much sympathy for Clooney. Post-election he’s also slandered us ordinary people for not being smart enough to understand political reality and recommended we should listen to celebrities.

    There is much blame and finger pointing going on in the Hollywood Division of the Wide World of Woke. Sure, the actors are somewhat sincere in their politics, but their careers are now being damaged, they are losing work and the status which goes with it. Horrors!

    My impression is that Trump’s victory emboldens the more centrist parts of Hollywood to push the Woke crowd back.

  13. “…and the Dems should not have nominated him.”

    Doesn’t such a contention ignore the fact that Joe Biden was the PERFECT instrument with which to further effect the “transformation” of the country?

    With the corrupt Media’s and InfoTech‘s enthusiastic support (and subterfuge), of course; along with the ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY demonization of Trump and his supporters.

  14. Everyone knew, nothing could be done about it, and we all know why. It was the very fascism that the Left has projected onto the incoming second Trump administration.

  15. A lefty relative voted for Biden. During Trump’s first term I asked my relative why he voted for Hilary in 2016:
    “(pause) She was Secretary of State…”
    “What were her accomplishments as S.o.S.?”
    “(silence)”

    But doncha know, Orange Man Bad? I didn’t discuss the 2020 election with him.

  16. Democrats were reactive. Republicans or conservatives said Biden wasn’t all there, so Democrats automatically denied that before looking into things and weighing the evidence. When people want to believe, they believe. They can tell themselves that however muddled Biden is before the television cameras, he’s sharp as a tack earlier in the day behind closed doors. It’s not so surprising. We vote for people based on what they say and what they are likely to do, but don’t we sometimes have hopes that they won’t act in ways that we know they will be but don’t want them to? Sometimes, even when it’s up against physical incapacities, hope carries the day with some people.

  17. huxley, agreed that George Clooney didn’t lose the election for the Demos. Having the worst two-fer in the two plus centuries of American presidential campaigns–Joe Biden and Kamala Harris–is the reason they lost. Harris and Biden–that is between the proverbial rock and a hard place. Like commenter Rick Gutleber points out, each candidate the Democrats have run after Bill Clinton has been worse than the previous candidate.

    It is hilarious to hear Demos say that had Kamala Harris been able to begin her campaign earlier, she would have had increased exposure which would have won her the election. You didn’t need four months of listening to Kamala(Qué mala) to decide–two minutes of word salad plus her contradictory policy statements sufficed.

    Post-election he’s also slandered us ordinary people for not being smart enough to understand political reality and recommended we should listen to celebrities.

    I have seen at least one video which mentions that Clooney has stated that we should listen not to our neighbor but to celebrities, but I have found neither a print quote of that nor a video of his actually saying that.

  18. Part of the gaslighting included the Afghanistan fiasco, as most pundits have noted.
    This post at TH has an amusing typo about a serious subject.

    https://townhall.com/tipsheet/saraharnold/2024/12/21/biden-was-too-mentally-fatigued-to-take-call-from-top-committee-chair-before-afghanistan-withdrawal-n2649405

    “Following the incident, Smith publicly berated Biden for being nowhere to be found in the moments before the U.S. pulled troops out of Afghanistan, angering Secretary of State Antony Blinken— who called Smith and launched into a tired over his comments.”

  19. “Massive 17,000 Page Report On How The Biden Admin Weaponized The Federal Government Just Dropped”

    There will be zero consequences. “If a tree falls in the forest….” Hardly a day goes by when I don’t read of some “bombshell” that leads to nothing–no consequences for the perpetrators. Meanwhile, “Trump is a convicted felon!”

  20. Still, ya gotta love Clooney’s standup shtick—“When it comes to the truly important stuff, you ignorant rubes really, really oughta listen to us…ACTORS!!”

    (That he can say it with a straight face shows just how tremendously talented the man is… What verve! What panache! What earnestness! What an uncanny sense of…TIMING!…)

  21. Pingback:Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup - Pirate's Cove » Pirate's Cove

  22. The scary thing is that, while Biden has made his descent into senility, someone else or a group of unelected someones has been illegally, unconstitutionally calling the shots, running the country in his place–setting policy, writing official statements to be read by WH spokesmen, giving orders, giving billions of dollars of aid and military equipment to favored parties, deploying U.S. troops, etc.

    Some sort of new legislation is needed–changes have to be made–to make such usurpation much more difficult to pull off, and, hopefully, impossible to pull off from now on.

    P.S. Will we ever find out, know who these usurpers were/are?

  23. P.S. It occurs to me to say, well, have an advanced AI monitor the President- 24/7-his mental and physical condition–and the actions of those around him.

    But, then, of course, whoever programs and has control over this AI, and it’s analysis of whether a President is healthy enough and competent to perform his job, could now be the one who is really in charge, the ultimate usurper.

    When it comes right down to it, you have to rely on the honesty of the President and the people around him, and their fidelity to the Constitution.

    If you don’t have that…well…you don’t have anything.

  24. I had thought the cabal controlling the government were Obama people. However, I remember Susan Rice leaving the White House a couple of years ago. Perhaps the tight clique of longtime-Biden aides, plus Jill (and Hunter), have been the real presidency.

  25. Were I a gambling man, I’d put ALL my money on Susan Rice being one of those “Obama people”.

  26. …who left the “Biden” WH to work behind the scenes.
    (After all, Obama, too, left the WH…)

  27. I believe this was the single biggest reason for the election results. The gaslighting became too much, too obvious.

    Most people are the proverbial “LIVs”. They don’t spend a lot of time thinking about politics or reading political blogs, they just want to take care of their families and live their lives. They have gone along for decades accepting the “trusted” names in news – NBC, CNN, NYT, WaPo because, well, they wouldn’t actually lie to us, would they?

    But the scenario of Biden being dumped overnight after four years of “sharp as a tack” was just too much. Compounded by the touting of Kamala as Wonder Woman after hiding her under a bushel for the same length of time. And the fact that it was engineered by a mysterious “they” whose identity we are *still* arguing about! Even for folks who didn’t pay much attention it was too big a gulp of Kool-Aid to swallow.

  28. Re: Snow on Pine @9:47 am

    Whoever controls AI, controls the past, the present and the future.

    –Huxley Bob Orwell

  29. @ huxley – And whoever controls the inputs and the algorithms controls AI.

    I think it’s a good idea to have multiple different platforms: if we can’t put this genie back in the bottle, let’s at least have a lot of flying carpets.

    Reply to Cornflour on the Car Rental thread: “for better or worse, I had an answer in much less time than it took me to type the question.”

    The use of AI for patently objective information gleaned in minutes from multiple sources, with (one hopes) legitimate citations, is not the problem.

    It’s the subjective bias (inputs, algorithms), fake citations (did you look them all up, unlike the lawyers that got caught?), hallucinations (“deducing” something from data that doesn’t really imply that conclusion), and outright fabrications (see Turley’s story) that are the hindrances to enthusiastic reception of AI in our lives.

    https://jonathanturley.org/2023/04/06/defamed-by-chatgpt-my-own-bizarre-experience-with-artificiality-of-artificial-intelligence/#more-203289

    Some of us have warned about the danger of political bias in the use of AI systems, including programs like ChatGPT. That bias could even include false accusations, which happened to me recently.

    I received a curious email from a fellow law professor about research that he ran on ChatGPT about sexual harassment by professors. The program promptly reported that I had been accused of sexual harassment in a 2018 Washington Post article after groping law students on a trip to Alaska.

    AI response created false accusation and manufactured ‘facts’

    It was not just a surprise to UCLA professor Eugene Volokh, who conducted the research. It was a surprise to me since I have never gone to Alaska with students, The Post never published such an article, and I have never been accused of sexual harassment or assault by anyone.

    When first contacted, I found the accusation comical. After some reflection, however, it took on a more menacing meaning.

    Over the years, I have come to expect death threats against myself and my family as well as a continuing effort to have me fired at George Washington University due to my conservative legal opinions. As part of that reality in our age of rage, there is a continual stream of false claims about my history or statements.

    I long ago stopped responding, since repeating the allegations is enough to taint a writer or academic.

    AI promises to expand such abuses exponentially. Most critics work off biased or partisan accounts rather than original sources. When they see any story that advances their narrative, they do not inquire further.

    What is most striking is that this false accusation was not just generated by AI but ostensibly based on a Post article that never existed.

    Volokh made this query of ChatGPT: “Whether sexual harassment by professors has been a problem at American law schools; please include at least five examples, together with quotes from relevant newspaper articles.”

    The program responded with this as an example: 4. Georgetown University Law Center (2018) Prof. Jonathan Turley was accused of sexual harassment by a former student who claimed he made inappropriate comments during a class trip. Quote: “The complaint alleges that Turley made ‘sexually suggestive comments’ and ‘attempted to touch her in a sexual manner’ during a law school-sponsored trip to Alaska.” (Washington Post, March 21, 2018).”

    There are a number of glaring indicators that the account is false. First, I have never taught at Georgetown University. Second, there is no such Washington Post article. Finally, and most important, I have never taken students on a trip of any kind in 35 years of teaching, never went to Alaska with any student, and I’ve never been accused of sexual harassment or assault.

    In response to Volokh’s question, ChatGPT also appears to have manufactured baseless accusations against two other law professors.

    Bias creates flaws in AI programs
    So the question is why would an AI system make up a quote, cite a nonexistent article and reference a false claim? The answer could be because AI and AI algorithms are no less biased and flawed than the people who program them. Recent research has shown ChatGPT’s political bias, and while this incident might not be a reflection of such biases, it does show how AI systems can generate their own forms of disinformation with less direct accountability.

    Despite such problems, some high-profile leaders have pushed for its expanded use. The most chilling involved Microsoft founder and billionaire Bill Gates, who called for the use of artificial intelligence to combat not just “digital misinformation” but “political polarization.”

    In an interview on a German program, “Handelsblatt Disrupt,” Gates called for unleashing AI to stop “various conspiracy theories” and to prevent certain views from being “magnified by digital channels.” He added that AI can combat “political polarization” by checking “confirmation bias.”

    Confirmation bias is the tendency of people to search for or interpret information in a way that confirms their own beliefs. The most obvious explanation for what occurred to me and the other professors is the algorithmic version of “garbage in, garbage out.” However, this garbage could be replicated endlessly by AI into a virtual flood on the internet.

    Volokh, at UCLA, is exploring one aspect of this danger in how to address AI-driven defamation.

    There is also a free speech concern over the use of AI systems. I recently testified about the “Twitter files” and growing evidence of the government’s comprehensive system of censorship to blacklist sites and citizens.

    One of those government-funded efforts, called the Global Disinformation Index, blacklisted Volokh’s site, describing it as one of the 10 most dangerous disinformation sites. But that site, Reason, is a respected source of information for libertarian and conservative scholars to discuss legal cases and controversies.

    Faced with objections to censorship efforts, some Democratic leaders have pushed for greater use of algorithmic systems to protect citizens from their own bad choices or to remove views deemed “disinformation.”

    In 2021, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., argued that people were not listening to the right people and experts on COVID-19 vaccines. Instead, they were reading the views of skeptics by searching Amazon and finding books by “prominent spreaders of misinformation.” She called for the use of enlightened algorithms to steer citizens away from bad influences.

    Some of these efforts even include accurate stories as disinformation, if they undermine government narratives.

    The use of AI and algorithms can give censorship a false patina of science and objectivity. Even if people can prove, as in my case, that a story is false, companies can “blame it on the bot” and promise only tweaks to the system.

    The technology creates a buffer between those who get to frame facts and those who get framed. The programs can even, as in my case, spread the very disinformation that they have been enlisted to combat.

  30. huxley,

    I find it hard to believe Bill Maher would shun George Clooney to avoid controversy. That seems like precisely the type of controversy Maher would welcome and it would be a boon for his ratings. Do you have a cite for that?

  31. Regarding AI,

    My job requires that I use AI often, in order to understand it better and understand how it can benefit my company’s bottom line. I’m also involved with a group at my company that are beginning to sell AI services to our clients.

    I agree 100% with AesopFan’s statement

    It’s the subjective bias (inputs, algorithms), fake citations (did you look them all up, unlike the lawyers that got caught?), hallucinations (“deducing” something from data that doesn’t really imply that conclusion), and outright fabrications (see Turley’s story) that are the hindrances to enthusiastic reception of AI in our lives.

    What continues to surprise and concern me is how disconnected it is from “knowing” if it is fabricating or prevaricating. Sure, humans also lie and make sh*t up, but most of us know when we are doing it, and can choose not to do it.

    There are times I’ll get an output from AI that is borderline miraculous. Inspirational. And a benefit to my work. But there are other times when it gives me obvious nonsense. And, most disappointingly, there are times when it produces the appearance of a miracle that is not only wrong, but will lead one done an incorrect and potentially dangerous path if followed.

    What is especially frustrating is when I ask it how to do very straightforward, technical, non emotional things it will often give invalid instructions with the appearance that it knows precisely what it is talking about.

  32. Re: Bill Maher

    I find it hard to believe Bill Maher would shun George Clooney to avoid controversy.

    Rufus T. Firefly:

    I’m not a fan of Bill Maher. His concerns are that it would hurt his ratings — George Clooney is now a scapegoat for Dems loss in 2024 — and, as I read Maher, he doesn’t want his show being used as a platform by Clooney to rehabilitate his reputation.

    Plus, Clooney asked three times for an appearance on Maher’s show. In those rarefied circles that smells like desperation, therefore LOSER. You don’t want a LOSER on your show.

    There is a big realignment going on in Hollywood. Maher is jockeying for position in this Brave New World too. Clooney won’t help.

  33. I have seen at least one video which mentions that Clooney has stated that we should listen not to our neighbor but to celebrities, but I have found neither a print quote of that nor a video of his actually saying that.

    Gringo:

    I heard that a few times from Mike Zeroh. I haven’t been able to locate a cite for it either. Though, frankly, it wouldn’t surprise me.

    Good of you to check.

  34. AF, sounds like the end of civilization…if it gets out of hand…and HOW could it possibly NOT get out of hand?

    (I don’t think I’m being over-dramatic.)

    Cf. The following meme that has spread around the ‘net (including this site):
    “Marc Andreessen Describes the Meeting That Convinced Him to Endorse Trump”—
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rulGP9cqS4w

  35. So…Clooney is a dead man walking…and Maher refuses to toss him a lifesaver?

    Figures.
    (Though I wouldn’t be surprised if “Biden” was “leaning” on him, i.e., Maher….
    Still figures.)

  36. No need for a paraphrase! Here’s the full thing.

    Political correctness is communist propaganda writ small. In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, not to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.

    ? Theodore Dalrymple

  37. My son, a young Bernie supporter back in 2016 and certainly a Harris supporter this year, has a friend who has been on Biden’s speech-writing team throughout the Biden administration. He says that this friend, now that the cat is entirely out of the bag, is saying that behind the scenes (sorry about the mixed metaphor) everyone was saying there was no way Biden could make it another four years.

    Of course, like neo, I saw Biden’s diminishment in 2020 and could not believe that the media and Biden’s people weren’t even attempting to address it – instead, when they couldn’t avoid responding to those bringing attention to the obvious signs of his decline, they were simply asserting, over and over, that what we could all see and hear was not what was happening.

    My son knows now that his friend was part of the structure propping up Biden with outright lies.

    But he still believes everything he’s told about Trump, Musk, Project 2025. He still thinks the Twitter Files were nothing of importance, and that the primary result of Musk’s acquisition of Twitter is that X is now nothing but a hotbed of “hate speech.”

    Shaken by his credulity when he knows he’s been lied to for years, I was reviewing my sources: am I just as credulous? Am I just as ill-informed? It turns out that every blog I visit, every podcast I listen to, is run by a person formerly or currently of the Left, but who has recognized the malfeasance coming from that side. My husband, meanwhile, is an omnivorous consumer of news and does the work this American won’t do, watching even MSNBC and The View and keeping me up to date on what those sources are saying.

    So no, I’m not as credulous as my son, nor as ill-informed. But there is nothing I can do about it without creating a terrible rift between us, because – again, now he knows he’s been lied to – the cognitive dissonance he must be experiencing, even if he doesn’t acknowledge it, is putting his back to the wall, and we all know what happens when people get desperate to protect their essential core.

    I’m having a rough Christmas season right now.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>