A MeanMesa Fiction
The prospect of an interview sat well with the Republican political strategists when it was first proposed. A few of the details of the plan had been conveniently left out of the original presentation, but the central body of the idea was simple enough.
The "talking points" managers would send along a lower echelon spokesman -- meaning a representative with plenty of deniability in case things went off the tracks -- the interview could occur, and then the video and audio of the session would be returned to main GOP Psychological and Ideological Consistency Purity Branch for approval and censorship before any release.
Perhaps the most remarkable aspect of the proposed interview would be the introduction before it began of a recently developed "truth pill" to the subject. After that, careful attention could be paid to answer the question of whether or not the "talking points" this subject had been exposed to during the routine indoctrination process had been a success, that is, had penetrated so deeply into the Republican subject's mind that the responses he might give during the interview would reflect the mind numbing consistency the party valued so highly.
Two anticipated points were made in the agreement. First, nuances would count. Pre-packaged story lines had a habit of breaking down in interviews when follow up questions were asked. Second, not only would the topic of the interview be announced beforehand, but all of the discussion would deal with strictly political questions disguised as material issues rather than any troublesome matters of substance.
|Lower Echelon GOPCon Operative (image source)|
Interviewer: "Good afternoon. Thank you very much for coming."
GOPCon spokesman: "I guess so. This interview is anonymous, right?"
Interviewer: "Well, yes, of course. The video of the interview will be sent to the, uh, Psychological Purity Department or something, but once it's there, only experts with GOPCon Security credentials will have access to it. Did they mention the 'truth pill' when they were telling you about it?"
GOPCon spokesman: "Uh, yes, they did. Does it have any, like, side effects? Is it illegal?"
Interviewer: "No, of course not. In fact, it's so subtle that you probably won't even notice it. Are you ready to take the 'pill' and get started on the interview?"
GOPCon spokesman: "Okay. Does it really make you tell the truth? I mean, does it work?"
Interviewer: "It seems to work. All of our tests leading up to this interview indicate that the pill works just fine."
The spokesman, clearly becoming quite nervous, gingerly swallowed the pill offered by the interviewer.
Interviewer: "The interview topic we agreed on with the Purity Department is about Libya. Are you ready to discuss the questions which seem to keep coming up about the military action in Libya?"
GOPCon spokesman: "I suppose so. That's what the big boys at Consistency told me we would talk about. By the way, will the video show my face or just the back of my head? I would hate to have my colleagues know that it was me if I were to say anything wrong."
Interviewer: "Your face will be 'fogged.' No one will be able to see who I'm interviewing."
GOPCon spokesman: "What about my voice? Someone might recognize my voice and know it was me."
Interviewer: "We're going to change your voice so no one will recognize it, either. Now, can we start the interview? The pill ought to be kicking in about now."
GOPCon spokesman: "Okay, I guess. I'll have to say that I'm a little nervous. Is that a side effect of the pill?"
Interviewer: "No, of course not. It's completely normal to be a little nervous going into a video taped interview. Just relax. You'll do fine."
GOPCon spokesman: "Okay. What's the first question?"
Interviewer: "Let's start with the big picture. Are you in favor of what action has been taken in Libya?"
GOPCon spokesman: "I guess it's alright. One big problem I have with it is that it started too late. We should have taken action sooner."
Interviewer: "Okay. I think we waited until we could get the UN resolution passed so it would be a multi-lateral effort. Why do you think we should have started sooner? In fact, would you have supported military action undertaken by the US alone?"
GOPCon spokesman: "The reason we didn't start sooner is because Obama is a weak leader, indecisive. Now he's trying to blame his own failings on waiting for the UN."
Interviewer: "But now that things have started, wouldn't you say that the operation was going along fairly well?"
GOPCon spokesman: "Not really. For one thing we don't have a clear idea of what the mission is supposed to be. No one knows what Obama is trying to do. The American people deserve some kind of explanation."
Interviewer:"Doesn't the UN resolution cover that?"
GOPCon spokesman: "No, everyone knows that you can't trust the UN. Americans know that something 'fishy' is going on, and they want Obama to come clean with them. The American people have spoken."
Interviewer:"Why are you suspicious about the role the US is playing? What more would you need to know to make you support the effort."
GOPCon spokesman: "There's nothing that can be told to us which would make Obama's leadership failure seem any better. Plus, Obama said that he wanted Gaddafi out of Libya, but then he said that he wasn't sending our military to kill him. See? The story just doesn't make sense."
Interviewer: "But the UN resolution was about protecting the people of Libya from Gaddafi's military slaughter. It seems like the intervention is accomplishing that. Wouldn't you agree?"
GOPCon spokesman: "No. We're starting a third front with the invasion of Libya. We're already in two wars, and now, we're in another one."
Interviewer: "But there's not going to be an invasion. The Libyans don't want, and the 'no fly' folks have said they weren't going to do that."
GOPCon spokesman: "See. After the invasion, the US is going to be stuck there for years -- just because of Obama's lack of leadership."
Interviewer: "He said that it would be a matter of days, not weeks. Doesn't that mean anything?"
GOPCon spokesman: "No, it doesn't. Obama was born in Africa. I'm pretty sure that he's invaded Libya based on orders from the Marxist insurgents in Kenya where he was born. Plus, there's no exit strategy. Americans don't know how we're going to get all those troops out after we've finished. In fact, we don't even know what has to happen before we call it a victory and finally start bring the troops home."
Interviewer: "Uh, okay. Do you agree with the House members who are complaining about not debating the action before it began?"
GOPCon spokesman: "I do. There should have been a long, serious debate in the House before Obama committed any US military assets. This was another case of Obama's leadership failure."
Interviewer: "But would you still have thought that was a good idea if Gaddafi's Howitzers were flattening Benghazi while the debate kept going on longer and longer?"
GOPCon spokesman: "All that was just an excuse for Obama to extend government control even deeper into the lives of Americans. Plus, his trick has forced us tax payers to foot the bill for the invasion without having any say. We Republicans believe in the value of debating Obama's leadership failure even if it means that Gaddafi kills the Libyans in Benghazi. This would demonstrate, once and for all, that Obama can't lead the nation."
Interviewer: "Do you think that a House debate on military action would have finally supported the President's policy? I mean, they might have decided that the intervention in Libya was actually something that America wanted to do."
GOPCon spokesman: "Americans have spoken out loud and clear. They don't trust Obama after all the other socialist things he's done, and they don't want him running loose, invading another Muslim country just because he can."
Interviewer: "But the polls are showing that a strong majority of Americans -- 70% or so -- support the policy. Doesn't that mean anything?"
GOPCon spokesman: "See. That's why something like this has to be debated in the House. Plus, there's no exit strategy after the invasion. Americans are tired of that."
Interviewer: "But, couldn't a debate like that turn political? I don't think House Republicans are ready to have a quick debate to just settle the question."
GOPCon spokesman: "That's right. The debate is more important than the question. There's an election coming up, and the American people have spoken, loud and clear. The Republicans in the House have their voice. They're tired of Obama's flip flops and hypocrisy."
Interviewer:"But what about the Libyans who are fighting for their freedom and democracy? Isn't that important?"
GOPCon spokesman: "That's just another trick. No one knows who these people are, whether they are 'good Muslims' or 'bad Muslims.' Obama's just rammed another big government take over through without caring whether the thing ends in our favor or not. Plus, Christian Americans already don't like Muslims. That's another problem that Obama has -- trying to keep Americans from knowing that he's a Muslim."
Interviewer: "Shouldn't we just be willing to help people not be massacred while they are fighting against the odds for their freedom?"
GOPCon spokesman: "It's hypocrisy. Why aren't we helping people in Bahrain or Yemen or Syria? The governments in those places are shooting people in the streets, too. Obama probably wants to start bombing all across the region. No one knows what he's doing and he isn't saying. He's not listening to the American people."
Interviewer:"But don't you think that there's a difference between firing on protesters in the street and Gaddafi unleashing his air force against defenseless civilians in his own cities?"
GOPCon spokesman: "See. That might be a difference if Obama weren't a hypocrite. Plus, there's no exit strategy for after the invasion. Plus, there's French all over the place. They want to take credit for starting this war instead of us. This is just another power grab to further Obama's socialist agenda. In fact, Libya is just like ObamaCare with death panels and big government."
Interviewer:"Uh, okay. I think we've covered this pretty well. Thank you very much for helping with the 'truth pill' test and for a great interview."
The video's review by the Purity of Psychology Control Board at the GOP "talking points" office was, generally, good.