I don’t read Time, but somehow my neighbor signed up for it and put down my address. While passing time on the porcelain reading chair I was flipping through and came across a disturbing article on Obama’s playbook.
An article in Time called “How Obama is Using the Science of Change”, reveals part of Obama’s playbook and much about the makeup and motivation of his academic propeller head administration. It’s all about behavioral change. Using science against people to get them to do what YOU want. What is scary is there is not a mention of freedom of choice, but rather how to shape the masses into your agenda. Something right out of some sinister Denzel Washington conspiracy movie. Cept, this one is for real.
The Obama administration is a few elitist academic propeller heads conducting their class science project on the rest of us guinea pigs. I wish they were that innocent and well intentioned, and that the ramifications of their dangerous actions would just be a poof of smoke in a science classroom.
Here are a few of the administrations’ behavioral change agent academic propeller heads:
Cass Sunstein-regulatory czar, co-author of behavioral economics manifesto(article’s word,not mine) “Nudge”
Peter Orszag- budget director, obsessed with behavior economics, does he not remind you of a snot nosed elitist geek punk from school working on a science project?
Austan Goolsbee-economic aide, behavior economist at U of Chicago
Jeff Liebman-exec associate budget director, behavior economist at Hahvahd
Alan Krueger-Assistant Treasury Secretary, behavior economist at Princeton
Larry Summers-has done work in behavioral finance
After reading the article you can see there is a method to his madness. However, it is apparent Obama is focusing on less method and more madness. He obviously just read the cliff notes or has a reading comprehension problem as he skips steps and uses it for the wrong purpose. As par for the course for Obama, he missed the single most important aspect, human choice.
The “Change” campaign was not randomly chosen. It is all part of a plan, a process. Making change is summarized in 4 steps:
1. Make it Clear
The article says studies show you should give better information on energy, diets, mortgages, credit cards in order for us to make better choices. Rules for better disclosure help. Obama obviously made some attempt here but it has only been lip service. His more disclosure campaign especially w/ bills has not seen the light of day past his teleprompter. Obama also shows his shallow cliff notes comprehension by just saying the word “clear” over and over instead of actually make things clear! I guess he learned that when you say something over and over again, people will start believing it’s true. (Bush is dumb). Has Obama really presented any “clear” evidence that bolsters his reasons for change?
2. Make it Easy
Actually making it easy isn’t really about making it easy. This step is about making the choice you want the default choice and making people take action to “opt out”. It’s a sneaky way of forcing choice, relying on people’s resistance to change and making an effort to change their direction. Notice the underlying them of these steps is forcing change and nearly taking choice away from people.
3. Make it popular
The power of conformity is a powerful driver of behavior. Creating social norms through peer pressure. They will tell you everyone else is doing it (weatherproofing their homes for example). Soon, the peer pressure will be used as a weapon to intimidate people. “You are the only one on your street who hasn’t weatherproofed, what is wrong with you!” I’m sure the intimidation and gentle persuasion of behavioral change will involve a fee or a tax of some kind. Love those free choices.
4. Ah, and the final and most effective step of making “Change we can believe in.” Make it MANDATORY!
Euphemized (is that a word?) in the article as “Sometimes we need a shove” . Hah!
“The research proves change can come about when it’s easy and popular, but making it lucrative-or even mandatory-can make sure it happens.”
Whisky Tango Foxtrot! Did I just read that in Amerika? I am shocked we have Obamatopians writing this so quickly. Could you even imagine if this were written about Bush? Forcing change on us for our own good? Goes to show the academics are brainwashed and are willingly signing up for more government control by a few “ElectedElites” that know what’s best for the rest of us.
Obama believes in change, no matter what. The screaming take away is there is no freedom of choice. He is throwing down the “Midas Muffler” gauntlet, saying you can pay me now or pay me later.
Michelle Obama warned us during the campaign, “[Barack] is going to demand that you shed your cynicism, that you put down your divisions, that you come out of your isolation, that you move out of your comfort zones, that you push yourselves to be better.” The President reinforced this in his Inaugural Address when he urged Americans to set aside childish things and choose hope over fear.
Translation: resistance is futile earthlings! Change or be changed!
But we don’t need to change our hearts like that. Opt-out 401(k)s, simpler mortgage applications, programmable thermostats and cost-effective medical protocols can help us do the right things even if we remain ignorant, lazy, greedy and obsessed with childish things.
This reveals the entire underlying premise of the community organizer brainwashing that ignores true free choice and the very foundation upon America was built. The fact that grown adults, one being our President, is characterizing most people as ignorant, lazy, greedy and obsessed with childish things is something out of a Stephen King novel. that we need some smart ElectedElites to save us from ourselves and tell us what to do is hair raising. It’s no coincidence that Obama comes across as arrogant, preacher-like, elite, and condescending, because he in fact believes he knows what’s better for us and will have to save us from ourselves.
Behavioral literature can be a depressing window on human folly. But it offers us ways to transcend our folly, to restrain our ids, to harness our conformity and inertia and weakness in order to do less of the things that hurt us and our country.
In case we didn’t get the message in the previous summation, the author gave us another in the final paragraph of the article. Good gawd, where did we go wrong? That these people think we are all weak, Id driven zombies running around with no self control that need to be conformed to not hurt our country?
For all of you that think Obama is an opportunistic teleprompter reader, this article should be “CRAP, MEET PANTS!” material. To think that masses of people are voluntarily going along with this radical view(insert your “ism” here) is disturbing.
I hope when this science experiment blows up it only burns those arrogant academic ElectedElite propellor heads in order for them to learn a lesson in hubris. It’s too bad that this experiment will harm many many more innocents.
Method to his madness? Nah, I’d say Madness to his Method.