The Boy Who Cried Wolfism?

The dust-up between Attorney General Eric Holder and Congressman Louie Gohmert during a congressional hearing was the next day followed by Mr. Holder addressing Al Sharpton’s National Action Network’s (NAN) conference in Washington.

It was during Holder’s address to a presumably friendly audience that the implication of racism raised its ugly head and Mr. Holder is quoted as saying:

"I am pleased to note that the last five years have been defined by significant strides and by lasting reforms even in the face of unprecedented, unwarranted, ugly and divisive adversity," he continued.

"If you don't believe that, you look at the way, forget about me, you look at the way the attorney general of the United States was treated yesterday by a House committee … What attorney general has ever had to deal with that kind of treatment?”  (emphasis supplied, but we’ll come back to it later)

Accusations of racism are a staple of political discourse for many persons of color if they are infected by the Democrat desire for totalitarian control.  When “racism” doesn’t drive the nail home, other accusations, such as the ever popular “sexism” or (in the case of Harry Reid) the indictment of being wealthy and having a last name that sounds like a very popular carbonated cola.

And what better forum could Mr. Holder have used than an organization founded by the Rev. Al Sharpton? The man who insisted that Tawana Brawley was raped by whites and who decided based on absolutely no evidence that George Zimmerman (a “white”-Hispanic) was guilty of murder. 

Time and again accusations of racism have been hurled at those in opposition to the wish list of Democrat policies that do nothing but undermine and diminish the very country that these same Democrats want to rule.  And time and again these same accusations have been proven to be utterly unfounded.

But apparently Democrats, who claim intellectual superiority over, well, everybody who isn’t a Kool-Aid drinking Progressive, are ignorant of a gentleman who is often cited as the source for the story “The Boy Who Cried Wolf” who is known today as Aesop.  Aesop had a pretty clear idea of how human behavior actually works, which is to say, he certainly wasn’t a Progressive or a Democrat.  He noted in “The Boy Who Cried Wolf” that telling a lie again and again when evidence indicates clearly that there actually was no basis for the lie is a self-defeating strategy.  Even with the main stream media carrying water for the Democrats, the obviousness of the lie is apparent to anyone paying even a minimal amount of attention.

The same situation exists for Democrat/Progressives when it comes to accusations of “sexism”, waging a war on women, waging a war on the elderly/social security beneficiaries, “islamophobia” and on and on and on.

Every time we hear that type of thing from acquaintances, neighbors of even family members, it might be useful to counterattack with one simple phrase:  Well, that’s just another “wolf-ism”!

By using the word “wolf-ism” it will initially beg the eloquently phrased question from your Democrat/Progressive listener:  Huh?  A quick recap of Aesop’s fable, and the explanation that it’s just a lie being repeated and repeated, will force your listener into defending the lie, not you defending the accusation.  And using “wolf-ism” might become popular enough to not even need the explanation about Aesop.  With a little luck it would become our generations equivalent to Ronald Reagan’s famous “There you go again” line in his debate with Walter Mondale.

Getting back to Eric Holder’s comments at the NAN conference, it should be noted that Mr. Holder’s remarks are just chock-a-block full of “wolf-isms”.  Just look at the way he describes his ordeal as “unprecedented”.   If one looks at the word, it literally means that having a member of Congress question the veracity and character of a sitting Attorney General has never, ever happened before.  I’d be willing to bet real money that Angelo Gonzales, Janet Reno and John Mitchell would all beg to differ, and I’ve a more extreme example if you wish to read it.

Jim Yardley is a retired financial controller, a two-tour Vietnam veteran and writes frequently about political idiocy, business and economic idiocy and American cultural idiocy.  Jim also blogs at http://jimyardley.wordpress.com/, and can be contacted directly at james.v.yardley@gmail.com

The dust-up between Attorney General Eric Holder and Congressman Louie Gohmert during a congressional hearing was the next day followed by Mr. Holder addressing Al Sharpton’s National Action Network’s (NAN) conference in Washington.

It was during Holder’s address to a presumably friendly audience that the implication of racism raised its ugly head and Mr. Holder is quoted as saying:

"I am pleased to note that the last five years have been defined by significant strides and by lasting reforms even in the face of unprecedented, unwarranted, ugly and divisive adversity," he continued.

"If you don't believe that, you look at the way, forget about me, you look at the way the attorney general of the United States was treated yesterday by a House committee … What attorney general has ever had to deal with that kind of treatment?”  (emphasis supplied, but we’ll come back to it later)

Accusations of racism are a staple of political discourse for many persons of color if they are infected by the Democrat desire for totalitarian control.  When “racism” doesn’t drive the nail home, other accusations, such as the ever popular “sexism” or (in the case of Harry Reid) the indictment of being wealthy and having a last name that sounds like a very popular carbonated cola.

And what better forum could Mr. Holder have used than an organization founded by the Rev. Al Sharpton? The man who insisted that Tawana Brawley was raped by whites and who decided based on absolutely no evidence that George Zimmerman (a “white”-Hispanic) was guilty of murder. 

Time and again accusations of racism have been hurled at those in opposition to the wish list of Democrat policies that do nothing but undermine and diminish the very country that these same Democrats want to rule.  And time and again these same accusations have been proven to be utterly unfounded.

But apparently Democrats, who claim intellectual superiority over, well, everybody who isn’t a Kool-Aid drinking Progressive, are ignorant of a gentleman who is often cited as the source for the story “The Boy Who Cried Wolf” who is known today as Aesop.  Aesop had a pretty clear idea of how human behavior actually works, which is to say, he certainly wasn’t a Progressive or a Democrat.  He noted in “The Boy Who Cried Wolf” that telling a lie again and again when evidence indicates clearly that there actually was no basis for the lie is a self-defeating strategy.  Even with the main stream media carrying water for the Democrats, the obviousness of the lie is apparent to anyone paying even a minimal amount of attention.

The same situation exists for Democrat/Progressives when it comes to accusations of “sexism”, waging a war on women, waging a war on the elderly/social security beneficiaries, “islamophobia” and on and on and on.

Every time we hear that type of thing from acquaintances, neighbors of even family members, it might be useful to counterattack with one simple phrase:  Well, that’s just another “wolf-ism”!

By using the word “wolf-ism” it will initially beg the eloquently phrased question from your Democrat/Progressive listener:  Huh?  A quick recap of Aesop’s fable, and the explanation that it’s just a lie being repeated and repeated, will force your listener into defending the lie, not you defending the accusation.  And using “wolf-ism” might become popular enough to not even need the explanation about Aesop.  With a little luck it would become our generations equivalent to Ronald Reagan’s famous “There you go again” line in his debate with Walter Mondale.

Getting back to Eric Holder’s comments at the NAN conference, it should be noted that Mr. Holder’s remarks are just chock-a-block full of “wolf-isms”.  Just look at the way he describes his ordeal as “unprecedented”.   If one looks at the word, it literally means that having a member of Congress question the veracity and character of a sitting Attorney General has never, ever happened before.  I’d be willing to bet real money that Angelo Gonzales, Janet Reno and John Mitchell would all beg to differ, and I’ve a more extreme example if you wish to read it.

Jim Yardley is a retired financial controller, a two-tour Vietnam veteran and writes frequently about political idiocy, business and economic idiocy and American cultural idiocy.  Jim also blogs at http://jimyardley.wordpress.com/, and can be contacted directly at james.v.yardley@gmail.com

RECENT VIDEOS