Several of us were talking last week — during lunch or some shit — about how Tim Russert is a master at the sound-bite trap. That is, he’ll sit someone down one year, get them to say something, and then several years later (or by using someone else’s video) bust out with a “so-and-so, you said this so many years ago [plays clip]. And now you’re doing exactly the opposite. What’s up?”

This morning, he has Sec. Rice on, and he worked hard to get that initial quote, getting her to say (not the exact quote):

Russert: So will you run for president?
Rice: No, I will not.

Of course, it took about 3 minutes to get to that point.

Off-Message

More interestingly, following up on news from the Washington Post, they had this exchange:

Tim Russert: “So you would not outlaw abortion?”
Rice: “No.”

Now, first off, I’m always happy to find someone who’s pro-choice. But, more interesting to me, is the act of someone as highup as the Secretary of Defense in an ostensibly Christian Fundamentalist government admits publicly that she wouldn’t outlaw abortion. What’s interesting to me is how a little moment like this give you a glimpse into (what seems like) the real thoughts of people in power.

Minorities Making a Majority

The Bush government is very good at using a consistent voice: everyone on “the team” says the same thing, making it seem that not all these people not only want the same thing, but that they believe the same thing. My understanding of the theory of
mob-think is that given a group a people, people in that group are more likely to simply choose what they want and believe based on what a perceived “large” and powerful sub-group of group in that group want and believe.

That is, if there’s a group of 10 people trying to choose were to go to lunch, and no one has expressed an opinion, once you get about 2-3 people who are even mildly passionate about going to one place, the majority of the rest of the group will sway that way. The group would reach a tipping point.

So, if that theory holds, it illustrates one of the very important reasons for groups of leaders/managers (e.g., the Bush government) to be constantly and consistently on message. If all the Republicans in the country are saying the same thing, they’re like those 2-3 people in the group of 10 who are passionate about where to go to lunch: it’s more likely that the country will go with what those “2-3″ Republicans wants.

Studying the Abnormal to Understand the Normal

With that line of thinking on the table, it becomes very curious when someone like Sec. Rice speaks so publicly off-message. (My assumption here is that being anti-abortion is on-message for the Bush government.) I’m always desperate to understand the mind-set, and how they got to and maintain that mind-set, of people who think differently than me (that’s part of the reason I studied Philosophy in school instead the major I started with, English). And, as in the study of the mind/brain, one of the best ways to understand what’s normal, is to study what’s abnormal.

That’s why issues like Sec. Rice saying she’s against outlawing abortion are exciting to me for more reasons than just the surface of the issue. It’s why McCain is always interesting as well: like showing up on SNL, back in 2002, making fun of all the culture of fear stuff back then.

That’s It

As you might expect from a liberal-arts-degree, nut-job-liberal like me, I don’t have any action items, or conclusions, for all this. But, Sec. Rice is certainly more interesting to me now than she used to be. Not only am I thinking that I’ll get more interesting observations along the above “the origin of thinking” lines if I start paying more attention to her, but, she seems more like a real person who has a mind of her own. It’s something similar to the excitement of finding out that a high-level executive at a large company has a public blog that isn’t just PR-trash. There’s a window there into a world I know nothing about and have no access to. It’s exciting, even in a very small way.