Important point one: Republicans have framed Democrats as flip-floppers when their positions has changed on an issue. And Democrats have struggled within that frame, trying to explain their positions and justify or deny the flip-flop.
Point two: I would like all Democrats to STOP IT. PLEASE, STOP IT. Instead, reframe the issue by being honest. Democrats are liberals, and open to change, while Republicans are conservatives who like the status quo. Democrats consider new information and adjust their positions accordingly; Republicans reject new information as “scary science” and repeat the same mistakes over and over.
Point two: I would like all Democrats to STOP IT. PLEASE, STOP IT. Instead, reframe the issue by being honest. Democrats are liberals, and open to change, while Republicans are conservatives who like the status quo. Democrats consider new information and adjust their positions accordingly; Republicans reject new information as “scary science” and repeat the same mistakes over and over.
Or simply; Democrats want change, Republicans don’t. Change is different from flip-flopping in that it’s based on reality. Flip-flopping on the other hand is based on political convenience.
That’s why this next story is so funny. It shows how a recent task force examined new information, made a measured recommendation, and opened the way for change.
Republican partisans are trying to make something out of nothing for the election season, like voter fraud or tort reform, faking outrage and name calling are the two basic elements of deception. The quotation marks and bold print signify the "hyperbolic BS."
From the JSonline and Wispolitics.com-State Republican Party leaders accused Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle of “reversing his position” on whether Wisconsin's moratorium on nuclear power plants should be repealed. Assembly Speaker Mike Huebsch said Doyle’s new willingness to repeal the moratorium is the “opposite of what he said” in 2003. Doyle spokesman said “It’s probably unfair to equate any potential comments on a specific bill five years ago.”
Here’s where common sense and responsibility come in to play. Who could argue with this logic:
Doyle said that his task force on global warming reached a “good conclusion” in recommending the easing of Wisconsin’s moratorium. Doyle dismissed (the) GOP claims as “this sort of desperate attempt to make things up on energy.” He said “Somehow this idea that that’s an abandonment of one position and the acceptance of another is just nonsense,” Doyle said.
“Nonsense” in the name of the game when it comes to appealing to the majority of “low information voters.” They are the heart of the conservative base.
Doyle said that his task force on global warming reached a “good conclusion” in recommending the easing of Wisconsin’s moratorium. Doyle dismissed (the) GOP claims as “this sort of desperate attempt to make things up on energy.” He said “Somehow this idea that that’s an abandonment of one position and the acceptance of another is just nonsense,” Doyle said.
“Nonsense” in the name of the game when it comes to appealing to the majority of “low information voters.” They are the heart of the conservative base.
Huebsch said Doyle has had a “change of heart” and Mark Jefferson, executive director of the state Republican Party, called Doyle’s new stance a “reversal.” Huebsch, Jefferson and Republican Rep. Phil Montgomery said it was “a major break with Barack Obama.” Jefferson pointed to comments Obama made-- where he said nuclear energy was not “optimal” -- to argue that “he was actually an opponent of nuclear power.” An Obama staffer said the Illinois senator has never taken nuclear power off the table in discussing future generation but has said there are areas that need to be addressed, including security of nuclear fuel and waste and proliferation.
“Regardless of how he got there, I’m happy he got to that point,” Huebsch said.
The most important distinction has to be made here; “That point” is not the same as Huebsch’s point.
Huebsch’s crowd would love to start building nuke plants all over, at the public expense. That’s right, who do you think insures them? Taxpayers. And if the Republicans had their way, they would have ignored two very important “points.” Would the nuke plants actually save us money or cost more for the energy, and what do we do about all the waste? Wisconsin law requires a federal repository. Hell, maybe we should repeal that too, and take our chances.
If you went by the newspaper articles, you would have probably thought the Republicans nailed those wimpy Democrats again. But that’s a whole new topic I don’t want to get started on.
The most important distinction has to be made here; “That point” is not the same as Huebsch’s point.
Huebsch’s crowd would love to start building nuke plants all over, at the public expense. That’s right, who do you think insures them? Taxpayers. And if the Republicans had their way, they would have ignored two very important “points.” Would the nuke plants actually save us money or cost more for the energy, and what do we do about all the waste? Wisconsin law requires a federal repository. Hell, maybe we should repeal that too, and take our chances.
If you went by the newspaper articles, you would have probably thought the Republicans nailed those wimpy Democrats again. But that’s a whole new topic I don’t want to get started on.
No comments:
Post a Comment