On 21/05/06, Steve Bennett <stevagewp(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/20/06, Ray Saintonge <saintonge(a)telus.net>
It's still a matter of how you expose the hypocrisy. In the case of the
Massachusetts congressman who openly campaigned for a maximum of four
terms, it was a verifiable fact that he was in his seventh term.
I would still be careful - I doubt that we could not have found a source for
someone else pointing out the hypocrisy. If it was up to us, we would have
to be very careful that he had indeed promised that, that there were not
significant mitigating circumstances in the meantime, that anybody actually
Politicians make lots of broken promises...it's appropriate to point out the
ones that made headlines. Pointing out that a promise made as a backbencher
to completely reform the nation's tax system was never carried out...well,
you'd struggle to find a one line mention in a local paper about that.
My view, incidentally, is that it would be worthwhile mentioning that
as a backbencher he promised X, Y and Z - it shows where his interests
lay, which is always of note - but actually saying "and, of course, he
never managed it" is itself the "spin" You assume by default that a
backbencher's goals are never going to be carried out, and whilst on
the rare occasions when one manages it you say so*, actually pointing
it out seems like you're trying to make a point.
I guess this ties in well with the headlines thing - successes should
be remarked on, and Big Things which fail remarked on, but not the
things that no-one noticed...
* A. P. Herbert gave a maiden speech on his second day in the House
promising to reform the divorce laws - and had it done within a year!
- Andrew Gray