In politics, as in life, words matter. They mean precisely what they say, not necessarily what we mean them to say. Once they are uttered, once they enter the public domain, they cannot be unsaid. All the explanations and clarifications in the world are of no use. Words take on a life of their own.
This morning (February 15, 2012), CNN trumpted a "surge" in support for Rick Santorum over Mitt Romney as the Republican presidential nominee. Yet the gap between them is only 2%. This is a surge?
CNN also raised the specter of "class warfare" because Santorum is the favorite by a wide margin among blue-collar voters, whereas white-collar voters prefer Romney. By the same token, gender warfare could be said to have erupted between the two camps (men for Santorum, women for Romney).
Meanwhile, Santorum himself says he is a "full-spectrum conservative". This could be interpreted as meaning that his base is wider than merely Tea Party patriors and white evangelicals. But it can also be seen as an attempt to please everyone at the risk of pleasing no one. At least he's not "severely" conservative as Romney claimed to be at CPAC.
Santorum has previously said that he "cares about 100% of America". This is patently false. He clearly does not care about pro-choice advocates, or about lesbians and gays who want their relationships to enjoy the legal status of marriage.
CNN and Santorum, how about a little truth in advertising? Let's take the rhetoric down a notch, shall we?
No comments:
Post a Comment