Monday, March 09, 2015

When is it "blame?" When is it "credit?"

It's a fine line between "blame" and "credit."

Generally, the issue is one of connotation.  If something negative happens or is about to happen, either in reality or through perception... then it's called "blame."

If something positive happens or is about to happen, either in reality or through perception... then it's called "credit."

The GOP at the federal level is far too concerned about that issue.  They and their supporters shy away from the battle of ideas and principles.  They sell out our long term political future in the name of their short term electoral future.

Some don't, of course.  How many years had we heard that Kansas Governor Brownback and the GOP had turned that state into a slow-motion airplane crash?

Democrats were trying to use that state as an example of how bad things can be under GOP leadership, blowing off the train-wreck states run entirely by democrats.

Bully Winningham tried that garbage in the last election:
Economics:  I have witnessed the State of Kansas implement “Red State” economics – cutting income & sales tax resulting in 45% less revenue, drastic cuts to education and transportation and the state’s credit downgrading.  My Opponent  insists that we implement these disastrous Tea Party Tactics in Washington State.
The outcome in the last election?  (After all, Kansas was in such horrific shape and it was all the GOP's fault, right?)

Governor Brownback?  Reelected.

Sen. Roberts (Admittedly a RINO) Reelected.

All 4 members of Congress (All GOP) Reelected.

GOP Attorney General:  Reelected.

GOP Secretary of State:  Reelected.

GOP Treasurer: Reelected

GOP State House +4 to 97... democrats? -4 to.... 28.  (No state senate races were held in 2014)

So, did the GOP get the "blame" for whatever shape Kansas is in... that shape being akin to the Middle Ages if fringe-left whack jobs like Winningham, Mussolini Mikey Briggs and that ilk were to be believed?

Or did those re-elected arguably get "credit?"

I see this as an important question over all on matters of accountability and politics: for example, the American people HATE Obamacare.  It's never came close to majority support; it was a major player in the crushing leftist defeat this past November.

How can anyone believe that if Obamacare is killed... that those who killed it... those who campaigned against it... would somehow be "blamed?" for it's demise in any meaningful way?

The importance of this was most recently demonstrated when  the RINO Congress caved to Obama on the illegal alien issue.

The American people (The only people that matter, politically) do NOT support this most recent effort by Obama to wipe his behind with our Constitution.

How then, can Congress be blamed for fighting him on this issue, save for the fringe-left lying and RINO paranoia?

It can be.  But the very risk of offending people over principle... causes those in charge to run away.

After all, what's paying millions of illegal aliens to break our laws compared to maybe losing an election where... you guessed it... the dems would pay millions of illegal aliens to break our laws?

So, it's "blame" when you oppose the outcome.  And "credit" when you support it.  And quite Freudian when you see who, exactly, is using what.

No comments: