Double-speak becoming part of the required context for reporting on Gardner

(Promoted by Colorado Pols)

Rep. Cory Gardner (R).

Rep. Cory Gardner (R).

In her "Reality Check" spots about political ads, CBS4's Shaun Boyd doesn't just render verdicts on the truthiness of political advertisements but also offers contextual information for viewers, telling us, "Here's What You Need to Know."

Evaluating the veracity of an ad stating that Gardner sides with big oil because, as the ad states, he's voted "to keep billions in handouts for big oil companies, even as they make record profits," Boyd reported last week that Gardner indeed "opposed repealing tax breaks that have been in place for oil-and-gas producers for more than 100 years." But she found the statement that Gardner is on the side of big oil "misleading" because Gardner has also supported wind energy.

Here's What (I Think) You Need to Know: Last year, on a talk radio show, Gardner suggested last eliminating the Energy Department altogether:

Gardner: "In fact, Energy Department is something we ought to look at and see whether or not they are actually justified to be there anyway."

I couldn't believe it when I heard Gardner say it, but no one else seemed to care at the time, except radio-host Amy Oliver, who lapped it up lovingly.

And that points to the context that Boyd should have added to her piece on the League of Conservation Voters' ad: Gardner talks about energy policy in radically different ways depending on the audience.

You say, all politicians pander. Okay, but eliminating the Energy Department? Who besides former GOP presidential candidate Rick Perry tries to say that.

What if Gardner had been speaking to employees at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), which is funded by the Energy Department? Would Gardner have talked to them like he did to Oliver, KFKA's anti-wind-energy radio host, who doubles as a staffer for the libertarian Independence Institute? Would he go there and say we need to have a conversation about how to save money, and junking the Energy Department should be part of it?

Double-speak is something reporters naturally look for. With Gardner, it's getting to the point where it's part of the context for whatever he's talking about, starting with personhood, of course, and heading out from there to global warming, taxes, immigration, and more.

18 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. Ralphie says:

    I remember that Reagan also wanted to disband the Energy Department when he was President, until someone whispered in his ear and told him that they were the people who built the nuclear warheads.

  2. DawnPatrol says:

    As we all have learned, wingnuts and Baggers get special kid-glove treatment.

    The MSM villagers don't dare challenge them, lest they risk being called "biased" by the organized right-wing Scream Machine. No, the villagers contort themselves into human pretzels to provide righties a pass on their brazen, easily disproven lies and distortions, while crudely constructing false equivalencies to offer them political cover.

  3. JeffcoBlueJeffcoBlue says:

    Local reporters don't know how to deal with politicians lying to their face. They feel obliged to be nice, especially to Republicans, so of course Shaun Boyd doesn't bother to ask Gardner, "you know you're full of shit, right?" She lets it go. It's got to stop.

  4. davebarnesdavebarnes says:

    If we get of DoE, then what happens to civilian control of nuclear weapons?
    Why is this issue never addressed?

    • MichaelBowmanMichaelBowman says:

      At that point, Caribou Barbie's prophesy manifests itself.  Like a chicken in every pot.  This couldn't possible end badly…

      • notaskinnycooknotaskinnycook says:

        Well, MIchaelBowman, it was The Dim Bulb From Alaska. What did you expect? The part of your link that struck me, though, was the "officer…all alone…" line. Back in the '60s, my dad was one of those guys. He was an Air Force NCO and he pulled that duty for 48 hours at a whack. But never alone. there were always four of them. Two of them would have to turn their keys at the same time to launch anything. That was to aviod having one guy flip out and do something he couldn't undo. Now, it was true that they  did spend most of  there time playing cards, but gambling scandals?

         

  5. ModeratusModeratus says:

    We don't need an Energy Department to either build nuclear weapons or give tax credits. This is just a giant misdirection. Gardner has backed may energy sources, including wind and solar. Abolishing the Energy Department would be just that and nothing more. It doesn't mean we'd have no energy, silly libs!

    • Ralphie says:

      Roasted Beets

      Ingredients
      12 beets
      3 tablespoons good olive oil
      1 1/2 teaspoons fresh thyme leaves, minced
      2 teaspoons kosher salt
      1 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
      2 tablespoons raspberry vinegar
      Juice of 1 large orange
       

      Directions
      Preheat the oven to 400 degrees.

      Remove the tops and the roots of the beets and peel each one with a vegetable peeler. Cut the beets in 1 1/2-inch chunks. (Small beets can be halved, medium ones cut in quarters, and large beets cut in eighths.)

      Place the cut beets on a baking sheet and toss with the olive oil, thyme leaves, salt, and pepper. Roast for 35 to 40 minutes, turning once or twice with a spatula, until the beets are tender. Remove from the oven and immediately toss with the vinegar and orange juice. Sprinkle with salt and pepper and serve warm.

    • davebarnesdavebarnes says:

      You are ignorant.
      1. The law requires civilian control of nuclear weapons.
      2. "In total, the President's 2014 Budget provides $28.4 billion in discretionary funds for DOE to support its mission… It includes $11.7 billion for nuclear security…"

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account


You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.