Blinded by Partisanship
Thought I'd give you some insight into the fun of parsing political speak and political operatives' inability to ever say they actually agree with their opponents.
Tonight, I'm covering an appellate court's decision which will likely mean Illinoisans will be asked to vote twice on the same day to fill Barack Obama's old Senate seat. Essentially the court said Roland Burris' appointed term is up on election day in November and not in January when the winner of the November election will take the oath in Washington (see story here http://bit.ly/cMSpVh). We asked the campaigns of Republican Mark Kirk and Democrat Alexi Giannoulias whether they think Senator Burris should be allowed to stay until January. Giannoulias made himself available for an on-camera interview in which he said "I think at this point he should probably serve out the remainder of his term and the next Senator should start in January."
Rep. Kirk was in Washington and unavailable for an interview. His spokesperson responded to my question with the following statement: "Over the last four years, Alexi Giannoulias stood by and watched our state slip into fiscal crisis. We certainly don't need to saddle Illinois families with any more debt."
Doesn't quite answer the question, does it? Only after a repeated back and forth, did Kirk's PR person finally admit... wait for it... wait for it... prepare the breaking news bulletin... the two candidates AGREE!
My intent is not to specifically pick on Team Kirk, because many political operatives of both parties handle issues this way. It's ashame. There's nothing wrong with saying "we agree." Voters may even appreciate it.