I love how the losing side spins things.
I saw on the noon news that voucher supporters were glad that they exceeded their goal of 150,000 voters.
They left out the point that 300,000 voters voted the other way.
And, the following from the Sutherland Institute (hat tip KVNU):
"Thirty-eight percent of Utahns voted in favor of Referendum 1..."
I wonder how they'd spin some other losses?
2 comments:
I think it's also revealing that only 38% of Utahns supported a measure that our own legislators thought was a great idea.
Time for some new blood?isuxuevz
I'm curious to learn your definition of "spin." Our press release did not say anything that was not based in fact and focused on what our plan at Sutherland is moving forward in education reform. What is it about this that constitutes "spin?" We simply acknowledge that a significant portion of Utahns support education policies that realistically give parents more options outside the public education system. That is fact, not spin.
Another fact is that the referendum vote validates the legislature's consideration and passage of HB 148. I quote from the Utah code (62A-4a-201): "a parent has the right, obligation, responsibility, and authority to...educate...the parent's children; and the state's role is secondary and supportive to the primary role of a parent." It's noteworthy that the mandate on our government does not say "unless a majority of Utahns think otherwise."
The closest thing to spin on this blog page is Jason's suggestion that the referendum suggests that we should vote out our legislators. Why? For doing what Utah law tells them to do? If Jason is both aware of the above quoted section of Utah law and understands its meaining in the context of this voucher debate, then there's your example of spin.
Post a Comment