From It Affects You
I’ve read many great defenses of prosecutor Ronnie Earle here and elsewhere. As they point out, he’s got a decidely nonpartisan record, having prosecuted four times as many Democrats as Republicans. But as good and as accurate as these defenses are, many play into DeLay’s frame.
The evidence is clear enough and presented well enough that we will convince any reasonable person that Earle’s motivations are not partisan. But the mere mention of the argument in these terms forces people to answer the question “Is Earle (Are Democrats) targeting DeLay for partisan reasons?” The frame is of angry Democrats out on a witch hunt for Republican blood, and so it allows DeLay to change the subject. When responding, we need to reframe it so people are instead asking themselves, “Are DeLay and his supporters smearing an honest public servant so they can avoid accountability?” The frame now is of unethical Conservatives looking to get away with bad behavior by blaming others. The focus stays on conservative corruption, and we become the aggressors rather than the defenders.
It should not be difficult to do. After all, wouldn’t you expect someone with a history of unethical behavior to defend himself using unethical methods? It plays right into our frame. So when we’re facing accusations of Earle being on a partisan witch hunt, we should not respond with, “Earle is not playing politics because…” Instead we should respond with, “As he’s always done, Tom DeLay is using dishonest and unethical methods to achieve his goals. Now that he’s been indicted for some of those tactics, rather than face the consequences, he and his supporters are attempting to smear those who stand against his unethical behavior…”
And then, thanks to the great work of Think Progress and others, we have plenty of evidence to go on the attack to show that DeLay and his apologists are sliming a dedicated and honest public servant.
This is not a time to be on the defensive, it’s a time to attack.
From It Affects You
Excellent Point. Subtle difference but important and effective.
I tried this one out today, when my right-wing co-worker (whom I otherwise simply adore) said, right on cue, “Well, Ronnie Earle would indict his own mother if he thought it would be politically favorable to the Democrats.”
I just looked him in the eye, and said kindly, “Don’t worry, xxxxx, we’re here for you now.”
End of conversation!
Tell your friend that Earle has prosecuted 4x more Dems than Republicans, and see if they can compute that.
🙂
“Well, Ronnie Earle would indict his own mother if he thought it would be politically favorable to the Democrats.”
The grand jury foreman also had a great line:
I made that point earlier today in the open thread. The grand jury indicted DeLay – not Earle.
DeLay’s vicious personal attacks against Earle today show that he has no facts to stand on to defend himself. The statement he made about this being the weakest case in American history (or words to that effect) show how incredibly self-important DeLay thinks he is. His handlers really screwed up that entire statement. He took the low road and now he will be pummeled for it.
“Ronnie Earle didn’t indict him. The grand jury indicted him,”
What you mean it’s not the most baseless indictment in American history?
heh
Excellent points you make although I think the title should be ‘How to Defend Ronnie Earle’.
Folks should use the information in this diary to write LTE’s. The WSJ started attacking Earle on the grounds that he was a partisan Democrat months ago so that would be a great place to start.