"They're not fighting special interests, they're fighting us"

"They're Not Fighting Special Interests, They're Fighting Us"

by digby

I've written a number of posts about how the right is successfully framing all government action as a "bailout," the new bill to provide funds for teachers, cops and firefighters being no exception. Here's Bachman:

(I don't know if that's a grammatical mistake or an Amos and Andy parody. With Bachman and Brietbart, it's plausible either way.)

Typical right wing bloggers characterize it like this:

Yet another bailout from productive private sector taxpayers, for yet another unproductive Democrat special interest group.

Oh well, at least the teacher unions are happy with their bailout. And the Wall Street bankers are happy with their bailout. And the auto unions are happy with their bailout. And the public sector unions are happy with their bailout. And so on, and so on, and so on.

I would expect that the left-wing media will getting a bailout soon. And then the left-wing trial lawyers. And then the left-wing illegal immigrants. And then the left-wing prisoners. That should about cover it, I guess.

The minute I heard the right wingers railing about "bailouts" I knew it was going to go this way. But they may have made a mistake this time. In 2005, Arnold Schwarzenegger called a special election to dramatically cut funding for teachers, firefighters and nurses. He campaigned by calling them "special interests." They fought back hard with a series of ads that reminded Americans that he was talking about them and their neighbors. He tanked in the polls, his initiatives were soundly defeated and at the time people wondered if he could win reelection.

Here's one of them:

Democrats should study that campaign. "He's not fighting special interests. He's fighting us" is a hell of good message.