Late add: New evidence of Sunderland’s conservatism! See below, after the jump.

The newly-elected chair of the Vermont Republican Party, David Sunderland, took office with the backing of moderate (relatively speaking) Republicans, and with a promise to “rebrand the party, making it more palatable to moderates and independents.” There was much talk of a change in tone, an effort to be more civil in political discourse.

And then a couple days later, Sunderland issues his first press release, and damned if it isn’t straight out of the Jack Lindley playbook: wildly exaggerating a comment by Governor Shumlin and giving it the worst possible interpretation.

The comment: Shumlin said he would seek federal waivers to bring “everybody into the [insurance] pool.”

Sunderland’s interpretation: OMG OMG SHUMMY’S GONNA KILL MEDICARE AND VETERANS’ BENEFITS!!!!!!!

Governor, some will interpret that as an expression of your intent to kick Vermont’s senior citizens off of Medicare and to disallow Vermont’s honored veterans from continuing their health care coverage through Tricare.

… The Vermont Republican Party stands ready to defend our seniors and veterans against any takeover of the federal healthcare plans they currently have and enjoy.

Shumlin quickly responded, saying he had no intention of ending senior health programs in Vermont, and making it clear he appreciated the unintended irony of the accusation, since it’s usually the Republicans who bash “federal healthcare plans.”

“I’m glad you see the benefits and popularity of government-run health care programs like Medicare and Tricare, both of which cover millions of Americans regardless of their financial situation.”

Yeah, Governor, swat that fly.  

Okay, so exactly when does David Sunderland start “making [the VTGOP] more palatable to moderates and independents”? So far, it’s the same-old same-old.

Plus, it’s decidedly far removed from Phil Scott’s own position on health care, which is to try to help make reform better instead of indulging in partisan piling-on. Could this be the first crack in the “moderate” alliance?

______________________________________

p.s. My fellow GMD front-pager BP is apparently a more skillful archive-diver than I, because he uncovered some decidedly damning evidence that Sunderland is not, and has never been, a “moderate.” This comes to us from the late lamented Peter Freyne, writing way back in 2004 after then-State Rep. Sunderland had won a spot on the House GOP leadersihp team.

On first blush the new House GOP team looks like more of the same. Hube is tight with Freed’s old “inner circle” that included Reps. Judy Livingston and Patty O’Donnell.

And Sunderland is definitely in tight with the GOP God Squad. Last session, Sunderland’s first, he cosponsored a number of Sister Nancy Sheltra’s bills restricting abortion access and requiring parental notification.

Another was H. 415, which would have required public-school kids to observe a daily moment of silence while seated at their desks so those who wanted to pray could pray.

God bless us and save us!

Since health care is at the top of the Democratic agenda, we wondered what Sunderland’s views were.

We found an article he wrote a couple years ago describing Democrat Doug Racine’s call for single-payer, universal coverage, “a state run, Soviet-style, tax-funded health-care system.”

Great.

A little red-baiting will certainly liven things up.

Congratulations, J. Edgar Sunderland!

Written as only Freyne could. And while the 2013 Sunderland has (so far) abstained from red-baiting the health care issue, you can see the same Karl Rovian “hit ’em below the belt” political style.

We here at GMD look forward to more of Sunderland’s “moderation.”

(And we still wonder why nobody in our political media has produced a story exploring Sunderland’s political history and allegiances. Also, maybe someone could ask him where he stands on reproductive rights and if he still thinks single-payer is “Soviet-style”.)