Language Is Power

Joe has said this many times but I’m always amazed at how the phrasing of comments about an issue have the ability to frame it one way or another. In an article that is actually favorable to the Republican’s offer to agree to the Simpson-Bowles package that was drafted last year, there is this about the letter sent to the White House signifying such:

The letter didn’t address arguably the most contentious issue in the talks – President Obama’s insistence that the wealthiest Americans pay a higher tax rate, a nonstarter with the GOP. Nor did it spell out how Republicans would reform health care programs – although House Republican aides said the GOP leadership would favor raising the Medicare eligibility age from 65 to 67 to save money.

The White House quickly rejected the counteroffer as not balanced. “In fact, it actually promises to lower rates for the wealthy and sticks the middle class with the bill,” said White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer.

Note the bolded text – both of which would imply that 1) Republicans are refusing to institute a higher rate on “the rich” and 2) Republicans are actually lowering rates for them.

Neither of which are truly accurate. Remember – what we are talking about is the reauthorization for the Bush tax cuts that were across the board for all taxpayers. The Republicans want to retain those providing tax cuts for all. What Obama wants is to let the rates stay for those under 200K and go back to the old rates for the folks over that.

Language is pretty powerful. It could have been written more accurately like this:

The letter didn’t address arguably the most contentious issue in the talks – President Obama’s insistence that the wealthiest Americans revert to former, higher tax rates, a nonstarter with the GOP. Nor did it spell out how Republicans would reform health care programs – although House Republican aides said the GOP leadership would favor raising the Medicare eligibility age from 65 to 67 to save money.

The White House quickly rejected the counteroffer as not balanced. “In fact, it actually promises to retain the current rates for both the wealthy the middle class,” said White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer.

In Obama’s speech the other day, he stated that the Republicans were holding up the package “over tax cuts for the top 2%” when 1) since the rates are already lower, Obama is actually trying to raise them (you can only call them a cut if you believe that the money already belongs to the government – these rates have been in place for 11 years) and 2) the GOP is holding it up because there were no meaningful spending cuts in his offer.

About these ads

4 thoughts on “Language Is Power

  1. If Barry ever comes along with a cephalic proposal that is truly balanced, he would garner the support on a bipartisan level. But Barry really isn’t either cephalic, nor interested in bipartisanship, now is he?

    Nope, he isn’t. Like the spoiled little brat that did not get spanked enough as a child, ole Barry just wants what Barry wants, and he wants it now, and not out of his own pocket.

    Socialism is all fun and games until you run out of other people’s money.

  2. Ah yes. So the GOP has some divine right to avoid higher taxes on the right, because it is “a non-starter”. Ignoring that cuts to social programs has likewise long been a “non-starter” for the left.

    And how ironic your choice of attack here- with the GOP claiming *their* offer is the simpson-bowles plan, with no less then Bowles himself calling BS.

    And please, pray tell, after the election just how is it the right believes they can bargain, well no, scratch that, because they are refusing to bargain. How is that they demand that they are in a position of power and that their demands must be met?

    • Maybe because spending bills originate in the House, which the Republicans still hold by a large margin, and a 3 point victory in a national election isn’t a mandate.

      Oh, and maybe this:

      The coalition of voters that gave President Barack Obama a second term splits over how to reduce the deficit, according to a poll released Monday.

      A survey of 800 Obama voters, conducted last month by Benenson Strategy Group for the moderate Democratic think tank Third Way and shared first with POLITICO, finds that 96 percent believe the federal deficit is a problem and that 85 percent support increasing taxes on the wealthy.

      Yet 41 percent who supported the Democratic incumbent want to get control of the deficit mostly by cutting spending, with only some tax increases, while another 41 percent want to solve it mostly with tax increases and only some spending cuts.

      Just 5 percent of Obama supporters favor tax increases alone to solve the deficit, half the number who back an approach that relies entirely on spending cuts.

      http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=AFB97D18-DF86-41DC-9953-717381AA05A8

      Why would Obama think he is in a position of strength since nothing has changed?

  3. “Barry” IS NOT a socialist. He’s a true blue Communist.

    He’s merely driving a stake thru the heart of LIBERTY by collapsing the country economically so from the ashes he can build a communist collective with him and his friends as the elite organizing all us “worker bees”.

    As Joe has explained extensively: “coward” & Piven. :-)

    Remember “workers unite” = “worker bees” get to work, for your new task masters !

Talk Amongst Yourselves:

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s