Ever since George Orwell’ writings, we have known that some of the most effective demagoguery is related to the distortion of language. The latest example demonstrated with no sense of irony, in this from Politico:
“Pretty much anything with the pejorative suffix on it — ‘care’ — is going to be viewed unfavorably by conservatives,”said former longtime Mitt Romney spokesman Ryan Williams, who was with the Massachusetts governor when he signed Romneycare. Romney had hoped to tout it in his 2008 presidential campaign, and he campaigned on a promise to repeal Obamacare in 2012.
Turning “care” into a bad word surely ranks as one of the great linguistic triumphs of the 21st century.
It would be equally sadd, but only in a long term sense, if the word “republican” completes its already begun journey to equivalent negativity.
One of the meetings was a private conversation between Sessions and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak that took place in September in the senator’s office, at the height of what U.S. intelligence officials say was a Russian cyber campaign to upend the U.S. presidential race.
Given the context, I find it hard to believe that Sessions would not have told State, FBI, CIA or NSA about that contact. Moreover, surely any sane politician would have written a “memo to file” as a future potential defensive tool. I would have assumed that they one or more of the above would have known anyway.
I regard the apparent absence of both (or even just a failure to report them by now), as something close of consciousness of guilt — although I have no personal knowledge of such general procedures, or what he did.
“I have to tell you, it’s an unbelievably complex subject,” Trump said. “Nobody knew that health care could be so complicated.”
Having got my breath back after hearing this insight, I realized that this is indeed classic Trump.
When you can not do something, you look for an excuse.
You never apologize, you never consider that you might have been wrong.
You never, ever, ever admit that others were right before you. (Stalin used to convict people for “premature morality.”)
The distortion, at best, of truth to continue to keep things on the prior path.
The lack of introspection
I suspect that when we look back at the history of Trump’s presidency, we will discover that such acknowledgements are a prelude to a major change. I suspect that this precursor will be followed on attacks on prior allies for their positions, also then followed by the separation from decision-making and participation.
They have not get there yet, but now that the Republicans are finding just how really, really hard it is to repeal Obamacare, its only a matter of time before they start explaining that the worst thing about Obamacare is that has been written to make it hard to repeal.
Some of the reasons:
It was built so that people would like it — how unfair can you get!
It was built to save money — outrageous.
It reduces stress on state budgets — inconsistent with Federal policy.
It gives people choice — worse and worse.
It advances public health — not a government function.
It cleverly removes the donut hole — what a disaster!
You have to agree that a program designed to give people what they want is clearly unfair to the political process, threatens the Republic and serves all those “takers.
You also have to agree that if we are not careful, the same people will come up with a tax cut that helps those who are not rich, will help people get childcare, control campaign contributions, and expand access to education.
Maybe the Democrats should try to get a bill passed that CDC should take on the tracking task.
If it were not passed, at least when Republicans attached the validity of the data in the non-governmental one, the response would be: “You can not complain, you prevented the establishment of a registry upon which all could rely.”
This would simply be a documented list of all the people whose deaths appear to have been caused or accelerated by the repeal of the ACA.
It would start now with any suicides triggered by anxiety about the fear of lack of health care coverage.
Such a list would include some demographic data, but with the identifying data kept confidential, unless the family wished otherwise.
The demographic data would allow generalizations about what groups are being hurt. It would be particularly interesting to discover what counties they came from, and the voting patterns in that county. I would guess that the impact will be much higher in those counties and states that do not have the resources to “replace” on their own.
Maybe just the threat of this list would make some “Repeal and Replace” advocates think very carefully about accepting a “replace” that was one in name only. Imagine the list being used by an opponent in future elections. Imagine if, regardless of that, a PAC threatened in advance to run those ads all over.