http://unsilentgeneration.com/2010/01/20/obama-cuts-deal-that-will-reduce-social-securitymedicare-and-all-entitlements/Everyday I see something posted here like this and everyday very few of us get past the dishonest headline to the crux of the lie and/or unintentionally misleading soundbite. Headline readers may want to stop here and just post their gut reaction first then proceed to the rest of my post. Or if you haven't made it this far yet then, here is a preemptive :rofl:
Look of the title of this blog post (recently linked to in GD): "Obama Cuts Deal To Reduce Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid". Now look at the "evidence" used to support the title (from WaPo):
-snips- (because the blogger's use of WaPo violates our copyright policy)
" Under the agreement, President Obama would issue an executive order to create an 18-member panel that would be granted broad authority to propose changes in the tax code and in the massive federal entitlement programs — including Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security — that threaten to drive the nation’s debt to levels not seen since World War II.
The accord comes a week before Obama is scheduled to deliver his first State of the Union address to a nation increasingly concerned about his stewardship of the economy and the federal budget. After a year in which he advocated spending hundreds of billions of dollars on a huge economic stimulus package and a far-reaching overhaul of the health-care system, Obama has pledged to redouble his effort to rein in record budget deficits even as he has come under withering Republican attack.
The commission would deliver its recommendations after this fall’s congressional elections, postponing potentially painful decisions about the nation’s fiscal future until after Democrats face the voters. But if the commission approves a deficit-reduction plan, Congress would have to act on it quickly under the agreement, forged late Tuesday in a meeting with Vice President Biden, White House budget director Peter R. Orszag, and Democratic lawmakers led by Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.), House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (Md.).
The commission is likely to form the centerpiece of Democrats’ efforts to reduce projected budget deficits, which have soared into record territory in the aftermath of the worst recession in a generation. Government spending to bail out the troubled financial sector and to stimulate economic activity have combined with sagging tax collections to push last year’s budget deficit to a record $1.4 trillion. The budget gap is projected to be just as large this year and to hover close to $1 trillion a year for much of the next decade."
- end snips
What here supports such a title? Is this deliberately misleading or just reactionary drivel? By reactionary drivel I mean: an irrational or visceral response that leads one to illogical conclusions. Nowhere does it say what the title leads one to believe...unless the blogger has some sort of mythical psychic power to see the future, that is.
There are legitimate beefs with this administration (health care, war, jobs, weak stimulus, failure to prosecute war crimes, etc.). But inventing imaginary injustices that have yet to occur and probably will not occur distracts from real problems (especially the real problems of funding our entitlement programs after Bush and the Republicans deliberately wrecked the treasury).
Let's take the example of a person who calls their Senator about this issue. They call and say "hey you better stop Obama from cutting our Social Security and Medicare benefits....Right fa#$#ing now!!!" Well how is this different from the caller who called in a month ago worried Obama was gonna off Granny in one of his socialist death panels? "Hey you better stop Obama from offing Granny in one of his socialist death panels ....Right fa#$#ing now!!!" Both equally imaginary, though I suppose Obama cutting SS and Medicare/caid benefits may in some universe seem logical. This is partially one of the fears Scott Brown propagandized his way to a win with. "I'll protect your Medicare benefits from that dastardly Obama." Somewhere in this process we become like our opponents. Not doing our homework, falling for scary soundbites, and running around with no direction or purpose.
Sure, we need to keep an eye on this commission and we better pressure our congress critters to do the right thing regarding entitlements (e.g. eliminate the cap, ensuring retirement security, expanding medicare, etc.), but falling for this type of shit makes us all look bad.
Do us all a favor and read past the headlines for a change.
Oh and P.S.: once past those headlines look to see if the text and the claim made by the author meet somewhere near the intersection of honest and factual. I hope that I am not far off. But I'm sure someone will be along to correct me. The biggest spot for potential critique would be "but you are conflating two different things". My preemptive response is: "no I am not. I am aligning two imaginary beliefs, both based on disinformation." One may be deliberate and the other unintentional, but neither are forgivable.
P.S.S. I'd post this in the original thread, but no one would read it. The reason for its own thread is that I feel I could post a thread like this daily on other topics with similarly misleading titles and a similar unblinking reaction by many, so...take my choice of topics today as "here is just one example". Tomorrow there will be another exemplar.
I am not sure if there is an active campaign to confuse progressives on right/left/up/down issues or if there are a bunch of blogging reactionaries with irrational fears unintentionally misleading people. Either way the function is the same. Confusion and misdirected anger. We have valid reasons to be angry. Let us focus on those.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
