I'm wondering what it's going to take for my former colleagues in the Texas press corps to call out Rick Perry for using the term "socialism" over-and-over to describe the insurance reform Congress passed last week.
Either Perry and reporters covering him don't know what socialism is (and I doubt that), or Perry again is pushing Tea Bag propaganda, and the press is too lazy or too intimidated to challenge it.
I'm used to Perry embarrassing Texas. So, I'm not surprised he's parroting Dolph Briscoe's old obsession with "creeping socialism." Thankfully, we've moved beyond the 1970s, though you wouldn't know it from the Cold War rhetoric in a statement Perry released last Sunday and sound bites he repeated later in the week.
Journalists can't stop politicians from issuing statements, but they can -- and should -- challenge them and include clarifying context in their reports when statements and sound bites push outright lies. Last week, the Associated Press and others quoted him (without questioning or providing context) saying, the legislation "crosses over into the line of socialism."
Socialism, for anyone who slept through 11th grade, is an economic system where the means of production are owned either by the government or directly by the workers. The Socialist Party USA actually opposed the reform bill because it does just the opposite.
Obama and the Democratic Congress rejected a socialist approach when they removed the public option, which would have put the federal government in competition with for-profit companies. That effectively preserved the American insurance industry - and the longstanding market structure that supports it - as a conglomeration of regulated, shareholder-owned corporations.
Don't believe me? Go to the NYSE; they are all still there: Aetna, Cigna, etc... There is no new federal program like Medicare or Social Security to compete in the marketplace with private insurers -- much less replace them. (It does expand Medicaid, the federal-state partnership in place since 1965 to provide insurance for the poor, but people on Medicaid are not potential buyers for market-priced insurance.) It's simply a disgrace for Perry to mislead Texans who trust him, and it's a disappointment for journalists who know better to allow him to use their access to the public and the credibility of their organizations to spread the "socialist" lie.
What I think we're seeing is Perry trying to creep out of the corner Congressional Republicans have created for anyone running on their ticket this year. Their saber rattling about repealing the legislation is just trash talk and fund-raising fodder that raises further questions about their credibility. They know, and so do we, that there is no way they can flip enough seats to get the 2/3 majority in the House and Senate they would need to override Obama's veto of anything designed to repeal this bill.
And frankly, anyone who has ever worked on a campaign at any significant level can see that barring something unforeseen it's a huge mistake for Republicans to make health care their signature national issue. Political campaigns aren't about trying to change anyone's mind or core values. That's foolish; it just doesn't happen. Campaigns are about convincing a majority of voters that the issues most important to them the day they vote are the issues they think your party is best prepared to handle.
In political parlance, taxes, the economy and defense are considered "Republican issues." Education, the environment, human services (like health care) are considered "Democratic issues." If the midterm elections end up being about health care, conventional wisdom says, the narrative foundation favors Democrats. That is why I think Republicans eventually will try to shift the narrative to the economy, perhaps unemployment.
Bill White is the first Democrat in more than a decade with a real chance to win statewide in Texas, but he is going to have to be almost perfect to do it. His chances increase if the campaign narrative centers on health care and he is smart enough to use it to his advantage. His changes skyrocket if education joins health care as a top tier issue.
The Austin American-Statesman reported this week that Texas has the highest rate (25.1 percent) of uninsured residents in the nation. The number of Texas businesses that offer insurance to employees since Perry came into office dropped from 53 percent in 2000 to 49 percent in 2007. And per-worker spending on insurance increased at a faster pace in Texas between 2000 and 2007 than it did nationally. (Here is a detailed overview of how Health Care Reform will affect Texas. It has 27 footnotes to document information that comes almost entirely from nonpartisan sources such as the American Medical Association, Kaiser Health Facts and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.)
Health Care is not a winning issue for Perry, which is why he's selling the "socialist" scarecrow. He's trying to reframe the issue, and he is using demagoguery to do it. You certainly aren't hearing him say: "Let's repeal the annual and lifetime caps on insurance reimbursement!" Or "Hey, I promise to restore the insurance companies' right to refuse to treat your pre-existing conditions and drop your coverage when you get sick!"
Add the recent brouhaha at the Texas State Board of Education, and the political gods have handed White a real opening.
The question is whether White can package those issues for voters so they draw simple distinctions between him and Perry that are consistent with White's own record. And whether news reporters continue to let Perry get away with terms like "socialism," which misrepresent the truth, inflame public sentiment and question the credibility of the governor and news organizations that are covering this aspect of his campaign.
Follow Joe Cutbirth on Twitter: www.twitter.com/jcutbirth
He knows the word "socialism".
He'll use it a lot, because that's a word he knows.
Of course he doesn't know what it means. That would take some research, and possibly independent thought..... which are two things not required of Texas Republican politicians.
The liberal founding fathers were for a democratic republic and Enlightenment of the people, including free public school and room and board while in school. Free libraries, etc..
The liberal founders knew we need to enlighten the citizens so they can vote wisely.
The "General Welfare" clause applied to "We the People" in direct opposition for a stratified monarchy of wealth and power.
So of course the conservatives are against public education, reason, science and civil discourse.
Conservatives are anti-social.
anything that is for the general welfare is socialist to them.
"Socialism" is a silly issue. Perry cannot define "Socialism".
FYI, the office of Governor in Texas has much less power than in other states.
"Some scientists say that Mars is a planet slightly further away from the Sun than Earth. Others say that Mars is a small red peanut hanging out for kicks in the cosmos."
It's funny how people love to scream "Socialism" like its a new or bad thing, when in fact everything that falls under the umbrella of "Social Services" is in fact a form of socialism! As Asiclilpup points out below, everything from Roads, Highways, Drinking Water, Schools, Libraries, Fire Departments, Police Forces, the Military, our Government's payroll, Medicare, SOCIAL SECURITY, etc. are all funded on a basis of socialism.
What's killing this country is our methodology and application of taxation, not socialism. Study after study has shown that a flat tax rate would lower individual taxes, while increasing overall tax revenue. But as usual, politicians divert our attention to the symptoms, rather than the root cause of our problems. So people like Perry scream "Socialism" because so many people have no idea what it means, and confuse it with Communism.
I don't want to write a book, so you should Google "Flat Tax" to understand how Bill Gates et al would be paying drastically more than folks like you and I.
a flat tax is a percentage, they estimate that if it were implemented it would be around 3%.
which means (i cant believe im having to explain this) someone making 20k a year would pay 3% of their yearly income, while someone who made 250k a year would pay 3% of their yearly income.
unfortunately, you will never see a flat tax, because the rich people make the policy, and they like the fact that the bulk of taxes are paid by the poor and middle class.. namely me and you.
DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH SOCIALISM IS IN YOUR EVERY DAY LIFE? From your roads to your garbage pick up, to police protection to your libraries and just about everything else that we take for granted without thinking about. Just think about this one thing---- when the pilgrims came to America, they harvested their crops and stored those crops in a community storehouse for the coming winter for all to share and survive----- SOCIALISM OR COMMUNISM, YOU CALL IT WHAT YOU WISH. Now claim your ties to the MAYFLOWER or the NINA, PINTA or THE SANTA MARIA.
"First of all, then we have to say the American public overwhelmingly voted for socialism when they elected President Obama," Sharpton said. "Let's not act as though the president didn't tell the American people - the president offered the American people health reform when he ran. He was overwhelmingly elected running on that and he has delivered what he promised."
From Sen. Max Barcus:
After the Senate passed a "fix-it" bill Thursday to make changes to the new health care law, Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., chairman of the influential Finance Committee, said the overhaul was an "income shift" to help the poor.
"Too often, much of late, the last couple three years, the mal-distribution of income in American is gone up way too much, the wealthy are getting way, way too wealthy and the middle income class is left behind," he said. "Wages have not kept up with increased income of the highest income in America. This legislation will have the effect of addressing that mal-distribution of income in America."
THAT IS SUCH BULLSHIT. I'm not going to let you get away with that misrepresentation on my thread.
That quote is out of context, and I'm going to link to the You Tube clip, so people can see you are misrepresenting what Sharpton said.
The statement you site is from an interview with Geraldo, and Geraldo, interrupts Sharpton, and Geraldo interjects the word "socialism" into the discussion.
It's an old reporters trick to use the phrase "Some would say..." and then toss out something from the fringe - something the reporter doesn't have the balls to ask directly himself - so he hides it behind the faceless "some" and that sets up a distance that removes his accountability for something so ridiculous.
The clip shows Sharpton is taken aback, because that isn't the point he was making. And he is responding to how ridiculous Geraldo's assertion is by saying that if it is true, you would also have to believe something as absurd as a majority of Americans voted for socialism.
The phrase is more contextually written:
"Well, first of all then, (if that is the situation as YOU, Geraldo see it) then we have to say the American public voted for socialism when they elected President Obama.
Here is the clip and everyone reading this should go to it and hear Geraldo interject the word. So be honest and if you are going to cite this, do it with the appropriate context.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T00pJrIREak
From the October 1996 Update of the DSA 'New Party':
"New Party members are busy knocking on doors, hammering down lawn signs, and phoning voters to support NP candidates this fall. Here are some of our key races...
Illinois: Three NP-members won Democratic primaries last Spring and face off against Republican opponents on election day: Danny Davis (U.S. House), Barack Obama (State Senate) and Patricia Martin (Cook County Judiciary)."
The media has increasingly become a propaganda arm of the Democrat party. Before you accuse me of making that up, review the coverage for the 2008 election. Or, they produce stories solely for the chock value. Shock or propaganda. That is what counts as media today.
As far as the Socialist comment goes, he is almost correct. The Democrats did not have the intestinal fortitude to force through what they really wanted, which was Socialism. So they did the next best thing. Lay the groundwork to destroy the market version, thereby leaving only the Socialist version as the only option. So, technically, you are right. He used the wrong word. He will have to wait for a couple of years until the insurance companies collapse. THEN he will be using the right word.
Or, we can stop it now, and we won't have to quibble with what word to use when.
msnbc: General Electric
CNN: Turner Broadcasting
Fox: Newscorp
ABCNews: Disney
wow, look at all those paragons of liberalism running the media...lol, what a joke
what about radio? 91% conservative
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2007/06/talk_radio.html
And if you want to argue this bill could LEAD to socialism you should probably talk to 1996 Republican Presidential candidate Bob Dole, Former Republican Senate Majority Leader Dr. Bill Frist, both of which ENDORSED this bill. Former Governor Mitt Romney who signed the Mass. health bill that is nearly identical to the bill, or you could always go back in time to speak with Orrin Hatch or Newt Gingrich in 1993, when they fully endorsed a plan exactly like this.
The Republicans are little better than the Democrats, that is a fact. But, they are not overtly hostile to the notin of individual freedom and liberty, or at least less overtly hostile, so they will get my vote this year.
Despite who owns the companies, the message has always been left leaning. The radio has been mostly conservative, not because of some nepharious plot, but rather there is no alternative that is profitable to support itself. But, when you compare the scope of talk radio with the other means of media, that coverage is very low. with movies, newspapers, news, television shows, and music pushing a left leaning message, you could say talk radio is pretty much the only counterweight.
It seems it will be completely up to Bill White and his supporters to actually tell the truth about health care and many other things. We've got a big job on our hands.
Is it because the people doing all the screaming are simply shouting epithets about socialism and armageddon based on their own ignorance, hypocrisy, and lack of civility??