NEVER say 'Social Security reform'--say SS 'TERMINATION' or SS 'PHASE-OUT'!

[AirAmFan]

I think 'privatization' has become way too mild a word for this year's leading WH domestic 'policy' Macchiavellian proposal. What do you think?

This evening's Nightly News with Brian Williams reported on the progress of 'President' Bush's 'Social Security REFORM' proposal. Williams's repeated use of the term REFORM really grated on me tonight. When will MSM start calling the proposal what it REALLY is--a REPUBLICAN SOCIAL SECURITY TERMINATION plan that's been in the works for seventy years!

WE should NEVER help Karl Rove and Alan Greenspan commence the phase-out and termination of Social Security by falling into their trap and referring to their proposal as 'Social Security reform'. Talking Points memo has a permanent link to a very telling linguistic slipup by one of the proposal's leading point-men:

From http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2005_02_27.php :

"(February 27, 2005 -- 03:24 PM EDT) Longview (Texas) News-Journal, Feb. 26th (***LINK***):

'Former U.S. House Majority Leader Dick Armey said Friday that Social Security should be phased out rather than saved.'

SO THERE IT IS. Not only does Armey think Social Security should be "phased out", he believes, as he is quoted as saying in the article, that the eventual effect of the Bush plan will be phase-out. ... (Armey is) saying that if you let people pull their payroll taxes out of Social Security it will eventually cripple the program.

Now, in case folks need a precise flow-chart of how to work this, Dick Armey is the head of FreedomWorks. And FreedomWorks is one of the three or four major groups funding and organizing the push for President Bush's privatization plan. So the head of one of the main groups funding the PR blitz for President Bush's privatization plan says Social Security should be "phased out" and that the eventual effect of the Bush plan will be phase out.

-- Josh Marshall"

[BlueEyedSon]

1. SS "piratization"

[imenja]

4. that's a good one! n/t

[McCamy Taylor]

2. Privatization is good enough.

:dem:

[AirAmFan]

9. But does the word "privatization" really EXPOSE what the Rethugs are trying

to do, and does it MOBILIZE people to oppose them?

As Rethugs escalate their dishonest 'reform' campaign, don't we need to at least begin to escalate our language, to fight back?

[imenja]

3. SS Destruction

because that is precisely what they have in mind.
But they aren't going to win this one! :bounce:

[snippy]

5. Republican War on Social Security. n/t

[LiberalFighter]

6. We had a Meet-up tonite about this idea...

George Lakoff's book, "Don't Think of an Elephant" covers the topic of how Republicans define who they are and what we need to do.

[AirAmFan]

7. Great! Language is SO important. When Rethugs NAIL THEMSELVES

with the TRUTH about their Macchiavellian proposals, we need to spread their words far and wide.

Dems need to sound-byte, blog, email, and blast-fax profound truths about Rethug goals, just the way the GOP broadcasts Orwellian lies to hoodwink and terrorize people into voting for them.

Armey's use of "PHASE-OUT" is a profound insight into the mindset he shares with Grover Norquist, Alan Greenspan, Milton Friedman, and other far right extremist thinkers. It's not just 'Social Security reform' they're spewing while planning Social Security phase-out:

'School choice' is Orwellian Rethug doublethink for their plan to PHASE-OUT public education in shared democratic values.

'Tax simplification', 'death tax repeal', and 'marriage penalty removal' are Orwellian Rethug catchphrases for their progressive income taxation PHASE-OUT plan.

'Partial birth abortion' is Orwellian Rethug for women's right to choose PHASE-OUT.

And so on and so on and so on.

[donheld]

8. 'Social Security Deformation'

[ElsewheresDaughter]

10. got it!...that's exactly what it is "SS TERMINATION"!!!

[Donna Zen]

11. Pirates! Make 'em walk the plank

They be the pirates of the SS ItAin'tBroke. A visit wid Davey Jones be a waitin'.

[Wilms]

15. Yeahaaaargh, mate!

But * is blindfolded already. And he's walkin' 'round the deck.

Give him time.

[Hidden Stillness]

12. This Tells Exactly What They Intend to Do

I agree with the whole idea of the original post. I have never liked the word "privatization," and never use it when I'm just talking to anyone. I think "private," used this way, was even an "early," (1980s or whenever they really started pushing it), Republican propaganda/mind control/talking point, to replace the word "commercial." When Reagan etc. first started to rip up the system of government services, and outsource all the work to corporations, ("friends"), then kill those departments, I first heard these things referred to as "private." The whole trend of the Federal Government being destroyed--unionized, Federally-protected jobs and benefits lost, and our right to control how tax money was spent along with it--was concealed because it was never described clearly anymore. The original idea of a corporation was that it had a charter awarded to it by the government, and was accountable to the public. Then suddenly along comes this word "private," strangely now meaning "corporate" or "commercial," and you knew these bastards were shutting something off from us, and it was a whole new world. The right to privacy suddenly shifts, on corporate command, from the individual to a corporation with stockholders. The use of the word "private," when actually "commercial" was what was intended, plants this horrible, fascist idea in the mind that "their world"--used to be "our country"--is not for us to know; off limits, too important and complex for us. Related to this issue, I also think the word "privatize" is not strong enough, but studies have shown that people turn against it based on negative response to that word, so on that score it was okay.

The fact that they keep calling it "reform" on the media shows yet again, if you needed any more proof, that they are all the same group, and all promoting the same agenda. They respond to no facts, they admit the existence of nothing, they never change the wording even when it doesn't make sense. This TalkingPointsMemo article containing the actual words "phased out"--shocking, chilling; and thank God for people like this who are watching out for these things--should be referred to constantly. It is not "tinkering with" the system, it is not "moderate," it will END it. This is as clear as it gets. Also, just today (March 3), this asshole Alan Greenspan, (HOW does that incompetant keep that job year after year??), "proposed" abolishing the income tax (rich people) and replacing the whole system with a national SALES TAX (middle-class and poor). God, what a fuckass!

Again, as to the original post here, I agree that "termination" or "phase-out" are good, accurate, scary words, and should be used. "Reform," besides being a lie, indicates that they are being thoughtful, and perhaps have not yet decided where this legislative action will go; when actually, these evil bastards have only the intent of making us all totally destitute, desperate, begging paupers, by the real, Medieval sense of the term. Then what....?

[AirAmFan]

14. Awesome post! Welcome to DU: I look forward to seeing YOUR lead posts

[kentuck]

13. And they want people to believe only Dems get SS....

It is "your" Social Security.

[Greybnk48]

16. Raiding the Family Social Security Insurance plan

that's how I frame it publicly.

[TXDemGal]

17. I have always referred to it as the Rethug Plan to DISMANTLE

Social Security, because that's what it is. That is their intention.

[foreverdem]

18. Doesn't it create a windfall for big business?

There was a caller last night on the Majority Report that used to be a business owner and posed the question that wouldn't this "privatization" be a big plus for big business since employers would have to contribute less to social security because employees are contributing a percentage to their own "private account" without an employer matching that amount. I hadn't thought of this before and the shrub and the repukes have not addressed this before. Has anyone heard this argument or know if the caller's line of thinking is correct?

[PA Democrat]

19. Yesterday Harry Reid actually said * wants to DESTROY Social Security

Here's the actual quote from Reid's appearance on CNN's Inside Politics:

REID: This is interesting. The president has never seen a crisis he hasn't created. Social Security, judges. So the next thing I assume I'll be hearing from Republicans, they want to change rules some way, as they do on the House when you get a problem with ethics, they just change the rules. That's what they're threatening to do here on judges, maybe that's what they should try to do on Social Security. Change the rules.

That's what they seem to be wanting to do, rather than face the situation we have before us. The situation is Social Security is not in crisis. Social Security is not in crisis. The president understands that and that's why he wants to privatize it, to destroy it.

More at:

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0503/03/ip.01.ht...