Assert, Repeat, Assume
W. had an group interview with a set of journalists from regional newspapers. (Those annoying national reporters kept asking him to explain details, and confront unpleasant facts.) He gathered a group more likely to be impressed by his mere presence, so he could go on selling his Social Security ideas:
Seriously, this shows a shift into the next phase of the propaganda campaign. He's no longer flogging the financial crisis. Now, he's buried it in the background assumptions. The "reasoning" here is that, since the system doesn't have the resources to pay benefits as promised, there are going to be de facto cuts in those benefits, because there won't be any money. Therefore, any adjustments we make to cut the promised benefits to a lower number aren't really cuts (because they wouldn't get that money anyway). It's just admitting the reality of the situation, "Adjusting (the future retirees expectations) to reality."
This 'assert, repeat, assume-as-fact pattern' is a standard rhetorical scheme with these guys. It's pretty effective, and they are clever about using it. But it's fairly obvious if you look for it. In this case, there's also some lovely logic within: there is a system "crisis" because future retirees won't get the money they are supposed to get, so to fix the system we'll change it so that future retirees aren't supposed, to get that money, and the system will be fine. (Pay no attention to the fact that the retirees still won't have the money.)
All of us born after 1950 should interpret this as Bush saying he intends to cut our Social Security benefits, on his way to dismantling the system entirely. And it has nothing to do with the financial health of the system, though he'll happily use that as a smokescreen.
Bush said the current system cannot be sustained, and he implied that benefits in the traditional program will have to be scaled back for those born after 1950.Not a benefit cut, an "adjustment to reality." Bwah-ha-ha-ha! "Reality!" Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha......like he has any respect for reality.
"One of the suggestions, for example, is that they grow but not at a rate as fast as projected," he said. "You can call it anything you want. I would call it an adjustment to reality."
Seriously, this shows a shift into the next phase of the propaganda campaign. He's no longer flogging the financial crisis. Now, he's buried it in the background assumptions. The "reasoning" here is that, since the system doesn't have the resources to pay benefits as promised, there are going to be de facto cuts in those benefits, because there won't be any money. Therefore, any adjustments we make to cut the promised benefits to a lower number aren't really cuts (because they wouldn't get that money anyway). It's just admitting the reality of the situation, "Adjusting (the future retirees expectations) to reality."
This 'assert, repeat, assume-as-fact pattern' is a standard rhetorical scheme with these guys. It's pretty effective, and they are clever about using it. But it's fairly obvious if you look for it. In this case, there's also some lovely logic within: there is a system "crisis" because future retirees won't get the money they are supposed to get, so to fix the system we'll change it so that future retirees aren't supposed, to get that money, and the system will be fine. (Pay no attention to the fact that the retirees still won't have the money.)
All of us born after 1950 should interpret this as Bush saying he intends to cut our Social Security benefits, on his way to dismantling the system entirely. And it has nothing to do with the financial health of the system, though he'll happily use that as a smokescreen.
posted by Paul at 10:03 AM |
|
email this
