Tuesday, October 27, 2009

New Name for The Public Option

The new name for The Public Option of Health Care Reform is the Consumer Option. This is a smart move. It is one thing to undo the public; but, one can not touch the consumer. People do not identify with the public in as much the powerful consumer. Do note the change in message.


October 27, 2009

HomeArchivesRSS SyndicationMerchandiseDonationsContactAboutSearch


« NY23 now a litmus test for conservatives | Blog Home Page | Graph of the Day for October 27, 2009 »
Email Friend | Print Article | 34 Comments | Share
October 27, 2009
Pelosi wants to 'rename' the public option
Rick Moran

What is it about liberals that they think they have to fool people into supporting them?

Run as a nice, safe moderate only to become screaming leftists once in office. It really shows they have no confidence that the substance of their ideas can stand scrutiny much less win out in a fair fight with the right.

The latest manifestation of this is Nancy Pelosi suggesting that we "rename" the public option. Matt Sedensky of the Seattle Times notes:


A government-sponsored "public option" for health care lives, though it may be more attractive to skeptics if it goes by a different moniker, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Monday.
In an appearance at a Florida senior center, the Democratic leader referred to the so-called public option as "the consumer option." Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., appeared by Pelosi's side and used the term "competitive option."

Both suggested new terminology might get them past any lingering doubts among the public - or consumers or competitors.

"You'll hear everyone say, 'There's got to be a better name for this,'" Pelosi said. "When people think of the public option, public is being misrepresented, that this is being paid for with their public dollars."

Does "everyone" really say 'there's got to be a better name for this?' Not that I've heard. We may assume then, that it is liberals who want a "better" name for a public option that will indeed be paid for with public dollars if you are honest enough to include subsidies paid for by tax payers in your definition of "public dollars."

Perhaps Pelosi doesn't see taxpayer dollars as public money. Regardless, I think the old saw about dressing a pig in a prom dress will still leave you with a well dressed porcine is apt here. Even if you put a goat's head on the pig, you won't change its nature.


Posted at 09:37 AM | Email | Permalink | 34 Comments | Share
Recent Articles
•Is Barack Obama 'too nice' for his own good?
•Does the Supreme Court Still Sit?
•Signing away sovereignty
•Who Wants War with Iran?
•The Race Against Nothing
•Reporters Without Borders: Bordering on Insanity?
•Lies, damn lies, and opinion polls
•Stimulate What is Needed
•Obama's True Lies
•Losing Israel
Blog Posts
•Graph of the Day for October 27, 2009
•Pelosi wants to 'rename' the public option
•NY23 now a litmus test for conservatives
•Hey J-Street: Your anti-Israel bias is showing
•The whiff of fascism becomes a stench
•Ratings for Fox New up 10% since attacks by Obama
•The coming public pension nightmare
•Say it ain't so, Joe.
•Let Them Eat Veal
•NYT assigns equal blame to Israel for Arab riots
Monthly Archives
•October 2009
•September 2009
•August 2009
•July 2009
•More...




About Us | Contact © American Thinker 2009

6 comments:

Tom Usher said...

Well, the "conservative" is either completely ignorant of who Frank Luntz is or he's deliberately twisting the whole idea of word choice and naming schemes.

Frank Luntz is the premier "conservative" name or label twister to accomplish exactly what the "conservative" railed against toward the so-called left or liberals. Luntz came up with "death tax," for instance, to shift the perception away from estate tax (taxing the rich upon unearned inheritance often stolen from the poor).

Luntz even gave away a freebee to the left by specifically stating in the open that they should call the plan a "choice" since conservatives identify with that concept.

Obviously, Pelosi and the others don't want to appear to be taking Luntz's advice.

Luntz is the one who brought us "climate change" to replace "global warming" while the conservatives then go around claiming that liberal shifted to "climate change" because they couldn't defend "global warming."

So, this "consumer option" is falling into that exact same pattern. The right is condemning the left for what the right has done often better (if one thinks twisting is better).

Peace,
Tom Usher
Real Liberal Christian Church

Lauren said...

I'm not sure. The public option was just beginning to gain traction (new poll cited). However, the public option name itself has been vilified be a lot of partisans. Actually, now that I think of it. It might be a good idea. People will associate the health care option with tax-paying American citizens, i.e., consumers, rather than illegal aliens or people on welfare.

askcherlock said...

Let's just call it the Public Option. I think people are already very confused. There are not a lot of details unless you want to read 2000 pages. Our Senators and Congressman should be giving us details about how this proposal could impact us. For me, without a Public Option, what good is HCR? We will end up paying higher taxes or premiums for those w/o health care as they go to emergency rooms.

miracle said...

Regardless of the name that they attached to this bill. The bottom line is taxes will go up, and the middle class will have to take this on their backs. A govt run health care will be a disaster. I do not have all the answers, but govt run care has not work elsewhere and the govt is in denial if they think it will work in the states.

Anonymous said...

Genial post and this mail helped me alot in my college assignement. Say thank you you for your information.

Hinrichsencsqx said...

Well, the "conservative" is either completely ignorant of who Frank Luntz is or he's deliberately twisting the whole idea of word choice and naming schemes. Frank Luntz is the premier "conservative" name or label twister to accomplish exactly what the "conservative" railed against toward the so-called left or liberals. Luntz came up with "death tax," for instance, to shift the perception away from estate tax (taxing the rich upon unearned inheritance often stolen from the poor). Luntz even gave away a freebee to the left by specifically stating in the open that they should call the plan a "choice" since conservatives identify with that concept. Obviously, Pelosi and the others don't want to appear to be taking Luntz's advice. Luntz is the one who brought us "climate change" to replace "global warming" while the conservatives then go around claiming that liberal shifted to "climate change" because they couldn't defend "global warming." So, this "consumer option" is falling into that exact same pattern. The right is condemning the left for what the right has done often better (if one thinks twisting is better). Peace, Tom Usher Real Liberal Christian Church