Funny Talkin'

Sorry about the lack of posting; school's been starting up again and it's been tough finding some time to write.

I've been noticing a language trend in the media lately regarding the health care proposal. They insist on referring to it as "universal" health care, or "health care for everyone", etc. instead of calling it what it is: socialized. It's not the right thing for our country, but there is nothing evil about the term. It's not even a political-correctness issue; it is what it is...Or is it?

What's likely happening is that many older people would think ill of the term "socialized", as it brings back memories of the Red Scare and propaganda of the Cold War era. So, this may be a communication tactic to avoid such insinuations. However, the problem with that lies in the semantics behind the aforementioned terms they're using instead. Those terms make it sound wonderful: Health care for everyone! Yay!!! And most people who support the health care proposal have not and will not do any research on it's consequences whatsoever (I only know one friend who actually did). So they'll absorb the information provided by the government like sponges...And why not? "Universal" health care sounds terrific! Everyone's covered? No tax increase? No trillion-dollar price tag? No horrors of socialized health care like in the UK? Awesome!

Unfortunately, the deeply-rooted costs of the proposal are being hidden behind crafty false labels which enable the media to drum up support while simultaneously shutting out the crazy right-wingers.