Thursday, February 03, 2005
Revisiting Acronyms
It seems that the Bush administration is continuing its nuanced use of phrasing (to which Bush himself will then apply his nuanced use of delivery style) on some of their target issues.
The whole Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) issue and search didn't work out so well, and the current administration would probably rather not remind anyone of it, but at the same time they still see value in the core issue, so in the State of the Union they have been redubbed Weapons of Mass Murder (WMM). It also ups the ante a bit, since "destruction" can be interpreted as simply property damage, while "murder" leaves nothing to interpretation.
Last year's congressional attempts to pass a Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA), which would bar gay couples from marrying, failed. But the administration clearly wants to hold on to the issue in an effort to please one of their core constituencies, so the effort will continue. However, the president is now referring to it by the actual name of the bill, the Marriage Protection Act (MPA). This removes the reminder that this is a proposed constitutional amendment designed to limit rights rather than protect them, and places the bill in a frame of actual protection. They're not trying to prevent marriage, they're trying to protect it! And that's what the Constitution is for, right - protecting us? It must be okay!
We need some progressive strategists with this much savvy and polish. Please.
|
The whole Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) issue and search didn't work out so well, and the current administration would probably rather not remind anyone of it, but at the same time they still see value in the core issue, so in the State of the Union they have been redubbed Weapons of Mass Murder (WMM). It also ups the ante a bit, since "destruction" can be interpreted as simply property damage, while "murder" leaves nothing to interpretation.
Last year's congressional attempts to pass a Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA), which would bar gay couples from marrying, failed. But the administration clearly wants to hold on to the issue in an effort to please one of their core constituencies, so the effort will continue. However, the president is now referring to it by the actual name of the bill, the Marriage Protection Act (MPA). This removes the reminder that this is a proposed constitutional amendment designed to limit rights rather than protect them, and places the bill in a frame of actual protection. They're not trying to prevent marriage, they're trying to protect it! And that's what the Constitution is for, right - protecting us? It must be okay!
We need some progressive strategists with this much savvy and polish. Please.
|
Posted by Rogueslayer at 2:49 PM 
