Announcing the first PP&P Readership Contest

Here's the setup: Yes, we've all had a little fun lately at the expense of GOP Language Despot Frank Luntz and his up-is-down efforts to dictate how we're allowed to discuss Republican legislative initiatives (such as his abrupt, poll-driven insistence that the centerpiece of Bush's Social Security phase-out plan should be called "personal accounts" rather than "private accounts"), and his apparent inability to notice when he's being made the butt of some pretty funny satire.

I'll even go so far as to admit I've even described myself on occasion as "like Frank Luntz, but with a moral compass" (and, one might add, with much better hair, as I'm sure you'll agree if you've seen the "Daily Show" clip)--raising the frightening theoretical possibility that if Luntz and I were ever to meet face-to-face, it could obliterate both his universe and our own. But I digress.

The latest GOP effort at thought engineering is to declare that the upcoming attempt by Senate Republicans to eliminate the filibuster rule--so that otherwise unappointable radical judges can be whisked through the Senate advise-and-consent process by the small Republican majority--was never, never, ever, referred to by Republicans as "the nuclear option.' No, no, that that was the Democrats' term for it. The Repubs have always referred to it, piously, as "the constitutional option." Or so the latest story goes.

Well, as Talking Points Memo politely notes, that's really just a lie --and not even a terribly skillful one, in the age of Google and LexisNexis, since it's a matter of a few keystrokes to determine that it was none other than Republican Senator and establishment embarrassment Trent Lott who coined the term when the end-the-filibuster idea first got floated in GOP circles.

The immediate problem, from the GOP point of view, is obvious: In the last few days, their polling must clearly have indicated that using "the nuclear option" to refer to the attempt to scuttle a 200-year tradition of open debate in order to ramrod a bunch of ideological whack-jobs onto life jobs on the federal bench tends to encourage voters' worries that the Senate--the entire Republican Party, actually--is in the hands of extremists with little grasp of or sympathy for the sort of government they've been elected to lead. Hence the poll-tested-as-friendly "constitutional option" as a euphemism for "shutting down debate."

(I hear you asking,"But what about the contest? You promised a contest!"
Yes. Patience. We're getting to that.)

So. Let's reconstruct what we've got here: A very unpopular Republican agenda, driven by the most ideologically extreme part of the party, suddenly gets a name change based on polling data, while the agenda itself forges straight ahead. Hmm . . .

Republican . . .
extreme . . .
sudden name change . . .
polling . . .

Am I crazy, or does this have Luntz's fingerprints all over it?

This would all be pretty laughable if the so-called Liberal Media weren't already starting to fall for it, picking up the newest GOP talking point--or, if you prefer, meme--or, if you prefer, lie--that the Dems are the ones who started using "nuclear option" to refer to the upcoming GOP plan to gut the last remaining Senate rule protecting the voice of the loyal opposition.

But what the hell--let's treat it as laughable anyway. Wit has always been the one form of weaponry where the left has the right outgunned and--as Molly Ivins rarely misses a chance to remind us--if you're not having fun, you're not doing it right anyway. I've already had some fun imagining just how far we could push the Luntz principle of up-is-down-ism, and even the folks at Wonkette took time off today from their normally sphincter-based humor to get off a few good ones. They even had the inspiration to convert Luntz's name into a verb. Sweet.

So I'm hereby announcing (wait for it . . . ) the first PP&P Reader Contest: Invent the Best Luntz-ism. (We're naming it after Frank because it's just so "him" even though there's no smoking gun directly linking him to this particular "constitutional option" incident. Yet.) To enter, simply click the "comments" link at the beginning of this post, and send me your suggestions, along these lines:

Republicans hate it when people call it ________, even though that's what it is. So from now on we have to call it _________.

Send as many entries as you have funny ideas. (And remember: "funny" and "long" don't necessarily mean the same thing. If you have to take much time to explain why it's funny, you may already be showing Republican tendencies.) The winner will receive a personal email of congratulations from me, suitable for framing once you've sent it to your printer.

Decision of the judges will be final. All entries become the property of Persuasion, Perseverance, and Patience. Some assembly required. Celebrated where prohibited.