The High Ground of Language, continued: I want a job writing memos like that!

Although the stakes for American workers are considerable, it's been clear for some time that the argument over what to call Bush’s plan to phase out Social Security--should the replacement program be called "private accounts" or "personal accounts?"--does have its genuinely silly moments.

The short version: The proponents of phasing out Social Security--whether the Cato Institute, the Heritage Foundation, or then Governor of Texas George Bush--have called it "privatization" for years. At least they did, right up to the point about a year ago when polling revealed that the phase-out scheme, already unpopular with a majority of voters, was even more unpopular when it was called "privatization" or "private accounts."

At that point, right-wing pollster and brand advisor Frank Luntz put the word out: Drop the word privatization and all its variants. Henceforth, the GOP-approved locution would be the poll-tested-as-warmer-and-fuzzier personal accounts. The death of Social Security, but with a human face, if you will.

But the Bush administration, and its allies, didn't stop there. In a display of great, big, huge brass ones that has become the GOP signature, they now complain that anyone who continues to use the proscribed term is--are you sitting down? no sharp objects in your hands or pockets?--engaging in cheap, partisan, semantic game-playing.

In fact, as the NYTimes reports,

Mr. Bush complained last week that "'Privatization' is a trick word," intended to "scare people."

Meanwhile, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, who's beginning to show some flair for the game, some sense of how it’s played, twisted the knife on the Republicans a little by correcting a reporter in a news conference who called them "personal" accounts:

"It’s 'privatization,'" Mr. Reid said, adding that "personal accounts" was "the Republican term."

Luntz, the Erwin Rommel of the GOP Sprache Korps, quickly put the word out to the troops:

"'Private' is exclusive. 'Private' is limiting. 'Private' is something that’s not available to all. "'Personal' is encompassing. It’s individual. It’s ownership. In the end, you need the combination of 'personal' and 'security.'"

The foot soldiers in the administration and the media wheeled like geese in formation. And thus are Republican talking points born.

Honestly, I confess that, deep inside, I’m a little envious. I mean, how great a job would that be--sending out memos all day saying, Henceforth, we shall only refer to A as B? Even though (unlike Luntz) I’m burdened by a moral compass, I nevertheless believe I could do Luntz’s job.

For example:

To: All Republican operatives
Re: Polling update

Effective immediately, discontinue the use of "unethical" in all references to charges concerning House majority leader Tom DeLay’s lobbyist-financed travel, interfering in Texas redistricting, pending indictments, and so on; upgrade to "high-fiber."

According to our research, "unethical" is perceived by 79% of voters as somehow in conflict with our highly successful "values"(tm) initiative. "High-fiber," by comparison, is perceived by similar numbers, especially among key demographics, as being healthy and promoting regularity.

Sample sentence: We are confident that Congressman DeLay’s many conflicts of interest have set new standards of high-fiber behavior for Republicans.

Or:

To: All Republican operatives
Re: Polling update

Effective immediately, discontinue the use of "failed" and "disastrous" in all references to the results of our Iraq policy; upgrade to "no-iron." 

Our research indicates that 82% of voters associate "failed" policies with poor leadership and bad strategy ("disastrous" tested slightly better, at 79%). "No-iron," on the other hand, is associated by a full 87% of voters with convenience and comfort.

Sample sentence: Americans can sleep better tonight, secure in the knowledge that overextending our defense resources, diverting our attention from al Qaida and bin Laden, and squandering the trust of our allies have produced a no-iron policy in Iraq.

Or:

To: All Republican operatives
Re: Polling update

Effective immediately, discontinue the use of "ruin," "despoil," and "strip" in all discussions of the administration’s environmental policies; upgrade to "expondrigate."

In our polls, 91% of voters reacted negatively when "ruin," "despoil," and "strip" were associated with the air they breathe, the water they drink, or the other natural resources they enjoy. (Note: We followed the survey with focus groups, in which panelists frequently mentioned "Theodore Roosevelt" and "environmental stewardship." No one on the survey team was able to identify these terms, but we plan to incorporate them in future polls, perhaps testing them out with plans to pave over Wyoming after the 2006 elections.) Since current modeling techniques have identified no existing language that could put a positive spin on our environmental policies, we simply made up the word "expondrigate."

Sample sentence: To those Americans concerned that we must preserve the environmental riches of our great nation for future generations, we solemnly assure you that our children’s children will one day look back at us and say, That was the generation that expondrigated every last bird, fish, tree, river, and wilderness acre by 2008.