Posted on Jul 14, 2011
By Bill Boyarsky
At his news conference this week, President Barack Obama seized on a misleading Washington word—“entitlements”—to describe the badly needed aid programs that are likely to be cut because of his compromises with the Republicans.
“Entitlement” is a misleading word because it masks the ugly reality of reducing medical aid for the poor, the disabled and anyone over 65 as well as cutting Social Security. Calling such programs entitlements is much more comfortable than describing them as what they are—Medicare, Social Security and money for good schools, unemployment insurance, medical research and public works construction that would put many thousands to work.
It’s also a Republican word. It implies that those receiving government aid have a sense of entitlement, that they’re getting something for nothing. And now it’s an Obama word as he moves toward the center and away from the progressives who powered his 2008 campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination over centrist Hillary Clinton.
....It’s impossible to decode anyone’s language because of the maneuvering over the debt limit. But Obama was clear about his long-range goals in a speech to the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington on April 13.
....He proposed reducing Medicare and Medicaid by $500 billion by 2023 and “an additional $1 trillion in the decade after that.” And if more cuts must be made, the independent cost-cutting commission authorized by his health reform law would do it, although Obama described the process in a deceptively positive way: “additional savings by further improving Medicare.”
He also left open the possibility of cost cutting in Social Security. “Both parties should work together now to strengthen Social Security for future generations. But we have to do it without putting at risk current retirees, or the most vulnerable, or people with disabilities; without slashing benefits for future generations.”
...Obama has to be honest, forthright and progressive—and stop using “entitlements” to refer to worthwhile government programs. He’s a writer. He must know what negative nuances the word carries. FULL STORY
OK fine. I got it that us
But comrade Bill Boyarsky fails to provide a replacement word for "entitlements".
Salvation comes in reading the wise Comments section, wherein commenter "Leefeller" shows us the correct replacement for "entitlements" is "peoples rights".
Which, when we recall Fearless Leader's memorial speech from his youth in 2001 about the Constitution being a " charter of negative liberties- what the government CAN'T do to you"-
It makes perfect sense that receiving money from the government is a RIGHT, the "positive liberty of what the government MUST do for you"