Spinning out of control

March 13th, 2017 at 10:52 am

Over at WaPo. One expects a certain amount of Sunday AM spin from politicians selling, in this case, the Republican health care plan. But this is a really bad plan–a hugely regressive tax cut attached to a bill that will leave millions uninsured. It is as if the problem they set out to solve is a) the rich need higher after-tax incomes, and b) the poor need less insurance coverage.

Speaking of spin, while I’m happy to crack wise all day, I’m with Paulie Walnuts Krugman on this incident with Sean Spicer on jobs day last Friday. Spicer told the press corps that his boss thought the jobs report “may have been phony in the past, but it’s very real now.” This just cracked up the press corps, who chortled at Spicy’s quip. But it got under my skin. Watch the video.


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

One comment in reply to "Spinning out of control"

  1. Smith says:

    How is not claiming we’re “closing in on full employment” not an unforgivable spin, as the data (from this blog even) shows otherwise, (two years away when you do the math)?
    How is allowing 15 to 20 million to lose coverage unacceptable, but allowing 25 million to still be without coverage under Obamacare was ok? Anyone remember Clinton’s plan for universal coverage? http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/02/12/hillary_clinton_doesn_t_have_a_practical_plan_or_any_plan_at_all_for_achieving.html
    No, her issues were increased globalization, being for the TPP before she was against it, the gold standard of trade agreements, and the offense of calling Miss Uniververse fat.
    We’re getting spun from all sides, and the spin from Democrats is the most annoying.
    We are not yet near full employment, and there is no plan the Democrats have to extend health insurance to everyone. Krugman claims the Republicans don’t have a plan. Neither do the Democrats. I’m aware of the need to outline the catastrophe of repealing Obamacare. But on a practical side, it’s worth noting how the Democrats lose (and lost) by defending the status quo.