The Brawler was reading Journal Sentinel reporter Steve Walters' profile of State Senator Kathleen Vinehout, who's been a leading advocate of the Senate Dems' health care plan, when his eyes popped at this paragraph:
And the rookie senator now finds herself out front on the radical $15.2 billion universal health care plan being pushed by her fellow Senate Democrats.
"Radical"? Huh? Did the Brawler miss something? Does the Senate plan call for the state to seize control of insurance companies and hospitals?
The relevant definition of "radical" in the the Brawler's Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary reads: "marked by a considerable departure from the usual or traditional: extreme...tending or disposed to make extreme changes in exisiting views, habits, conditions or institutions."
Given that the Senate plan leaves the health care delivery system intact, I have a hard time defining it as "radical." I'm not sure why Walters believes the application of this adjective, this loaded adjective, helps his readers better understand the plan, what it does or how it works.
A cynic would argue that the word "radical" fits in with the right's talking points on the subject ... including ones Walters dutifully reports deeper in the piece:
Republican legislators can stop it from becoming law, and they have vowed to do just that. They call it a "socialist" plan and the biggest single tax increase in the history of Wisconsin.
"Senator Vinehout's story is heartfelt," said Republican Sen. Ted Kanavas of Brookfield. "But their plan is completely misguided. They've decided to blow up a health care system that is the best in the nation."
Walters knows that the "biggest single tax increase in the history of Wisconsin" is nothing but right-wing spin. Why report it? The "socialist" charge is also patent bullshit. Why report that? How is that educating the Journal Sentinel's readers?
A cynic -- or someone who cares about the press and its role in our civil discourse -- would also point out that, for whatever reason, Walters is a pro in recycling right-wing talking points.
His regurgitation of the Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance "tax burden" "study" from 2003 remains a monument of bad journalism. And his takedown of Jim Doyle after his triumphant reelection was embarrassing to all.
Few political battles will be bigger, more complicated and more fraught with misleading propaganda than the one shaping up over the future of health care in this state and in this country.
It's something too important to be left to a proven hack like Steve Walters. The Brawler suggests the Journal Sentinel hire Seth Zlotocha.
I was going to write about that "radical" description, but see you have beaten me to the punch.
Many have asked for years whether Walters is looking for a spot on the GOP payroll. But the Republicans would be crazy to hire him, since he already does their PR for free.
Posted by: xoff | July 16, 2007 at 10:35 AM