One of the saddest days in politics this year was the loss of Representative Thaddeus “Thad” McCotter of Michigan, who resigned in July. Thad McCotter had run for the GOP presidential nomination, but when he realized he was so crazy that Bachmann voters eyed him with suspicion he decided to run for reelection to the House. Then things got messy because it turned out he didn’t have enough signatures to qualify for the GOP House primary…due to fraud. So he decided to run as a write-in. And then ended that bid when it became clear his petition fraud dated back to 2006. Finally, McCotter resigned with a bizarre farewell letter.
But now McCotter’s legacy can live on. The awesome Tumblr Floor Charts has posted some screencaps of McCotter’s particular brand of crazy. Revisiting these charts is like welcoming an old friend. Thad McCotter used his access to the national stage to coin an entirely new language (full video here). In this speech, McCotter determined to undermine the clever rhetorical trickery of his Democratic rivals by changing the definitions of basic words in the English language.
So you can already see the format. “Progressive” = “Regressive.” Also, war is now peace. While this contrarian definition is odd, I’m willing to hear him out. Perhaps he provides a definition explaining how Progressive policies hurt the poor. Nope. No definition here. You may be thinking that I’m unfair and he actually explained his reasons in the accompanying speech, but no. Check the video! His speech was literally just read off the charts. But he does helpfully use it in a sentence. “Democrats are progressive” becomes “Democrats are regressive.” Well that’s great because I wasn’t going to figure that out from the translation.
“Change” = “The 1970s,” which at least makes some sense because that would be a change so he’s no longer just converting words to their antonyms. Once again there’s a sentence in case you weren’t grasping his point.
“Government” = “Socialism” continuing the long trend of Republicans having not a single fucking clue what “socialism” really is. I wonder if McCotter would be so quick to demonize the term if he realized that Americans view socialism more favorably than the Tea Party.
“Enhance Revenues” = “Raise Taxes.” I think I may have just had a stroke because Thad McCotter actually defined a phrase correctly. It’s fair to say the Democrats are engaged in some spin when they use the more friendly (read: less demonized by 30 years of Republican propaganda) “enhance revenues,” but when pressed Democrats will freely admit that this requires raising taxes somewhere because…math.
“The Rich” = “You.” We can’t blame McCotter for preparing this speech before Mitt Romney courageously told us that 47% of Americans are takers who pay no taxes at all. So “the rich” can’t really be “you” unless you fit in the 2% that the Democrats have singled out for tax hikes. On the other hand, if McCotter was consciously limiting his audience to the House floor he’s probably right.
“Invest” = “Waste” is not really a fair translation unless you’re investing with JP Morgan. Investments can be a waste, of course. Just not in the Obama administration, where federal spending has been remarkably clean, most investments — like the auto bailout — have more than paid for themselves, and Republicans have to bend over backward to allege waste by pretending that “loan guarantees” equal “spending” as opposed to commitments to spend in the highly unlikely case of default. This kind of accounting would render every insurance company bankrupt within seconds. Compared to America’s 8-year long “investment” in no-bid contracts for Halliburton the Obama administration should be receiving awards for investment efficiency.
“Energy” = “Lethargy.” What? I mean, these are antonyms in the context of personal vim and vigor vs. fatigue. But McCotter’s suddenly helpful contextual sentence informs us that he’s talking about energy policy. What’s a “lethargy policy?” I’m guessing it’s a policy of forging signatures on petitions rather than collecting them door-to-door.
“Green Collar Jobs” = “Unemployment.” Now I’m starting to understand the sentences, because this translation makes no sense unless you look at the sentence he’s trying to shoehorn this into. Green collar jobs have not materialized as quickly as many would hope. But to suggest that Obama is replacing blue collar jobs with either green collar jobs or unemployment is a gross inaccuracy. In fact, manufacturing jobs — the staple of the blue collar demographic — have grown under Obama after drastically falling off under President Bush. Republicans like to cite the fact that there are fewer blue collar jobs under President Obama, but this is sleight of hand carried out by tacking the continued freefall of the first 3-6 months of 2009 on Obama rather than Bush and by blaming Obama for Republican efforts at the state level to gut public sector spending — the other main source of blue collar employment.
Now we switch to “Global Democrat” as opposed to “Local Democrat.” Why weren’t the titles “Foreign” and “Domestic?” Why am I trying to find logic in something Thad McCotter says?
“Diplomacy” = “Magic” specifically as it relates to Iran. I think the election beat back this malarky pretty well — if you don’t have any suggestions beyond doing what we’re doing right now then shut up.
“Engage” = “Appease.” Can I try a sentence? “Democrats will appease gatherings of suspected terrorists by obliterating the guilty and innocent alike with unrestrained drone strikes.” This is harder than McCotter makes it look.
“End” = “Lose” when talking about Iraq. Pretty sure Democrats are just following the Bush administration timeline, but whatever.
Bring us on home, buddy! There’s the whole decoder ring in effect — a summarized Democratic platform twisted into something non-sensical. All you need to beat Democrats is a nifty mechanism to completely reverse reality. That and a couple thousand non-forged signatures.