That’s an apt way to describe this week’s health-care-reform media blitz by the White House.

It’s probably also a good way to describe this debate over that media blitz:

The USA Today takes note of the fact that support for school choice is growing among Democratic, often black, politicians:

While vouchers will likely never be the clarion call of Democrats, they’re beginning to make inroads among a group of young black lawmakers, mayors and school officials who have split with party and teachers union orthodoxy on school reform. The group includes Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson, Newark Mayor Cory Booker and former Washington, D.C., mayor Anthony Williams.

I’d only add that this broadening support is hardly limited to black Democrats, and that support for education tax credits is spreading even more quickly among Democrats. And while choice might never become a Democratic “clarion call,” it just might become the new consensus among serious education reformers in both parties.

For instance, a Democrat-controlled and, I assume, mostly white legislature in Rhode Island passed a donation tax credit. And Democratic governor and legislature in Iowa raised their tax credit dollar cap by 50 percent in 2007. The paper mentions black mayor Corey Booker’s support for school choice in New Jersey, but the white, former Democratic state party chair, and current state Senator Ray Lesniak is also pushing for a donation tax credit bill.

The model case is Florida. When the Florida legislature passed its education tax credit program to fund private school choice in 2001, only one Democrat supported the measure. Last year, the state legislature expanded the program with the votes of one third of statehouse Democrats, half the black caucus and the entire Hispanic caucus.

In the past few weeks, nearly a third of Senate Democrats and half of House Democrats voted to significantly expand the program’s revenue base. Virtually all Republicans did the same, and Republican Governor Crist is expected to sign the bill soon. In all, 43 percent of state Democratic legislators in Florida voted in favor of education tax credits.

The toothpaste is out, and the teachers unions can’t put it back in with all the dues money in the world.

According to an unnamed “top White House official”:

It’s hard to talk about socialized medicine when the hospitals, doctors, insurers, the private sector players are working with us at the White House.

Let me get this straight. A president who is ideologically committed to socialized medicine is negotiating with an industry that’s committed to making as much money as possible off of socialized medicine.

But don’t worry. If there’s one thing they’re not discussing, it’s socialized medicine.

Tomorrow morning, the Rev. Joe Darby of Charleston, South Carolina and I will kick off a dialogue about school choice. As South Carolina’s legislature debates an education tax credit bill, Joe and I will debate the merits of school choice right here at Cato​-at​-Lib​er​ty​.org.

Joe is an eloquent, thoughtful guy. I expect it to be very interesting.

Here’s a roundup of bloggers who are writing about Cato research and commentary:

• Blogging for CEI’s Open​Mar​kets​.org, Ryan Young used Edward Crane’s op-ed about conservatives’ shortcomings.

• At The Hill’s Congress Blog, Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann cited Cato research that shows that taxpayers spend about $300 billion per year on tax preparation services.

• Cory Doggett blogs regularly about oil issues, and has been writing a lot lately about Patrick J. Michaels’ work on climate change.

• At The Liberty Papers, Brad Warbiany quoted David Rittgers on the drug war in Afghanistan.

• Free​dom​Pol​i​tics​.com editor Bill Goodwin blogged about the controversy over private property and the 9/11 memorial in Pennsylvania, linking to Ilya Shapiro’s commentary.

Are you blogging about Cato, but not on the list? Drop us a line and let us know!

Over at NPR​.org, I’ve got a commentary that explains why comprehensive health care reform is far from certain — current events notwithstanding. Read it, recommend it, comment on it.

From the NPR piece:

There are two things standing in the way of Democrats’ plans for universal health insurance coverage: math and politics.

First, the math. According to the Urban Institute, covering the uninsured would cost a minimum $120 billion per year. Over 10 years, that comes to about $1.6 trillion.

That money’s gotta come from somewhere. And that’s where politics comes in. Everybody wants that money to come from someone else.

UPDATE: Here’s my appearance on Fox News today, discussing lobbyists’ proposal to cut health care costs:

Also, is health care a right?

I smell a rat. Lobbyists never advocate less revenue for their members. Ever. If they did, they would be fired and replaced with new lobbyists.

The industry wants universal coverage, because that means more customers and more revenue. But universal coverage is expensive: it could cost $2 trillion itself.

If you tax your way to $2 trillion, the people revolt. If you try to “free up” the money by cutting payments to the industry, the industry revolts. Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D‑MT) says he has reforms that will reduce health care spending over time, but the Congressional Budget Office won’t recognize those assumed savings.

So the industry may simply be trying to help Sen. Baucus cook the books by signaling, “Hey CBO – we’ll make sure those reforms work!” – with every intention of fighting those spending reductions later on.