Why banned words?

With all the recent furor over the running of the White House, I’m hoping that substantive policy issues don’t get lost in all the drama.

One such topic is the banned words at the CDC, as reported on recently by Sue Lani Madsen (“The bloody shirt offers us a lesson,” Dec. 30). Her historical take on it was informative, but missed the key point entirely.

Yes, the directive to not use those particular words did indeed come from within the CDC itself, but the question is “Why?” The answer is that this very important organization knows that in a time when critical funding is being gutted by the Trump administration, they must take the most ridiculously extreme measures so as not to offend HHS Secretary Alex Azar, budget hawk Mick Mulvaney and certain members of Congress in order to gain financial support for the valuable work they do.

Apparently, words like “diversity,” “vulnerable populations,” and the most dreaded of all, “science-based,” raise such ire in the collective conscience of Trump World that the CDC is afraid to use them. How incredibly sad, and frightening, that this is where we are.

Madsen calls this “Smart Communications 101.” Most folks recognize it as subtle intimidation by the powers that be.

Warren Wheeler

Nine Mile Falls