If an official called something a "breakthrough," would normal Americans think it was a good thing?

I want to show you example 845,965 of how cunningly the Democrats running this poor abused nation use words in a way that means the exact opposite of their normal meaning:

What does the word "breakthrough" mean to ya?

If something is described as a breakthrough, would most Americans interpret that as a good thing?

Well let's see...the dictionary says a breakthrough is "any significant or sudden advance, development, achievement, or increase, as in scientific knowledge or diplomacy, that removes a barrier to progress.  
  Example: "The jet engine was a major breakthrough in air transport."

Another definition is "an act or instance of removing or surpassing an obstacle or restriction; overcoming a stalemate."  Still sounds very positive, very good, eh?

So when a government official uses the word "breakthrough," virtually everyone proficient in English would think that was a good thing, right?

With that background, if you heard a spokesdemon for the regime use the term "breakthrough case," would you intuitively think that was a positive thing, or a worrisome, negative thing?

Of course it sounds positive, as in a "significant or sudden advance, development or achievement...that removes a barrier to progress."

So what did biden*harris spokesdemon Jen Psaki mean when she used the term "breakthrough cases" three times in 30 seconds at yesterday's White House press conference?  A "significant or sudden advance or achievement"?

Hahahahaha!  No, she was referring to people who'd been diagnosed with the Chinese virus despite having been fully vaccinated.

"Wait, how is that possible?  After all, the head of the CDC told us--many times--that if we got vaccinated we wouldn't have to wear masks.  Wouldn't that imply that vaccinated people couldn't get the virus?"

Uh...umm...uh...(whispers) not exactly.  But don't worry, cuz the vax is almost totally effective, citizen.  Only one-tenth of one percent of those who take the vaccine will get the virus.  Or something like that.

"Would you define 'something like that'?"

"Well, the actual number could be two percent.  Or five percent.  Or ten percent.  We don't really know. But one thing is absolutely certain:  It's a number.  And if you ask any more questions about what that number is, we'll tell you company you're an "anti-vaxxer" and you'll be fired from your job."

Okay, let me see if I've got this:  Now that we know to treat Chinese virus patients with hydroxychloroquine and zinc, so that deaths of people who get the virus are becoming rare, and the case numbers are way down, and the percentage of those needing hospitalization is quite low--most people being totally asymptomatic--the Chinese virus is no more of a threat than normal flu.  But the rate of serious injury linked specifically to the vax is climbing, yet you're still going to force kids as young as six to take the jab or they won't be allowed to go back to school.  Is that about right?

"Yes."

Okay, just one more question:  60 Democrat members of the Texas House fled to DC to block a vote in the Texas House that they knew they'd lose.  All of them claimed to have been fully vaccinated, and yet six of them tested positive for the virus.  Could you tell us what percentage the White House thinks that is?

"Um...uhh...um...I'll have to circle back to you on that.  I don't have a calculator handy and that answer would involve math, so..."

[Voice from back of room:]  "It's ten percent, ya moron."

"Who said that?"

[Eight hands go up.]

Lesson: When a Dem regime wants to fool the rubes into thinking a negative thing is really good, call it a "breakthrough."  Makes perfect sense, right?  Saul Alinsky and Joseph Goebbels would understand.

Sources (several):

CNN (very pro-regime)  

CBS (another pro-regime rag)