The Democratic Party and their media enablers, such as the New York Times, slaughter the Republicans when it comes to economic reporting. The public discussion of social security taxes, unemployment benefits, and stimulus takes place in the language of Keynesian multipliers and stimulus counterfactuals.
He who controls the language of debate has already won, no matter how inappropriate or ridiculous. (I cite as an example of the latter the discussion of unemployment benefits as a form of stimulus that will restore the economy to health).
The Democrats and their media enablers use a tried-and-true template to dominate the debate. I use the New York Times article, “Analysts Say Economic Recovery Might Suffer if Tax Break Is Allowed to Expire,” to illustrate how it works.
The article’s objective is to convince readers that all right-thinking people know that the economy will go down the toilet if there is no agreement on extending the payroll tax cut and unemployment benefits. They claim that “economists” or “analysts” agree on this. They then interview four economists/economic organizations that support this conclusion and they cite one senior White House official who warns of dire consequences. They then dismiss one skeptic, who makes a technical point the average reader will not understand.
Voila! “Economists” agree with the Democrat position.
There is no reason why two cannot tango.
I have taken the liberty to rewrite the Times article to prove the opposite case. I use four respected economists and one respected media outlet and cite only one supporter of the administration case.
Here is my version, new headline and all. I preserve as much of the original Times language as possible:
Read the rest