NPR’s latest economic coverage makes me want to stab my ears with ice picks. Here is the formula: misconstrue side A as only wanting to improve the economy through stimulus without concern for the deficit, then misconstrue side B as having a reasonable argument that deficits are scary so lets stop feeding the kids because that’s what tough-love daddies do.
Next, sidestep the fact that side B’s argument doesn’t make any logical sense as a short term strategy if you actually want to reduce the deficit in the long term. And definitely don’t point out that side B’s specious position is much more likely to be rooted in a cynical (albeit ingenious) political tactic.
Now, find two experts who reach across the proverbial isle to find a much more subtle position which advocates short term stimulus with a plan for future deficit reduction, but make sure not to mention that this is actually what side A has been advocating for all along. This way NPR gets to implicitly associate itself with the oh-so-subtle middle ground by way of distorting the periphery.
Throw in some he-said-she-said about whether tax cuts for big business work to stimulate jobs. Quote one expert as advocating this position and another expert as citing evidence which contradicts this claim. IMPORTANT: No matter what happens do not do ANY independent research to verify either claim, because we all know this reality-based-research would point to a
Finally end with something Mitch McConnel says about not wanting to hurt future generations (a claim that is directly contradicted by the arguments of both your experts). Voila! [Commence stabbing of ears.]
Thanks NPR! I can’t wait to hear your smug Argumentum-ad-temperantiam voice as the soundtrack for economic Armageddon. I’ll make sure to save the podcast, so I can listen on repeat long after you’re gone.