The assertion in the article is that Mitt Romney not being castigated for making an off the cuff claim that reducing spending in his first year would be counterproductive "proves" that Republicans are trying to slow economic growth to gain power. Thus:
So your average NY Magazine reader, already pretty certain of the thesis finds their suspicions confirmed -- it is always easy to confirm our suspicions.
However, is that really what the discussions have been about? No.
BO wants to INCREASE spending AND increase taxes on the "wealthy". So Mitt saying he is going to hold the line on spending and saying nothing about taxes is actually significantly different than the meaning reported, and likely far less nefarious.
Republicans just believe that the private sector tends to allocate capital better than the public.
It is an article of faith for Democrats that GOVERNMENT spending is positive for the economy, but also that high taxes on the WEALTHY are beneficial. Having Bill Gates sell a billion worth of MS Stock so that BO can send $500 M to some Solyndra, and 500m to various folks so they can spend it as they see fit is a FAR better investment than leaving the money in MS stock. ]