I can be reasonably assured that no such thing will happen to me, so all I can hope for is that Tufte holds himself to the same ideal.
Did Obama just hire a very talented propagandist, or a guy who deftly presents the bill's inadequacies? I guess we'll find out. Either way, his presentation will certainly be the anchor point of the stimulus debate.
Why's it have to be either/or? My side/your side?
I'd hope, and I bet this is what Obama's hoping too, that the guy will produce some stuff that is very reflective of WHAT'S IN THE DAMN BILL. Obama stands to gain politically from public understanding of the bill because frankly, as long as the graphic doesn't consist of "$$$ -> (hammer&sickle)", it'll be better press than the thing's gotten so far. The truth is worth something.
The bill is a whole lot of things and none of them are black and white -- quantifying them in a way that's more educational than "they're gonna start death panels", "socialism", blah blah is difficult and Obama clearly feels he stands to gain from public education here.
For example, the stimulus was 40% tax cuts. Now, given that 99% of the republican party voted against it and called it socialism or whatever, you probably wouldn't think that. But it's true. Education helps, when you've made an honest effort at good policy. It's not just propaganda.