Just say "personal accounts" update

It looks like Rove and Luntz are winning the fight to ban the term "privatization." Reporters have begun using the admin's new poll-tested terminology:

NYT: "If individual investment accounts become an integral part of Social Security, as President Bush is proposing, what will happen to workers who become disabled before they retire?"

Reporter questions from Wednesday's press conference:

"Q: Mr. President, at the beginning of your remarks today you referred to two criteria that you're looking for on a Social Security fix; namely, permanent solvency and personal accounts....

Q: Any transition to personal accounts is estimated to cost between $1 trillion to $2 trillion over 10 years....

Q: Are you prepared today to say that those who opt into a potential private account -- a personal account could, in fact, have a guaranteed benefit, as well?"

Credit goes to TPM and Salon for compiling these. Like I mentioned in my first post, for once we're actually seeing the birth of spin on this issue-- cradle to maturity. But why is the press so willing to cave in?