A New Story: Politics for the 21st Century

I went to high school with Tucker.  He was an aggressive conservative debater even then.  I specifically remember him attacking me for wearing a "Mutants for Nuclear Power" button when I was a lowly freshman and he was an upperclassman.  Since then I have taken classes in logic, and logical fallacies, studied History in college and taught just about every social studies class at the high school level.  He is very smart, and a good rhetorician, but is still using the same tired fallacies to make his arguments.  While the "illicit transference" fallacy (drawing general conclusion from specific cases) is pretty common, and just because an argument is a fallacy doesn't mean it is not sound, in Tucker's case, he uses them as a tool of propaganda.  See the list of propaganda principles here. Let's start with the problematic argument he made against my button in 1985.  He asked what California would do for electricity if it immediately shut down all nuclear ...

 Please show me your magic wand of "targeting."  This is the 4th article you have published, second from the editorial board against Direct Cash Payments.  And the 4th time that your "targeting" has remained vague at best.  Until you explain exactly how you plan to "target" AND get the relief to people as soon as possible, you are wrong.  Direct cash transfers are the most progressive idea out there, in general. Your arguments: 1. People who don't need it will get it.  Mine: people who DO need it won't unless your "targeting" is 100% efficient. 2. Unemployment benefits would be better.  Mine: that misses a large swath of people, including gig workers and stay at home parents (who are staying at homer to educate their children).  AND it is a drag on employment. 3. It's expensive.  Mine: So is giving everyone a free vaccine which I assume we both support.  At what price is a human life not worthy of being saved.  The tax co...

 There are two versions of reality in America.  I, of course, think I live in the "real" one, and that the right wingers live in a fantasy world of alternate facts, lies, and conspiracies.  Since the insurrection at the Capitol, I have been thinking about nothing else.  As an exercise, I wanted to see how many words I would have to change for a comment from RedState to accurately reflect my own beliefs.  I made 11 changes and changed only 5 words.  Please forgive the grammar, it is not mine. Here is the RedState Version of reality: The Democrat party, their news & social media outlets, far left radical supporters, Antifa, BLM and the political collusion with China in their agenda towards transforming America into what they have been indoctrinating the last generations into, a Socialist single party leadership. They have used every Communist tactic China uses to control what the public see's, hears, believes. The Democrat party, many R...

The Washington Post is a fantastic newspaper but they have a real issue in how they write about direct cash payments specifically and Universal Basic Income in general.  Their latest editorial got a bit right, but so much wrong.  Here is my comment: I absolutely agree that state and local aid is critical; and its lack is likely the reason that the 2008 recession lingered so long.  That needs to be next.  And I agree that that the "targeting" to under 150k a year is also foolish - but I agree because these payments should be universal, and recurring. But to oppose $2,000 stimulus checks is to show that the editorial board of the Washington Post is woefully uneducated about the large and growing body of evidence in support of direct cash payments, still believes that it is possible for the government to quickly and effectively "target aid", still believes that UI benefits do not have a negative drag on unemployment, and finally, and cruelly, that a certain...

Here are my thoughts, and response the this piece in WaPo today. Yes, in terms of what can be done without the do-nothing/obstructionist Republicans in the Senate.  But at the same time, pick a battle in the Congress that you can win to make 2022 a more realistic chance to GAIN seats.  This is the battle for direct cash payments to combat the pandemic and its economic fallout.  82% of voters approve of more rounds of stimulus checks.  Sending three months at $1,000 /month would be the same as the $900 billion proposed.  Do not combine it with anything else.  Make them vote on sending help to people who need it, or not. As much as I am in favor of helping states deal with their budgetary issues, make that a separate fight. Make it universal and therefore fair.  Sell it as essential for small business and families.  Do not take the bait of talking about how to afford it.  Means-test the tax next year, not the benefit this year. Thi...

Here is my reply to this article about the lessons of the 202 election   "I was just discussing this with my 18 year old son. The GOP has better "glue" to generally hold it together. While all Anti (Roe, government, taxes) it serves the purpose of a unifying message, albeit a destructive and angry one.  The Democratic party is a coalition of many interest groups who value their own silo more then winning (at times), and who can get lost in their own ideology. At times the Dems can be dogmatic. At the core, there is little "glue" that holds this coalition together. It is diverse. It is broad. It is also divided.  However, I don't think it is divided on "eventual" priorities; as labor rights, civil rights, social justice, climate change, voting rights seem to be favored by the vast majority of Biden voters. What is divided is the messaging AND a first priority.  A casual glance at the campaigns of the GOP since the time of Nixon ...

David Brooks Op-Ed in the Times today will certainly draw a lot of the kind of comments that I read just now.  While I have no faith in the Republican party to do anything except be obstructionist, it is really important to pick the first battles wisely.  Here is my response. "There are real differences between rejoining the Paris Accord, and ruling by "diktak" as you say. But the point is still essentially valid.  As much as I love Obama, and like the ACA, in hindsight, the central focus should have been on creating more economic equality and opportunity for ALL Americans through extremely popular measure like a $15 minimum wage (which Florida voted for in 2020 61% despite also voting for Trump). However, given that the first priority will certainly be COVID-19 response, policies like the $15 min wage won't help much. And the generous unemployment benefits not only don't reach those that need it, but also have a downward drag on employment.  It is t...