Dan Lipka Web Log

Do some conservatives believe the simple ideology that the states should just take care of everything except for national defense.  This simple idea would be a much more compelling argument than what they are trying now.  Repeal Obamacare, the federal government should do anything for healthcare; if you state wants to give you health insurance, go for it (for example, all children in NYS have access to free health insurance).  This completely removes the argument that repealing Obamacare (or any federal program) hurts people.  It isn't about helping or hurting people, it is about giving the responsibilities back to the states.  New York can have sanctuary cities (because their people want it), and Alabama can make it illegal (because that is what their people want).  New York can restrict fracking, but Idaho can have a giant fracking party.  It is their people and they will deal with the consequences.  The idea would be even better, if there was an automatic tax shift.  For example

There are so many things that don't many any sense.  The biggest is that after 6 years of focusing on the repeal and replacement of Obamacare, the Republicans seemingly are giving up after failing just once.  The original bill took years to develop and the Republicans (and Trump) think that if they can't work something out in just a month that it is time to just move on.  If the ACA is such a disaster, why not keep working on a solution?  You can (or are supposed) to be able to do more than one thing at a time.  However, what if the point wasn't to pass new healthcare laws?  Let's look at the actual results of the process.  1) No new laws, 2) Trump looks pretty bad and couldn't deliver, 3) Paul Ryan's position as Speaker is in jeopardy, 4) the Freedom Caucus (i.e. the Tea Party) showed significant power.  I don't think #1 is important, they still have 18 months to pass something before the next election. I don't think #2 is important, as Trump just doesn

Dear People Who Support Trump's Ideas, The election showed a real and powerful support for the ideas that Trump promoted.  The ideas behind "America First", "Build the Wall", and reducing the size and impact of the federal government are legitimate ideological concepts, even if you won't agree with it.  However, this message and movement currently lives and may die with Donald Trump.  If the movement continues to support him and he fails, the movement will lose both momentum and credibility. If he continues to lie and embarrass this country, at what point do you say that Trump was the wrong person to implement your agenda?  There is nothing wrong with saying that your message was good, but Trump lied to you about being the best person to promote it.  Perhaps, by even suggesting this, you can at least make Trump accountable to you.  If he believes that your support is unconditional, what is his motivation to actually do what you want? There have been ma

When I think of "super-villains", my mind goes write to comic books, but the truth is that there are real super villains in the world.  Let's not kid ourselves, but there are 5-10 people every century who are brilliant, charismatic, hard-working, determined, and completely immoral.  People who raise to positions of supreme power and do anything to keep that power.  People who have a complete disregard for life for life or liberty.  Often these people raise up through the political, military, intelligence, or business sectors.  There are the most known villains, like Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Tojo, and Chiang Kai-shek, but you also have to include Pablo Escobar, Al Capone, Pol Pot, Mohammed Omar, Ratko Mladić, and dozens of others.  There are people who are much worse than murders because they harm people on a mass scale.  People who are responsible for thousands of deaths, rapes,or enslavement either directly or indirectly.  We have seen dictators in every part of the globe .

I think there are some very fundamental differences in the perspective of people in this county.  It is important to recognize that others have a different set of basic values, which drives their lives and decisions.  I was thinking about what the questions would gleam those differences. Do you think it is your obligation to help those who have less?  Does it matter if those people are in your family, are your religion, are your race, are in your state, or are Americans? Do you feel that people who who disagree with you are bad? Who do you trust?  The media, religious leaders, scripture, experts, friends, family, etc? How important is faith to you?  If your religious perspective differs from the perspectives of "experts" in an area, what do you do? Of the groups that disagree with your perspective the most, how many of those people do you know very well?  (Muslims, evangelicals, homosexuals, atheists, socialists, transgender, white supremacists, black lives matters

Dear Democrats, Be very careful with the entire issue of Trump and Russia.  If you can't prove something, you will lose so much credibility, so early in the game.  If you cannot prove something this time, it will be used as an example of a "Democratic witch hunt that will once again lead nowhere."  Republicans will use this one failure over and over again to discredit any future allegations.  You should just stick to investigating "Russian interference in the election".  This way you only have to prove they did something, like hack into the email server.  And, as part of that investigation, something comes up against the administration, than cautiously move forward. There is one exception, which is if you really, truly believe there is collusion that will actively put Russian interests ahead of our own.  If you believe that, how could you not investigate?  However, don't be wrong! Coming soon, my fun conspiracy theory...

Dear Media, Please step back for a moment and look at the big picture.  Why are you reporting what you are reporting? Please explain that to the public.  Write an in-depth article on yourself, who you are, your point of view, and your mission.  Make it easy to understand, make it compelling, make it honest. Explain how you can endorse a candidate, but somehow cover that person fairly*.  Explain how you do or don't cover everyone's perspective evenly.  Write a variety of  articles that engages different people with opposite views.  Fight for your audience by showcasing your value! Ps, is there a media outlet that has at least two writers, from opposite perspectives, writing articles on the exact same topic.  Here is a view from the left and a view from the right (which is different than one article trying to stay in the middle). Pss, can  you please please please make a law that says "If you call yourself "news", you have to provide references for all factua

Commercials have become 30 second, high quality movies.  They are produced at such a professional level that they are able to convey almost any message about any product.  Although there is entertainment value in this, and some companies are better able to showcase their product, there is a very worrying trend.   You might have noticed commercials like this... This is a beautifully inspiring commercial, but the problem is that it is for big oil (more specifically, The American Petroleum Institute (API),  the largest U.S. trade association for the oil and natural gas industry.).  Their job is to ensure that huge oil companies can make as much money as possible, regardless of the consequences to anything else.  However, the commercial makes it seem like they are wonderful group of artists, models, and explorers. "Oil pumps life" seems like such a lovely concept. They are neither lying, nor telling the trust; this is propaganda in its purest form. Over the next few years, yo