We oppose President Biden’s lawless and authoritarian new mandates announced yesterday. We also denounce his divisive rhetoric toward unvaccinated Americans, his reckless antipathy for federalism, and his threats to usurp state governors.

Contra Mr. Biden, this is entirely about freedom and personal choice.

His proposed executive orders represent nothing less than centralized tyranny, whereby the federal government operates under no legal constraints. This is government anarchy.

About six months ago, I wrote an article here explaining that state preemptions of local government are a bad thing—even when Ron DeSantis does it. I vehemently stand by these principles. However, it is now time for Ron DeSantis to take that principle of decentralized control and run with it—against the Biden administration.

In my article last week, I talked about Michael Huemer’s notion of “false fallacies.” These are often listed in logic books as bad arguments, but some of them, Huemer suggests, are actually good arguments, at least if suitably modified.

This week, I’d like to talk about another false fallacy, one that Huemer doesn’t include on his list. This is the “slippery slope” fallacy, and at least one version of it really is a case of bad reasoning. Here is a good account of it:

As a senior in high school, I ran for class president with “Do the right thing” as my campaign slogan. Though I realized years ago how utterly pretentious that message is, I’m often reminded that it’s good politics, which proves the point that politics is poison. To vote for someone else is to “do the wrong thing,” and you don’t want to be a bad person, do you? It’s a sinister trick that comes in many phrases—all of which are highly effective in duping the majority—yet democracy is still deified.

As everyone knows, the West, and especially northern California, has been suffering from a year-long drought, leading numerous statists and busybodies to leap in to control, ration, and ordain. The water “shortage” may not be exactly blamed on the private sector, but it is there, supposedly, and surely government must leap in to combat it—not, of course, by creating more water, but by mucking up the distribution of the greater scarcity.

Our healthcare system is broken, a fact nobody would have disputed in precovid days. Regulatory capture is a reality, and the pharmaceutical industry is fraught with examples. Yet we trusted private-public partnerships to find an optimal solution to a global pandemic, assuming a crisis would bring out the best in historically corrupt institutions.

Here is a brief list of less-than-savory behavior demonstrated by our titans of healthcare: 

All major problems can be fairly laid at the door of the government, particularly on the woke philosophy that energizes all too much of its behavior.

Most economists are of the view that through the inspection of economic data it is possible to identify early warning signs regarding boom bust cycles. What is the rationale behind this way of thinking?

During the 1930s the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) introduced the economic indicators approach to ascertain business cycles. A research team led by W.C. Mitchell and Arthur F. Burns studied about 487 economic data points in order to establish what business cycles are all about. Mitchell and Burns had concluded that