Finding Common Battle Grounds

In another short episode, we discuss a recent proposal by the FDA to ban menthol cigarettes. Menthol cigarettes are more addictive than regular cigarettes, and they are the most common type of cigarette smoked by Black Americans. Josh argues that banning drugs is rarely a successful approach and agrees with the concerns raised by many Black smokers that this will essentially criminalize behavior that is more common among Black individuals, resulting in the criminalization of Black individuals in the US. Ryan pushes Josh and Tom on whether it is the federal government's responsibility to restrict harmful substances. In general, we all agree that it is the responsibility of the FDA to regulate harmful substances, but we ultimately conclude that smoking rates are declining through existing measures and that this specific ban does not seem to make a lot of sense.

In this short podcast, we discuss briefly whether we think the federal government should ban ghost guns. Ghost guns are typically a reference to guns that were created using a nontraditional manufacturing process, like a 3D printer, that do not have a serial number and for which the government has no registration information. Josh and Ryan agree that this is probably a non-issue, though for somewhat different reasons. Josh argues that most 3D-printed guns are not strong enough to shoot more than one round and that these are typically just novelty items. Ryan argues that, once the designs for such guns are online, it's impossible to remove them; to think otherwise is to fail to understand the internet. Ultimately, we agree that, until ghost guns become a serious issue, this seems like a solution looking for a problem and is likely a waste of time on the part of the ATF and Biden administration.

In this episode of Finding Common Battle Grounds, we had originally intended to have another open discussion (our approach when one of us doesn't have enough time to research an issue). Tom had several questions lined up, but we ended up spending over an hour on the first question: Is Disney's opposition to the recently passed "Don't Say Gay" legislation in Florida going to have harmful consequences for Disney? Additionally, is Disney's embrace of progressive values for employees and in some of its media beneficial or detrimental for the company? Our discussion is wide-ranging, but the focus is on whether media with an overt agenda is okay. Josh argues that agenda-driven media is problematic, regardless of whether the agenda is conservative or progressive. Ryan argues that all media has an agenda and that it is primarily when we disagree with the agenda that we find it problematic. Everyone agrees that being preached at isn't preferred in media.

A little pressed for time this week, we opted for a different format. Moderator Tom came prepared with three questions. First up was a question about whether Twitter needs a competitor due to its growing level of censorship on the social media platform. Second was a question about whether Joe Biden's gaffes and evidence of his cognitive decline are cause for concern. Finally, we discuss Will Smith's slap of Chris Rock at the Academy Awards and whether it was immoral and inappropriate. Despite the different format, we actually agree on many points.

In this episode of Finding Common Battle Grounds, we discuss whether it makes sense to have a race or gender quota for supreme court justices. In a weird twist, Josh adopts a strawman pseudo-progressive persona for the entire episode and argues that the only criteria we should use for selecting supreme court justices is whether they are racial minorities or women and that we should completely disregard any qualifications. Rather than find common ground, we spend the majority of the episode trying to determine what Josh's actual point is. We also watch a clip of the confirmation hearing for judge Ketanji Brown Jackson in which Senator Blackburn from Tennessee poses a gotcha question about defining gender to score points with anti-trans individuals. At least there is bonus content.

In this episode of Finding Common Battle Grounds, we discuss whether the federal government, which began delaying payments for student loans early in the pandemic, should again delay payments for student loans which are scheduled to resume in May 2022. Josh and Ryan agree that, in hindsight, a lot of what the government did for COVID-19 was problematic, though whether delaying the repayment of student loans is complicated. They also agree that, in general, people should pay back loans. They also agree that not every college major or undergraduate or graduate degree has the same earning potential. Josh and Ryan also agree that the federal loan program (not the Pell Grant program) has not been successful in helping under-privileged individuals and instead is primarily helping the middle class. They also discuss federal and state governments' shift away from direct subsidies of higher education through tax dollars and toward an indirect subsidy through loans that ends up benefitting for-profit corporations in the process. They also agree that debtors are controlled by lenders (a biblical reference). Finally, they largely agree that a compromise moving forward might be to forgive some of the money people owe (probably not all the debt) but in return for stricter lending policies in the future that take into account students' majors, their future earning potential, and the school they attend.

In this episode of Finding Common Battle Grounds, we discuss whether the US should send soldiers to Ukraine. We agree that what is happening in Ukraine is awful and that this is Putin's doing. Josh tried to put some of the responsibility for Russia invading Ukraine on the policies of left-leaning administrations in the US but did not get agreement from Ryan. We all agreed that the US should do as much as possible to support Ukraine in this invasion - from sending weapons and "advisors" to cyber warfare and severe sanctions - but the risk of nuclear weapons is too high to warrant sending in American troops. We also discussed the possibility of Putin using nuclear weapons. In the bonus portion of the podcast, we discuss Trump's compliments toward Putin.

In this episode, we discuss the January 6, 2021 attack on the US Capitol. We largely agree. Josh initially disagrees with Ryan's claim that it was an attack, instead preferring the term "riot" instead. However, Josh recognizes that there was a small minority that planned to attack the Capitol. Josh also agrees with the intent behind the attack and that it may have succeeded in making legislators fearful. Ryan agrees with Josh that progressives don't want to stop talking about this issue because it makes conservatives and the right look bad. There is some disagreement over what percentage of conservatives actually support the violence that took place - Josh says it's a very small percentage while Ryan thinks it's a larger percentage. They also agree that the Republican National Committee never should have called it "legitimate political discourse" but recognize that the RNC is doing everything it can to try to shove the attack under the rug because it was conservatives who attacked and they did so to try to overturn a democratic election. Finally, Josh and Ryan agree that it was a threat to democracy, but it failed. Long live the democratic republic of the USA!

In this episode of Finding Common Battle Grounds, we discuss whether Joe Rogan's podcast, The Joe Rogan Experience, should be censored because of COVID-19 misinformation. We actually struggled to find common ground in this episode, which surprised us. To begin with, Josh argued that the attempts to censor Joe Rogan were rooted more in what was perceived to be vaccine hesitancy rather than misinformation, but this required clarification. We did agree that we should listen to experts, though skepticism is warranted when listening to everyone, including experts. Josh suggested that the individuals who questioned whether Joe Rogan should be censored lacked credibility, but that was complicated. We ultimately concluded that the media made errors on this point, not those raising concerns. We didn't agree on whether minor efforts to censor Joe Rogan, like adding a flag or warning message to podcasts that contain misinformation that could be harmful, should take place. The big area of debate was in who gets to determine what qualifies as misinformation. We discuss this briefly in a short bonus section after the main podcast ends.

In this final episode of Season 1, we start off 2022 with our predictions for what we think will happen during the coming year. We generally agree that Republicans will gain ground in the Senate and probably the House. We also agree that pandemic fatigue will spread and an increasing number of people will return to pre-pandemic behaviors. We also agree that our current political situation is likely to lead to serious economic consequences in the long run but potentially in the short run with Tom predicting a looming economic crash. We also worry about the state of our democracy since there continues to be disagreement about what is true. There was also some discussion though not full agreement about President Biden either stepping down from office or being forcefully removed. The general sentiment is that the future isn't all that bright.