satire
Politicians provide us with all of the comedy gold. We're only mere curators.
Another One Bites the Dust (But Temporarily Recovers via Intubation and State-Funded ICU Care)
Nothing says “we don’t know what we’re doing” quite like a sequel to a lethal injection — that was the thought that came to my mind as I read of the failed execution of Christa Pike in Tennessee yesterday.
By Scott Christenson🌴3 days ago in The Swamp
𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐀𝐌𝐄𝐑𝐈𝐂𝐀𝐍 𝐅𝐔𝐍𝐇𝐎𝐔𝐒𝐄: 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐆𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐬𝐢𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐏𝐨𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐓𝐮𝐠-𝐨𝐟-𝐖𝐚𝐫
The Genesis of America's delusions of freedom and democracy were established by the creation and ratification of the Constitution of the United States. Instead objective reality insists it's a back-alley brawl disguised as a founding document: How Hamilton’s industrial elites and Jefferson’s plantation lords ignored Washington's warnings, rigged the political game, and wired the original partisan booby trap we are still stepping into and bleeding over centuries later.
By Meko James 16 days ago in The Swamp
Madison Locals Offer Measured Takes on Lindsay Clancy Mistrial
Positioned at the far end of State Street, Derrick Williams, a Black police officer assigned to crowd control, has spent days listening to alternating angry chants from Lindsay Clancy supporters and counterprotesters. Passersby walked past, looking him knowingly in the eye, and pleaded either “Protect our children” or “Protect our mothers.” Because Derrick makes a point of not following national news, he remained confused about the specifics of the debate and simply focused on keeping the crowds moving.
By Scott Christenson🌴19 days ago in The Swamp
The Missing Argument in the Stay-at-Home Parent Subsidy Debate
Preface: Video Context: Video Credit: Timcast / Tim Pool This article is a response to a recent Timcast segment discussing the proposed policy that would allow qualifying married couples with a stay-at-home parent to receive childcare subsidies of roughly $9,000 per child per year. The video frames the central debate around whether this amounts to additional welfare or whether it simply redirects money government is already spending on childcare toward parents who choose to provide that care themselves. Around 9:32–10:20 , Tim argues that the welfare expenditure already exists and that the important change is where the incentive points: instead of subsidizing families specifically when parents work and children are cared for elsewhere, the same funding could begin supporting married parents who raise their children at home.
By Peter Thwing - Host of the FST Podcast27 days ago in The Swamp
A Better Buyout: Paying Married Parents to Buy Back Their Time
A Different Kind of Buyout I previously proposed what I called a Family Support Buyout: give families the option to voluntarily exchange a large portion of the government benefits and services already being spent on their behalf for one predictable, untaxed monthly payment they control themselves. Instead of administering SNAP, childcare subsidies, housing assistance, refundable credits, cash assistance, and other ordinary supports through separate bureaucracies, government could calculate the avoidable cost of those programs and offer families perhaps 65, 70, or 75 percent of that value directly. The family would relinquish the benefits being replaced, taxpayers would retain the remaining savings, and the household would gain dramatically greater control over how its resources are allocated. Medical coverage, disability services, catastrophic healthcare, and other specialized needs could remain separate because those costs are less suitable for a simple cash conversion. The central idea was straightforward: if government is already spending $100 supporting a family, perhaps both taxpayers and the family can benefit if the family receives $70 directly instead.
By Peter Thwing - Host of the FST Podcast27 days ago in The Swamp
THE GREAT AMERICAN FUNHOUSE: How We Traded the New Deal for a Corporate Lease and Called It Freedom
Gather ’round, citizens, grab your participation trophies, and strap yourselves tightly into the Tilt-A-Whirl because the ride is completely unbolted from the concrete.
By Meko James 29 days ago in The Swamp
Family-Directed Support. AI-Generated.
American family policy has a basic design failure. Government can spend heavily around a low-income household—on subsidized child care, food assistance, housing support, tax credits, disability services, provider reimbursements, case management, and repeated eligibility reviews—while the household itself remains cash-poor, overregulated, unable to save, and vulnerable to every ordinary emergency.
By Peter Thwing - Host of the FST Podcastabout a month ago in The Swamp
Pay Families Directly Without Paying Them to Remain Poor. AI-Generated.
Every debate over family policy tends to collapse into two positions: keep the current fragmented, provider-directed welfare system, or replace a household's entire public-spending footprint with one large, unrestricted cash payment. Both sides of that argument are, in their own way, correct about something important. The status quo really does trap families in cliff-ridden, cash-poor dependency on institutions that treat parental caregiving as economically worthless. The buyout really does identify a genuine contradiction — government will pay almost anyone to care for a child except the parent — and it's right that fixing that contradiction is worth real money.
By Peter Thwing - Host of the FST Podcastabout a month ago in The Swamp
