The Trouble with “Two Things Can Be True” Logic

A common phrase used these days to help explain a situation is that “two things can be true at the same time.”  This is absolutely accurate.  However, there are times people argue about a topic that to accept both sides of their arguments defies logic and reason.  The Corporation for Public Broadcasting (PBS and NPR) is a prime example, but they are hardly alone.

 Start with the recent budget, which will eliminate one billion dollars going to CPB.    On the one hand, CPB argues that only two percent of their budget comes from the one billion dollars.  On the other hand, they argue the cuts will cripple local stations, especially in rural areas where NPR is relied upon by locals to get weather information, breaking news, etc.  Leave aside the fact that the NPR station in the market of the recent tragic floods in Texas was hours behind other sources in providing information and warnings.  We still have to account for how it is possible to cut two percent of any budget and cause massive problems.  

Because the truth is that 70 percent of the dollars go directly to the stations.  In return, they send those same dollars back to PBS and NPR to acquire programming.  In some places, this is known as money laundering.  It is untrue that these dollars are a drop in the bucket, and cutting them out of the budget will cripple local stations.  One or the other is true.  Guessing that tired song about two percent being unimportant to how their system operates has been exposed for what it is—a misrepresentation of the truth.  

Doubling down, NPR remains adamant that they are not a mouthpiece for progressives.  Last year, one of their own (Uri Berliner) authored a piece that pointed out in the Washington, D.C. bureau, of the 72 registered voters who had a party affiliation, a total of zero were Republicans.  That created a clash between Berliner and CEO Katherine Maher, resulting in his resignation from his position.

This month, in her Congressional testimony, Maher argued NPR was a straightforward source of news.  Here is an example of her view of things.  She called President Trump “a fascist and deranged racist sociopath.”  She has since said she regrets saying this.  Maher has acknowledged that they might have done a better job on the Hunter Biden laptop story.  You think?  

Berliner said in his piece that inside NPR, they said the quiet part out loud—that the story needed to be spiked, because reporting it might help Trump and hurt Biden.  I am unfamiliar with that being the basis of qualifying for the practice of journalism.  However, when you do stories denouncing how white teeth are just a hangover from colonialism, maybe I am missing something.  Conclusion: You cannot say and do what PBS and NPR have done in their reporting, and then claim to be an unbiased source of information.  One or the other.

And, what about the recent cuts to Medicaid?  For years, we have been told that illegal immigrants were not receiving Medicaid.  Now, we are being told thousands, if not millions, of these folks will lose all access to healthcare as a result of the cuts.  Huh?  Which one is it?

That idea of love of the law and for the Constitution stuff is another one of those tricky things.  Previously, President Biden bragged on how his Administration had found ways to ignore the Supreme Court ruling on forgiving student loans, which is actually transferring the debt (much of it to non-college graduates).  On his way out the door, Biden declared the Constitution had officially been amended to include the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA).  Never mind the requirements, as stated in the Constitution, had not been met.  No, our protector of democracy just issued a decree.  This week, a federal appeals court ruled that President Biden was not a king (where did I hear about no kings?) and basically said what he had done was horse excrement.  To accept both that he loves the rule of law and the Constitution is to say Biden, and his followers, really mean it when they talk about the rule of law and the Constitution, and doing so includes defying Supreme Court decisions and the Constitution itself.  Good luck with that.

Remember this:  Talking out of both sides of your mouth only makes you less believable and credible. What do you think?