Here’s a classic example of a bogus logical opposition from Matt Bai in the New York Times Magazine:

So-called [Democratic] centrists, with precious few exceptions, have lined up with their party’s base against the idea of partly privatizing Social Security, even though those same Democrats used to argue that the program was gravely ill.

How can one of the nation’s top political writers put his name on a sentence like this? Why would there be any contradiction between expressing concern for the future of Social Security and opposing privatization? Private accounts would worsen the finances of Social Security and the federal government for decades. Even the Bush administration has admitted that they do nothing to resolve the system’s financing shortfall and require trillions in borrowing over the next several decades. Where the hell has Bai been?