A.T. Stowell PMers, this--the scandal revelations--is all too fast and easy. The question about IRS targeting conservative groups was probably a plant. http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2013/05/lois_lerner_irs_scandal.php Obama is creating a fog to cover Benghazi, to which there will be endless congressional investigations, resulting in low level firings and indictments, in which Obama anticipates GOP overreach (think Lewinski investigation) to have something to campaign against for the midterms. Period. That's his play. It is legacy time in the executive, and the road to legacy is through a congress willing to work with him.
A.T. Stowell Ok. Lets think about secondary consequences. Where does the interest on student loans go? Doesn't it line the pockets of the elites at quasi-government institutions, such Freddie and Fannie? The government has taken over loan consolidation. Where does the interest on those loans go? Won't lower interest rates increase the amount irresponsible borrowing? If you are 60k in debt and only have a humanities degree to show for it, you're an irresponsible student. Period. Education about debt repayment? What college student heeds that advice?
A.T. Stowell The real question is what prompted them to begin the club in the first place. And the easy answer "racism" just won't do. The interracial politics of high school culture is more complex than that.
A.T. Stowell 1. Who is calling them stupid? If the target population has, on average, lower IQs regardless of the causes, then they have lower IQs unless the research is methodologically unsound. Lower IQ translates to a number of other social problems--among which is lower income--and to not include these problems is unwilling to be socially scientific about it. Legalization advocates are being intellectually dishonest to ignore these facts, and the race card is cheap way to avoid serious discussion.
A.T. Stowell I see this article presented an opportunity for the progressive snark brigade to sound off. Perhaps we should ask ourselves if these same people, and many others, feel unheard and unrepresented by their elected officials.
A.T. Stowell More studies? For what, to tell us the obvious? Criminals and psychos - diligently pursue disarmament and treatment of such individuals. End discussion. The problem is that progressives can't deal with reality...can't talk about it an honest way.
A.T. Stowell "The same thing that makes anyone else an expert on anything else; study and thoughtful consideration" This sounds good on paper, but is pure fiction. There is a difference between experiential knowledge and book knowledge. Those who end up crafting policy based on the latter, in the absence of the former, often do more harm than good. Who does this? In a word, elites...
A.T. Stowell Check the polls. Very few see gun-control as an important issue. The media is carrying the water on this one... Is it not sufficient to point out that the current bill would not have stopped any of the shootings dating back, at a minimum, to Columbine?
A.T. Stowell The conclusion is wildly overstated. 1. 90% support for background checks does not = 90% support for the bill. 2. Background checks wouldn't have made a damn bit of difference in any recent massacre. It is unlikely it would have made a difference in future incidents. Additionally, if the bill had passed, it would have been a political win for the president and his party, but not a win for the American people--they would have the appearance of being safer, without actually being safer. Background checks represent the lowest bar that progressive thought they could have crossed. 3. Political efficacy is not in votes or in polls, but in organizations. We've known this for decades. At this point, the American people should know better.