DO TELL ... Scandals undermine government credibility at bad time for Obama’s presidency.
And the third scandal is just beginning.
I'd hazard a guess that -- with the possible exception of MSNBC -- the fawning mainstream media is about to quit fawning.
Monday, May 13, 2013
MICHAEL BARONE: Did Clinton and Obama Believe Their Benghazi Baloney? If I had to choose between incompetent and liar, I'd choose both.
IT'S NOT ABOUT GUNS. It was never about guns. It's about control.
A thought for Democrats: it's not wise to take moral superiority to a gunfight. You'll lose.
A thought for Democrats: it's not wise to take moral superiority to a gunfight. You'll lose.
FEWER GUNS, more killing. Best comment: "The left uses every tragic killing as an excuse to take guns away from the people who didn't do it."
Second best were the multiple comments by 'RikOShea', who correctly pointed out -- and ably defended -- the obvious correletion/causation conundrum. The problem, of course, is the second half of the 'correlation does not imply causation' argument: it does give you a place to start looking.
That there is more to gun violence than the red/blue divide is obvious, but the divide does give you a place to start looking for and weighing the other (probably cultural) factors that do impact gun violence.
Second best were the multiple comments by 'RikOShea', who correctly pointed out -- and ably defended -- the obvious correletion/causation conundrum. The problem, of course, is the second half of the 'correlation does not imply causation' argument: it does give you a place to start looking.
That there is more to gun violence than the red/blue divide is obvious, but the divide does give you a place to start looking for and weighing the other (probably cultural) factors that do impact gun violence.
PAUL KRUGMAN: “Fire insurance is worthless! After all, there’s no evidence that it prevents fires.” Which, I think, is exactly the point. Fire insurance is not supposed to prevent fires; its purpose is to mitigate the economic consequences of a catastrophic fire, not pay for routine maintenance.
The same should be true of health insurance. It should not be for routine maintenance (health care); it should be for mitigating the economic consequences of catastrophic illness.
The same should be true of health insurance. It should not be for routine maintenance (health care); it should be for mitigating the economic consequences of catastrophic illness.
TAX POLICY: Why pull the wagon when you can ride in it?
Mitchell is writing about the government's proposal to limit retirement savings, but the government entitlement mentality (you aren't entitled to your money) is a staple of big government andliberalism progressivism.
Mitchell is writing about the government's proposal to limit retirement savings, but the government entitlement mentality (you aren't entitled to your money) is a staple of big government and
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)