The nature of rumors and the dangers of jumping to conclusions are illustrated here. Don’t believe everything you see on Twitter. Re the Willernie some walkbacks are in order, though they end up being kind of trivial.
You read the charges on Scribd and it’s not obvious there was a preceding altercation at the bar between the barkeep and the perp. Rather, it looks kinda random. Which is to say the perp is profoundly mentally ill, was drunk, left the house with his rifle and headed for the nearest intersection looking to shoot at things / people. And made some effort to do it, as he stopped at the fire station first to find a cutter to grind off the trigger guard lock on his deer rifle.
Yeah, and not a handgun, but a pedestrian Savage .30-06 deer rifle… which is enormously powerful, quite a bit more powerful than an AR, for instance. Assuming the perp left the house to shoot at road signs and yes, passing cars, he would have done less damage with a run of the mill handgun, and might not have actually have hit anything before being interceded. That’s a pointless alternate reality though, the whole thing is just too freaky for words.
Intuitive or Counterintuitive It hasn’t been all mindless obstruction here in the Obama years, and I recall the conservatives making the principled point over 2009-12 that extended unemployment benefits would exacerbate unemployment problems on the whole, preventing the market from getting to equilibrium, providing basis for workers to make counterproductive choices about work…
Conservatives are dumb, liberals cried. Obstruction, liberals cried.
Some evidence is in.
So yeah, like the ‘is it irony’ game we play here, we can wonder if it’s intuitive or counterintuitive. What I do know is, it’s ironic how you’re moved to take job offers when unemployment runs out. And that’s probably a good thing.
Conservative outrage dujour: Rebekah Erler http://www.startribune.com/politics/statelocal/289648641.html Discussed her over the last summer re the Juicy Lucy Sitdown. Rush is wrong as far as it goes, she’s not one of liberalism’s shock troops, not a fake. Conservatives are being obnoxious. I have been thinking about what bugs me about her beseeching the President though. It’s that she has no insight for the age continuum, ie, that there’s going to be financial hardships when you are forming a new family / household, there’s going to be job instability when you are young and the low man on the professional totem pole. Also what bugs me, that liberalism would seek to solve with wealth transfers these mostly pedestrian financial problems faced by young families. I know that child care expense is a drag, but they’ll get through it without help. Figure, they’re going to be a $150k/yr family in the next 10 years. The whole kids are expensive and jobs suck in your 20’s and 30’s phenomena is self-correcting, and time is what corrects it. You don’t need a permanent redistributive engine to distort it all.
You got unanimity, basically. Everyone knows he shouldn’t take that job, and says as much http://minnesotabrown.com/2015/01/public-lobbying-group-hired-tomassoni-now-reeling.html But the guy rilly rilly wants his $45k, won’t back down amidst overwhelming public disapproval. Stones baby.