Categories
Accountability crime and punishment folly ideological culture moral hazard responsibility

Sticks & Stones

James Hodgkinson of Belleville, Illinois, came to Alexandria, Virginia, where for the last few months he lived in his van . . . undoubtedly down by the river. Yesterday, he wielded an assault rifle, attempting to massacre Republican congressmen at a park practicing for tonight’s annual charity Congressional Baseball Game.

He shot House Majority Whip Steve Scalise, who remains in critical condition; a lobbyist also in critical condition; a staffer, hit in the leg and released from the hospital; and two Capitol Police officers, who still shot and captured the shooter. Hodgkinson later died in custody.

Politically, the down-on-his-luck, 66-year-old assailant was a big fan of MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow and volunteered for Sen. Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaign. So, what does his act of violence say about Maddow? Nothing. How much is it Sen. Sanders’ fault? Zero.

The Washington Post reports that Hodgkinson was “angry with President Trump,” noting this violence came “amid harsh political rancor and a divided country.”

Michelle Malkin declared she had “warned for more than a decade about the unhinged left’s rhetoric.”

“The hatred is raw, it is undiluted, it’s just savage,” Rush Limbaugh offered. “These are the mainstream of the Democrat base, and I don’t have any doubt that they are being radicalized.”

It harkens back to then-President Bill Clinton’s success in blaming the 1995 Oklahoma City Bombing on “loud and angry voices” (read: Rush Limbaugh) who “spread hate. They leave the impression that, by their very words, that violence is acceptable.”

Sure, we should hold speakers accountable for dehumanizing verbal attacks on their opponents. But not for acts of violence these speakers do not commit, nor condone.

Condemn the violence. Stop using it to smear your opponents.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.


Printable PDF

 

Categories
term limits

Day One Experience

A woman starts a new job. She has experience in accounting, learning, getting things done; no experience in that particular job in that particular office. Within days, though, she impresses her new boss with her skill and productivity. She knows what to do and she’s doing it.

True story.

Perplexed? Shocked? Can’t happen?

If that’s your response, I’m betting that you’re not anybody who has ever had to leave one job and start another — and make yourself worth your salary in that new job.

I’m betting that you are, rather, a would-be permanent officeholder facing term limits who has just been telling a reporter how long it takes — years, right? — to get the lay of the land. Then, just as you’re figuring out the difference between a bill and a law, boom! comes your term limit. Ergo, no matter how effectively term limits foster electoral competition or thwart political corruption, they must be repealed or at least drastically diluted.

Is that your story?

If so, I suggest that you resign and make way for a more conscientious student of life and work.

Leaders find ways to get a handle on complexities, to prioritize, to delegate. To the extent that knowing about the budget, lawmaking procedures, and so on would be helpful before starting the lawmaker job, how about studying up beforehand? If the budget is confusing, how about talking to policy analysts or accountants? I could get you in touch with some good ones.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
national politics & policies responsibility

Deficits Matter Morally

There are two things I don’t understand.

Actually, there are many things I don’t understand, but what I’m thinking about, now, is how one can honestly defend massive government deficits in one of the two usual ways.

The first defense became a cliché while I still wore footsie pajamas: Deficits don’t matter because we owe the debt “to ourselves.”

The truth? More complicated. Some people buy debt; others don’t. Were we to “forgive us our debts” (to appropriate a familiar phrase), we wouldn’t be forgiving what we owe “us,” but what the “U.S.” owes just those investors who’ve bought that debt.

And not even “everybody” owes the debt, since the taxes that would be collected, extra, to pay the debt might not come out of your pocket, or mine — it’ll come out of those pockets, over there. (Of course, you’re probably thinking, “I should be so lucky!”)

No wonder government debt is so tempting. On the surface it’s all inclusive. “We’re all in this together.” But beneath, it’s some folks trying to get one over on other folks.

Nasty, eh?

Then what about today’s excuse: “We owe it to folks overseas.” Since much of our governments’ debt gets bought up by investors abroad, we don’t have to worry about it because . . .

The unspoken thought is: “We’ll just renege on our promises.” Not pay it. Screw them.

Simple truth: Apologists for growing deficits flirt with mass theft from the government’s creditors.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.