Jeanne Assam carries a firearm undercover, and she likely saved many lives at New Life Church in Colorado Springs, CO.

Thank God Jeanne Assam was there, that she was armed, and that when she heard gunshots she had the courage to run to the murderer and deal with him. How many more would have died if she had not killed him? We'll never know, but surely the death toll would be higher.

I’ve long ridden this hobbyhorse and am happy to see the NYT join the good guys, even offering this cool interactive graphic.

For me the bottom line is this: it’s ironic that a program often touted as being good for education relies, first of all, on the economic ignorance of its "core" customer base (quick: what’s the expected value of a dollar "invested" in a lottery ticket, compared with a dollar put in an interest-bearing bank account?) and, second of all, on an attitude (wishfully thinking that one can get something for nothing) that is antithetical to the connection between hard work and self-discipline, on the one side, and reward, on the other that we’d presumably wish to cultivate.

To me, lotteries indicate a failure of political leadership: they’re a so-called "voluntary tax" imposed by legislatures unwilling or unable to make the case for spending more public money on education. read more »

I realize that the plural of anecdote is not data, but this article puts a human face on the damage the Democrats will do if they axe the D.C. voucher program, as they show every intention of doing, at the first opportunity. Kinda makes you wonder if they really care about the kids.

With several former (including myself) and current teachers floating around this space, I'd be interested to hear reactions to this paragraph from Mickey Kaus' blog:

Is "merit pay" for good teachers nearly as important as making it easier to get rid of mediocre teachers? (You want to get hissed, tell that to the NEA.) In the successful organizations I've worked for, the positive incentives (in the form of unequal pay) weren't nearly as powerful as disincentives (in the form of fear that you might get fired if you didn't do your part). For one thing, negative incentives are highly compatible with teamwork. They get the whole organization going, including people who'll never be hot enough to get performance bonuses. They don't breed envy and backstabbing. read more »

Yesterday, the House passed a bill that would make gasoline price gouging a federal offense. How does the House of Representatives, in their infinite wisdom, define gouging?

(1) IN GENERAL- It shall be unlawful for any person to sell crude oil, gasoline, natural gas, or petroleum distillates at a price that--

(A) is unconscionably excessive; or

(B) indicates the seller is taking unfair advantage unusual market conditions (whether real or perceived) or the circumstances of an emergency to increase prices unreasonably.

So who defines "unconscionably excessive"? Since when was there anyone in Congress with a full understanding of the economics of gasoline and the entire supply chain to be able to definitively state what the price of gasoline should be?

This is exceeding foolish legislation that ignores the basics laws of economics. The law of supply and demand dictates that prices must rise when demand rises. This is a basic economic fact that isn't open to interpretation.

As a result there is a fairly obvious solution to rising gasoline prices - STOP DRIVING. The great irony here is that while there is much talk about decreasing our dependency upon oil, this bill ensures that we will continue our dependency upon oil. Those clamoring for more hybrid cars and a more "green" energy policy should be calling for higher gas prices if they were honest. A corrollary to the law of supply and demand is that increased prices will create a decrease in demand. Isn't that what we want???

Hello, all.

My name is Jay; I am an associate of Will's, a student, and a political professional in Washington, DC. I'm looking forward to passing through GWH every so often to participate in the conversation that Will is facilitating here.

Today, I'll just leave you with this gem from Glenn Greenwald:

Two of the three leading Republican candidates for President either embrace or are open to embracing the idea that the President can imprison Americans without any review, based solely on the unchecked decree of the President. And, of course, that is nothing new, since the current Republican President not only believes he has that power but has exercised it against U.S. citizens and legal residents in the U.S. -- including those arrested not on the "battlefield," but on American soil. read more »

There has been a tremendous amount of discussion over the YouTube video ad attacking Hilary Clinton. I'm not going to rehash the story nor discuss the issues of who did it and why. More than enough has been said about an ad that actually didn't say anything. read more »

This slipped by me last week, but Professor Dan McFadden had some positive things to say about Part D (for its proponents, anyway). I have yet to read his analyses, but plan to now when time permits.

To quote a quote from Greg Mankiw’s blog:

“…but I think it is reasonable to say that the Part D market has performed as well as its partisans hoped, and far better than its detractors expected.” -McFadden read more »

I posted this at No Left Turns.

We wait with bated breath for something more than these airy generalities from Keith Ellison, who, as you surely know, is our first Muslim Congressman.

Surely if hard questions can be posed to Mitt Romney and if deep suspicions about theocracy can be raised every time a conservative Christian speaks, we’re entitled to know exactly how Ellison’s faith informs his politics. read more »

The Intercollegiate Studies Institute has recently published Joseph Pearce's Small Is Still Beautiful, a re-examination of E.F. Schumacher's Small Is Beautiful. Schumacher's book was a call for human-scale, decentralized economies and convivial (to borrow Illich's term) technologies. From the book's website: read more »