Something to add to a lengthy and interesting discussion:

Being accepting of the scientist, engineer, or architect is one thing.  If the market has a need that can't be fulfilled, then let's find the best that we can.  But we're allowing millions of uneducated, unskilled workers who are displacing those here who would fill other jobs.

Teenage unemployment is over 25% last I checked, for black youths it's even worse.  Public education doesn't promise a great skill set, though there are exceptions.  Had an old friend (R.I.P Jon) who got a good job as a mechanic through his auto shop teacher.  I was washing dishes at 14.  I mowed yards with a friend in high school until we couldn't compete with illegal labor.  The government promotes distortion in the market to displace low skilled youth who perform these jobs at a price agreed upon.  And they make it too easy to not work (welfare for college kids?!).

It's part of a larger problem that will take time to fix.  And people to teach those who will listen.

I must differ on the claims that we are "a nation of immigrants."  Our forefathers emigrated here and became Americans.  I've had friends and coworkers who have done the same more recently, waited years, took the classes, spent thousands, they are Americans. 

However, there are now those who want us to assimilate to them.  And the bureaucracy, elected and otherwise, are compliant.  I work with many engineers from India, China, et al, here because they can be more productive and have a better life.  Some are jumping through the hoops to become citizens, some will leave, but none are asking for ballots and welfare forms in their native tongue.

"The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with approval of their own conscience." C S Lewis

Um... Where is Chewbacca's head?

Would be a good debate rebuttal.  Nice find!

Ditto to all of that.

That's good.  Thanks.

We had a nice conversation in the Intel feed that got to that a while ago.  There are a lot of nice charts and graphs here, a good conversation. 

This does show Evan Thomas is completely ignorant of how commodity markets work in general, oil in particular.

Did Rupert Murdoch just post on Ricochet?  There must be something else in the bottle of Basil Hayden's...

Peter, you're wrong on this one.  Our own James Pethokoukis has written about income inequality many, many times over at AEI.  On more than one occasion.  And that's just the first four links in a google search, there are more.

Second, I tune out when I hear "middle class" in the talking points.  Those two words have come to disturb my calm.  We are not a nation of classes, where each is relegated and there is no mobility (I know there's a Reagan quote, can't find it).  Instead of, again, accepting the premise, we need to explain the fault in logic.  Most of us are poor when we're first on our own, then we work our way up.  People at the bottom and top of the income scale are the ones who aren't there very long (h/t Heritage).

Was John Kerry's wealth ever an issue?  He didn't even work for his fortune.

Excellent point, as I've also been in the similar situation when news strikes.  I should have been more pointed as to where I was going, though I think it was the combination of my prejudices.

I grew up knowing Mr. Sajak as a television personality.  I started listening to Ricochet about 2 years ago, and subscribed last year.  Suddenly, I hear the Pat Sajak describing political philosophy with which I agree.  First shocker.

Then, he's not some game show host.  He's witty, and knowledgeable about the issues.

I thought of Mr. Sajak as someone whom I grew up watching on TV.  I didn't think he was old enough to be in Vietnam, let alone there during the moon landing.  Of course, it's taken some time to realize that I'm thirty somethingorother.  Look, a squirrel!  ===>

Media people I've know seem to have always been associated with their relative media (radio hosts, television, bloggers etc).  I think it's the more varied background, and current post on R, that threw me off a bit.

That's one of the original posts on Political Math:

http://politicalmathblog.com/?p=1819

He also has a great YouTube channel, you may remember some of the early vids going a bit viral.

First legal job was bagging groceries at Brookshire Bros, Columbus TX.  I learned some people will recognize it when you work harder/smarter than the other guy, and reward you for it.

Before that, mowing yards, washing dishes at a restaurant, Dad's non-AC office supply warehouse in Houston, et al.  I felt good at the end of a hard day's work, take a shower, eat supper, sleep like a baby.

What an amazing conversation.  I thank everyone for keeping it civil with the disagreements, and Blake for sticking with it.  A few thoughts:

A plan can be perfect until the first shot is fired (there are many versions of this statement, you get the idea).  Decisions are made "on the fly" in numerous encounters.  Hindsight can be hindrance not help without all of the facts, which are impossible to obtain these decades after.  We think we have many if not most.  Did they?

Though the mindset can be explained, can it be truly known?  Most of us don't understand the feel of having a press and public to cater to (less supportive since, I wager), competing intel, wondering if advisers are sincere in wanting the best for geopolitical or personal reasons.  A Commander in Chief may feel responsible for all of the telegrams sent to Gold Star families.  After so many letters, to and from, it takes an iron will not to be attached to the fate of those one would send. 

Study versus second guessing...

Thanks for the additions, Orion.

When the bolt is pulled back, it unloads the cartridge that was just fired (the position shown).  From here, when you push the bolt in, the next cartridge in the magazine loads into the chamber, you turn the handle down to lock into place, ready to rock.  Lever action rifle (a la old westerns) accomplishes the same function, different form.

A semi-automatic does this, well, automatically.  When a round is discharged, the bolt moves back, cartridge ejects, and the next round loads automatically.  Most hand guns you see are like this (not revolvers). 

Remington model 1100 is a semiautomatic shotgun that does this very well. Most shotguns you see are pump action, nice loud noise to scare off an intruder, pump between shots quickly ejects the cartridge and loads the next round.

We need to take Peter and Rob to my family's place, I'd love to get their reactions to some quality gun time.  Or at least to this thread.

1:  Non-military style would be like most hunting rifles that you see in the store, or in a movie/television show where people are hunting.  Generally looks like this.  Same basic shape and only holds a handful of bullets (5 or 6).

"Military style" will hold many more bullets in a cartridge (usually 30 or so), and is generally going to be all black metal and plastic.  It is still semiautomatic, so one bullet each time the trigger is pulled (military has full auto and semi-auto option, on the same weapon).

You can also find them in pink.  Hellllooo Kitty!!

2: Shotguns have different gauges, like handguns have calibers.  Big difference is that you get different shells depending on what your use will be.  The shells have small pellets in them, with a few larger ones mixed in.  Different style shell for hunting different fowl, or home protection.

3: Not really a cop carrying style pistol.  You can buy what they carry at almost any gun store.  But I'm in Texas...

That was the quick version, hope it helps.  Welcome, kid.