Dec 26, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
Skip Oliva of the Center for the Moral Defense of Capitalism has filed a brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in United States v. Mountain Health Care. Writes Skip:
Last December the Justice Department forced a group of 1,200 physicians and healthcare providers in North Carolina to disband. The DOJ said the group, Mountain Health Care, illegally adopted a common fee schedule for use in negotiating contracts with managed care purchasers. The DOJ considers any fee schedule illegal because when doctors agree to set their fees in concert, the DOJ claims it harms consumers. The government said Mountain's fee schedule "artificially" raised prices and denied consumers the "benefits" of competition for physician services. The implication is clear: the government claims physicians have no real right to set their fees. Despite denying any wrongdoing, Mountain agreed to disband because they couldn't afford the cost of fighting the DOJ.
During the public comment period on this "settlement," I objected the to the total lack of factual context in the government's complaint. Basically the DOJ argued Mountain raised prices, but no outside observer knew what those prices were or what the "correct" market prices were, because the DOJ wouldn't release that information. When challenged, the DOJ said they had no obligation to provide any context, and that asking them to do so would unreasonably impair their ability to promptly settle antitrust cases. The district court overseeing the case couldn't be bothered to deal with my objections, and the judge rubber stamped the settlement without comment.
Fortunately there's a provision in the antitrust law that allows malcontents like me to intervene in the proceedings and ask for appellate review. This now brings us to the Fourth Circuit in Richmond. I've asked the Court to decide whether the DOJ must disclose Mountain's allegedly "anticompetitive" fee schedule. Seeing as it's the sole piece of evidence referred to in the DOJ's complaint, the public (and the district court) should have a chance to examine it. The antitrust laws require disclosure of any "materials or documents which the United States considered determinative" in an antitrust settlement case. The DOJ always argues that provision doesn't really mean anything. Now the Fourth Circuit will decide if that's really the case. The DOJ will file its reply to my brief in January. I can't wait to see what distortions and lies they come up with.
Dec 26, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
From Cox and Forkum:
Last month, Orson Scott Card made some good points in an op-ed about the Demorats' anti-Bush obsession: The Campaign of Hate and Fear (Hat tip Rich Chandler).We have enemies that have earned our hatred, and whom we should fear. They are fanatical terrorists who seek opportunities to kill American civilians here and Israeli civilians in Israel.
But right now, our national media and the Democratic Party are trying to get us to believe that the people we should hate and fear are George W. Bush and the Republicans. I can think of many, many reasons why the Republicans should not control both houses of Congress and the White House.
But right now, if the alternative is the Democratic Party as led in Congress and as exemplified by the current candidates for the Democratic nomination, then I can't be the only Democrat who will, with great reluctance, vote not just for George W. Bush, but also for every other candidate of the only party that seems committed to fighting abroad to destroy the enemies that seek to kill us and our friends at home.
Dec 24, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
From Cox and Forkum:
Recommended Reading:
Peace on Earth -- and Its Price by Robert W. Tracinski
This year, more than most, many people are choosing to spend their Christmas by searching for a haven of peace and tranquility in their homes and families. But we have not been able to do so without a few reminders of the value and the cost of that peace.Dec 23, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
The city of Rocky Mount commissioned sculptor Erik Blome--who had cast sculptures of Rosa Parks and Thurgood Marshall (first black Supreme Court justice) to create a statue of Martin Luther King.
Reports the UK Independent, "White sculptor's 'un-African' statue of Martin Luther King divides the South" (22 December 2003):
It was in the North Carolina city that the civil rights leader first tested what would become his most famous speech, declaring in November 1962: "My friends in Rocky Mount, I have a dream tonight." But plans to honour Dr King's memory by commissioning a bronze statue have triggered a huge disagreement in what is already a divided city, with members of the black population making accusations against white officials.
The critics say the pose of the statue appears "arrogant" and Dr King's face does not look realistic. But what has really upset them is that the sculptor is white. The critics are demanding that the sculpture be recast - at least its head - with a different pose and a more "African" face. Kimberle Evans, one of the most outspoken critics of the $56,000 (£32,000) statue, said: "We need an artist who can relate."
To your racism?
Recommended Reading:
The Destruction of Martin Luther King's Dream of a Colorblind Society by Onkar Ghate
"It is no surprise that America is growing more racist, since the affirmative action and multiculturalist programs are themselves based on racist premises."
What We Should Remember on Martin Luther King Day: Judge People by Their Character, Not Skin Color by Edwin A. Locke
What should we remember on Martin Luther King Day? In his "I Have a Dream" speech Dr. King said: "I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."Dec 23, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
You can't miss this photo of Egyptian foreign minister Ahmed Maher after being assaulted in Jerusalem by Palestinians as Maher tried to pray at the Al Aqsa Mosque. In a dispatch from the Jerusalem Post, the New York Sun reports:
Palestinian Authority officials reacted with fury and embarrassment to the attack. Some P.A. officials first claimed Israel instigated the attack to drive a wedge between the Palestinian Arabs and Egypt. But when pictures of Mr. Maher being assaulted by scores of Palestinian Arabs were aired, there was great embarrassment among senior P.A. officials.
Dec 22, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
From ZDNet News:
Although the official interim report from the U.S.-Canada Power System Outage Task Force does not conclusively state that the MSBlast worm contributed to the blackout, there is ample circumstantial evidence that it did.
First, the blackout occurred just three days after the MSBlast attack started. Second, both primary and backup Windows computer systems at FirstEnergy (the Ohio-based utility company where the blackout began) were reported to have crashed just prior to the blackout. Third, FirstEnergy had trouble with the Slammer worm last January. And fourth, evidence suggests FirstEngery's IT department was slow in general to patch OS vulnerabilities in the past.
BUT DON'T TAKE my word for it. Bruce Schneier, president of the security company Counterpane, doesn't believe the interim report either. In addition, SecurityFocus columnist Kevin Poulsen first suggested the link not long after the blackout. And antivirus researcher Mikko Hypponen, manager of F-Secure Antivirus research, states in the December 2003 issue of Vanity Fair that while MSBlast didn't cause the blackout, the blackout wouldn't have happened without MSBlast.
Dec 21, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
From the UK Telegraph ["Saddam not a dictator at BBC"]:
...descriptions of Saddam Hussein are the latest target of a [BBC] corporation diktat. "An email has been circulated telling us not to refer to Saddam as a dictator," I'm told. "Instead, we are supposed to describe him as the former leader of Iraq. "Apparently, because his presidency was endorsed in a referendum, he was technically elected. Hence the word dictator is banned. It's all rather ridiculous." The Beeb insists that the email merely restates existing guidelines. "We wanted to remind journalists whose work is seen and heard internationally of the need to use neutral language," says a spokesman.
"Technically elected"? (Bear in mind that Iraquis were forced to "vote" for Saddam). "Neutral" to whom? "President" Castro?Dec 21, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
"I am not trying to say that [the Americans] are angels! They have their interests; they came to Iraq for that reason, not to free the Iraqis. But the fruit is, in fact, liberation." --Chaldean Bishop Louis Sako of Kirkuk [Zenit]
Dec 21, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses, Dollars & Crosses 2
From FoxNews [Hat Tip: B. Harburg-Thomson]:Libya has agreed to end its pursuit of weapons of mass destruction and allow international inspectors to enter the country and search for such weapons, President Bush announced Friday...Libyan leader Muammar al-Qaddafi has admitted trying to develop weapons of mass destruction and now plans to halt all such programs, Bush said...Bush said the United States and Britain, wary of Libyan promises, would watch closely to make sure al-Qaddafi keeps his word. And he said Libya's promises on weapons aren't enough; it must "fully engage in the war against terror" as well. If Libya "takes these essential steps and demonstrates its seriousness," Bush held out the promise of helping Libya build "a more free and prosperous country."
...The U.N. Security Council ended sanctions against Libya on Sept. 12 after al-Qaddafi's government took responsibility for the [1988 bombing of a Pan Am jet over Lockerbie, Scotland, that killed 270 people] and agreed to pay $2.7 billion to the victims' families.
Observe that the best that the U.N. could offer Libya for their 1988 bombing of a Pan Am jet over Lockerbie, Scotland was to give Libya chairmanship of the so-called U.N. Commission on Human Rights (while kicking the U.S. off the council). See Another United Nations Sham: Libyan leader Colonel Gadaffi to Head the U.N. Human Rights Commission for details of the "U.N. Human Rights" sham. "Multilateralists" and advocates of the "international community" must be wondering how did the U.S. and Britain achieve such a concession without the "assistance" of the United Nations?...But the United States has kept its own 17-year embargo in place.
If you are an admirer of "Old Europe" foreign policy you must be thinking: Doesn't the U.S. know that such a policy does not "work"? All it does is to create "resentment." How does one "build bridges" with such an "unilateral" foreign policy, clearly not approved by Howard Dean, Kofi-Annan, and his merry band of U.N. approved dictators? Dictators must be cuddled, kissed, and appeased....Libya had relied heavily on foreign assistance for its weapons programs. It had already made overtures suggesting it would slow or halt its programs to improve its international standing.
Foreign "assistance" from whom? Anyone from the "Axis of Weasels"? The report does not say.The U.S. intelligence statements on Libya's alleged weapons programs suggest efforts in that country were not as advanced as Iraq's were before the U.S.-led invasion. At the White House, Bush said the war in Iraq and efforts to stop North Korea's nuclear program had sent a clear message to countries such as Libya that they must abandon weapons programs."In word and in action, we have clarified the choices left to potential adversaries," Bush said. That was an apparent reference to Iran and North Korea, two other countries that the United States contends are trying to develop weapons of mass destruction. Without naming them, Bush added: "I hope other leaders will find an example" in Libya's action. ["Libya to Allow Weapons Inspections", FoxNews, December 20, 2003]
To quote from a previous Dollars and Crosses new item from the The London Telegraph (September 13, 2003) that quoted an interview of Italian Prime Minister Berlusconi:"I said, given the enormous and paradoxical success of fundamentalism, why don't we reform the UN? Let us say to Mr X or Y in this or that dictatorship, you must recognise human rights in your country and we give you six to 12 months to do so, or else we intervene. "We can do this now because there is no countervailing power," he said referring to the collapse of communism in the Soviet Union."...Yes! By force if necessary, because that is the only way to show it is not a joke. We said to Saddam, do it or we come. And we came and we did it." A spokesman for Mr Berlusconi said the prime minister had been telephoned recently by Col Gaddafi of Libya, who said: "I will do whatever the Americans want, because I saw what happened in Iraq, and I was afraid."
Thanks to America's words and deeds the world is, in fact, a safer place. America must not stop until it End States That Sponsor Terrorism.***
From Cox and Forkum:
Recommended Reading:Thinking it Alone: U.S. Must Reject the Evil Doctrine of "Multilateralism" by Alex Epstein
Military decisions are decisions about life and death--about what should be done to protect us from enemies who seek our destruction. If our leaders are to fulfill their obligation to defend our country, they must--starting with Iraq--reject the poison of "multilateralism" and replace it with the virtue of independent, rational judgment.Libya Gets Away With Terrorist Acts Against the United States by Alexander Marriott
At a time when the United States of America are fighting a war against International Terrorism and Terrorist States, the last thing the country needs is the appearance of weakness or appeasement. But the settlement that is looking more and more likely between the families of those who perished in Pam Am flight 103 and the Libyan government, that had that plane destroyed, is just such an act of appeasement and weakness that, if it comes to fruition, will only embolden clandestine acts of terror by states hostile to the United States.Another United Nations Sham: Libyan leader Colonel Gadaffi to Head the U.N. Human Rights Commission by Brett Schaefer
Even the most creative scriptwriter couldn't top the real-life plot twist the U.N. Commission on Human Rights will have concocted when Libya becomes its chairman."Multilateralism's" One-Way Street by Robert W. Tracinski
The past week has shown us that "multilateralism" is really a one-way street--a street that consistently runs against American interests.Lockerbie Verdict Vindicates Continued Sanctions Against Libya by James Phillips
The outcome of the Lockerbie bombing trial underscores the need for a firm U.S. policy toward Libyan dictator Muammar Qadhafi.The UN Human Rights Agenda: A Strategy of Diversion by Anne Bayefsky
UN intergovernmental human rights machinery is not keen on specifics. Its members include some of the most notorious human rights violators in the world today: China, Cuba, Iran, Libya, Saudi Arabia, and Syria. Those countries prefer devoting UN funds, (22% of which are from the United States), to criticizing Israel - lest attention wander too close to home.The United Nations Against Individual Rights by Jeff Jacoby
If the UN 'Human Rights' Commission were really concerned with human rights, the accession of a ghoulish regime like Libya's to the chair would indeed be a scandal. But the commission's true purposes are to give Third World bullies a venue for grandstanding, to harangue Western democracies, to ensure that the world's cruelest rulers escape condemnation, and, of course, to bash Israel. There's nothing in that agenda to disqualify Libya. Or, for that matter, Vietnam, Saudi Arabia, China, Syria, Sudan, or Zimbabwe -- each a notorious human-rights violator and each a commission member in good standing.UN Confidence Games: Libya as the Chairman of the U.N.'s Human Rights Commission? by Ken Adelman
With the official representatives of Libya and Syria having control over key United Nations agencies, you wonder just how much wisdom the UN can impart to guide American foreign policy.Dec 18, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
From Yahoo News:
French Education Minister Luc Ferry said on Thursday he planned to submit to parliament early next year a draft law banning religious symbols such as Islamic headscarves in state schools....Ferry said he planned to keep the draft law short and simple, and although he had yet to settle the exact wording he was leaning toward prohibiting what would be described as "ostentatious" symbols of faith.
The minister, who earlier expressed concern over suggestions there might be a ban on all religious symbols in schools, said he was satisfied Chirac had restricted it to overt ones like headscarves, Jewish skullcaps and large Christian crosses.
Small ones apparently are permitted.
Fadela Amara, head of a French organization campaigning for the rights of Muslim girls, said the move would help counter the pressure of radical Islamists.
The wearing of a headscarf, cross jewelry, etc. does not violate the rights of anyone--it is simply a form of advertising or free speech.
Government schools have no right to go against the wishes of the people who pay for those schools--the tax-payers-- unless the government is willing to refund their money. Of course, the very existence of such schools entails the violation of rights as they are paid for by coercion, i.e., taxes. A private school, on the other hand, does have the right to "censor" such speech, and to set such clothing rules, i.e., uniforms, and the like.Dec 18, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
From Yahoo News:
...Sony said on Thursday that it had developed the world's first running -- okay, jogging -- robot. "All around the world, universities and think tanks have been researching how to make robots run but we are pleased to announce that we have done it first," Toshi Doi, an executive vice president at Sony told a news conference.
...The big technological breakthrough, says Sony, was in getting both the robot's feet to lose contact with the ground at once. Up until now humanoid or two-legged robots have needed to have one foot on the floor to move stably. "The hardest part was theoretical. Humanoid robots like Sony's older Qrios and Honda's Asimo have been based on a theory which dictates that there must be contact with the floor. We had to develop a new theory," said Doi.
...The next challenge, said Doi, is to make Qrio's running motion less jogging-like and more like an athlete's. At the moment, Qrio's time with both feet off the ground is only 40 milliseconds, compared with around one second managed by athletes, he said...Sony, which also makes the Aibo robot dog, a sell-out success when it debuted in 1999, said it still doesn't have a timetable for commercializing Qrio, whose name is short for "quest for curiosity." [ "Sony Unveils World's First 'Running' Humanoid Robot"]
Dec 18, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
From Yahoo News ("Putin blasts US war in Iraq but says ready to consider debt relief"):
...Much of Iraq's eight billion dollar debt to Moscow -- including interest payments -- is from military equipment that the Soviet Union delivered to Iraq in the 1980s when Saddam Hussein attacked Iran in a war that killed one million people on both sides and ended in a stand-off....But Moscow has been furious with Washington in recent days for barring countries that opposed the war on Iraq from taking part in the lucrative first phase of reconstruction projects for the country.
What is the source of the "lucrativeness"? Washington. In other words, Moscow is "furious" that it cannot get money from Washington.
...Only hours before Baker's arrival, Putin used a live question-and-answer session with Russian television viewers to issue some of his most stinging criticism of the Iraqi war to date...."The use of force abroad, according to existing international laws, can only be sanctioned by the United Nations. This is the international law. Everything that is done without the UN Security Council's sanction cannot be recognized as fair or justified," said Putin...
Translation: The United States cannot kill Hitler, or his equivalent, without the permission of Hitler, and/or the other dictators of the world, i.e., Russia, China, Libya, etc. The U.N. is nothing more than a debating society to sanction and protect dictators.
[Putin] also suggested that the United States may be showing over-confidence on the international scene and warned that "empires" had fallen before from feeling too strong and using their military might indiscriminately.
Translation: Don't you dare come after me. Don't you dare!
His comments came days after Moscow warned Washington that its decision to hog Iraq reconstruction projects was "unacceptable" and began to waver on the issue of debt.
Translation: It is "acceptable" enough for us to think about negotiating on the debt.
....Moscow is owed 3.5 billion dollars in original debt and another 4.5 billion dollars in post-Soviet interest, according to the Paris Club. Russia is followed by France with three billion, Germany with 2.4 billion, the United States with 2.2 billion, and Italy with 1.7 billion. Japan is the Club's largest Iraqi donor and is owed 4.1 billion dollars.
Any nation that sold weapons to Saddam's Iraq has to take up those payments with Saddam. In other words: any country, company, or individual that voluntarily supports a dictatorship deserves to lose their "investment."
From the Dissident Frogman (chart edited by Cap Mag):
[Chart Source. Data source used to produce chart: Iraq arms trade, SIPRI projects. Chart title changed to reflect that data from Stockholm International Peace Research Institute only goes up to 1990. So the chart does not show any illegal sales (illegal due to UN sanctions) made to Iraq after 1990.]Dec 18, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
From Cox and Forkum:
Democrat presidential candidate Howard Dean made a speech recently in which he revealed who he thinks should control American military interventions.Dean said he "would not have hesitated" to launch an attack on Iraq "had the United Nations given us permission and asked us to be part of a multilateral force."
In other words, in matters of self defense, Dean expects the U.S. to ask permission from an organization that harbors the dictators and tyrants from whom we seek to defend ourselves. (Saddam's Iraq was a U.N. member).
But Dean wasn't the first candidate to tout his willingness to sacrifice America's sovereignty to other nations. There was also this comment from Wesley Clark.Well, if I were president right now, I would be doing things that George Bush can't do right now, because he's already compromised those international bridges. I would go to Europe and I would build a new Atlantic charter. I would say to the Europeans, you know, we've had our differences over the years, but we need you. The real foundation for peace and stability in the world is the transatlantic alliance. And I would say to the Europeans, I pledge to you as the American president that we'll consult with you first. You get the right of first refusal on the security concerns that we have. We'll bring you in. [Emphasis added]
Can you imagine France and Germany agreeing to let us attack any terrorist-sponsoring nation? Of course not. And that's exactly the goal of Clark and Dean: to humble the American giant before the world. Bush certainly has his "multilaterist" tendency that are cause for great concern. But these two would apparently relinquish control of our military as a matter of principle
Recommended Reading:
Howard Dean's Anti-American Foreign Policy by Allen Forkum
Howard Dean considers it more "moral" and "idealistic" to use our military self-sacrificially and not selfishly for American interests. To him it is better when our soldiers risk death for the sake of other countries than for the sake of America. I can think of few foreign policies more morally atrocious than that.
Howard Dean's Proposal for Economic Regress by Harry Binswanger
Economic progress would mean leaving (not "putting") more money in the hands of Bill Gates and less in the hands of "the average American."
Lean, Mean, and Dean by Michael J. Hurd
Translating Howard Dean's Ideas into Reality.
Presidential Candidate Howard Dean: Fascist of the Left by Michael J. Hurd
Howard Dean is a fascist of the left, just as Pat Buchanan was a fascist of the right. Dec 17, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
From Yahoo News:
BEIJING - A Chinese court sentenced a hotel worker and a prostitute to life in prison on Wednesday for organizing a three-day-long sex party for Japanese tourists -- a case that outraged Chinese and reignited anger over Japan's wartime conduct. All 14 of those convicted in the sex party case by the Zhuhai Intermediate People's Court were Chinese citizens....Prostitution, though illegal, is common in China and often practiced openly in tourist hotels in major cities....The public and nonessential employees were barred from the courthouse by officials who cited privacy concerns. ["China Sentences Two to Life for Sex Party "]
It also appears that Red China wants Japan to extradite Japanese construction workers who "clearly requested sexual services." Japan has so far refused. To which an appeaser might ask: why can't Japan be more accomodating like Christian conservative Pat Robertson?
As the AP release appeared the best that a UK Guardian editorialist with a "nostalgia for the political climate" when "capitalist-style growth was regarded as political poison" can do is whine about the fact that China's growth is not moving along "green" lines as the bicycle has been replaced by the evil car.
Meanwhile innocent individuals who violated the rights of no one sit in prison after being railroaded under kangaroo law proceedings.
Recommended Reading: George W. Bush's Unprincipled Foreign Policy Against Taiwan by Allen Forkum
How good can it be when President Bush and the Communist dictatorship of China share the same negative view of another nation's desire to be free from the threat of tyranny?Dec 17, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
From Cox and Forkum:
"If you are looking for perfect safety, you will do well to sit on the fence and watch the birds." -- Wilbur Wright
Today marks the 100th anniversary of the Wright Brothers first flight. There have been many great achievements in aviation in the intervening years, from trans-Atlantic passenger jets to moon landings.
Unfortunately, cultural changes have gradually turned against the innovative spirit that makes such technological strides possible. The above quote is included in an op-ed by Heike Berthold: America Has Grounded the Wright Brothers.A century ago Americans understood that progress comes at a price and were willing to pay it. Orville Wright was hospitalized after a crash that killed his first passenger; Clyde Cessna, the founder of Cessna Aircraft Company, only earned his wings after 12 crashes. [...] But the risks these early aviators took were calculated and deliberately accepted. They stemmed not from irrational folly, but from their willingness to accept the responsibility of independent judgment. ... Today, we seek to escape the responsibility of judgment while demanding that progress be risk-free. New products are expected to be instantly perfect, to last forever and to protect us from our own failings—or else we sue.
Berthold argues that government regulations have also stifled aviation innovation.[B]y the 1930s the government had begun regulating the airlines, master planning route structures and suppressing competition. Today, innovation has ground to a halt under the weight of government control. Unlike the first 25 years of flight, the last 25 have seen few major advances -- and regulatory barriers suppress the adoption of new technology. For instance, most FAA-certified aircraft today are still the same aluminum-and-rivets construction pioneered more than 50 years ago, while for at least a decade non-certified experimental aircraft builders have preferred composite materials, which make their aircraft stronger, roomier, cheaper, and faster at the same time.
(Coincidentally, Boeing just announced plans to produce their first new jet design in 13 years, one that utilizes composite materials.)
But utopian product safety is not the only cultural battle being fought. The Wright Stuff by Thomas Sowell examines how even the Wright Brothers have fallen victim to "political correctness."Man had dreamed of flying for centuries and others were hard at work on the project in various places around the world when the Wright brothers finally got their plane off the ground a hundred years ago, on December 17, 1903. It didn't matter how long or how short the flight was. What mattered was that they showed that it could be done.
Alas, Orville and Wilbur Wright are today pigeon-holed as "dead white males" whom we are supposed to ignore, if not deplore. Had either of them been a woman, or black or any of a number of other specially singled out groups, this hundredth anniversary of their flight would be a national holiday with an orgy of parades and speeches across the length and breadth of the country. [...]
Many of the great breakthroughs in science and technology were gifts to the whole human race. Those whose efforts created these breakthroughs were exalted because of their contributions to mankind, not to their particular tribe or sex.
In trying to cheapen those people as "dead white males" we only cheapen ourselves and do nothing to promote similar achievements by people of every description. When the Wright brothers rose off the ground, we all rose off the ground.
For a rational perspective of the Wright Brothers' achievement, here is the Smithsonian Institute's tribute: The Wright Brothers: The Invention of the Aerial Age. Though this FoxNews story notes a serious omission by the Institute:
The Smithsonian Institution is celebrating the 100th anniversary of the Wright Brothers' first flight with a Web presentation and the grand opening of a new branch of the National Air and Space Museum. The tribute is ironic as the Smithsonian spent 28 years denying the Wrights credit for the first flight in favor of promoting the dubious legacy of one of its own.
FoxNew also reports: Bush to Honor Wright Brothers on 100th Anniversary of Flight.Dec 16, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
From Cox and Forkum:
This cartoon was intended to run yesterday but was displaced by news of Saddam's capture. Pro-democracy/anti-terrorism demonstrations occurred in Baghdad last week, but you might not know that if you only watched network news. Except for the FoxNews channel, the major media did not give the demonstrations significant coverage.
The blogosphere, however, did a great job of taking up the slack. In particular, InstaPundit provided a number of good links (here, here, here and here). Highlights include: Report from Iraqi blooger Healing Iraq with photos, photos, and more photos; Report from Iraqi blooger Iraq the Model with a follow-up comment on his disappointment with the media, western and Arab; Donald Sensing posted screen captures of FoxNews television coverage.Dec 16, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
Writes Mark Steyn:
One of the reasons America has an illegal immigration problem is because it has a legal immigration problem. If, like that hapless British Army wallah, you do things by the book, go to a US consulate in a foreign city and get issued with an "Advance Parole", you lay yourself open -- for years to come -- to being suddenly plunged, entirely arbitrarily, into a bureaucratic nightmare that destroys your life. Compare that to the courtesies extended to illegal aliens....if you slip across the border, rent an apartment, get a job and a driver's license courtesy of outgoing California Governor Gray Davis, the entire Democratic Party and a good half of the Republican Party will bend over backwards to respect you as a fine upstanding member of the Undocumented-American community and facilitate your access to all the benefits the state has to offer. Entering America illegally is a rational choice.
If a non-criminal foreigner wishes to immigrate into America--and an American is willing to hire him--the process of immigrating should be little more than a matter of "rubber stamp" paperwork, as opposed to a sometimes decade-long process. Immigrants should not be permitted to enter if they simply intend to be future members of the welfare state.
[
