Friday, September 21, 2007
* Shouldn't Dan Rather's latest bout of delusion require us to look back with a skeptical eye towards everything he has done? While it is possible that his suing CBS is a result of some recent deterioration in his mental condition, it is far more likely that he went off the deep end a long time ago. And if so, then how many other stories that he pushed over the years are built on as flimsy a base as the story on Bush's National Guard service?
* I'm all with denying Iranian thug Ahmadinejad permission to visit Ground Zero and I'm okay with criticizing Columbia University for inviting him to speak, especially in light of their hostility to US military recruiters. Heck, I'm fine with not even giving him a visa to come to the United Nations. But it is time for the right to stop their hypocritical braying every time the left comes out and, for example, refuses to give Harvard ex-President Larry Summers an invite to speak. If it is okay for us to object to speakers and visitors based on their politics and background, then it has to be okay for the left to do the same. Let's challenge the left on the values of who they allow and don't allow, and not the silly argument that they're not being fair.
* Sports (and race) writer Michael Wilbon absolves Philly quarterback Donovan McNabb of accusing anyone of being racist in claiming that black quarterbacks are scrutinized more closely than white quarterbacks. Sorry, Mike, but notwithstanding the merits of McNabb's complaints, accusing someone of doing to blacks what they don't to whites is the definition of racism.
* John Hawkins writes that liberals suffer from a "childlike emotionalism applied to adult issues". Put another way, they suffer from an inability to realize their lofty ideals have real world tradeoffs that render much, if not all, of their ideals unworkable. For example, liberals rail about the uninsured and underinsured and blame greedy insurance companies and the GOP (not always in that order). If not for this, they say, all would be fine, everybody would have health insurance and not face financial ruin in the event of sickness or injury. What they fail to acknowledge is that one can not provide a benefit to some people without paying for it, and that the bills for covering the uninsured and underinsured will be paid by the currently insured in the form of higher premiums, reduced coverage, higher taxes and a lower quality of care. It would be intellectually honest to declare that this was okay, that those with insurance ought to accept less and pay more in order to provide a benefit to others, but the left doesn't do that.