From Calpundit:
The answer is obvious. America was responsible for a big chunk of Bill Gates' fortune, which is why it makes sense that he should be asked to pay more to keep the country going.
Calpundit observes that "if Bill Gates had grown up in Pakistan, he might be worth a few million dollars." Thus, our attention is focused on the plight of those living in Pakistan, a nation without political and religious freedom, ruled by a dictator. The false conclusion is then drawn that since the government of the United States is what allowed Bill Gates to accumulate $50 billion, he should be expected to "pay more to keep the country going."
However, Sweden's government has religious and political freedom that is comparable to the United States. And while choosing between a life in Sweden versus a life in Pakistan is an easy choice, it is unlikely that the hypothetical Bill Gates would have earned any more money in Sweden than in Pakistan, because Sweden is a socialist state.
It is the Economic Freedom of America that allowed Bill Gates to become fabulously wealthy, and it is our economic freedom that is threatened when our leaders pursue the politics of greed and envy, as advanced by Calpundit in the form of confiscatory taxes and larger entitlement programs.
Short of highway robbery, higher taxes are never going to make Bill Gates poor, nor will they ever make the poor as rich as Bill Gates. Instead, they create another opening for the harmful and failed policies of socialism and communism to infiltrate and destroy our economy. Some folks just refuse to learn.
Actually, this is not news. However, after completing the phone registration of Office XP today, (work related, not personal), I hate them even more. Why, you ask? Because the phone registration process is one of the most asinine things I've ever had to sit through.
First, you have to call the Microsoft toll-free number and listen to a computer explain the rules to you.
Second, you have to read a 50-digit number over the phone while the lame voice-recognition system mangles your words. (Based on its own heuristic of evil, it decided that I should be allowed to type the numbers using the phone keypad, but this announcement came only after I had finished speaking the first forty-eight numbers aloud. Thanks.) To make it worse, you have to speak the numbers in groups of six. After each group, the computer reads them back to you and then asks if it can continue. ("Did you say 3... 1... 4... 5... 9... 2? If this is correct, say 'yes'. If not, say 'no'.")
Once you are finished with the voice-recognition horror, you are ready for the third level of the abyss: Listening while the computer voice reads your confirmation numbers, which you then must type into your own computer. Once again, we are only allowed to work with six numbers at a time. ("3...4...9...1...7...6... Okay, are you ready to go on? Say "Go On" if you are ready to continue, or else say "Repeat" for me to repeat the numbers.")
If you manage to do everything right the first time, then you might get to register your software. Otherwise, rinse and repeat.
Lessons Learned:
First, what would normally take two humans about two minutes over the phone, now requires fifteen minutes and two aspirin thanks to a computer.
Second, the voice-recognition system must have been written by the same programmers that brough us Microsoft Bob.
Third, hangup the phone before you lose your mind, and install Open Office instead.
And Susan Estrich has a column:
Hillary's book is next. Could someone please tell these people to shut up?
...If the issue is ethics, no one has less than Sidney Blumenthal. He used to call me, during the Dukakis campaign, which I was running and he was supposed to be covering, to offer covert advice, which if accepted might result in better coverage. Much later, when I criticized him, he tried to get me in trouble with my editors. All the while, I was defending his boss. That's Sidney. He's Hillary's best friend.
No wonder Republicans are delighted to see his return to the spotlight. It raises money for their causes.
So, the word on the street is that the U.S. Attorney's Office is looking at possible charges against Jayson Blair, the infamous NY Times reporter. Jeff Jarvis describes it as chilling. I think that's a premature assesment, since we don't know what charges the authorities may be contemplating.
Let's not forget that filing fake expense reports is fraud, and while the offense might not be worthy of federal charges, that doesn't mean it should be ignored. Enron was also fraud. Should it have been ignored?
With Enron, people lost their trust in corporate accounting. With Jayson Blair, people lost their trust in an American institution.
Jim Lacy argues in National Review that perhaps there aren't any WMD, after all. So why did Saddam put up such a fight on inspections? Because he was being duped by his own men.
Instead, his henchmen did everything possible to obfuscate the true WMD picture and to thwart any inspection teams. If they had nothing to hide, they sure worked hard at trying to hide it. What if they were not just hiding a possible WMD program from inspectors, but also hiding from Saddam the fact that no such program existed?
AP News Wire
NEW YORK - The New York Times and the Weekly World News have decided to join forces, company executives announced today.
"We believe the WWN will help bring a new level of accuracy to our reporting which we haven't had before," said Arthur Sulzberger Jr., chairman of The New York Times Company and publisher of the newspaper.
"The decision to join forces is consistent with my policy, 'When Wrong, Get Right'," added Executive Editor Howell Raines. "And this merger is a big step in that direction."
According to sources, the proposed merger could be complete within weeks if the Federal Trade Commission rules that joining the two media giants is not a violation of federal anti-trust laws.
"We will have to review the proposal very carefully," said FTC Attorney Gerald MacPhiddy. "Everyone knows that The Times and the Weekly World News are fierce competitors, and the biggest players in their market."
Since the Democrats are trying to make political hay out of the issue, I present to you "A Tale of Two Jets."
President Bush makes a jet landing on an aircraft carrier and visits with the troops. President Clinton ties up jet air traffic for hours while getting his hair coiffed. Now, which one was the bigger waste of time and money?
Here's a great quote from Victor Davis Hanson :
The New York Times has lost all sense of perspective. A new Middle East peace proposal is circulating, amidst continued homicide bombing, and what is the Times focused on? A look at the issues, perhaps? An examination of the proposal? Some background information about the new Palestinian Prime Minister and his cabinet? Nope.