Our will is to keep the torch of freedom burning for all.

Let’s be clear. President Bush’s administration bears little resemblance to President Reagan’s, who himself was less of a Conservative than many people realize. Even in 1994, when Republicans took control of the House with the relatively conservative Contract with America, Conservative ideas were never implemented on any scale in the federal government. As I pointed out three years ago, the current administration has had the highest rate of federal government growth since the presidencies of Richard Nixon and LBJ. Don’t you dare cite this administration as an indictment of Conservativism.

Karen the liberal blogger says that “people who work hard and play by the rules should indeed have a basic social safety net below which they cannot fall. Their children should enjoy adequate health care and access to a decent education.” But as is noted in the comment section of her post, that social safety net already exists. American children do have access to adequate health care, a decent education. We already spend 21 percent of the federal budget on Social Security alone, according to FactCheck.org. “Even more went for health care, including 16 percent for Medicare and 7 percent for the Medicaid program for low-income persons.”

We don’t live in a Dickens novel, Karen. And the fact that some middle class Americans might suffer a bit because they overstretched and undersaved back when houses and gas were cheap, does not mean that the free markets failed, or that government needs to save us.

Shame on those Republicans who did not adhere to true Goldwater Conservative ideals, because they are the ones who have set us up for this kind of abuse.

The Presidential Race (and by "race" we mean, you know, skin color, athletic strengths, and cuisine)

Jon Stewart on the "racist" tones in John McCain's infamous "Paris Hilton" ad spot:

What a great clip, especially the first 5:45, as I didn't find the "Race Genie" especially humorous or insightful. Thank you Theo for bringing the clip to my attention. It's this kind of abuse that needs to be heaped more frequently and thoroughly on anybody who tries to make race an issue in this election.

By the way, Jason Kenney makes the interesting observation that McCain wasn’t even the first to compare Obama to Hilton. It was, in fact, Sen. Obama himself.

What a racist.

August 4, 2008

Why the Right should not champion Fox News

Says Billy Beck:

I expect the mindless appeal to sensations that you can find on CNN or MSNBC, essentially because their politics are so stupid. There is a great deal of stupidity in conservatives, too, but their intellectual heritage is a lot richer -- and a lot more true -- than the Left, and it's too bad that its principal popular media presence in America exists on the level of things like Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly.

I can stand the disgust of putting up with specimens like Wolf Blitzer and that fucking stupid cow Mika Brzezinski: I don't expect a thing in the world from them except cheerleading for more of the whip, and they let me know just how that project is going from day to day. What I can't stand is the pretense of intellect from people who make cheap noise about freedom and blow it at me with the hokey-ass tastes of Fox News. They're really just insufferably pathetic.

This is where my co-blogger Rammage and I might diverge. He seems to enjoy (with a hearty guffaw) the antics of partisans like those on Fox who are more concerned with teasing and taunting the American Left than with either just reporting the news, or providing a consistent and coherent philosophical basis for analyzing and criticizing policies and organizations in our political system.

Personally, I have no stomach for it. Like Billy, I think it does more harm than good to hear those commentators on the Right spew their drivel in the name of "freedom". They are overall every bit as bad as their counterparts on the Left. I'd just like to hear more people recognizing how little value either side is contributing to the actual cause of freedom when they play these games.

Olympic reporters in China

Some things speak for themselves:

In 2001, when the International Olympic Committee (IOC) awarded the 2008 games to China, Wang Wei, the leader of China's bid told reporters: "We will give the media complete freedom to report when they come to China."

But for many reporters there now, it’s still unclear how free they will be able to report or not, as the restrictions and red tape seem almost endless, and they never know whether they've covered all their bases. "We already have to tell the Chinese everywhere we want to be in August, and what time," one TV broadcaster, who preferred to remain anonymous, recently told the Associated Press. "We have to provide a list of the guests who will be interviewed and the content of the interview."

That is, some things speak for themselves where permitted. Which is to say, if you are reading the article I linked, you are probably not doing so in China.

That the Chinese government will frustrate and limit the international press during the Beijing Olympics is a given. What remains to be seen is whether the international press will show itself to be a greater force than the Chinese government in the long run.

It is possible that the Chinese government will make the situation so untenable and intolerable that reporters will never forgive the transgressions, and will draw ever greater worldwide attention to the oppression that the Chinese people have undergone for years.

Or it is possible that the international press will complain a lot during the games and immediately afterward, but then fail to provide any sustained or cohesive effort to bring freedom to the Chinese people, who--unlike the international athletes and press--will still be living in China after the games.

A.J. Liebling once said "People everywhere confuse what they read in newspapers with news." That's still true today, though television news has dethroned the newspaper. Blogs are still reactionary, focusing mostly on the "news" that is published by papers or broadcast on TV... by reporters. While they do not decide what is news and what is not to the extent that they once did, the traditional media still has the power to shape narratives and focus the world's attention. I can't think of a cause that should be a greater motivation to them than worldwide freedom of the press.

Let the games begin...

July 30, 2008

Presumption best precedes failure

Columnist Dana Milbank poked fun at Barak Obama today for behaving as though he had already won the presidential election. Third-hand, we are told that Obama said the following to House Democrats yesterday:

"This is the moment . . . that the world is waiting for... I have become a symbol of the possibility of America returning to our best traditions.

What's interesting is that it doesn't matter whether or not he actually said this. Supporters will see nothing wrong with it, and for detractors it will only confirm their opinions of him. But for me, the statement makes an interesting contribution to a thought experiment about failed candidacies.

If Barak Obama wins the election, I think we all know that John McCain's presidential aspirations are over. He will finish out his fourth term in the Senate and he might even surprise us by seeking a fifth term in 2010, but nothing more.

But what will happen to Barak Obama if John McCain wins? Will he immediately run for re-election in the 2010 Senate race? And from there... what? A 2012 repeat of Obama and Clinton duking it out for the Democratic nomination? How will Democratic politicians treat him if he has to spend the next four years as the presumptive nominee? Democratic voters won't fall out of love with him if he loses - hell, they still absolutely love Al Gore and Bill Clinton, so we know they have long memories. But can he possibly keep the golden child mojo working without ruffling a lot of feathers? What would he become in American pop culture? Would a 2012 defeat (either for the nomination or the presidency) end him? Would a 2010 Senate defeat end him? Could even a defeat this fall unravel everything?

I know that whenever he does finally fall, it will be attributed to evil forces in the Republican corporate-political machine, bent on destroying hope and the best traditions to which Mr. Obama refers. And it will be so ugly. But at this point, I just can't wait for it to happen. Not because I wish any ill will on Mr. Obama, but for no reason other than because I don't like presumptiveness. As some anonymous wag said on Fark! this morning, "What he is doing seems to be as smart as copyrighting "19-0" a week before the super bowl."

Yes, that is an excellent analogy.

May 10, 2007

Pesticides and Academic Achievement

I’m not sure what to make of this study that hit the airwaves today suggesting that there is a direct relationship between the date on which a baby is conceived and the child’s future academic achievement.

[Paul Winchester, M.D., Indiana University School of Medicine professor of clinical pediatrics] and colleagues linked the scores of the students in grades 3 through 10 who took the Indiana Statewide Testing for Educational Progress (ISTEP) examination with the month in which each student had been conceived. The researchers found that ISTEP scores for math and language were distinctly seasonal with the lowest scores received by children who had been conceived in June through August.

"The fetal brain begins developing soon after conception. The pesticides we use to control pests in fields and our homes and the nitrates we use to fertilize crops and even our lawns are at their highest level in the summer," said Dr. Winchester, who also directs Newborn Intensive Care Services at St. Francis Hospital in Indianapolis.

So, does this achievement gap exist outside of Indiana? Anywhere in the southern hemisphere? I don’t hear that being asked anywhere else, so I’ll ask it here.

May 7, 2007

Dissing Ron Paul

Via errant AtlasBlogged author Jib Halyard, I learnt that GOP presidential candidate Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX) was getting no respect from ABC news after last week’s debate. Jib directs us to Jack Henderson’s blog, where it is noted that

[Paul’s] name wasn’t included in a Web-based check-off “rate the candidates” poll from ABC. And his was the only name left off the list.

This was no accident. Scores of online visitor comments relating to Dr. Paul’s exclusion were deleted, the candidate’s name was still prominently absent hours later, and before long a mini-scandal had made the front page of Digg, Reddit, and other social-networking sites.

Welcome to the Internet Age, you morons.

April 29, 2007

Melted Steel

(Click on image for link to slideshow)

April 26, 2007

33 Stones

Ah, the 33rd stone has finally hit the front page. It was on the radio today, and the newspaper (a great story in the Richmond Times-Dispatch), and in the blogosphere. I was hoping we wouldn’t have to do this.

You see, in the wake of the massacre at Virginia Tech last week, 32 memorial stones were placed in front of Burruss Hall – one for each person killed. A student named Katelynn Johnson added a 33rd stone – one representing the gunman, VT student Seung-Hui Cho, who ended the killings when he committed suicide. And that 33rd stone is proving controversial – at least, among people who have no apparent connection to Virginia Tech.

For example, Richmond talk-show host Mac Watson likens this 33rd stone to a Hitler shrine at the Holocaust memorial. McQ at QandO likens it to listing and memorializing the 19 hijackers among the victims on 9-11.

I couldn’t disagree more. As I heard a 19-year-old VT student say last week, the stones don't bring anybody back from the dead. They aren't for the dead. They are for those who were left behind - the friends, family, coworkers. Seung-Hui Cho was a sick young man. Yes, he committed a horrible, evil act. But I can’t equate him to Mohamed Atta and Hani Hanjour. It’s just not the same. I find it mind-boggling that McQ thinks it is.

Katelynn Johnson is simply among the people who are able to recognize that Cho will be mourned, as any person should be. His family mourns him, as does some part of the university that feels that they let him down by not being able to intervene on his behalf before it went this far. But it must feel really good to get on the radio or post comments to QandO mocking Ms. Johnson for being a sociology-psychology major – a very substantive argument, folks. Her major.

I’m sure a lot of my friends won’t agree with my point of view on this. But of all the actual VT students I have spoken with since the shootings, none are wasting their youth stewing in hatred. They want to move on. And they do want to understand Cho – “What could make him do something like that?” It’s not a worthless question, and there is more value in remembering him as a sick human being who needed help than in remembering him as a caricature, an animal-demon.

No, I don’t memorialize him. I haven’t read his writings or seen even one second of his movie. But neither do I think that I am better than those people at Virginia Tech who need to better understand him in order to cope with this tragedy. Shame on those of you who do. When Ms. Johnson identified herself in a letter to the editor in the Collegiate Times, the response from the VT community was supportive and positive. Think about that for a minute.

The rest of the world has no business trying to insert themselves into the VT grieving process with your hissy fit over a 33rd stone. The last thing anybody at VT needs right now is your hubris and your bullshit.

April 19, 2007

Great Horny Toads!

Some stories are too bizzarre not to share. For example, this one.

Amorous toads have caused the deaths of scores of fish at a lake near Scarborough. In one incident around 70 carp, worth about £3,000, were lost after male toads tried to mate with them on the Wykeham Estate.

April 13, 2007

The Official PC Radio Hit List

Who is next, now that Don Imus has been fired?

Keith Olbermann has made a partial list:

Where's the other outrage? Rush Limbaugh calls Barack Obama 'Halfrican-American.' Michael Savage says the Voting Rights Act means 'a chad in every crack house.' Neal Boortz says Cynthia McKinney looks like a 'ghetto-slut.' Why have none from the racist right been protested, boycotted or fired?

Please note that I do not listen to any of these shows. But how disturbing is it that Olbermann would start calling for his ideological opponents to be taken off the air? How offensive is that mentality? (Offensive enough to call for Olbermann’s dismissal? I’m sure some on the right would miss the irony and do exactly that.) As Glenn Beck noted on air yesterday, Olbermann appears to be unaware that an atmosphere so charged would jeopardize Olbermann’s career, too. Remember: The Frankenstein monster sought to destroy its creator. This is no different, Keith.

As a side note, I do want to point out that the word “ho” clearly isn’t very offensive, as it has been casually repeated and batted around the airwaves, blogosphere, and print media nonstop for over a week. If it were truly offensive, it would be elevated to the level of those special words that go by their first initial – the “N” word, the “B” word, etc. If “ho” is so hurtful, maybe it should be called the “H” word from now on. The furor over this word is reminiscent of the Macaca flap, where commentators, bloggers, and jackasses around the world said over and over, “the use of the word ‘macaca’ is highly offensive! ‘Macaca’ compares blacks Indians to monkeys! The use of the word 'macaca' is enough to bar one from public office! Don’t ever say ‘Macaca’! Macaca, Macaca, Macaca!”

(Actually, this point was also made by the Jon Henke at QandO last December.)

For our amusement, let's imagine the following conversation:

Pundit: Look, I don't think it should be a sin, just for saying "ho".

Al Sharpton: You're only making it worse for yourself!

Pundit: Making it worse? How can it be worse? Ho! Ho! Nappy-headed hos!

Al Sharpton: I'm warning you! If you say "ho" one more time…

(Sharpton gets suspended from radio show)

Al Sharpton Hey! Who did that?

Media Gaggle: She did! She did! He! He did! He!

Al Sharpton: Was it you?

Media Exec: Yes. Well you did say "ho".

(Media Exec gets barraged with criticism and is fired)

Al Sharpton: STOP IT! STOP IT! STOP IT RIGHT NOW! All right, no one is to fire until Jesse Jackson or I blow this whistle. Even if... and I want to make this absolutely clear... even if they do say, "ho"

(Sharpton gets permanently fired from radio show)

So, is there an official “PC Radio Hit List”? Yes, I believe there is. Media Matters has published it. After our airwaves have been purged cleansed (sound too genocidal?) tidied up, we can next focus on the filthy internet.

I can only hope this site doesn’t attract too much attention with its snappy, threaded prose. Think we will be safe?

April 11, 2007

Rabid, Rabid!

No surprise here… Elizabeth Edwards, the wife of Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards, is upset with her neighbor – some guy by the name of Monty Johnson. She refers to him as a “rabid, rabid Republican”. She once saw him brandishing a gun. She says he keeps his property “slummy” just to spite her. She wouldn’t be nice to him if she ever met him, according to the Charlotte Observer and a host of other news agencies who are pouncing on her hurtful remarks. See also the Raleigh • Durham • Cary • Chapel Hill • Podunk News & Observer, which reports:

Monty Johnson was heading home Monday with a cooler full of catfish when he learned his new neighbor had turned him into a minor celebrity.

Nothing about this situation is especially surprising (except that it was carelessly spoken aloud and giving the Edwardses bad press). Nor is it unique to Podunk, NC where these people live. But since it’s been thrown out there into the news, I’d like to highlight the parts of the story that really frame my view of the situation:

Johnson said he has lived his entire life on the property, which he said his family purchased before the Great Depression.

Johnson, who has posted a "Go Rudy Giuliani 2008" sign on a fence just 100 feet from the entrance to the Edwards' driveway, has criticized Edwards for the scale of their nearby home. The property and home, which includes an indoor basketball court, an indoor handball court and an indoor pool, is valued at $5.3 million.

The Edwardses are still putting the final touches on the property, which they purchased in 2003.

It’s a pretty familiar story. It really highlights the difference between the haves and the have-nots. It’s almost like there are two Americas or something.

I don’t say that as somebody who hates Jon Edwards or his family. I don’t hate him for his wealth or his politics – in fact, I don’t hate him at all. I’m just somebody who can’t stand it when people expect their neighbors to “keep up” – especially since Mr. Johnson has lived there for more than half a century longer than the Edwards family. If they wanted to live in an exclusive Democratic haven with covenants against Guliani signs, they should have purchased land in that kind of community. If they wanted to live someplace where you could have your neighbor’s run-down childhood home destroyed, they should have picked New London, CT. If they wanted to live someplace where their neighbors would never be brandishing firearms, they should have purchased in Washington, DC (hahahahahahahaha! Come on, that was funny!)

As Rammage notes via email: “I'm instantly reminded of:

“Political tags—such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal conservative, and so forth—are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire. The former are idealists acting from highest motives for the greatest good of the greatest number. The latter are surly curmudgeons, suspicious and lacking in altruism. But they are more comfortable neighbors than the other sort.” ~ Heinlein

Which would you rather have as a neighbor?”

Indeed. Good call, Rammage.

April 7, 2007

The Waxing and Waning of AtlasBlogged

One of the ongoing themes here at AtlasBlogged is the way our post frequency varies like a cheap ham radio. Despite several people having author privileges, the site sometimes goes several days with no sign of life. I’ve discussed it before. More than once.

I think I just got booted from being an author at WatchBlog, for not meeting the rule that all authors post at least twice a month. I’m okay with that. David Remer specifically invited me to provide a Libertarian point of view at the site, but I don’t much like the LP. I prefer the term “libertarian” be an adjective more than a noun. I wasn’t really able to fit in at WatchBlog, even though I like the idea for the site.

We’re probably on the verge of getting dropped from Kip’s Elite Eleven, as we violate one of the four criteria. I blame Rammage and Jib. Hopefully Kip is too distracted by real events to bother with demoting us.

But I will see if I can reverse the trend – at least turn this week's inactivity into a local minimum. I have a few things that have sat on the back burner for a long time, and I will try to put some of them on the table this week, as I am on spring break.

As usual, my co-bloggers have no excuse.

April 1, 2007

Charting Global Warming Hysteria

AtlasBlogged reader Flounder makes an interesting observation about Yahoo's Associate Press science news:

I use MyYahoo as my home page. I track stocks and sports and news about aviation etc. I also track technology and science…the Jpeg here shows the Science panel as it looked 2pm on April 1st. Seems like the only science today is global warming.

Did someone say 'agenda?' Nah, couldn't be with our objective press.

March 20, 2007

Celebrity Look-alikes

I’ve run across a few photos this week of people in the news who bear what I think is a striking resemblance to certain celebrities. Tell me if I am wrong.

First up is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed:

Reminiscent of U.S. Senator Blutarsky:

Next, Phil Spector:

Clearly Sideshow Bob:

The most frightening one is Senator Hillary Clinton:

A dead freaking ringer, I tells ya!

And last but certainly not least, New York District Attorney Arthur Branch:

Looks a lot like that actor from Hunt for Red October:

This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we'll be lucky to live through it.

March 16, 2007

Wonders Never Cease

Via email, Rammage alerted me to this post by Dale Franks over at QandO. Rammage rhetorically asks, “What's wrong with this paragraph?”

"The sun sets over Hagia Sophia in Istanbul, a church that was first built in 537 B.C. as a Mosque when the city fell to the Ottomans. When Turkish President Kemal Ataturk turned it into a museum in 1935, Christian mosaics covered up by the Muslims were revealed."

My concern upon reading this photo caption isn’t even the blundering lack of adherence to historical fact. Humbug to Rammage and Dale, and their "facts". I take issue with something even more fundamental in the WaPo article that is related to the error-strewn photo captions: There is no reason to "update" the list of the Seven Wonders of the World. And if there were, this list they are reporting on is pretty poorly put together. I agree with Egypt's Culture Minister, who called it "absurd". He asked that the Pyramids be taken off the list, but was denied.

See if you can find the contradiction in these two paragraphs from the Post:

Viering said the pyramids could not be removed because the competition is a purely democratic process, driven by Internet voting (and to a lesser extent phone balloting). "It's the people of the world who are making this list. It's not our decision," she said.

Voting began in 2001. Nominated monuments swelled to 177, were culled to 77, then winnowed in late 2005 by a group of experts to the current 21 finalists, each from a different country.

Expletive! This newspaper article was so poor that we are all stupider for having read it.

Of course, the Washington Post notes that many organizations have put together their own lists of 7 wonders over the years. It reminds me of another annoying trend - the many so-called "Bills of Rights" that are out there. Perhaps there should be a Seven Wonders of the Taxpayers World, and an American Society of Civil Engineers Bill of Rights. We can have experts cull the lists, then winnow them – it’ll be a purely democratic process all around.

March 4, 2007

Arctic Surge?

The Weather Channel has decided to poke a little fun at the Surge/Reinforcements framing issue. Will a fresh batch of artic air be surging into the Midwest and Northeast? Is that word too hot for this cold air? I see the humor.

Political cracks aside, it’s going to be 60 degrees here in Richmond tomorrow, and no sign of the first snow of the season. Sigh.

February 18, 2007

The Moral of the Tale of Marcotte and McEwan

Back on Friday, I read an article at Politico.com claiming liberal bloggers are “impudent, impotent, unreflective and unaccountable.” Not surprising if coming from a Republican, but in case you haven’t heard about this article, it’s coming from Dan Gerstein.

Gerstein calls lefty blogs onto the carpet for hypocrisy and a failure to address the real issues in the recent John Edwards/Marcotte/Whatshername fiasco. Let’s start with the obvious fact that the rightosphere was going to go nuts over these hires. The question isn’t whether or not these bloggers would be attacked – the question is how political allies should to respond to it. This is where Gerstein notes that the ball was dropped.

[Left-wing bloggers] have decided that the best way to fight the “right-wing smear machine” that they so despise is to create an even more venomous, boundary-less, and destructive counterpart and fight ire with more ire.

As Gerstein writes, these tactics are fine if a blogger’s objective is to engage in hate/counterhate with their ideological counterparts, or to drive an echo-chamber and the mutual-visit traffic so many sites enjoy. But neither arguments nor elections are won on the outer fringe. It is important for the serious blogger to read and engage people of opposing views in a serious manner. People simply aren’t persuaded or turned on by mud slinging or flamespraying, and neither party can win without the support of The Middle. You know, The Middle? That part of the electorate that generally claims to vote for the lesser of two evils? Some of those who defended Melissa McEwan and Amanda Marcotte might not give a rip about The Middle. But John Edwards does, and his supporters have to as well – even his bloggers.

I am not saying that Marcotte and McEwan are less than capable writers. And I’m not even bothering to belabor the point that they weren’t well vetted – that’s obvious. I am simply saying that while it’s fine to defend their right to publish the hateful anti-Christian diatribes that sparked all of the controversy, it’s a different matter to defend the content of their writing, or to suggest that the only reason the two were attacked is because they "speak truth to power".

Too many (nearly all) on the e-Left missed the point and tried to defend these writers simply because they were being attacked by the Right. And the Edwards campaign has suffered an early embarrassment. For a candidate who currently makes the “Oh, and him” list after Senators Clinton and Obama, that’s serious.

The main lesson that serious political bloggers might take from all of this mess is that the enemy of your opponent is not necessarily your friend.

February 13, 2007

Some Google News

It is being reported that a court has ruled that Google News breaches copyright law by linking to articles on the internet without consent. A group of Belgian newspapers brought the suit, which Google may appeal. Two thoughts:

1. This image is one of the most delicious I have ever seen. There is nothing wrong with irony, my friends.

2. Why bring this suit? I can't see the point. As the Times OnLine notes:

Analysts said they could not understand why the group, which has filed a similar action against Yahoo!, was pursuing the case, and that newspapers benefited from having stories indexed on Google News, which made their sites more prominent and boosted traffic.

“It’s utterly mad what they’re doing,” David Bradshaw, principal analyst with Ovum, said. “Google makes you relevant, it helps people find you. I can’t see how these people think being listed would be damaging.”

[point finger] Exactly. I'd love to be listed on Google News. They can even have free access to the AtlasBlogged cache, with no complaints from me (though technically Rammage owns the site). But the suit really does seem stupid on its face.

February 10, 2007

Pelosi and the Plane

Many on the right have seized the opportunity to criticize House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for requesting a bigger military jet than the one Dennis Hastert used during his tenure. Except that the right got it wrong.

As the New York Times noted in this article :

Ms. Pelosi and fellow Democrats said that House security officials insisted that she travel in a government plane and that if she had her way she would fly on commercial craft. They suggested that Republicans were hypocritical, scheming sexists trying to deny the speaker the same protection afforded her male predecessor.

[emphasis mine] I have no idea how this is sexist, but it certainly was hypocritical. Many Republicans, including the White House, seemed embarassed that anybody tried to call Pelosi out on this issue. As for myself, I understand that the "red meat" section of the rightosphere could jump the gun when knowning half the story, because that's the game both sides play. The danger of jumping the gun is that you can get disqualified from the event, and that's exactly what happened here.

I appreciate those Republicans who were honest enough to defend Pelosi and even make light of the situation. At the top of the list, Jeff Flake (R-Arizona), quoted in the same Times article as saying:

Next week, we are going to steal their mascot and short-sheet their beds.

February 7, 2007

On Trial for Publishing the Danish Cartoons

Philippe Val, publisher of the French weekly magazine Charlie Hebdo went on trial this week for publishing the infamous Danish Cartoons.

The charge is “publicly slandering a group of people because of their religion” (I have seen several variants of this, so I guess the translation is a bit open to interpretation.) The charge carries a possible six-month prison sentence and a fine of up to €26,800. Val was quoted as saying, "In a democracy, we're all shocked by what people say and do. We just have to learn to talk about it.”

The shame is that he even needed to say that. As Rammage so eloquently noted last year, this situation puts the American Left in quite a quandary. Which value is more important – freedom of the press, or respect for the cultural and religious beliefs of those in third world countries? Is it okay to print cartoons that criticize Islamists, or is it not?

But even if Americans answer that question correctly, it may not help Mr. Val in his trial over in Europe. After all, Europeans have criminal bans on swastikas, headscarves, and “hate speech” (potentially on line, as well). I have no faith that justice will prevail.

Of course, maybe I will be surprised. After all, Germany recently announced that it will not push for a EU-wide ban on swastikas and Holocaust denial. There may be some pockets of Europe where dialogue is preferred to prison when dealing with those with whom one disagrees. I sincerely hope Mr. Val is in one of those pockets.

While I am on the subject of Holocaust denial, let me share with you an amusing point by the Brussels Journal:

If Turkey joins the EU then we will have the comedy situation that denial of the Armenian Holocaust is a criminal offence in France, whilst mentioning it is a criminal offence in Turkey. The happy result of this could be that the entire population of France could be lifted and placed, Midnight Express like in Turkish prisons. Of course the entire population of Turkey could then find itself extradited to France and imprisoned there.