I ask the question because I suspect that most Americans are unaware of the lunacy they could be enjoying. Consider the last few weeks:
- Today, The Times muses that perhaps federal regulators should take modest control of Google’s search algorithm. Oh, don’t worry: just some control, not complete control.
- On Monday, they commendably inveighed against honor-killings, highlighting an apparent Hindu honor-killing. The editorial, which I’m sure was a self-parody intended to make Mark Steyn’s head explode, mentions that honor killings are becoming increasingly common in Asia and even Europe. It contains no reference whatsoever to Islam or to the fact that Islamic honor killings are becoming increasingly common in the U.S. and Canada.
- On July 7, they wrote about how “sensible” it was for President Obama to bypass the Senate with a recess appointment for his new Medicare Czar, who will oversee $500 billion in cuts to the program under the new health care bill. No advise and consent, no public hearings, none even scheduled.
- On July 4, in decrying the “aggressive” Roberts Court, the Times defends your First Amendment right to provide material support to terrorists, but decries the notion that a corporation might be allowed to spend money on a political ad.
- On June 28, the Times wrote that “the Supreme Court disregarded the plain words of the Second Amendment and overturned the District of Columbia’s handgun ban, deciding that the amendment gave individuals in the district, not just militias, the right to bear arms.” The Second Amendment, of course, reads: “The right of people in militias to keep and bear arms…”
- To celebrate the Independence Day weekend, the paper reprinted the famous line from the Declaration of Independence about “unalienable rights.” Except that they omitted that part about the right to “Life.” A correction was published later, but this explains a lot.