Best of the Blogs
In the '90s, we heard frequent complaints that the technology rich were not sharing their wealth like the robber barons of yore. Yet now Bill Gates is turning his attention to his philanthropy. That is his personal paradox: he ruthlessly earned those billions and now generously gives them away. Yes, he has a heart. Gates, as it turns out, is a man, not a machine.
Jeff Jarvis From BuzzMachine ( buzzmachine.com )
Al Gore justifies his enjoyment of a carbon-intensive lifestyle in a speech in the UK:
He said he was "carbon neutral" himself and he tried to offset any plane flight or car journey by "purchasing verifiable reductions in CO2 elsewhere". Translation: I am rich enough to benefit from executive jets and Lincolns because I pay my indulgences. All you proles have to give up your cars, flights and air conditioning. The new aristocracy; there's no other way to describe it.
Don Bosch From the Acton Institute PowerBlog ( acton.org/blog )
After the FCC fined CBS $3.3 million for a smut-filled episode of ... Without a Trace , CBS filed a FOIA request asking for information on complaints the show generated. The station found 4,211 people had complained about the episode's depiction of a teen orgy. But according to CBS, it's not clear that any of those 4,221 had ever, you know, seen the show.
Kerry Howley From Hit & Run ( reason.com/hitandrun )
What a ghastly moment it must be for a Muslim when it dawns on him that what he thought was merely some pleasing rituals and the obligation to be a good little person is actually an unbreakable oath to fight an eternal war against un-Islam, no holds barred.
Brian Micklethwait From Brian Micklethwait's Blog ( brianmicklethwait.com )
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.