Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: calgal who wrote (2503)	12/12/2003 12:10:39 AM
From: calgal	Respond to of 90947

NBC loves Al Charlatan Brent Bozell (archive) December 12, 2003 \| Print \| Send What were they thinking at NBC's "Saturday Night Live" when they invited racial hate-monger Al Sharpton to be a guest host? "For me, it's a wonderful opportunity," Sharpton said in his opening monologue. "Maybe tonight, people can finally get to know the real Al Sharpton. President Al Sharpton." "Saturday Night Live" is now a routine stop for politicians who've ended their active campaigns, and in some cases, their political careers. Al Gore, John McCain, Rudy Giuliani, Janet Reno and Steve Forbes have all guest-hosted. But never before has NBC handed over roughly a half hour of its airtime and a week of positive publicity to a currently operating presidential candidate. A smattering of stations in early primary states said "no thanks" to this network conflict of interest. Apparently they haven't figured out yet that the FCC's toothless enforcers might take four years to decide on some slap on the wrist. But what about simple bad taste? Is this a proper pop-cultural reward for a man who began his political career in 1987 and 1988 parading around the country, and on "Geraldo," and on "Phil Donahue," forwarding a vicious racial hoax starring a teenage girl who smeared dung and wrote racial epithets on herself, and then falsely accused a pack of white men of repeatedly raping and sodomizing her? "I see him on 'Saturday Night Live,' and I think it is more appropriate for him to be there than taking part in presidential debates," Stephen Pagones told the New York Post. To him, Sharpton is simply a cruel joke. The former prosecutor's hopes for a political career were ruined by Sharpton and the Brawley hoax when he was accused of being one of the rapists. Pagones won a $345,000 jury verdict proving Sharpton's vicious lies, but it's Sharpton who is the toast of the town. But that's not the end of Sharpton's record of infamy. In 1991, and again in 1995, Sharpton was ranting at the center of racial protests -- filled with blacks screaming anti-Semitic taunts -- that ended up in a stabbing death, four shooting deaths and a fire that killed seven. Knowing that, you should choke when you hear how Sharpton concluded his NBC show with the line: "I hope tonight America's laughing together. Maybe then we can learn how to live together." Lorne Michaels, the longtime boss of "Saturday Night Live," seemingly could care less whose lives were destroyed. Michaels raved to the New York Times, "He's the guy who has the great one-liners, who dominates the debates. He just knows who he is and is comfortable with himself." He told U.S. News & World Report, "I think Americans tend to trust people with a sense of humor." The problem isn't that Sharpton is comfortable with himself, although he shouldn't be. The problem is that so many others who claim to revere racial harmony, rhetorical civility and the truth are comfortable with Sharpton. Swap races, and imagine a white activist making a career out of falsely accusing blacks of rapes, leading marches that caused mentally unstable whites to kill in fits of rage. Does that reversed composite sound like great hosting material for "Saturday Night Live"? Who next, Lorne Michaels? Abortion clinic bomber Eric Rudolph? I bet he's "comfortable with himself," too. Nobody should pretend that NBC isn't enabling Sharpton to gain a higher political profile and greater credibility for himself. Ask Detroit Free Press columnist Rochelle Riley, who hoped his comedian's platform leads to better things: "He's raising his profile so when he's raising issues of vital concern to real voters, people will listen. What Sharpton is doing is what the other candidates should be doing, too. He's knocking down the fear. He's making people see him in (a) new light. The more he connects, the greater impact he'll have." She thinks NBC has allowed Al Charlatan to show he's "a funny, astute, well-meaning guy." Sharpton's lying manipulation of the Tawana Brawley hoax was not funny, or astute or well-meaning. Neither were the deaths that spilled out of his "no justice, no peace" street provocations. For "Saturday Night Live" and most of the chuckle-head political culture, livening up dreadful Democratic debates absolves all the horror. There is no need for unrepentant Rev. Sharpton to repent, because no one remembers what he has done. Brent Bozell is President of Media Research Center, a Townhall.com member group. ©2003 Creators Syndicate, Inc.

To: calgal who wrote (2503)	12/12/2003 12:11:01 AM
From: calgal	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

The cost of the legal system Bruce Bartlett (archive) December 12, 2003 \| Print \| Send Everyone knows the old joke about the weather: Everyone talks about it, but no one does anything about it. Sometimes I think all of the concern about our nation's manufacturing sector falls into this same category. Across the political spectrum, politicians wail about the loss of manufacturing jobs and demand "action." But the only thing anyone ever seems to come up with is trade protection, which is a cure worse than the disease. The real reasons for manufacturing's woes are never addressed. Last week, the National Association of Manufacturers and the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI) published a study detailing the true sources of manufacturing's problems. They do not originate in Asia, but here at home. Relative to our trading partners, the U.S. imposes many costs on our manufacturing businesses that make it difficult for them to compete. Without these additional burdens, American firms would be far more cost-competitive, leading to increased employment and wages. The NAM/MAPI study identifies four key areas where American manufacturing firms are significantly burdened compared to our principal competitors. It estimates that they add 22.4 percent to the cost of production here relative to there. These include corporate taxes, employee benefits, pollution abatement expenses and tort liability costs. -- Corporate taxes are 5.6 percent higher here on average than among our competitors. Only Japan's corporate taxes are higher than ours; China's and Taiwan's are 15 percent lower. -- Employee benefits, mainly for health, are 5.5 percent higher here. Only South Korea, France and Germany have higher benefit costs. -- Pollution abatement costs are 3.5 percent higher in the United States. None of our competitors have costs higher than ours. -- Our tort liability system is 3.2 percent more expensive. No country has a system more expensive than ours. This last point is reinforced by a new study from Tillinghast-Towers Perrin, a consulting group. Last week, it estimated that U.S. tort costs climbed to $233 billion in 2002, or 2.23 percent of the gross domestic product. This is like an $809 per year tax on every American, paid in the form of higher prices for goods and services, higher insurance costs and a deterioration in living standards. In its Dec. 15 issue, Newsweek details some of the ways in which lawsuits for personal injuries, medical malpractice and other things have reduced the quality of life in America. Children's playgrounds have been closed and sports tournaments canceled, ministers are afraid to comfort their parishioners, coaches fearful of suits when a child is not picked for a cheerleading squad, and on and on. Major cities like New York and Chicago have been forced to cut back services to the poor because of the cost of lawsuits. In 1999, the City of New York alone paid out $418 million to settle various suits. Of course, legitimate personal injuries deserve compensation. But, less and less of each dollar awarded in tort suits actually compensates for injury. According to the Tillighast study, only 22 cents on the dollar compensate for actual economic loss. The rest went to lawyers or involved punitive damages or those for "pain and suffering" that went far beyond compensating actual loss. Because juries are now willing to award absurd sums, the court system has become like a lottery, encouraging sleazy lawyers and greedy plaintiffs to take advantage of it. Newsweek notes that $28 billion was awarded by a jury to a woman who blamed the tobacco companies for her smoking habit and subsequent lung cancer. An Alabama jury awarded $12 billion to the state (which was known to be suffering a budget crisis) from ExxonMobil for violating lease agreements. The magazine details other multibillion dollar awards, as well. If it were only a matter of money, the problem might not be so bad. Judges routinely reduce such awards on appeal. But because companies still have to worry about jackpot awards, they change their behavior in ways that are often injurious to everyone. For example, it is thought that $50 billion to $100 billion is wasted each year on unnecessary medical tests that doctors order just to protect themselves from a lawsuit. Pharmaceutical companies have cut back on the manufacture of vaccines in large part due to lawsuits, leaving many unprotected. People are not unaware of the heavy cost they pay for an out-of-control legal system. A poll earlier this year for the American Tort Reform Association found that 76 percent of Americans believe that their health costs are higher because of excessive medical liability lawsuits. By a two-to-one margin, people believe that lawsuits are hurting the economy and discouraging the creation of jobs. Yet every effort to reform the system is blocked by the trial lawyers who have gotten rich off of it. And as the biggest contributor to the Democratic Party, they have the clout to do it. Bruce Bartlett is a senior fellow at the National Center for Policy Analysis, a Townhall.com member group. ©2003 Creators Syndicate, Inc.