Talking to Hear Myself Talk

When I decided to attempt a weblog, I determined that I wasn't going to say anything unless I had something original to say. That's why I only update this thing every few days: Much of what I would have said has already been said, faster and better than I could have said it.

If I were talking just to hear myself talk, I would talk to my kids like everybody else does. :) And the planet really doesn't need one more collection of links to other sources.

But every now and again I stumble onto something that I think you should see.

L. Brent Bozell III, for instance, whose column is available both at Creators.com and MediaResearch.org, offers this gem:

CNN offers to grant time to bin Laden, yet finds that there are some people who are so evil and misguided that they cannot be allowed a platform on CNN – for example, opponents of the global warming theory.

And Bill O'Reilly, who has a visible enough soapbox on Fox News, is currently on a story I'd like to see a speedy resolution to:

Here's an interesting ethical question. Say you're a celebrity, and you agree to do a benefit for the families of the victims of the terror attack. You go on television and ask your fellow Americans to donate money. And they respond. Hundreds of millions of dollars have poured in from the TV telethon and the concerts. You feel good that various charities are flush with donated cash partly generated by you. And of course you benefited from the public seeing you in an altruistic situation.

But then a logjam occurs. And the donated money does not get to the families very quickly. In fact, six weeks after the attack, less than 10 percent of the $1.4 billion pledged to help those grieving families has actually been distributed. Some families have received no donations at all. So what do you, the celebrity, do? What is your responsibility in this situation?

...Well, maybe you should go on television and ask some direct questions.