Last week, American liberals gave Banned Books Week a lot of attention. The New York Times, for example, has run countless features on it, from "Ways to Celebrate Banned Books Week" and "What Are You Doing for Banned Books Week?" to a 2009 editorial appreciation of the American Library Association's Judith Krug, who established Banned Books Week back in the '80s, "during one of the nation's periodic censorship epidemics." Yet as A. Barton Hinkle observes, the Times and its liberal readership also favor banning books. That's evident from the paper's editorial support for a constitutional amendment designed to overturn Citizens United and curtail the reach of the First Amendment.
The Scandinavian country is betting against draconian restrictions and in favor of the free movement of people and goods.
A former staffer says he sexually assaulted her in 1993.
No, British Epidemiologist Neil Ferguson Has Not 'Drastically Downgraded' His Worst-Case Projection of COVID-19 Deaths
But he has raised his estimate of the virus's reproduction number, which implies a lower fatality rate than his research group initially assumed.
That's a huge concern as forecasters expect the U.S. unemployment rate in the months to come to surpass that seen during the depths of the Great Depression.
One way of getting a perspective on the magnitude of the problem, at least today, and in what seems to be the hardest-hit country.