Tag Archives: Big Media/Big Tech
Big Media seems uneasy about the Tea Parties
I have every expectation of betrayal, once these people get into power, as it appears they will. Many, I would say, are already betraying the libertarian and constitutional principles they claim to uphold by advocating social conservatism and unconstitutional war.
Nevertheless, the fact that the media is scared seems like a good sign:
Pure vitriol:
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Also, from Paul Krugman:
This is going to be terrible. In fact, future historians will probably look back at the 2010 election as a catastrophe for America, one that condemned the nation to years of political chaos and economic weakness. 
(Read more from nytimes.com)
The title of the article is “Divided We Fail.” He doesn’t mean ‘divided,’ though, he means doing as I say.
NY Times doesn’t like my reading list.
Movement of the Moment Looks to Long-Ago Texts
So the agitation for greater liberty is nothing but the “movement of the moment.” It’ll pass, just like Fresca and drive-in theaters.
But when it comes to ideology, it [the Tea Party] has reached back to dusty bookshelves for long-dormant ideas.
It has resurrected once-obscure texts by dead writers — in some cases elevating them to best-seller status — to form a kind of Tea Party canon.
Um. Are you saying we should only read popular texts by living writers?
All told, the canon argues for a vision of the country where government’s role is to protect private property — against taxes as much as against thieves. Where religion plays a bigger role in public life. Where any public safety net is unconstitutional. And where the way back to prosperity is for markets to be left free from regulation.
Yes. No. Mostly. Yes.
Republican nominee for Senate in Wisconsin, asserted that the $20 billion escrow fund that the Obama administration forced BP to set up to pay damages from the Gulf of Mexico oil spill circumvented “the rule of law,” Hayek’s term for the unwritten code that prohibits the government from interfering with the pursuit of “personal ends and desires.”
This is a distortion to discredit the theory in the above mentioned books. Most libertarians/Austrian economists (Lew Rockwell) were against Obama’s interference in the BP disaster, but, and this what the NY Times neglects, advocated a 100% liability instead of the artificial cap which Obama placed on the company’s liability.
In his own words — Krugman, 2002
AlJazeera.com vs. CNN.com
Julian Assange walks out of bullshit CNN interview with class and dignity
NY Times readers rail against hit piece on Wikileaks
Wow, nakedly transparent attempt by mainstream media to discredit Mr. Assange for exercising actual journalism. Wonder how long it will take for him to become “suicidal” or for his small plane to crash.
Kudos to thebigprune commenter above.
This article is biased. I have not started reading the article when I already warned of the ‘dodgy’ Assange in the title itself. In the first paragraph the warning continue. We are told your journalist met his in the “run down Paddington district”. This is nonsense. Paddington is in the centre of town, flanked by Hayde Park, Notting Hill, Bayswater and very close to Oxford Street. Nobody in London calls the Paddington district ‘run down’.
Second paragraphL “dwindling number of loyalists” and “uses cash borrowed from friends”. Does he turn into a Wereworlf at night too?
Thirs paragraph, we steady him up a bit but hold on, “he sports a wispy stubble” that is really dodgy.
Fourth paragraph: “notoriety” again.
I wonder one thing. Did Mr Assange killed £200,000 people? Does he torture them?
No. It so happens that Mr Assange is taking on the most gigantic, un supervised power in the world. This is not Darth Vader and his cohoots. This is… the Pentagon! How come? The lovely Pentagon? That place full of generals and stars and cuddly Teddy bears?
Media FAIL Again: Ahmadinejad & 9/11
Media Manipulation, as usual
As usual, when something important happens that might reflect poorly on the government, our media does what it does best: it lies.
Here’s the latest example. The original, widely published story was this:
A U.S.-led military rescue operation ended in failure Friday when a Taliban militant set off explosives that killed a British aid worker kidnapped two weeks ago in eastern Afghanistan, Western officials said Saturday.
. . . .
During the rescue, Western officials said, one of the captors detonated explosives near Norgrove, killing himself and the aid worker, who was spearheading a development project run by Development Alternatives Inc., an international consulting firm based in Washington, D.C.
It’s become a little harder to find the original. I excerpted the above from this McClatchy Newspaper.
Only later, after the shock, and false-reality sets in, after our interest wanders elsewhere, do we get the actual story:
A grenade thrown by U.S. forces may have killed a kidnapped British aid worker in Afghanistan, British Prime Minister David Cameron said Monday, as the U.S. military announced an investigation into the failed rescue attempt.
(source)
. . . but, but, but, the original was so convincing. I mean I could almost see it. Just like in the movies: selfless rescuers coming to the aid of an attractive woman, while evil terrorists stand ready to blow up her (and themselves) in the name of evil fanaticism.
Looking back at the original report, it seems the military anticipated, i.e. “prepped the battlefield” for the apology they’d eventually be making:
“There was no choice,” said a senior official with the U.S-led military coalition in Afghanistan who asked not to be identified because he was not authorized to officially discuss the incident. “There was good information that this needed to be done because there were concerns that her life was in imminent danger.”
I’m going to go out on a limb and presume the “Western officials” were well versed in the 25 disinformation techniques and knew from the start their duty was to bullshit. I mean, look at the level of detail in the original misinformation:
Two Western officials said the captor used a suicide vest.
Some might even call it . . . . L-Y-I-N-G.
I intend no disrespect to the fallen or to the soldiers. I myself served in Kunar province where the incident took place, and know some of its valleys as well as I know the back of my hand. I’ve enjoyed great friendships with my fellow soldiers, Afghans and aid workers.
R.I.P. to all the fallen.
I make this critique because I’m soooooooo sick of all the fucking lying.
In war, truth is the first casualty. ~Aeschylus (525 BC – 456 BC)
See also:
Digg vs. Reddit
Seems the media is upholding Digg’s false image of superiority over Reddit, its rival user-driven information site.
I’ve sensed that my flavor of controversial stories never seem to achieve any prominence on Digg. The paranoid side of me thinks Digg is more easily influenced by the establishment, and therefore rewareded with favorable reviews by Big Media.
By the way, there is a ***brilliant*** cartoon about the Digg-Reddit war. It’s extremely well-told and full of inside-jokes.
part 1
part 2 (The bird is reference to Twitter and the short life-span of the average user’s active participation.)
I don’t think part 3 exists yet, but feel free to search.
U.S. vs International Editions of major magazines
Village Voice: “White America Has Lost Its Mind”
Hard to believe this article was published. Some people would describe it as cultural Marxism. I find the article offensive because it suggests that
1) white people’s brains operate differently from the brains of other ethnicities in ways that make is more susceptible to various lunacies.
and 2) I oppose government healthcare, bailouts, stimuli, money printing, and the expansion of our wars, because I’m racist.
It is a very, very typical red herring distracting from the ideological debate between liberty and socialism and shifting the game into identity politics. When the game is identity politics, it doesn’t matter whether the red team or blue team is in charge, they win, and we, the masses, lose.
The brains of white folks had been humming along cogently for near on 400 years on this continent, with little sign that any serious trouble was brewing. White people, after all, had managed to invent a spiffy new form of self-government so that all white men (and, eventually, women) could have a say in how white people were taxed and governed. White minds had also nearly universally occupied just about every branch of that government and, for more than two centuries, had kept sole possession of the leadership of its executive branch (whose parsonage, after all, is called the White House).
But when that streak was broken—and, for the first time, a non-white president accepted the oath of office—white America rapidly began to lose its grip.
As with other forms of dementia, the signs weren’t obvious at first. After the 2008 election, when former House majority leader Tom DeLay suggested that instead of a formal inauguration, Barack Obama should “have a nice little chicken dinner, and we’ll save the $125 million,” black folks didn’t miss the implication.
. . . .
A black man got elected president, and suddenly every aging white boomer in this country turned into Carole King—they sure as hell felt the earth moving under their feet.
Meanwhile, the brother moving into the White House inherited the kind of mortgage that even Wall Street executives might hesitate to call “subprime.”
A devastated economy. Two wars, neither being fought with clear goals. Housing markets that resembled war zones. A health system crippled with costs. An auto industry cratering.
But surely, in a time of crisis, the country could pull together to fix this mess, right?
Can you help a brother on health care? No.
The economy? No.
Financial regulatory reform? No.
National security? No.
Now, some black folks can be forgiven for thinking, as they watched the political drama in Washington unfold over the past two years, that this was just another form of the same old thing they’d put up with in one way or another in this conflicted multiracial country.
But there is another explanation.
White people have simply gone sheer fucking insane.
. . . .
On February 19, 2009, not a month into Obama’s presidency, Rick Santelli—a former hedge-fund manager—had a meltdown on the floor of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange while broadcasting for CNBC. Santelli was incensed not that the government was bailing out the multimillionaires who had run giant financial institutions, but that assistance would also be going to help out ordinary people who found themselves defaulting on their home mortgages. Calling such folks “losers,” he said, “How many of you want to pay for your neighbor’s mortgage that has an extra bathroom and can’t pay their bills?”
He then added that he was not only mad as hell, but wanted to do something about it: “We’re thinking of having a Chicago Tea Party in July. All you capitalists that want to show up to Lake Michigan, I’m gonna start organizing.”
Suddenly, other angry (and obviously very confused) white people began organizing their own “tea parties” and, from the start, had to defend themselves from charges that there was more than a little racial component to their movement. (Read more from villagevoice.com)
Peter Schiff on the Rises Prices of Everything
One of Peter’s best videos:
* What experts are saying about gold. When asked, Suzanne Orman hesitantly admitted that investors can buy gold, but just a tiny bit, and certainly not the physical stuff, but an ETF.
If you believe in sound money and the JP Morgan Gold fraud, then it seems like she’s taking her talking points from some very powerful people.
* Big Media propaganda talking about this was the best September (typically a down month) in 71 years.
This is obviously flawed. If, for example, the dollar loses half it’s value in a day, the same analysis will call it the best DAY the stock market has ever seen.
Peter compares the Dow’s 7.7% and S&P’s 8.8% gains to other things:
A Commodities index gained 8.7%.
Soy Beans 9.5%
Copper 10%
Rice 10%
Oil 11%
Corn 12%
Silver 13%
OJ 13%
Cotton 17% (Peter’s jockey shorts beat the Dow)
Sugar 19.3%
Australian Dollar 9%
Peter Asks: “Do you think stocks really went up in value in September, or is it more likely that the dollar lost value?”
* The bogus CPI index says prices went up 1.5%. Federal Reserve’s Open Market Committee says inflation is too low.
The Real Conundrum: Why the Hell Do We Care if China Manipulates Its Currency in Our Favor?
Finally, some good analysis of China’s currency manipulation. Basically, China is hurting itself and helping us. The outcries about them destroying our exports is a rehash of long-discredited mercantilistic ideas.
This great post on Cafe Hayek rewrites part of a Washington Post article.
Read carefully:
“This week, committees on both sides of Capitol Hill will plumb the conundrum of Chinese currency manipulation. The conundrum isn’t that — or why — China is manipulating its currency: By undervaluing it, China is systematically able to underprice its exports, putting American (and other nations’) manufacturing consumers and businesses that purchase China’ cheap imports at a significant disadvantage. The conundrum is why the hell the United States isn’t doing thinks it should do anything about it.
There are certainly plenty of senators and congressmen — and Main Street Americans U.S. producers that compete with China — who’d like to see the White House place some tariffs taxes on American consumers and businesses who purchase the underpriced low-priced Chinese imports. If the administration doesn’t act, Congress may just consider mandating some tariffs punitive taxes against American consumers and business on its own.”
Murray Rothbard and the Deflation Bogey
The Paul Reveres of the economics profession are riding their horses, warning Americans, “Deflation is coming! Deflation is coming!” From Paul Krugman to Joseph Gagnon to the various mainstream news publications, the message is the same — the government needs to induce inflation now, or else the economy will sink further into the Slew of Despond and unemployment will increase.
A recent U.S. News article declared,
When the price of cars or sweaters or iPods declines, it’s a break for consumers and a welcome sign that economic productivity is improving. That helps drive up living standards. But when the price of everything drops, it’s an alarming development that portends stagnation.
. . . .
After the crisis arrives and the depression begins, various secondary developments often occur. In particular, for reasons that will be discussed further below, the crisis is often marked not only by a halt to credit expansion, but by an actual deflation — a contraction in the supply of money. The deflation causes a further decline in prices. Any increase in the demand for money will speed up adjustment to the lower prices. Furthermore, when deflation takes place first on the loan market, i.e., as credit contraction by the banks — and this is almost always the case — this will have the beneficial effect of speeding up the depression-adjustment process.
Most people, including the majority of economists, make their error in the failure to see that the initial effects are not permanent, provided the government and the monetary authorities permit these adjustments to occur. Just as inflation has a very real and harmful effect upon the relative values of factors of production, deflation also has an effect on the factors, but the effect over time is to return those factors to their proper proportional values, according to consumer preferences.
To put it another way, the economy right now needs deflation, yet all of the public voices are shouting that what we really need is for the economy to take another “hair of the dog.” Rothbard explains,
Just as inflation is generally popular for its narcotic effect, deflation is always highly unpopular for the opposite reason. The contraction of money is visible; the benefits to those whose buying prices fall first and who lose money last remain hidden. And the illusory accounting losses of deflation make businesses believe that their losses are greater, or profits smaller, than they actually are, and this will aggravate business pessimism.
It is true that deflation takes from one group and gives to another, as does inflation. Yet not only does credit contraction speed recovery and counteract the distortions of the boom, but it also, in a broad sense, takes away from the original coercive gainers and benefits the original coerced losers. While this will certainly not be true in every case, in the broad sense much the same groups will benefit and lose, but in reverse order from that of the redistributive effects of credit expansion. Fixed-income groups, widows and orphans, will gain, and businesses and owners of original factors previously reaping gains from inflation will lose. The longer the inflation has continued, of course, the less the same individuals will be compensated.
Some may object that deflation “causes” unemployment. However, as we have seen above, deflation can lead to continuing unemployment only if the government or the unions keep wage rates above the discounted marginal value products of labor. If wage rates are allowed to fall freely, no continuing unemployment will occur.
. . . .
Right now, the Austrians seem to be the economic version of Cassandra, predicting the future and giving sound advice, only to be rejected by most academic economists and certainly the politicians. Krugman last year demanded that the government “stop the pain” via inflation and dramatic increases in government spending.
Unfortunately, more doses of inflation will not stop the pain, at least any longer, and the more the government inflates and recklessly spends, the worse the pain will be. The very “cure” of inflation will be what makes the economy sicker. However, if we would be willing to experience the real economic pain just a little longer, a real recovery would be around the corner. In fact, had the authorities more than two years ago agreed to stop the foolishness of promoting inflation and malinvestments, we would be in recovery now.
Unfortunately, there is going to be no recovery, at least for a long time. Deflation is the answer, but few are listening. Rothbard understood this fact intimately. Those who reject his wise counsel will live to regret it.