March 31, 2009

Can the Media be Any More Wrong?

I don't really need to say this, but I will.  The media are a bunch of morons.  In their reporting about yesterday's drop in the Dow, they managed to blame it on everything except what actually caused it.  The truth of the matter is that the Dow fell because of the actions of the Failed Obama Administration in forcing out the CEO of GM.  Whether the guy needed to go or not is irrelevant.  The fact is the government forced a business to change management.  Investors are scared that they could do this to any company, so they start dumping stock.  It's that simple.

The media can't bring itself to say this.  If they did, it would be critical of their idol, and they can't have that.  I suspect that their secondary motivation is to suck up to the gummint to protect any future media bailouts.  It's all about dollars and cents.

Ironically, it is their dishonest reporting that is making times so hard for them.  The more they lie, the more their credibility is called into question.  When people don't believe them, their circulation/ratings fall.  As those numbers fall, their revenue falls.  As their revenue falls, they have to resort to sucking up to the gummint.  They ramp up their dishonest reporting and the cycle repeats.

Gosh, I wish there was a way to break the cycle.  On a whim, they might try reporting the truth.  You never know how that will work out.

Posted by: Steve L. at 06:24 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 252 words, total size 2 kb.

March 16, 2009

You Can't Make This Up

In an article about the AIG bonuses, I found this little nugget: 

Rep. Barney Frank, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, earlier Monday charged that the move to pay bonuses amounted to "rewarding incompetence."  

"These people may have a right to their bonuses. They don't have a right to their jobs forever," said Frank, a Massachusetts Democrat.

 This from a guy who has been in office for 28 years.

Posted by: Steve L. at 01:35 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 75 words, total size 1 kb.

March 10, 2009

People Who Fail to Understand History are More Dangerous

This morning, our statewide daily newspaper published a letter to the editor from a lefty rocket scientist. The sub-moron wrote:

>

When FDR took office in 1933, unemployment hit 24.9 percent, nearly a quarter of the workforce. It fell to 21.7 percent in 1934 as the New Deal kicked in. By 1935, it was 20.1 percent, and by 1936, it fell to 16.9 percent. Unemployment continued to fall in 1937 to 14.3 percent. If this is not “an appreciable improvement in economic conditions,” then what is? >

FDR didn’t just manage to win the 1936 election. He won it in a landslide with 523 electoral votes. He carried all but eight electoral votes. It was only after FDR eased back on deficit spending in 1936 when he became overly concerned about balancing the budget that the economy fell back into a recession and unemployment rose to 19 percent in 1938. >

President Obama’s stimulus bill makes good economic sense and history supports him. >

Apparently, this idiot doesn’t really understand much about history. The New Deal was not an actual plan to stimulate the economy. It was a massive increase in government spending designed to make life a little better for people. The New Deal didn’t create private sector jobs. It created massive government public works projects that provided jobs for the unemployed. These weren’t real jobs in that they weren’t permanent, and the money used to create them was real. It was debt. They were temporary jobs designed to alleviate hard times for some people. That’s why the unemployment numbers went down.

>

 

Of course, FDR was popular when it came re-election time. He had put a bunch of people back to work, even if it was temporarily. The average person didn’t know deficit spending from a hole in the wall. They didn’t care that the government would have to pay back the money borrowed to create the jobs. They just knew that their lives were a little better.

>

 

Also, the writer failed to make the connection between that fact that the government decided to balance the budget and unemployment rose while the economy slipped back in a recession. It was the government money that was propping up the economy not any real economic improvement brought on by the FDR’s programs. Had the New Deal really helped the economy, it would have been able to sustain itself when the government tap was turned off.

>

 

There are many economists predicting the exact same result from the Obama plan.

>>>>>>>

Posted by: Steve L. at 06:59 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 422 words, total size 4 kb.

February 13, 2009

It Just Goes to Show You...

This week, Time magazine has published "25 People to Blame for the Financial Crisis." In it, they list the 25 people they belive to be most responsible. Not surprisingly among the political players, there are several Republicans and only one Democrat. Bill Clinton is the only Dem mentioned in the piece. While the list isn't any particular order (allegedly,) his name is waaaaaaaaaaay down near the end. Even then, the text accompanying his picture downplays his role. It even ends with:

None of it was an endorsement of permissive lending and risk-taking. But if you believe deregulation is to blame for our troubles, then Clinton earned a share too.

With such powerful statements as that, you can tell this is a fair and balanced piece.

The next closest thing to a Dem on the list was Franklin Raines, but he's just a businessman, isn't he?  Where are Franks and Dodd and even our President, Obama?  They managed to take fistfuls of money from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac while claiming that everything was good and blocking attempts at increasing regulation.

Apparently, only R's make any mistakes.

Posted by: Steve L. at 12:14 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 192 words, total size 1 kb.

December 15, 2008

I'm a Believer Now

Well, I am now convinced that Global Warming is a scam:

Mother Nature, of course, is oblivious to the federal government's machinations. Ironically, 2008 is on pace to be a slightly cooler year in a steadily rising temperature trend line. Experts say it's thanks to a La Nina weather variation. While skeptics are already using it as evidence of some kind of cooling trend, it actually illustrates how fast the world is warming.

The world is cooling, so that's evidence of Global Warming.  Got it.  Black is white and cold is hot.

Posted by: Steve L. at 06:44 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 96 words, total size 1 kb.

December 11, 2008

Global Warming?

Houston had its earliest snowfall ever and first in 4 years.  Was Al Gore in town?

Posted by: Steve L. at 07:48 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 18 words, total size 1 kb.

November 23, 2008

Historians are Pinheads

I was just watcing a show on the History Channel.  In it, they were discussing the settling of Texas and the Texas Revolution.  They had a historian on the show who was clearly a left-wing kind of guy.  He had previously made statements that were somewhat derogatory towardd traditional Texas values.  Eventually, he made what is perhaps the most stupid statement a historian has ever made.

While discussing the Texas Revolution, he said (paraphrasing,) "The Texas Revolution and the Republic of Texas are perfect examples of the success of illegal immigration."  Let's analyze that from the perspective of Mexico:

1.  A group of illegal immigrants move into a part of Mexico (along with legal immigrants.)

2.  The immigrants decide that they don't like the laws of Mexico which they are livng under.

3.  The immigrants revolt.

4.  The immigrants defeat the Mexican Army and capture the Mexican President.

5.  The immigrants demand to be given their independence from Mexico and the President agrees to their terms.

6.  The immigrants form their own country from the former Mexican state.

7.  The new country is eventually granted U.S. statehood.

Yeah, that really worked out well for Mexico.

Posted by: Steve L. at 09:47 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 198 words, total size 1 kb.

November 17, 2008

Rupert Murdoch Drops the Hammer

In a lecture sponsored by the Australian Broadcasting Company, Rupert Murdoch called out the MSM. My favorite quote:

"Far from celebrating this citizen journalism, the establishment media reacted defensively. During an appearance on Fox News, a CBS executive attacked the bloggers in a statement that will go down in the annals of arrogance. '60 Minutes,' he said, was a professional organization with 'multiple layers of checks and balances.' By contrast, he dismissed the blogger as 'a guy sitting in his living room in his pajamas writing.' But eventually it was the guys sitting in their pajamas who forced Mr. Rather and his producer to resign.

"Mr. Rather and his defenders are not alone," he continued. "A recent American study reported that many editors and reporters simply do not trust their readers to make good decisions. Let's be clear about what this means. This is a polite way of saying that these editors and reporters think their readers are too stupid to think for themselves."

Thank you, Rupert.  When you compbine that with the fact that the MSM is in the tank for the Democrats, you have a bad combination.  There are lots of people who will blindly believe whatever the media tells them.  They stick to one source for all their news.  The opportunity for abuse is too large.

Now, the media is right aout this stupidity in one sense.  Too many people cannot distinguish between news and commentary.  Unfortunately, that line has been blurred in recent years by cable news programs that present a news story followed by commentary.  After a while, it all becomes globbed together as news.  That's why the Keith Olbermanns of the world are dangerous.  They know people think that what they say is news and they use that to effect.

This will probably never change.  People will still unfailingly believe the news and newsmen will use that notion to their advantage.  Bloggers and other non-traditional media will be the firewall stopping it from engulfing everyone.

Posted by: Steve L. at 02:17 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 336 words, total size 2 kb.

November 12, 2008

Camille Paglia is a Tool

Apparently, the reason that the media failed to look into our President-elect's past is because right-wingers made too big a fuss about it. At least, that's what Camille Paglia seems to think. For instance, questions about Obama's birth certificate were never reported because:

 

Thanks to their own blathering, fanatical overkill, of course, the right-wing challenges to the birth certificate never gained traction.

 

And who can forget Obama's uninvestigated ties to Bill Ayers and his terrorist wife:

Blame for the failure of this issue to take hold must also accrue to the conservative talk shows, which use the scare term "radical" with simplistic sensationalism, blanketing everyone under the sun from scraggly ex-hippies to lipstick-chic Nancy Pelosi.

 So, see?  We are to blame for Obama winning.  Had we only ignored him, the MSM would have been all over him like white on rice.  We have only ourselves to blame.

Posted by: Steve L. at 02:04 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 152 words, total size 1 kb.

<< Page 1 of 1 >>
29kb generated in CPU 0.03, elapsed 0.0271 seconds.
41 queries taking 0.0121 seconds, 80 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.