Posted by Charles II on October 21, 2013
Ben Dimeiro, MMA:
In a chapter focusing on how Fox utilized its notoriously ruthless public relations department in the mid-to-late 00′s, Folkenflik reports that Fox’s PR staffers would “post pro-Fox rants” in the comments sections of “negative and even neutral” blog posts written about the network. According to Folkenflik, the staffers used various tactics to cover their tracks, including setting up wireless broadband connections that “could not be traced back” to the network.
A former staffer told [NPR reporter David] Folkenflik that they had personally used “one hundred” fake accounts to plant Fox-friendly commentary:
I’m sure if Fox works on it, they can sink lower.
Posted in conservativism, liars | 1 Comment »
Posted by Charles II on October 1, 2013
Via Ritholtz, a picturesque guide to rhetoric. For example:
On an episode of the topical British TV show, Have I Got News For You, a panelist objected to a protest in London against corporate greed because of the protesters’ apparent hypocrisy, by pointing out that while they appear to be against capitalism, they continue to use smartphones and buy coffee.
Posted in Just for fun, liars | 1 Comment »
Posted by Charles II on May 30, 2013
Study: Media Fact-Checker Says Republicans Lie More (via Tom Kludt at TPM)
Gee. Ya think?
According to CMPA [George Mason Univ. Center for Media in the Public Interest] President Dr Robert Lichter, “While Republicans see a credibility gap in the Obama administration, PolitiFact rates Republicans as the less credible party.”
If George Mason University and Politifact say the GOP lies three times as often as Dems, it has to be ten times:
Some critics, such as Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) and the Columbia Journalism Review, have criticized Lichter and the CMPA for holding a conservative bias of their own or for being funded by conservative foundations.
Possibly the Republican Establishment is coming to the conclusion that they might have jumped the shark.
Posted in liars, Republicans acting badly | 4 Comments »
Posted by Charles II on December 12, 2012
An entry by several NBER members and Sumit Agarwal on the mythology side, countered by Barry Ritholtz on the reality side:
There are two major, critical questions that show up in the literature surrounding the 1977 Community Reinvestment Act (CRA).
The first question is how much compliance with the CRA changes the portfolio of lending institutions. Do they lend more often and to riskier people, or do they lend the same but put more effort into finding candidates? The second question is how much did the CRA lead to the expansion of subprime lending during the housing bubble. Did the CRA have a significant role in the financial crisis?
There’s a new paper on the CRA, Did the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) Lead to Risky Lending?, by Agarwal, Benmelech, Bergman and Seru, h/t Tyler Cowen, with smart commentary already from Noah Smith. (This blog post will use the ungated October 2012 paper for quotes and analysis.) This is already being used as the basis for an “I told you so!” by the conservative press, which has tried to argue that the second question is most relevant. However, it is important to understand that this paper answers the first question, while, if anything, providing evidence against the conservative case for the second.
There is a simple step that anyone attempting to make a logical argument about causation should essay before going to an econometric model: does the causal link make any f–king sense? The extinction of the dinosaurs might have caused the Renaissance, but I don’t f–king think so.
I have long been skeptical about the NBER and the involvement of political agendas in its actions. Maybe it’s just that economics has become a more conservative profession in my lifetime, but this paper just adds to my disquiet about NBER in particular.
Posted in economy, liars | 2 Comments »
Posted by Charles II on November 22, 2012
Via Scoobie Davis, this gem from Rick Perlstein:
And that, at last, may be the explanation for Mitt Romney’s apparently bottomless penchant for lying in public. If the 2012 GOP nominee lied louder than most—and even more astoundingly than he has during his prior campaigns—it’s just because he felt like he had more to prove to his core following. Lying is an initiation into the conservative elite. In this respect, as in so many others, it’s like multilayer marketing: the ones at the top reap the reward—and then they preen, pleased with themselves for mastering the game. Closing the sale, after all, is mainly a question of riding out the lie: showing that you have the skill and the stones to just brazen it out, and the savvy to ratchet up the stakes higher and higher. Sneering at, or ignoring, your earnest high-minded mandarin gatekeepers—“we’re not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact-checkers,” as one Romney aide put it—is another part of closing the deal. For years now, the story in the mainstream political press has been Romney’s difficulty in convincing conservatives, finally, that he is truly one of them. For these elites, his lying—so dismaying to the opinion-makers at the New York Times, who act like this is something new—is how he has pulled it off once and for all. And at the grassroots, his fluidity with their preferred fables helps them forget why they never trusted the guy in the first place.
Don’t miss the part about an oilfield in the placenta.
And if I’d read Scoobie, I would have seen the latest Jack Chick, which ties together Catholicism, Islam, Communism, Nazism, Free Masonry, and Satanism into one neat bundle. Did you know that 1 million Southern Baptists have joined their body to the Whore of Windsor and become Masons?
Posted in 2012, liars, Mitt Romney | 1 Comment »
Posted by Charles II on October 17, 2012
Romney has proposed a 20% rate cut and limiting deductions to $17,000 or $25,000 or $50,000, depending how generous he’s being with imaginary money that day. So, would such a tax reform be revenue neutral, or even raise revenue?
Tax Policy Center:
Eliminating all itemized deductions would yield about $2 trillion of additional revenue over ten years if we cut all rates by 20 percent and eliminate the AMT. Capping deductions would generate less additional revenue, and the higher the cap, the smaller the gain. Limiting deductions to $17,000 would increase revenues by nearly $1.7 trillion over ten years. A $25,000 cap would yield roughly $1.3 trillion and a $50,000 cap would raise only about $760 billion.
Without more specifics, we can’t say how much revenue such limits would actually raise. But these new estimates suggest that Romney will need to do much more than capping itemized deductions to pay for the roughly $5 trillion in rate cuts and other tax benefits he has proposed.
So, even at its best, Romney is talking about cutting revenue by about $300B per year. Like, say, cut Medicare benefits by nearly half. That would do it.
Posted in liars, Mitt Romney, taxes | 2 Comments »
Posted by Charles II on February 2, 2012
(image from http://cache.gawkerassets.com/assets/images/39/2012/02/eb8e07101f4f8099a2b6c77418a79b72.png)
(image from https://twitter.com/#!/karenhandel/status/8080771312)
Meet Karen Handel, Senior Vice President of
Public Policy FAIL. It’s just malicious gossip that Handel promised to end funding for Planned Parenthood well before the Stearns congressional hearing began. Gossip like this:
“I will be a pro-life governor who will work tirelessly to promote a culture of life in Georgia. … I believe that each and every unborn child has inherent dignity, that every abortion is a tragedy, and that government has a role, along with the faith community, in encouraging women to choose life in even the most difficult of circumstances. …since I am pro-life, I do not support the mission of Planned Parenthood.” [Signed, Karen Handel]
[She] “promised to eliminate funding for breast and cervical cancer screenings provided by” Planned Parenthood, according to Jezebel.
Posted in abortion, abuse of power, liars | 3 Comments »
Posted by Charles II on December 6, 2011
(image from http://mariopiperni.com/)
Via Scott Horton, Der Spiegel’s Mark Pitzke:
Africa is a country. In Libya, the Taliban reigns. Muslims are terrorists; most immigrants are criminal; all Occupy protesters are dirty. And women who feel sexually harassed — well, they shouldn’t make such a big deal about it.
Welcome to the wonderful world of the US Republicans. Or rather, to the twisted world of what they call their presidential campaigns.
They lie. They cheat. They exaggerate. They bluster. They say one idiotic, ignorant, outrageous thing after another. They’ve shown such stark lack of knowledge — political, economic, geographic, historical — that they make George W. Bush look like Einstein and even cause their fellow Republicans to cringe.
And so the farce continues. The more mind-boggling its incarnations, the happier the US media are to cheer first one clown and then the next,
Then there’s Newt Gingrich…the US media now reflexively hails him as a “Man of Ideas” (The Washington Post) — even though most of these ideas are lousy if not downright offensive, such as firing unionized school janitors, so poor children could do their jobs.
Pompous and blustering, Gingrich gets away with this humdinger as well as with selling himself as a Washington outsider — despite having made millions of dollars as a lobbyist in Washington. At least the man’s got chutzpah.
Americans have a short memory. They forget, too, that Gingrich was driven out of Congress in disgrace, the first speaker of the house to be disciplined for ethical wrongdoing.
Rick Perry’s blunders are legendary.
Meanwhile, Michele Bachmann … [is] still tolerated as if she’s a serious contender. Ron Paul’s fan club gets the more excited, the more puzzling his comments get. Jon Huntsman, the only one who occasionally makes some sort of sense, has been relegated to the poll doldrums ever since he showed sympathy for the Occupy Wall Street demonstrators.
Which leaves Mitt Romney, the eternal flip-flopper and runner-up…
What a nice club that is. A club of liars, cheaters, adulterers, exaggerators, hypocrites and ignoramuses.
Pitzke misses the point. These are the sorts of personal characteristics that Republicans admire, at least as long as the person in question has lots of money. How can the party who impeached Bill Clinton for adultery a little over 10 years ago have as its frontrunner a man who was engaging in adultery at the same time that he was impeaching Bill Clinton? It only makes sense if Bill Clinton’s sins were not big enough to gain him a place in the Republican pantheon.
I predict that what will happen in the end is a deadlocked convention, and an exciting, new candidate will materialize. Someone relatively unknown. Someone whose secrets are well enough hidden that they won’t emerge before the election. Probably a military man.
And someone worse than all of the rest of the liars club that is the Republican primary.
Posted in 2012, hypocrites, liars, Republicans, Republicans acting badly | 7 Comments »
Posted by Charles II on October 24, 2011
Parliamentary questioning of Les Hinton demonstrated that he’s one of the most competent corporate executives out there:
The culture committee questioned Les Hinton, the former executive chairman of Rupert Murdoch’s lot. He appeared from New York by video link. Thanks to modern technology, it was possible for a great cloud of ignorance, prevarication, vagueness and amnesia to billow across the Atlantic.
Mr Hinton knew nuffink and remembered less. You could have stopped any passing schoolboy and learned as much.
One of the great talents you must have to be a corporate executive is to be informed about every detail of your subordinates’ lives except when it involves your own personal liability. “Sociopathic” barely begins to describe it.
Posted in anti-truth, liars, Rupert Murdoch | 1 Comment »