The Tea Party downgrade

[Arraya]

Yes, excellent analysis eaves. More simply, it’s manifestations of mass-projection through the echo-chamber of social media that actually incite what they claim to be highlighting.

Who needs evidence when you have the demons in your own head?

[SD Realtor]

Eavesdropper I agree with your posts, and the misrepresentation of them in the media does occur which is very sad. Equally sad, or perhaps moreso is that racism is alive and well everywhere. Right now our family is on the Outer Banks in Nags Head on vacation and yesterday I saw a few pickups drive by with the confederate flag in the back of them. Pretty sad.

By the same token I do not view the Madison NBC News as a blog or racially motivated posting board. They used the term “beatings” when discussing the witnesses reports. The WIsonsin State Journal did not, they used the words attacks, the ABC affiliate WISN quoted police saying that “One officer described it as a “mob beating”…

So while you want to attribute the whole thing to every blog and forum you read misrepresenting what really happened, I am not so sure that this is accurate. So yes groupspeak and all that does exist and it goes in both directions.

People become fearul to not speak out against wrongdoing, racism is evil no matter what the direction. As sad and disgusting a sight it was to see confederate flags flying where I am vacationing right now, I am equally very very happy I was not in my car that night at the state fair in Wisconsin.

[SD Realtor]

Eavesdropper I agree with your posts, and the misrepresentation of them in the media does occur which is very sad. Equally sad, or perhaps moreso is that racism is alive and well everywhere. Right now our family is on the Outer Banks in Nags Head on vacation and yesterday I saw a few pickups drive by with the confederate flag in the back of them. Pretty sad.

By the same token I do not view the Madison NBC News as a blog or racially motivated posting board. They used the term “beatings” when discussing the witnesses reports. The WIsonsin State Journal did not, they used the words attacks, the ABC affiliate WISN quoted police saying that “One officer described it as a “mob beating”…

So while you want to attribute the whole thing to every blog and forum you read misrepresenting what really happened, I am not so sure that this is accurate. So yes groupspeak and all that does exist and it goes in both directions.

People become fearul to not speak out against wrongdoing, racism is evil no matter what the direction. As sad and disgusting a sight it was to see confederate flags flying where I am vacationing right now, I am equally very very happy I was not in my car that night at the state fair in Wisconsin.

[SD Realtor]

Eavesdropper I agree with your posts, and the misrepresentation of them in the media does occur which is very sad. Equally sad, or perhaps moreso is that racism is alive and well everywhere. Right now our family is on the Outer Banks in Nags Head on vacation and yesterday I saw a few pickups drive by with the confederate flag in the back of them. Pretty sad.

By the same token I do not view the Madison NBC News as a blog or racially motivated posting board. They used the term “beatings” when discussing the witnesses reports. The WIsonsin State Journal did not, they used the words attacks, the ABC affiliate WISN quoted police saying that “One officer described it as a “mob beating”…

So while you want to attribute the whole thing to every blog and forum you read misrepresenting what really happened, I am not so sure that this is accurate. So yes groupspeak and all that does exist and it goes in both directions.

People become fearul to not speak out against wrongdoing, racism is evil no matter what the direction. As sad and disgusting a sight it was to see confederate flags flying where I am vacationing right now, I am equally very very happy I was not in my car that night at the state fair in Wisconsin.

[SD Realtor]

Eavesdropper I agree with your posts, and the misrepresentation of them in the media does occur which is very sad. Equally sad, or perhaps moreso is that racism is alive and well everywhere. Right now our family is on the Outer Banks in Nags Head on vacation and yesterday I saw a few pickups drive by with the confederate flag in the back of them. Pretty sad.

By the same token I do not view the Madison NBC News as a blog or racially motivated posting board. They used the term “beatings” when discussing the witnesses reports. The WIsonsin State Journal did not, they used the words attacks, the ABC affiliate WISN quoted police saying that “One officer described it as a “mob beating”…

So while you want to attribute the whole thing to every blog and forum you read misrepresenting what really happened, I am not so sure that this is accurate. So yes groupspeak and all that does exist and it goes in both directions.

People become fearul to not speak out against wrongdoing, racism is evil no matter what the direction. As sad and disgusting a sight it was to see confederate flags flying where I am vacationing right now, I am equally very very happy I was not in my car that night at the state fair in Wisconsin.

[SD Realtor]

Eavesdropper I agree with your posts, and the misrepresentation of them in the media does occur which is very sad. Equally sad, or perhaps moreso is that racism is alive and well everywhere. Right now our family is on the Outer Banks in Nags Head on vacation and yesterday I saw a few pickups drive by with the confederate flag in the back of them. Pretty sad.

By the same token I do not view the Madison NBC News as a blog or racially motivated posting board. They used the term “beatings” when discussing the witnesses reports. The WIsonsin State Journal did not, they used the words attacks, the ABC affiliate WISN quoted police saying that “One officer described it as a “mob beating”…

So while you want to attribute the whole thing to every blog and forum you read misrepresenting what really happened, I am not so sure that this is accurate. So yes groupspeak and all that does exist and it goes in both directions.

People become fearul to not speak out against wrongdoing, racism is evil no matter what the direction. As sad and disgusting a sight it was to see confederate flags flying where I am vacationing right now, I am equally very very happy I was not in my car that night at the state fair in Wisconsin.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=SD Realtor]By the same token I do not view the Madison NBC News as a blog or racially motivated posting board. They used the term “beatings” when discussing the witnesses reports. The WIsonsin State Journal did not, they used the words attacks, the ABC affiliate WISN quoted police saying that “One officer described it as a “mob beating”…

So while you want to attribute the whole thing to every blog and forum you read misrepresenting what really happened, I am not so sure that this is accurate. So yes groupspeak and all that does exist and it goes in both directions. [/quote]

I’m a little confused by your post, and I’m sorry if I didn’t make mine more clear. I certainly didn’t mean to imply that I looked at every message board. The point that I was trying to make was that I found what I considered to be adequate and responsible reporting on the incident from the mainstream media on the first day after. Around the same time, my search turned up many (and I do mean “many”) websites, all of a similar sociopolitical persuasion and tone, that were reporting that the attacks were racially-motivated, and were circulating the identical “report” that featured the eyewitness statements. When the next round of mainstream news reports came out, it appeared that they were reacting to what had been circulating on those sites (and, quite possibly, to reports from their own viewers/readers who had seen them). At that time, they mentioned that the issue of racial motivation had been raised, and they asked that anyone having eyewitness accounts of this contact them. They also quoted the police chief as saying the evidence, THUS FAR, had not shown racial motivation. He, too, asked eyewitnesses to come forward.

My overall point is that the internet has become the primary and definitive news source for a very large number of people, who are actually listening/seeing stuff generated and maintained by rumor mills. And they use these “news reports” as EVIDENCE that the mainstream media is not doing its job, and that they are arbitrarily suppressing stories, or certain facts in stories, to affect the political course in this country. Because, as everyone knows, the mainstream media (except for Fox News) is biased. And they are ALL liberal.

BTW, to all who believe that, here’s an interesting fact: many of the reporters may be of a liberal bent, but most of the publishers and owners of mainstream media are conservative. So what does that tell you, America?

[eavesdropper]

[quote=SD Realtor]By the same token I do not view the Madison NBC News as a blog or racially motivated posting board. They used the term “beatings” when discussing the witnesses reports. The WIsonsin State Journal did not, they used the words attacks, the ABC affiliate WISN quoted police saying that “One officer described it as a “mob beating”…

So while you want to attribute the whole thing to every blog and forum you read misrepresenting what really happened, I am not so sure that this is accurate. So yes groupspeak and all that does exist and it goes in both directions. [/quote]

I’m a little confused by your post, and I’m sorry if I didn’t make mine more clear. I certainly didn’t mean to imply that I looked at every message board. The point that I was trying to make was that I found what I considered to be adequate and responsible reporting on the incident from the mainstream media on the first day after. Around the same time, my search turned up many (and I do mean “many”) websites, all of a similar sociopolitical persuasion and tone, that were reporting that the attacks were racially-motivated, and were circulating the identical “report” that featured the eyewitness statements. When the next round of mainstream news reports came out, it appeared that they were reacting to what had been circulating on those sites (and, quite possibly, to reports from their own viewers/readers who had seen them). At that time, they mentioned that the issue of racial motivation had been raised, and they asked that anyone having eyewitness accounts of this contact them. They also quoted the police chief as saying the evidence, THUS FAR, had not shown racial motivation. He, too, asked eyewitnesses to come forward.

My overall point is that the internet has become the primary and definitive news source for a very large number of people, who are actually listening/seeing stuff generated and maintained by rumor mills. And they use these “news reports” as EVIDENCE that the mainstream media is not doing its job, and that they are arbitrarily suppressing stories, or certain facts in stories, to affect the political course in this country. Because, as everyone knows, the mainstream media (except for Fox News) is biased. And they are ALL liberal.

BTW, to all who believe that, here’s an interesting fact: many of the reporters may be of a liberal bent, but most of the publishers and owners of mainstream media are conservative. So what does that tell you, America?

[eavesdropper]

[quote=SD Realtor]By the same token I do not view the Madison NBC News as a blog or racially motivated posting board. They used the term “beatings” when discussing the witnesses reports. The WIsonsin State Journal did not, they used the words attacks, the ABC affiliate WISN quoted police saying that “One officer described it as a “mob beating”…

So while you want to attribute the whole thing to every blog and forum you read misrepresenting what really happened, I am not so sure that this is accurate. So yes groupspeak and all that does exist and it goes in both directions. [/quote]

I’m a little confused by your post, and I’m sorry if I didn’t make mine more clear. I certainly didn’t mean to imply that I looked at every message board. The point that I was trying to make was that I found what I considered to be adequate and responsible reporting on the incident from the mainstream media on the first day after. Around the same time, my search turned up many (and I do mean “many”) websites, all of a similar sociopolitical persuasion and tone, that were reporting that the attacks were racially-motivated, and were circulating the identical “report” that featured the eyewitness statements. When the next round of mainstream news reports came out, it appeared that they were reacting to what had been circulating on those sites (and, quite possibly, to reports from their own viewers/readers who had seen them). At that time, they mentioned that the issue of racial motivation had been raised, and they asked that anyone having eyewitness accounts of this contact them. They also quoted the police chief as saying the evidence, THUS FAR, had not shown racial motivation. He, too, asked eyewitnesses to come forward.

My overall point is that the internet has become the primary and definitive news source for a very large number of people, who are actually listening/seeing stuff generated and maintained by rumor mills. And they use these “news reports” as EVIDENCE that the mainstream media is not doing its job, and that they are arbitrarily suppressing stories, or certain facts in stories, to affect the political course in this country. Because, as everyone knows, the mainstream media (except for Fox News) is biased. And they are ALL liberal.

BTW, to all who believe that, here’s an interesting fact: many of the reporters may be of a liberal bent, but most of the publishers and owners of mainstream media are conservative. So what does that tell you, America?

[eavesdropper]

[quote=SD Realtor]By the same token I do not view the Madison NBC News as a blog or racially motivated posting board. They used the term “beatings” when discussing the witnesses reports. The WIsonsin State Journal did not, they used the words attacks, the ABC affiliate WISN quoted police saying that “One officer described it as a “mob beating”…

So while you want to attribute the whole thing to every blog and forum you read misrepresenting what really happened, I am not so sure that this is accurate. So yes groupspeak and all that does exist and it goes in both directions. [/quote]

I’m a little confused by your post, and I’m sorry if I didn’t make mine more clear. I certainly didn’t mean to imply that I looked at every message board. The point that I was trying to make was that I found what I considered to be adequate and responsible reporting on the incident from the mainstream media on the first day after. Around the same time, my search turned up many (and I do mean “many”) websites, all of a similar sociopolitical persuasion and tone, that were reporting that the attacks were racially-motivated, and were circulating the identical “report” that featured the eyewitness statements. When the next round of mainstream news reports came out, it appeared that they were reacting to what had been circulating on those sites (and, quite possibly, to reports from their own viewers/readers who had seen them). At that time, they mentioned that the issue of racial motivation had been raised, and they asked that anyone having eyewitness accounts of this contact them. They also quoted the police chief as saying the evidence, THUS FAR, had not shown racial motivation. He, too, asked eyewitnesses to come forward.

My overall point is that the internet has become the primary and definitive news source for a very large number of people, who are actually listening/seeing stuff generated and maintained by rumor mills. And they use these “news reports” as EVIDENCE that the mainstream media is not doing its job, and that they are arbitrarily suppressing stories, or certain facts in stories, to affect the political course in this country. Because, as everyone knows, the mainstream media (except for Fox News) is biased. And they are ALL liberal.

BTW, to all who believe that, here’s an interesting fact: many of the reporters may be of a liberal bent, but most of the publishers and owners of mainstream media are conservative. So what does that tell you, America?

[eavesdropper]

[quote=SD Realtor]By the same token I do not view the Madison NBC News as a blog or racially motivated posting board. They used the term “beatings” when discussing the witnesses reports. The WIsonsin State Journal did not, they used the words attacks, the ABC affiliate WISN quoted police saying that “One officer described it as a “mob beating”…

So while you want to attribute the whole thing to every blog and forum you read misrepresenting what really happened, I am not so sure that this is accurate. So yes groupspeak and all that does exist and it goes in both directions. [/quote]

I’m a little confused by your post, and I’m sorry if I didn’t make mine more clear. I certainly didn’t mean to imply that I looked at every message board. The point that I was trying to make was that I found what I considered to be adequate and responsible reporting on the incident from the mainstream media on the first day after. Around the same time, my search turned up many (and I do mean “many”) websites, all of a similar sociopolitical persuasion and tone, that were reporting that the attacks were racially-motivated, and were circulating the identical “report” that featured the eyewitness statements. When the next round of mainstream news reports came out, it appeared that they were reacting to what had been circulating on those sites (and, quite possibly, to reports from their own viewers/readers who had seen them). At that time, they mentioned that the issue of racial motivation had been raised, and they asked that anyone having eyewitness accounts of this contact them. They also quoted the police chief as saying the evidence, THUS FAR, had not shown racial motivation. He, too, asked eyewitnesses to come forward.

My overall point is that the internet has become the primary and definitive news source for a very large number of people, who are actually listening/seeing stuff generated and maintained by rumor mills. And they use these “news reports” as EVIDENCE that the mainstream media is not doing its job, and that they are arbitrarily suppressing stories, or certain facts in stories, to affect the political course in this country. Because, as everyone knows, the mainstream media (except for Fox News) is biased. And they are ALL liberal.

BTW, to all who believe that, here’s an interesting fact: many of the reporters may be of a liberal bent, but most of the publishers and owners of mainstream media are conservative. So what does that tell you, America?

[eavesdropper]

[quote=svelte]Back on topic, it looks like many are coming to the conclusion that S&P lacks credibility and has less than pure motivations:

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/p-slammed-u-downgrade-174205361.html

“S&P is the world’s largest ratings agency. In most cases, its business model is based on charging the issuers of debt–private corporations, local and state governments, for instance–in exchange for a rating. The issuer then uses a positive rating to give investors confidence in the solidity of the investment. But S&P also rates the debt of 126 countries. And, like many of the countries whose debt is rated by S&P, the United States neither requests nor pays for its rating.”

They get their income from the companies they rate. Yeah, no incentive to shade the grades there…[/quote]

Even if S & P went ahead and did this as as an ethical and moral obligation to their clients (as they claim), the risk of post-downgrade fallout was tremendous. Even if their reasoning is sound, and within the parameters of their professional duty (which I seriously question), there was NO need to downgrade at this point in time. S & P supposedly follows a list of 5 considerations in grading, and they obviously did not do so. If they had, they could have only come to the conclusion that the likelihood of U.S. default in the foreseeable future is less than miniscule.

It’s apparent that they did not recognize the potential of repercussions of enormous international impact. Or they did recognize it, and chose to go ahead and downgrade anyway.

Either one is not a quality that I would include in my firm’s marketing materials.

Entrepreneurs, take heed. Business start-up opportunity in Aisle 6 (aka 55 Water Street, New York). Doesn’t require intellect, but believing your own bullshit is a must.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=svelte]Back on topic, it looks like many are coming to the conclusion that S&P lacks credibility and has less than pure motivations:

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/p-slammed-u-downgrade-174205361.html

“S&P is the world’s largest ratings agency. In most cases, its business model is based on charging the issuers of debt–private corporations, local and state governments, for instance–in exchange for a rating. The issuer then uses a positive rating to give investors confidence in the solidity of the investment. But S&P also rates the debt of 126 countries. And, like many of the countries whose debt is rated by S&P, the United States neither requests nor pays for its rating.”

They get their income from the companies they rate. Yeah, no incentive to shade the grades there…[/quote]

Even if S & P went ahead and did this as as an ethical and moral obligation to their clients (as they claim), the risk of post-downgrade fallout was tremendous. Even if their reasoning is sound, and within the parameters of their professional duty (which I seriously question), there was NO need to downgrade at this point in time. S & P supposedly follows a list of 5 considerations in grading, and they obviously did not do so. If they had, they could have only come to the conclusion that the likelihood of U.S. default in the foreseeable future is less than miniscule.

It’s apparent that they did not recognize the potential of repercussions of enormous international impact. Or they did recognize it, and chose to go ahead and downgrade anyway.

Either one is not a quality that I would include in my firm’s marketing materials.

Entrepreneurs, take heed. Business start-up opportunity in Aisle 6 (aka 55 Water Street, New York). Doesn’t require intellect, but believing your own bullshit is a must.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=svelte]Back on topic, it looks like many are coming to the conclusion that S&P lacks credibility and has less than pure motivations:

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/p-slammed-u-downgrade-174205361.html

“S&P is the world’s largest ratings agency. In most cases, its business model is based on charging the issuers of debt–private corporations, local and state governments, for instance–in exchange for a rating. The issuer then uses a positive rating to give investors confidence in the solidity of the investment. But S&P also rates the debt of 126 countries. And, like many of the countries whose debt is rated by S&P, the United States neither requests nor pays for its rating.”

They get their income from the companies they rate. Yeah, no incentive to shade the grades there…[/quote]

Even if S & P went ahead and did this as as an ethical and moral obligation to their clients (as they claim), the risk of post-downgrade fallout was tremendous. Even if their reasoning is sound, and within the parameters of their professional duty (which I seriously question), there was NO need to downgrade at this point in time. S & P supposedly follows a list of 5 considerations in grading, and they obviously did not do so. If they had, they could have only come to the conclusion that the likelihood of U.S. default in the foreseeable future is less than miniscule.

It’s apparent that they did not recognize the potential of repercussions of enormous international impact. Or they did recognize it, and chose to go ahead and downgrade anyway.

Either one is not a quality that I would include in my firm’s marketing materials.

Entrepreneurs, take heed. Business start-up opportunity in Aisle 6 (aka 55 Water Street, New York). Doesn’t require intellect, but believing your own bullshit is a must.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=svelte]Back on topic, it looks like many are coming to the conclusion that S&P lacks credibility and has less than pure motivations:

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/p-slammed-u-downgrade-174205361.html

“S&P is the world’s largest ratings agency. In most cases, its business model is based on charging the issuers of debt–private corporations, local and state governments, for instance–in exchange for a rating. The issuer then uses a positive rating to give investors confidence in the solidity of the investment. But S&P also rates the debt of 126 countries. And, like many of the countries whose debt is rated by S&P, the United States neither requests nor pays for its rating.”

They get their income from the companies they rate. Yeah, no incentive to shade the grades there…[/quote]

Even if S & P went ahead and did this as as an ethical and moral obligation to their clients (as they claim), the risk of post-downgrade fallout was tremendous. Even if their reasoning is sound, and within the parameters of their professional duty (which I seriously question), there was NO need to downgrade at this point in time. S & P supposedly follows a list of 5 considerations in grading, and they obviously did not do so. If they had, they could have only come to the conclusion that the likelihood of U.S. default in the foreseeable future is less than miniscule.

It’s apparent that they did not recognize the potential of repercussions of enormous international impact. Or they did recognize it, and chose to go ahead and downgrade anyway.

Either one is not a quality that I would include in my firm’s marketing materials.

Entrepreneurs, take heed. Business start-up opportunity in Aisle 6 (aka 55 Water Street, New York). Doesn’t require intellect, but believing your own bullshit is a must.

[Author]

Posts