[gogogosandiego]

I’ve been saying this for years, Inflation is overstated. Cars are a great example. Yes, they cost more. But they get better MPG. They break down less. They routinely come with 10 year warranties or free service. They are safer so we are less likely to get hurt or killed in an accident. Front and rear cameras, NAV, etc.

[gogogosandiego]

The Fake Americans Russia Created to Influence the Election

The Russian information attack on the election did not stop with the hacking and leaking of Democratic emails or the fire hose of stories, true, false and in between, that battered Mrs. Clinton on Russian outlets like RT and Sputnik. Far less splashy, and far more difficult to trace, was Russia’s experimentation on Facebook and Twitter, the American companies that essentially invented the tools of social media and, in this case, did not stop them from being turned into engines of deception and propaganda.

An investigation by The New York Times, and new research from the cybersecurity firm FireEye, reveals some of the mechanisms by which suspected Russian operators used Twitter and Facebook to spread anti-Clinton messages and promote the hacked material they had leaked. On Wednesday, Facebook officials disclosed that they had shut down several hundred accounts that they believe were created by a Russian company linked to the Kremlin and used to buy $100,000 in ads pushing divisive issues during and after the American election campaign.

On Twitter, as on Facebook, Russian fingerprints are on hundreds or thousands of fake accounts that regularly posted anti-Clinton messages. Many were automated Twitter accounts, called bots, that sometimes fired off identical messages seconds apart — and in the exact alphabetical order of their made-up names, according to the FireEye researchers. On Election Day, for instance, they found that one group of Twitter bots sent out the hashtag #WarAgainstDemocrats more than 1,700 times.

Russia has been quite open about playing its hacking card. In February last year, at a conference in Moscow, a top cyberintelligence adviser to President Vladimir V. Putin hinted that Russia was about to unleash a devastating information attack on the United States.

“We are living in 1948,” said the adviser, Andrey Krutskikh, referring to the eve of the first Soviet atomic bomb test, in a speech reported by The Washington Post. “I’m warning you: We are at the verge of having something in the information arena that will allow to us to talk to the Americans as equals.”

[gogogosandiego]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/24/immigrants-science_n_866321.html

[gogogosandiego]

1. The subtitle to your video says:
“Uploaded on Sep 27, 2008: NYC Wall St. Bailout Protest 25 September 2008 – 500+ out to say ‘no’ to Bush’s $700B bailout plan”

There may be 1500 people there.

Your words: “As I’ve pointed out earlier, there were protests in 2008 that got absolutely zero news coverage. Thousands of people in the street”.

“I specifically called out the fact that it was not being discussed in the media back in 2008.”

My very simple question to you (2nd time): Were there other protests with thousands in the streets? Or was that the only one?

If so, I already showed you where it was covered by CNN. If there were more please enlighten me.

2. This is fucking amazing. I’m very aware of the leanings of the editorial pages of both papers. I haven’t referred to the editorial pages of either. That has nothing to do with their news reporting. Are you seriously telling me you don’t understand the difference? A freshman who has taken 2 or 3 days of Journalism 101 knows more about reporting that you do. No wonder you think the news is biased. smh

3.“There was no reason to lower rates” Because you say so?

4. The DNC isn’t part of the government? What you want is not in the best interest of this country.

5. “I was actively involved in the presidential campaign, so knew what was going on”. Great. I was actively involved in putting a man on the moon. Prove it.

6. I state again – “Prove that corps had more say than pols.” And again -“corporations are the ones who wrote most of the trade agreement” Prove it.

7. I’m going to reference this every time you post. You have one last chance to look into what was actually passed and admit that you have no idea what you are talking about.

8. There was no “anti free speech bill” passed. ZH is guilty of sloppy “reporting”.

Your sources and links are garbage. I don’t have to prove that the news and editorial pages of a good paper are protected by an ethical firewall. I don’t have to prove to you that Russia hacked the DNC. I don’t have to prove to you that 2+2=4. You do need to provide evidence for your kooky claims.

(This will now be the second post where I have clearly called you out as having no evidence)

[gogogosandiego]

1. Where were there thousands of people in the streets in 2008? Be specific. It was not “all I could find”. It took 10 seconds to find. To find actual reported articles 8 years later I’d probably have to use Lexus or something else better than google and I’m not going to do that unless you have some actual specifics because I don’t remotely remember people in the streets.

2. Paul Krugman writes on the editorial pages. He or any other opinion piece or personality has nothing to do with what I am explaining to you about how large, world renowned papers like the NYT and WSJ work. ZH is clickbait. Nothing more, nothing less.

3. The Fed raised and then lowered as the economic cycle dictated, not bc of the stock market. Rates are irrelevant to lending standards all things being equal. The loosening (and outright fraud within the system) of lending standards was the primary cause of the housing bubble.

4. You don’t get it. You’re putting the cart WAY before the horse and you seem to think it’s OK for foreign countries to steal information from our government.

5. “Those who know what was going on”? You I suppose?

6. Prove that corps had more say that pols.

This is more or less what happened:

“Only the representatives of “We the People” should be involved, with input from corporate, environmental, and labor groups who are all given the same consideration.”

ISDS already exists in other trade agreements; I’ve already explained this to you. It’s not some boogie man that allows corps to just sue whomever they like for whatever they like.

7. You still don’t understand what happened with that bill.

8. I “oppose” sloppy, conspiracy based “reporting” that suggests Obama signed a anti free speech bill into law under the cover of Xmas.

You’re going to need to start presenting evidence for your claims if you’d like to continue. Actual, verifiable evidence. Not “I was there” or “I know” or “I was told”. That’s not how a “debate” works if you think we are debating.

[gogogosandiego]

1. “Protests in 2008 that got absolutely zero news coverage” – Nope!

http://money.cnn.com/2008/09/25/news/economy/bailout_protests/?postversion=2008092517

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) — The public backlash against the Bush administration’s proposal to use tax dollars to bailout Wall Street spilled into the streets Thursday.

“People all over the country are up in arms about
this,” said David Elliot, a spokesman for grassroots advocacy group UsAction. “Our members are livid, and they’re hitting the streets.”

Do you have a specific example of “thousands of people in the streets” that you feel wasn’t covered?

The Piggington thread you posted was a perfect example of what I’m talking about. The minute the Tea party got any traction it shifted to anti-tax and other predetermined causes which was its specific intent all along.

2. Now it’s “vested interests” and only sometimes the government? Before it was “the media is controlled by the government”.

Those people who tell reporters “what to say” are called editors. Do I need to explain the training, experience and education that is typical of a copy editor at a large paper?

Here is an example of the editorial direction provided at Zerohedge: “Despite holding itself out as a town crier for market angst, transcripts from Zero Hedge internal chat sessions provided by Lokey reveal a focus on Web traffic by the Durdens. Headlines are debated and a relentless publishing schedule maintained to keep readers sated. Lokey said the emphasis on profit—and what he considered political bias at the site—motivated him to quit.

Despite the compensation, he contends that he left because he disagreed with the site’s editorial vision. “Reality checks are great. But Zero Hedge ceased to serve that public service years ago,” Lokey wrote. “They care what generates page views. Clicks. Money.”

Lokey, who said he wrote much of the site’s political content, claimed there was pressure to frame issues in a way he felt was disingenuous. “I tried to inject as much truth as I could into my posts, but there’s no room for it. “Russia=good. Obama=idiot. Bashar al-Assad=benevolent leader. John Kerry= dunce. Vladimir Putin=greatest leader in the history of statecraft,”

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-04-29/unmasking-the-men-behind-zero-hedge-wall-street-s-renegade-blog

IIRC it was the NYT that broke the NSA illegal wiretapping story. There are literally 1000’s of other examples of outlets like the Times and WSJ breaking stories that “threaten powerful interests”.

Journalists at real news outlets like the WSJ and NYT are not threatened with criminal charges if they report on certain topics. The NYT and WSJ are not biased in what they say.

3. That’s what the Fed did. It warned. It raised rates when the economy started to slow. .75 and 1.00 are not “tiny” increases. The consensus opinion about the cause of the housing bubble was lax lending standards. Not low rates.

4. Russia selectively released information to make HRC look bad. There is no argument about this. If you don’t see the issue here you are clearly deluded as to what Democracy is and what’s important.

Yes, HRC moved to the left because of Bernie in an attempt to gather those votes. Bernie certainly had some odd or unusual ideas which is why he wasn’t a serious candidate. By attempting to run as a Democrat against HRC and inject populist policies into the debate he likely harmed the party.

No one is trying to start a war with Russia. Russia has been the aggressor for the last several years in Eastern Europe. We are simply countering that.

5. Trumps victory was not obvious to anyone. If it had been it would have been widely reported on.

6. “Unprecedented….with the possible exception of NAFTA”. The TPP is far larger than NAFTA and has far more parties (countries) so the complexity and need for secrecy is far greater. Can you elaborate on the coverage of NAFTA vs. TPP? Or do you just not understand the proliferation of the internet and other mediums in the last 20 years? (Hint: whatever the next “free trade agreement” is the same types of people will tell you the secrecy is “unprecedented” – with absolutely no evidence to such, same as now – and you’ll believe it).

Corporations didn’t have more say in the TPP than politicians. Corps and politicians had negotiators appointed on their behalf. As also did labor unions, environmental groups and others. If the MSM had done this: “letting people know about the trade deal and how our own politicians weren’t allowed to participate in, or even know the details about, these negotiations until after the agreement was drawn up” they wouldn’t be doing their job of reporting facts as that is exactly how the deal was to be negotiated, as all other trade deals have been negotiated.

It is clear that you think your opinions are newsworthy and that if they aren’t being promoted there is some grand conspiracy.

As for fast track, do you think it’s prudent for something that was negotiated for several years with multiple other countries (with us as the lead) to be derailed by our (or any other countries) Congress over party lines or special interests? They could certainly deny it under fast track if they chose as any other countries government can do.

I really don’t want to digress here because I know it will draw another longwinded, non-factual rant from you but here goes anyway! The TPP, while nowhere near perfect, would have been a good deal for us by legitimizing and leveling the field for trade THAT ALREADY OCCURS between countries using the same principles that govern other trade agreements. The populist uprising keyed by Bernie and Trump will be bad for our economy and our place in the world in this regard. If you don’t understand this or just blanket think “free trade” is a bad thing you are uninformed.

7. I see you still don’t understand what actually occurred with that bill.

http://www.snopes.com/obama-signs-christmas-bill-making-alternative-media-illegal/

Are you now admitting that ZH is “sensationalized” (that would be a step in the right direction for you)?

I’ve never “debated” you in the past and this is not a debate. Your behavior in this topic is very typical as I have observed it for years.

[gogogosandiego]

1. If you were protesting bailouts that’s great. If you thought you were part of or referred to what you were doing as a Tea party movement you were duped by political and corporate interests, plain and simple.

2. The media world is not controlled by the government. Yes a news piece is called a “story”. That isn’t the same thing as a story that is made up or has discretion from the author. A news story is reported, as in facts are reported. The NYT and WSJ are not biased in their reporting.

3. The Fed doesn’t “clamp down on speculation”. Your own link shows the Fed funds rate increasing in 1999 until the economy slowed in 2001 (that’s when the Fed is supposed to lower rates, not when there is “speculation”). Think tanks and other experts don’t consistently get things wrong; it’s just that they can’t force the government and others to act. Yours is a classic argument of “well if I was in charge I would have done this, this and this (magically of course) and everything would have been perfect”.

4. I’m not going to condone the actions of the DNC. Bernie was certainly an oddball candidate and one can make a very strong argument that his nomination was not in the best interest of the party. But don’t you dare question my support of Democracy after posting that you think the takeaway from a foreign country hacking government databases and then selectively releasing the information in a way to potentially affect our elections is “they exposed the fraud and collusion”. That shows how little you care about Democracy, your only allegiance lies with getting your guy elected. And no one is trying to start a war with Russia.

5. Trump was not obvious to anyone. I’m sure it was widely predicted by Bernie supporters once they realized Bernie wasn’t happening. The same way Trump supporters would have all predicted Hillary over whoever beat Trump.

6. “Unprecedented”? Versus what? Again, all trade deals are done as confidentially as possible for good reason. Government, corporate and other interests were all involved in TPP negotiations. Once done it’s released for everyone to see. This is how most “deals” are done. For you to expect anything differently with something covering hundreds of variables with numerous other countries as parties and took several years to get done is ridiculous. What exactly should the media have been reporting about the TPP? “Day 876 here at TPP negotiations, meeting number 52, everything is pretty locked up, back to you in studio Joe”?

As for me, I’ve been reading this site for years. Your statement that there aren’t many objective news sources and that ZH is somehow objective (and continue to believe so after having been shown they are not) was too much for me. I had to make an ID and jump in. I never said the MSM is the “sole source of unbiased information”. I am saying that sources like the NYT and WSJ are some of the best outlets and are specifically designed and run to give unbiased news. ZH and similar sites are not news.

Your attempts to discredit me and pass me off as a troll are pathetic and typical.

[gogogosandiego]

You’ve gotten so much wrong in this thread I’m not even sure where to start….

The Tea Party publically “started” over a rant on TV against people potentially getting mortgage modifications in 2009. It had nothing to do with bailouts or “socializing losses”. In reality the groundwork for the Tea Party had been laid for years prior with the main goal being smaller government and less regulation. It was not even remotely a grass roots movement. If you were involved you were duped.

You presented several “stories” (I’ll select a few) that you feel the MSM got ”wrong”. This is the crux of your problem, real news doesn’t tell stories. It’s doesn’t try to predict the future.

“the Fed is unwilling to do anything about it” (how would anyone know if they are unwilling? What exactly should the Fed do? Who says they should do anything? You? How is this news? it’s pure uninformed speculation)

“As the Fed attempts to stimulate the economy, it will require more and more stimulus to get incrementally weaker and weaker responses.” (the Fed again! Methinks you don’t really understand what the Fed does, but certainly a vast prediction like this is newsworthy! There have literally been 1000’s of articles about the Fed, its powers, its limitations, its role, etc. written in the past 8 years – news, opinion and otherwise)

The DNC is conspiring with the Clinton campaign and major financial and political backers to win the Democratic nomination. If she wins, she will lose to Trump. (duh, Bernie wasn’t a Democrat and had some pretty wacky ideas, of course they were, only rabid Bernie supporters feel it’s some grand conspiracy)

Trump will win the Republican primary, and if he runs against Clinton, he will win the general election, too. (reporters are supposed to be clairvoyant?)

The Trans-Pacific Partnership is being drafted behind closed doors.. (zzzzzzzzzzzz…all trade deals are negotiated confidentially. The same things in the TPP are already present in other trade deals, this has been widely reported)

You then go on to say “accurate information on many of these topics was available only via alternative news sources”. You’re not looking for accurate information; you are looking for information that supports your biases.

The irony of you trying to tell others what is news is truly amazing.

If you want to read some real news and be informed pick up the NYT or the WSJ, two of the best in the world.

[gogogosandiego]

In April 2016, the authors writing as “Durden” on the website were reported by Bloomberg News to be Ivandjiiski, Tim Backshall (a credit derivatives strategist), and Colin Lokey. Lokey, the newest member revealed himself and the other two when he left the site.[1] Ivandjiiski confirmed that the three men “had been the only Tyler Durdens on the payroll” since Lokey joined the site in 2015.[1] Former Zero Hedge writer Colin Lokey said that he was pressured to frame issues in a way he felt was “disingenuous,” summarizing its political stances as “Russia=good. Obama=idiot. Bashar al-Assad=benevolent leader. John Kerry=dunce. Vladimir Putin=greatest leader in the history of statecraft.”[1] Zero Hedge founder Daniel Ivandjiiski, in response, said that Lokey could write “anything and everything he wanted directly without anyone writing over it.”[1] On leaving, Lokey said: “I can’t be a 24-hour cheerleader for Hezbollah, Moscow, Tehran, Beijing, and Trump anymore. It’s wrong. Period. I know it gets you views now, but it will kill your brand over the long run. This isn’t a revolution. It’s a joke.”[1]

[Author]

Posts