Blame the Media

Glenn has this post from a Thomas Bray piece debunking all the stupid complaints about oil profiteering. All worth a read, but this part is what I want to emphasize:

most folks have a vastly inflated view of corporate profits. One regular survey of Americans found that the majority believes the average corporate profit is between 30 percent and 40 percent of sales, while the real figure is closer to 4 percent.

Why do most Americans have ideas which diverge so drastically from reality?

If you were an honest journalist or editor, you would be really interested in publishing information that is "news". Remember the big splash that feminists created with their bogus story on Super Bowl violence? It was considered "news" because the story was telling us a "fact" which was different than we thought. What we understood was wrong. Another great example was the poll this past fall that showed over 40% of the public thought we were in a rescession when the reality was that the economy is as strong as it has ever been in history. What a great opportunity for a story which would set the record straight!

There are hundreds of similar examples which come up all the time. From the number of homeless, to similar myths about hunger, the environment, racism and sexism (just to name a few of the worst topics of misinformation) and of course the war in Iraq today, the MSM consistently provides the American public with false information.

When the public's understanding diverges significantly from reality, blame the MSM. Even if they didn't publish the original misinformation, real journalists would jump at the chance to publish the "news" correcting the error. When errors persist for long periods of time, it is because the MSM is happy for people to continue to believe the lies.

Corruption at the highest levels?

Jack Cashill's column is a must-read. There is too much in there to summarize. Read it.

Back home

Was out of touch in Memphis this week.

Weather Channel Celebrates Deaths of Millions

I checked the Weather Channel this morning to see when the rain will finally let up. Today is Earth Day and they are celebrating environmental milestones. I saw two short spots, for example, celebrating the banning of DDT in 1972 and the banning of CFCs in 1978.

It has been well documented that the claims in Rachel Carson's book which led to the banning of DDT were false. The scientific evidence shows that DDT spraying does not harm the environment as claimed. DDT spraying, however, is the only effective way to control malaria in the third world. Since the DDT ban, millions and millions of impoverished people of color have died from malaria who would likely have lived without the ban. Malaria not only causes death for so many, but even those who survive are so severely weakened that they can do little productive work.

The mindless celebration of regulations which cause death, disease and impoverishment for millions of people is more than sad. It is sick.

Of course, you have to wonder about what's between the ears of folks who think it is a good idea to stand out in the middle of a hurricane dodging flying debris while telling us how really stupid it would be for anyone to go outside during the hurricane.

Stupid is smarter than brain-dead

Friedman is considered one of the better Times' columnists. Talk about damning with faint praise. Stupid (really, really stupid) is still smarter than brain-dead. A one-eyed man with severe glaucoma "sees" better than the blind. Of course, his vision is still badly distorted.

Generals shoot feet

I agree with Dr. Krauthammer.

In the end, I thnk they will have hurt themselves more than Rumsfeld. And done even more damage to the military.

Left-- "Stop using good sense!"

An article today in the dead tree WSJ outlines all the problems of France's left-wing newspaper. The most interesting part of the tale has to be the position taken in a petition by the lefty reporters who staff the paper. They claim that the problems are due to an editorial line "that flirts too often with 'good sense'." The article says that they urged more radicalism from the paper. That is, they wanted "causes, utopias, desires and provocations."

Of course, there are two possible explanations for this. One -- they oppose good sense out of business smarts. They know that their readership is a bunch of wackos who have no interest in rational judgment.

Or two -- they are just wackos without a clue.

Is it the readership or the reporters who are nuts? Or both?

The ultimate question

Richard Brookhiser asks the question which ought to inform every discussion of the war and our foreign policy: If you don't have a workable plan of your own, shut up!

Only he says it nicer and refers to facts and such.

Curiouser and curiouser some more

Clarice Feldman identifies all the really interesting questions in the persecution and prosecution of Scooter Libby which have been raised in discovery filings. I am looking forward to her posts over the next few days.

Who ya gonna believe?

On the issue of our troops' morale in Iraq, you can believe a Democratic congressman who says he wouldn't enlist today or a real Marine who served two tours in Iraq.

When corruption is a politician's civic duty

The Captain points out how the NY Times changes coverage depending on whether the politician is a Democrat or a Republican. When Hillary takes a payoff, it is simply doing her duty. If the GOP does it, it is scandal, scandal, scandal!

The selfishness of liberals

Arthur C. Brooks points out some interesting differences between young liberals and young conservatives.

The lying NY Times

Professor Cori Dauber points out "a damn lie" spread by the Times.

The absence of rational argument

Hugh Hewitt demolishes the arguments made by liberals against military action in Iran. What is most notable when you review the arguments is that they fail to address the question. That is, they lack any serious attempt to be rational.

What the Kool-Aid does to those who drink

Jay Rosen gives us a wonderful example of what happens to a liberal who inhales the wacko kool-aid by the gallon. If you want to know why so many of today's journalists are so bad (incompetent as well as corrupt), remember that Rosen teaches journalism at NYU.

Wash Post on propaganda

As Paul Mirengoff points out, the Wash Post is really upset that the US is telling the truth in a way that can help American soldiers because they perceive it as a "propaganda" campaign.

The Washington Post does think, however, that it is perfectly fine to engage in a partisan exercise of propaganda posing as journalism which relies on lies and slander to defeat politicians who are Republicans.

As the Post sees it, defeating Bush is such a noble cause that lies and slander are acceptable. Defeating terrorists, however, is not important enough to justify the military giving out truthful information.

Where's the gravitas?

CBS News has been losing viewers. They have been losing credibility even faster. Hiring Katie Couric must have been for the purpose of trying to entice viewers who have enjoyed her cuteness in the morning.

It couldn't possibly be for the purpose of bringing gravitas and credibility to the news broadcast.

Banking on Stupid

Just saw a clip of Obama attacking Bush for not doing more to free the country from dependence on foreign oil. Dems fight all oil exploration in the US, even in a frozen hellhole in Alaska, and Obama blames W.

This can only make sense to someone who is brain-dead stupid or suffering from BDS. (Is that redundant?)