Category Archives: Media

Letter of the Week: In Defense of Coulter

Ann Coulter, Media, The Zeitgeist

James Huggins writes:

Ann Coulter usually calls a spade a spade. In this case she called it a bloody shovel. Sometimes she’s over the top but at least we know where she stands. At least, also, she doesn’t genuflect to the gay/lesbian idol like the rest of us are forced to do. These alleged conservatives who jump up on chairs and pull up their skirts like Gracie Allen seeing a mouse give me a pain. Maybe Coulter is over the top, but I’ll take her “hemline-short” arguments any day as opposed to the never ending gutless pandering to the left done by supposed conservative spokesmen. By the way, what’s wrong with being homophobic? As long as a homophobe isn’t shooting or rock throwing then said homophobe should be allowed his own opinion. It’s a free country. Isn’t it? Or anyway, it used to be.

 

Updated: The ‘Stock Scare’: Connecting the Dots

Economy, Free Markets, Government, Media

Jeffrey Tucker of the Mises Institute connects the dots:

“Ah, nothing focuses the mind that a good ol’ fashioned stock market sell-off. Nothing is more likely to cause people to decide that Bush is a really bad president, or inspire pessimism about the future. One might think that a war in Iraq and US equity valuations have politically nothing to do with each other, but when portfolios show declining cash value, blame flies in unexpected ways. Depending on how long this lasts, we might find that brutal criticism of all this president’s policies will become even more ubiquitous.
Meanwhile, looking through my email archive from yesterday, I see this alert from Frank Shostak: ‘The central bank of China’s tighter stance runs the risk of creating a financial accident, which could have serious effects on US real economic activity.’
So let us make another prediction: Republicans will blame China for its reckless monetary policy. And while the data seem to suggest that there is merit to the idea, Frank himself says that we must distinguish between the bullet (bubble in the US) and a trigger (China’s inflation).”
[End Quote]

I listened to Kudlow and Friends, but they seemed more interested in justifying their abiding political faith in Bush, deficit spending, and the miracle of tax cuts. Sure, on the face of it, returning stolen goods to their owners is a good thing for the robbed and the economy in general. The problem lies in what is unseen: the hidden theft/tax of inflation, which finances deficit spending. Congress, as you know, is spending so much more than the treasury collects in revenues. Could this malpractice possibly have (gasp) wider repercussions?!

Some “Texas Straight Talk” will help complete the picture.

Update: Wouldn’t you know it, “his Holiness Alan Greenspan, who can’t stand not being in the spotlight” (as a friend put it), shot his gob off about a recession on Sunday, and voila: the market reacted. Greenspan’s Delphic pronouncement contributed to a stock-market decline. The man should be muzzled!

Updated: The 'Stock Scare': Connecting the Dots

Free Markets, Government, Media

Jeffrey Tucker of the Mises Institute connects the dots:

“Ah, nothing focuses the mind that a good ol’ fashioned stock market sell-off. Nothing is more likely to cause people to decide that Bush is a really bad president, or inspire pessimism about the future. One might think that a war in Iraq and US equity valuations have politically nothing to do with each other, but when portfolios show declining cash value, blame flies in unexpected ways. Depending on how long this lasts, we might find that brutal criticism of all this president’s policies will become even more ubiquitous.
Meanwhile, looking through my email archive from yesterday, I see this alert from Frank Shostak: ‘The central bank of China’s tighter stance runs the risk of creating a financial accident, which could have serious effects on US real economic activity.’
So let us make another prediction: Republicans will blame China for its reckless monetary policy. And while the data seem to suggest that there is merit to the idea, Frank himself says that we must distinguish between the bullet (bubble in the US) and a trigger (China’s inflation).”
[End Quote]

I listened to Kudlow and Friends, but they seemed more interested in justifying their abiding political faith in Bush, deficit spending, and the miracle of tax cuts. Sure, on the face of it, returning stolen goods to their owners is a good thing for the robbed and the economy in general. The problem lies in what is unseen: the hidden theft/tax of inflation, which finances deficit spending. Congress, as you know, is spending so much more than the treasury collects in revenues. Could this malpractice possibly have (gasp) wider repercussions?!

Some “Texas Straight Talk” will help complete the picture.

Update: Wouldn’t you know it, “his Holiness Alan Greenspan, who can’t stand not being in the spotlight” (as a friend put it), shot his gob off about a recession on Sunday, and voila: the market reacted. Greenspan’s Delphic pronouncement contributed to a stock-market decline. The man should be muzzled!

How Dare You Disparage a TV Host, Ilana!

Intellectualism, Journalism, Media, The Zeitgeist

Now for something completely different. A blogger has claimed it was outrageous of me to belittle Glenn Beck’s brain power without the attendant detailed textual exegesis and footnotes—just about. I had mistakenly surmised that among those with a modicum of intelligence certain things are manifestly true. Alas, the culture has deteriorated to such an extent that no a priori agreement exists about intelligence and its manifestations.
Since Beck, mercifully, doesn’t write (he will, he will; the dreaded book will appear in the fullness of time), there are vaults of TV-time evidence to prove he is not too bright. For anyone who possesses a smidgen of intelligence, who lives in America, has watched a lot of TV, and listens to the radio; let us establish a couple of a priori truths:
Beck is a bit of a simpleton. Rush Limbaugh isn’t the brightest. Hannity is not too smart. Nor was poor Anna Nicole Smith, RIP. If civilization means anything, some things in this world must simply be accepted as axiomatic. But standards mean squat, I know, I know!
And while we’re at it, the economic laws of supply and demand do not need empirical proof for their validation; they are a priori true. Or, as Gene Callahan puts it in this excellent essay, “they are logically prior to any empirical study of economic phenomena.”