Psychopolitik 2.0

Not in a particularly serious mood today. Here’s a screen cap of somethin’ that made me chuckle (click on the thumbnail):

In a section of an MSNBC article about Massachusetts’ mandatory health insurance system, found the following from an owner of a seafood restaurant, who had already been offering insurance before the new rules:

“I think that’s basically how liberal government works — liberals in the government work,” [Nathan Nickerson, owner of Arnold’s] said. “They force-feed you things that they feel are good for you, like it or not. And that’s the way it is. … There’s so many regulations on every level now, to try to run a business, it’s very, very difficult. Having said that, I’d like to see everyone with health insurance.”

Who was governor of Massachusetts at the time again?  Oh yeah, a republican.

Insinuation of cause & effect that says more than the author realizes in 3…2…1…:

Global stocks staged a strong rally on Monday after central banks pumped emergency funds into the markets for a third consecutive trading day. […]

The liquidity injections by central banks helped to ease the worst of investor fears over the short-term fallout from a liquidity crunch in credit markets following problems in securities backed by US subprime mortgages – home loans for people with poor credit histories.

Sentiment had been hit last week by worries that some financial institutions had become reluctant to lend to each other because of fears that European investment vehicles were nursing big losses on subprime-related securities.

This prompted central banks in Europe, the US and Asia to offer emergency injections of liquidity on Thursday and Friday, a move that continued on a smaller scale on Monday.

You call it “liquidity”, I call it “funny money”.  To-may-to, to-mah-to…

I’m no professional on this, but the attitude offered here strikes me as nonsense.  It seems like any semblance of skepticism about investments is read as unambiguously “bad”, as if markets are supposed to be all about an exaggerated sense of calm.  If casinos were treated this way, methinks Nevada would go bankrupt overnight.

As anyone who thinks about these kinds of things knows, there’s a rather striking difference between the media in the U.S. & how news is done abroad.  For example, take the following: Manuel Noriega (remember him?  Thought not…) is up for release from prison soon, and there’s dispute over where he goes from there.

Here’s the Associated Press’ take:

Former Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega wants U.S. officials to send him back to his home country when he finishes his drug trafficking and racketeering sentence next month, but American prosecutors are pushing for him to be extradited to France to face another trial.

Noriega, 72, appeared in federal court Monday as attorneys debated the ongoing question of where he will be sent when he finishes his sentence in a Miami prison on Sept. 9.

During the hearing, Noriega wore a military uniform and his dark hair slicked back, pausing at points to put on glasses and read documents, and conferring with an attorney. He used a headset to follow a Spanish translation.

His lawyers say because he is a prisoner of war, he should be sent to Panama, where he wants to fight a conviction in the slayings of two political opponents. U.S. prosecutors, meanwhile, are pushing for him to be extradited to France, where he was convicted in absentia in 1999 on money-laundering charges.

Sounds pretty bog-standard really.  Note that they found what he was wearing to be relevant to the story.  Onward, as the AP throws in a short history lesson…

U.S. forces captured Noriega after a 1989 military invasion ordered by then-President George H.W. Bush in part because of the Panamanian’s links to drug traffickers. It later emerged that Noriega had been on the CIA payroll for years, assisting U.S. interests throughout Latin America, including acting as liaison to Cuban President Fidel Castro.

“Assisting U.S. interests”?  Rather ambiguous term there, wonder what he was doing?

Britain’s Daily Telegraph at least fills in the blank somewhat:

The US invaded Panama in 1989 after sanctions and local opposition forces failed to oust Gen Noriega. From the late 1950s to 1986 he had been a key US ally in the region and had worked for the CIA while also dealing in drugs and mixing with Colombian cartel bosses.

As his military regime tightened its grip and Gen Noriega became increasingly critical of Washington, the US took action to remove him.  Panama’s government is under pressure to secure his return to face allegations that he ordered several murders, including that of the opposition leader Hugo Spadafora, who was tortured and decapitated in 1985. (emphasis mine)

Oh, that’s what he did.  Torture & murder people, and sell drugs off our tax dollars for decades before the charade of arresting him — which itself made no sense even if he wasn’t on the payroll, since he was, um, not in the fucking US at the time — even came about.  Need I mention where he learned such techniques in the first place?

It’s obvious what’s going on here.  If he stands trial in Panama, the reasons for his crimes are going to be discussed, and since there’s no Operation Panamanian Freedom going on at the moment, there’s no microphone to shut off when he goes into detail. From the perspective of our current rulers, the LAST thing the world needs is yet another airing of our dirty laundry, another reminder of how long we’ve been utter hypocrites.  With a track record like ours, where we’re going to be trying frantically to sweep it back under the rug for years to come, can you really blame the rest of the world for rolling their eyes when we claim to want to help them somehow?

Found this amusing: apparently because of recent crackdowns on illegal immigration, competition between “coyotes” is so fierce they’ve taken to treating women like actual human beings.

Props.

Sure, it’s baseball, and I’m in no way a fan (IMO, playing the video game is more fun than the actual sport), but a disagreement is a disagreement. Personally, I think the whole steroids thing in baseball is overblown, for the following reason:

No matter how strong you are, you still have to actually hit the ball.

When you think about it, baseball is a peculiar sport. It’s the only one I know of where the team with the ball/puck/rubber chicken/whatever is actually on DEFENSE, the best thing you can do is have the ball go so far that another one has to be brought out to replace it, and 30% is considered great (that’s why averages are written out like bullet calibers — “.301″ sounds more impressive than “30 percent”).

To be honest with you, my personal impression of Bonds is that he’s an asshole. Funny thing about that is, the way the media has been treating all this kinda makes me sympathize with him. All that’s going on in the world, and they still find time to gripe about him*? Barry Bonds doing roids doesn’t result in people being killed overseas, y’know…

(* - needless to say, I’m not talking about the specifically sports media.)

I’m offline for a few days, and warrantless surveillance gets LEGALIZED??  Gawd forbid I break my wrist, water-boarding’d become the punishment for marijuana possession, yeesh…

Spines.  You have them.  Acknowledge that.

Apparently what caused all the problems was a domino effect of sorts from yet another defective part, this time the heat sink for the processor. It wouldn’t fit properly, so the slightest shift (I have a super old desk) moved it enough for the CPU to overheat & the motherboard to fry. The last thing to replace is the CPU, and I am 99.999% POSITIVE that the mothership will be back on track. Once that thing works I’m not opening it again.

That out of the way, here’s something that might or might not become a regular feature: in-progress book reviews. Right now I’m reading “Radicals for Capitalism” (their term, not mine), Brian Doherty’s history of the libertarian movement. So far, I do find it interesting for all the people that I still hadn’t heard about, like the founder of the Foundation for Economic Education. One story in there that’s particularly amusing is Lysander Spooner apparently having had a rival letter carrier service back before it was illegal to do so on a level playing field, only to be ran out of business by the State. Sometimes it really is that simple.

Doherty does slip up in one respect: of the anarcho-Left roots of libertarianism are kinda glossed over, with only a passing mention of Benjamin Tucker, meanwhile Rand gets a shout in two three different sections. This doesn’t ruin it, but it does sorta tip off his particular bent, though in the immediate term I don’t nitpick. It’s worth finishing, so I will.

If you don’t hear anything in the next few days, it’s because my home computer is severely dysfunctional at the moment, bear with me.  I should be back up to normal in a few days.