Weird times

I've got you under my skin. In accordance with the Conspiracy Theorist Full Employment Act, PayPal wants to replace passwords with "natural" identification devices implanted directly into your skin and brain.

Does the company really think that even the most silver-tongued spokesperson has the ability to persuade the citizenry to go along with this scheme? I can't believe that anyone reading about this technology will respond with enthusiastic approval. "Wow! This new system sounds GREAT! I can't wait to get my brain injection! Hurry up, PayPal! My frontal lobe longs to become 'as one' with your fine corporation!"

On such occasions, I'm glad that our nation brims with Jesusmaniacs who can't read about such a development without muttering dark warnings about 666 and the Mark of the Beast. Most of the time, I consider your average Christian fundamentalist to be dumber than a rock who flunked out of rock school. But fundies also have a strong tendency toward paranoia, and in this case, paranoia is good.

Gotta love the title. "Entire Western Media is a Troll Army." It's a story about the demonization of Russia, and the author is probably himself a troll for Vladimir. But a good argument is a good argument...

Russian media do not talk blindly about Russia's "annexation of Crimea". Russian media have refused to toe the Western media line that, against voluminous evidence, denies the Neo-Nazi character of the Western-backed Kiev regime. Therefore, the Western reasoning goes, the Russian media are a Kremlin propaganda tool and Moscow has despatched a "Troll Army" to disseminate disinformation. How richly ironic is that?

Typically, Western claims of "Kremlin propaganda" are just more assertion layered upon assertion, unsupported by any evidence. The "evidence" is simply that the Russian media do not peddle the mainstream Western viewpoint. So with totalitarian-like mentality, the Western conclusion is that Russian media "must be" propagandist.

When Putin briefly dropped out of sight last month, writers in the west went into Screwy Squirrel mode:

The madness has subsided, but only a few weeks ago, the Western news media were uniformly transfixed with feverish rumours and speculation on Putin's absence. Was it a "palace coup?" or "was he dead?" Was he receiving "plastic surgery?" or had his partner "given birth to a baby in Switzerland?"

This frantic spell of Western media behaviour, based on that incident alone, could be a case-study in how it is centrally manipulated with a political agenda and thought-control.

By the way, Obama declined Russia's offer to participate in VE Day celebrations in Moscow.

I liked the old Cold War better. It made sense. This new one is just silly.

Hillary is the new Putin. As peeved as I am at Hillary Clinton, I'm not going to blind myself to the manipulative mainstream media campaign against her. The New York Times (!!) and the Washington Post have entered into an unprecedented scheme to scoop up dirt provided by a scumbag propagandist who writes for fucking Breitbart.

"Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich" will debut on May 5. But the Times, the Post and Fox have already made arrangements with author Peter Schweizer to pursue some of the material included in his book, which seeks to draw connections between Clinton Foundation donations and speaking fees and Hillary Clinton's actions as secretary of state. Schweizer is the president of the Government Accountability Institute, a conservative research group, and previously served as an adviser to Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin.

Fox News' use of Schweizer's book has surprised no one. The bulk of the network's programming is conservative, and the book's publisher, HarperCollins, is owned by News Corporation. But the Times and Post's decision to partner with a partisan researcher has raised a few eyebrows. Some Times reporters view the agreement as unusual, sources there said.

If you trust the NYT's ability to "vet" information, remember: We're talking about the same news organization that let Judy Miller and her companions use our newspaper of record to drum up a fake case for war. That kind of "vetting" cost this country trillions.

Obviously, we shouldn't believe a guy like Peter Schweizer even if he says "Hi! My name is Peter Schweizer." What we have here is your basic all-stops-out propaganda Blitzkrieg. But why direct a propaganda campaign against Hillary (again)? During her tenure as SoS, didn't she sell out to the neocons enough?

At this point, I'm not sure how to respond. To be honest, I would rather see a maverick like Jim Webb get the nomination. On the other hand, when the NYT and the WP and Peter Schweizer say "Jump!," the soles of my shoes turn into glue. My natural instinct is not to give those fuckers any satisfaction.

A housekeeping note: I've turned off the comment verification again. Yes, the verification process is incredibly annoying. Please understand, though, that when verification is turned off, this humble blog gets hit by a Niagara of spam comments. When I delete the spam too rapidly, real messages sometimes get lost.