The Lies Never End — Incompetent Journalism from Yasha Levine & Kate Zernike

I defy anyone to read Hayek’s The Constitution of Liberty on social security and get out of it the lies and misrepresentation spread yesterday by left wing journalists Yasha Levine of Nation and Kate Zernike of the hyper-partisan New York Times.  Zernike, of course, is a repeat offender, having spread howling nonsense about Hayek in the New York Times before.  Zernike’s professional beat is the world of free market, limited government and conservative political activists and ideas, and yet she’s a demonstrable ignoramus — and a highly bigoted one at that — when it comes to the biggest, most obvious giant elephants in the room encompassing her assigned responsibilities.  Zernike grabs a leg and mistakes it for a tree trunk, gets goosed by the trunk and thinks its a fire hose.  She’s incompetent, yet intentionally deceptive and dishonest to boot.  And she’s just one more reason no one should trust the content of the New York Times — as only a dwindling cohort of the clueless still do.

UPDATE: It turns out that Yasha Levine and Mark Ames — the authors of the error-ridden hit piece on Hayek — come straight out of the bowels of Russian yellow journalism and pornography, specializing in National Enquire type made up “news” laced with lots of blood and nudity.  See the Wikipedia entry on their publication history here.  It’s very reassuring to see fraudulent intellectual history moving directly from the Internet sewer publication of Levine and Ames into the pages of The Nation and then on to the New York Times with not a fact check or opened book bothered with in the process.

This entry was posted in Tweets. Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to The Lies Never End — Incompetent Journalism from Yasha Levine & Kate Zernike

  1. a reader says:

    for example?

  2. Greg Ransom says:

    I’m not going to repeat the misrepresentations of Levine and Zernike here nor link to them.

    Read Hayek’s The Road to Serfdom and The Constitution of Liberty if you’d like Hayek’s views — you won’t find them in Levine and Zernike. Levine & his co-author are trash writers for a hard left yellow journalism Internet rag with roots in most pathological anti-social elements in Russia. It is appalling that The Nation & the New York Times have chosen to sully themselves with the intellectually incompetent ravings of these reeking sewer rats from the bowels of Russia and the Internet.

    Look elsewhere if you’d like to find someone willing to spread these lies and misrepresentations.

  3. Ampontan says:

    Oh, I think he has good reasons to say what he says, he’s just so angry that he doesn’t want to publicize what they say.

    As a blogger, I understand that very well, and I refuse to link to certain sites myself for the same reason. (Once I saw a journalist — from The Guardian — taunt the operator of another site who had criticized the journalist by blowing off the criticism and signing off with, “Thanks for the link.” Hit counts lead to ad revenue.)

    Nevertheless, in these situations I will argue strongly against a position I disagree with, quoting specific passages, and give people just enough information that they can Google it for themselves if they like, with no link.

    I think that would be the best course for the author of this post.

  4. No need to link. Can you just explain what it is about the letter from Koch to Hayek that isa lie? The letter is posted (I wont link it though!), so I assume its a fake like obama’s birth certificate?

  5. Greg Ransom says:

    Andrew — no. I’m not going to repeat the falsehoods of Levine & Ames. Sorry. If you are interested in Hayek, please read some Hayek.

  6. I guess you could say I’m interested in Hayek. Anyway, I’m perfectly happy to accept their take on Hayek until someone gives me a compelling reason not it.

  7. Greg Ransom says:

    Andrew, you are a leftist grad student — I’m not surprised by your low intellectual standards, i.e. taking the word of yellow “journalists” / pornographers from Russia who brag on their web site about their well earned reputation for defamation and below National Enquirer journalist ethics, with zero experience in the history of ideas:

    “I’m perfectly happy to accept their take on Hayek until someone gives me a compelling reason not it.”

  8. ajit says:

    This is very funny. You can’t refute what Ames and Levine has dug up about Hayek’s cynicism and hypocrisy. So just indulge in some ad hominem attacks on them.

    When you can’t answer somebody’s arguments just shift the goal post.wonderful.

    Hayek lectured about evils of welfare state but took advantage of them in Austria and US. You don’t see any problem with it.

    Who the hell cares about Ames/Levine’s experience with history of ideas. The only thing matters on this issue is whether they are on target , whether they are quoting accurately about Hayek/ Koch correspondence. From this blog post, it appears they have hit the bull’s eye.

  9. Greg Ransom says:

    ajit, with all due respect … bullshit. Read Hayek. I am not going to spend any more time on the trolls, who have zero legitimacy & who clearly have distorted Hayek with a leftist agenda motivating their dishonesty. And note well. These guys brag on their web site about their well know and well earned reputation for defamation.

    You troll me again, ajit, and you are gone.

  10. This is some real highbrow discourse.

Comments are closed.