Sep
19

Two-Minute McArdle




Posted at 21:56 by Gavin M.

Which Half?
If, as this Cato scholar claims, half the money that the US spends on health care is wasted, then perhaps it’s because we’re supporting the rest of the world in terms of health care research, or maybe something like that.

PKBlog!

I see Paul Krugman has a blog, although I must say it isn’t a very good one.

What You See Is Not What You Get
While I didn’t even obtain a copy of Jon Chait’s book before reviewing it unfavorably in the TPMCafe Book Club discussion, I shall now hide behind Will Wilkinson in expressing that, like Will, I wish I could have spent more time on the book discussion. Alas, so busy lately with things, Will and me. That said, Will has posted another few sentences from his copy of Chait’s book, and I have an opinion on those too.

Feel That Earning Power
I’m a fan of the Earned Income Tax Credit, which is supposed to encourage work. Then again, the 28-year-old maverick economist Raj Chetty says it’s flawed because poor people don’t even know how much they’d be making without taxes, in a paper for which he received a $60,000 fellowship from the right-wing Hoover Institution.* I mean, not that I knew that. I mean, not that I read Chetty’s paper either. Anyway, food for thought.

Driven Consumers
Regarding this thing that Ezra said, the actuality is that, okay, it isn’t that uninsured people decide to go without medical care; it’s that insured people have all sorts of unnecessary procedures foisted on them. Take me for instance: Now that I’m insured and not paying for medical care out of pocket, doctors make me undergo tests for diseases I don’t even end up having. Does that make anyone healthier? I think just the opposite.


* Home of such luminaries as Thomas Sowell, Newt Gingrich, Victor Davis Hanson, and Edwin Meese III

100 Comments »

  1. Gus said,

    September 19, 2007 at 22:07

    I think she should just write up her crap and send it to you for condensing. It’s a real snappy read that way, kind of like a Jackie Harvey column.

  2. billy pilgrim said,

    September 19, 2007 at 22:08

    Good Chthulhu, It’s Jane Handy.

  3. Dhalgren said,

    September 19, 2007 at 22:13

    I didn’t know she was a fan of Reynolds. No wonder we want her out of a job.

    http://www.affdoublethink.com/archives/2007/04/15/whats_your_stor_6.php#postcomment

  4. Andrew said,

    September 19, 2007 at 22:15

    ATTENTION SADLYNOVIANS!

    YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO DIVE HEAD FIRST INTO THE BIG BUCKS HAS ARRIVED!

    AFF $10,000 College Blogger Contest
    by Jerry Brito | Sep 17, 2007

    America’s Future Foundation today announced a contest for college bloggers with a grand prize of $10,000.

    The purpose of the contest is to shovel out wingnut welfare like there’s no tomorrow encourage original liberty-minded blogger journalism on college campuses and to identify young conservative and libertarian talent who wish to pursue careers as journalists and writers. The contest is open to all graduate and undergraduate bloggers age 25 and younger.

    The winning blog will be awarded a cash prize of $10,000, and be invited to be a panelist at an AFF Roundtable on higher education in Washington, D.C. The award will be announced on April 7, 2008.

    A panel of renowned bloggers will judge the contest. Judges include:

    Jonathan Adler of The Volokh Consipracy
    Radley Balko of The Agitator
    Robert Bluey of The Heritage Foundation and RobertBluey.com
    Jonah Goldberg of National Review Online
    Mary Katharine Ham of TownHall.com
    Megan McArdle of JaneGalt.net

    All I can say is… wow.

  5. a different brad said,

    September 19, 2007 at 22:18

    See?
    Condensing is the way to go.
    Copycat.
    *still completely not jealous*

  6. humbert dinglepencker said,

    September 19, 2007 at 22:19

    Sweet jumped up jeebus on a cracker. Teh stoopid is like molecular acid my brain is meltpghoibkl gleepborghaob uplgggg hmpaphhdnph bluup bluuuphh

  7. Legalize said,

    September 19, 2007 at 22:23

    Srsly, I went to the dentist the other day, and I didn’t even have a cavity! WTF?! Moreover, when I got my eyes checked the doctor determined only a SLIGHT change in my prescription. I wasn’t even bling or anything!

  8. Notorious P.A.T. said,

    September 19, 2007 at 22:25

    I think I’ll click on to one of those columns to see if it’s really that bad.

    [a minute later]

    [head shaven, room darkened, ladling river water onto self in front of a bonfire and an ox being slaughtered]

    the horror!!! the horror!!!

  9. Some Guy said,

    September 19, 2007 at 22:26

    what, exactly, does it mean to be “liberty-minded”? Is that anything like being “brownie minded”? Or “Dublin Mudslide minded”? Is there a quantitative measurement to HOW liberty one is minded?

  10. Kathleen said,

    September 19, 2007 at 22:27

    additional 5-second MM: I am so smart! S-M-R-T!

  11. comsympinko said,

    September 19, 2007 at 22:35

    SHE’S…SO…FUCKING…STUPID.

  12. a different brad said,

    September 19, 2007 at 22:39

    Geezuz. She didn’t get 100% on that test. Some of the questions are horribly phrased, and some are damn near nonsensical. To me, it speaks mostly of poor comprehension of Plato.

  13. anon said,

    September 19, 2007 at 22:47

    …fan of Reynolds…

    Fan? Didn’t she guest host the ole professor’s blog?

  14. legion said,

    September 19, 2007 at 22:49

    So, is every day at the Atlantic a drunkblogging day, or does she write like that sober?

  15. Some Guy said,

    September 19, 2007 at 22:53

    I’m taking teh MM quiz, and it’s either very cleaver and smart, or extremely mis-leading and partisan. I can’t put my finger on it. Some of the questions are of questionable significance to American history.

    And I would flat-out say that question 60 is wrong. If they changed “Social-Security” to “social programs” then maybe yes.

    Irregardless, 80% isn’t bad. I suspect MM is lying about her 100%, but whatever.

  16. Clem said,

    September 19, 2007 at 22:54

    Be warned, McArdle now seems to be screening comments. The habit that, uh, some of us have of taking screen grabs for review may have presented a problem. No comments, no evidence, no problem. (My comment on the Wilkinson post just barely beat the buzzer.)

  17. marc page said,

    September 19, 2007 at 22:58

    Two-Minute McArdle …

    Is that what the boys called her back in high school ?

  18. Clem said,

    September 19, 2007 at 23:06

    Legion, it’s the Nyquil. No, really.

  19. El Cid said,

    September 19, 2007 at 23:16

    You know, it occurs to me that although I haven’t read up on physics and stuff, if you’d do some sort of really strong magnetic fields from some sort of small machine you might have, like, sort of anti-gravity, a little bit, and then the liberals would all be wrong because we’d still have cool cars and stuff but not have to buy Toyota Priuses because private enterprise would let us levitate.

  20. legion said,

    September 19, 2007 at 23:34

    Clem,
    Well, you know what they say – if she’ll swallow Nyquil for recreational purposes, she’ll swallow anything.

    Or something like that.

  21. Dorothy said,

    September 19, 2007 at 23:36

    and it’s either very cleaver and smart, or extremely mis-leading and partisan. I can’t put my finger on it.

    I’d go for “misleading and partisan” or “rather poorly done”. Certainly not “clever and smart”.

    There are a few “do you know the test-taking tricks” questions that can be answered without actually knowing anything about the subject. That’s not good.

    There are several “opinion” questions posing as “fact” (like throwing the word “prudent” into the “George Washington’s role in the founding can be best described as…” “Prudent” is a judgement issue, not a factual issue, and therefore open for debate as to whether that’s the “best” description.)

    There are very many “good lord, I can’t believe they actually put that on a test!” issues and several “What exactly was this question supposed to be teaching me” issues. Lots of trivia, very little trivium.

    Some of the questions are of questionable significance to American history.

    Yeah, about half, maybe.

    See, I remember “politics” or “government” classes and “economics” classes being two completely different things–heck, they were taught by two different departments. It’s the heavy inclusion of economic theory that makes me lean towards “partisan”: “capitalism” is not synonymous with “American government”, despite what the wingnuts believe.

    And for “civics” tests or a “civic literacy” test, I’d expect more questions about the relationship between the Federal, State, and Local Governments, the different spheres of the Federal government, the duties and rights of citizens, the difference between citizens, resident aliens, and non-citizens, how laws are enacted, how laws are struck down, how amendments to the Constitution are enacted, etc.

    I can’t believe a “civic literacy” test had questions about the influence of the Federal Reserve on money markets and reason two businesses in different countries would sign a deal–and yet the terms “civil disobedience” and “civil rights” were completely absent.

    I completely believe that Meghan got 100–heck, I’d be willing to believe that Meghan or someone from her crowd wrote the test.

  22. Righteous Bubba said,

    September 19, 2007 at 23:44

    I have recently noticed that a solar system looks like an atom. The sun would be a nucleus and the planets electrons. If our solar system is an atom of some larger being’s universe the implications are profound. What say you, Professor Reynolds?

  23. Sadly, Cambridgeport said,

    September 19, 2007 at 23:48

    I took that silly little quiz and got a 95% (swear to God!) but I had to think like a wingnut to do it. Some of those questions are atrocious.

    ISI is a fairly creepy cult phenomenon. A professor invited me to one of their events once, and I went, not knowing who or what they were. They had tables of books full of conservative propoganda on every liberal arts subject. It seems that the only true meaning of Greek art is that war is good, and Plato would have totally hated welfare.

    I was mixing over the free food (which was just tasty enough to make the day worthwhile) when one of their pencil necked goons in a name tag and Young Republican tie came around to process me into the ranks. He asked what I was interested in as a career, and I said that I was thinking of going to law school. He shook his head and, I shit you not, said, “No, we have a lot of lawyers right now, we really want more people to go into education”. My jaw dropped and I left without thinking of a good retort. I was that stunned

    I know that sounds like the liberal equivalent of the “I was the only conservative at a Washington cocktail party and…” but they are really that deranged.

    Also, Megs didn’t even interpret ISI’s findings accurately. Harvard did the best out of any school, but showed comparatively low improvement between freshmen and seniors. Maybe because – you know, they were already the best and the test is geared toward freakin high school kids. Harvard isn’t in the business of turning out patriotic cogs for the machine, nationalist brainwashing is sort of a K-12, molding a good loyal American thingy.

    How did a woman who can’t comprehend basic statistics become an econ writer?

  24. mikey said,

    September 19, 2007 at 23:57

    But Bubba, if that was the case, every time a comet entered the inner solar system/atom, wouldn’t saturn have to jump down to venus’ orbit and emit a moon?

    mikey

  25. Quicksand said,

    September 19, 2007 at 23:58

    I thought we were going to take a break from McArdle — or is there no turning back from the seductive power of teh Stupid Side?

  26. Righteous Bubba said,

    September 20, 2007 at 0:03

    But Bubba, if that was the case, every time a comet entered the inner solar system/atom, wouldn’t saturn have to jump down to venus’ orbit and emit a moon?

    Just as we may not split the atom with every particulate intrusion, not all extra-solar body passing through has to cause a reaction. Hayek did not write on the matter, so I must consult my bong.

  27. Vivek S. said,

    September 20, 2007 at 0:06

    I need to sucker Hoover into giving me some of that fat wingnut stash.

    Any ideas?

  28. fardels bear said,

    September 20, 2007 at 0:15

    In that article about here that Dhalgren links to in the third comment, it notes that McAddled had “a stint as gossip columnist for her business school’s newspaper.” Just think about that for a minute. I can’t imagine what that is. Did she report on which venture capitalists were in Armani when they took over and sold off the local machine-tool factory?

  29. R. Porrofatto said,

    September 20, 2007 at 0:44

    Behold:
    Today, on the other hand, our top rate kicks in at about $300,000 of household income–the salary of two law firm associates. I’m not asking you to feel sorry for them, as I certainly don’t; but the vast majority of law-firm associates I know are actively looking for jobs that will require less work. Raising the tax on their extra income by ten percentage points might well make that decision much easier. (Which is not to say that we shouldn’t do it; only that comparing this situation to 1951 is a little loonie.)

    So slippery it gleams. She’s like the burning bush of empty rhetoric.

  30. mikey said,

    September 20, 2007 at 0:51

    I need to sucker Hoover into giving me some of that fat wingnut stash.

    I’m thinking the same thing. Here’s my wingnut tryout paper:

    Paddies, Deserts, Hedgerows and Verdant Fields

    The US could not succeed in Vietnam. The American military won every major engagement but, ultimately, was forced from the field. Similarly, the US military is having difficulty making significant progress in Iraq, in spite of overwhelming military superiority. In WW I and WW II, the Americans not only won the battles, they won the wars.

    So we must ask ourselves: What exactly is the difference? Was the NVA or the Iraqi insurgency fielding a better fighting man than the Wehrmacht or the Imperial Japanese Navy? Unlikely. Was the typical American soldier or Marine that much better than his counterpart today? While it could be argued that the Marines who fought in Belleau Wood were tougher than anyone today can imagine, and a lot of the grunts in the mud of Vietnam were less than ideal soldiers, it’s reasonable to assume at least a parity between today’s and yesterday’s fighting men.

    I submit, at the end of the day, it comes down to terrain. Deserts and rice paddies simply are not conducive to the ways of the American warrior. The forests and fields of central Europe, the small volcanic islands of the pacific, these are the kinds of battlefields that spell success for the American Military.

    So how does this knowledge inform our decisions about the way forward in Iraq? Simple. If we want to win, first we must alter the terrain. If we can terraform Mars, certainly we can make Iraq into France, whereupon our glorious Armies will march with their supporting armor directly to victory!!

    Thanks.

    Please contact me for writing gigs…

    mikey

  31. Righteous Bubba said,

    September 20, 2007 at 0:53

    a little loonie

    A Canadian coin.

    Looney and loony are both acceptable versions of crazy.

  32. acrannymint said,

    September 20, 2007 at 1:11

    I am only got 75%. I need to read more philosophy. Economics also screwed me up

  33. Kathy said,

    September 20, 2007 at 1:12

    Mikey: “And we will be prepared for war on Mars, too!” Or something.

  34. J— said,

    September 20, 2007 at 1:18

    Here’s one: A law professor asks we consider the historical shift in the Supreme Court’s political and ideological center from Reagan’s election to the present and their ramifications for cases considered and decisions made during this period? I see no utility in such an exercise nor sense in the proposed temporal frame of analysis, hence they are stupid and the law professor, self-absorbed.

  35. SamFromUtah said,

    September 20, 2007 at 1:19

    Dorothy said, “capitalism” is not synonymous with “American government”, despite what the wingnuts believe.

    Thanks for that. This is one of those beliefs that drive me nuts. In extreme cases, zealots munge democracy, capitalism, conservatism, and Christianity together into some mushy concept of “the American Way”. They’ll use the terms interchangeably without being able to define any of them coherently, and often as a justification for ideas that violate one or more of them.

    I sure hope this sort of “thinking” goes out of style, but I’m not holding my breath.

  36. J— said,

    September 20, 2007 at 1:20

    their ramifications its ramifications

    The beauty of writing this summary is that I get to call my error a joke!

  37. ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said,

    September 20, 2007 at 1:22

    Brilliant mikey. Iraq needs less camel spiders.

    I mean Solpugids.

  38. Pere Ubu said,

    September 20, 2007 at 1:26

    I shall now hide behind Will Wilkinson in expressing that, like Will, I wish I could have spent more time on the book discussion.

    It’s just so difficult to tear yourself away from Teh CW, after all.

    Mikey: “And we will be prepared for war on Mars, too!” Or something.

    We’d better be – we’ve had our interplanetary Pearl Harbor already!

  39. Smiling Mortician said,

    September 20, 2007 at 1:32

    “No, we have a lot of lawyers right now, we really want more people to go into education”.

    Y’know, I read that line, and I can’t imagine what made me think of this.

    Yeah, yeah. So I Godwinned. It happens.

  40. g said,

    September 20, 2007 at 1:34

    I submit, at the end of the day, it comes down to terrain. Deserts and rice paddies simply are not conducive to the ways of the American warrior. The forests and fields of central Europe, the small volcanic islands of the pacific, these are the kinds of battlefields that spell success for the American Military.

    Yes, the conventional war-monger view. Only those nations located on Pacific Islands and in temperate latitudes will be attacked by the US. If its dry or swampy, let it alone.

    If we want to win, first we must alter the terrain.

    You are a true visionary!!!!! A neo-enviro-conservative!

    Vietnam? It was only lost because someone failed to clear space south of Hue for a nice perennial border and rose garden, some country lanes for the tanks to trundle along. Cambodia? A lovely stand of spruce, rhododendron and heather should have been established near Angkor Wat, before the bombing commenced! Such lost opportunities!

    Let’s initiate the planting surge for victory in Iraq? Turn Iraq into Normandy! Plant some apple trees, some cow pastures, and build some haystacks along the Tigris River, and you’re good to go. Edelweiss, beech forests, and alpine rock gardens in Baghdad! Instant victory! Don’t forget the Black Forests and stunning waterfalls of Basra, where the storks nest about the castle towers! Guaranteed success for the troops, and Mission Accomplished!

  41. objectivelypro said,

    September 20, 2007 at 1:56

    certainly we can make Iraq into France

    And in 2020 I’ll be in Baghdad sitting at a little sidewalk bistro on the left bank of the tigris; sipping burgundy while sunni and shiite alike toss their berets in the air and sing le basra-aise

  42. Djur said,

    September 20, 2007 at 2:11

    … Volokh Conspiracy … The Agitator … Heritage Foundation … Jonah Goldberg … Mary Katharine Ham … Megan McArdle

    What’s funny is that I can’t decide which of these are dirtying the others by association. More funny is that I’m pretty sure most of these would disclaim any association with the others if it came down to it.

    Seriously, someone should ask McArdle and those dicks at Volokh whether they really consider the Heritage Foundation and Townhall to be ideological allies.

  43. Pere Ubu said,

    September 20, 2007 at 2:32

    … Volokh Conspiracy … The Agitator … Heritage Foundation … Jonah Goldberg … Mary Katharine Ham … Megan McArdle

    It’s like a wingnut singularity – thought can’t travel fast enough to escape its devouring maw.

  44. RubDMC said,

    September 20, 2007 at 3:17

    Two minute McAddled is just two minutes too much.

    Who’s up for some 10-second McAddled?

  45. Kevin said,

    September 20, 2007 at 3:23

    Gavin, I see you are honest enough to admit that Krugman’s blog is weak. If you can admit his editorials are boring as well, forget half of the bad things I’ve said about you. I take them back!

  46. objectivelypro said,

    September 20, 2007 at 4:01

    It’s his first day, ya…

    …What?

    Pie?

    I’ll be right there.

  47. abanterer said,

    September 20, 2007 at 4:11

    Why O Why does McArdle get a paycheck from the Atlantic? Has she even written a column that wasn’t either pointless opinions touted as “fact”, or pointless opinions in general? She’s in way over her depth, and it shows. Painfully.

  48. Robert Green said,

    September 20, 2007 at 4:14

    i was wandering across the internetz just now when i noticed an entire nation choke out in vain, before being silenced.

    it was red sox nation.

  49. bklyn said,

    September 20, 2007 at 4:15

    teH
    yAnQiz
    r
    guna
    Git

    Ur
    d00Dz

  50. a different brad said,

    September 20, 2007 at 4:19

    Yankees.

  51. a different brad said,

    September 20, 2007 at 4:22

    Yanks- 4 v toronto, 3 at tampa bay, 3 at baltimore
    Boston- 3 at tampa, 2 v oakland, 4 v minnesota

    Keep in mind, Boston has to finish a game ahead. Yanks won the season series.
    *uncontrollable cackling*

  52. Pere Ubu said,

    September 20, 2007 at 4:31

    Now that I’m insured and not paying for medical care out of pocket, doctors make me undergo tests for diseases I don’t even end up having. Does that make anyone healthier? I think just the opposite.

    I’d make a snarky comment about not having firefighters ’cause houses aren’t burning down constantly and firing all police and re-hiring them back when there’s a crime to save on wages and benefits (Just-in-Time Law Enforcement!) but I have the sad feeling she’d think those were good ideas.

  53. Lame Man said,

    September 20, 2007 at 5:05

    Oddly enough, terraforming Iraq and then conquering it would probably take about as much time for Victory! as the current occupation will take.

  54. Lame Man said,

    September 20, 2007 at 5:06

    And I’ve requested a large shipment of fresh Jockeys be sent up to the Boston area, pronto.

  55. AkaDad said,

    September 20, 2007 at 5:08

    Liberal + Red Sox fan = Suicide Prevention Hotline

  56. Shorter (and Fake) Kevin said,

    September 20, 2007 at 5:57

    I think facts are boring, and I mistake S,N! parody for reality!

  57. InsaneInTheCheneyBrain said,

    September 20, 2007 at 6:15

    >Is that what the boys called her back in high school ?

    Game, set, and fucking match.

  58. Kevin said,

    September 20, 2007 at 6:54

    “Shorter (and Fake) Kevin said,
    I think facts are boring, and I mistake S,N! parody for reality!”

    Heh. Is there any specific fact you have in mind? As I’ve said at least a dozen times, I love those things, and even base my life on them (engineers have no choice if they want their processes to work).

    And I do get that SN is just a humor site, but I also have a problem with it always making the good guys sound evil and the surrendery guys sound somehow good… Is THAT what you’re misreading?

    Regardless, it’s not a big problem, and I’m pleased as punch that Gavin has realized that one of the liberal icons is quite the idiot!

  59. cokane said,

    September 20, 2007 at 6:59

    it’s not that she’s dumb so much, as that she seems to have no idea how anything in reality actually functions

  60. cokane said,

    September 20, 2007 at 7:01

    really though all this rubbish from wingnut bloggers is outrageous. why do these people adopt followings? it’s like reading some op-ed columnist who’s been allowed to write column after column where not a single fact is checked.

  61. bryanD said,

    September 20, 2007 at 7:33

    Is this the same Megan McArdle who has a reviewer profile on Amazon.com (complete with headshot and “avid cook, avid reader” self-descriptor) who can’t be troubled to review more than 2 objects in 4 years?

    http://www.amazon.com/gp/pdp/profile/AUHYYWVWAWX8W

  62. kuvasz said,

    September 20, 2007 at 7:50

    Reading the works of this woman, this carbuncle of humanity is akin to having the sound of a wet fart echo in your ear.

    If I wanted the experience of reading such ignorant crap I”d read the slam books of my junior high school nieces.

    Please don’t promote this person on your site. I know is easy picken’s but you are shining light upon a person where no light has a right to shine.

    If you want laughter fodder, try train wrecks and air plane crashes and Confederate Yankee’s Self castration manual., but certainly not this moral maggot Mcardle.

  63. bryanD said,

    September 20, 2007 at 8:05

    (con’t) she’s a big faker, too. Her amazon.com Wish List: “Moby Dick”= 5 stars? She’s never read it. Twain holds up. Melville is a chore. And rating Pink Floyd’s “Wish You Were Here” above “Dark Side Of the Moon”? “WYWH” has it’s moment(s) (the title cut), but the overall LP is deeply flawed. A two track (tops) disc. Happily “Animals” was a nice rebound.
    What were we talking about again? ”
    Oh yeah, no pantie shots to report!

  64. noen said,

    September 20, 2007 at 9:19

    Pere Ubu said,
    I’d make a snarky comment about not having firefighters ’cause houses aren’t burning down constantly and firing all police and re-hiring them back when there’s a crime to save on wages and benefits (Just-in-Time Law Enforcement!) but I have the sad feeling she’d think those were good ideas.

    They are good ideas, in a way. That’s how they do it in rural towns. You have “just-in-time” firefighters and shared police. Of course you aren’t really firing and re-hiring them. You just train some local folk as volunteer firemen and draw on their skills when you need them. Like throwing a kegger. If you’ve ever been in a small town you know they have the best keggers.

  65. Hoosier X said,

    September 20, 2007 at 9:28

    You know, one of these days, one of the conservatives is going to present a factual argument without a hint of sophistry or deception or any logical fallacies. It might even be something relevant. And we won’t know what to do. Because we’ve never had to deal with something like that.

  66. Jrod said,

    September 20, 2007 at 9:33

    And rating Pink Floyd’s “Wish You Were Here” above “Dark Side Of the Moon”? “WYWH” has it’s moment(s) (the title cut), but the overall LP is deeply flawed.

    Blasphemy. WYWH is Floyd’s best album. DSotM and Animals are both great albums, but both feature a few excruciating minutes of atonal looping noise that they cooked up after spending too long hotboxing the studio and suffering from oxygen deprivation. At least that’s how I always imagined it.

    I’d give Animals the nod for their best album if it didn’t have five minutes of “Stoooone, stoooone, stoooone, stoooone, stoooone, stoooone, stoooone, stoooone, stoooone, stoooone, stoooone, etc.” on Dogs, but sadly it does.

    WHWH has none of that crap, so it wins. I guess McAddle can’t always be wrong.

  67. Ruthie said,

    September 20, 2007 at 11:21

    Take me for instance: Now that I’m insured and not paying for medical care out of pocket, doctors make me undergo tests for diseases I don’t even end up having. Does that make anyone healthier? I think just the opposite.

    Megs, the price of newsprint has increased, and the literacy rate of Americans is on the wane. Does it make sense to fill a periodical with your astute observations and wit? We think it’s a waste of ad space. And we know you had visions of that parking one of those designer Aprica strollers next to your desk at work, but FMLA and working mothers are such a financial drag on employers….

  68. Jillian said,

    September 20, 2007 at 11:29

    Teehee…….the latest McAddled is pretty good, too – referring to an unsourced statistic quoted secondhand in the Atlantic from the very right wing “Le Figaro”, the original of which cites no studies to back up its claim and is written in a language other than McAddled’s milk tongue (I don’t want to claim that she doesn’t actually even speak French, because I don’t know that to be the case, but it’s even funnier if she doesn’t).

    And the statistic in dispute right now? “Over half of French children under five have never brushed their teeth”.

    Think really hard about that one for a minute.

    Go on.

    I’ll wait.

    Has it possibly occurred to her that HALF OF FRENCH CHILDREN UNDER FIVE DON’T HAVE ANY TEETH TO BRUSH?!?!?

    God! The second-hand account of this story-originally-written-in-French indicates that the ORIGINAL SOURCE doesn’t even include any citations whatsoever. How can ANYONE be this mouth-breathingly gullible and credulous and still manage to function? I’m having visions of the upper class twit of the year show here – perhaps we should start calling her Vivian Smith-Smythe-Smith?

  69. Some Guy said,

    September 20, 2007 at 11:36

    In other news, half of The Atlantic’s readers are under the median age of the readership, while the other half are above it. We will need a generous grant to further study why this is.

  70. Jillian said,

    September 20, 2007 at 11:38

    err…..should be “secondhand in The Economist

    I’m still sleep-deprived from the car drama earlier. Sorry.

  71. ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said,

    September 20, 2007 at 14:07

    Thanks for the youtube, Jillian. I love Monty Python.

  72. Herr Doktor Bimler said,

    September 20, 2007 at 14:13

    A lovely stand of spruce, rhododendron and heather should have been established near Angkor Wat, before the bombing commenced! Such lost opportunities!

    Before we invade your country, we demand… Another shrubbery!
    Then, when you have found the shrubbery, you must place it here, beside this shrubbery, only slightly higher, so we get the two-level effect with a little path running down the middle. But it has to be wide enough for a M1A2. And it can’t be a cobblestone path; cobblestones wear out the treads like buggery.

  73. Gary Ruppert said,

    September 20, 2007 at 14:36

    Once again, I am noting that liberals are basing their reality on lies and media bias. Like Dan Rather, they would like to sue reality itself.

  74. MzNicky said,

    September 20, 2007 at 15:03

    Gary Ruppertlike person: Reality is a concept by which we measure our pain.

  75. Sadly, Cambridgeport said,

    September 20, 2007 at 15:03

    And it can’t be a cobblestone path; cobblestones wear out the treads like buggery.

    Not to mention, they make buggering considerably more hazardous.

  76. Woodrowfan said,

    September 20, 2007 at 15:26

    she seems to have no idea how anything in reality actually functions

    isn’t that the very definition of “libertarian”??

  77. ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said,

    September 20, 2007 at 16:01

    A bumpersticker for all the Garys out there (FAUX or No):

    Republicans to the Troops: Shut Up and Die!

  78. witkacy said,

    September 20, 2007 at 16:57

    >Vivek S. said,
    >I need to sucker Hoover into giving me some of that fat wingnut stash.
    >Any ideas?

    “There’s no news at the court, sir, but the old news”: Doodle theodicies of capitalism’s eternal beauty & balance…Find ever-new ways of describing how the foul policies of the New Deal, like a Mongolian horde, trashed Arcadia…Marshall every brand of soft-science and statistical massage to shit copiously on the poor…Neo-/post-eugenics “theories” never EVER get stale!

    Extra points if you are a non-white wingnut whose sociopathy extends even to self-hatred (kinda like a circus geek, debasing himself for a hot meal)!

  79. roy edroso said,

    September 20, 2007 at 17:02

    Actually, all of McArdle — and all the works of most other glibertarians — can be consdensed to a single sentence:

    “I got mine — don’t worry ’bout yours.”

  80. MCH said,

    September 20, 2007 at 18:09

    I just want to say that I, for one, do not at all mind the constant beatdowns aimed in McCurdle’s direction. Shooting fish in a barrel is so much more fun when the fish really deserve it.

    While obscure crazies like the Pastor are gems to behold, the lesser crazy of McAddle, plus her Elbow/Posterior Identity Confusion Syndrome, times her wider influence, equal a perniciousness even a passel of newly-graduated-from-homeschool Coach Dave/Marie Jon’ lovechildren could surpass.

    And, while McArdle seems passingly familiar with logic (albeit honored only in the breach), and the others mentioned certainly do not, it’s clear that the total looneys at least have a work ethic. Swank’s many screeds per day. Marie, ever cognizant of the glory of God, writing so earnestly, and in a second language, no less! Coach hauling spaghetti like a man, Kaye squeezing punctuatorial nuance from a stone-like head!

    But Meggie? Can she even be bother to maintain a point of view?

  81. Righteous Bubba said,

    September 20, 2007 at 18:20

    But Meggie? Can she even be bother to maintain a point of view?

    Lots of people have mentioned Jonah Goldberg and I think it fits. He’s more evil, but he too is an ignoramus by choice who can’t argue his way out of a paper bag and will equivocate the second any fellow-traveller disagrees with him. They’ve earned derision, the only real earning they’ve ever done.

  82. Mr. Bath Bear said,

    September 20, 2007 at 18:40

    [pauses to contemplate the dread jinx-bringing power of what he's about to say; then proceeds] Can I just point out how much better the thread is when (virtually) everyone ignores that thing it’s better to ignore?

  83. Marita said,

    September 20, 2007 at 18:44

    Mr. Bath Bear!!!!

    If only we could have a visit from Mario, my day would be complete.

  84. Mr. Bath Bear said,

    September 20, 2007 at 18:48

    Well, you know he’s pretty busy these days, what with the O.J. thing in Vegas and all.

  85. The Jinx said,

    September 20, 2007 at 18:56

    [looming ever nearer]

  86. Johnny Coelacanth said,

    September 20, 2007 at 18:58

    “DSotM and Animals are both great albums, but both feature a few excruciating minutes of atonal looping noise ”

    Dark Side is the better of the two albums, I gotta disagree witcha. What’s wrong with atonal looping noise? That’s texture, dood. It makes you appreciate the not-noise parts more. I think the “high noon in a clock shop” part of Time is brilliant, and the noisy parts of On the Run make the whole song. See also Whole Lotta Love by Led Zeppelin, or Sonic Youth’s entire Daydream Nation album.

    And, oh yeah, McArglebargle is teh stupids.

  87. fardels bear said,

    September 20, 2007 at 19:27

    Am I the only one here who really likes “Saucerful of Secrets?” And who believes that Can’s “Tago Mago” is better psychedelic freakout than anything by Pink Floyd?

  88. MCH said,

    September 20, 2007 at 19:28

    Animals. Maybe Dark Side… is just overplayed in my mind, good as it is. Maybe it’s that I work in a corporate cubicle and thus have a special appreciation for “Dogs”, while the last seven or so years heighten the experience of “Sheep”.

    As for “stooone stooooone stoooooone” etc.: Dood, that’s the psychedelic part. This is the band that recorded Saucer Full of Secrets, after all…

  89. fardels bear said,

    September 20, 2007 at 19:34

    Kewl. MCH and I both mention “Saucerful” within a minute of each other. Dood, did ya ever really look at this wallpaper? I mean REALLY look at it?

  90. MCH said,

    September 20, 2007 at 19:40

    You beat me to the mention, Ursa fardels.

    I kinda like it. It can be quite trying to listen to, though, and parts of the album seem, well, unsuccessful. It’s great for the Syd/sheer crazy factor. I don’t think any other band could have pulled off “Corporal Clegg” (and they just barely did).

    I like chunks of Syd’s solo work, too, even some of the tracks that are totally screwed up. “Love You”? “Dollyrocker”? “Wouldn’t You Miss Me”? (but not “Let’s Split”…)

    The only thing I’ve heard that vaguely approximates the sort of stuff on Syd’s Opel are the tracks I’ve heard from Van Morrison’s Bang Records contractual obligation album, upon which is displayed a truly McArdlian sense of craftsmanship. Hilarious, but not of the same standard (for whatever that’s worth). VM can’t sing when he’s improvising, and let spite get in the way of much of the potential creativity (the first four “songs” are identical except for the words). Things do pick up a bit by the time he gets to “Have a Danish” and “The Great Big Royalty Check”. I do love how he didn’t bother tuning his guitar.

  91. Keanu Reeves said,

    September 20, 2007 at 19:42

    Kewl. MCH and I both mention “Saucerful” within a minute of each other. Dood, did ya ever really look at this wallpaper? I mean REALLY look at it?

    Whoa…

  92. Hoosier X said,

    September 20, 2007 at 19:45

    Lots of people have mentioned Jonah Goldberg and I think it fits. He’s more evil, but he too is an ignoramus by choice who can’t argue his way out of a paper bag and will equivocate the second any fellow-traveller disagrees with him. They’ve earned derision, the only real earning they’ve ever done.

    I was thinking Thomas Sowell, but Jonah Goldberg works just as well. Some might nominate D’nesh Disouza.

    Everybody wins. (Except their readers.)

    Did you ever notice when you’re ridiculing Sowell, some yo-yo will say, “Well, he has a Ph.D,” as if that makes his logical fallacies less fallacious or his intellectual dishonesty less dishonest or his sophistry less sophic.

    Still, it’s not a particularly tragic waste of an Ph.D in economics.

  93. Keanu's English Accent from BS's DRACULA said,

    September 20, 2007 at 19:53

    Whoa….Sir!….

  94. Righteous Bubba said,

    September 20, 2007 at 19:59

    I was thinking Thomas Sowell, but Jonah Goldberg works just as well. Some might nominate D’nesh Disouza.

    Goldberg +5 Legacy Burn
    McArdle +7 Mainstream Acceptance Gutpunch
    Sowell +4 IQ Zap
    D’Souza +6 Advanced Smear

  95. Mr. Bath Bear said,

    September 20, 2007 at 20:41

    Re: the notion (extrapolated from comment by J. Coelacanth @ 18:58) that a less overtly gratifying interlude in a song makes you appreciate its overtly gratifying elements in some way that theoretically increases the overall level of gratification

    Maybe, but it’s a dangerous game. “Whole Lotta Love” I’ll give you, and in cases where the less gratifying element is itself genuinely inspired—e.g., the Frippertronics break in “Something in 4/4 Time” by Daryl Hall—the gambit often does raise the stakes of the ensuing payoff. But run it out too long and all you’ve got is a rally killer—e.g., Queen, “The Prophet’s Song”: the first half (through the bridge) is totally unimprovable, full-on William Blake-scaled apocalypse rock, but then that fucking Echoplexed-vocal section goes on about nine minutes too long, and everything after that is just trudging. (See also “Brighton Rock”—almost exactly the same thing. I’ve always thought Brian May felt some need to sabotage his best songs.)

  96. Righteous Bubba said,

    September 20, 2007 at 20:53

    Queen, “The Prophet’s Song”

    Ooo yes, that’s a startling demolition of a song with noodling. Nevertheless the Floyd Dark Side tape stuff is perfectly listenable.

  97. Johnny Coelacanth said,

    September 20, 2007 at 22:53

    Excellent riposte, Monsieur Bath Bear. As for noise making the other parts of the song better, that was partly jest. If part of a song sucks ass, it only makes you wish the whole song was like the part that didn’t suck.
    Gratuitous noise-wanking can certainly ruin a good song, as per your examples (and I’m thinking of Rude Awakening #2 by Creedence Clearwater Revival, which starts off with a simple, beautiful melody and turns into four minutes of backwards horns, found sounds and annoying bullshit. But with the name of the song, the noise may have been the point). I’m with Righteous Bubba though; the Dark Side stuff is poifectly listenable and adds to, not subtracts from, the more musical parts. Your mileage may vary. De gustibus non disputandum. Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball.

  98. Jrod said,

    September 21, 2007 at 11:02

    The annoying noise part on DSotM I was referring to was On The Run, which undoubtedly was groundbreaking and mindblowing in 1973, but just sounds like half-assed techno these days. Maybe not fair to the Floyd since they couldn’t know, but I still skip that track. Some people complain about Great Gig in the Sky for being overly long noise, but I love that song. It has great vocals and song actually goes somewhere.

    Same deal with Whole Lotta Love. The orgasmic yelling isn’t exactly musical but it’s still entertaining and has it’s own progresion that fits nicely with the rest of the song.

    I guess I should point out that my main problem with the “stooone” bit of the song is that it lasts far, far too long. It does a fair job of putting across a feeling of hopeless dread that you’ve chosen the wrong path in life and there’s no escape from it, it just keeps dragging on and on, with the only sense of escape coming from thoughts of the manipulation and barbarity that others have inflicted upon you, which justifies your own manipulation and barbarity, which gives you a better feeling at least than staring down the reality that is the endless droning of being dragged down by the stone….

    OK, maybe they were on to something. I still skip to Pigs at that point. Hey, quit bogarting that joint!

  99. Danger, Blog Robinson said,

    March 10, 2008 at 2:22

    [...] partly because they know her, and it’s damn hard to make fun of people you know. The folks at Sadly, No! have a great time at McArdle’s expense, and, while it borders on juvenility, it’s [...]

  100. grdkv ficv said,

    April 29, 2008 at 7:07

    frbhwa qxoade mvfgjqbxi hcyqplur stprj iaru lwnygj

Leave a Comment

  • Things of Interest

  • Meta Goodness

  • Clunkers

  • httpbl_stats()