From the McArdle blather….

I’ve promised not to say too much more about Jonathan Chait’s piece, as I’m doing a TPM book club on the topic next week.

WTF? Is everyone giving out wingnut welfare these days? Not that a TPM book club is such a big deal, but why does anyone, let alone a plausibly liberal–or at least Democratic–website, want to give this dope yet another platform?

Nevermind McArdle’s content, even her style is puerile.
“Paul Krugman is about a zillion times smarter than I am, and also, grows a prety [sic] impressive beard.”
Like, omigod. You guys? You guys! Srsly!
Oh
mai
gahd!

I just love McArdle’s comment section, which basically consists of her getting schooled over and over and over again. It’s like glibertarian whack-a-mole!

The TPM book club should at least provide some entertainment value.

That’s not fair! An honest summary of libertarian logic! It makes them look dumb! And it’s mean, mean, mean.

You should stop doing it because it gives them ammunition to call us mean and unserious. And that is the most important goal ever! So to get them to stop calling us mean and unserious, we need to agree with everything they say and tell them how brilliant they are about everything and never, ever call them on it when they lie or contradict themselves.

That second part wasn’t much shorter.

I would like to see Meagan debating Ms. Rosedale’s third grade class. She might score a point or two there, but at her blog, not so much.

Why do libertarians seem like the cherry pickers of the political discourse? Selfish cherry pickers.

I don’t think most libertarians had a very good preschool education. You know, the part where you are taught compassion and sharing…

(I hope Dr Marita doesn’t read this, or I’ma get pnwed!)

All that’s really missing is the links from Matt Yglesias, Ezra Klein, and other serious thinkers.

Whoomp, there it is.

Ockhams Razor says the second McArdle is the true one.

Reynolds’ picture puts me in mind of a choice Seymour Skinner quote: “Well, the children are going to have to learn about Tek War sooner or later!”

Why is Paul Krugman afraid to debate this woman?

I just will never cease to be dumbfounded that some people can look at the last six years and say “The problem is too many legal constraints on the US President.”

seriously.

You are all very, very nasty to Megan McUrkle… why if you’d open your mind, you’d see her wonderful, wonderful ideas could work too!

You are all very, very nasty to Megan McUrkle… why if you’d open your mind, you’d see her wonderful, wonderful ideas could work too!

Indeed! Why just last week I learned that I’m not as hot as I think I am and that “slag” is a profanity. And today, thanks to Sadly No, I learned what happened to the annoying neighbor girl from Small Wonder. She apparently likes Ginger-tinis. I eagerly await tomorrow’s lesson.

I don’t want to get all looksist, but this post’s picture of McArdle is teh hawt compared to your previous ones. Well, she looks human-ish at least.

Instapundit…instapundit…hmmmm…rearranged doesn’t it spell: in’nat stupid?

And Norby’s Skinner quote reminds me of a Grampa Simpson gem: ” What are YOU cackling at, fatty? Too much pie, that’s your problem.”

Is Megan really that tall? She looks about 6’7″ in that pic.

Right. Now I’m being size-ist. Right.

“Fee Fie Foe Fum, I smell the stench of brown people suckling off of the nanny state’s teat,” or something.

I’m trying to add -isms to my resume’, so I thought I’d try it out. Not really my vintage, however…

Wow, the short person standing in the forground of the McArdle pic looks like me, or rather, the back of my head. If it were me, it would only make McYarkle look slightly taller than average, because I’m seriously height-challenged.

I’m in full agreement with a different brad on this twit’s writing style. The girls my teenage son hangs with have a more sophisticated way with with words. Libertarian = arrested development.

Aww, aren’t they one big happy clique.

Whattaya want to bet she got that TPM invite through Ezra Klein?

The clique is how you get to blog at the Atlantic, yammer on bloggingheads.tv, inspire Mark A. Kleiman to gently demur that your ‘hit people with 2x4s’ plan is merely a ‘bad idea’.

The acceptance of Megan McArdle into this media structure is simply an inevitability when you have “liberals” like.. well, you know who.

But never mind me — I’m a purist, an asshole, unforgiving, yaddayaddayadda.

Actually, I’m fed up with the whole fucking thing. Yesterday Atrios made fun of Disney-ABC News for having a Iraq panel composed entirely of nimrods who supported the invasion. Which, he’s right to do that. But say the same fucking thing about Atlantic Monthly, and all of a sudden you’re an Alex Cockburnequse asshole. So fuck it all.

You mean glibertarians read something other than the raving mad woman screeds of Rand? Are you sure that book club isn’t really about making martini’s and gossiping?

But what do you really think, HTML…

But seriously…while you get unfairly tagged with all the “purist” nonsense for (correctly IMO) calling out the Drums and other “sensibles” on a fairly regular basis, I think that the Atlantic’s sacred-cow status jumped the shark several Robert D. Kaplan and Dinesh D’Souza cover stories ago.

Or do people really accuse you of bein’ all Cockburnian for saying nasty things about that once great journal?

Whattaya want to bet she got that TPM invite through Ezra Klein?

Indubitably!

Klein’s “writing” is sweaty with panting obsequious ambition. He writes like an aging careerist: timid, ingratiating, careful not to offend people who are powerful.

Now if Lee Siegel had taken an interest in McArdle, that would have meant something!

Worser McArdle:

“Kneel, acolyte, and suckle at my gingertini teat. Now, fetch my cloak!”

norbizness said,

September 6, 2007 at 20:49

That second part wasn’t much shorter.

It was much shorter than Megan’s original post(s). And it was a good summary.

Galadriel was an elf too; she was basically OK, but gave in to her desires for adventure, power and rulership in Middle Earth (and peer pressure) and left Valinor with the rest of the Noldor in defiance of the Valar. (Stay with me…) In the end, after witnessing all the sorrows and hardships that afflicted the Noldor because of their defiance, she became one of the wisest of the wise. Hopefully elf Megan’s exposure to the slings and arrows outside the echo chamber of her own supporters will have the same effect on her.

And that Reynolds pic has a disturbing resemblance to Alfred E. Newman.

Marie of the Apostrophes is hotter…

HTML-

Have you checked out Dennis Perrin? He loves calling out the libs on their BS.

You sound kinda tense, man. I think you need to take an R&R trip to Seattle.

I’d gladly help you with any (insert preferred type of relaxation, especially particular to the Pacific NW here) you may need.

I am personally confused about how I am to self-identify. I’m liberal, but so is Michael Hanlon(?). I’m all for individual liberties, but hostile to the libertarians’ selfish crap. I’d be a Dem, but that is fucked from the top down. And I can’t figure out if I can claim to be a Sadly No-ite, because I’m not sure you’d have me.

I’m actually kinda pissed that the name centrist has been twisted to mean anything but. What do you call yourself when you try to walk the middle path? Independent works, but it implies a certain amount of anarchy and lack of organization.

How do we band together when most of use just qualify (relative to the establishment) as Fringe?

Just so you know, I invited McArdle to debate Paul Krugman, Ezra Klein, Jon Chait and Ross Douthat at TPMCafe next week on Jon’s book because debates are more interesting when folks disagree, and she’s already very publicly done so.

Ezra’s input was not needed.

I agree, t4toby. At this point, I am frequently irritated by all the PoliSci 101 labeling that seems to be so important to so many people.

For what it’s worth, at this point in time it seems like it’s easier to self-identify, or perhaps more accurately describe your worldview succinctly, by saying what it is you’re NOT.

I’m not a wingnut is a good place to start…

mikey

Good point, mikey.

I think I’ll just wear a shirt that sez: Wingnuts and Moonbats and Centrists, Oh My!

I think I’m a Golden Ruler. You know, like a Libertarian with Compassion and Empathy.

Golden Ruler – I like it. I’ve been thinking of changing my blog name…

Ok, Andrew. So you’re giving free airtime, as it were, to the glibertarian viewpoint (as if it deserves the gift, and as if that position could not be well-imagined by your readers if left unstated), nevermind that you’re pretty misguided in thinking that your readers benefit from its ventilation. But did it have to be represented by her?

Couldn’t you get someone from Cato? Or some Randroid from the Peikoff Group? Couldn’t you get someone who did not advocate beating anti-war protestors with 2x4s? You know, there are several glibertarians who aren’t quite *that bad*…

Look. You could have asked Jim Henley or someone from his blog, and that would have been respectable. But, no: you asked this awful person McArdle instead. Because she’s of the clique and apparently Julian Sanchez (the other glibertarian in the club) wasn’t available.

But thanks for replying. And I mean that sincerely.

Just so you know, I invited McArdle to debate Paul Krugman, Ezra Klein, Jon Chait and Ross Douthat at TPMCafe next week on Jon’s book because debates are more interesting when folks disagree, and she’s already very publicly done so.
That’s true, Andrew. Obviously so. Debates are even more interesting when folks disagree and all involved are very, very good.

Have you checked out Dennis Perrin? He loves calling out the libs on their BS.

You sound kinda tense, man.

Thanks for the offer. Yes, I am tense. Steve Gilliard and Jim Capozzolla — liberals who happened to be right about Iraq & etc. — died from lack of funds but the clique of liberals who weren’t right is alive and well-paid and enabling wingnuts. It’s a big steaming pile of shit on any sense of justice and it’s right here in our back yard, so to speak. But while you can scream for more DFHs on CNN or in the WaPo, you’re an asshole if you scream for more DFHs in the exact places where DFHs ought to be in the first place, in the liberal blogosphere.

On a totally different topic (since there sadly ain’t no open threads here), you might get a few chuckles from this D-list wingnut.

“The creepy thing to me is the phrase “invasion of Manhatten.” There may be many (ahem) who don’t think that Al Qaeda declared war on us on Sept. 11th. Many who think it was just an act of a madman. But make no mistake about it, they saw it as an invasion.”

Pure gold, I tells ya. Goooold.

(I hope Dr Marita doesn’t read this, or I’ma get pnwed!)

What does this have to do with me? I’m all for mandatory seminars on sharing and compassion for libertarians. I’m just not sure they’d do any good.

As HTML put it much more shrilly eloquently, the problem with McArdle is not that she disagrees with the other TPM panelists (in and of itself a good thing…one does want a diversity of views at a debate). The problem is that she’s empty-headed, lazy, and casually vicious.

And though the last of these qualities is probably the most disturbing, from the point of view of conducting an interesting debate, it’s the first two that are the bigger problem. Take a look at the way the conversation tends to go on any of her posts at the Atlantic online. She puts forward a glib take on some issue or another, almost always without even taking ten seconds to google around and get her facts straight (why do any research when prefacing sentences with “it seems to me” takes care of that unfortunate reality thingy?). Her commenters then proceed to shoot the many fish which McArdle has let lose in the barrel. If she feels like engaging with them, she then claims to have been arguing something entirely different from what she was in fact originally arguing, but usually the fallback position is just as idiotic because she still won’t bother to learn anything about anything…and the whole process repeats itself.

In short, a debate with Megan McArdle is about as interesting as the Argument Sketch argument.

BTW- HTML

I’m serious as a heart attack about the invitation.

I think we need something like Daily Kos or Red State, like a clearinghouse for the freaks on the fringe.

Funny how the fringe is the center. Weird. I think I may have stumbled on something. The whole damn process is a frickin’ Mobius Strip!

Seriously. I think reality may be created using mobius architecture.

I think I need to go home and be alone with my tinfoil hat now.

HTML Mencken,

First off, kick ass name.

In terms of Cato, we actually have someone coming from Cato a week after next to debate Greg Anrig on his book, so that was kind of done.

Also, there’s something of a trade off in setting up these debates. While I don’t really agree with your assessment of McArdle, I’m willing to concede that there’s always a “smarter” person to get. But it’s not just raw intelligence and skill that makes people good in these forums and makes for interesting reading. It’s wit, writing abillity, ideology, and blogginess. As a result, whenever it makes sense to get bloggers to join in (Digby’s supposed to be chiming in on the Gitlin Book Club this week), I try to.

Hope that makes sense.

ll that’s really missing is the links from Matt Yglesias, Ezra Klein, and other serious thinkers.

Ohhhhhhhh, Gavin, you bitch.

Sorry, Marita, I seem to remember you sticking up for a libertarian at one point, possibly even claiming that you were a Libertarian. i could be completely wrong, as I usually suffer from a serious case of pot-addled memory.

But it was meant in fun. Nothin’ but love for my fellow Sadly, Noers.

(That includes you, too, Kevin.)

But it’s not just raw intelligence and skill that makes people good in these forums and makes for interesting reading. It’s wit, writing abillity, ideology, and blogginess

Yeah, I don’t think the complaint was that she’s not the absolute best you could do. It’s that she’s ridiculous. She doesn’t appear to use the intelligence that he has, and she doesn’t make honest or well thought out arguments. So it isn’t that she isn’t the best representative of the libertarian viewpoint – it’s that she’s a horrible representative of that (or probably any) viewpoint. Picking someone like her is either sticking with the clique or not trying very hard.

Sorry, Marita, I seem to remember you sticking up for a libertarian at one point, possibly even claiming that you were a Libertarian. i could be completely wrong, as I usually suffer from a serious case of pot-addled memory.

Ummm… probably didn’t stick up for a libertarian (on anything relating to libertarianism, anyway) and DEAR GOD NO, I AM NOT A LIBERTARIAN!!!!

I’m going to cry myself to sleep that anyone ever thought I was a libertarian. I’ve been called a lot of nasty things in my life, but seriously…

Hmm, Andrew Golis post followed by TRex post.

On Sadly, No!

Look, if this place is gonna go all upscale and A-listy, I’m gonna get concerned.

‘Cause the first thing you’d have to do is get rid of the likes of me. Hell, I wouldn’t join a club that would have me as a member either.

But then, before you know it Dice-K’ll turn in another really crappy start (which would be his fourth in a row) and Bradrocket’ll go all
“AAARRGGGHHHH FUGGITY YAKERIFIER FUG!!!” only with (mostly) real words and that’ll scare off a bunch of ’em…

mikey

Marita,

I need to smoke less, or think more.

That is all.

I need to smoke less, or think more.

Nah, just don’t call me such horrible names. 🙂

Look, if this place is gonna go all upscale and A-listy, I’m gonna get concerned.

So do you think Vitter tried to simulate the baby poop or what? Or are we dealing with middle-aged near-constipation rabbity poops?

Very well put, Marita.

As for “blogginess,” there ought to be some law prohibiting hiring/firing based on ineffable qualities.

It’s Mona who’s the libertarian.

While I don’t really agree with your assessment of McArdle, I’m willing to concede that there’s always a “smarter” person to get.

Oh, man, I hope Megatron reads that.

It’s wit, writing abillity, ideology, and blogginess. As a result, whenever it makes sense to get bloggers to join in (Digby’s supposed to be chiming in on the Gitlin Book Club this week), I try to.

Any attempt to suggest that McArdle is in Digby’s class as a blogger is severely misguided, to say the least.

Tall, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life, unless you have a subsidized blog.

Tall, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life

I don’t recommend it for EVERYONE, but it’s worked for me…

mikey

Andrew,

Are you really telling me that choosing her had nothing to do with her contacts? that she wasn’t chosen because of who she knew — and who knew her — but rather selected only for meritocratic reasons?

Look, I think Jim Henley’s libertarianism is as crackpot as anyone else’s, but there’s no doubt he’s a better blogger (and better *libertarian*) than McArdle — smarter, wittier, a better writer, though of course because he has been consistently against the Iraq War, he’ll never get a gig at the Atlantic Monthly and thereby accepted into the Clique.

You must understand that, to me, it seems like you guys don’t read many other people’s blogs besides those of your friends.

That said, inviting Digby is a welcome if criminally belated step in the right direction.

Anyway, thanks for replying again.

Marita, I think 14toby has you confused with Mona.

Marita, I think 14toby has you confused with Mona.

Without knowing anything about Mona, I’d like to say that my politics are much better.

Also, while I’m comparing myself to someone I’m unfamiliar with: I’m cuter than she is.

I’m sure that’s all true, Dr. Marita. Also, I notice Righteous Bubba beat me to the probable source of the confusion, at 1:14.

What impresses me is how much the TPM gang are like Tim Burton’s Beetlejuice.

You say their names three times and they appear out of nowhere!

‘Cause the first thing you’d have to do is get rid of the likes of me. Hell, I wouldn’t join a club that would have me as a member either.

mikey

I’ve been in the Sadly, No! free speech zone for almost a week, meself. Course, I think it’s an accident caused by stardog and the spam filter.

P.S. This is a test of the free speech zone system.

I was told in all seriousness by one of Megan’s fans in the comments that Megan:

does not admire Jane Galt, that is just a coincidence
is not a follower or admirer or Ayn Rand
and is most emphatically NOT a Libertarian

I think that is true. Megan McArdle is just a stupid, privileged woman taking advantage of a fad to advance her own career. I think this is true for a lot of media personalities. They take a look and see that certain ideologies are popular and then they just pander to those people and laugh all the way to the bank. I mean, it would be really easy to do wouldn’t it? You all see just how stupid these people are, how hard would it be to feed these “morans” exactly all the shit they want to hear?

Of course there is a drawback, every once in a while you have to leave the cocktail circuit and actually mingle with the tards. You also have to bite your tongue around the true believers like Kristol or Podhoritz and then there is that empty gaping hole where your soul was… but other than that it’s sweet.

Megan McArdle is just a stupid, privileged woman taking advantage of a fad to advance her own career.

Yeah, but I think she’s SMOKIN’ hot.

I was told in all seriousness by one of Megan’s fans in the comments that Megan:

does not admire Jane Galt, that is just a coincidence
is not a follower or admirer or Ayn Rand
and is most emphatically NOT a Libertarian

I can top that. In the pioneer days of the ‘sphere, Jim Capozzolla made fun of McArdle’s Randroidness and said a few choice words about her blog-de-plume. So she quickly comments to the effect that J.C. was being completely unreasonable to assume she was a Randroid and that her psuedonym had nothing — nothing! — to do with Ayn Rand.

But then McArdle is a serious person while J.C. is merely a dead DFH who was more consistently right about the issues than most of our paid liberal and glibertarian bloggers. Certainly *he* would have never been invited to a TPM gig.

I think she’s SMOKIN’ hot.

Oh please. On her best day she’s merely somewhat cute. I know she gets a lot of mileage out of her “Yes, I was a model” schtick (always said with modesty, but the frequency by which the subject is broached underlines the point that the modesty is of a faux variety), but really, it was only because she is tall.

Marie Jon’ is a hot wingnut. McArdle’s just a schmuck. And at least no one takes Marie that seriously.

I once suggested to my girlfriend she was elf-like. She objected strenuously. I didn’t understand why until now. It’s that she’s a socialist. Also yes, Marie Jon’ is hot.

Is she tall? The complete photo (sorry about the L@lbertarian text addition) indicates she is standing while those around her are sitting. And she does look like an elf, though not a Liv Tyler kind of elf. That non-existent upper lip is just creepy.

noen: That might have been me in one of Megatron’s comments, didn’t mean to give any impression that I was a fan of hers, but in the interest of fairness I pointed out that she herself claimed to have chosen “Jane Galt” in a 10 years ago NYT comment section to tick off whoever she was “debating,” who was a devoted Randroid. But since she now uses her legal name for her “blogginess” (WTF does that mean, anyway?) too bad for her being stuck w/ J. G. Haw haw!! Pick a good pseudonym & stick w/ it, I say.

Cast off your slave name!!

Malignant 32X.

Ooops!! Neither knew (nor noticed) that the second link would somehow become a link to someone’s e-mail!! Be nice, don’t abuse it.

Whomever it was that labeled her “McAddled” did the world an inestimable service.

If her name didn’t contain a “c”, it would anagramize to “Rand meme gal”.

And did toby just invite some discussion about whether or not it’s a good idea to call oneself a liberal? Because I’m just going to bow out right now if he did. I know y’all are sick to death of my really boring ranting about how I’m not a liberal, and most of y’all probably aren’t liberals, and liberals suck – and because I really do love you guys, I won’t do it again.

But liberals really do suck. Bill Clinton was in town today, and if I had to hear one more liberal talk radio host fawn over him, I might have just done myself a serious harm. Bill Clinton also sucks. But then again, he’s a liberal.

“Bill Clinton also sucks. But then again, he’s a liberal.”

If Bill Clinton is a liberal, then I need to find a place to sit somewhere off the very far left edge of the table – like in the living room.

(BTW, Bill doesn’t suck. He is sucked. Big difference.)

all I have to say is, you try drinking 10 gingertinis and then walk around a mall.

See, Jillian, that’s the problem. I don’t have a clue what definitions you’re using. Oh, I’m certain they are more “correct” than mine, but me and about a bazillion other folks out here in the world think of ourselves as liberals. I’m PROUD of being a liberal. I can’t even guess what would be wrong with that.

But then, “conservative” doesn’t mean what it used to mean, either.

But that’s why the labels have become meaningless. They mean what we THINK they mean, what we want them to mean. We seek a shorthand way to describe what our political worldview looks like.

I’m sorry, but I think the generally accepted definition of “Liberal” describes me most accurately. I think government has an obligation to it’s citizens, to take care of them, educate them, balance the scales, fill in the gaps. I think a better use of America’s wealth is taking care of America rather than building and deploying weapons. I think that makes me a liberal.

Technically, I’m probably wrong. But more people would understand my position from that one-word description than would not….

mikey

mikey,

All the thinking you have ever done in your life has never helped anyone nor could it.

2¢ worth: Progressive is probably better than “liberal,” which has pretty much been destroyed in today’s discourse. And “progress” is better than conservatism, which can & should be ridiculed as the already powerful & entrenched trying to hold onto their power & privilege.
The history of the U. S. is a history of progress toward equality & whatnot, and applying the rights enumerated in the Costitution to all citizens, not just male property owners. It is also the history of the powerful resisting this progress. But no one’s learning that in school these days.

McArsehole? I’d hit it. I already have.

Oooooo. mikey’s hit the big time if Jose Chung is feeling threatened by him.

Jose. You’re probably right. But one rainy afternoon a long time ago I pulled a Navy FAC with about half a pound of metal in him out from a killing zone. Under machine gun and mortar fire. When I didn’t have to. He’s still alive today. I get christmas cards from him.

Can you say anything close to the same?

mikey

I think that the Atlantic’s sacred-cow status jumped the shark several Robert D. Kaplan and Dinesh D’Souza cover stories ago.

Not to mention Bobo Brooks’ cover story explaining, via a great many anecdotes, that the simple peasant Heartlanders don’t need a living wage, because they so love the cheap crap and spoiled food products available from fine megacorporations like Wal-Mart(tm) and Red Lobster(tm). Also, he let us know, people who didn’t go to school with David Brooks are kinda simple-minded, so being exposed to real choices — in retail or in politics — would only make them tired & unhappy.

I still buy an issue of the Atlantic occasionally, but only from chain stores where they don’t know me. And I’m careful to ask for a bag, in case anybody whose opinion I care about sees me carrying it.

As for TPM, can’t read it. I’m on dialup, and the endless linkerage… what *is* the word for the blogging equivalent of the air-kiss?… always crashes my poor 20th-century laptop.

Jose Chung isn’t even a real boy.

t4toby and mikey – I tend to go with one of (a) progressive, (b) sensible (as in The Sensible Party), or (c) freak.

It’s amazing how hard it is to explain that I use logic, reason, compassion, and the principle of universality to form most of my political thoughts, leavened with notions of social responsibility, justice, and prudence (as in, if something might result in catastrophe, don’t do it).

The most difficult problem, I think, is that most people don’t think. They latch onto their chosen political viewpoint like a lamprey, and never let go, regardless of how stupid it is. Any proof that it is stupid merely makes them more vituperative.

Sigh. Is humanity worth saving? I sure as hell can’t tell.

Oh, and Jose? You’re a knobhead. Just so you know.

So does this mean I don’t have to feel guilty about casting lusty looks at Marie Jon all the while stunned into submission by the stupidity of the writing.

I invited Megan because I *shock!* enjoy reading her blog, and when she started to argue against Chait’s book I thought she’d be perfect for the discussion.

The point before was not that there’s always someone smarter than her, it’s that there’s always someone smarter than everyone. The challenge is getting a good combination of very smart people who can have an engaging conversation. I think she easily fits that criteria, although obviously many hear very much disagree.

On a side note, I think it’s incredibly lame (and boderline sexist) that the thread, even jokingly, needed to turn to her looks. I’ve noticed few comment threads about female bloggers are able to last without doing the frat boy thing, and I think it’s unfortunate.

Andrew,

Lighten up — I think you might also notice our collective sophomoric delight in making fun of the looks of various male right wing pundits — see, e.g. the doughy pantload (if you must).

And yes, the latter actually has an ideological component — see Greenwald from yesterday. It is the collective laughter at those alpha males who dominate the pages of the Corner, Weekly Standard, et al. And, of course, the Fightin’ Kagans.

Andrew, try walking around a mall dressed as a frat boy, eating a sammich, and making sexist jokes, then get back to us.

On a side note, I think it’s incredibly lame (and boderline sexist) that the thread, even jokingly, needed to turn to her looks

Oh Andrew, you haven’t been around here much, have you? Pretty much every thread makes fun of someone’s looks regardless of gender.

If you’d like to post a link to your own photo, we’ll happily have a go at you too. Would that restore your faith in us?

Jose. You’re probably right. But one rainy afternoon a long time ago I pulled a Navy FAC with about half a pound of metal in him out from a killing zone. Under machine gun and mortar fire. When I didn’t have to. He’s still alive today. I get christmas cards from him.

mikey

mikey, i love you. This put down makes the existence of the entire intertoobz worthwhile.

don’t worry about this place going upscale. As long as I’m around, things will stay on the scruffy, loud and annoying side.

HTML is my favorite DFH. It perks me up a bit, as well as depresses me terribly to see there is still someone around who is not willing to compromise on principles. Depresses me because it’s just not that common anymore.

Mega-Ann McAddled would be hotter if she would JUST THROW SOME EXTRA PUNCTUATION INTO HER NAME!!!

Has anyone pointed out to Andrew that around these parts, the comments about looks are generally more prevalent about the GUYS?

Oh, I see Marita beat me to it. Well played, Doctor.

You know, maybe there ought to have a Beginner’s Guide To Snark page, kind of like Atrios has, to clue in the newcomers.

So this is kind of a “that’s just our culture” defense?

So this is kind of a “that’s just our culture” defense?

Listen, you said it was “borderline sexist”, we pointed out that we make fun of the looks of people of both genders.

Perhaps when Ms. McCardle writes something that isn’t completely ridiculous we’ll focus on more substantive criticisms of her work.

If by “that’s our culture” you mean “it’s not gender specific to either the targets of mockery or those mocking them”, yes.

I stand corrected. I forgot that she self-identifies as “the world’s tallest female econoblogger.” Probably doesn’t have any facts or stats to back that up either.

Used to be a model, you say? (And does so often, you add?) Tall, thin, thin upper lip, squinty eyes…hmmm, figure model for a Sears catalog? Or Sears web site?

BTW, Andrew Golis: S,N! commenters may be looksist pigs, but most of us know the difference between “hear” & “here.” How’s your blogginess? (Or is that “bloggishness?”)

I invited Megan because I *shock!* enjoy reading her blog,

Then you got rotten taste in blogs, is all I can say. And if you think McArdle’s the type to give good convorsation, I for one am glad I’m not invited.

Looking good, Andrew. And to look good is to have good blogginess.

It’s SNARK, friend.

Sadly, No specializes in responding to the writers who do not qualify for a reasoned response. Trying to argue with them using logic and rationality gives their arguments far too much merit.

So it’s ridicule and looksism, wall to wall and balls to the floor. Or something like that. Give us better wingnuts and we’ll give you better arguments.

Actually, I take that back. When people like mikey and HTML, real lefties and literate, compassionate humanists (who also happen to be excellent writers) get the kind of platform goof-nuts like The Doughy Pantload and McAddled get as a matter of course, and you’ll start seeing some excellent arguments.

Until then, it’s sammiches and celery. And apostrophes.

She was a model at one stage, jesus, i didn’t realise ‘dippy women’ were ever part of the fashion scene.

As for the ‘liberal’, ‘conservative’, etc tags, I do find that all quite depressing. The original meaning of these tags has changed (and is changing) so much that they are rendered meainingless. It is more a US thing than elsewhere in the world, but Liberal appears to mean somethign different even country to country.

For example, older members of my family describe theselves as ‘old liberal’, or ‘Scots liberal’, which tends to mean a conservative with a small ‘c’, but a social conscience, if that makes any sense. Those political views did appear to be dying out in Scotland, although the Nationalist SNP has adopted some of them, now that they are in power and have to appear responsible.

You know, maybe there ought to have a Beginner’s Guide To Snark page, kind of like Atrios has, to clue in the newcomers.

No, I kind of like to see the newbies wandering into the swamp and getting sucked down by the crocs.

Previously, he’s working in Democratic politics….

Golis studied social theory and American political history at Harvard College…

Guess they don’t teach bonehead English @ Harvard “College.” Too bad he couldn’t have gone to Harvard University.

And get a shave. You look doubly wimpy w/ that scruff.

Andrew Golis is two razor swipes away from having a Wingnut Facial Mullet.

Andrew Golis said,

I invited Megan because I *shock!* enjoy reading her blog, and when she started to argue against Chait’s book I thought she’d be perfect for the discussion.

It boggles my mind how anyone can enjoy the filth she writes. Sure, it’s wrapped up in shiny bows but it’s still filth.

The point before was not that there’s always someone smarter than her, it’s that there’s always someone smarter than everyone. The challenge is getting a good combination of very smart people who can have an engaging conversation. I think she easily fits that criteria, although obviously many hear very much disagree.

Megan is a self absorbed twit who doesn’t know even the first thing about economics. What she does know is how to translate her sociopathy into econ-speak but she isn’t bright enough to hide it. Like her position on torture, or her lifeboat ethics in regards to health care or just about any other topic that she comments on. What you get with Megan is a box with nice foil wrapping and pretty bows and happy faces. When you open it and look inside all you see are dead bodies.

Why do people still think that “Crossfire” is the perfect model for “engaging conversation”?

You all have moved up in the world. When I first was here it was a little general store with Moxie in the front and ammo in the back and Bisquick with bugs in it on the shelves.

I’ll jes go back to peeling my scabs and practickin’ this musical band saw ….

Golis studied social theory and American political history at Harvard College…

Soc Stud much, Andrew?

I had to share an Ivy League educational background with McAddled.

Now it turns out I was in the same concentration with one her fanboys.

I don’t know which is worse.

(Incidentally, what is that thing that Golis has on? Was he an extra in Woody Allen’s Sleeper?)

But say the same fucking thing about Atlantic Monthly, and all of a sudden you’re an Alex Cockburnequse asshole. — HTML.

But then you have to deny teh gloobulll worming..

I invited Megan because I *shock!* enjoy reading her blog… The challenge is getting a good combination of very smart people who can have an engaging conversation. I think she easily fits that criteria, although obviously many hear very much disagree.

Mr. Golis, if reading McArdle’s blog-writing has led you to believe she’s a “very smart” person, your taste sucks tiny green harbles. And if you’ve awarded McArdle that status based on some other attribute — such as her engaging real-world personality, or the fact that a once reputable magazine gives her money, or the faint hope that if you put out for her she’ll introduce you to her (a)cuter friends — then you’ve verified HTML Mencken’s theory that McArdle’s blogging success is based on the lowest forms of “networking”.

Further, if your TPM profile has any truthiness, I am going to assume that you’re one of the kollege kid larvae who helped destroy Howard Dean’s campaign. And if “Harvard College” isn’t some little-known midwestern campus, I may also blame you for the decline of affordable housing in Allston and the lines at Johnny D’s.

See, there are plenty of ways for those of us “hear”* to hate on you without even getting into your physical shortcomings.

*And stop leaning on the spellchecker to do your proofreading, lazy little Ivy-League punk.

[…] either time to make fun of Andrew Golis’s appearance, or time to see what new conservative zaniness has come flapping […]

Picture of Kimberly Kagan from Tbogg today. Megatron in a few years?

Shorter someone: I just don’t agree with your criticisms even though I won’t say they are wrong and by the way, your sexist as well.

Methinks there are some nasty little cliques developing in the lefty blogosphere.

I tend to think that the existence of Megan McArdle kind of puts a severe dent in the theory that markets are inherently meritocratic.

Meanwhile, let’s find out what actually smart people think of Ms. McArdle.

No, I kind of like to see the newbies wandering into the swamp and getting sucked down by the crocs.

Hey, lobbey, I hate to break it to you, but crocs do a bit more than just suck. Unless they’re really, really, really old.

M. Boufant,

That’s funny — I thought it was Megan when I saw it. To continue the lookism, I thought she was quite attractive given the handicap of having been born with Kagan genes. Or is she related by marriage?

sigh.

The pseudonymous masses strike again.

I thought I looked quite hip in that picture with my boy-scruff and American Apparel sweatshirt. Clearly I was wrong.

Anyone have a picture they want to send me to make fun of?

Also, if anyone has something interesting to say about Chait’s book, email me. If it’s good, I’ll post it. Andrew at talkingpointsmemo.com.

It’s been fun SN. Time to return to feeding the children.

As a matter of fact, Andrew, we of the pseudonymous masses do post pics.

Scroll down to the end of this post. I look quite ridiculous and am proud of it. But then if we pseudonymous types looked equally — if unintentionally — ridiculous whilst holding a gingertini, we’d be invited to TPM and get paid to soil the Atlantic’s electronic pages.

That is, if we knew the right people.

Attention Sadly, No!-

Marita is not Mona.

If I ever have a half pound of metal deposited in my person, I think I’d be happy to have mikey around.

And Mr. Golis (Who does look quite hip, in a LA circa 2005 sort of way) needs to put HTML on one of his panels, if he’s serious about stimulating discussions.

PS My soccer team won its 10th ‘Championship’ in 21 seasons. Oh, yes, we are the scourge of the Seattle Rec League.

Oh and by the way, I am single-handedly responsible for losing the Dean campaign. I have a whole closet full of orange beanies.

That’s funny, Andrew, because I was told I was single handedly responsible for electing the Lesser Bush (By voting for Dean in 2000). See, we have something in common.

Seriously, man, have you read this post by HTML on Rich Lowry?

I’d like to see any one of the panelists at TPM Cafe try to compete with the laser focus of our Southern Hippie friend.

The pseudonymous masses strike again.

What? Bloody hell, I thought Clem was my given surname. Clearly I was wrong.

I’m quite sure, however, that when you purchased said American Apparel sweatshirt you gave the clerks a stern talking-to about AA’s lame, sexist, frat-boy-pandering advertising campaign. You know, the one with the semi-nude pubescent girls kicking it amateur porn-style.

Sincerely yours,
Adam Eli Clem (Mrs.)

BTW, for those playing along at home, McAddled has pointed out that the “gingertini” in the picture above is, in fact, a watermelon “martini.”

I raise this point for a number of reasons….

1) This is an example of Megatron appealing to an objective fact to win an argument. I still don’t expect a lot of argument winning from her. But paying attention to facts would be a big step in the right direction. So watermelon “martini” it is.

2) Even more than the “gingertini,” which only contains the -gate-like suffix, the “watermelon martini” is a crime against the martini. A martini contains gin, dry vermouth, and an olive or a twist of lemon rind. Period. Reasonable people can disagree over how much dry vermouth should go in it. Losers are free to substitute vodka for the gin and call it a “vodka martini.” But other mixed drinks are not martinis. This is not, however, Jane Galt’s fault.

The pseudonymous masses strike again.

I’m pretty sure my name is actually Marita.

Anyone have a picture they want to send me to make fun of?

Sure! Here you go Andrew. Not the best likeness of me, but it was at the tail-end of a baby-eating contest (or something), and I was feeling a little woozy. Have a field day!

The pseudonymous masses strike again.
…
Anyone have a picture they want to send me to make fun of?

Red herring, red herring, and a wee bit of goalpost moving. May I remind you this started because you accused posters of being sexists? Admit you were wrong and we’re not sexist jerks, just jerks, or we’ll be forced to bag on your momma, too.

IB,

The best faux martini of all is the “White Cosmopolitan” which tastes like a cosmo, but looks like the real gin and vermouth deal. (It has clear cranberry juice in it — who says America has lost its competitive edge?)So a faux manly man like I can enjoy the pleasures of the cosmo all the while looking like James Bond if Bond were a hulking, paunchy, middle aged lawyer.

PS My soccer team won its 10th ‘Championship’ in 21 seasons. Oh, yes, we are the scourge of the Seattle Rec League.

Dude, bring your team out to NY and have a friendly with my team (10 Amigos and 1 Gringo). Be prepared to lose but also to enjoy a great BBQ afterwards at my place with your kind of inhalable refreshment being served liberally. Just don’t bring anyone who’s afraid of Meskins or Salvadoreños.

As for Andrew Golis, when it comes to horribly out of shape, warmongering chickenhawks and masculinity cultists I think appearance is fair game but I don’t see the relevance of McCardle’s looks to the bullshit she produces so we’re in agreement on that point and I wish you luck becoming the next David Broder. Do you like quail?

If that pisses you off go ahead and make fun of my appearance

I’d love to, Lawn guy. And I am not afraid of teh Brown. the hard part is convincing the other members of the team to go.

But ditto that with here. I’m always trying to get folks to come out here and visit (I’m a pretty gracious host), but unfortunately, I think my forwardness bring these sorts of thoughts to mind. C’est la vie.

I see you may be the aforementioned Gringo.

PUT THE FUCKING LOTION IN THE BASKET!!!

Oh and by the way, I am single-handedly responsible for losing the Dean campaign.

Don’t be so vain; you had plenty of help from all the other damp little pests in your campus-coddled swarms. There’s only one thing you political lampreys can accomplish single-handedly, and even that (I’m told) you prefer to do in groups (or circles). I just hope you had the minimal social awareness to wash that hand afterwards, young man.

And you still haven’t owned up on the “Harvard College” pretentiousness either, I notice.

I invited Megan because I *shock!* enjoy reading her blog… The challenge is getting a good combination of very smart people who can have an engaging conversation.

…about the good times puking in the shrubbery after binge-drinking at Choate (or wherever)? Because, seriously, even I can see that this woman is an intellectual lightweight, and I’m a fucking Bengal Cat.

However, I am sure that this virtual networking of your fellow careerists is exciting and amusing for you all. The rest of us, who have to live in the world you prattle about without ever experiencing? Not so much.

Anyone have a picture they want to send me to make fun of?

You can see my photograph by clicking my name. I have better hair than any of you.

The pseudonymous masses strike again.

This is my real name.

PS ‘Harvard College’ or not, u r a moran, d00d.

HTML — your photo of Jeff Jacoby here:

http://www.sadlyno.com/archives/5761.html

is one of the most horrifying existential documents in world history.

only people from Mass. who are fated to have to read teh Globe can understand the pain this pompous and aloof pissant pustule can exert.

Yours et cetera.

Doug Watts

I am really enjoying watching Megan drive you people crazy.

I am really enjoying watching Megan drive you people crazy.

Crazy? We’re already crazy, McAddled had nothing to do with that. We’re just having some gleeful fun at the expense of this obviously sheltered intellectual lightweight, stopping occasionally to mourn the demise of a once-great organ of the American Left.

Unlike your type, we don’t take everyone seriously just because they write for some big name. You need to learn a thing or to about the ways of Sadly, No! before thinking that she gets under our skin somehow. She’s obviously stupid not too bright, the kind of person this site specializes in.

Thank you for your guesses as to “my type”, Simba. Nice try.

The reason I’m enjoying it has zero to do with respecting her for the “big name” she works for. It’s because I know Megan extremely well, having shared a cubicle for most of the last four years or so at her old employer. She is an extremely kind and decent person, and she’s a good friend to me. And so I enjoy the fact that it’s professionally great for her that you guys all care so much that you spend countless hours on her, even if you’re so short of clever things to say that you have to make fun of her looks or whatever.

I disagree with Megan all the time — did when we worked together, still do when I read her blog. But I can disagree without calling her a fool or a lightweight because I know very well that she’s smart as a fucking whip, and more widely and better read than almost anyone I’ve ever met including, to judge by the level of wit here, pretty much every commenter on this blog. She’s also a fine writer, which is why a “once great ” organ of the left hired her to write, despite her politics.

You guys have a pretty funny blog. Some of you commenters are not total idiots. I think you do a good thing and have a good role in the ecosystem out there. But it’s a role like needed parasite; you couldn’t live without Megan. So it’s nothing personal against you. The whole system is kept healthy by good sharp satire and humor, some of which appears here.

But when you call a friend of mine a fool or a racist or dipshit or many of the other things people have mindlessly called her here, I’m going to defend her. (I expect you’d do the same for your friends.) And by the by, I’m also going to enjoy the fact that she is paid to write for a prestigious publication while all you jerkoffs can do is say “tall elf” and “lightweight” and whatnot in a comments section. I’m sure all you wits and wags weren’t hired by the Atlantic because the place is in decline. Those grapes were sour anyway.

It’s because I know Megan extremely well, having shared a cubicle for most of the last four years or so at her old employer.

You lose, thanks for playing.

Hark! Is that Robert Lane Greene, back for more?

By the way, elf is her word—overgrown elf, to be precise.

She’s also a fine writer

No.

Megan via Roger Ailes:

An upper middle class white kid who decides to become a journalist is consigning themselves to a lower standard of living than the one they grew up with; at one time I considered writing a book on downward mobility. But it’s not the same decision that a kid whose parents are a janitor and a waitress makes. Even if their parents don’t give them money, the upper-middle class kid know that if some financial disaster appears, their parents can step into alleviate it. Help with things like housing downpayments in expensive urban areas will be forthcoming. Eventually, a small inheritence will provide capital for needed projects. Meanwhile, an enhanced lifestyle is generally available through parental meals, vacation homes, theater tickets, and so forth.

Genius!

Lane, that her friends and family think she’s smart as a whip is all well and good, but strangers can only judge her by her writing, some of which has been stupid and lazy.

Lane, that her friends and family think she’s smart as a whip is all well and good, but strangers can only judge her by her writing, some much of which has been stupid and lazy and sometimes evil.

Excellent summary, Tigrismus!

One day, Lane’s “Doin’ It All for the Dollas” standard will lead him/her to defend Britney Spears as approximately ten thousand times as good a singer as, for example, Billy Holiday, or Maria Callas, or Emmylou Harris. After which, his/her body may never be found.

Lane,

Evidence please, evidence. You can assert all that you want that Megan is smart as a whip, well read, and a great writer, but there is zero empirical evidence to suggest that you are corect. Her writing is not nearly as good as many of the commenters here manage to dash off in spare moments, her thought is sophomoric, and she gives the sense of not having gotten too deep in the syllabus in many of those Ivy League courses,

She also appears to have had nothing in the way of real life experience and perhaps, as a result, shows the moral sensibility of a semi-precocious adolescent.

Most of us are simply stunned that this gets you a gig at the Atlantic. That and being the world’s tallest elf I guess.