But, I Can Only be Ugly on the Inside!

McMegan talks about America's first face transplant. I know, I love it, too.

There's been a sort of fascinated repulsion surrounding these transplants, but severe facial disfigurement is probably the worst accident that can happen and still leave you alive.

Who wants to give the odds on whether or not she is being hyperbolic here? And who the fuck are the people that say that people whose faces have been horrible disfigured shouldn't be able to have skin transplanted to repair them? Does Megan think those people really exist and/or represent some kind of mainstream "revulsion?"

Still, that sentence is funny as hell. Seriously, read it again, "severe facial disfigurement is probably the worst accident that can happen and still leave you alive"

Yes, that's right, "severe facial disfigurement is probably the worst accident that can happen and still leave you alive"

Not going schizophrenic, which leaves pretty much unable to form any meaningful relationship at all. Not Alzheimer's, which makes you shit yourself and forget the names of your wife and kids. Not brain stem injury (or whatever it's called) which leaves you unable to move any part of your body save your eyes. It's the ones that make you ugly that really get you.

Oh, boy, I can't stop reading it.

"severe facial disfigurement is probably the worst accident that can happen and still leave you alive"

"severe facial disfigurement is probably the worst accident that can happen and still leave you alive"

"severe facial disfigurement is probably the worst accident that can happen and still leave you alive"

I'd rather be dead than ugly! WOOT!!!!

The big question, of course, is whether or not it's worse than being poor.

Megan Goes Out on a Limb

Woah there cowboy:

The acting CFO of Freddie Mac has been found dead in his basement, an apparent suicide.

(...)

But there's no reason to blame either the regulators, or some dark scandal, as I imagine some commentators will try to. Kellerman wasn't tainted by the entity's earlier problems, and you don't commit suicide because you're mad at regulators. You commit suicide because you have deep mental health issues.

Look at our go girl, bravely telling her fans not to be complete assholes. Maybe she learned something from the Ledger affair? Stop laughing! That wasn't a joke!

I'm not sure what's worse, the fact that she alludes to some "dark scandal" in order to try and show that there are others equally as crazy as the loons on her side despite all evidence to the contrary, or the fact that she is now acknowledging how rabidly insane her fan base is and yet it does nothing to change her course.

If people as off the fucking wall as Megan's commenters started showing up here, I'd start a Fire brad, Nutella, and M. Bouffant blog. Heh, there I go again, futilely trying to contrast Megan with someone who has some smidgen of a conscience.

Damned if You Do, Damned if You Don't

There has been an historic event over at The Atlantic. Our "Eloise at The Atlantic" (as Roy Edroso puts it. I've never read Eloise but apparently it's very clever.)- well, it's truly astonishing - I... I... I'm getting choked up here.... she... she... she properly capitalized a title.. There's even grammar and shit in that thing. "Preach it, Brother Sanchez"... the phrase has just become the prettiest on record. Why, our muse,after years of badgering, may have finally listened to a critic. Could such a thing have happened? If so, I think we can likely head over to, uh..., somewhere in Europe and tell them not to bother powering the LHC back up. The Standard Model has been proved. The world is in harmony. We an all sleep at night, safe and sound, comfortable in the knowledge that terrorism has been defeated and that the economy is back on the up and up. Hold your breath, people. It might just be the greatest time to be alive.

While we can rest comfortably in the knowledge that the writers of the day are taking the 5 seconds necessary to make sure their articles are properly introduced, there's still work to be done. Though our pupil's post may have finally been begun in a competent manner, that which follows still reeks of hackdom, shallowness, and bias. I give you the "I know you are but what am I argument":

Julian points out that authoritarianism isn't some exclusively Republican vice:

Failing to funnel billions to a failing business is a form of authoritarian punishment. As an alternative, we're offered the proposition that we "want affordable, safe, fuel-efficient, environmentally sound cars built by committed workers who are rewarded for undertaking this task on our behalf." I think it's a lot more revealing to contemplate the sort of mindset that insists on seeing every economic outcome as a political "reward" or "punishment."

This whole familial frame seems to amount to an inverted Gospel of Wealth: Where the 19th century claimed that financial success was a reflection of moral worth, the function of public policy in the 21st century will be to create that symmetry. The only question is whether workers in a particular industry are naughty children who need to be sent to the corner for a time-out, or well-behaved children who should get a gold sticker for effort. This is, as I hope goes without saying, a pretty authoritarian frame on either side. It also seems like a manifestly awful way to make economic policy choices. Barring some marvelous Lebnizian coincidence, the answers to questions about the moral desert of workers in particular sectors are unlikely to consistently match the answers to quesitons about what's in the long-term interest of the economy as a whole.

Julian incredulously asks how failing to give away billions is a sign of ideology. That's a fair point, if not for the fact that Republican's were busy gleefully rejoicing that the auto-bailout gave them a chance to "take their first shot against organized labor." If there's anything that screams well reasoned consideration, it's failing to back a bill intended to aid the economy during the worst blah since blah because you have a chance to stick it to those pesky blue collar workers and their whole "treat us fairly" bullshit. But, I digress.

Apparently, the fact that Congress is making sure the money is being spent on something reasonable rather than keeping a failing business alive to continue to fail is a evidence of "mindset that insists on seeing every economic outcome as a political 'reward' or 'punishment.'" (YEAH SCARE-QUOTES!) It's not like when we wrote a blank check for the financial industry they didn't just blow it on expensive spas in California or use it to buy up other companies rather than lend it to people like we wanted.

Yes sir, either you agree with ole' Jules about how, as usual, the government should stay away or you're an authoritarian. Also, if you tell Jules that blindly following the same rules in all situations is, at least, dogmatism and almost certainly authoritarianism, then he's rubber and you're glue.

Welcome Back to Obvious Land

She's tired today, so it's back to only posting the mindlessly obtuse mixed with the blatantly obvious:

Round 1:

After scrubbing my house from top to bottom after the move, the skin is literally peeling off my hands from all the chemicals. This has made me think about getting a steam cleaner,

Being a chemist and all, I had this problem, too. Then one of my lab-mates pointed out this little box of blue rubber things that are shaped like hands.

Her defense in comments is that she's allergic to latex. Is there a malady from which she doesn't suffer? I sure hope they invent some other kind of thin and elastic material soon.

She moves on:

Second bleg is for a friend, who wants a nice digital camcorder that can double as a webcam. Not super-extravagent, just solid and easy to use. Any suggestions?

Oh, yeah, I have a suggestion. It's called Goo-fucking-gle, you lazy idiot.

Round 2:

A link to an article about plastic boobs getting lost at sea. Tee. Hee.

Round 3:

This New York Times article suggests that doctor arrogance is a significant cause of medical error.
(...)
What I want to know is whether disruptive doctors actually account for a notable percentage of medical errors. I'm sure if you surveyed doctors, 20% or so could report an error caused by a lazy LPN, incompetent PA, or pigheaded nurse. But I'm skeptical that "nurse pigheadedness" is actually a major problem that America's healthcare system needs to address.

Hmm, well, for starters: it seems pretty fucking obvious that competence might have something to do with, well, competence (To me, anyway). But then, for the truly dense, the New York Times goes out and wastes fucking time to show just that. And yet, somehow, our muse is still skeptical. I guess when you put all your blind faith in the "free market" it's difficult to have any leftover for anything else, like, say, faith that human decency is an inherently good thing....

Obviously, She's Still Sick

She must be delusional from fever. There is no other plausible reason for her to actually title a post "2-4-6-8! Time to overregulate!" The second line of the poem, is of course, "and now I'll go regurgitate!"

This poetically titled word-turd is about government regulation, so you know that it will be fun. Let's see where she starts:

Freddie has a typically thoughtful post on financial regulation:

Freddie, as you may know, got his start as a commenter on MM's blog. Now, for the second time, she's all like "look at my baby!" Proud parents can relate.

While Freddie may or may not be "typically thoughtful" by pointing out that greedy people will do anything for money (no really, that's what was so thoughtful), Megan's thoughtfulness is, amazingly, even shallower. To wit:

As libertarians go, I'm relatively in favor of financial regulation. But I think there are two ways to think about financial regulation:

Right, that's because she's NOT, I repeat, NOT AT FUCKING ALL NOT EVEN A FUCKING TINY BIT a libertarian. She's a ridiculous conservative hack that is too chickenshit to admit that she's a conservative, and so instead calls herself a "libertarian" while backing all conservative positions and criticizing liberals no matter how right they turn out to be (see previous post). So, with that out of the way, let's take a look at the exactly TWO ways... two ways.... two fucking ways! She thinks there are only TWO FUCKING WAYS to regulate. How can she write that thought down and not fucking start bleeding from her ears as her brain wilts into a pool of soggy dog shit? This idiotic woman actually wants to boil down a concept as broad as "regulation" into TWO fucking things. I swear, this women has the most binary grasp on the world EVER. She fucking HEARS in black and white.

1) Wall Street people are tricky bastards who spend almost all of their time thinking of how they can best maximize their profits by screwing The Little People.

Yes, that's right, liberals dehumanize everyone. That is not at all, BTW, Megan dehumanizing liberals. It's just true true fact. I'm not even going to quote the fleshing out of this tremendously idiotic stance because the stupid is already raising my blood pressure, so let's get right to number 2:

2) There are multiple possible equilibria in financial markets, and one of the problems in those markets is that decisions which are individually highly rational can, in aggregate, move society to one of the bad equilibria. Worse, those decisions may be sticky--it may be much harder to get out of the bad equilibria than into them. The government should act to mitigate the systemic risks by doing the things that only it can do: enforce transparency, solve collective action problems, and analyze the system for systemic rather than local risk. This will necessarily involve sacrificing some potential upside in order to insure against catastrophic downsides. But the government must remain aware of its own tendency to be excessively risk averse, because regulators are punished for visible failures, but not invisible lost benefits. It must also worry about the way that the very regulations intended to ensure safety can create or enhance systemic risk, as has happened in this crisis with rules such as the mark-to-market rule, and various institutional requirements for high credit quality in investments.

Blah blah jargon blah bullshit blah, so basically the two avenues are either "You're a stupid, shallow, knee-jerk liberal that hates anyone who make money" or "You agree entirely with Megan and are therefor wise, and good looking, and totally modest." Gee, which would you choose?

Yup, I'd rather be a stupid knee jerk liberal than anything resembling Megan McArdle, too. PLAN A WINS AGAIN!

Needless to say, I think the second approach is better. Unfortunately, in crises like this, the general political attitude is closer to the first one.

OMG why, oh WHY won't she SHUT THE FUCK UP? I'm putting her back in her cage. "Needless to say, I prefer the one that I painted in bright, rosy, smarty pants colors to the one in which I dogmatically attack my opponents and accuse them of dogmatism!" WHO THE FUCK WOULD'VE THUNK?!!?!??! THANKS FOR THE POST, MEGADOODLE!

Moreover, it seems to me that at least some of the people who are tremendously excited about the prospect of regulation are not excited because they are worried about the health of the financial system so much as they are intoxicated by the power that greater regulatory authority might give a liberal government to advance other goals, such as redirecting capital flows to more "deserving" uses, or reducing income inequality.

Hmm, and it seems that at least some libertarians are pedophiles, rapists, and murders SO THEREFORE MEGAN MCARDLE IS TOO! OMG, HOW COULD SHE RAPE SMALL CHILDREN AND THEN MURDER THEM?!!?!?!?!?!!?!?! And note how she basically says it's terribly horrible for liberals to take this latest power grab to do things like give money to poor people, ignoring that the latest conservative power grab was used to bomb the brownies, keep the gays from marrying, increase income inequality, etc etc. It's almost as if she's a one sided shill for pack of soulless, greedy, assholes who are, don't forget, raping and killing children.

I think this is a very good time to strip down our regulatory system to its bare bones and rebuild it into something more effective: streamlining regulatory authority, refocusing it on systemic risk and giving it the power to pursue those issues more effectively, purging the overreliance on single models that make things more convenient for the regulators, and figuring out how the hell Basel II went so deadly wrong.

I think now would be a very good time for Megan to tell me WHAT THE FUCK BASEL II IS!

But I do not think that this is anything close to what we will actually get. We will get piecemeal patches designed to prevent the problems that just occurred without much attention to future issues (see, Enron and mark-to-market accounting). We will probably see restrictions on various types of activity, without regard to lost upside from that activity. There may well be some dramatic and pointless gesture, such as Glass-Steagall's drive to split off investment banking from commercial banking. I expect some populist measures like letting judges rewrite mortgages in bankruptcy, which look swell until the cost of a mortgage goes up.

Omg, preventing the same economic collapse from happening again!? Keeping your money safe and making investments transparent?!?!?!? Judges letting people keep their houes?!?!?!?!?!?!?!!?!! CATS AND DOGS LIVING IN HARMONY!!!!!!!! THE LIBERALS ARE ON THE LOOOOOOOOOSEEEEEE!!!!!! AHHHHH!!!!!!!!

This will make happy those who are definitionally in favor of more regulation.

What kind of person is definitionally [sic] in favor of more regulation? Are there people that just get a boner every time the government tells them what to do? Megan thinks that people are just like "Yeah! More laws! I'm so happy for economic catastrophe because now I get to follow more laws!" How can she not see that THESE ARE THE EXACT FUCKING CATASTROPHES THAT MAKE US WANT A PRO-FUCKING-ACTIVE GOVERNMENT TO BE-FUCKING-GIN WITH?!?!!?!

I think this metaphor perfectly describes McBinary's view of the world; People are cold, so they start a fire. Then it's nice and warm. Some people are like "Awesome, we're warm. Let's save some firewood and keep this fire going nice and toasty forever" and then others, let's call them, I dunno, flibberglarians, they go "No way! This fire is great so a bigger one is better! Let's throw everything on there! Our food! Our houses! Yeah! Fire is awesome!" Afterwards ,that flibberglarian looks around at all their possessions all burned up and blames the people who aren't retarded and accuses them of hating fire all along.

A lot of people writing today seem to think of regulatory agencies as quasi-prisons for Demon Finance, and think that the main problem with the current system is that it's mollycoddling the inmates. Bankers are not criminals.

I'm sorry, WHAT? Does that make sense to anyone? Is that even remotely true? Is she talking about the little gremlins that live under her bed or something? She really feels the need to tell us that "Bankers are not criminals?" wow, whodathunkit. Bankers aren't criminals guys. Man, my ideology is in fucking TATTERS because of this woman's intellect.

As a class, they are exactly as self-interested, self-destructive, and short-sighted as other classes of people that liberals want less highly regulated, such as unions and community organizers.

Right, as a class, those bankers, who act individually and do their best to increase their profits from 1 to 2 gagillion dollars a year no matter what the consequences, are EXACTLY the same as the community organizers who are people the go around, generating collective action so that people can NOT LIVE IN SQUALOR. I-fucking-dentical.

I love Megan.

Evil Minds Think Alike

Great minds think alike

It occurred to me, while I was listening to the congressional hearings, that the government could stop most of this by just seizing houses in default and continuing to make the mortgage payments. It turns out someone else is thinking the same way:

Yes, what a great mind. Give the banks lots of money and fuck over your average Joe who just wanted a fucking house to live in. Oh, wait she thought of that problem.

There are inherent issues here: at what rate do we rent to the current occupants? How do we make the banks pay for their folly? Also, the government is not a notoriously effective landlord. On the other hand, it punishes the homeowners without putting them on the street, and eventually the houses will be worth something.

Well, I said she thought of it. It's not like I said she actually gave a fuck about it.

Punish the homeowner, but save the bank. John Smith's right hand surely knows not what his left hand does.

She Actually Wrote That (Part Megan in a McArdle-going Series)

I'm sure this post deserves more than drive-by, but I can't resist:

For one thing, a lot of old people would starve because they believed their government--a valuable object lesson in the problem with relying on government programs, to be sure, but it is perhaps a mite rough to let millions of old people die pour encourager les autres.

What is the lesson that these old people should learn, you ask? Well, it appears to be that libertarians would really like to be even BIGGER assholes than they already are:

Yes, we all concede that Social Security and Medicare are bad programs that should, at the very least, be structured very differently than they are. But that doesn't mean we can just try shock therapy.

She seems almost disappointed that she can't just make the government bail on its promise to keep the elderly from starving on the streets. In fact she feels the need to mention a second reason to not throw these programs away:

For another, there is no political possibility of enacting a law that causes millions of old people to starve.

Because, for most of her fans, the whole people living in poverty thing really isn't persuasive enough.

I know, honey, it's tragic, but it looks like those awful, awful safety nets in place that keep gramma and grampa from living in a shelter are sadly here to stay. The world is so cruel. If only the rubes understood that it's the market that determines whether or not the people who build our economy get to enjoy it once they stop working, not some namby pamby thing like the "government" and it's stupid, inefficient "will of the people" bullshit.

One gets more and more sympathetic towards the cause everyday.

A Tale of Two Stupid People

Minnesota arrests:

The first stupid person, is me, for trying to engage Megan as if she were a human. Guess who the second stupid person is.

First, read at least part of this. It's horrifying. Greenwald writes:

Protesters here in Minneapolis have been targeted by a series of highly intimidating, sweeping police raids across the city, involving teams of 25-30 officers in riot gear, with semi-automatic weapons drawn, entering homes of those suspected of planning protests, handcuffing and forcing them to lay on the floor, while law enforcement officers searched the homes, seizing computers, journals, and political pamphlets.

Megan says a "peppering" of requests to cover the flagrant abuse of police power describe below by "commenters" (and the plural was used because I, the lone commenter, posted more than one comment, I suppose). She doesn't mention the writing to Megan of this email from your truly:

I asked in comments (admitted OT) but you didn't answer. Hopefully you can enlighten me here.

Why is it that, as an alleged libertarian who hates all forms of government intrusion into the basic rights of the people. you haven't blogged about any of the first amendment suppression that has happened at both the DNC and the RNC?

If you don't know what I'm talking about, I highly suggest you start reading Glenn Greenwald's blog (no relation). Here are links to a couple of articles pertinent to what I'm talking about in this email:

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/08/25/blue_dogs/index.html

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/08/30/police_raids/index.html

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/08/31/raids/index.html

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/09/01/protests/index.html

I'm sure a journalist such as yourself could uncover a lot more and it seems to me to be the biggest step towards a police state that has happened since Gitmo. Why are you silent on this? It seems a hell of a lot more intrusive of the government to be pointing machine guns and people who even THINK of protesting than it is for them to be raising taxes. How about picking up the bullhorn on this.

To be clear, this isn't a Dem v Rep thing. The "free speech zones" and etc that happened at the DNC was just as horrible. When is someone besides the DFH community going to start realizing that shit is getting out of hand?

Or, ignore me, and go on spouting abnout Palin and her pregnant teenage daughter. You know, the stuff that really matters.

Typos in the email have not been corrected. (Re-reading makes me realize just how badly I need to start proof reading my emails... YIKES)

The links are to articles brad mentioned earlier and a few others. You must read them as there is simply no overstating just how shocking they are.

They were so shocking they even triggered Megan to action. She dutifully writes a blog post about how some of the RNC protesters were arrested for doing illegal things like blocking traffic and breaking windows. She goes on to take the side of the police.

Thanks, Megan. This completely answers my questions about PREEMPTIVE raids BEFORE the convention of houses where PROPERTY WAS SEIZED and the occupants were HANDCUFFED FOR EXTENDED PERIODS OF TIME, with MACHINE GUNS POINTED AT THEM and then NEVER CHARGED WITH ANY CRIME save for one that has never been prosecuted before, mostly because it's patently unconstitutional.

I guess this is just like the 2x4 thing, only with M-16's. Megan must be fucking TICKLED.

Onward marches libertarianism. Dutifully fighting the grave abuses of power such as illegal searches, torture, detention and intimidation taking too much of Megan's money to feed the elderly and poor.

I asked her in comments and I'll ask again. How in the world does she sleep at night?

I don't even have the energy to curse at this point. Sorry to let you down.

The Glibertarian Philosophy in a Nutshell

From today's L. A. Times, I thought I'd share this nugget of free market love w/ all.

McCain's amnesia should be construed as a positive political gaffe; the more homes he owns, the better. His message to every American voter is that like him, they can all achieve the American dream through the time-tested habits of focus, hard work and perseverance (and helped by positive government policies that he proposes, like minimal taxation to stimulate investment and jobs.)

Unfortunately, many with socialist inclinations in the opposing camp have not learned the lessons of failed socialism elsewhere.

Ashok Sharma
La Cañada Flintridge

Military & "Public" Service career?
Family connections.

Dumping your first wife 'cause she shrank while you were away?
Legal costs, filing fees, child-support, alimony.

Marrying a bottle-blond beer baroness 18 yrs. your junior, who owns a corporate jet?
Priceless.

Oh those whacky black people

Note, there are a lot of run-ons and typos below but this brought me to such a rage there's no way I can revisit it in order to neaten it up. Other contributors are welcome to it.
(brad adds: Done and done. You might want to make clear to Megan you weren't threatening her, even implicitly, lest she seek you out and shoot you in preemptive self-defense.)

Oh no, here we go again. Hasn't Megan learned not to talk about black people yet?

Is there reverse privilege?

I think it's safe to assume that minorities and women know more about life in the dominant group than the reverse--if for no other reason than the ways that media centers around their experience.

Yeah, you totally know what it's like to be a man, Megan. Afterall, you've seen a football game or two. Similar, I'm keenly aware of gay culture from having watched a handful of Queer Eye for the Straight Guy episodes. More on this later and by later I mean her next sentence:

But that can be tricky. Have you ever noticed how Europeans think they know way more about life in America than they actually do, because they watch our television and movies? I'm pretty sure that I know more about men's world than they know about mine--but I'm also confident that I don't actually know what it's like to be a man.

Gotta love Megan. Make a point as your topic sentence, then use your supporting sentences to refute that point.

While we were at Aspen, Ta-Nehisi and Kenyatta and I talked about the fact that most white people have some older person--a relative or a family friend--who is an extremely good person, and also says racist things. Most of us don't confront those people, except perhaps in a "Now, grandma, you know you shouldn't say those things*" kind of way.

Actually, I usually loudly sigh and facepalm AT THE LEAST whenever my ultra-rightwing older brother talks about the "sandniggers", but then again, I have a conscience.

That most of us have concluded that we can't raise an 85-year-old might be cowardice, but to me it feels like choosing my battles

And why battle racism when there's so much more pressing issues, like the lack of soy milk at Megan's local grocer.

Rather, I'm continuing what I tried to say in this post: that both communities, because they have a less than perfect understanding of the others' [sic] experience, are more suspicious of each other than they need to be.

No Megan, white people crossing the street when they see a black person coming is oversuspicious. Black people getting denied an interview because their name is Aiesha is fucking racism and is something to get VERY FUCKING LEGITIMATELY pissed off about.

Ending racism: are we there yet? Huh? Huh?
Dear lord she is such a bitch. Nothing like making your title a comparison of complaints of continuing racial tension to bratty five year olds in the back seat of your minivan. Sigh. Why wasn't she the one that got shot?

Meanwhile, Julian Sanchez had a very good post in response to Ta-Nehisi. You should read the whole thing, but I've been thinking hard about this piece:

She says. You know that this means the quoted post is in fact the biggest piece of shit ever.
Julian says:

There are still, of course, sectors of American society where the crude racism of the epithet and the noose is casually accepted. But, happily, this sort of thing largely is beyond the pale in polite company

Well Julian and Megan are some sheltered motherfuckers. I lived in Pittsburgh a mere three years and spend most of that time in the admittedly sheltered world of the undergraduate. Still, I heard more than once public declarations about how horrible gays were and how you couldn't trust black people. I even had my liberal and "enlightened" friend tell me once that she does, in fact, cross the street when she sees a black man coming. This wasn't some subtle, subconscious thing either. She actually argued that it was a reasonable step to take in order to avoid getting raped.

But no, racism is totally on the back burner these days. Just ask Jesse Helms. His career went to total shit because of his stroke overt racism.

Julian goes on to argue that racism is subtle these days. I'll skip it for now and get back to our muse, who loudly applauds her compatriot in not really caring about black people. (It's okie though, because neither of them has ever called anyone a nigger.)

While I think Julian's onto something important here, I wonder if this is even relevant for most of the white community. Most people just don't seem very interested in battling subtle bias.

Really? I'd love to battle that. I think most progressives (of which there are an ever increasing number) would love to battle it, too. Moreover, I'd love to battle the still largely present beat you over the head racism. I think it'd be awesome if penalties for crack and cocaine were similar. It'd be great if there were genuine public outcry for the labeling of black New Orleans residents scavenging for food as "looters." I think it'd be fucking terrific if Kanye West's speech would've been treated as the ballsy, needed to be fucking said, slap in the face of continuing, unabashed white racism that it was rather than the "OMGZOR HE DIDN'T READ THE TELEPROMPTER" travesty it was treated as.

The earlier anti-racism movements had clear goals. Free the slaves, change the Jim Crow laws, tell people they ought to treat black candidates the same as all the others. The new battle is against an endless battle against one's own thoughts. This sounds fine for people who are professional intellectuals, especially if they are focused on race or gender issues. I think that when feminist blogs say, "Everyone is sexist--we are not blaming you, but we need your help to stamp it out" they think they're extending an olive branch. But to most people, I suspect it just sounds exhausting.

Seriously, we gave the darky the vote! Does he really expect us to do the horribly tiring self reflection it would take to genuinely eradicate discrimination in all its forms? I mean, c'mon people, Survivor! is on!

And, to tell it true, the newer forms of sexism and racism aren't as bad as what proceeded them. With civil rights, we were asking people to slay dragons. Now we're asking them to spend the rest of their lives exterminating mosquitos. It may be true that a swarm of mosquitos is almost as bad, in toto, as a single dragon. But they don't summon the same sort of emotional energy.

First off, mosquitos are a horrible fucking analogy as malaria kills shitloads of people every year, but of course, they're not white people so of course Megan wouldn't think of that. Second off, FUCK YOU, YOU STUPID RACIST CUNT. You honestly think that racism today is some trifling thing? Yeah, it's just those damn niggers being uppity. So what if they can't get a cab in New York? Let em fucking walk! And hey, when the store clerks follow them around that's just an opportunity to have a knowledgeable employee around to ask questions about the merchandise!

She continually outdoes herself. This is why I hate libertarians. They can write entire tomes about how terrible it is that young people have to pay for the health care of old people, but dismiss racism as so 1968. Fuck you, Megan. I hope you die and join Jesse Helms in the gang rape circle, you self-entitled, racist piece of shit.

Megan, Is That You?

If it really is McArdle, this is a pretty awful response to the question posed, which was, "Well, do you have any suggestions as to what can be done about torture, etc., then?"

No, nor do I have any suggestion for how to deal with the perennial problem of unrequited love, the dissatisfactions of aging, or parents who say horrible things to their children. Sometimes life's a bugger.
Posted by Megan McArdle June 21, 2008 10:15 AM

Come to think of it, she's had about eight hrs. to delete this & advise all that it wasn't her typing, so unless she's off for the wknd., we can assume that she ranks "unrequited love" w/ torture & mass murder. What do you know? Again the "life's a bugger," or, "life is unfair, so..." Why any fucking laws then? Why not anarchy in the streets, & the farmlands as well?

Interesting comment thread in general. Megan has a bit of a hissy fit on FMM friend Susan of Texas, & there's the usual "leftie Euroweenie" blather from the guns, gawd, & homophobia folk.

A Very Free Market

Megan is a consumer. Doesn't produce much of use, but she can buy stuff.

The word on the street from my shadowy hipster associates is that the thing to do is jailbreak the phone and then ebay [sic] it internationally to some country where the iPhone is not yet sold through a carrier. In those fabled lands, a jailbroken iPhone 1.0 is probably worth almost as much as you paid for it.

Oh, please. McM is too scared to hit the "streets" w/o a gun, & we doubt that iPhones are a big part of "street" activity. (Maybe "shadowy hipster associates" think they're bad, w/ their "jailbreaking" iPhones, but it's not "the street.") Do screw up the iPhone & sell it overseas, though, so your victim won't be able to get his/her money back. It's the American way.

Elements of Style©:
Dep't of Redundancy Dep't.: If I e-bay it, say, nationally, instead of "internationally" to "some country," does that make "some country" the United Snakes [sic]?

"Fabled lands?" Megan, Megan, Megan, B. A. in English from a (lesser) Ivy, perhaps a few weeks of a comedy course would help. That should be something like "benighted zones," or "sadly deprived nations," or "lands w/o hope," anything but "fabled."

Imaginary one-sided conversation:
"Megan, honey, you know we love you, but what are we going to do with you? We invested all our money in the Hoity-Toity Day School, and you couldn't get in anywhere better than Penn, & then we went further into debt to get you an M. B. A. so you could get a job, and really the best thing you've done is answer the phones & run the copier at "Ground Zero," and you still don't have any prospects of giving us grandchildren, and please don't tell me you're sleeping with any of your shadowy hipster associates, [she sobs] are you?" [Here Mrs. McArdle begins to weep quietly as Megan reaches for her & the lights go down slowly.]

Sorry Brad, but...

this may be the worst thing ever.

That feisty contrarian we call Megan asks, 'Should Lori Drew be prosecuted?'

For those who don't like links, Megan is wondering if a 47 year old woman (Lori Drew) who posed as a 16 year old boy on MySpace and courted and flirted with a 13 year old girl should be prosecuted with a crime. BEE TEE DUB, the 13 year old girl killed herself after the 47 year old qua 16 year old said nasty and hateful things to the child on the intertubes.

Megan then offers up this news:

After looking into the case, local and state law enforcement authorities could not find any criminal laws that Drew had broken. But last week Thomas P. O'Brien, the U.S. attorney for the Central District of California, brought four federal charges against her: one count of conspiracy and three counts of accessing a computer without authorization via interstate commerce to obtain information to inflict emotional distress.

Then her expert legal advice: "But it seems to me that it isn't a legal crime." Her argument consists off.... oh wait, she just avers that Drew's actions were legal.

Now, I have no problem with a lawyer who offers his/her sober positive analysis of the case, and concludes that a crime was not committed. However, I think it is pretty fucking disgraceful to glibly assert that a crime wasn't committed, especially when the asserter lacks any legal expertise, or acute logical facilities. Glibly dismissing these legal charges as unfounded is even more disgraceful in world where Chris Hansen is ubiquitous and everyone knows that the laws regarding adult online contact with minors are pretty fucking stringent.

UPDATE:

Here is a smart post arguing why, based on sound legal principles, the case against Drew is unfounded. Just cus we're fair and balanced here at FMM.

UPDATE 2:

Comment time, from STC:

The essence of this is that if someone hurts your feelings - on the Internet no less - and you are so unbalanced as to go off and kill yourself, they are liable?

Yes, because thats what happened. In addition to fraud and establishing a romantic relationship with a minor. Later, STC opines that "This woman is a bit pathetic." Actually, Drew is the most pathetic thing ever, second only to her apologists.

ZOMG

Shorter Megan: The Bush administration wasn't indifferent to the plight of black people after Hurricane Katrina destroyed their lives because Burma kills monks.

brad adds:

Americans could be told that 500,000 had died in a Bangladeshi apartment building fire, and we'd just sort of nod and say how awful it all is.

No, I'd ask for further details about an apartment building that half a million people, at least, lived in. That'd be a very unusual building.

I don't know how she does it

Every time I think I can no longer be shocked by something she does, she manages to find just another dimension of cruelty with which to express herself

The New York Times discovers cutting yourself only twenty years after my high school classmates. Stand by for this weekend's special report: Sometimes, Teenagers Drive Out into the Woods and Drink Too Much Beer.

Dear teenagers who cut themselves,

I know that cutting yourself provides grounding in a world so insane that up is down and left is purple, but there are more constructive ways to deal with depression. Next time you feel the urge to hurt yourself, find Megan McArdle; and hurt her instead.

Sincerely
Wow, this women really doesn't have any empathy at all, does she.

brad adds:

Since Megan ultimately has no topic but herself, we all know she has asthma. I knew a kid who died of asthma related problems when I was in the fifth grade. Therefore, any issues Megan faces are passe, and fodder for being made fun of.
Right?
(Don't worry, I won't. I have a soul.)

Waiting...

When do we get the "I know they're radical & extreme in Burma/Myanmar, but Jesus, this is just too much" item about the cyclone, Abu Dhabi style? Or was that Dubai?

Proof Megan is a conservative

Megan describes JEB Bush's some other guy's expression of gratitude that the state can murder black people with needles as "odd."

No Megan, its odd that Clay Aiken is on QVC. Its evil that a governor is thankful that the state is going to kill more people.