Now That We Won't Have Megatron To Kick Around For A Wk. Or Two

Megan to get hitched: Better late than never, eh? (Full disclosure: This reporter has never been married. As a libertarian libertine I'm much too dedicated to my freedom principles to enter into a contract w/ someone for emotional support or whatever the hell they do this for.)

And this is not funny:

We are finally on the brink of that happy moment that every girl dreams of:  a qualified change in family status under section 125 of the tax code.

And I've no idea why they think it's funny. The intention may be self-deprecation, but it's usually more self-revelatory.

This may be a revelation as well:

It turns out weddings are complicated, and require a great deal of last-minute detail management. Especially when you have to push your column through fact check before you are allowed to depart.

Not that weddings are a pain, but the resentment behind "push through fact check."

Other mental images to be avoided (As well as use of "hopefully."):

hopefully I'll come back fortified by blissful romance + long hours spent lying on the beach.

I won't wish the future Mrs. Suderman ill. (Don't forget the sun-block!) The present Mr. Suderman, well, good luck, pal.

Guilt By Association

Via LG&M, I peeked at something called Pileus. Granted, blog-pimper Robert Farley advised that he didn't agree w/ them much, but one doesn't expect to see Megan McCardle [sic] considered a "high quality blog"

by anyone who takes himself seriously.

We here don't even take ourselves seriously, but even we know enough not to take Ms. McArdle seriously at all.

Elements Of Style©: Just from a technical standpoint, Megan types neither well nor clearly, seldom bothers to correct typos, & so on, as often documented here & elsewhere in cyberspace. That alone makes her space less than high quality, w/o getting into, you know ...

Is This An Ad Hominem Attack?

Poor Megan. Up since 1419 ET, but no one wants to discuss.

Or am I just being rude?

If Less Is More, We're In Trouble

The Hunting of The Snark brings this to our attention, which disappointed founder/publisher brad.

Do I want to know who she follows? Sure I do: 'Tis herself. (Alas, not a heavy or recent user.)

Be nice, brad.

Just When I Thought I Was Out...

We've been getting complaints about our lack of postings directed along the prevailing winds of this blog's stated purpose. It's true. We've been lazy. Frankly, can you blame us? I mean, Megan's random careening of a blog career is hardly affected by our ineffectual plinking, and how much fun is it to hear us exhaust our supply of "yer dum" jokes on the same person over and over?

Oh, really? You like that sort of thing? Well, alright then. Here, I'll do a nice short easy one then just to make you happy.

Random Thought:

I would find Malcolm Gladwell's responses to Steve Pinker so much more compelling if they didn't rely so heavily on sly, and irrelevant, accusations of racism.

Huh. That's pretty funny. She's ad homineming someone for ad homineming. Good joke there. I'll have to make sure to note the potential humor opportunity. But, first, better do my due diligence and read the link.

Oh, turns out it's a blog post following up on something else. I guess I'd better read that. Wouldn't wanna start in the middle, ya know?

Hey, wait, this is a letter to the editor in response to a New York Times book review. Fuck, well, I guess I'll start at the book review, then. Man, this short post is getting tedious.

OK, read 'em all. What have we got? Well, Malcolm Gladwell wrote a book. Steve Pinker said the book had some good parts and some bad parts and mentioned that Gladwell's claim that IQ is irrelevant doesn't seem to be supported. Gladwell writes to the NYT stating this view is an "ice-flow." Pinker replies with various studies and letters from scientists that say this is a mainstream view. Gladwell then points out that some of these studies aren't so cut and dry and, in fact, present a nuanced view of IQ. He also points out that other sources are openly racist and push IQ inheritablility/racial inferiority agendas. Megan cries "fowl!"

Fuck, that took a while. And this post is getting long. Better go trim it down. That's gonna take a while, too. OK, so what's the pith, here? Well, Megan did a few stupid things. Lemme find my notes. I know I already wrote one of those down... AH YES! Here it is! She used an ad hominem attack to refute an argument for being ad hominem. Oh, man, irony IS a classic.

What else? Oh, yeah, she wrote a single sentence about multiple articles and responses which haven't really been widely discussed. That's pretty funny. I mean, it's quite narcissistic to think everyone would just know what you're talking about in that situation. Yeah, narcissism jokes go over well. I'll stick one of those in.

Am I missing anything? Oh, RIGHT! I forgot that Gladwell didn't really make any "sly accusations of racism" so much as pointed out that one of Pinker's sources was OPENLY RACIST and therefor might be tainted by an agenda. That's pretty important. Rather glaring error on her part. Kind of defeats the whole purpose of her post, really. Oh, we can make a self-defeating joke. Another classic.

Hey, wait, she used the word "irrelevant," too, which is also wrong because, hey, those "sly accusations" only kind of undermine entirely the credibility of one of Pinker's sources. That's fairly relevant. That's definitely gotta go in.

OK, so, she contradicts herself, acts narcissistic, and fails to understand the arguments of the people she's "criticizing" (TWICE in the span of TWO WORDS). Shit, I forgot, I have to explain this whole fucking mess because most likely no one has read the book review, or the response to the book review, or the response to the response to the book review. Yeah, so, I gotta do all that. In a short post.

Oh, hey, look at that. 5pm already. Fuck it. Good enough. I'll just punch out. Wife's gonna kill me if I log in any more overtime.

Update: Heh. I tried to be as thorough as possible here in order to illustrate my point and I STILL forgot to mention explicitly in my round up at the end that she fails to link to two of the three things she is discussing. Indeed.

Her stupidity; It takes a genius to keep track of it all.

Equivalent Megan

Tech Talk:

I'm flying to Florida and I had to tell you about it so badly that I wasted 10 bucks on wifi that I can't use because my laptop sucks. OMG, you can get internet on the plane now!

For Those Who Are Interested

Megan Live!

25 Aug 2009 01:16 pm

I'll be doing a live chat on the Washington Post tomorrow. Those who are interested can participate, or view it, here.

Fire Megan McArdle supports engagement in public discourse.

How Could They Possibly Sell for More Than I'm Willing to Pay?

Megan tells us "Why I Think the Housing Bubble Has Not Yet Bottomed" because there are a few retards out there who, incredibly, want Megan's opinion on things.

The reason housing prices haven't bottomed, she says, is because the people selling this condo are asking more than it sold for 4 years ago. Naturally, she's not looking at the multitude of graphs showing the national housing price is still well above historical norms. Nope, she's armed with an anecdote. For those too lazy to click, the listing is in the heart of a good neighborhood in the middle of DC.

Now, for someone so convinced housing prices haven't bottomed, it's a bit odd she's looking at house listings. That's, of course, not the stupidest thing she is doing, though. The stupidest thing is here is that she doesn't know anything about housing prices save that they're down. Anyone who is a modicum of informed would know that they're down in some areas but relatively unchanged in others. Those other areas typically being in the center of major metropolitan areas; you know, like downtown DC. To wit, commenter Jim:

Are you familiar with comparable sales? Looks like the going rate for a 900-1000 sqf 2 bed 1 bath condo within a couple blocks of this one range from 485-540K over the last 6 months (6 sales). Seems to me they are already at the low end of this range. Perhaps their realtor knows the market better than you do?

An expert knowing more than Megan? NEVER!

Oh, and thanks, Jim. As soon as I read it I knew she had to be wrong along these lines. I'm glad I didn't have to do the legwork myself to prove it.

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.

Not Very Subtle.

Oh uh, Suderman, you'd better run.

PLEASE LOOK AT ME!

Seriously, look at me. Come on, look at me. LOOK AT ME. WTF?!?!?1 WHY WON'T YOU LOOK AT ME?!?!?!?:

A close brush with almost notoriety:

A friend informs me that on my favorite ever television show, The Wire, one of the main characters was originally going to be named McCardle.

That's it. That's the ENTIRE FUCKING POST.

Hey, guy, on House the other week there was a patient with my last name! Also, I'm kind of smart and have chronic pain so I take narcotics all the time right in front of people and I'm inconsiderate so sometimes people compare me to House! Oh, and I was House for Halloween the other year! Oh, and a blogger that is pretty famous and liberal has my last name (but he's gay and I'm not). Oh, and that guy on House that had my name, I can't believe I forgot to mention this, OMG, his affliction was that he said things without thinking and like, OMG I DO THAT ALL THE TIME!

Isn't that really interesting guys? Seriously, I'm like, almost notorietyious! It's like that movable "Almost Notable!" only I'm not a hot chick. Oh, but guys, I totally once dated this girl who some people said was "pretty cute" which is like close to hot, so really, IT IS JUST LIKE ME!
ME!
ME!
ME!
ME!
ME!
ME!
ME!
ME!
ME!

Oh, and usually I get mad when people put an extra "C" in my name but it's ok when you're "The Wire" which is like, about drugs, which, cause I'm a libertarian (did you know I'm a libertarian?) are like totally OK (but not as OK as being ridiculously wealthy and owning 56 houses while other people starve to death!)

ME!ME!
ME!ME!ME!ME!

Fuck Do, fuck Re, fuck Fa, Sol, La, Ti, and Do gets fucked again! It's all ME!ME!ME!ME!ME!ME!

Mad? I'M NOT MAD!!!!

Oh, goody, Megan's talking about herself taxes! What fun!

According to Megan, some dude thinks we should raise the top tax brackets. Apparently the idea that a top bracket in the neighborhood of $400k isn't optimal is actually worth discussing these days. I'm sure there's lots of people who think there is no meaningful difference between 400 thousand and 400 million dollars a year that really need to be argued with.

Anyway, this dude Megan quotes is all like "some people are angry and bitter" and then Megan's all like "OMG, WTF! I am totally NOT angry and bitter! Uh, like, life's too short for that. It's just like Dez-Cart sez!" Well, no, seriously, she says:

I'm not angry and bitter; I'm about as mad as I am at the prospect of people who bought homes they can't really afford getting a bailout while I continue renting--which is to say, not very. Life is rather too short to spend it getting angry at remote strangers.

Yeah, we all wish we were as majestically sanguine as Megan. She doesn't let the little things, like stupid poor moochers getting all uppity--thinking they deserve a house--and then buying the home that the financial experts enthusiastically tell them they can afford. Oh, and the people that fleeced the economy and pay very little taxes.. uh... something about them too.

I mean, why get bothered at huge social injustice when there's important things to get into a huff about, like the fact that she needs to show ID to get Pseudofed or that the DMZ insists that her car actually allow her to see behind it before she legally drives it around.

To show us how not bitter she is, she follows up with this incredibly snide and baseless trenchant thought:

I also note, just as an aside, that the definition of "very rich" seems increasingly to be set at "just above the level a top-notch journalist in a two-earner couple could be expected to pull down".

Oh, really? How nice of these "journalists" to provide you with both an exact figure along which the line between rich and poor is drawn as well as their jountly filed 1040s! I mean, you aren't just making that completely the fuck up, are you Meggies? You wouldn't happen to be sniping at "top-notch journalists" out of jealousy or inferiority, would you? No, of course not. Life is too short to feel belittled by complete strangers who are much more thorough, intelligent, moral and hard working than you are.

Of course Megan's point in all this, in case you were wondering, is the following:

That said, I don't see why brackets top out at a relatively low level of income. Indeed, I don't see why we have tax brackets. They're inefficient, and a lot of them have pernicious marginal effects on those near the ceiling. Why not a continuously scaling function from negative (EITC) to some maximum? These days, people use either printed tax tables or tax software to prepare their taxes; this shouldn't present an undue hardship. Obviously, with my preference for less government, I would recenter the scale so that people making $250,000 a year pay relatively less, and those making $10 million pay relatively more, in order to make the proposal revenue neutral. But the basic concept seems bipartisan.

Ah, yes, see, Megan's not throwing a passive aggressive hissy because she actually disagrees with what she's quoting. She just has much better reasons to believe what the author believes. She has a point; why make arguments about "fairness" and "justice" when you can just mumble about "efficiency" and then you don't even need to be "human!" I also love that people who make $250K need to pay less but people that make $10 million need to pay more. Funny, I notice a lot of "third tier bloggers" seem to think the line between rich and poor just happens to fall somewhere in the range of what they can imagine themselves believably making in the future. Shocking, indnit?

The Internet: Bringing you Horrible Shit Tailored to your Specific Taste in Horrible Shit

The Atlantic has realized that, though their wisdom is infinite, it is not applied in an exact enough manner. Lo! That shall change, for now we've got "Ask the Editors!"

That's right kids! Now, instead of having random issues addressed in a poorly researched, shallowly reasoned, and ideological bent, you can have specific issues addressed in a poorly researched, shallowly reasoned, and ideological bent!

Ah, the march of progress! Soon we'll have McArdle beamed right into our brains! Oh, the fun we'll have!

On a side note, I know "beamed" is the proper spelling, but doesn't "beemed" look a lot better? I mean, it looks like it's being beamed! How awesome is that?!?! I know, pretty fucking awesome, right? Write to Webster's! We'll make it happen.

Your Narcissist is Showing

Megan is talking about grading (wtf?!?! why?! The last thing she should want is for someone to think of analytic objective evaluation when they're reading her blog!)

It's mostly boring shit. She's actually discussing whether or not to judge people on merit or ability, an analysis that most of us knock-out in about five minutes when we're twelve. Naturally, Megan's wording is rather telling:

Is it fair to set the bar higher for me than for someone who isn't as capable? Or vice versa? Is it fair to send the signal to employers that I wasn't up to scratch even when I did objectively better work than some other student?

Who uses the first person singular pronouns when discussing hypotheticals? Don't people usually use "you" or "they" or, occasionally, "one?" No, not me! When I'm imagining a situation where I'm better than others, I like to make sure that I can connect with it! I wouldn't want the point of how superior I am to be lost on YOU the reader, now would I?

Maybe. After all, one of the things that employers and graduate schools are presumably looking for is ability to exert oneself consistently.

Alright, first of all, the word "maybe" DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN ENTIRE FUCKING SENTENCE YOU FUCKING GRAMMAR ASSASSIN!!!!! YOU'RE A FUCKING ENGLISH MAJOR! NO AMOUNT OF BRAINS OR WORK CAN ACCOUNT FOR THE FAILURE TO LEARN THE FUND-A-FUCKING-MENTALS OF THE FUCKING LANGUAGE YOU PURPORT TO "MASTER!"

....okie... deep breath, Toast.... we've made real good progress with our shrink.... c'mon man... come on down....

phew

ok... moving on...

Anyway, who's fucking surprised that Megan thinks that employers aren't looking to hire people that actually know shit? Clearly, it's not a phenomenon our muse has encountered directly. That must mean she views herself as a "hard working" type. I wonder how she figures that?. I guess it is difficult for her to throw out the occasional "rich people shouldn't be allowed to literally eat the poor" posts. Man, she really slaves away.

In Case You Were Wondering

Megan has been trying to be coy about it, but she is living with her boyfriend and it's definitely Peter Suderman. He's the one she spent the night with waiting for the iPhone (one air-mattress and two pillows...) to come out and when when Culture11 went under Megan blogged about lay-offs coming to her home.

Anyone got some dirt on him?

brad adds:

Nownow. If he's done anything horrible professionally it's fair game, but let's remember the personal is off-limits.

8 Reasons to Hope the Megan is Never Really Trying to Procreate, Or: Finally, Some Good News

Megan's got a triple dose of dumb up today, but let's start with the good news. I'd like everyone to know that it is now 100% guar-un-TEED that we will avoid a depression. I know this, obviously, because Megan is convinced that we're in one already.

My reasoning for thinking of this as a depression, rather than a recession: roughly, that we don't understand how to get in or out of it.
(...)
This kind of perfect financial storm is a rarer bird, and no one has plausibly claimed to have mapped the way out yet.

Megan is possibly the only person on earth who claims that we don't know what's going on. I've read at least a dozen articles about the causes of this recession, and most of them are in agreement (except for the crazy bastards blaming the black people). Megan can't be bothered to acknowledge them, however, because that would expose her readers to the idea that overly free markets played a role in this calamity andwecan'thavethatnowcanwe?

Nope, instead it's just some "perfect storm" of three things coming together in an unprecedented fashion. Megan doesn't know what those three things are, but somehow she knows that they're there. I guess that's just the Catholicism in her, that faith in three undefined but all controlling entities. Who cares, though? As I mentioned, Megan thinks we're in a depression which means next quarter will show a rapid turnaround. You're welcome.



Also on the docket today,-because she wants us to.... uh... something? I don't know, maybe just show us that she reads The New Yorker-she links to this piece, an intelligent insight into the minds of a neurotic idiot that I couldn't be bothered to finish. The author trenchantly describes the fact that she's delusional and has spent herself needlessly into huge debt whilst being not very gainfully employed in order to furnish herself a certain lifestyle. A lifestyle that she appears to have never actually evaluated before sitting down to pen this 1000 word ode to her poor life skills. It's a real thinker piece, or I'm sure it gets to be one by the end that I got far too bored to reach.



Megan's most recent post once again makes us all thankful that she never procreated. Actually, maybe I wish she had as it'd have been hard for her to become a shitty hack blogger ruining a perfectly good magazine while serving time for child neglect. On errands:

If you are a towing a child (and his gargantuan supply of diapers), it is much easier to bind him tightly into a car seat than manhandle him onto the bus.

Megan's idea of motherhood; dragging children by their ears while carrying around 50 diapers and strapping them to car seats with knots that make their arms turn blue. What human thinks babies shit "a gargantuan" number of times per day?

And indeed, whenever I write anything at all in praise of city living, I am contemptuously informed that I only like it because I don't have kids.

Hmm, and yet somehow you know all about how hard it is to raise them...?!?!?!!?!?!?!?!?!? And for fuck's sake, Megan actually swallows that bullshit parents say about it being "easier" to raise kids in the suburbs? Um, no, parents do that so their children don't have to sit next to any black kids in school, not because they like forcing their child to be utterly dependent on them until driving age rather than until they're old enough to read a map. She even acknowledges that in her next paragraph:

But this is not, really, a very good argument against city living. Most people spend the majority of their lives these days neither being nor having small children. And small children are the ones that make suburban living preferable. Older children are much easier to deal with in a city, because after age eleven or so, they no longer need to soak up hours of Mom's time being ferried around.

She shoots down her own arguments now... is that progress?

That's not to say that we should force the suburbanites into the city, either. To each his own. But the mere fact that something is not convenient for toddlers, or their guardians, does not ipso facto mean we should discard it in favor of something that better pleases the Playskool set.

Right, civil engineering is so nanny state. I mean, Megan's all for pricing negative externalities into things so long as that means no one has to actually make any of the sacrifices (like moving out of the suburbs) that would be required to actually mitigate those externatlities. And what the fuck is that last sentence supposed to mean? Now she's arguing against the suburbs? Wasn't her introduction in defense of them? What the fuck is this woman blathering about? I swear, she takes a straight jacketed stroll through la-la land and calls it a coherent analysis. She doesn't even know what a fucking thesis is!

I really don't understand the people that think she's any kind of intelligent. I think she basically got her audience by giving a bunch of libertarian dorks a boner over the idea of a "Jane Galt" and has just been coasting on that ever since. In the comments section of the depression post there's oodles of people saying that if the government just sat back, everything would be fine. The post I mocked below about her car has all these morons making tangential declarations about declaring "if Megan the government fucked up registering her car so badly, imagine what socialized medicine would be like!"

Even When She's Smart, She's Dumb

Over at McArdle's house, we see she's finally managed to get her car into legal status. It's been in her possession since August, but - naturally - (ed. where do the spaces go when you insert a hyphen? Is that right? It never looks right, but neither does leaving any out.) it's not her fault.

Since this is an article about her, and she gets to complain about the government, it goes on for quite a while. Three pages and 28 bullet points of stupidity. Some of the more amusing bits in her chronology are things like "16. Thanksgiving" and "21. Christmas" because we all know how important the arrival of holidays are to the story of Megan performing a quotidian task like registering her car.

Surprisingly, she never comments on her own stupidity for doing things like buying a replacement mirror too small to cover her current one or insisting on going to a Mini dealership rather than a regular mechanic. Why would you buy a car whose closest dealership is hours away if you're going to moronically insist on getting even minor repairs done there?? Ah, the workings of the McArdle mind, so complicated and yet so nonsensical. Figuring her out is like finishing a crossword puzzle made by someone who doesn't know that "yndxly" isn't a word.

The previous post is a bit of masturbation about how great a book reader she is. Apparently now that Rove is making the ridiculous claim that Bush is an avid reader, it's vogue to be learned again. She claims that 600 wpm is "above average" but "not particularly impressive" which doesn't make sense, since that's two or three times the average. Is this some sort of faux-modesty or is she too stupid to even identify what few skills she actually has? The woman claims to have read four books in the first week and a half of the year and then whines about how she isn't keeping up her resolution to be a better reader this year!!! Why the hell would you even bother with such an outdated metric when so much reading is done on the internet? I mean, it's not like you HAVE to read only porn on the tubes, even if that's what everyone else does.

Man, she's dumb

How's The Weather Up There?

Say what you will about me (& they do!) I'm eco-friendly. So, I'm recycling this, from the Asymmetrical Info comments to an item about a statistical correlation between "intelligence" & (wait for it ...) height! 

(Do note "Fred," who, shark-style, senses "intelligence + height," & seizes the opportunity to remind all how stupid groups X, Y, & Z are, statistically.)

There's a Fred in every woodpile around here, isn't there?

That aside, Megan, we get it already. You're 6' 2" or whatever. If it's that important to you to share it w/ the world, go to the nearest 7-Eleven & have your mugshot taken next to the height indicator on the door. Or borrow the line-up room at the nearest police precinct. Or get The Atlantic to spring for a professional shoot in a fake police station. Then put the picture at the very tippy-tip-top of your blog. For extra emphasis, you could put a shot of yourself stretching to hold up the picture of how tall you are atop the sidebar.

Sheesh!!

I Told You So 3: The Told You So-oning!

Apparently someone is fed up with nepotism.

Let us mince no words: the idea that Caroline Kennedy might be nominated to the Senate is embarassing. I come from a state that has given its fair share of bad ideas to the world. Punitive drug laws. Pennies ground into a medal with the Empire State Building on it. Rudy Giuliani for President. But this goes beyond that into a zone previously occupied only by the inventors of Pepsi Clear. We fought a whole war and everything to get away from political dynasties. Why are so many brain dead boomers avid to reinstall the talentless byblows of their bygone youth?

Caroline Kennedy is the child of some politician and we know nothing about her, so it's a terrible idea to let her be a senator for a short period of time.

Contrast that to GWB, who was the child of a politician that had a track record of running every company he was ever a meaningful part of into the ground. Him, we gotta vote for him twice.

I love how she claims that she's NOT a Republican.

Also, what the fuck is she talking about with "Pennies ground into a medal with the Empire State Building on it?" Is she talking about those souvenir things that squish a penny? Does she think those are only in New York? Does she realize that grinding and pressing are two separate things? Does she ever stop smoking crack? Ever?

TOLD YOU SO! PART DEUX

We just knew blogging would be light, as stated two items below.

so blogging will probably be light today.

Why do these bloggers always say "probably?" They know bloody damn well they're going to be cheating their employer for the next two wks., until the post-New Yr.'s Eve hangover is gone. 

Wouldn't you love to see a parasite like McArdle trying to hold down an actual job, as most wage-slave Americans must? Have to be at the same place, at the same time, five days a wk., & don't get paid if you don't show up. Would that change her attitude towards the parasites who live on the work of others? Probably not, as her identification w/ the oppressor class is probably unshakable at this stage in her existence.

We're embarking on an extended haul to New York City and then Western New York

"We?" Fleas back? Extended haul? What, is she a truck driver now?