My Readers Just Don't Understand Me

Goodness! Ms. McArdle seems to have gotten a clearer picture of her commentariat.

Perhaps there is another side to this story, as my commenters will no doubt hasten to assure me. But I'm having trouble seeing what it might be:

[...]

I expect tomorrow, if Brown wins, we'll hear a lot of talk about a Republican resurgence.  But unless the Republicans can come up with a more convincing program to keep stuff like this from happening--and a more convincing economic program than cutting taxes in the face of record deficits--I don't think they're ready to lead. 

My conservative readers are no doubt winding up to tell me I'm a liberal sellout.  But I don't think it's particularly bleeding heart to think that we shouldn't have to fake suicides to cover up for abusing prisoners.  In fact, I think that's the stance of a hard core believer in law and order.

Hard core!

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.

Can You Imagine?

Worst sentence ever written in journalism?

The nerve of a typist who has to clarify herself every couple of wks. calling someone else on bad journalism or typing. Or anything else.

This gig is sapping my non-existent soul. At this point I can barely muster outrage.

Liberal Fascist Economics

Was Nazi science good science?

Not the newest question under the sun. Not as if mlle. was sitting around wondering about it all day long. She finds the post she's referring to "disturbingly persuasive." The fun is from the commenariat.

What about Nazi economics? Militarization, mass infrastructure spending, removing Jews from top positions in the economy, and autarky -- seemed to work pretty well for them in the 1930s, no? Would a similar policy work here? Now that free trade/globalization/open borders immigration has taken us to the brink of a Great Depression 2.0, maybe it's worth considering.

Posted by Fred | December 8, 2008 5:26 PM

Whooo. And Fred doesn't know when to stop.

Why not? Think about it: we run massive trade deficits. While other countries would reciprocate against our tariffs, on balance, the U.S. economy would benefit, as we are now net importers. Our manufacturing sector would expand, creating new high-paying blue collar jobs. At the same time, enforcing our immigration laws would raise wages for unskilled workers by reducing the supply of unskilled labor from Mexico and points south. And I don't think the economy would skip a beat if folks like Robert Rubin were asked to bow out.

Some more militarization wouldn't hurt either. Why not expand our ground forces by a couple million men? That would take a bite out of unemployment, and help raise civilian wages, by tightening up the labor pool, and with that many men we could finally clean out the nest of vipers that is the Pashtun areas of Pakistan.

Posted by Fred | December 8, 2008 5:36 PM

Indeed. Ask Robert Rubin (& "folks" like him) to bow out, not on the basis of whatever the hell his/their policies might be, but because he's one of the "chosen people." There's pragmatism at work.

My Eyes, They Just Pop Right Out!

Oh, how fun:

There's nothing quite so infuriating as seeing some idiot with southern plates driving his jeep too fast in the snow because he doesn't realize that four wheel drive provides faster acceleration but does nothing for his stopping radius.

If only everyone knew as much about cars as our muse, then we might all be more informed about our stopping radii.

Update:

In the comments our muse says (in response to a Southerner who takes umbrage at her generalization):

I've driven in snow in both Western New York and in DC; there's no question that the DC drivers are much worse in much less snow.

That's right, folks, Megan is armed with anecdotal observation and so, therefore, CANNOT BE QUESTIONED!!!!!

Dep't. of Paranoia

McA claims there is trouble w/ the spam filter, but I've been prevented from posting a comment twice today.

Too many comments have been submitted from you in a short period of time. Please
try again in a short while.

Bullshit!!

Quote of the Day!

But I'm kind of shocked, though I shouldn't be, to realize that men don't even see it, the way they don't see catcalling, because it never happens when they're around.

She is shocked that men don't see what doesn't happen around them.

Yes, ladies and gentlemen, this women IS paid for her insight.

Sinking One's Teeth In, All The Way

At last, not a pile of indecipherable economic mish-mosh but something vaguely connected to the real world that I can work on!

No, really, leave it aside, because the moral question is irrelevant to the practical one. What will be the effect of this? Will it build the credibility of international justice institutions by proving that even the powerful US can be brought to heel?

No, don't leave it aside, because the practical question that must first be asked is, "Does torture work?" (Meaning, does it provide useful information to save the lives of thousands of people? Not meaning, "Does it entertain sadistic civilian prison guards double-dipping in the Army Reserve or National Guard?") How could it not build credibility to deal w/ Bully Number One?

We are still the country of Monroe and Roosevelt.

And all along I, for one, have been laboring under the illusion that this is now the country of hedge fund managers & corporate entities that move to overseas P. O. boxes to avoid paying taxes. Oh, &, uh, we'll assume Our Muse was referring to presidents, rather than shock absorbers, so, which Roosevelt, exactly? And if she does mean Monroe (of the doctrine) isn't a corollary of said doctrine that This Great Nation of Ours™ maybe shouldn't be occupying sovereign nations & stealing their resources for the profit of corporate entities through dubious legalisms?

It will only be after the damage is done that Americans will realize it is sometimes convenient to have allies, while Europeans belatedly discover that internationalism doesn't just run on solemn conferences and soft power. Not to mention how cute they'll all look trying to hem in Russian expansionism without the implicit threat of the American troops now stationed in their countries.

Ms. McArdle, if you're so damn smart as to realize all these things, why aren't you interested in somehow informing or advising Americans, especially, of these facts? "It won't work because: A) Americans don't realize allies are (sometimes) convenient, B) Most of the public will view this as an act of war," isn't much of an attitude to have. It is the duty of the privileged to educate &...oh, sorry, different group of privileged. Forget it.

(In passing, let's note that "Bobo" Brooks is also nervous about the Rooskies.

If we’re going to have a president who is going to go toe to toe with the likes of Vladimir Putin, maybe it is better that he should have a ruthlessly opportunist Fast Eddie Obama lurking inside.

What up? I thought the Chinese were our next "real" enemy? Can't they let go of the USSR/Russia? Not unlike a dog who gets close to rabid when you try to replace its old chew-toy w/ a newer, chewier one.)

It might be nice if international justice were like a real national legal system, where everyone, rich and poor, submits themselves to the impartial will of the courts. But it is not.

Oh, so much crap. "Might" be "nice?" Real national legal system?" "Everyone submits," yes, though some have greater & some lesser chances not to submit, & the quality of attys. & amount of money available to the defendant can, believe it or not, affect the outcome of a trial. "Far too much time in the Bat Cave," indeed, mlle.

This is not fair--life isn't, you may have noticed.

This particular piece of common, popular crap makes my blood boil. I'll make it perfectly clear: Life is arbitrary, people are unfair. Therefore, the unfairness of people can, it is to be hoped, change or be changed. Please understand that, & never, ever, use that bromide again.

I know that I have a lot of seething war opponents reading this, their souls screaming that the practical considerations are secondary to the moral ones. But the US flatly cannot be brought to heel in this manner, while other nations can. Shall we enjoy the righteous satisfaction of expressing our moral outrage, at the cost of severely eroding the international community's ability to encourage peace in the rest of the world? Only if you think that American politics is so overwhelmingly important that it overrides trivial considerations like dead Bosnians.

Uh? I understand a bit o' sarcasm is being used in the last sentence, but the entire piece prior argues that American politics will not allow ("is so overwhelmingly important") justice to be done, & does trump dead Iraqis, not to mention the several thousand Americans dead & many thousands more permanently damaged, in so many different ways. Why is bringing war criminals to justice reduced to "American politics" in the first place? And let's also face it, if one side says justice isn't important, we're too powerful to stand for accountability & punishment for bad decisions (not poor people though, they make a bad decision they have to pay for it!!) & yet our power is what makes all these international institutions able to save Bosnians, while the other side disagrees & calls for justice, punishment for criminals, accountability, responsibility & all the other glibertarian buzzwords, the whole thing transcends politics, because my side (DFHs) is obviously just & correct. Does she really think this is mere politics, that because G. W. Bush, war criminal or not, sets most peoples' teeth on edge, that this is all about "Bush Derangement Syndrome?"

Ms. McA. also, unconsciously, brings up another point. It is often said that the U. S. spends more on its military than every other nation on the planet combined. Not sure if this is absolutely true, but we certainly do outspend all the other large nations that might even remotely pose a threat to our sovereignty. And there's little question that much of these expenditures are wasted, poorly spent, lost to fraud, & so on. (Just like those welfare entitlements, right?) I now anxiously await a call from the Megatron to seriously cut military spending, so that our nation is no longer hostage to corporate cheaters, & so that we'll no longer be able to bully our way to immunity on the world stage. After all, if the only legitimate federal expense is defense, our defense dollars are being squandered, & we don't seem able to defend ourselves against a few religious wackos w/ box-cutters, shouldn't a severe pruning of wasteful spending be our number one priority?

Rooster Ribbing

In its entirety:

Thanks to the readers who wanted to know who the least attractive celebrity is that I'd be willing to hook up with. This is a fascinating question, one I had not previously considered. It is not, however, a question that I will answer for public delectation.

Then why even mention it, you big overgrown tease of an econo-blogger ?

In all fairness, I think she may be trying to be funny.

And, there is no such thing as an "unattractive celeb." If someone is a "celeb," there's something going on, even if the beauty isn't traditional. Besides, it's a celebrity!! (The SoCal Mind at work. You saw it here.)

Bang!! You're Dead, Or Maybe That's Me

Megan feels that she'll buy a gun, just because she can, if the D. C. court decision goes to the rights of everyone, not just a well-regulated militia, to "pack heat."

While that's stupid enough on its face, it is, as so often happens, the Asymmetrical Information commentariat where the real fun lies. Scores of macho dudes advising Ms. Megan exactly which weapon to buy, as if they were, oh, displaying some plumage in a mating dance, let's say.

One voice of sanity in the comments does say that Megan has quite a load of pants-wetting psychopaths. Couldn't agree more. Having seen Bowling For Columbine a few wks. ago, it certainly seems that Americans are a bunch of scaredy-cats, in the worst way, and these people, who are going to "teach the gov't. a lesson" merely by owning a gun, & think that civilization (Huh?) will collapse at any moment, so they'll need a gun, are beyond patheticness & belief.

If only they'd let her spread her wings and fly!

OMG! OMG! It's another of those oh-so-rare self awareness alerts! The buzzers are going off! Red lights are flashing! Watchmen are on lookout for nefarious creatures on horseback and meteorologists have been dispatched to hell!

President Bush is having a press conference on the economy this morning. For the life of me, I can't imagine why. No one is exactly waiting with bated breath for his crack assessment of the nation's economic problems

(...)

Nonetheless, I, like all the other reporters, will dutifully discuss this press conference as if it mattered

Oh, woe is Megan! She'd be trenchantly analyzing what really mattered if only those stupid rubes in the public cared! It's not her fault for pandering!

So, wait, does it count as self awareness when you realize your own fault yet still blame your audience for making it so? I guess not, huh?

Call back the meteorologists, and stand down the watchmen. False alarm.

She gets surprised a lot

A surprising number of commenters sent here by other blogs seem to believe that implying I am a lesbian is a gross insult. An even more surprising number seem to think that it is a wicked "gotcha" to point out that I too, am kind of on the beanpole side, as if this fact had perhaps escaped my notice. For the apparently large number of commenters who have just immigrated from Mauritania, American women are not usually flustered and ashamed when you tell them how skinny they are.

A surprising number of commenters are resorting to personal attacks after you post a bunch of them? That's a surprising surprise. I'm surprised she's so surprised, to surprise you. Then again, maybe if that surprises you I should ask "what else have you learned on your visit to our planet" "Are you from Mauritania?"

Well, we know she's got one good quality. At least she recycles.

Most distressing of all, however, is the fact that they seem to have completely missed the point. I am a Barack Obama supporter, albeit of a rather tepid variety, worried about a potential issue in the general election, not a detractor looking for nasty things to say about him. I don't think it's weird or crazy to worry that a Democrat promising to end the war and trying to project a super nice-guy image may lose the testosterone race to a fighter pilot promising 100 more years. This does not imply approval of philandering, other fraternity-boy antics, or the 100 years war.

Yeah, it's like how Jews can make Jew jokes. Or only black people, and Megan, can make fun of black people. Guys, she's an Obama SUPPORTER! She's totally allowed to spread ridiculous, sexist bullshit attacks that have nothing to do with his policy. It would be irresponsible of her not to.

That Hollow Laugh. Can You Hear It?

Into the breach, as requested by brad. Time is short, but we did notice this:

Now, some of my readers are arguing that we journalists have a duty to give the public what they don't particularly want. Okay, well, you really should know how to calculate a bond duration; if you have fixed income investments, as you should when you're near retirement, you'll want to know the weighted average maturity in order to balance your income across time. The mathematics for simple instruments is fairly easy; I can explain it in perhaps ten minutes of moderately involved reading, then you'll want to spend perhaps an hour or so doing excercises [sic]at home to make sure you've really nailed it. Ready?

That's ridiculous. You didn't come here to be bored by some formula you can look up if you need it; you're here to talk about foreign policy!

. . . oh hear that hollow laugh. That, my friends, is the sound of an eager young journalist's soul dying just a little bit every day.

The point is, one can look up all that economic crap, or even hire a broker or investment adviser or someone else who knows this crap to do it for you, as many people w/ "fixed income investments" nearing retirement & hoping for the sweet surcease of death after too long being worked like a dog do. There's not really anywhere to go for John Yoo information besides the blog-o-sphere, & most people don't head there until the MSM has made them aware of Yoo & his memos, or whatever other horror is being perpetrated in their name, in an alleged democracy. Perhaps every single American should be placed on trial in The Hague, on the basis that the citizenry wasn't paying attention to the orders being followed. Then let's see what the "eager young journalist" has to say!

This in the context of her haranguing G. Greenwald:

Greenwald error number two: I don't cover politics; I cover economic policy.

Please. All is political, especially economics. And I'll bet you more readers read the cooking tips than wade through the boring & obscure economic items. I know I certainly do.

But if you take my sarcasm literally, I'm right!

Pricing Power:

I'm impressed by the fact that the response so far to my post on cost overruns in the Massachusetts health care program has so far been met by . . . changing the subject

(...)

These are spectacularly irrelevant to the question of whether covering the uninsured will cost much, much more than estimates

Duh, guys! Megan's snark was in no way an attempt to bash a program she clearly is ideologically opposed to! She was just talking about how much she hates it when political programs cost more than politicians said they would! For proof of this, look at how many times she's lambasted Bush about how the Iraq war went a gazillion times longer and cost a babolizzion times more money than they said it would! Bad estimates are one of her pet peeves. She didn't mean anything else by it! Her readers are just really really obtuse!