Megan's Hating Hillary Again

And the analogy she uses really sucks this time.

Did you ever go on a date with one of those guys who thinks that if one splash of cologne is sexy, eight will be positively irresistible? After you've crawled, gasping, onto the street and the blue tone has faded from your lips and fingernails, you kind of want to go back and explain to him, gently, that many things in this world are really best in moderation....I'm getting that feeling about Hillary. Cry once, you're human. Cry all the time, and it's a schtick. A schtick, moreover, that suggests you're a cynical, manipulative woman who uses tears to get what you want.

For an upper west sider who's an Ivy league-educated English major, critiquing a national female candidate, that's really low. But I expect comments like this from Megan all the time. Her daily output in her paid position as one of the resident bloggers for The Atlantic seems to consist of one serious attempt at economic analysis, one not-so-serious article on race or gender, and various filler posts about her life as a Libertarian, or her day at work, or her technology questions, or her lack of historical research skills, or her crushes on fellow Atlantic blogger, Matthew Yglesias, or [Better Than] Ezra Klein.

Brad, over at Fire Megan McArdle, has a nice rebuttal:

You know what? I don't like Hillary either. She's a centrist, and a political hack, and she'll do whatever her advisors tell her to do on anything important. That doesn't make her a weak female, it makes her a political hack, which is apparent regardless.
In the meantime, dissembling or being manipulative is something Megan would never, ever do. Especially not for trivial reasons.
Stop making me defend Hillary, Megan and Maureen Dowd and the rest of the Heathers. It doesn't matter to anyone in the goddamn world you don't like her as a person. That Hillary's positions and proposed policies have major flaws are more than enough cause to oppose her candidacy. Clinton derangement syndrome is never a pretty thing. Soon Megan will be talking about Vince Foster and lesbian cocaine smugglers.


It has been said that we lefty bloggers, big and small (me being very small) have picked on Megan way too much. But it is just too tempting to watch her work and produce at least one laughable post each day. I look at her and I wonder what my life could have been if I became a so-so journalist and picked-up a gig like the one she has at The Atlantic. Would I be making the same irrational comments and factual errors? Would I be giving another team of bloggers material to pick-on every day? Would it make a difference if I was a six foot tall woman, or would I still be picked-on for being a tall guy who went to a state University? I won't ponder too much, but the fact that I'm posting this means that I have thought about it.

All I know is that I joined the anti-Megan bandwagon after I learned about this nasty 2003 post, in which she basically said that her fellow young New Yorkers protesting the 2004 Republican National Convention ought to be pre-emtively beaten with two-by-fours, in a coy reference to this nation's so-called "pre-emptive" invasion of Iraq. I also cringe at her condescending response to her critics.

And yes, there are many others in this world as disgusting as she. We all meet them as we live our lives. Especially in this crazy town.