"An article on Monday about Jack Robinson and Kirsten Lindsmith, two college students with Asperger syndrome who are navigating the perils of an intimate relationship, misidentified the character from the animated children’s TV show “My Little Pony” that Ms. Lindsmith said she visualized to cheer herself up. It is Twilight Sparkle, the nerdy intellectual, not Fluttershy, the kind animal lover."
— From this week’s New York Times. Sorry, Bronies, she’s taken. (h/t Paul Johnson)
"
The most remarkable attribute Krugman has brought to the Times is rudeness. The social niceties that accompany his exalted position are utterly lost on him. He does not seek out the company of famous politicians and cannot be courted with flattery or access. He understands that you can’t arrive at truth without explaining why mistaken beliefs are wrong.
Krugman makes a mockery of the prohibition against arguing with his fellow columnists, larding his columns with rebuttals to unnamed subjects who happen to believe things that were advocated on the Times op-ed page earlier in the week. Thomas Friedman writes a column complaining, “Does anyone know what President Obama’s preferred outcome is? Exactly which taxes does he want raised, and which spending does he want cut?” And the next day, Krugman writes: “Oh, and let me give a special shout-out to ‘centrist’ pundits who won’t admit that President Obama has already given them what they want. The dialogue seems to go like this. Pundit: ‘Why won’t the president come out for a mix of spending cuts and tax hikes?’ Mr. Obama: ‘I support a mix of spending cuts and tax hikes.’ Pundit: ‘Why won’t the president come out for a mix of spending cuts and tax hikes?’ ”
"
—
Because Paul Krugman Didn’t Keep His Calm - Reasons to Love New York 2011 — New York Magazine. Two responses:
Re: the first paragraph. If what you’re about is “explaining why mistaken beliefs are wrong,” then you’re not trying to “arrive at truth”: you believe you already possess it. Also, the characteristic Krugman argument is, roughly, “Your argument is wrong because it’s mistaken,” or, when he wants to change things up, “Your argument is mistaken because it’s wrong.”
Re: the second paragraph, note that Krugman’s response to Friedman — if that’s what it is — is a non-response. Friedman asked which taxes the President wants to raise, and which spending he wants to cut — and Krugman doesn’t answer either question. If Krugman had Friedman in mind, then he managed to bluster his way past questions he didn’t have answers to. This too is typical Krugman.
In brief, the more rudely Krugman behaves, the more likely it is that he lacks substantive arguments. (This is equally true of almost every other pundit I can think of, with the possible exception of Christopher Hitchens.) If that’s the kind of thing you want to celebrate, New York, knock yourself out, I guess.
(via ayjay)
Really? Krugman’s point was questions like Friedman’s were stupid. With only so many words in a NYT op-ed column, why would he waste them answering a stupid question?
(via pegobry)
"Frank Bruni is going to be so embarrassed when he finds out these Facebook vacation photo captions were, in fact, printed in the opinion section of the world’s most influential newspaper!"
— Hamilton Nolan’s is as good an explanation as any. I tend to think something like an ill-fated mushroom trip before the switch to op-ed addled dude’s mind.
"
If A.J. Liebling represents the best tendencies of The New Yorker, then you, Adam Gopnik, represent the very worst: relentless undeserved self-fascination, intolerable elitism, and abiding belief in the fundamental importance of your fucking dog. The group “H.L. Mencken, A.J. Liebling, and Adam Gopnik” includes two of the biggest badasses of 20th century journalism and one dude who believes that “Just a year ago, I gave up sweets” is a legitimately enticing first sentence to readers not related by blood to Adam Gopnik.
Go write another book that will be the talk of Upper East Side private school waiting rooms and give me fewer pages in my New Yorker to flip past in frustration, you twee little pastry fetishist.
“The cynics are right nine times out of ten.” - H.L. Mencken. He would have rather written for Gawker, anyhow.
"
—
Adam Gopnik says H.L. Mencken wasn’t New Yorker material … Hamilton Nolan GOES IN.
I love this shit.
![joecoscarelli:
pussy-strut:
willystaley:
Curious about Drake’s eating habits, I did a little research and came across this gem. The Polo Lounge in Beverly Hills — from his “Stay Schemin” verse — doesn’t sell Spaghetti Bolognese, but they do sell “Parpadelle” [sic] Bolognese for $36.
Fucking restaurant managers are so hopelessly stupid at all levels, it’s astonishing. And Drake needs to learn his pasta shapes, or is a very fussy orderer.
important drake/pasta research
It seems to me like he’s bragging about ordering from the kids’ menu.
this!](http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ly6545GdxU1qzncfro1_500.png)
