I'm not saying she's some kind of goverment agent but if they did create an agent to discredit Ron Paul and others, he/she would say alot of things McArdle says.Puhleez! Anyone who has any kind of following on the internet gets all kinds of comments written about them.
If you are going to go into histrionics about a comment, you need a new line of business. And I do mean histrionics. She writes:
My well known dislike of Ron Paul's economic policy ideas, expressed rather vehemently to Dave Weigel as a critique of his ranting about monetary policy, has triggered a lot of complaint along these lines, directed to my twitter feed (@asymmetricinfo) and my inbox.A lot of complaints? Take a look at her twitter feed. Even the most generous counter, say a Kochanack, would only be able to find two or three comments that could have possibly been made as a result of her original comment to Weigel. If she thinks this is a deluge, I'd like to introduce her to this guy Noah that I have heard of.
But, you may ask me, "Why go into this? Nobody pays attention to this nutty stuff other than maybe her Kochanack-affiliated husband, who has to read it for fear of a quiz at home."
At which point, I must direct you to The Atlantic's national correspondent Jeffrey Goldberg, who presumably has now raised the question of whether McArdle is a government agent to the national level. He writes in his own post on the subject:
Apparently, the Internets think that Megan is a government agent assigned the important task of marginalizing Ron Paul. One of her interlocutors wrote, "I'm not saying she's some kind of goverment agent but if they did create an agent to discredit Ron Paul and others, he/she would say alot of things McArdle says."National correspondent Goldberg continues:
It's kind of an open secret around The Atlantic offices that Megan actually works for the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency. Most of the time, when she's not blogging, she's tasking satellites that have been programmed to track Ron Paul's thoughts as they arrive from outer space.So there you have it, from McArdle histrionics to The Atlantic's national correspondent taking a slap at Ron Paul, one of the most decent human beings in America. Oh yes, just some fun, inside the beltway humor, that the rest of America can't get.
Bottom line, this bizarre behavior toward the most knowledgeable student of monetary policy in Congress, at a time when the country faces a huge inflationary threat in the coming year, suggests an arrogant, failure of understanding about economics that makes Lady Gaga look like a neurosurgeon in comparison.
It's one thing if these people could argue toe to toe with Congressman Paul about the regression theorem, the proper methodology for a science such as economics or the damage that Fed money printing does to the structure of capital in an economy, but they can't. So they put on a carnival act of words in fear that if they actually challenged Congressman Paul on his well grounded and deep economic understanding, their confusion about basic economics would be laid bare for all to see.
So here's the challenge to McArdle and Goldberg: If you think you know so much more about economics than Congressman Paul, please explain to me why his belief in the regression theorem is wrong?
Please explain to me, why his view on the methodology of economics is wrong?
Please explain to me why his view, that Fed money printing causes distortions of the capital structure, is wrong?
Don't tell me you can't find Congressman Paul's thoughts on this. As he has said many times, he derives his understanding of economics from the writings of Ludwig von Mises and Murray Rothbard. It's all there.
From your vast knowledge on the subject, I await your explanation of why Mises, Rothbard and Paul are wrong. Since you claim to know more about all this than Congressman Paul and why he is wrong, I should expect an answer when? Tomorrow?