• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Battle won, war still ongoing.

Why is it so hard for them to condemn hate?

“What are Republicans afraid of?” Everything.

Good lord, these people are nuts.

Today’s GOP: why go just far enough when too far is right there?

Anyone who bans teaching American history has no right to shape America’s future.

Within six months Twitter will be fully self-driving.

… among the most cringeworthy communications in the history of the alphabet!

Prediction: the GOP will rethink its strategy of boycotting future committees.

You can’t attract Republican voters. You can only out organize them.

Damn right I heard that as a threat.

I see no possible difficulties whatsoever with this fool-proof plan.

I’d try pessimism, but it probably wouldn’t work.

Innocent people don’t delay justice.

Sadly, there is no cure for stupid.

It’s all just conspiracy shit beamed down from the mothership.

They love authoritarianism, but only when they get to be the authoritarians.

“Cheese and Kraken paired together for the appetizer trial.”

You can’t love your country only when you win.

How can republicans represent us when they don’t trust women?

Authoritarian republicans are opposed to freedom for the rest of us.

Ron DeSantis, the grand wizard, oops, governor of FL

This blog will pay for itself.

The cruelty is the point; the law be damned.

Mobile Menu

  • Winnable House Races
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • Balloon Juice 2023 Pet Calendar (coming soon)
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • War in Ukraine
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • 2021-22 Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Politics / Glibertarianism / The circle jerks

The circle jerks

by DougJ|  July 27, 20101:14 pm| 71 Comments

This post is in: Glibertarianism, Technically True but Collectively Nonsense

FacebookTweetEmail

Andrew Sullivan linking to McMegan:

Megan doesn’t like how Warren uses data:

Heh indeedy.

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « Always, Always Wrong
Next Post: Principled supporters of small government »

Reader Interactions

71Comments

  1. 1.

    Morbo

    July 27, 2010 at 1:17 pm

    That’s funny, I’ll bet you’d be hard pressed to find someone outside of glibertaria who likes how Megan uses data.

  2. 2.

    dj spellchecka

    July 27, 2010 at 1:24 pm

    at the risk of igniting a flame war, i enjoy andrew’s blog…BUT he doesn’t know the first thing about economics….his ignorance on the subject is really quite remarkable

  3. 3.

    Zifnab

    July 27, 2010 at 1:24 pm

    Even assuming Megan wasn’t a total shill, is that even an argument, or just an appeal to Megan’s fee-fees?

  4. 4.

    DougJ

    July 27, 2010 at 1:27 pm

    @dj spellchecka:

    Why would that start a flame war?

  5. 5.

    Tonal Crow

    July 27, 2010 at 1:27 pm

    When a Republican says “empirical”, she means “derived via pettifogging from one or more of my favorite dogmas”.

  6. 6.

    jacy

    July 27, 2010 at 1:28 pm

    McMegan doesn’t so much use data as just wads it up and tosses it haphazardly in the general direction of the wastebasket, then it lays around on the floor for a while and gets tracked away on the bottom of someone’s shoe, never to be seen again.

    I’ll say it again, reading McMegan can actually make you dumber.

  7. 7.

    Tonal Crow

    July 27, 2010 at 1:29 pm

    @jacy:

    I’ll say it again, reading McMegan can actually make you dumber.

    Republican pundits are WMD: weapons of mass dementia.

  8. 8.

    toujoursdan

    July 27, 2010 at 1:29 pm

    @dj spellchecka:

    No flame war with me. At times I like it too, even though his basic themes carry a “What’s in it for me?” feel.

  9. 9.

    BTD

    July 27, 2010 at 1:30 pm

    @DougJ:

    I’m curious when you might ever accept that Sullivan himself is a joke.

  10. 10.

    gbear

    July 27, 2010 at 1:31 pm

    It doesn’t exactly read like a ringing endorsement, more like ‘will you get off my fucking back if I post something??’ All that means is that they may be circle jerking, but maybe not enjoying it. It’s still a dumb move by Sullivan.

  11. 11.

    brendancalling

    July 27, 2010 at 1:32 pm

    totally OT, but to the person who asked if hops will grow in South carolina, the answer is yes, but they like a lot of water.

    totally ON-topic, reading megan mcardle has indeed made me stupideder.

  12. 12.

    Bill Rutherford, Princeton Admissions

    July 27, 2010 at 1:32 pm

    The best thing about Weigel’s recent stint at Smalltown Boy’s place was that the Atlantic bloggers finally stopped fluffing each other and actually engaged in substantive debate (and yes, I’m including TNC in this, who’s had absolutely nothing to say about Megan’s revisionist history of the Civil Rights era).

  13. 13.

    BTD

    July 27, 2010 at 1:32 pm

    @dj spellchecka:

    Why do you limit his limitations to economics?

  14. 14.

    dj spellchecka

    July 27, 2010 at 1:33 pm

    @dougj…i think saying anything nice about andrew in some quarters is flame bait, not the part that he’s an ecomonic illiterate…i suspect there’s broad agreement on that, once it’s pointed out…cheers

  15. 15.

    beltane

    July 27, 2010 at 1:34 pm

    Teh math, it is too hard for McMegan. How dare Elizabeth Warren do the numbers thingy whatchamacalit better than McMegan.

    If Sarah Palin can compare herself to Shakespeare, we should start comparing McArdle to Euclid.

  16. 16.

    dj spellchecka

    July 27, 2010 at 1:37 pm

    @btd…only because that was the subject under discussion here…he’s also pretty clueless when it come to race and his recent freakout over journolist was wildly off the mark

  17. 17.

    John Cole

    July 27, 2010 at 1:40 pm

    What is even more annoying is that on some of the pieces McMegan is butchering and attributing to Warren, Warren is actually the third author. Often times the third author on pieces like that is someone there specifically for an area of expertise, such as tying together theoretical implications that might be otherwise missed, ensuring that methodology is sound, or relying on that person’s vast knowledge and past work to provide reliable usage of extant research in the field. Not to mention the article has to be then peer-reviewed by other experts in the field. Then some hack cobbles together a bunch of opinion pieces (where is McMegan’s contrasting research or her usage of literature other than the much smaller Delaware study that Rortybomb annhilates), and predictably another economic illiterate, Sullivan, comes along and says it is interesting. You don’t get to just weakly and ignorantly opine on this kind of thing, you need to produce some sort of evidence or research to back up your arguments. McMegan doesn’t. McMegan can’t.

    After Betsy McCaughey at the TNR, you would think Sullivan would have some shame.

  18. 18.

    Sentient Puddle

    July 27, 2010 at 1:41 pm

    @beltane: Remember, McArdle doesn’t work with statistics. She deals in hypotheticals.

  19. 19.

    Waingro

    July 27, 2010 at 1:41 pm

    I’m all for reminding people that McArdle is a horrible asshole and a pseudo-intellectual poseur, but it’s important to remember that she’s ultimately a cog. An infuriating twit with the self-awareness of a literal cog, but still.

    She has a job because she says what the ruling class wants to hear:

    After all, why is McArdle so excruciating? It’s not because she is Wrong On The Internet. It’s because she is Wrong On The Internet while in a position of influence and power.

    And why is she in this position? Is it because David Bradley, the owner of the Atlantic, wants to employ people who work hard to present an accurate picture of the world, and McArdle has somehow fooled him? Or is it because David Bradley wants to employ people who work hard to dishonestly slime Elizabeth Warren?

    And why is she in this position? Is it because David Bradley, the owner of the Atlantic, wants to employ people who work hard to present an accurate picture of the world, and McArdle has somehow fooled him? Or is it because David Bradley wants to employ people who work hard to dishonestly slime Elizabeth Warren?

  20. 20.

    Katie5

    July 27, 2010 at 1:41 pm

    One look at the debacle over the Statistics Canada long census form demonstrates that not only do right wingers hate empirical evidence but ridding themselves of empirical evidence suits their long term goals.

  21. 21.

    DougJ

    July 27, 2010 at 1:42 pm

    @John Cole:

    I think he is contractually obligated to fluff McMegan, FWIW.

    Which is totally different than and not as bad as being on JournoList.

  22. 22.

    Redshift

    July 27, 2010 at 1:47 pm

    Megan doesn’t like how Warren uses data:

    And to think, that link could have been changed from fawning to truthful just by adding “i.e., to accurately support positions that Megan disagrees with.”

  23. 23.

    Warren Terra

    July 27, 2010 at 1:48 pm

    @John Cole
    Without commenting on McMegan’s idiocy, I mightn’t place importance on author order; in other fields author order is very meaningful, but I’ve heard in Economics it’s often alphabetical.

  24. 24.

    Waingro

    July 27, 2010 at 1:48 pm

    I’m curious when you might ever accept that Sullivan himself is a joke.

    he’s also pretty clueless when it come to race and his recent freakout over journolist was wildly off the mark

    After Betsy McCaughey at the TNR, you would think Sullivan would have some shame.

    To understand Sullivan, you have to remember one important thing- he’s a overemotional dumbass who happens to be an excellent prose stylist.

    He doesn’t know shit about policy, other than optics and which way the wind is blowing.

    It’s nice that he’s saying less stupid shit than before and that he’s not Glenn Beck, but really, does he expect a fucking cookie?

  25. 25.

    Bill Murray

    July 27, 2010 at 1:49 pm

    @jacy: McMegan totally uses data. She writes her conclusion, then makes up (or sometimes misinterprets others work) data to fit the conclusion. Then she runs that baby. That right there is how MBAs roll with the maths

  26. 26.

    beltane

    July 27, 2010 at 1:49 pm

    @Waingro: I understand that this is her job, but none of this explains why she is so awful at her job. There are plenty of right-wing economists who of presenting the propaganda. If McArdle displayed even a smidgen of competence, we’d be attacking her arguments, not mocking her lack of basic math skills.

  27. 27.

    Bill Murray

    July 27, 2010 at 1:50 pm

    @Waingro: or the whole Bell Curve fiasco, too

  28. 28.

    Allison W.

    July 27, 2010 at 1:50 pm

    It was pretty disappointing to see Sully link to McCardle, but he usually links to a few people that lack credibility.

  29. 29.

    Bill E Pilgrim

    July 27, 2010 at 1:51 pm

    The Glibberati stick together.

  30. 30.

    Irishnana

    July 27, 2010 at 1:52 pm

    I know this is off-point, but the HP ad completely obscures the post beneath it, making it literally impossible to read. There is no close box. Officially HATE this!

  31. 31.

    PeakVT

    July 27, 2010 at 1:53 pm

    Also, The Circle Jerks, too.

  32. 32.

    Bill Rutherford, Princeton Admissions

    July 27, 2010 at 1:53 pm

    @Bill Murray:

    I’m not given to hyperbole, but if Sully tries to martyr himself over his support of The Bell Curve one more time, I’m swearing him off forever.

  33. 33.

    Bill Rutherford, Princeton Admissions

    July 27, 2010 at 1:55 pm

    @DougJ:

    I doubt it’s contractual, I think it’s just a gentleman’s agreement. TNC hates it when people call Megan a moron in his comments section.

  34. 34.

    Marc

    July 27, 2010 at 2:04 pm

    Sullivan has been honest about confronting his past mistakes, and he has been superb on the subject of torture and about uncovering the rot in modern conservative thinking. He’s been brave, and I think correct, on confronting the distorted discussion of Israel in the US. I don’t agree with him on a lot of things, because he does have conservative instincts. But the tribal us-or-them attitude on display here is rotten to the core. And it’s far, far too common in the blog domain.

  35. 35.

    Warren Terra

    July 27, 2010 at 2:10 pm

    Marc, I’ll grant he’s good on torture and some other issues, byt he’s been anything but forthright on several major past errors – the infamous “fifth column” comments especially.

  36. 36.

    BTD

    July 27, 2010 at 2:12 pm

    @John Cole:

    Sullivan has no shame. You guys should know that by now.

    Need I remind you of the years where he was on a jihad against Krugman and was Donald Luskin’s biggest cheerleader?

  37. 37.

    roshan

    July 27, 2010 at 2:12 pm

    If McMegan was as smart as this girl, then maybe I would listen to her.

  38. 38.

    BTD

    July 27, 2010 at 2:14 pm

    @Marc:

    No he hasn’t. Where has he owned up on Fifth Column? Betsy McCaughey? Charles Murray and the Bell Curve? Pimping Luskin and attacking Krugman?

    He has not owned up on any of this.

  39. 39.

    BTD

    July 27, 2010 at 2:15 pm

    @BTD:

    Or his dirty campaign against Al Gore.

    Sullivan is just plain awful.

  40. 40.

    BTD

    July 27, 2010 at 2:18 pm

    @dj spellchecka:

    Guilty. I will always dispute anyone who credits Sullivan for some type of insight or fairmindedness.

  41. 41.

    Comrade Kevin

    July 27, 2010 at 2:19 pm

    @PeakVT: No, no, this.

  42. 42.

    John Cole

    July 27, 2010 at 2:26 pm

    @Warren Terra: If that is the case, I stand corrected.

  43. 43.

    El Cid

    July 27, 2010 at 2:27 pm

    If you say that you are depending on empirical data then it makes it true, like a magical phrase. You don’t actually have to get or know actual empirical data.

  44. 44.

    Emma

    July 27, 2010 at 2:34 pm

    “To understand Sullivan, you have to remember one important thing- he’s a overemotional dumbass who happens to be an excellent prose stylist.” Ladies and Gentlemen, we have a winneh! Somebody dust off that internets thingy and hand it over!

  45. 45.

    Avid Reader

    July 27, 2010 at 2:36 pm

    That’s hilarious, I just saw this on Sullivan’s and thought: “It’ll only be a matter of minutes before someone over at Balloon Juice points to this with a snarky post.” Sure enough, popped over here and… TA-DA!

  46. 46.

    dj spellchecka

    July 27, 2010 at 2:38 pm

    @btd…no problemo…i understand that sully have lots of haters [and with good reason]….my “clueless about race” comment ties directly into the whole “bell curve” fiasco…. i’m more surprised that anyone would think he’s NOT controversial…cheers

  47. 47.

    QDC

    July 27, 2010 at 2:41 pm

    @Warren Terra:
    @John Cole:

    I have no idea whether the order of the authors is important, but neither of the two papers was published in an econ journal. One was in a medical journal (American Journal of Medicine), and the other was in a health policy journal (Health Affairs). Both journals are peer reviewed.

    Incidentally, the papers have the same authors, and they are in a different order. Alphabetical in AJM and not so in HA.

    Oh, and this stuff is basically my field, and I would encourage Megan McArdle, to submit her research with alternative conclusions to peer reviewed publications. The dataset is public, after all, and we know what a math whiz and expert on empirical methods she is on account of her Chicago M-fucking-BA. Either that or STFU.

  48. 48.

    BTD

    July 27, 2010 at 2:47 pm

    @dj spellchecka:

    As I said, guilty.

  49. 49.

    PeakVT

    July 27, 2010 at 2:47 pm

    @Comrade Kevin: Heh. I almost went with that one. Or this one.

  50. 50.

    BruinKid

    July 27, 2010 at 2:49 pm

    Any debunkings to her latest invective against Warren? At least this time, all she does is hide behind Todd Zywicki instead of making her own arguments.

  51. 51.

    Brachiator

    July 27, 2010 at 2:50 pm

    @Sentient Puddle:

    Remember, McArdle doesn’t work with statistics. She deals in hypotheticals.

    But only when her calculator has enough decimal places.

  52. 52.

    Keith G

    July 27, 2010 at 2:52 pm

    Oh, you mean to tell me that Sully took a break from demanding a DNA test for Trig and Ma?

    And if you ever want to read a puss-filled stylistic prose, read this gem:

    http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/07/the-partisan-tools-at-journolist-and-trig.html

  53. 53.

    Bill Rutherford, Princeton Admissions

    July 27, 2010 at 2:54 pm

    @Keith G:

    He sort of apologized for that, but…yeah. Holy shit. He really hates it when other journalists aren’t as obsessed with Sarah Palin’s vagina as he is.

  54. 54.

    That's Master of Accountancy to You, Pal

    July 27, 2010 at 2:59 pm

    @Waingro:

    To understand Sullivan, you have to remember one important thing- he’s a overemotional dumbass who happens to be an excellent prose stylist.
    —
    He doesn’t know shit about policy, other than optics and which way the wind is blowing.

    I disagree slightly. He’s an overemotional drama queen who happens to be an excellent prose stylist. He is functionally innumerate, and is thus prone to being badly wrong on any subject that involves quantitative analysis.

    That’s why he can be good on torture: there’s no math. It’s just a moral question.

    That’s why he continues to defend The Bell Curve: He doesn’t understand the arguments against it. There’s no point in arguing with him about it, because he’s lost at the beginning. Murray has numbers, the critics have numbers and Sully has no idea what either of them are saying.

    I don’t know if he has a learning disability and can’t grasp quantitative concepts, or if he’s just a lazy dumbass who can’t be bothered to learn even the basics. Frankly, I don’t care. Anytime one of his posts includes a number, stop reading it and go on to the next one. I don’t care if all it was was a street address; he’s going to fuck it up.

  55. 55.

    dj spellchecka

    July 27, 2010 at 3:18 pm

    so ultimately sully’s shout out to mcmegan is a toofer…he doesn’t understand economics and he keeps the faith with the atlantic’s version of “the 11th commandment.”

  56. 56.

    Arclite

    July 27, 2010 at 3:18 pm

    I said this the other day, and since then, there has been at least one mention of mcmegan on this site. She needs her own tag!

    Or maybe not. Who wants to go look her crap up anyway…

  57. 57.

    FlipYrWhig

    July 27, 2010 at 3:22 pm

    What is the matter with this person? Who put Megan McArdle in a position that what she cares about any fucking thing deserves to be shared with the world? It’s fucking ridiculous. It’s like James Inhofe talking about climate change. They don’t know remotely what they’re talking about, they just know that they’re right.

  58. 58.

    Arclite

    July 27, 2010 at 3:30 pm

    @Arclite: See? TBogg did it:

    TAGS: I COME FROM A FAMILY OF ACADEMICS WHO ARE ACTUALLY INTELLECTUALLY INTIMIDATING.

  59. 59.

    John Cole

    July 27, 2010 at 3:37 pm

    @Arclite: She has her own tag- Techincally True, but Collectively Nonsense.

    See:

  60. 60.

    trollhattan

    July 27, 2010 at 3:39 pm

    I feel like an idiot even asking (familiar territory, but hey): why does The Atlantic employ this nimrod and obvious fraud? To make Goldberg look good? Ain’t working.

    That she’s in the same group as Coates and Fallows is simply galling, and taints them all. It’s not as though she’s a pinch of (red, designer) salt in the bouillabaisse (“for a soupçon of balance”) she’s a fucking vial of mercury.

  61. 61.

    currants

    July 27, 2010 at 3:45 pm

    @toujoursdan:

    No flame war here either, though I quit reading him about a year and a half ago or so. Used to like reading his blog, but his strident and obsessive anti-choice posts (don’t get me started on his religion posts) drove me up a wall. I mean, he’s a gay male, right? For that specific reason I think he should just STFU already–it’s not a choice he’s ever going to have to make (okay, fine, maybe I’m irrational).

  62. 62.

    Arclite

    July 27, 2010 at 3:56 pm

    @John Cole: Oh, that’s HER line? Thanks, John.

  63. 63.

    liberty60

    July 27, 2010 at 4:00 pm

    I love how the underlying thrust of McCardle’s post is to refute refudiate the notion that medical bills cause, contribute, add to or otherwise make bankruptcies happen.
    I can only attribute this to the blindness of people who really don’t have to worry about finances, who refuse to acknowledge that for many middle aged people, a sudden illness and medical debt of upwards of several hundred thousands of dollars IS a catastrophe, not paid off with a subtle reshuffling of some investment account somewhere.

    Funny how every glibertarian I ever met was young, healthy, well employed.

  64. 64.

    Bill Rutherford, Princeton Admissions

    July 27, 2010 at 4:19 pm

    @liberty60:

    “Funny how every glibertarian I ever met was young, healthy, well employed.”

    And white. Well, maybe Asian.

  65. 65.

    DougJ

    July 27, 2010 at 4:26 pm

    @That’s Master of Accountancy to You, Pal:

    That is a perfect description of Sullivan. If it’s quantitative, he’s awful. But he writes very well and his analysis of Obama’s political style is brilliant.

  66. 66.

    HyperIon

    July 27, 2010 at 4:39 pm

    @Bill Rutherford, Princeton Admissions:

    TNC hates it when people call Megan a moron in his comments section.

    yeah, and he also hates it when commenters point out his sometimes egregious use of commas. but both sets of people have a point.

  67. 67.

    sy2d

    July 27, 2010 at 5:49 pm

    Why Friends Don’t Let Friends Cite The Atlantic’s “Business and Economics Editor”: Further to the Megan McArdle is Always Wrong chronicles.

  68. 68.

    J.W. Hamner

    July 27, 2010 at 5:54 pm

    What I find most impressive about this whole thing is how little McCardle was able to come up with to criticize. I know in my field you could come up with a laundry list of faults on even the best papers in a couple of minutes… research is done on a continuum and no paper is the final word on a subject… and yet all of her objections are extraordinarily weak and extremely dubious. I guess that’s a strong testament to the scholarship of Warren and her collaborators.

  69. 69.

    Leisureguy

    July 27, 2010 at 7:34 pm

    Useful info re: Megan and Jeffrey Goldberg:

    1) Views from the reading/subscribing public are influential.

    2) The standard form for Atlantic email addresses is [email protected] — e.g.,
    [email protected]
    [email protected]
    [email protected]

    3) The people of influence are:

    the owner, David Bradley: [email protected]
    the editor, James Bennet (note spelling) [email protected]
    the online editor, Bob Cohn [email protected]

    Use this information wisely and only for good.

  70. 70.

    Bill Murray

    July 27, 2010 at 7:40 pm

    @J.W. Hamner: or a strong testament to how little McMegan understands.

  71. 71.

    Bernard

    July 27, 2010 at 11:52 pm

    the whole idea behind thinking with or for membership in a “tribe.” If a Tribe actually believes in facts, reality as it is, that a good start. that whole fact based reality vs. the faith based reality of Trust Me, I Know . that is why it is a good “tribe” to be a party with and of. of course, i could also choose to be an idiot and believe the nonsense of the “right thinkers,” and follow the Tribe way, lol. problem with that is i prefer not to be quite that stupid and easily led.
    i have no problem with following a reality based thinking Tribe, though. I’ve seen what happens where Non reality based/faith based thinking get used. lol any refudiators here!

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

Recent Comments

  • Yutsano on Open Thread: Exciting News — Andy Kim Is Contesting Menedez’s Seat (Sep 23, 2023 @ 11:17pm)
  • Jackie on Open Thread: Exciting News — Andy Kim Is Contesting Menedez’s Seat (Sep 23, 2023 @ 11:15pm)
  • Geminid on Open Thread: Exciting News — Andy Kim Is Contesting Menedez’s Seat (Sep 23, 2023 @ 10:59pm)
  • Redshift on Open Thread: Exciting News — Andy Kim Is Contesting Menedez’s Seat (Sep 23, 2023 @ 10:58pm)
  • eclare on Open Thread: Exciting News — Andy Kim Is Contesting Menedez’s Seat (Sep 23, 2023 @ 10:57pm)

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
We All Need A Little Kindness
What Has Biden Done for You Lately?

Balloon Juice Meetups!

All Meetups
Talk of Meetups – Meetup Planning

Fundraising 2023-24

Wis*Dems Supreme Court + SD-8

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Mailing List Signup
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)

Twitter / Spoutible

Balloon Juice (Spoutible)
WaterGirl (Spoutible)
TaMara (Spoutible)
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
TaMara
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
ActualCitizensUnited

Join the Fight!

Join the Fight Signup Form
All Join the Fight Posts

Balloon Juice for Ukraine

Donate

Cole & Friends Learn Español

Introductory Post
Cole & Friends Learn Español

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2023 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!