No Reservation Required!

Hey, some good fellow went and followed the link below to read that racist post from Aaron Clarey on Indians. And I guess he then asked,

How do you know it was Native Americans that stole your car???!!!!Pretty presumptuous on your part!

to which the Pathetic Ignorant Little Man answered, gracefully,

Uh, because the cops recovered it on an Indian reservation.

No, i just surmised it must be a group of Indian kids because that's the mood I was in.

Any other stupid questions?

And, hey, that does clear it up! Because there's no chance that, say, some white kids that stole a car and are wondering where to go with it, might not want to go where they've heard they can buy smokes and sixes for cheap, and where there aren't so many cops on the ground. No, it's much more likely that whoever stole the PILM's car drove straight home with it, that being of course the whole point of a joyride, and having the additional benefit of letting people know who stole the car, which can help if they're particularly thick radio-host-types.

So rest assured, it's NOT some odious little man making a characteristically racist assumption and then broadcasting it as true from his soapbox.

The Lone Ranger and Tonto Fistfight in Heaven

So, quite often someone from the Great Out There will email us more instances of public racism from "Captain Capitalism" Aaron Clarey. Usually, we ignore them, because the Clareywatch is not a customer-service oriented outfit. Then all of a sudden when we check one out, we find a little gem like this little racist item (PDF) from the Clareyster. Let's look at it.

He's unloading scorn on an outfit he's heard about on the radio called MUD, which stands for Metro Urban Indian Direction, an "initiative to help educators reach out to Indian kids." So as always it's like there's a wall of stupid between Clarey and information, since we're told that the organization, MUID, is actually the Metropolitan Urban Indian Directors, an umbrella organization for Indian organizations in the area which does a number of things including advocate for afterschool and educational programs and safe neighborhoods. He makes fun of the fact that he can't learn anything about them on the Internet - presumably because he's looking for information on whatever made it through the wall of stupid, not what actually exists - and I guess that "libertarian light" insists that every NGO, even little ones which basically just coordinate separate entities, employ its own web guru.

And he ends with these pearls of wisdom:

they're referenced as some kind of initiative to help educators reach out to Indian kids.

Maybe they could reach out to the scum bag Indian kids that stole my car and punch them for me.

Oh, I'm sorry, white males aren't supposed to display anger. We're just supposed to bend over.

So take note of the wisdom of Aaron Clarey, all you darkies! Keep all yours in line, 'cuz there ain't no reason we should be doing shit for any of you! No, we should instead by hunting down your kids for joyriding, which white kids don't. And beware the wrath of the white males, man. They are the sleeping dragon, the dark horse, the X factor.

Y'know, truthfully, we can't figure out why Clarey gets so hostile when people point out that he's a racist. I mean, you'd think he takes some kind of pride in it. He writes like he learned everything he knows from some kind of Archie Bunker correspondence course, with the exams proctored by Timothy McVeigh.

A bit of J school

Hey, it turns out that, life being unfair and all, we got an additional fifteen minutes! Fact is, because of the holidays and stuff, we just found out about it here. But we have a lot of little quibbles with the story presented.

Perhaps most striking was the assertion that "Captain Capitalism" Aaron Clarey "shines a libertarian light on politics." Now, funny thing, but libertarians don't actually advocate national ID cards, or celebrate when an authoritarian government seizes private property for big public works projects, or bitch and moan when women and families make their own economic decisions, or advocate increased government control over the borders or scrutiny of firms' hiring practices or... Heck, for that matter they probably don't launch big lawsuits against free speech, no? Especially not when they don't even allege a penny of monetary damage in the complaint, which you'd'a thunk the reporter had read, no? Surely that's not "libertarian."

Well, look, that's actually sort of irresponsible of the writer. If Aaron Clarey is a libertarian, I'm a giant panda.

Now, you might try "conservative." Except, well, conservatives don't talk smut about women and children and the elderly or make fun of the religious or suggest minimum wage COLAs or attack Larry Summers' suggestion that affirmative action to recruit women into technical fields might be fruitless (admittedly, Aaron seems confused about what he's commenting on there), or celebrate when dictatorships build obstacles to keep people from fleeing torture under Communist regimes, or...

And neither label really conveys Aaron's bizarre need to keep up - but to hide! - speech which is nothing but a long racist attack on Latinos, or which harasses Americans who've lost their homes and families in a natural catastrophe, or tells us that gays are unmanly, or the bizarre insistence that the Nazis under Hitler were left-wingers, or...

Mr. Reporter, "libertarian" is dishonest. I think the words you're looking for are bigoted, offensive, jingoist ass.

Hope that's helpful!

UPDATE: But ya gotta love the "Perils of Pauline" sound of "this guy's not getting away with it." It makes one feel so...nefarious!

'Cause Uncle Joe, tells me so!

"Captain Capitalism" Aaron Clarey offers the following useful advice to up-and coming Iagoes economists:

When the elected legislature spends money on public works, in particular on public transportation, after hearing out specialists and public debate, you should look closely at the publicly available details of the finances, because rest assured the project is wasteful and stupid.

But when a totalitarian, unelected government spends money and commandeers private property for a public works project, in particular public transportation, without showing anyone anything and releasing what are generally understood to be doctored figures about the project's success, it's the right decision, and it's brilliant.

Incidentally, here at the Clareywatch, where we can't spray a seltzer bottle down the hall without soaking a bunch of atmospheric scientists Busby-Berkeley-style, we've been having a lot of fun with the latest batch of Clarey attempts to sound like a scientist - even appealing to "John Stossel" (no doubt quite the geophysicist) to refute the overwhelming consensus of the people who generate the data Clarey posts and to call, say, The Economist "idiots." Now we've talked on this before, and are getting requests to do so again, but, look - go talk to someone credible. Anyone looking to a guy who can't even read the graphs in his own purported area of expertise, to explain this stuff, is stewing in his/her own drool. Sorry, fanbase.

Aaah, Casual Wednesdays!

Usually, a man needs to look sharp: professional, alert, ready for anything the leftists might throw at him. "I don't worry 'cuz my wallet's flat," y'know? And I respect that and honor it.


But sometimes you find yourself softening up a little, and if you don't watch it, you find yourself endorsing longtime Democratic proposals. And that can prevent you from doing the things that need to be done, like, keeping an eye out for those "scum bag parasite" sneaky "poor" people buying filet mignon with food stamps, or helping people stupid enough to pay income tax on $10K. And that's why I like to kick back once in a while, relax, let myself hang out, y'know? Let's hear it for "Casual Wednesdays."

History is Bunk!

Once again, you can be educated by this post, in which Aaron Clarey, explaining why "real dictators are ALWAYS on the left," gives the amazing, previously undiscovered fact that

Hitler was a socialist. That's why they called it the National SOCIALIST Party.

I mean, who knew? Other amazing facts you can glean from the Clarey Method:

• The People's Republic of China is a Republic run by the People.
  
• Franco, Pinochet, Tsar Nicholas - all leftists!
  
• East Germany was the democratic one.
• Surprisingly, the Republic Of China also governs China.
• The Democratic Republic of the Congo is a democratic republic.
• The Democratic People's Republic of Korea is ... well, you know.
• Great Britain is just great!
• "Power drinks" are not just for weenies, in fact they do "give you wings."

Incidentally, there seems to be some question about how Aaron Clarey became "Captain Capitalism." Going theory here: frequently dropped on the head as an infant, combined with just unbelievable contempt for people who earn the title "Captain."

UPDATE: Wow, the laughs keep coming! Aaron responds to an operative from Team Clareywatch, questioning the intelligence of labelling the Nazis as leftists, with

But the nationalization of industry by the Nazi's would kind of make them live up to their political name's namesake.

Brilliant! Always stupider than you think possible. History is, it seems, bunk.

UPDATE UPDATE: Some of our usually kind supportive emailers from out there in cyberspace are expressing doubt that even Aaron is this stupid, despite lots of previous evidence. C'mon, guys, you could go look yourselves! But alright, just because I love you even when you're lazy farts, here's the PDF.

UPDATE UPDATE UPDATE: No I'm not going to PDF it, but, the comments have continued and gotten weirder. And ya gotta think: given all the comments Aaron blocks, man, it's weird what he lets through. Enjoy, all - down the rabbit hole.

Lots in one package

You gotta admire "Captain Capitalism" Aaron Clarey for packaging as much hate speech as possible into a thin package. Right here, for example (PDF), he pulls off racism and sexism simultaneously while seasoning it with a little anti "Jesus freak" bigoty: a threefer! That's economic efficiency. Ya gotta appreciate the picture, so in case you're not clear on exactly what it is the "Mexican women or Chinese women" are willing to do for you, you know.

Ya gotta admire too -- few guys can so conveniently pull up soft porn pix of Chinese air stewardesses when they need them. Looks like Aaron's found an economically efficient alternative to dating, too.

More tasty exegesis of racism from Aaron Clarey!

Hey, everybody, crayons up now, it's contest time! And special thanks to "Captain Capitalism" Aaron Clarey for giving us some credibility here: now you readers know that when we say he posted such-and-such and such-and-such a time, we're good for it!

So: On May 16, 2006, Aaron Clarey posted the following lovely item on his website, which he has since tried to bury:

Blacks Commit Disproportionately More Crimes than Whites

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-2179561,00.html Why is it so hard to say? Why can't we address this like adults to solve the problem and be forth right [sic] about it? Oh, I forgot, because it's the truth. And the truth hurts. Especially when it harms the socialist movement

OK, let's do some exegesis now! The link is to an article discussing that in some areas of London, a plurality of people arrested based on evidence from hidden cameras (every libertarian conservative's delight!) is black.

So, right out of the gate Aaron is establishing his racist bona fides. He's going to use the behavior of blacks in London to say something about blacks in our society, since apparently race is much more deterministic of, say, people's criminal behaviors than nationality, society, etc. That racist assumptiuon isn't uncharacteristic of Aaron: he did it, for example, when he tried to say that Latino-lookin' guys in Minneapolis should be thought of as misogynists based on badly interpreted stats from Mexico. But, geez, it makes you think back a little uncomfortably on, say, things he's had to say about Africans, doesn't it? Of course, in this case he's right: everybody who's been among African-Americans knows about their strikingly universal love of fine tea and cheese, their reverence for the Queen, their love of soccer (which they sneakily call by a different name, just like they sneakily misspell words like "flavor" and "color") and cricket, their colorful argot ("boot" for "trunk," "trainers" for "sneakers," and "bobby" for "5-0," for example) and their quaint ethnic cuisine ("colcannon," "pigs-in-blankets," "haggis," and the like). But that's besides the point.


But then Aaron goes on to talk about how somehow, we don't discuss that there's a real disproportionate crime problem among minorities here in America. Which is, well, puzzling, because I think it would be difficult to read a major American newspaper for a week without finding some discussion of it, and it's a major theme of American art as well. And even if you accept the occasional evidence that Aaron Clarey basically can't read at an adult level, well, the culture has been so rife with this idea that if anything the discussion has been on how there's far too much portrayal of minorities as criminals rather than as heroes on TV and in pop culture. Hell, the only really new idea in the dialogue in forever has come from conservatives like Ward Connerly arguing that if anything we focus too much on the racial statistics. Even Aaron Clarey is not ignorant enough to think that what he's saying here is not unrealistically stupid.

So why's he say it? Well, because there's a population, sad to say, of low-browed, knuckle-walking, sloping-forehead, thick-necked Americans that are real real sure that all those nasty black people are getting away with something, and that's why they personally are being shafted, and if only the wool weren't being pulled over everyone's eyes by the liberal media, they'd get it. And that's Aaron's core audience, and here he is, reaching out - so nakedly that even he has tried to hide it. He's quite happy to smear minorities to make the fan base happy, until somebody notices it.

And he tells you as much with his clincher. Aaron, why exactly would a more criminal picture of black Americans harm "the socialist movement"? What exactly are you implying there? Care to elaborate, PILM?

I'm thinking, not.

Running teasers!

Hey, everyone, just wanted to remind you that in the next couple of days we'll be discussing Aaron Clarey's 5/16/06 post on the criminal tendencies of blacks, another fine blog post which he's been hiding away, no doubt out of modesty regarding his ... brilliance.

We're proud to bring you this fine feature because here at the Clareywatch we occasionally get comments to the effect of, "c'mon, Aaron Clarey is a fool, but no racist!" and then people read that great post on Latinos in the Minneapolis social scene and rethink. And then read s'more context, and rethink more. And then read his views on women, on Katrine victims, on ... well, let's just say there's so much depth to the guy that our readers can appreciate.

But we know that the monkey house feels differently, and we've invited them to explain why that post on Latinos isn't racist. So, here's your chance, guys! If you can write a really good explanation of why that post, and the "blacks and crime" post, aren't racist, then go for it! I'd be happy to change my mind in the face of a good, convincing explanation. Of course, I don't think you can pull that off, but frankly I think you need the practice. Remember, spelling counts! Sharpen up your crayons now!

Against the Day!

Now, it is definitely a celebration occasion here at the Clareywatch, since Thomas Pynchon has released a new novel, and that makes us deliriously happy. So, we're going to do a couple of things for you here.

First, in the next week, we'll give you, right on the blog (not as a PDF!) the text of Aaron's May 16, 2006 post on the criminal tendencies of blacks! That's right, right here for your edification! (To be honest it's not that we're so great, it's that it's real short so we can suck up typing it in.) The exegesis of that great piece of "Captain Capitalism" Aaron Clarey's writing on Latinos was so much fun, after all, so, let's do more!

Second - the monkey house is back open! Expect the lovable, stupid inmates to come throw feces for your entertainment soonest!

Aaron Clarey, Man of Steel!

So, here at the 'Watch we've been meaning to post something on, just what the hell is "Captain Capitalism Aaron Clarey's political philosophy? We've thought of it as a kind of Stalinism, exemplified by his praise of the horse sense of the common, blue-collar man coupled with a sort of contempt for him and a certainty that he shouldn't be running things, a certain, um, tendency to try to bury his past statements, a certain Belinskyesque view of how art and culture serve the state - all that. And we wanted to comment on his "libertarians for national ID cards!" writing here, where he says with regards to Mexican immigration,

Oh no, I'm completely for the free movement of labor and capital.

My issue is the issue of illegality COMBINED WITH a big movement on the left to get illegal aliens to vote.

If we had a national ID card, then I would be against the wall. But right now the sovereignty and integrity of the nation trumps any economic gains (great as they may be) of the free flow of labor. ie-capital can't vote, illegal aliens can.

I mean, that's so small-government libertarian, isn't it? My issue is, the government says it's wrong. We need a national ID card. The government needs to look out for the "integrity of the nation." Like, pure distilled Hayek, right? And we're trying to figger out how to praise this wisdom, when suddenly Aaron comes along today and gives us a great big paean to Stalinism (PDF)!

I mean, hey, yeah, who can not praise the Chinese government's great ability to do the right thing for their country by force! Like, when they take organs from all those prisoners who gave them up out of remorse for having committed the crimes the government falsely accused them of, and sell them to foreigners, that's certainly making "the right decisions," no wonder Aaron Clarey is "envious"! And he's certainly right to praise their decision to build a huge dam that may be an economic and environmental nightmare - no way to know, since of course they won't show you data. After all, what could be nearer and dearer to a conservative or a libertarian heart than the government taking away a lot of people's property to give to a state-controlled venture? What conservative couldn't praise a communist government for building walls to help keep people from fleeing starvation in totalitarian lands! Man, it's like Aaron Clarey is channeling Reagan! He's so smart! You go, China! Mr. Hu, build up that wall! And frankly North Korea is much more helpful than Mexico, no? They know how to deal with people trying to violate Chinese soveriegnty! I bet once there's a wall they'd be happy to help by patrolling their side with dogs, and guns, and maybe some kind of special secret police!

And of course, Clarey points out that it's all because they don't have to deal with a Sierra Club or ACLU. Of course, our government doesn't have to deal with those guys either, it's just that they have ways of getting their message out, whereas in China the government muzzles free speech - and here at the Clareywatch, we know how Aaron hates free speech.

Nothing to criticize there, comrades! Our only little nitpicky complaint is that once again, Aaron Clarey seems to be showing that first-grade reading comprehension with

Meanwhile it took Bush, what, 6 years to get us to AGREE to build the fence?

Uh, Bush didn't want the fence ... stupid. Bush is the guy who, as governor of Texas, stood up to Pete Wilson's maneuvers to deny services to illegal immigrants, and protected those services. Bush wants a guest worker program, and they crammed the fence down his throat.

Not all stingy bastards - just one!

So, in this post, "Captain Capitalism" Aaron Clarey points out that people are unfair to criticize the American government's monetary donations in the wake of the Christmas 2004 tsunami, since Americans donate so much money abroad. And it's a good point. The charitable response of the American people makes one proud. The principal of this blog, for example, tossed cash worth about 1% of his pre-tax income into a collection site at a place of worship, to help the victims, and many other people did more. Of course I realize that that claim is conveniently non-provable (and non-deductible), but nobody's really going to question it; it's in character, and besides, we all know people who did more or less the same, because the scale of the catastrophe was so horrifying.

And that's really a testament to the Pathetic Ignorant Little Man, isn't it? Because, given the comments he's made about foreign aid, about the world's poor, about America's poor - hell, about all but the richest 40% of Americans - it simply defies belief that Aaron Clarey put so much as a quarter in a tin can for the tsunami's victims. Hell, Clarey is so repulsive that he almost brags that he doesn't give to charity; press him on it, and I'm sure he'll feed you some crap about how he's contributing to GDP and that's really what helps those people.

And that's quite an achievement, isn't it? I mean, how many people do you know, who are so subhuman, that you would be skeptical if they told you, "I ponied up $20 for the Indian Ocean tsunami victims."? And yet at the same time, the guy bitches and moans about how wrong it is to call us stingy because people - other people - are so generous to those in need? Bravissimo, Aaron! You're one unique dude.

Simply amazing

So, we've often noted how "Captain Capitalism" Aaron Clarey, having gotten busted here for that racist post on Latino Americans, keeps changing the name: he clearly wants to hide it, presumably since it contains no real content but a racial slur, but also wants to keep it up there, presumably since it contains no real content but a racial slur: he knows who his audience is and wants to please 'em, but doesn't want decent normal Americans to know what he thinks. OK; this has been a real exercise in learning that Clarey is a worse human being than even we thought he was. (Fun project on the burner: a slide show of all the versions of that post). And he's done similar things with other posts, like the one trashing all but the richest 40% of Americans.

But, can you believe it, he's doing the same thing with the post trashing Katrina victims, too! The original is here, but he's rewritten it here (or the PDF is here).

And, man, it totally fools everybody!

Build a memorial to the unknown taxpayer!

By the way, we've been meaning to call attention to this item here.

Pardon for quoting the blogger, who writes

...[Clarey] took a call from a guy who is a Vietnam Era veteran. After asking Clarey his age and marital status (31, unmarried), this guy suggested that Clarey trot down to the local recruiter and sign up so he could take his energy and do just what he was suggesting.

Well, Clarey sorta danced around the suggestion, saying that he paid plenty of taxes and that was pretty much equivalent to serving in the military. Besides, he added, he had been to the recruiter, but balked when told he'd be best suited to be a logistics officer.

A couple of other callers phoned in and didn't seem all to happy with Aaron's reasoning about his taxes being a sufficient contribution for someone seemingly so fired up about fighting hard and strong. Clarey seemed a little less spirited after all those calls.

That got me thinking. What does it cost to send a soldier to fight in Iraq? I did a little Googling, and found this story. It seems that the cost of sending a soldier to Iraq for a year has gone up a lot, now reaching approximately $400,000. That's a lot of money. I wonder if a 2-hour-a-week talk show host and part-time ballroom dance instructor makes enough money to pay that much in federal income tax. Somehow, I doubt it.

Now, I certainly don't believe that a person has to join the military to be a patriot, although I'll call any man or woman who serves a patriot. I do believe, however, that a man who trumpets his determination that we fight and fight hard on the radio, while spending the rest of his time teaching folks how to Salsa, should not be claiming that his taxes are equal in any way to the service of the brave young men and women who risk their lives in our military.

The first caller I mentioned said, "It seems like you're one of those 'Let's you and him fight' kind of guys," to Clarey. I think Aaron needs to dust of his old economics texts and figure out how his federal tax dollars are equivalent to service in the military. I think his math's a little shaky on this one.

Ya gotta wonder, did the little fellow actually compare paying his taxes to serving the country in uniform? And, what, is he above being a logistics guy or something? 'Cuz we've got first-hand info here that if you want to just be a grunt and go remove IEDs, they'll let you do that (and even pay you a hefty bonus at the moment). So as always I find myself wondering, what kind of man awards himself a title, and what contempt does that show for the men and women who earn it?

Once again, Clarey sides with the racists against the capitalists!

So, "Captain Capitalism" Aaron Clarey has given us this great post on Mexican reaction to the proposed American "border wall," which helps remind us that being poor should make you ashamed (I'm not sure if you're supposed to call out, "Unclean," or what.) And of course, as always the racial double standard is really striking: one wonders how such a fervent booster of Ireland can criticize a country because less than a mere tenth of its population are expats.

But the thing is, as seems often to occur, Aaron is taking a line here that, as far as I can tell, not a single major economist follows: so, what gives? After all, economists at Goldman Sachs - real economists, whose decisions affect how real real large amounts of real money are invested - are bullish on Mexico and think it'll become the world's sixth largest economy - bigger than the European ones, Korea or Vietnam - by 2050! The Economist predicted Mexico as the fifth largest economy by 2040 (using GS data; I'm not sure what they were using). And if you think, sure, 30, 40 years out, what's that worth - well, Mexico is one of the few third world countries that can now issue long term debt at almost first world interest rates, so, if you believe in capitalism and markets than it's pretty clear how capitalism is voting. How odd that Aaron Clarey doesn't know that, mere days after Mexico's first issue of thirty year bonds was pretty big economic news: wow, he's good at this stuff! For that matter, real economists - notably Jagdish Bhagwati, Mr. Brain-drain-emigration-models - would see Mexico's current emigration level as something for Mexicans to be optimistic about, a symptom of progess (I'm feeling lazy - you can find a recent summation of how this works from Kanbur and Rapoport (2005) J. Econ. Geog. 5: pp. 43-57).

Now, given Aaron's history of comments about Latin America and, for that matter, about Latino Americans, you might think, OK, I can guess why he's breaking with capitalism and economics here. And it might explain why Aaron Clarey thinks it's a big deal that China and India are putting out more engineering graduates (granted, of dubious quality) than is America, but doesn't even notice that Mexico, though smaller than America, is also heathily outpacing America in pumping out trained engineers.

It's nice to know that when Aaron's loyalties are divided between the jingoistic bigots and the capitalists, he knows which way he wants to jump!

NEWS FLASH!!! WORLD'S DUMBEST BLOGGER FOUND!

So, way back in that Octber 6 post we pointed out that "Captain Capitalism" Aaron Clarey appears to have the reading comprehension of a six-year old, but could at least look at pictures. But an alert correspondent points out that Aaron has already showed an inability to understand pictures in this post, titled "NEWS FLASH!!! WORLD"S TWO DUMBEST WOMEN FOUND!

Here, Aaroncriticizes Chicago for passing a minimum wage law essentially aimed at Wal-Mart, claiming that it will reduce employment. And indeed, while it turns out to be very hard to quantify the effect of minimum wage laws from real data, the theoretical arguments that they reduce employment are strong. Aaron then shows us a picture of the "world's two dumbest women" celebrating passage of the law.

And what do we notice? The women are wearing union local T-shirts. They are union members. Now, do organizations whose negotiating strength comes from withholding labor, benefit or suffer when it becomes more expensive to hire new workers? And if they benefit, are the women "dumb," or "cunning"?

Boy, I guess Ricardo and rent-seeking really are in those super advanced ec courses, the ones real economists take!

Our correspondent suggests that Aaron's real problem is that the "two dumbest women" are members of two groups - blacks and women - whom Aaron has been known to slime. But I disagree: I think in this case he's just genuinely ignorant!

But just to make everybody happy, we'll follow up with a post (above) where Aaron decided to side with the racists over the capitalists!

When is money not money?

"Captain Capitalism" Aaron Clarey spends a lot of time bitching about how academics contribute nothing to GDP and are useless (the word he generally uses is "academians," because he's illiterate, but you get the point).

Now, we can think of all kinds of reasons why that isn't true which are, y'know, complex and stuff. All that great technology that comes out of the academy, all those business startups near colleges and universities, the real income advantage conferred by academic training, the fact that all those economics professors make the big bucks by consulting for real world businesses, et cetera, and recognize that Aaron is a moron. But the thing is, Aaron's prejudice against academics is actually prima facie stupid because, as anyone even modestly intelligent who's ever been near a university will tell you, universities are large, impersonal corporations which provide a service for money.

For example, Harvard University's 2005 budget was $2.8 billion. And that doesn't include a lot of large sums -- like R&D money from government or private sources awarded to and spent by researchers there, much of the budget at Harvard affiliated hospitals, and so on. Or associated expenses, like living expenses and spending by members of the university community for textbooks and the like.

What sort of half-assed economist doesn't count three billion dollars as a
contribution to GDP?

Just wonderin'.

Unbelievable!

Again Aaron Clarey changes the link to his racist poston Latinos, so he can keep it up but keep it hidden from you, dear readers.

Why is making racist comments about Latinos so important to him?

Of course he also changes the link insulting most Americans and calling the poor "scum-bucket parasites," so ya gotta figure it's not just racist speech he values, it's also ignorant, offensive speech.

Ah, well. Time to start changing some of those links to the PDFs so you can come to the carnival and gaze, fascinated, like some sort of repulsive spider under glass. Or, more apt, like a teratoma in a formaldehyde jar: you look, cluck your tongue sadly, and think, in a better world, this twisted, repulsive thing would've been a man.

UPDATE: and the link moves again!

Virtue? A fig!

One of the joys of interacting with Aaron Clarey as this site sometimes causes, is the realization that he is even more amusingly stupid than we thought! For example, look at his posts here - magnificent! Who knew?

So, of course, many of you are aware that Aaron is involved in some amusing attempts to kill the free speech of this blog's principal. So, today we got to see his first big court filing on the case. And Aaron's counsel builds to a thrilling conclusion, in which he sums up the gravity of his charge by a lovely, isolated and boldfaced quotation on defamation from Act III, scene iii of Othello, beautifully attributed to "William Shakespeare."

That's right - Iago's speech! Beyond belief! Team Clareywatch has been rolling on the floor laughing. We like to picture Aaron with his counsel, Derek Smalls-like, open mouthed expressions of awe all around, thinkin', Wow, Shakespeare, deep. That'll kill them. And it does! I defy you not to crack up....

Here's a little aside for the monkey house since I know you guys are a little, um, literacy challenged. "Iago" is a character in Othello with few scruples and a talent for vicious untrue speech - a repugnant, worm-like man. Motivated in part by racial hatred, in part by misogyny, and mostly by deep jealousy toward talented and decent people, he plots against Othello. In act III, scene iii, he gives the speech Aaron gave to emphasize his case, in which he plays at gross emotional distaste for foul speech while at the same time indulging in it himself, trying to snare those around in his lies.

Brilliant, Aaron, just brilliant. I couldn't have picked it better for you myself.

We have to apologize for ever trying to parodize you here. Nobody can use your voice to make you sound as racist, ignorant and repulsive as you yourself can.

Now this is just plain weird

OK, all I can get from this post is, Aaron can't read (but he can look at pictures!) All due respect to Summers and what he may or may not have been trying to do, but what he did was say, maybe you couldn't really get that many more women in the hard sciences because maybe due to natural reasons having to do either with aptitude or lifestyle preference, women chose not to go into them, and so we maybe shouldn't shoot for full gender equity among (say) science faculty. And the left pushed back at him for questioning the orthodoxy of the idea that women should make up lots more of the faculty in top-flight hard science departments.

Aaron seems to've gotten it backward, and is taking the extreme left position. Which of course he'll entirely go the other way on as soon as he realizes it. Aaron's not smart enough to have an ideology but he wants to toe the line anyway...

I mean, leave aside the usual display of misogyny. You just gotta wonder how functionally illiterate a guy is who fundamentally got wrong something over which so much ink (and electrons) was spilled. Doesn't keep him from commenting on it though! And that, that is the Clarey leitmotif.

Merry-go-round

Hee, hee -- he changed the "Mexican Women" link again, can you believe it? I mean, he knows it's racist so he tries to hide it whenever we link - but it's important to him to keep the racist speech up there, he doesn't just delete! Amazing!

Look, sooner or later we'll just change all the links at right to links to the PDF cache.

Boyfriend of the year!

Looking for that special approach which will win you the ladies, noble young sir? Take your advice from "Captain Capitalism" Aaron Clarey! Remember to badmouth all your ex-girlfriends as often as possible in public (PDF): it impresses future girlfrieds with the good choices you make and let's 'em know not to walk out!

And good first-date chat? Impress her with things you've learned from Aaron: like how women's liberation causes rape (PDF), how feminists aren't marriageable (PDF), or how stupider women look better (PDF).

She'll positively swoon!

UPDATE: A member of Team Clareywatch requests that we include this gem, a real winner! PERFECT date conversation - how could any woman not want this filthy scumbag romantic dreamboat?

Employee of the Month!

How do you make it in the business world, boys n' girls? How do you succeed where others fail? Easy! Take a tip from "Captain Capitalism" Aaron Clarey! You publicly make comments like this and this about your coworkers (PDF, PDF) and like this about your clients (PDF)!

That's the kind of can-do spirit business loves!

Fifteen minutes

Well, it seems this website's principal figure has made it into print. Lessons? Wisdom? Don't ask us, ask somebody who earned his fifteen minutes in the sun by banging starlets.

But, let's just erase a couple Aaron Clarey mistruths, shall we?

Aaron would have you believe that this isn't about squelching free speech, but rather about people impersonating him. Nuh-uh. This blog stopped using Aaron Clarey's voice on the very day (June 19) that he first communicated to us that he didn't want it used; in fact, this blog has not used Aaron's voice at all since . But Aaron sent his summons which started the suit the article described on August 20 - more than two months later. This is about Aaron Clarey trying to silence speech he doesn't like, plain and simple.

And secondly, it didn't start with a call to Aaron telling him someone called him a racist -- it couldn't have. Because when Clarey first commented on this blog, nobody had called him a racist here. What panicked Aaron were links to his own speech -- links he still tries to hide. And that's what's getting him in trouble.

Man, Clarey can't even tell the truth when it's not on a blog!

I dream of Gini....

Which to believe, what Aaron says about Gini coefficients here, or here?

The best thing I can say about "Captain Capitalism" Aaron Clarey: smart enough not to read himself.

But speaking of Gini coefficients -- maybe we'll do something on it soon.

Another brilliant research tip from Aaron Clarey!

Fascinating to see Aaron commenting on a movie about Muslims here and here and repeatedly bringing up the comments of a three year old girl to prove "how effed up these people are." Which is a pretty strong statement about a three year old girl but we already know Aaron doesn't shy from that kind of thing.

Now, as it happens, one of the principals here at the Clarey Watch knows a thing or two about three year old girls. And, they'll say anything. Ask 'em where hair comes from, some time - fascinating. They don't know what "kill" or "dead" mean - bless 'em - and have every kind of crazy idea there is. So there's a useful tip from Aaron! You want to prove something, anything, to support any thesis whatsoever: interview a three year old, then hold her up as "fucked up." It's a surefire research tool.

Probably even works for bigots!

First, shoot the fish in the barrel

Of course, when "Captain Capitalism" Aaron Clarey decides to go post in backface, how're we gonna let that go? So don't miss this post (or the PDF here) where Aaron puts on the voice of an imaginary reader:

Captain Capitalism Reader #3 – "Yo man. So I was like hangin with my homies and word up g, get dis. Al Sharpton comes up to me and says, "you know prices are coming down just because Bush wants his cronies getting re-elected." And I was like, "whoa, step-off man! That’s like crazy freaky sh!t because my man Captain Capitalism predicted you leftist perps would be push that sh!t on us, thinking we was some dumb flock o’ sheep willing to be brainwashed and follow you anywhere. Next thing you know you’d be saying some girl was raped by a bunch of white cops when she wasn’t. I owe it to my main man Captain C for keeping in the truth. Thanks Captain!"

Because, it's funny to make fun of how minorities talk! I certainly hope we get an Aaron Clarey rendition of Stepin Fechit! (and, you just gotta believe he does a good one!)

Ah, sweet sweet irony

What's so funny about this post is that "Captain Capitalism" Aaron Clarey (and I wonder again, how much does some ass have to disrespect the military to award himself a rank?) is eager to display a PDF of somebody's racist post just in case they decide to hide it.

Because, of course, only a contemptible worm would post racist material - like on how we keep the high crime levels in black communities secret in order to promote socialism, or how Latino Americans mistreat women, or how Muslims are "sexually inadequate" - and then try to hide it when somebody links to it, right?

Right.

The title's pretty funny, too!

Keeping the biogtry on display

By the way - those links keep getting hidden away. So in case you have some burning need to see, say, bigotry from Aaron Clarey which tells religious folk that they are psychologically scarred and should just stay home instead of bothering normal folk, the (moved) original is here, and the PDF is here. Which is odd considering the further anti-Christian bigotry here, but hey, that post is weird for a lot of other reasons too, given comments elsewhere both expressing disgust for children and mocking the idea that there's anything wrong with, say, working a child in a factory all day. But OK.

By the way, you can still see the poor being called "greedy scum bucket parasites" here, or get the PDF here.

And that weird, unscientific loathing of all things African discussed here, can still be seen in the original here or in PDF here.

And he tried hiding the "Mexican Women" post here, but PDF's are below.

Those're the one's we've covered some. More tk!

And, here's a thought. If you're like the Clareywatch crew, you're probably chortling too hard over the patheticity of this muscial links thing to think this through right now: but bear with me. When a racist/offensive post is pointed out here, Aaron hides it away and sometimes gets rid of it, and the cache links. But then, he can choose to play the musical links game for things he really wants to preserve.

So one wonders: what's so important about preserving posts which have no economic or political content but mostly serve to slime a racial or ethnic group? Why are those posts so important to Aaron? Waht does that tell you?

What's dumber than a mollusk?

Now, anyone who doesn't flat out admire "Captain Capitalism" Aaron Clarey has to be won over by this post. Here, a guy who has repeatedly demonstrated a complete lack of understanding of how to do statistics, calling people "mollusks" for - wait for it - not doing statistics well! That, friends, is cojones. It is truly impressive. Let's go through the post a bit, shall we? This is a bit outside of the usual remit of this blog but fortunately there's some offensive speech, not just the usual brainless patter.

Now, a lot of people - even, say, buisness oriented folk - have found a lot of bad news in the Census report on poverty. But here he's picking on a left-leaning group's comments on it.

He begins by making fun of a graph showing how many more people are living in poverty in America over the past few years.: there has been almost a 20% increase -- not beanbag. He then says they had to "mainpuilate the scale on the Y-axis." Uh, no. In fact, real stats packages real economists use - and for that matter even the crappy Excel graphs Aaron uses - will do this by default. The natural Y-axis ranges basically over the same range as your data, no? More on axes later. A graph is designed to help you present your data, kiddies, and that's all - "the right way" to set it up is so what you want seen can be seen.

He says, well, of course there's more people who're poor, there's more people, isn't the rate the relevant number? And here, Deputy Bullshit Spotters, is the point to listen to your inner voice that says, "Is this moronic toad really trying to suggest the population of the United States went up by something like 20% between 2000 and 2005?" Because it didn't -- it went up, by the Census Bureau's estimates, about 5%. That means, a plot of the rates is going to look, well, pretty much like the plot of the absolute numbers, with pretty much the same trends - NOT flat. How does he make it look flat? He screws with the Y-scale. Excellent.

And here's something for all you stats wannabes out there. You want to compare to pieces of data graphically? Make sure you show them with the same scaling, whatever scaling you use. Anyone who doesn't, is hiding something, or perhaps stupid, or both.

Now, Pathetic Ignorant Little Man (PILM) Aaron goes on to worry about "context" - you see, it's not fair to look just at a short time scale. Of course, PILM himself often makes judgements about trends from even shorter time spans - like, for example, here. But never mind. So he shows a plot of the poverty rates beginning with 1959. Basically it shows a gentle falloff from the '50s to 1970 -- from which one might infer that things like the New Deal and Great Society worked OK. Aaron thinks that's the relevant context. Um, why, oh Deputy Bullshit Spotters, is it relevant to compare poverty rates now, to a time when the US was segregated, and half the anti-poverty measures in action now, weren't in place? This is the challenge of all data analysis: define the meaningful "context." But for a group like CAP looking at immediate policy effects and solutions it's hard to defend Aaron's concept of "context."

"Thus, official economists would come to the professional conclusion," (says the PILM, who is not an economist, contra just about every economist involved in policy anywhere in the political spectrum) "that 'People should shut the hell up and stop their whining. Poverty is not a problem in America.'"

But, hey, there's never been a problem, right? After all, Aaron Clarey is the one who said that

"I'm sick and tired of your greedy scum bucket parasites known as 'the poor' who think you have it so rough"

so, how can there ever have been a problem, eh? I mean, screw these people!

And that's in a way as offensive as anything Aaron has ever written, and goes back to the point below about guys sitting in their rooms playing Super Mario who have no idea how actual Americans think. My personal guess on that thinking being, that while we recognize that how you help poor people may be a complicated issue, there is a real and terrible poverty problem in America if just a few hundred thousand people - let alone 40 million - are in need, and we desperately want to help, and anyone who denies that vision is a moral cretin, more fit to be called a "retard" or "mollusk," simply for lacking that understanding, than anyone at CAP. And I don't think it's just "liberal" or "conservative" Americans who'd agree with that.

Moving on - he again takes a shot at assessing the administration's policy effects just by looking at the past 4-5 years instead of longer (uh...OK, you don't need me to point out the problem). But then he says, hey, incomes fell for a while because we're coming out of a recession. Which is funny, because Aaron has heaped scorn upon the idea that we're coming out of a recession! And because, OK, we're coming out of a recession, incomes are recovering - but poverty numbers AREN'T, which seems to be CAP's point, no? Note that on the graph the Census Bureau doesn't identify the "recession" the same way Aaron (now) does. It's interesting to note, by the way, that while median incomes are stangant or declining, mean (per capita) incomes are going up, so Aaron's graphs are actually not addressing the "somebody's getting screwed" question.

Lastly he hits on the idea that illegal immigrants might be causing the jump - and, well, I think you know how to handle that question, it's going to look a lot like how you clever folk handled the population question. You know, "Is the PILM really saying....?" That way.

And check out the apparatchiks in the comments. It is tragic that after all the good work on decent people like Philip Mangano and others showing how new ideas and approaches can help the poor and the homeless, there are still fools who will spit out invented statistics about the percentage of homeless that are mentally ill or the like. These are not, of course, "fact-oriented" people.