Jokes that stopped being funny the first day of high school

I beg everyone, for the good of the nation . . . no more book reviews, newspaper columns, or devastating web repartee that consists of taking either

1) An out of context quote
2) A piece of self-deprecating humor from the target

And adding "Why, yes, you sure are!", or some close variant of same.

If you are too big to be stuffed into a locker by the kids with muscles and social skills, you are too old for this to evoke anything except an empathetic cringe. You can do better than this. And if not, they sell books of jokes in Barnes and Noble now.

Corollary: "This is beyond self-parody" is . . . well, you know.

Second corollary: sarcasm works only if you are really good at it. The ability to stretch out the word "riiiiiiight" over most of the half-time show does not count as being really good at it.

Third corollary: copulating inanimate objects excreting onto various surfaces and kicking each other in the large muscle group are not nearly as entertaining as you think they are. They are even less entertaining in print.

Fourth corollary: Naked incredulity is an adequate compositional style only when a baby panda crawls up a flagpole to rescue Jenna Bush, or Cher books a concert tour. Otherwise . . . did you really say that? I mean, okay, that's an adequate start. But then I need something more. For example, do you know anyone in law enforcement who can stop Cher before she dies again?

C'mon guys . . . the children are watching. Don't you care about the future of your country?

Update This is culled from watching the comments, on this blog and others, that commenters direct at each other. We have many witty and intelligent people in this comment section from both sides of the aisle. It pains me to watch the discourse in the comments degenerate into "You're a big fat *loser*, moron!" I thrill to the more amusingly pointed debate, but then my heart sinks as once again, some troll wanders in from outside and calls the other commenters "a bunch of retards". Leaving aside the fact that undoubtedly a number of our readers have loved ones who are developmentally disabled, this is neither amusing nor enlightening.

Comments

What inspired this?

Posted by Reality Man | March 28, 2008 8:34 AM

Has anyone ever told you that you're beautiful when you're angry?

Posted by dearieme | March 28, 2008 8:34 AM

Eh, it's all over the comments section. I'm not angry, it's just . . . how many thirteen year old boys are reading an economics blog?

Posted by Megan McArdle | March 28, 2008 8:45 AM

Whatever it is I said, I'm sorry. Please don't hurt me.

Posted by JB | March 28, 2008 8:48 AM

The problem is... people don't like hearing well-reasoned arguments that contradict their frame of mind. If they lash out at you, it somehow excuses them from the unpleasant task of thinking.

Posted by solarlux | March 28, 2008 8:54 AM

Megan, I'm sorry -- I'm a man. Everything that was funny to me when I was 14 is still funny today.

Posted by pr9000 | March 28, 2008 9:12 AM

Oh, and I forgot to add: boobs! Farts!

Posted by pr9000 | March 28, 2008 9:14 AM

I know Funny.

Funny:
Men in drag.
Children swearing.
Old women swearing.
A football in the groin.
A basketball in the groin.
Pretty much anything in the groin.
The Daily Show.
The Onion.
Stephen Colbert's address at the annual Bush/Media love fest.
Farts.
Certain parts of the male anatomy.
"Dick Cheney shot an old man in the face."

Not funny:
Will Ferrell.
Ben Stiller.
Friends (TV show).
Republicans.
Republicans who pretend to be libertarians.
Warbloggers.
Warbloggers who accuse The Left of being uncivil.
David Broder.
Non-apology apologies.
Jay Leno.*

And many, many more. Remember: I know Funny.

*was actually once Funny

Posted by ed | March 28, 2008 9:19 AM

apparently Special Olympics jokes are still ok.

Posted by sean | March 28, 2008 9:25 AM

A football in the groin.

Megan's blog had facts and analysis. But Football in the Groin had a football in the groin.

Posted by JB | March 28, 2008 9:27 AM

Megan's blog had facts and analysis.

But the facts were shoddy at best and the analysis thought through at a Jonah Goldberg-like level. Also too long winded. The end result: Not Funny.

Posted by ed | March 28, 2008 9:31 AM

Ed, if you find Megan so thoroughly unamusing, why are you here?

Posted by Princess of Swords | March 28, 2008 9:40 AM

Ed, if you find Megan so thoroughly unamusing, why are you here?

To elevate the discourse. Why are you here?

Posted by ed | March 28, 2008 9:42 AM

Ed,

It's not working.

However, you could probably slalom through every one of her humor no-no's in just three posts if you would call someone a retard at this point.

Posted by Chris | March 28, 2008 10:06 AM

Megan, is it OK if I call ed a failure?

Posted by Yancey Ward | March 28, 2008 10:06 AM

Annoying little prick named Ed who never provides intelligent responses but limits his input to vacuously sniping at the host:

Not Funny.

Posted by my take | March 28, 2008 10:07 AM

This is interesting, Megan McArdle (no underscore). You're listing things that should have stopped being funny (and I guess by extension, impressive and convincing) after high school. And I agree.

But weren't you also impressed by the Obama "Think Different" ad that someone made?

Isn't that video basically saying, "Hey, look how bad my opponent looks when you swap her into the bad guy's position. Hah, hah!"

Isn't that *also* something that shouldn't impress anyone after high school?

Posted by Person | March 28, 2008 10:10 AM

"It's only funny until someone gets hurt. And then it's freakin' hilarious."

- as seen on a T-shirt for sale at Steve & Barry's

Posted by Peter | March 28, 2008 10:23 AM

Gosh, Person, I haven't actually watched any political ads. No one bothers advertising in DC; the city's more than 80% Democrat, I believe, and was pretty much a lock for Obama.

Posted by Megan McArdle | March 28, 2008 10:31 AM

To elevate the discourse.

It's so sad to see someone fail so utterly in their aspirations.

Posted by Charlie (Colorado) | March 28, 2008 10:31 AM

Hopefully, this was pure venting on your part, Megan. I hope it made you feel better, just as it probably gave some sustenance to the trolls that are now beaming "It's working!"

You DO get more than your fair share of abusive commenting, but once you've put on a few more years and calluses, those noise filters will make them invisible to you.

It's the web: you look into the abyss, and the abyss looks into you. When you are lucky, you see a few sparkles there.

Posted by Jens Fiederer | March 28, 2008 11:36 AM

I'm heartened to see Megan calling for the end of the careers of Ann Althouse and Maureen Dowd.

Without out-of-context quotes, unfunny jokes and schoolyard sniping, what would they write about?

Posted by liberalrob | March 28, 2008 11:58 AM

JB:

I snarfed in class due to your 9:27 post. Brilliant.

Posted by Michael B. | March 28, 2008 12:34 PM

Blog reading in class? Tut-tut . . .

Posted by Megan McArdle | March 28, 2008 12:58 PM

First she came for my naked incredulity, and I didn't speak up because I am always credulous when my clothes are off.

When she came for my "copulating inanimate objects excreting onto various surfaces," I said nothing, because, yeah, that's gross.

When she came for my sarcasm, I didn't speak up because sarcasm is destructive.

And then she came for my blog reading in class...

Posted by Michael B. | March 28, 2008 1:11 PM

It's so sad to see someone fail so utterly in their aspirations.

Actually, I thought 'ed' was kind of funny, in the "well within the bounds of (inadvertent) self parody" kind of way.

Posted by anony_mouse_ | March 28, 2008 1:50 PM

So, Megan McArdle, you're claiming you NEVER saw the Obama "Think Different" ad where someone subbed in Hillary's face into the famous 1984 Mac ad?

Posted by Person | March 28, 2008 1:53 PM

Is it funny when you make a long post about how mean everyone is to you without stopping and thinking if maybe you said things that deserved it?

Is it funny when you call other people not funny but recycle the same, lame, unoriginal jokes over and over (e.g. "supply meet demand, what else have you learned on our planet.. etc)?

Finally, is taking a sentence that makes no-sense to begin with and mutilating it with a thesaurus funny?

Say what you like about blatantly mean spirited humor but, as I've said before, at least it's honest. You've done plenty of jokes in the same vein, only with an air of pretentious sanctimony that just drowns people in the flood of your hypocrisy.

You're not better than everyone else, Megan. Actually, in a lot of ways, you're worse. Please, fall off your high horse.

Posted by NutellaonToast | March 28, 2008 2:29 PM

Get a grip, Toasty. Megan is a saint compared to the vitriol she inevitably receives in nearly every comments section. And at least her harsher sentiments are directed at unnamed groups of people, unlike the personally-directed & insulting prose you've just composed. Cute, tell the journalist that she has to use a thesaurus... you're just brilliant.

Posted by my take | March 28, 2008 2:51 PM

Annoying little prick named Ed who never provides intelligent responses but limits his input to vacuously sniping at the host:

Not Funny

Oooooohhhh good one, my take. Touche indeed.

Posted by ed | March 28, 2008 2:59 PM

2x4 to a protester's head, causing permanent disability or death.

Comedy Gold!

Posted by Meegan McCardel | March 28, 2008 4:47 PM

Sorrowfully, I must report that variations on people's names are also usually not funny. It is generally much funnier if you can work up some sort of pun, though I understand that "McArdle" presents some unique challenges in that regard.

NoT, I wasn't aware that my vocabulary was causing comprehension problems for some of my readers. Now that you've called my attention to it, I'll try to slip in some more monosyllabic words.

Posted by Megan McArdle | March 28, 2008 4:57 PM

NutellaonToast wrote: You're not better than everyone else, Megan. Actually, in a lot of ways, you're worse. Please, fall off your high horse.

I'm going to break the fourth rule of fAIght club: THIS really is beyond self-parody.

Posted by anony_mouse_ | March 28, 2008 5:03 PM

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooo . . . anony_mouse_, how could you?

Posted by Megan McArdle | March 28, 2008 5:07 PM

Sorry. These tea bags say "Bigelow Plantation Mint", but judging by how pleasantly addictive they are, there's a real possibility they contain hashish.

Posted by anony_mouse_ | March 28, 2008 5:12 PM

Ohhh! Burned Meggies! You sez I no noz yer big werdz! I feelz dumz.

Why no responiz to my other commenteses tho? Were theyz used too big werdz for u?

Posted by NutellaonToast | March 28, 2008 5:26 PM

No one bothers advertising in DC; the city's more than 80% Democrat, I believe, and was pretty much a lock for Obama.

Huh. It's been more than a decade since I lived in the DC metro area, but I remember differently. Not only did candidates and parties advertise in DC to reach the NoVa and Md suburbs, but there was also advertising specifically for the purpose of swaying the media/government people who will then reach others all over the place. In fact, you were more likely to see political ads on cable TV in DC than in, say, NY or elsewhere around the country.

Posted by Al | March 28, 2008 5:31 PM

Vaguely funny, NoT. But it would be better as a LOLcat.

Posted by Megan McArdle | March 28, 2008 6:09 PM

Yeah, well, they don't let me post pictures in the comments here.

Still waiting on a response to my other criticisms. Actually, still waiting on a response to my thesaurus criticism too, as my point was not that it was too obfuscated but that it was a hackish attempt at humor devoid of wit or intelligence.

Posted by NutellaonToast | March 28, 2008 6:14 PM

I is in ur blogz

  /}_{\           /.-'

 ( a a )-.___...-'/

 ==._.==         ;

      \ i _..._ /,

      {_;/   {_//  fsc

goofin' on ur namez

Posted by liberalrob | March 28, 2008 6:50 PM

That is funny. Very slightly disturbing--how long did that take you?--but also very funny.

Posted by Megan McArdle | March 28, 2008 7:09 PM

Meghan,

Do you ever read Yglesias's blog? Do you notice a difference? On his blog Yglesias isn't
always pompously lecturing his readers to be "civil" in the comments section. Any idea why that is? Let's think...

Maybe it's because you're the one poisoning the well. Unlike Yglesias, you denigrate your opponents continually. You always resort to ad hominem attacks, calling the other side ignorant, misinformed, ridiculous, etc. Just this week, for example, you called parents who don't vaccinate their children "sociopaths." Last week you wrote about how "jaw-droppingly stupid" Barack Obama's race speech was. And your Eliot Spitzer vitriol was never ending. And you do this all the time.

About 80% of your posts are about how some blogger or journalist or politician got something wrong, and how you--being the genius you are--feel compelled to call them out on their "idiocy." And you use words like idiot, moron, stupid, et. al., all the time. Just two weeks ago you began a post about your support of legalizing prostitution like this: "I think most arguments about keeping prostitution illegal are stupid." Now, how do you expect people who disagree with you to respond to that? With love and kisses? No one--especially you, based on your recent posts--wants to be called stupid. Yet you call people who disagree with you stupid all the time.

Maybe if you adopted a more respectful tone, you're readers would too. Until then, I'm going straight for the jugular, regardless of how many times you write posts pleading with people like me to be "civilized" when they simply disagree with you--using the exact same language as you do.

Cheers!

Posted by Blake | March 28, 2008 10:26 PM

She's sensitive about "retard" but not "cripple" apparently.

Posted by Kevin | March 28, 2008 11:02 PM