The left is just upset because they have absolutely no one this articulate, this intelligent and this drop dead gorgeous speakling for them.
I consistently read Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, Ann Coulter, Michelle Malkin and Starr Parker among the other conservative columnists I read. I don't read them because I feel I need to make an affirmative aciton attempt to read minorities, I read them because they make intelligent well reasoned arguments in their columns.
My son is going into marketing and is taking economics courses and I have turned him on to Sowell and Williams as a counter weight to his liberal professors.
Funny I thought us knuckle dragging rightwingers were 1) SOOOOOOOOOO racist and 2) want to keep women in their place.
Back to Michelle. If this beautiful, intelligent woman were a liberal she would be paraded around by NOW and the rest of the left as the epitome of a modern woman, but because she is on the "wrong side" the left must do whatever it takes to discredit her, up to and including calling her the most vile racist names. What a bunch of children. Name calling is what little children do when they don't get their way, not what intelligent adults do when they disagree with someone.
JAH
I couldn't agree more, JAH.
The leftards have no choice but to resort to ad hominem attacks--they're simply too stupid to argue cogently for their positions.
Could you please provide a link where Wonkette claims that all right-wingers are racist?
Bullington, you're being ironic right?
Apparently conservatives are too busy patting themselves on the back for reading a minority woman's blog to recognize her's or their own hypocrisy. Malkin has been on her Mohammad Cartoon Jihad kick for a while now. So apparently it's vitally important for democracy that cartoons (which are so offensive to a group of people that it causes violent protest) be shoved down all our throats (After all, they're just cartoons for our Lord Jesus Christ's sakes!)
But when somebody makes offensive jokes towards her, it's like, totally different. No doubt because she made some complex moral reasoning weighing racist speech versus anti-religious imagery that she didn't let us in on, and not because she has a wildly inconsistent worldview that all Republicans don't not have.
Well y'know what, if Wonkette can't make racist sexist jokes about Michelle Malkin, the terrorists win.
I do love this argument that conservatives have become fond of lately- "Sure, in general we are pretty intolerant towards all non-whites, non-Christians, intellectuals, immigrants, dirty poor people, dirty French people, etc... But look at how intolerant all of them are towards us!" They then take the most outrageous liberal statement they can find, even if they have to scavenge for forum trolls and go through their anonymous hate mail, and then hold it up as the mainstream liberal view while ignoring anything approaching reasoned critique.
Hear that sound? That's the sound of democracy dying slowly and painfully. Thank you conservative punditry!
Blooper,
Your comment is too insensible for a sensible reply.
Jacob,
Ironic? No, but a bit hyberbolic I suppose. There are liberals who'll defend their positions reasonably--but they are very few.
"The leftards have no choice but to resort to ad hominem attacks--they're simply too stupid to argue cogently for their positions."
Wait a minute, who's too stupid to argue cogently dopey? I guess when rightards are too dumb to answer, they call intelligent arguments insensible. And then say the left can't defend themselves reasonably. Hah, thank you for proving my point.
Blooper wrote:
"No doubt because she made some complex moral reasoning weighing racist speech versus anti-religious imagery that she didn't let us in on, and not because she has a wildly inconsistent worldview that all Republicans don't not have."
Yep, you're the paragon of the cool logician...
Blooper, if you have an argument to make, with factual references and a coherent sequence of reasoning, post it. So far, all you've done is make accusations and fling insults.
If that's the best you can do, go away. You're boring me.
"Yep, you're the paragon of the cool logician..."
Guess they didn't teach you about double negatives in the big red schoolhouse, did they? I'll translate from my original comment "Republicans have wildly inconsistent worldviews."
Here's my evidence and reasoning. Malkin: "The Muhammed cartoons aren't offensive, they should be seen by all! However the personal attacks against me are very offensive, how dare Wonkette mainstream it!"
I'm sorry if you can't follow this still, I can't figure out how to put it into smaller words. Bottom line, if she was consistent and had any class, she would simply ignore Wonkette, accept that she's gonna have to take this stuff because of the positions she takes, and not bitch and moan about it like those whiny liberals conservatives are always complaining about.
Still with the personal attacks.
You don't like Michelle Malkin, that much is clear. The Muhammed cartoons were just plain ludicrous and Muslim extremists everywhere took the opportunity to kill people and wreak havoc, and somehow you make the leap in logic that this means Malkin isn't allowed to defend herself against personal attacks, or against people who publish her home address thereby putting her daughter's and husband's (and her own) safety in jeopardy.
That makes zero sense.
And now, because not only have you continued with the senseless blathering, you've made clear you think I'm stupid -- you're gone. My blog, my rules. You're not presenting an argument, you're a chimpanzee standing on a log, beating his chest and shrieking.
It's not amusing. 'Bye-bye.
Commenting by HaloScan
