Cob Pile
~Sicks and stones
may break my bones.
But talk,dont bother me~
-JoeCocker,somewhere on the mad dogs and englishmen tour.
I like michelle because:
She`s cute,attractive,thin,small,female,sexy(could be),right(my opinion),jibes with the T.I.T.S. theory,smart,down home,INTERESTING, funny,CURRENT,AMERICAN...
Yes, you're right, I'm an apologist for the kind of vile racist, sexist mail Malkin receives. I'd never criticize that sort of thing.
As for my posts on cartoons of Condi, I condemned some as racist and didn't condemn others, based on my considerable knowlege of political cartooning and cartoon techniques. Unless you have a logical rebuttal to my analysis, I don't think dismissing my post as an apologetic for racism is fair.
Excuse me, Ampersand. Your analysis was exactly what I intended the reader to read and consider. I failed to make that clear.
I thought the post I linked, taken together with the comments was an especially good illustration of the discussion going on at the time these cartoons were 'in the news'.
Your post addressed issues related to how the "line" nobody wants to cross is delineated, and you pulled no punches. I don't usually toss off uncredited links dismissively, but I can be a miserably lazy blogger.
I hope this clears things up, Ampersand. No offense intended. I'll try to write more clearly next time.
I sincerely apologize - I totally misread you!
My bad! Thank you for clearing that up.
Let's talk about double standards. 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!
Since you have such good ears, Blooper, do you hear the sound of Malkin supporters rioting in the streets and demanding the head of Wonkette?
Life and democracy are painful to begin with. I don't think Malkin was doing anything other than expressing that pain. She'll probably continue doing what she does in spite of the ridicule from her enemies.
Cartoons are being shoved down your throat? C'mon you big baby. Who's been drawing offensive cartoons of you? I suspect it's the Jihadist's who are giving you a wedgie and you choose to blame those who have the courage to stand up to them.
So, Michelle called the MSM cowards for cowering before the extremist who were so offended as to become violent. I think the MSM showed restraint by choosing not to show the cartoons due to the very real danger to human life this could cause.
The fact that violence over the cartoons was unjustified does not change the fact that showing the cartoons meant putting more lives in danger. Human life trumps principle, right pro-lifers?
But Michelle kept milking the issue, criticizing those who wouldn’t show it and trying to get it shown wherever she could, even on FOX news after they told her not to. Why? Because she was fighting for the civil liberties of a Dutch newspaper? Because even though the cartoons were offensive (which of course she didn’t think, because she is bigoted against Muslims) they shouldn’t be censored? No, her only aim was to provocate and spread hate for fun and profit, potentially endangering human life.
SO now a mainstream blog makes an offensive joke about her, and she whines and paints herself as a victim when she was the one championing offensive humor that could’ve cost people their lives. Some moral highground she has.
Bottom line: If she had any consistency, she would have simply ignored Wonkette’s crude humor, raising herself above it and accepting that it simply is the price she pays for the positions she takes. But that would take class, and of course she has none.
Posted by: Blooper at May 21, 2006 17:44 Permalink
Jesus, this is getting worse than 'days of our lives'....
It's about standing up to Jihadist's, Blooper. The Danish cartoons weren't that funny and the Wonkette jokes were much worse. I'm sure Michelle knows all about the price she's paying for what she's doing.
I figure Islamofascists are watching us 24/7 and noting where our weaknesses lie. Perhaps you see your 'moral high ground' as a strength. I see it as a soft spot.
Blooper is a doctrinaire moonbat, for whom rhetoric has replaced the faculty of reason. It doesn't pay to argue with these types. Do I detect a note of envy as well?
That occurred to me when I typed that last comment....
hmm
Commenting by HaloScan
