On Wash. Times' "America's Morning News," Malkin declares Michelle Obama "First Crony"
June 22, 2009 4:46 pm ET
Expand All
Expand 1st Level
Collapse All
-
-
MacDonald response to Hardy's statement that "the government invented ... the Internet": "No, Al Gore did"
4 hours and 46 minutes ago -
Weinberg, Hardy smack down Forbes' and MacDonald's IMAC rationing fearmongering
5 hours and 2 minutes ago -
-
Hannity falsely suggests Democratic health bills would only insure "12 million" people
November 20, 2009 9:58 pm ET -
-
Media Matters: The Palin chronicles
by Simon Maloy - November 20, 2009 -
The Friday Rush: A series of conflicts
by Greg Lewis - November 20, 2009 -
Contrary to media hype, Sarah Palin is very unpopular
by Jamison Foser - November 19, 2009
|
|
||
Connect & Share
© 2009 Media Matters for America. All rights reserved.
  |
||
Mr. News
It's getting dangerous out there when people like Michelle Malkin can keep a gig. She says inflammatory and extreme things in order to stay in the public eye.
I pity anyone who takes this woman seriously.
You mean like the Huffington and Kos kids did for the past eight years?
Actually, it seems, just liberal families. You cry about how mean conservatives are but don't hold your own people to those standards.
There is such seething hatred for Palin on the left that they attack her children...what is it about that you don't understand?
OH, you mean like the Obamas do with Michelle and the kids? How did that taxpayer funded 24K tax payer bought and paid for date (read photo op) the media fawned over? How about the nice sweet photo op with Obama parading his kids for ice cream instead of dealing with the Iran situation? It seems, whenever Obama is taking growing criticism on an issue, he wheels the family out. You seem to think that just because her family came to support her nomination that it equates to "whoring her children" out. You didn't mind Obama using his family to talk about family values. Palin did the same. Voters, afterall, want to see that politicians put their money where there mouth is. The difference is, you don't like her values. My defense, is the attacks on her children. You would flip out if the things said about her kids were said about Obamas kids instead. Palin is a big girl, so I'm not so much defending attacks on her.
Better still, in the "mainstream" there is seething vitriol aimed at Palin while Michelle is only taking criticism for her scandalous affairs. Big difference. If people were simply irrationally insulting Michelle I would have a problem with that.
BTW, insults add nothing to the argument other than a weakness in your own defense.
I mean, she finds something ugly to say about the First Lady nearly every single day.
Somebody's gotta take Photoshop away from this nasty lady, because she gets very ugly on people she does not approve of ...
Again, thinking it has anything to do with race or gender. You're so brain washed into identity politics that you think that anyone who is liberal is beyond reproach, especially if they are a minority or female. MLK must be rolling in his grave. You know, that silly 'ol saying he had about judging a person by the content of their character and not the color of ther skin. /sarc
The left is so fixated on race and gender it's disgusting.
"the right is fixated on those things"
What? Was it a Republican who said Americans are cowards on race? Was it Republicans who took every criticism of Obama and relegated it to racism? Is it Republicans who incessantly drone on and on about race in political speeches? Identity politics has always been a tool of the left and has been nothing short of divisive since the party's inception.
Hyprocrite...actually, I hold my party accountable for their actions. I had a number of criticisms of Bush over the years. Also, if you notice, when Republicans are caught in controversy they resign, Democrats run for re-election. Why is that I wonder?
Really? When is Senator John Ensign planning on resigning. If not, why is that I wonder? Speaking of Malkin, I think her website is a wonderful little echo chamber she's built for herself, I would love to argue with her on the merits of her posts, but she only allows wingnuts and a few token liberals to comment. Why is that I wonder? Perhaps she doesn't really want to hear any opposing viewpoints.
"Identity politics has always been a tool of the left and has been nothing short of divisive since the party's inception."
That must be why minorities come out and vote in such huge numbers for the Republican party since you folks are so accepting in that large tent of yours. I doubt it's been divisive since the party's inception since the term was invented during the 1960's, but please, blather on.
Ensign resigned hi post as the Chairman of the Republican Policy Committee did he not? You can also rest assured the voters will hold him accountable. When are Rangel, Dodd, Frank going to resign? William Jefferson had to be voted out and thankfully it looks like Dodd will be too.
"Republican party since you folks are so accepting in that large tent of yours."
Nah, the Dems just have a good strategy for duping minorities. With the exception of a few RINO's, Republicans are concerned with the benefit of all Americans, not pitting us against each other.
"I doubt it's been divisive since the party's inception since the term was invented during the 1960's, but please"
Check your history. Andrew Jackson is the Father of what is today's Democrat party. You know, ethnic cleansing of Indian tribes, that's kinda bigoted. How about the "peace" Democrats that were against the Civil War, you know, that war Republicans waged to free the slaves and fter winning ferociously fought to punish the South afterward. Or maybe the Jim Crow laws instituted by Southern Democrats catches your eye. If not, then maybe George Wallace who said, "...segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever." is one of them little Democrats you like to forget. It has long been my suspicion that wen Democrats realized that mistreatment of blacks was no longer cool, they instead pretended to be their friends and have for the most part enslaved them to government instead.
When it comes to minorities, Dems rarely put their money where there racist mouths are in actually providing viable solutions that enable minorities to be successful.
Once Hispanics became such a large number, they also became a minority of choice. Dems discourage assimilation, requiring English to be learned, and have no disregard towards the education levels of those subverting the sovereignty of our country. Why should they? If they were educated, could speak fluent English, brought in viable skills to the economy beyond unskilled labor (we have plenty of uneducated idiots here to fill that role) they would have a greater chance in this country for success. Instead it takes a generation or two for them to do so and unfortunately, a good number of them are already hooked on welfare and other government aid.
Your party cripples minorities by selling them promises of taking my money and other hard working, tax paying Americans and that of "greeeedy" corporations and giving it to them for some exaggerated or long abandoned concept of mistreatment. My party espouses the benefits of work ethic and creates an environment that any one with the drive to do so can be successful in this country.
I've noticed your party never takes up the plight of the American Indian. The one minority in this country that has suffered more than any. Why is that I wonder? Could it be they just simply aren't a large enough voting block?
The Democrat disinformation system has served it well...minorities are always welcome to the big tent. =) Once more, what does your party due to minorities already there? Your party is very disparaging of minorities in the Republican party. Look at some of the comments here on MM: sellout, self loathing b*itch, used by the evil white man...etc. Doesn't sound very concerned for minorities to me...
Awwwww, so cute, Anchor baby Malkin is playing dress-up as a reporter. How precious.