Michelle Malkin

Massa-ive Distraction - Why You Should Never Consort with the Enemy

Playing with Massa has landed Glenn in Swampland.  

YahooNews posted a serious "Overmatched by Disgraced Dem!" zinger on it's landing page this morning, meant to compliment the writer's understanding of unbiased mainstream media propagation. This article that was meant to denigrate and soil Glenn Beck, based on guilt by association, was listed under these titles on various pages scattered throughout the web:  

 This one article under various titles, designed to give passerbys the impression much has been written on the topic, was written by one slimey, Slimeland "Swampland"  blogger Michael Scherer, Time's White House "correspondent" who went to Columbia University's Graduate School of Journalism to learn how to blog about Jay Z and Beyonce, Saturday Night Live, groping and back hair.  

Yes, there's a reason why Scherer blogs at Swampland.  

We could credit Scherer for giving a stab at explaining the White House's healthcare legislation via the blogger's old cut 'n paste fall-back (while taking the devil's word for it) , but on the day that news broke of the the Democrat's hostile, reinvent-the-rules, no-vote, socialist take over of legislation through the Slaughter Solution , Scherer was busy doing the write-up about Massa's Caligulan orgy discussion on Glenn Beck's show.  

Perhaps doing other things as well.  

The problem is, one of conservativism's darlings, who was once thought of as "the next Rush," whom perhaps Rush "should fear," did not heed the advice of conservative media mavens such as Michelle Malkin who advised Beck on his radio show that Massa is  

a sick, desperate pol looking to save his hide and distract from his smelly ethics problems and personal problems. This is not a hero, not a bona fide champion of reform and integrity in government. He’s the jerk who gave the figurative middle finger to his own constituents as he proclaimed last year that he would ram single-payer down their throats no matter what they thought..  

Beck refuted Michelle's insistence that Massa's controversy was a distraction by pouting and yelling at her like a petulant teenager responding to a parent's concern over questionable behavior (after they've left the room) with "You don't know!"

She would blog about Massa 2 days before her heated discussion with Beck, and mere hours later, would blog about the Slaughter Solution before Massa would appear on Beck's show.  

For Beck, this was never a question of finding a replacement -- who would NOT want to appear on Beck's show, even last minute? -- but more of a refusal to capitulate to the sage advise of conservative veterans, that included Rush who said a full day before the Massa interview:  

[Massa's] out there challenging me to a fight. He wants to come on this show, calling me a coward on this phony soldier business. And these guys in the media are trying to say I'm one of this guy's champions. Anybody who embraces this guy, including the Democrats, please do, but it isn't me ..  

Actually from the moment this thing started yesterday I suspect a rope-a-dope and I still think a rope-a-dope's going on and I still think that anybody out there who embraces this guy is in for big trouble.  

Anybody who embraces this guy is gonna get caught.  

On the day before Beck's radio discussion with Michelle and the Massa Interview, Talking Points would skewer Rush's comments, an obvious, ominous foreshadowing of how the left would interpret Beck's handling of Massa. On the day of Beck's radio discussion with Michelle and Massa Interview, Rush would talk about "The Train Wreck That Passes for TV "News in 2010."  

Neither would influence Beck's decision to host Massa for an entire "faaaascinating" hour.  

So, while Obama continued his campaigning in the Middle America (no John McCain?) to advance socialized healthcare, and the Slaughter Solution would be on everyone's radar -- from small, conservative news organizations in my homestate to media giants, Glenn Beck would decide to follow through on his commitment to court controversy, like "one of this guy's champions."  

Glenn played with caca and he got his hands dirty.  

As for me, an established conservative who understands a bit about the dynamics of media and polics, -- and integrity and character -- my question about Beck is this:  

Is he courting conservativism because the movement is the "Now Controversy"?  

A serious question. 

About Fox, I would ask:

Why does Fox News allow this sort of gamble that would result in a distortion about the conservative movement?

Because this is what happens when you consort with the enemy: you lose control of the narrative. 

And then it gets picked up by people like Scherer who like  to blog in Swampland. 

I am comforted because the only reason Beck showed up on Scherer's radar was because of Massa. 

Massa will always be Progressive's Progeny, their breed. 

He doesn't belong to us. They own him and others like him, even if he's been blackballed and labeled "damaged goods" by their own. 

I have hope, not because Beck has said Michelle was right, but because conservative truth prevails.

I pity their envy. 

 

 

  

  

  

   

 

Glenn's Integrity in Question: Is Conservativism Just Another "Now" Controversy?

Nevermind Glenn's referring to Michelle Malkin as Michelle Obama ("Gosh, why am I even saying this?" @ 9:08).

Glenn's got a worser problem than Freudian slips of the tongue.

The video's here, via The Right Scoop.

Eric Massa will be gracing Glenn Beck with his Democratic presence tonight, and although Michelle warns Glenn profusely by telling him Massa's

a sick, desperate pol looking to save his hide and distract from his smelly ethics problems and personal problems. This is not a hero, not a bona fide champion of reform and integrity in government. He’s the jerk who gave the figurative middle finger to his own constituents as he proclaimed last year that he would ram single-payer down their throats no matter what they thought..

.. Glenn insists on playing the consumate libertarian, 3rd party (divide the vote) hero.

But then, I wonder.

He'll be giving considerable air time to another "ram the damn thing, Mr. President. Ram it!" entranced surrogate. How much time should you give your typical Ram-It guy?

And rather than restrict Messa to the standard 15-minute, "let's consider the opposition" segment, Mess will bless Glenn's entire show while Glenn gets high on "fascination" (@ around 10:00):

I think it's faaaaascinating.  No body's seen the show. You don't know what i'm going to do tonight. You don't know what he's going to do tonight. You have no idea. And the controversey is now. I think that's faaaascinating.

What does this say about Glenn's integrity?

For all I know, he may be exploiting the conservative movement because the "controversy is now."

 

Michelle Malkin: "Conservatives Aren't Behind Online" -- Yeah. Right.

I have a brief break at the airport on my way back from RightOnline, a conservative summit focusing on technology and new media for the Right, sponsored by Americans for Prosperity, the Sam Adams Alliance, and the Leadership Institute. It was a solid conference, featuring some excellent keynotes by Barry Goldwater, Jr., Michael Steele, and Robert Novak.  Also featured, and perhaps even most prominently, was commentator Michelle Malkin.

As a quick aside, it was a very good conference.  There were a lot of excellent discussions – including a lot of throught-provoking analysis by The Next Right co-founder Soren Dayton – and generally speaking, I felt that the conference offered a lot of useful information for people right of center who are trying to get involved in the new media world.

At most of the conference, the discussion focused on how the Right desperately needs to catch up with the Left at many levels – grassroots organization, appeal to young voters, and most importantly (at least in terms of the focus conference), technology and new media.  After a great deal of discussion on the first day of the conference as to how the Right can catch up technologically, Michelle Malkin, one of the keynote speakers on day two, threw a huge curveball.  I didn't write down the exact words that she said, but this is more or less her statement:

"Conservatives aren't actually behind technologically, we're just doing it differently."

RightOnline Summit

Promoted - this can be an important conference for the Right to begin organizing around ideas and people. - Jon Henke

For some reason, at Americans for Prosperity we seem to confronting the left head on quite a bit lately. You may have read about our little adventure last week, when we buzzed Al Gore’s mansion in a hot air balloon (to expose the high cost of global warming alarmism…)

 
Well, as many of you know, the YearlyKos / Netroots Nation Convention will be taking place in Austin, Texas from July 17th – 20th, and again, all of us at Americans for Prosperity weren’t content to just sit by and let them have all the fun! While the left convenes for their annual meeting of the tin foil hat wearers, I invite all of you to take part in a conservative gathering that will be going on just across town. Americans for Prosperity is hosting the RightOnline Summit on July 18th and 19th at the Renaissance Austin Hotel.

Editorial: Objective Journalism or hit piece on Michelle Malkin?

I never thought in a million years that I would be defending the knuckle-headed woman. However, here I am, once again, defending someone, of whom my political beliefs are a bit similar. Michelle, being a staunch Republican and Conservative, and me a former “Left of Center” type and more of a Libertarian and very much a Constitutionalist.  

In the interest of full disclosure, there are times, when I read what Michelle Malkin writes and I just roll my eyes and think to myself, “My God in Heaven, why do they let that women near a Computer?” However, there are other times, when I would like to whack her upside the head with an aluminum baseball bat, to knock some sense into her head, for some of the things that she has written. But then again, there has been quite a few times, that I would loved to kiss her soundly on the lips and give a nice squeeze on the butt, for some of the good stuff that she has written as well.

Deadly violence and sexual fantasies aside, when I see stuff like this piece in the Boston Globe, I find myself in a position of saying, “Hey, wait a minute here!”

What strikes me about this article is the glaring bias, could it be any clearer that this was written by some idiotic liberal who has a axe to grind with the Conservatives?

I mean, yes, when I read the article on Malkin’s Blog I just laughed and thought, “Well, maybe it is a slow news day, and she is looking for content.” It happens, I as a Blogger have the problem, some days, there just is not much write about in Politics. This is especially painfully true with the Democrats. I mean, can we just chose the candidate and move on please?

Nevertheless, what bothered me about this piece was this little quote here:

Some observers, including ultra-conservative Fox News commentator Michelle Malkin, were so incensed by the ad that there was even talk of a Dunkin’ Donuts boycott.

‘‘The keffiyeh, for the clueless, is the traditional scarf of Arab men that has come to symbolize murderous Palestinian jihad,’’ Malkin yowls in her syndicated column.

‘‘Popularized by Yasser Arafat and a regular adornment of Muslim terrorists appearing in beheading and hostage-taking videos, the apparel has been mainstreamed by both ignorant and not-so-ignorant fashion designers, celebrities, and left-wing icons.’’

The company at first pooh-poohed the complaints, claiming the black-and-white wrap was not a keffiyeh. But the right-wing drumbeat on the blogosphere continued and by yesterday, Dunkin’ Donuts decided it’d be easier just to yank the ad.

Said the suits in a statement: ‘‘In a recent online ad, Rachael Ray is wearing a black-and-white silk scarf with a paisley design. It was selected by her stylist for the advertising shoot. Absolutely no symbolism was intended. However, given the possibility of misperception, we are no longer using the commercial.’

Yowls? I mean, can you get any more biased than to reduce a woman of great writing skills and awesome Conservative values to a word like “yowls?” This is, by the way, an underhanded way of basically calling Michelle Malkin a crybaby.

I mean, I can understand the idea that some people find Michelle Malkin’s writing a bit screechy at times, but to basically slam her for her Conservative values in a article and disguise it as objective journalism is just pathetic.  As far as I am concerned the editors at the Boston Globe owes Michelle Malkin and people like me, who share her values a big apology, and should terminate the employment of the writer who produced this story.

Cross-Posted @ Political Byline

 

 

Syndicate content