Liberals have racist, sexist view of Michelle Malkin

The Moderate Voice ^ | 8-8-2005 | David Schraub

[RinAZ2005]

From the Comments by David Schraub Cross-posted to The Debate Link.

Though I'm not Kos, I thought it would be fun to play him for a post. So as they say over there: Elevated from the comments of this post by David (yeah, yeah, I know. They elevate "diaries." Sue me).

I just did an informal survey, among some friends of mine (all attorneys ranging from moderate progressive to slightly conservative to libertarian/objectivist). All work here in Colorado, drink beers with me occasionally.

I asked each (separately): "Say, do you know and/or like Michelle Malkin?"

Most didn't know her. 9 out of 16 to be exact, had no clue. More liberals knew her than conservatives/libertarians.

Those that did either were vehemently opposed ("she's a racist"), or pretty impress ("good writer").

Then I asked: "What do you know about Michelle Malkin?"

This is where it got uncomfortable, at least for me as a liberal.

The progressive friends, immediately went into "uncle tom" and, I guess, race conscious "ungrateful," stuff with lots of labeling along the "hypocrisy" view. These folks had heard of her from liberal blogs, and there was more than one derogatory comment about her either based on her sex or on her ethnicity. I was actually shocked and surprised at the "friend" (I’m reevaluating this relationship) who called her the "neocon's pocket gook whore." This is a gay man, and given the crap that the GLBT community has to deal with in terms of prejudice, I was literally sitting there with my jaw on my lap. He saw my surprise and said something to the effect of: Listen, she's so 'bad' that nothing is off limits with her.

That offended me and, as I see it on display EVERWHERE in the blogosphere right now, it still offends me as a liberal.

It offends me a lot.

Interestingly, when I asked the more libertarian/conservative guys and gal who knew of Malkin what they knew about her or how they heard of her, all three said they had been forwarded something or read a link sometime back in 2002 or 2003. I asked if they knew she was Filipino, and two of the three said "Malkin?" They didn't know. I should add that none of my friends are as "net" focused for news and commentary as I am, but it did surprise me that two of the "fans" had no idea about that. The other one (the woman) said "yeah, I guess I heard that..."

SO I asked her: "Do you think her writing is really that good, or does she get 'traction' out of being able to say things with a moral authority arising out of her sex and race that other conservatives can't." She said she didn't think so, because she knew for sure that she liked Malkin and her writing BEFORE she knew her ancestry. "She writes well," was my friend's overall summary.

Suffice it to say that I'm upset by the results of my little informal poll over the last couple days. To be sure, the plural of "anecdote" is NOT evidence, but my informal inquiries have revealed that only the progressives seem to be viewing everything Malkin does through the lens of her sex and ancestry. The conservatives who even knew who she was liked her writing.

And I do think I know these folks well enough that my take on their comments is accurate (they weren't playing dumb, so to speak).

That the two progressives, including one man I would have expected better from given the bigotry he has HIMSELF had to deal with, somehow found so much loathing for Malkin that even "off limits" issues weren't off limits in terms of her.

And we as progressives need to fix that. We need to fix it really bad, because we don't "own" women or minorities, and if we keep treating them as de facto proxies who will be disowned and denigrated for straying from the "hive mind," we will surely alienate our chances of ever hoping to retain their participation in the progressive sphere.

Spot on.

UPDATE: The author adds more (and I fixed the grammar):

Well, actually, the one guy who even ventured a guess (and he's more of an Ayn Rand guy -- i.e., deluded by the "me, me, me" views of objectivism, said thought she was Jewish based on her surname.

-Anonymous.

Post script: BTW, sorry for the scattered nature of that comment, and the errors. I really was typing it in haste, and I hit post instead of preview.

My second to the last paragraph should have had an additional clause to the effect that the progressives, both those I knew, and those in the blogosphere, who were willing to "go there" in terms of using caustic slurs against someone who they viewed as "really bad," gave me some pause about how we view the world as progressives.

Speaking as a lawyer, for example, I find Clarence Thomas's legal writings (well, to be honest: the collaborative product of he and his law clerks) to be pretty much on par with what the other SCOTUS justices are putting out. That I disagree so vehemently with his legal conclusions does not -- and it should not -- cause me, as it does many progressives, to tread into the waters of: Well, here's this affirmative action beneficiary stabbing us in the back.

I clerked for a state supreme court justice with a minority background, and a surname to match. He has been championed by the progressives, except as to a couple of dissents where he made perfectly defensible legal points that weren't quite on all fours with our liberal orthodoxy and which, while far from "conservative" resulted in nasty letters to his chambers from people calling him a sell out to his race.

I support affirmative action because, as a progressive, I think the lingering effects of racism in this country undermine the notions of "equal opportunity" upon which our nation was built. There is an ongoing and lingering wrong, and it is our duty to see to it that something is done about it.

However, I do not support affirmative action as some means to make sure minority persons stay in the liberal/progressive camp. My support is not limited to minorities who promise to take the "equalizing" effects of A.A. programs and use them and any success they obtain only to such ends that we, as the liberal intelligentsia, support.

But far too many of the prominent writers and thinkers in our political sphere behave EXACTLY as if that is what they expect.

And its not right.

[Pukin Dog]

I just think often physical appearance can obscure a serious political message.

I think you are projecting, partner.

In no way does Malkin's appearance obscure her message. Her obvious appeal, if it has any effect at all, could only be helpful to getting her message out.

[mudblood]

"there may be hope for this one"

Even if he'll always be a liberal, the fact that he can talk and listen at the same time means that he should get the same treatment in return. There's a VERY popular argument coming out of the lefty camp: the Right doesn't deserve your respect - shout them down - they are animals - we'll save our arguments for human beings (ie., other liberals). For the radical Left, the conversation has ended, and that's a shame.

[Riverman94610]

Cool.I work with many Filipinos on my job.Still not ready to learn Tagalog though!

[RinAZ2005]

Far out example-I saw Bernardine Dohrn speak in 1969

Yikes. She graduated from my high school. Needless to say, I was something of an outcast there. I might have been the only student that voted for Nixon.

[ZULU]

So do I... pictures???

[kx9088]

I would like to have a sexist view of her, even maybe in as little as just bikini bottoms. ;)

[ZULU]

YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!

[Red Badger]

The headphones are reallly sexy,..............

[Red Badger]

see #68.......

[Condor51]

Uh-huh I see.
A gay 'progressive' calls Michelle a "neocon pocket gook whore." Now isn't that just 'flucking' precious.

I'd like to meet this little sissy-marry face to face, or better yet Michelle meet him. She'd likely beat him like rented mule until he cried - I on the other hand wouldn't be so nice.

[Red Badger]

I wouldn't know Tagalog from Hutu......

[untenured]

In U.S. politics it is only in some portions of the right that one comes across people who actually envision, and act on the vision, of a post-tribal, post-diversity, post-multicultural society, color-blind society. For the left our future simply must be one of endless bean-counting and intertribal low-intensity political warfare. There is too much at stake for them to work toward actually ending tribal conflict. But in the meantime in their daily lives - their decisions on whom to hire, whom to marry, what doctor to see, etc. - Americans are ending the bean-counting society anyway.

India, China and Humanity.

[Question_Assumptions]

Leftists don't believe in principles. They are results oriented rather than process oriented (e.g., conservatives tend to want equal opportunity while liberals want equal results), thus they are willing to bend the process (and any principles they might claim to have) in order to get the results that they want. If leftists really cared, how could they possibly have looked the other way while their idols like Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot, and Castro piled up dead bodies like cordwood? They just don't care.

[jpsb]

Michelle Malkin is one of our best, I still want to kick Chrisy butt.

[ZULU]

Thanks.

We're very,very bad.. I know.

[El Gato]

Liberals have racist, sexist view of Michelle Malkin

Well, I wouldn't hold that too much against them. I have a sexist view of her myself. Or is that a sexual view. No matter. She's a babe. A smart one, my favorite kind.

[Little Bill]

There was a saying going back to the '50's, that all good looking women are on the right politically.

[Clemenza]

since too darn many of them vote GOP

Wish this were true, but it isn't. Of course, since so many Asians live in California, New York, New Jersey, and Hawaii, we shouldn't be surprised that they vote Dem. Of course, there are differences among the various Asian groups (Japanese Americans voting Dem, Vietnamese voting Pubbie) that should be taken into account. I should also report that Filipino Americans, even those who are Dems, are VERY pro-life.

[my_pointy_head_is_sharp]

We've long been aware of the inherent racism (and every other ism) of the so-called "progressives", "liberals", socialists, Democrats (whatever they want to call themselves). The funny thing is, they're neither progressive nor liberal (in the true sense of the words).

[TBP]

And jealous becaue our women are better looking and smarter than theirs.