It’s always funny to see how them what dishes it out can’t take it dished back. My Shrill Merkin™, a/k/a The Kewpie Doll From Hell™ is desperately trying to get back at Joy Behar (of ABC’s “The View”) for calling her a “bitch” on Bill Maher’s HBO show “last month.”
Triumphally, she pulls out that favorite card of the hyper-hypocrites of the Right, the (one-way) accusation of “hypocrisy,” because Joy Behar felt that John McCain responded inappropriately when he went along with the (typical) Republican voter, choked with insane hatred of all fellow citizens who don’t agree with the GOP agenda, who asked “How do we stop that bitch?” (Hillary Clinton).
It’s actually a legitimate observation on Behar’s part. McCain should have — by all civilized codes of conduct (which, evidently omit “Republican”) — said “We don’t need to go there,” and made his political points of disagreement. That was the code of conduct that we subscribed to when we approved the Constitution back in 1789. And that’s absolutely in the Senate tradition of collegiality.
But Malkin is so far up her own ass with her personal sense of outrage at being called a “bitch” (hey, Michelle! If the jackboot fits …), that she triumphally can “even” the score with Behar (and cast Behar’s point in concrete, BTW) in a post ‘wittily’ entitled “My Best Friend, Joy Behar“:
So, you see, since Joy Behar and I are such good friends, it’s okay for her to call me a “bitch.” But it’s not ok for John McCain to not say anything when someone else calls Hillary a “bitch.” Because he’s a man. And that’s inappropriate.
This is why I have no liberal women friends. Other than my best pal Joy Behar, of course.
They give me a migraine headache.
Ooooh. That’s so recherche.
And so sad. Michelle Malkin actually has a very thin skin, and shows it on a regular basis. Because she’s beloved for being a hate-filled, phony-superior know-it-all, but ghod forbid that anyone repay her in her own coin.
Then, she behaves like a … bitch.*
[* Who can't ever let go of a slight: The original "bitch" epithet was applied on HBO based on Malkin's savaging of 12-year-old, disabled Graeme Frost over the Children's Health Insurance program in congress last month. Malkin then responded (Nov. 7) with a clueless post "Liberal Oregon hates The Chiiiiiiiildren" that claimed:
Well, I hope the national Democrat leadership and their S-CHIP-peddling minions are paying attention. You know that brilliant idea of funding children’s health insurance with tobacco taxes? Liberal Oregon said no yesterday, voting down a massive tobacco tax hike ballot measure to pay for government-subsidized health care:
By the by, Oregon is NOT "Liberal." I know. I live here. And then she takes at face value THIS tobacco spokesman whopper (from the Salem Statesman-Journal):
J.L. Wilson, a spokesman for the RJ Reynolds campaign to defeat the tax increase, said the tobacco companies’ $12 million budget helped, but only because it raised legitimate concerns about Measure 50.
“Ultimately I think the measure collapsed under its own weight,” Wilson said.
from which she logicks:
Supporters of the measure blame the evil tobacco industry’s ad campaign for misleading voters. But it’s S-CHIP supporters who are the manipulators.
Funny, I live in Oregon, and watched the most expensive initiative campaign in Oregon history waged with media carpet bombing by the tobacco industry.
The Oregon equation is "when in doubt, vote no," and the whole phony attack was "they're amending the CONSTITUTION!" satanically spinning a winning issue that stopped an endless profusion of Rightie/Sizemore initiatives. The amount of money spent by Big Tobacco was obscene, but then, so was Malkin's take on something that she never understood, didn't research, nor ever commented on intelligently. No: she HAD to get even for the drubbing she took over attacking a disabled 12-year-old: "SEE! I am having the LAST WORD! Hahahaha!"]
Thank ghod that liberal bloggers are so preoccupied with their circular firing squad that they never notice, and never respond.
Kind of like last night’s Democratic presidential debate, in which the Republicans were never mentioned, while they went after each other (in between token kumbaya moments asking for “positive” debate). Malkin is safe.
Except from Joy Behar, evidently.
Courage.
4 Comments
17 November 2007 at 8:35 am
Your strongpoints apparently do not include logic.
which in turn makes it obvious that way down deep, you’re shallow.
I’m an espert on that.
17 November 2007 at 9:42 am
Woof! Woof woof woof! Woof! Woof woof!
21 November 2007 at 6:27 am
[...] Good grief. Even when Abraham Lincoln was actually William Seward? Astonishing that Lincoln’s devoutness could so inspire Seward’s hand. I wonder if that would be pro forma? This is the seduction of trying to make history conform to one’s ends. It is one thing to find a historical example that buttresses one’s own view. It is another to slant a historical event to force it to conform to that personal view. And yet, it happens all the time. David Gelernter is an idiot here, true: but he is not alone in his idiocracy by a long shot. (Or, colloquially by “a fur piece” but we shall leave Michelle Malkin out of today’s discussion). [...]
19 December 2007 at 6:39 am
I think Mishell is purty.
Comments are closed.