Our liberal friends seem unable to deal with people like Michelle Malkin. Never have, never will. So Howard Kurtz’s profile in the Washington Post is just par for the course in liberal condescension. He goes to Andrew Sullivan for a quote:
She may be shrill, but she’s not a shill.
Well, you can certainly say that Andrew Sullivan knows “shrill.”
Actually we should not be offended. So long as liberals just don’t get people like Michelle Malkin then so long do they just not get it, period.
Imagine, if you will, the Washington Post profiling a young, attractive, passionate liberal activist. Suppose they quoted her saying:
"They’ll ridicule my looks, ridicule my ethnicity, go after my family," the 36-year-old blogger says of her critics. "They’ve attacked my husband relentlessly. There’s a strong sexist strain among my liberal critics, who think it isn’t possible I could have gotten anywhere without my Svengali husband, or some white man, embedding ideas in my head."
Why, it would be the central quote on an article all about the nobility and the selflessness of the activist and bristling with outrage towards the cruel bigotry of her critics.
But not when the subject is a female, minority, Catholic, conservative woman.
But we should be understanding. Our liberal friends just cannot understand such a person. Their whole scientific, evolutionary world view says it could not happen.
Obviously it is not the liberal world-view that is the problem. So it must be the Svengali husband. Or something.
No comments:
Post a Comment