Michelle on “the year of perpetual rage”

Leave it to Ms. Maglalang to write a round-up on incidents of untethered rage in 2006 and focus only on the Muslims. No rage to speak of among us Christians and Jews. The irony, of course, is that her site, more than any other popular blog, thrives on one thing and one thing only: perpetual rage. Comb through the site at any time and feel the love. All it is is a non-stop shriek, a hysterical call to arms that eerily imitates those she seeks constantly to attack.

No other “big blog” can match Malkin for sneering outright at anyone urging compassion or anything less than brute force and violence. In one of her most truly deranged moments, she actually attacked a movement to discourage bullying in America’s schools; her “reasoning” is that we need tough, ready-to-fight thugs to go battle the jihadists. I am not exaggerating, and urge you to read this brilliant takedown of Malkin’s infamous bullying post. It makes it all so crystal clear: Malkin wants Americans to be as consumed with rage as possible, ready to react with violence against those jihadists she imagines hiding under your bed. Even if this means thugs terrorize gentler students at schools.

I consider the bullying post Malkin’s very most depraved moment and oh so telling about her vision for America: a vision of the Malkin Youth set loose on America, chomping at the bit to spill a little blood, crushing the nice kids who don’t want to fight in an orgy of unfettered rage. After all, how else can we beat the jihadists if we don’t gleefully kick in the faces of those pusillanimous weaklings in school, the ones who wear glasses?

Again, if any of you feel I’m harsh on Our Lady of the Concentration Camps, go read the above-referenced post. You’ll laugh out loud, but you’ll also see why I consider Malkin a dangerous lady. Shout Godwin’s all you want (first, you’d be wrong; second, I don’t care), but her vision of America is truly on a par with that of Ernst Roehm, whose brownshirts terrorized Jews and Communists and glorified brutality and perpetual rage,

Malkin defines rage, she is rage – she is a walking, talking blast furnace of white rage. Tragically, thanks to her loving army of thugs, this makes her a real menace and no laughing matter.

Don’t sell Malkinwald short – she was instrumental in nixing the museum on human rights at the site of the WTC and in forcing architects to redesign their plan for the memorial at the crash site of UA 93, all because Malkin and her goons thought they could see hints of a “red crescent” formed by the maple trees in the design. (See this Malkin-inspired post to see just how profoundly loony these people are. You won’t believe it, especially the part about the latitude/longitude lines pointing to Mecca!.) No, she’s definitely not just the butt of jokes, but an insidious force to be reckoned with.

Update: Oh well, what the hell? For old times sake:


And for anyone who wants to argue that this post shows I am as full of hate as Michelle, forget about it. I have never once urged my readers to pick up their pitchforks and attack anybody or anything as Michelle does regularly. I have never argued for internment of entire religions or races. Yeah, I hate Malkin and I admit it, just like I admit I hate all racists and all tyrants. But you have to work hard to earn my hate. For Michelle, all it takes is being a Muslim or a liberal. Or being gentle and kind.

Update 2: I see that Michelle’s kissin’ cousin today has taken anti-Muslim bigotry to shocking new heights (or new lows). Disgusting, despicable, vile and deranged. One of my very favorite bloggers appropriately rips Schlusel a new one.

The Discussion: 19 Comments

At the risk of agreeing with her on something…that museum does not belong at the WTC memorial. There should be such a museum, but it should stand on its own. The WTC memorial is just that – a memorial to all those who died there and those who survived it. Would you add such a museum to the Arizona memorial…or the Oklahoma memorial?

Which is not to imply I agree with the rabble rousing and bullying she engaged in. I also do not believe she was all that influential in affecting that decision. She seized on the decision as a personal victory – pitifully so, IMHO. Others repeated the self-serving rantings without much in the way of actual proof. And it seems to have become a sort of urban legend kind of thing. Never proven, highly doubtful but widely believed.

But I also have to thank you for the link to the “Red Crescent” conspiracy. Not to be watched while eating or drinking however. I had forgotten compeltely about that little moment of derangement.

Godwin’s rule is not an absolute. Sometimes the comparison is applicable.

December 21, 2006 @ 4:53 am | Comment

Gojuplyr, it appears that like a good wine, you are mellowing with age. I know we lean on different sides of the political spectrum and we’ve had some heated exchanges, but I always appreciated your willingness to look at all the evidence.

Whether the museum belonged at the WTC site or not is definitely debatable; my sole point is that Malkin made a huge amount of noise over it and, as you say, took personal credit for nixing it – and I think she does deserve at least some credit for raising the decibel level and handing out links to “grass roots” petitions to end it. The lady definitely has a following and unlike any other super-popular blogger, she uses it to incite her troops and to whip them into a frenzy. There’s always an “enemy” at her site, always a bad guy, always someone to rage against. Criticism and analysis is one thing – raw, ugly rage quite another. Sadly, that’s become her trademark, and it’s good to know that you seem at least in part to agree.

Yes, the red crescent post was a classic. But you have to realize, these people take this stuff seriously. They really believe the heads of the news media sit in an underground bunker conspiring to make the US lose the war in Iraq. The Malkin clique exists from outrage to outrage, feeding on and generating an endless stream of hate-based, logic-free rage.

December 21, 2006 @ 6:43 am | Comment

Plus the Islamo-nazis are gonna force us all to convert at sword’s point and wear burkhas.

December 21, 2006 @ 7:10 am | Comment

Richard, sometimes I wonder if your fixation on MM isn’t counterproductive. You know, like free advertising? If I hadn’t seen this post I wouldn’t be the least bit interested in looking up one of her rants today. Now I’m mildly interested.

December 21, 2006 @ 11:23 am | Comment

Well Sam, maybe I do the same for the objects of my other rants – Bush, the CCP, racists, tyrants, line cutters, Little Green Footballs, et. al. I realize I am increasing the “buzz” about Malkin, but I want to believe intelligent readers like you, after you’ve followed the links I offer, will walk away realizing she’s bad news. I strongly doubt my posts are going to win her any new fans, just as my posts about Tiananmen Square or the Cultural Revolution aren’t going to spawn a new breed of communists. Then again, who knows?

December 21, 2006 @ 12:28 pm | Comment

just as my posts about Tiananmen Square or the Cultural Revolution aren’t going to spawn a new breed of communists.

They don’t spawn them, but they do bring them crawling in from the blogsphere. 🙂

December 21, 2006 @ 7:35 pm | Comment

Schlusel’s comments on Barack Hussien Obama makes me want to vomit and that is amongst others. The presumption of being a Muslim on a mere name and vague connections to the father and step father. ‘and that is how other Muslim view him as being a MUslim as of paramount importance’. I want to shout to Shlusel that The Muslim world consider her less than a dog but it does not make it so but her comments may just do the job. And the presumption that being Muslim is what America is fighting against ie US is fighting Islam and hence implying all Muslims are terrorist. Then the leap of logic of middle name Hussien to the former Iraqi President. There are millions of Hussiens in the Muslim world and one of them were very eminent Prime Minister in a very democratic Malaysia.

This is what the depth that US politics have sunk to. Into a mire of illogical mud slinging gutter politics that caused me to shudder. Where do they draw the line or is there none. Maybe Lee Kuan Yew does have a point about free for all demoracy that US practises

December 21, 2006 @ 10:41 pm | Comment

Luckily more people like Obama than listen to wild-eyed lil’ Debbie.

December 22, 2006 @ 1:36 am | Comment


There better be a lot lot more as this women is still surviving as a comentator and not sued to bankcruptcy or into oblivion and she is a liability to anyone, society or any party associated with her. If she is considered an ‘alternative informed voice’, something is seriously wrong with the system.

December 22, 2006 @ 9:49 am | Comment

I honestly don’t know how seriously most people take her – but you’re right, it’s staggering to me that she and others of her ilk have any kind of national platform.

December 22, 2006 @ 10:19 am | Comment

Don’t forget, she is a nationally syndicated columnist, one of the top 5 most-read bloggers, write for Town Hall and appears regularly on Fox News and MSNBC. So she is not your average blogger – her platform is enormous, and unlike Ann Coulter, who I really think is a comedian, Malkin for some reason seems to be taken seriously by many, many fans, including one or two readers of this blog, much to my stupefication.

December 22, 2006 @ 11:25 am | Comment

And she is one of the featured columnists for The Weir Times, our local free paper up here in Weirs Beach, NH. So you know…she’s really something and all. And a bag of chips.

Sound of head slowly banging against Dad’s kitchen table…

December 22, 2006 @ 12:44 pm | Comment

Wait a minute are you talking about MM or Schlusel? But on closer inspection both are bad not sure who is worse

December 22, 2006 @ 2:56 pm | Comment

Debbie is worse – at least Michelle tries to appear like she’s not a racist. Schlussel lets it all hang out.

December 22, 2006 @ 9:01 pm | Comment

What Malkin and her ilk remind me of is people who have been beaten badly as children. I saw it a lot when I worked as a psychiatric nurse. When you’re young and you grow up in a household where there’s screaming violence all the time, that’s where your emotional thermostat is set. You view the world through a prism of rage, and it seems natural. If you could peer into the pasts of her screeching posters, how many do you think were abused (and have grown up to abuse THEIR children)?

December 23, 2006 @ 9:11 am | Comment

Is there a difference between resilience and rage? Between anger and rage?

I believe there is.

I’d be interested in your view of the events Malkin lists in her post. Are you not outraged by some of them in the least?

December 23, 2006 @ 7:42 pm | Comment

I am angry about many of the images Malkin shows, and I have spoken out against the deranged fundamentalism behind them. But Makin’s is a very selective rage. To see just why I despise her so much for her hypocrisy and two-facedness, see this post about how she turns a blind eye to the horrors perpetrated by all others who aren’t Muslim. Her site is a two-minute hate, and the Muslims are always the object of her rage.

December 24, 2006 @ 1:34 am | Comment

Ok, OK, you’ve convinced me: she’s really important, so I’ll start going to her site every day!

December 24, 2006 @ 11:30 pm | Comment

Sam, I want you to go to her site everyday. Know thine enemy; we have to know what these people are up to because they really can have an impact. That’s why I watch Fox News. The worst thing is to ignore them.

December 25, 2006 @ 12:16 am | Comment

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.