The Progeny
Dear Michelle Malkin,
As a simple Midwesterner who has never heard of your Conservative Commentatorship, I would just like to thank you for complaining about the Dunkin' Donuts add with Rachel Ray posing in the paisley scarf-kaffiyeh-look-alike-symbolic-of-terrorists fringed thingy.
It warms my heart to know that you are watching out for ignoramuses such as I, who would merely have thought the so-called "scarf" was chosen to match her shirt.
*pauses to say the pledge*
Also, I noticed that her hair is very dark and say...don't most jihadists have black hair?
And now that I think of it, those pink trees in the background could certainly be a subtle reference to Communism, could they not? (Reds...Pinko...get it??)
*clutches flag lapel pin nervously*
First the horrifying emails about Obama's education in a madrasah school, (I got them so many times it's hard to believe they ARE bogus) and now THIS.
And when you add on those new dollar coins that don't have "In God We Trust" on them (I don't CARE if it's etched along the edge instead...it's not the same!!), it is almost too much to bear.
So thank you for watching out for America, Ms. Malkin.
Most of us don't have a clue and rely on people such as yourself to tell us what to think.
May you receive all you are due,
Ma Hoyt
Tweet
posted by Ma Hoyt | 3:40 PM
7 Comments:
I don't think there can be much doubt anymore that a large portion of the Right today is virulently racist. The logic of this controversy is clear:
Scarf-wearing = Arab = Muslim = terrorist.
If I'm missing something, please let me know.
Hard to say, since I don't claim to know what/who all constitutes "the Right."
In some ways, it's just another label, ya know :-)
I do think some of these high profile people are trolling for odds and ends to splash about, so as to justify their continued existence.
And splashy new material is always in demand to fill up those 3-hour talk show slots (for some reason, the thought of four-stomached cows comes to mind).
Not that I think they're in collusion or anything...
I'm pretty sure it doesn't matter who all is in the Right, as long as (a) there are a lot of people who agree with Malkin, (b) those people have strong political opinions, and (c) those people do not belong to the Left or the Center. These three conditions appear to have been met.
"A large portion of the Right" does not include all of the Right, or even most of the Right. Just a large number of people who happen to belong to the Right.
I didn't even bring the Republican Party into it, or the so-called Religious Right, although I could have.
Have you ever met a liberal who would agree with Malkin about this "issue"?
Probably not...though I've lived a tremendously sheltered life and not met many liberals.
Specifically, I have not met any sporting name tags :-D
I think Malkin is more alone in her views than you seem to imply.
At least, I would hope so. But that doesn't make her any less out-to-lunch.
Or any less capable of influencing lazy-minded folks.
Is it racist or selectively xenophobic?
Anyone from the Right or Left or elsewhere: just don't bring scarves into it, please. That's not very nice to the French or to the rest of us.
Good question, Sharon. I am, of course, using racism in its least formal sense: "discrimination or prejudice based on race." It seems to me that selective racism and selective xenophobia overlap a lot.
Let me put it this way: Suppose Dunkin Donuts ran an advertisement featuring a man who was wearing a hat that looked vaguely like a yarmulke. Suppose Michelle Malkin then denounced the ad for glorifying Zionism. Would her reaction be indicative of selective xenophobia, or of selective racism?
(Note: The yarmulke is an actual religious symbol, while a kaffiyeh is merely a cultural and ethnic symbol. So if there is any racism at all in my example, I would expect it to suggest a stronger racist element in the Rachael Ray controversy.)
As far how many people agree with Malkin ... it's hard to say, of course. But I'm glancing over the 193 comments at Malkin's site, and the 493 comments at LGF, and the 427 comments at Townhall, and it appears that more than a few people are giving this controversy the time of day. And I happen to know that Malkin is a NYT bestselling author (Invasion: How America Still Welcomes Terrorists, Criminals, and Other Foreign Menaces to Our Shores). So I expect quite a few people might agree with her.
Way back in 2002, I heard one guy at LeTourneau say, "They're all terrorists to me," and another (in a different conversation) recommend a website called "Dead Ay-rab," which reportedly was a real hoot to read. In Sunday school, I heard people cheerfully recommend solving the Palestinian problem with a nuclear weapon. Whether or not it's technically racism and whether or not it's widespread, it's getting awfully tiresome.
Okay, I'm not sure I even agree with myself on a definition, but certainly agree with you on the "awfully tiresome" part.
On American reactions to non-Americans in general: it seems there are only extremes - either one can hate everyone else, or look down on everyone else, or embrace all that they do and are (including the negative), or just not care and ignore them.
Post a Comment
<< Home