Sandy GholstonMichelle Malkin is one of the biggest player haters out there in politics. But, her hate-producing skills are not limited to politics.
Check this garbage out as the wicked Malkin smears Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee for no good reason on a day when most people (even those with differing views) recognize the time to pay respect to Michael Jackson:
Oh, no, she didn’t.
Oh, yes, she did.
Democrat Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee just pimped the stupidest House resolution ever on stage at the Jacko memorial at Staples Center. She held up a big, framed copy of it as the crowd cheered. That was after she extolled “The King,” painted him as the world’s greatest humanitarian, and demagogued the child molestation cases by proclaiming that members of Congress “understand the Constitution” and “we understand laws” and we know that “people are INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN OTHERWISE!”
Yes, she did. Right there in front of Jacko’s three children.
I thought Al Sharpton’s memorial rant (“There was nothing strange about your daddy!”) was the low point for American culture.
Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee, you win.
This is the kind of heartless attitude that is far to prevalent on the far-right of the political spectrum and why conservatives are so out of touch and moving toward extinction in a world that is becoming increasingly multicultural and diverse. The close-minded society that is the Republican Party continues to show the kind of mean-spirited and hateful attitude that turns so many good Americans off.
Tags: Al Sharpton, close-minded, hater, Michelle Malkin, Michelle Malkin disrespectful, Michelle Malkin hater, multicultural, Sheila Jackson-Lee
July 7, 2009 at 11:56 pm
Why the thin-skinned sensitivity? Perhaps because you know in your heart that Sharpton and Jackson-Lee really are morons? Or maybe you just think anyone who clearly speaks their mind, rather than use soft flowery language, is a big meany! Please, grow up, act like an adult, and quit being so damn sensitive.
July 8, 2009 at 12:37 am
I think Michelle Malkin is the one too thin-skinned to have respect for the dead and those who mourn the dead. What a sad, vicious and unprovoked attack on Sheila Jackson-Lee who was paying respect to a fallen icon. Leave it to Michelle Malkin to come out with a hate-filled attack on a day of mourning for those who loved Michael Jackson. Tom, I think you and Michelle Malkin should take your own advice. You just ripped Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee and the Rev. Al Sharpton and then turned around and charged me with thin-skinned sensitivity and told me to grow up and act like an adult. Sounds like you’re being a hypocrite.
July 8, 2009 at 3:26 am
If you had read this article, then surely you would have glanced at the rest of her posts pertaining to MJ, including the one where she pays her respects. Or maybe you didn’t; liberals wallowing in the culture of umbrage rarely want the full story.
Anyhoo, here’s a link:
http://michellemalkin.com/2009/06/25/remembering-michael-jackson/
Here’s a bit of it, for your readers too busy thinking of clever new insults to hurl at conservatives to follow a link:
“His adult life was marred by lurid molestation charges, endless displays of bizarre behavior with his three children, plastic surgery horrors, and financial mayhem.
But he was a musical genius in his early days before he succumbed to Hollyweird and that’s what I’ll choose to remember.”
The rest of the posts on her site deal with the ridiculous media circus surrounding his death, and the comments about Rep. SJ-L simply question her priorities. I can’t help but think (and I’m sure I’m not alone) that her time can be better spent on more pressing matters, rather than pandering to the grieving mob.
You’d know this, if you bothered to read all her posts.
July 8, 2009 at 12:14 pm
So, you’re saying I have to read every single one of Michelle Malkin’s posts before I can make a comment on even one?
I am not sure I, nor anyone else, could possibly follow that logic.
Did you read all of my posts before commenting on this one? I doubt it.
I am glad Michelle paid some respects to Jackson, but that was not really the point.
As far as Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee is concerned, I think she has been an outstanding public servant and I am sure her priorities are well in order. Rep. Jackson-Lee has been an outstanding leader and a strong member of Congress for years and I am not going to disparage her or try to imply that she does not have her priorities in order because I’ve seen no evidence of that. Members of Congress work on all kinds of projects (most of which none of us will ever know) and they do generally with professionalism.
I don’t have a problem with Malkin questioning such an act, but I think her language toward Rep. Jackson-Lee was over the top to say the least.
Plus, I would caution you and others to read the language of what Rep. Jackson-Lee is proposing and remember that it will be debated.
July 8, 2009 at 2:00 pm
I didn’t mean read all her posts. Just the ones pertaining to MJ and the media circus around it. Its only a few posts.
And I didn’t read all your posts, but I did read a few, just to get a sense of who you were.
As for Sheila Jackson – Lee, we’ll have to agree to disagree. But I did read the bill (Its in one of the Michelle Malkin posts) and anyone who has the stones to actually debate this thing is going to be smeared as a rascist, and you know it.
July 8, 2009 at 3:54 pm
Fair enough. I did read some of her posts about Jackson and several others, but they were not quite relevant in terms of my criticism of a particular post.
As for the bill advocated by Rep. Jackson-Lee, I think you’re jumping to conclusions. I will wait to see what people have to say before making a declaration as to how people are going to react.
As far as people being smeared as racists, I think you’re putting the cart before the horse.
July 8, 2009 at 5:47 pm
“As far as people being smeared as racists, I think you’re putting the cart before the horse.”
You’re saying that only a racist would debate it? (I’m asking, I had to look up the phrase to understand it)
July 8, 2009 at 6:28 pm
Um, I was talking about waiting for the debate before declaring that some people will be declared racists. You made the declaration: “anyone who has the stones to actually debate this thing is going to be smeared as a rascist, and you know it.” I think you’re getting ahead of yourself.
July 8, 2009 at 7:14 pm
“I was talking about waiting for the debate before declaring that some people will be declared racists”
Oh. I still don’t think I’m getting ahead of myself, though. Just stating the obvious.
The reason people groaned at Rep SJ-L’s spectacle during the tribute is that she took the opportunity to use people’s grief to stage a pretty obvious political menuever. It has nothing to do with MJ, its just his passing is the platform she used to perpetuate this farce.
Here’s what. She drafts the resolution (no co-authors)and introduces on the largest stage possible. She introduces in on the floor of the House. Most people will step into line. Those who don’t, those who abstain from voting, those who vote “present” even people who wonder aloud about the political dodge she’s attempting to pull instead of the actual resolution itself will be pilloried in all the usual places. (I’m thinking HuffP
July 8, 2009 at 7:18 pm
(whoops)
HuffPo, Daily KOS, Countdown with K.Olbermann, etc.)
If she introduces it shortly before the Senate votes on Cap and Trade it’ll be even more telling; providing a distraction from the issue at hand and an oppurtunity to further denigrate conservatives as a bunch of ignorant rascists.
July 8, 2009 at 9:31 pm
Rep. Jackson-Lee had no control over Michael Jackson’s death. I am not following what one has to do with the other. These kinds of resolutions happen frequently when big-name people die. It’s interesting to me that some conservatives are making such a big deal about Michael Jackson.
July 9, 2009 at 2:31 am
“Rep. Jackson-Lee had no control over Michael Jackson’s death.”
Okaayyy…
“I am not following what one has to do with the other.”
Let me simplify. If I am to understand your criticism of Michelle Malkin, its to say that she chose the wrong time to besmerch Rep. J-L, seeing as how it was at a tribute for MJ. Respect for the dead, and all that. Okay, I get that.
But she’s not attacking MJ, you understand. She’s disgusted by Rep. J-L using MJ’s tribute program, an event his family and his children are attending, as a platform to promote a political menuever disguised as a show of respect. I mean, would you get irritated at someone who criticized Joe Jackson’s use of recent interviews to promote his new record label? Is it crass to be appalled at someone else’s poor taste?
“These kinds of resolutions happen frequently when big-name people die.”
True.
“It’s interesting to me that some conservatives are making such a big deal about Michael Jackson.”
Why does that surprise you? Everybody else is.
Let me simplify. I’m saying Rep SJ-L’s involvement in the MJ tribute was 100% political. (or maybe 90%. Mostly, political)
July 9, 2009 at 2:38 am
Scratch that 2nd “Let me simplify.” Copying and pasting and editing my paragraphs and forgetting to delete stuff. Sounds kind of smarmy with that 2nd one at the bottom.
July 9, 2009 at 2:56 am
I don’t think there is any evidence that it is 100% political and even if it was that is her choice. My beef with Malkin was her over-the-top hateful tone in her writing. I realize that is part of who she is, but it seemed well over the top and out of bounds. I commend Rep. Jackson-Lee for stepping forward and taking time out of her schedule to pay tribute to Michael Jackson. It was a generous gesture on her part and I hope her fellow members of Congress will join with her in recognizing Michael Jackson the way so many others have been recognized by the U.S. Congress.
July 9, 2009 at 3:01 am
I criticized Joe Jackson very strongly and so have a lot of people. I felt that he was exploiting his son’s death in a way that just seemed dark and twisted. Thankfully he eventually took more of a backseat to let other family members be out front.
July 9, 2009 at 3:03 am
No, it does not surprise me that some conservatives have been outspoken with their anger about the tributes to Michael Jackson.
July 9, 2009 at 3:24 am
There’s no evidence that her house resolution is motivated purely by politics. And I never said there was. It was just my opinion. All I’m saying is that we most likely haven’t heard the end of it, that’ll it’ll come up again, it will likely be divisive, and that the shadowy specter of the callous, heartless, rascist conservative will be invoked. A LOT.
Its also possible that this resolution ballyhoo will come around at a time when it could provide a convenient distraction; most likely the Senate vote on the Cap and Trade bill.
Now, this could just be me reading into things too much. Maybe she’ll introduce it and it’ll be debated with little fanfare or controversy.
But IF it happens this way, then it would be pretty obvious what Rep. JL had in mind when she trotted out the resolution in front of the tribute attendees and the millions watching at home. Wouldn’t THAT also be pretty tasteless?
July 9, 2009 at 3:31 am
Your words: Let me simplify. I’m saying Rep SJ-L’s involvement in the MJ tribute was 100% political. (or maybe 90%. Mostly, political)
You did seem to say it and yes it was your opinion (which you are entitled to).
Obviously we haven’t heard the last of it since it will be debated. There is still more to come.
I don’t think it will be distracted. Congressmen and Congresswomen have an amazing ability to juggle multiple tasks all at one time. They work on projects the average person knows nothing about.
It will not be a distraction (though I can sense the conspiracy theorist in you wants to believe that).
Whether there is fanfare or not is up to the potential obstructionists. Maybe the obstructionists want a distraction … hmm … maybe.
I think Rep. Jackson-Lee is an upstanding person and wants to recognize the great works of Michael Jackson who was a second-to-none entertainer and a humanitarian who did much to help people in need when a lot of people could have cared less.
I commend Rep. Jackson-Lee for having the courage to do this when she knows she is going to take heat from people.
July 9, 2009 at 3:47 am
Now.
As far as MM’s tone when writing about Rep SJ-L, there’s no question about whether it was hateful or not. But you chose to put it in the larger context of:
“This is the kind of heartless attitude that is far to prevalent on the far-right of the political spectrum ”
and
“The close-minded society that is the Republican Party continues to show the kind of mean-spirited and hateful attitude that turns so many good Americans off.”
I’d like to introduce you to this little gem…
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2009/07/03/huffposter-palin-will-run-12-more-retardation-platform
July 9, 2009 at 3:53 am
My comments are “awaiting moderation” now?
July 9, 2009 at 12:38 pm
That was bad and I did see that last night on the television. That was certainly a low blow and I do not condone it. But, that does not justify Malkin’s hateful words during a time of mourning for something that happens often for major celebrities.
July 9, 2009 at 12:40 pm
All comments await moderation. This is nothing new. I delete 10 to 20 spam comments a day by people selling all sorts of garbage (to keep them from cluttering the blog). Relax.
July 9, 2009 at 3:10 pm
I didn’t think you would condone it. I’m just saying that “mean-spirited and hateful attitude(s)” aren’t just the m.o. of the right.
July 9, 2009 at 3:20 pm
Certainly it’s not just from the right. I think it’s more so from the right, but not exclusively from the right.
July 11, 2009 at 12:01 am
Well, you can crumple up my “political ploy” theory and toss it in the circular file; the resolution was just denied by…
…Nancy PELOSI?!
Huhbuhwhaaat?
September 6, 2009 at 7:05 pm
Why are you the only person defending your own post?