Race Based Government?

[Jermyn Davidson]

Originally Posted by pelathais

Can you help me out with this? Where did she do any of these things? I know she was strongly against illegal immigration, but I never heard her say anything racist about any group of people.

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

Malkin's ties to the site (VDARE.com) are legion: it regularly prints her column, while she employs one of its writers, Juan Mann, as the principal writer of her "Immigration Blog" and lists the site on her blogroll. And it's not as if Malkin isn't well aware of the criticism, both of the site and her ties to it -- in a post on her blog in September 2004, she noted that "my friend Peter Brimelow [the founder of VDARE] observes that some people apparently think linking to VDARE is tantamount to a hate crime."


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alex-k...s_b_20873.html

Then there is this:

A Time to Discriminate
“Profile” foreign donors? Of course!

By Michelle Malkin

[…]Both papers uncovered dishwashers, cooks and other suspect Hillary campaign contributors in New York’s Chinatown, Flushing, the Bronx, and Brooklyn who were limited-income, limited-English-proficient and smellier than stinky tofu. One Asian donor admitted to the Los Angeles Times “to lacking the legal-resident status required for giving campaign money.” Another, Hsiao Wen Yang, told the New York Post she was reimbursed for her $1,000 donation.[…]



And this....

Malkin is perhaps best known for her book In Defense of Internment, in which she defends modern day racial profiling and the Japanese American internment by the United States Government during World War II. This book alone is enough to condemn her.

But over the last few months, her blog has dialed up the racism even more,


http://bloggasm.com/wow-michelle-malkin-is-racist



And this link shows how she misrepresents facts to paint a picture that may not be true:

http://www.newshounds.us/2006/05/05/...s_mexicans.php


I don't trust this person's journalism at all.

[TRFrance]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

This would almost seem noble of you except that Malkin has been documented to walk like, talk like and endorse racists ducks.

She is trying to change how others view her now, but she has earned her reputation.

Bingo.
Perfectly stated.

That's the key thing. She has earned this reputation.
People didn't wake up one day and decide out of the blue that they wanted to label Michelle Malkin as racist.

And its not just a matter of "Oh, those nasty left wingers like to call people racist". Fact is, there are scores of conservative writers, talk show hosts, etc out there (who are better, and more famous/prominent, than her) who have not developed this reputation the way she has.

Her own words have earned her this reputation, and it's well deserved.

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

Then there is this:

A Time to Discriminate
“Profile” foreign donors? Of course!

By Michelle Malkin

[…]Both papers uncovered dishwashers, cooks and other suspect Hillary campaign contributors in New York’s Chinatown, Flushing, the Bronx, and Brooklyn who were limited-income, limited-English-proficient and smellier than stinky tofu. One Asian donor admitted to the Los Angeles Times “to lacking the legal-resident status required for giving campaign money.” Another, Hsiao Wen Yang, told the New York Post she was reimbursed for her $1,000 donation.[…]



And this....

Malkin is perhaps best known for her book In Defense of Internment, in which she defends modern day racial profiling and the Japanese American internment by the United States Government during World War II. This book alone is enough to condemn her.

But over the last few months, her blog has dialed up the racism even more,


http://bloggasm.com/wow-michelle-malkin-is-racist



And this link shows how she misrepresents facts to paint a picture that may not be true:

http://www.newshounds.us/2006/05/05/...s_mexicans.php


I don't trust this person's journalism at all.

Good post, Jermyn.

But JD, we have someone on this forum who seems to feel that if you were to assess that type of information and conclude that the woman is a racist, you need to be challenged, hassled, and given a hard time over it, for making an "odious accusation" against "the girl" Michelle Malkin.

And that's almost funny, since this stuff is coming from someone who has limited knowledge of her writings and her career. But after a few minutes of browsing some websites he wants to come here and give people a hard time.

Absolutely ridiculous.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by TRFrance

Bingo.
Perfectly stated.

That's the key thing. She has earned this reputation.
People didn't wake up one day and decide out of the blue that they wanted to label Michelle Malkin as racist.

And its not just a matter of "Oh, those nasty left wingers like to call people racist". Fact is, there are scores of conservative writers, talk show hosts, etc out there (who are better, and more famous/prominent, than her) who have not developed this reputation the way she has.

Her own words have earned her this reputation, and it's well deserved.

Good post, Jermyn.

But JD, we have someone on this forum who seems to feel that if you were to assess that type of information and conclude that the woman is a racist, you need to be challenged, hassled, and given a hard time over it, for making an "odious accusation" against "the girl" Michelle Malkin.

And that's almost funny, since this stuff is coming from someone who has limited knowledge of her writings and her career. But after a few minutes of browsing some websites he wants to come here and give people a hard time.

Absolutely ridiculous.

Don't you feel a little silly by now? C'mon! Give me a quote of Michelle Malkin herself exhibiting racism and I'll take it up with her and you can watch and gloat.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

Then there is this:

A Time to Discriminate
“Profile” foreign donors? Of course!

By Michelle Malkin

[…]Both papers uncovered dishwashers, cooks and other suspect Hillary campaign contributors in New York’s Chinatown, Flushing, the Bronx, and Brooklyn who were limited-income, limited-English-proficient and smellier than stinky tofu. One Asian donor admitted to the Los Angeles Times “to lacking the legal-resident status required for giving campaign money.” Another, Hsiao Wen Yang, told the New York Post she was reimbursed for her $1,000 donation.[…]

Here Malkin has describe the illegal contributions Hillary had collected as being "smellier than stinky tofu..." Perhaps if you were unaware that only US citizens and legal residents are legally allowed to give to Federal campaigns you might have made an incorrect association here.

You do agree that a politician whose campaign solicits, uses and receives illegal contributions is "smelly" don't you?

Just because a far Lefty blogger said she was "racist" doesn't make it so. You have to look into these things yourself.

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

And this....

Malkin is perhaps best known for her book In Defense of Internment, in which she defends modern day racial profiling and the Japanese American internment by the United States Government during World War II. This book alone is enough to condemn her.

"Best known for..."? I've heard of her and read her columns off and on over the last few years but I never heard of this book until just now.

Using Wikipedia's page about that book I have just found quotes where Michelle Malkin calls Roosevelt's WW2 policies "racist". She says it was "racist" to put the Japanese Americans into internment camps like Franklin Roosevelt (D) did. Do you disagree with Michelle Malkin about this?

So, she's calling Roosevelt's policies "racist" and you're calling her a "racist" - for what reason?

Malkin's book did have an unnecessarily provocative title (probably named by some publicity hungry editor). The book appears to be a compilation of her columns. Her syndicator probably collected several columns covering a specific theme and rushed out a bunch of galleys to take to the talk show circuit. But despite the title, Malkin doesn't appear to support Roosevelt's "racist" WW2 policies in the book or her columns.

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

But over the last few months, her blog has dialed up the racism even more,


http://bloggasm.com/wow-michelle-malkin-is-racist

Funny, after an opening like that I would have expected a link to her blog. Why don't you link to her blog to give me examples of what you're trying to prove? But I follow the link, nevertheless... and here's the damning quote:

Nearly 300 illegal immigrants were convicted on driving-while-impaired charges and placed in North Carolina prisons in 2007.

Hispanics also account for 18 percent of drunken-driving arrests, while making up less than 7 percent of the state’s population, according to a study from the University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center aired in WRAL’s documentary “Focal Point: Crossing the Line.”

Your friends appear to be correct in pointing out her Gerrymandering of statistics (my phrase) when she moves from the stat in the first paragraph to the next. But is it inherently racist to cite a statistic?

Let's look for context:

Oh, my bad. You didn't say that - those are the words from the blog you link. You really should use the "QUOTE" box button when you're quoting another person's work. Confusion ensues otherwise.

Anyhow, your friend is wrong. Malkin never said those words. You see, if you had followed your friend's link you would have seen that he was not being straight with you. Malkin apparently found the "QUOTE" box button that I told you about and uses it on her blog.

Those words are not Malkin's but are quoted from a WRAL television news documentary. She never said that, whether it's racist or not is irrelevant. So, your buddy lied to you and you mistakenly called Malkin a "racist" as a result.

Here's the link so you can see for yourself, she's quoting the TV news documentary: http://michellemalkin.com/2008/04/19/hard-numbers-illegal-alien-drunk-drivers-in-north-carolina/

You see, you have to try and build trust with your readers. You can't misrepresent the facts. And when you do (we all make mistakes) you correct yourself.

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

And this link shows how she misrepresents facts to paint a picture that may not be true:

http://www.newshounds.us/2006/05/05/...s_mexicans.php

D'oh!

Dude! Mecha is a racist organization!!! That's what they call themselves! One arm of the org is called "THE RACE" or La Raza. Malkin did not "misrepresent Mecha." They do want to create their own state called Atzalan for only "bronze" colored people. And they support illegal immigration as a means of furthering that goal. That's what they say of themselves.

Here's their report from their conference at Cal State on Cal State's website:

http://www.calstatela.edu/orgs/mecha/planphilmecha.htm

So, no one has a quote of Michelle Malkin exhibiting racism? Nobody? What am I left to conclude?

[Praxeas]

Gotta love the liberal media and their other incarnations like blogs and various websites

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Gotta love the liberal media and their other incarnations like blogs and various websites

Sad thing is, TRF will probably never bother to click the links and follow up on this for himself. And JD appears to be so young! I hope he follows the links he gave to me and reads them.

These guys just got served. I hope they take it with the right spirit and stop the name calling. I know they're offline now, but I hope that tomorrow will come and we'll all be friends and TRF will say, "You know I was wrong..." and JD will say, "As an American soldier it is my duty to defend the United States from racist, secessionist and terrorist organizations like Mecha and it's a good thing we have people like Michelle Malkin helping to point out the dangers these groups represent."

[Jermyn Davidson]

Originally Posted by pelathais

Sad thing is, TRF will probably never bother to click the links and follow up on this for himself. And JD appears to be so young! I hope he follows the links he gave to me and reads them.

These guys just got served. I hope they take it with the right spirit and stop the name calling. I know they're offline now, but I hope that tomorrow will come and we'll all be friends and TRF will say, "You know I was wrong..." and JD will say, "As an American soldier it is my duty to defend the United States from racist, secessionist and terrorist organizations like Mecha and it's a good thing we have people like Michelle Malkin helping to point out the dangers these groups represent."

It is good for Michelle Malkin to have the freedom to express her opinions, even though her opinions I believe are tainted with racial prejudice.

I do not trust her writings.

BTW, Malkin is NOT my friend.

[Jermyn Davidson]

Articles written by Malkin for VDARE.com:


http://www.vdare.com/malkin/index.htm


VDARE is a hate organization.

Pat Buchanan's articles are published here, time to time. However, he does not have the "racist" label attached to him. Why, because he isn't.

However, Malkin can not lose that label because of the tone of her writings.


It is unwise to defend her.

[TRFrance]

Originally Posted by pelathais

Sad thing is, TRF will probably never bother to click the links and follow up on this for himself. And JD appears to be so young! I hope he follows the links he gave to me and reads them.

These guys just got served.

I hope they take it with the right spirit and stop the name calling. I know they're offline now, but I hope that tomorrow will come and we'll all be friends and TRF will say, "You know I was wrong..." and JD will say, "As an American soldier it is my duty to defend the United States from racist, secessionist and terrorist organizations like Mecha and it's a good thing we have people like Michelle Malkin helping to point out the dangers these groups represent."

Since you are determined to feel like you're right on this , then go ahead.
I dont feel like getting on a merry go round with you on this again today.

More and more I'm being reminded of your boorish style of debate which I've encountered before, and I'm reminded why I had actually considered just ignoring you totally, the last time I ran into the teeth of your insufferable rudeness, in a conversation we had 8 month ago. Doesnt seem like you've changed much, unfortunately. But I'll be cutting this conversation off real quick before it ever gets to the point that it did that time.

But this part in bold is some of the silliest stuff I've ever seen you post.
You're talking about me clicking links, and reading up on this...
So you're an authority on MM now? I know much more about her than you do!

So last night you read some stuff on her on some left wing sites, etc,( trying to poke holes into the assertion that she's a race-baiter and endorser of racists) and now you think you're an expert?
Please. Spare me.

Whatever you're trying to prove, this has become silly now.
It's not important to me to prove or convince you that she is or is not a racist. I simply said that was my opinion. But it's interesting that you have set yourself in opposition to me to either 1/prove she's not a racist or 2/ trying to undermine the assertion that she is..

....and again, this is someone who, before last night, you admitted you knew little about!

Originally Posted by pelathais

These guys just got served.

I hope they take it with the right spirit and stop the name calling. I know they're offline now, but I hope that tomorrow will come and we'll all be friends and TRF will say, "You know I was wrong..."

You think I got served? Are you kidding?
That's funny and sad at the same time. If you're not a comedian, then you should be, 'cuz that's some hilarious stuff. Sad thing is, you take this, and yourself, much too seriously. It's pathetic.

One thing is for sure. I have forgotten more stuff about Michelle Malkin and her writings that you've even learned about her so far with that midnight cram session you had last night.

If you seriously think you "served" me, then you really have a much higher opinion of yourself than you should. Humility doesnt seem to be your strong suit, that's for sure.

Originally Posted by pelathais

I hope they take it with the right spirit and stop the name calling.

name calling? I don't see where I've called you any names.
So I guess you're saying it's "name-calling" to refer to an endorser of racists as being racist?
She clearly endorses Vdare, which is a racist group. Then again maybe you'll find a way to tell us that VDare isn't really racist... so there, I guess you have an out if you want to find one.

(Who knows? You might be one of those "conservatives" who always seem to have a blind spot when it comes to racism, and who always bend over backward to explain away clearly racist speech and behavior.)

So who gets to be the judge? We don't get to use our own judgment on this unless it meets with your approval?

But lets cut to the chase: ...Since you stated in a previous post that "Mecha is a racist group" (which it certainly is!)... it would be interesting if you'd tell us if you think that VDare is also a racist group (...or not). And if it IS, maybe you'll tell us why it's then wrong to 'slam' Malkin for endorsing them.

If you feel like doing some research into her, feel free. But try to do research with an open mind, rather than with a mind to try to prove that "the girl" Malkin is being lied on. Yes, there are far left-wing sites that say a lot of hateful things about her, and distort her words to make her look worse than she is. But I didnt reach my opinion based on those sites, and I've never recommeded those sites to anyone to look up info on her. And if if you decide in your mine that you don't consider her stuff racist, then feel free. But don't pretend in one night to become an expert in someone you dont know much about. And dont come on here harrasing someone for holding what you consider an unfavorable opinion of someone, and harrasing them like a prosecutor, just because you disagree with what they say. People are still entitled to express their opinions here, and whether or not the "evidence" they provide is sufficient to "convince" you, they're still entitled to their opinion without you giving them a hard time about it.
You might want to get used to the concept of freedom of expression, ok?

As I said, at the end of the day my opinion remains my opinion, despite whatever you think.

Bye.

[Jermyn Davidson]

Founder of VDARE calls the 1965 Voting Rights Act a disaster:


And last but not least, from Michelle's buddy Peter Brimelow, VDARE founder:
We do publish writers who could fairly be described as “white nationalists,” in that they explicitly defend the interests of American whites—who, however, made up 90 percent of the populations in 1960, before the disaster of the 1965 [voting rights] Act.
Note, since the last installment in this O'Reilly/Malkin/VDARE series, Malkin quit her gig on O'Reilly.



http://www.swiftboatingusa.com/blog/...re-part-3.html