Mad about Malkin
Ok, I know I'm going to get some flack for this, but I think I have a thing for Michelle Malkin. Yeah, I know, I know. She's positively ghastly. There's not a commentator out that that is more disgustingly neo-con, with the exception of the deplorable Ann Coulter (a blond I could never admire). I'm not saying Michelle Malkin is my ideological match by far, I'm just saying I don't hate her.
If you know anything about me, you should know that I'm a moderate. As a journalist, and as an extension, a citizen of the United States, I refuse to look at one party for all the answers. I believe each issue facing this county deserves a vigorous debate and no party platform provides all the answers (or any in most cases). While some of my favorite blogs are left-leaning, I do find myself treading on the dark side. When I'm playing in the dirt, you're most likely to see me mudding it up with Malkin.
About a month ago, I saw a video blog by John Aravosis over at PoliticsTV. He runs an interesting blog, AmericaBlog, that mostly spits out the day's top stories along with some liberal bitching and moaning. I go to the blog often, but I can only take so much unabashed Bush bashing. His video blog, Monday Morning Blogger, is even more annoying. Actually seeing the guy parading around like some arrogant would-be broadcast journalist is sometimes too much to bear.
Anyways, he pointed out a few weeks ago that commentator Michelle Malkin had copied his brilliant video blogging idea (yeah right, John, you weren't the first one). So I checked out Malkin's video blog, Vent at HotAir.com. And I have to say, aside from abundance of nausiating neo-conservative fumes, it's much more even-tempered and well done. Malkin does the blog daily and she has quite the face for broadcast. You have to admit she is adorable (even if that cute smile hides a devil within).
One Vent I enjoyed was her rant on conservative commencement speakers. I thought she made a good point. It's ok for Jodie Foster to make a political statement when she delivers a graduation speech (and acts like a complete fool singing an Eminem rap), but when conservative speakers come up to bat, they are ridiculed, protested and booed. I'm not a big fan of Condolezza Rice or John McCain, but they are elected officials in our government and they do deserve a little respect. Not much, but just a little.
I don't always agree with Michelle. Sometimes her video blogs can be kind of scary. During her first full week of video blogging, she covered the upcoming United 93 movie release. She discussed the fact that the film came out to mostly decent reviews (though she disturbingly highlighted that Rush Limbaugh called the film "powerful" -- because that's the first guy I go to for movie reviews) She goes on some diatribe against Universal Studios and its Web site for United 93. But the most disturbing thing about the video blog is the ending. After making her point, she says farewell, and adds, "Never, never, never forget," after which she flashes a few disturbing scenes of 9/11. Ok, what is it with neo-conservatives always invoking 9/11 to make their point? America will never forget, but we will certainly move on. We don't know to be reminded of it every five seconds.
So, as I venture for more balance to my blogging, I will always head to Michelle Malkin for a good Vent. I mean, someone needs to balance out the liberal hotheads. (But, just so you don't think I'm really turning to the dark side -- Michelle Malkin is cute but Markos is cuter ;-)
Comments
Hey Mark, good to hear from you. You have your point of view, I have mine. But you sound like someone who one can have a disagreement with, and not have it turn into a huge ideological pi**ing match.
Anyway, I just came cruising by. I'm a big Michelle Malking fan. But it is good to meet someone from the left side of the political spectrum like you who seems to have the common sence and decency you do.
Ideological wars usually are a real bummer.
Good luck with everything.
Posted by: EFG | May 22, 2006 09:31 PM
Nick,
I don't find Mrs. Malkin to be a neo-con. She surely fits into the conservative category though. So what's the difference between a neo-con and a conservative? In my mind conservatives have an ideology (small government, anti-federlist, America first foreign policy, less taxes, pro free market, etc). Unfortunately, I think the neo-cons also have an agenda: power, world domination, pro big business, and oppression of individual rights. They are conservatives only to the extent that these purposes are served. That may be taking it a little far, but my relationship with the republicans is over (until they clean house of the non-cons). I will vote my conscience (libertarian). I can't bring myself to vote for the democrats whom I see as the party of the disenfranchised and anti-capitalist (though one could argue that subsidies for big business are just as anti-capitalist as redistribution of wealth to the "poor").
Here is where I part company with the conservatives; one can agree with their opinions without wishing to impose it by force of law upon others. Being a conservative makes sense. It is rational. Imposing your will upon others by force or threat of force is wrong -- even if done by government (a classical libertarian stance). For what is government, but a collection of people?
It’s strange, we have a well-funded libertarian think tank, the "Cato Institute," and Mrs. Malkin (individually) makes a bigger impact.
Regardless, I too enjoy Mrs. Malkin's video blog.
Rob
P.S. Mrs. Melkin's conflicted anti-federalist stand regarding the gay marriage amendment is a significant indicator she is a conservative, not a neo-con.
Posted by: RH | May 23, 2006 11:27 AM
ewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww. that's it.
Posted by: pad | May 23, 2006 04:54 PM
Perhaps I did use the term "neo-con" a little too liberally. Now that you mention it, what does it mean anyways? Perhaps I will give it some more thought later on in a separate, thanks for the feedback Rob!
Nick
Posted by: Nick | May 23, 2006 05:43 PM