Skip to content

Michelle Malkin is the real zealot

August 4, 2009

The wingnut and bolt of the republican party

The wingnut and bolt of the republican party

“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynihan

The late senator from New York was never more correct then when he made this brilliant statement.  We don’t shape the truth to promote our own agenda.   I’m sure Michelle Malkin has heard of senator Moynihan.  I’m sure she’s aware of that quote above.  I’m also sure that it does not matter to her in the slightest.  People like Ms. Malkin live to vilify, demagogue, and self-promote.  You see, they don’t care about the facts that are clearly presented before them.  If they did, how would they promote their agenda of intolerance and partisan rancor.

Michelle Malkin is not a supporter of President Barack Obama.  Fine.  She is more than entitled to dissent, and dissent vehemently.  What she is not entitled to do is obscure and create distortions of the truth, to promulgate her extreme agenda.  She is not entitled to incite her rabid followers by defaming those that she does not agree with.  But, with Michelle Malkin, the sensible components of responsible journalism don’t apply.  So she will forever be relegated to the radical, hateful, meat-headed fringe of her party.  Let’s point out just how ignorant Ms. Malkin can be

Here’s an example of her “responsible reporting,” to enlighten us as to what the evil mainstream media is not doing.  In a piece written about the administration’s science czar John Holdren, Ms. Malkin gives us startling facts about the czar’s purported methods and views.  Here’s a sample:

On Friday, I spotlighted the devastating reporting on Obama “science czar” John Holdren posted at zombietime and featured it as the lead story all weekend.

Refresher on Holdren’s eco-zealous views:

• Women could be forced to abort their pregnancies, whether they wanted to or not;

• The population at large could be sterilized by infertility drugs intentionally put into the nation’s drinking water or in food…

Don’t look to the MSM for coverage of Holdren’s radicalism.

Instead, you’ll find the NYTimes making hay of Obama’s NIH pick. Why? Because he’s an evangelical Christian.

Yes, Michelle.  You won’t see the mainstream media covering Holdren’s radicalism, because your report is false.  Politifact.com performed a thorough vetting of this argument, which shockingly, was also made by Glenn Beck.  Here’s a summation of their findings:

But with regard to Beck’s claim that Holdren “has proposed forcing abortions and putting sterilants in the drinking water to control population,” the text of the book clearly does not support that. We think a thorough reading shows that these were ideas presented as approaches that had been discussed. They were not posed as suggestions or proposals. In fact, the authors make clear that they did not support coercive means of population control. Certainly, nowhere in the book do the authors advocate for forced abortions.

But in seeking to score points for a political argument, Beck seriously mischaracterizes Holdren’s positions. Holdren didn’t advocate those ideas then. And, when asked at a Senate confirmation hearing, Holdren said he did not support them now. We think it’s irresponsible to pluck a few lines from a 1,000-page, 30-year-old textbook, and then present them out of context to dismiss Holdren’s long and distinguished career. And we rate Beck’s claim Pants on Fire!

For Michelle Malkin to continue to pursue this futile cause [she wrote another piece on Holdren just two weeks later], is the epitome of folly, hubris, and stupidity.  Who is the real zealot here Ms. Malkin?  Is it really the scientist, or is it the radical ideologue, supporting lies and ignoring the truth?

Advertisements
4 Comments leave one →
  1. Mike Weidner permalink
    August 4, 2009 1:53 pm

    I’ll have some comments on this tonight, when I have more time.

  2. Matthew Wright permalink*
    August 4, 2009 2:03 pm

    Sounds good.

  3. Mike Weidner permalink
    August 5, 2009 12:41 am

    Holdren and Paul Ehrlich were part of the ‘overpopulation’ hysteria of the late 1960’s. Ehrlich’s best selling book “The Population Bomb” (1968), basically stated that if we didn’t control population in this country, then by 1979 there would famine in this country. While it’s true that neither would advocate forced abortions – they wouldn’t be that stupid – the hysteria they created did make the idea plausible in the minds of many. Ruth Bader Ginsberg basically said as much last month in the New York Times…

    “Frankly I had thought that at the time [Roe vs. Wade] was decided there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of.”

    And whether you agree with abortion or not, that line of thinking is now reality. Look at the CDC website and you’ll see that the highest rates of abortion occur among the poor and minorities. What I saw for the 2005 figures stated that something like one out of three unborn African American children are aborted. You can argue that it’s the mother, not the government, who makes the decision. I would counter that either way, those unborn babies are just as dead.

    I’ll tell you what scares me about Holdren. His now discredited overpopulation theory spoke an oncoming catastrophe that required immediate action, including the massive redistribution of wealth. Sounds a lot like the global warming policy to me.

  4. Matthew Wright permalink*
    August 5, 2009 7:58 am

    I think the idea of population control has been kicked around for a while now, [not in the US, but in other countries] especially given the whole carbon footprint ecological policy, if you believe in such a thing. I think the real fear here is that any ideas involving population control in a country where abortion is the rule of law, gives people the impression of government control of women’s bodies. I just don’t believe Holdren advocates this theory. That is my point about Malkin’s assertion. It’s not fact, it’s conjecture.

    I’ll be on the CDC website today checking that stat out. It’s always been a known fact that some women use abortion as birth control. Unfortunately, that is one of the fears and problems with legal abortion.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: