Michelle Malkin is the real zealot
“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:
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?