Could I ask for a higher honor? It’s nice to know she reads me and has now linked to me no fewer than three times (here’s the latest). If I can say that I got under the skin of the most dangerous far-right rabble rouser in America, then this blog and all the hours that have gone into it (and there were lots until it all but ground to a halt this year) were worth it.
Malkin is evil; evil Malkin –
That is all ye know on earth
And all ye need to know.
1
By boo
I detect a substrate of passion between the two of you. Does she remind you of an old boyfriend or something? Perhaps you should take this opportunity to initiate a (cough) private correspondence…
October 28, 2007 @ 6:34 pm | Comment
2
By Raj
I think using the word “evil” to describe her is not much better than the sort of crap she writes.
I think it’s used all too lightly these days – I can’t remember the last time I used it.
October 28, 2007 @ 7:26 pm | Comment
3
By Ed
What happened to Peking Duck? Used to be a busy blog, nothing happening here now. Too bad. Another China blog slips away.
October 28, 2007 @ 10:09 pm | Comment
4
By richard
Ed, I am in semi-retirement. Once upon a time I had endless hours of free time I could kill by blogging. Then in January I got a new job and the party ended. I simply can’t operate like I used to, when I would put up five or more new posts every day. Sometimes we have to prioritize, as painful as that my be.
Boo, there’s certainly passion between Michelle and me, but not the erotic type.
Raj, I never call the CCP evil anymore because it’s too general a statement, and there are pockets of good within the CCP, even noble and benevolent. I won’t call the US government – even under Bush – evil because I know there is still a lot of good within it. But Malkin is evil, pure incandescent evil. Clinical tests prove it. I employ that word for no other blogger, and very few living people. Malkin is evil. Write it down and remember it.
Ann Coulter isn’t evil.
Charles Johnson isn’t evil.
Michelle Malkin, however, is evil. She is a throwback from an earlier, more violent age and her posts often constitute an overt cry for our descent into barbarism.
October 28, 2007 @ 10:15 pm | Comment
5
By Ivan
Richard, you said, “there’s certainly passion between Michelle and me, but not the erotic type”
HAHA! Oh, man, that made me splurt out my wine all over the monitor! đŸ™‚
But seriously, Richard, I just wonder – and I’m asking this in good faith – how can you write so categorically that someone is “pure incandescent evil” if in the next breath you’re a self-described agnostic who, by definition, is “uncertain” about the existence of any transcendent morality at all?
I know you got a lot of work to do, but I just want to raise that question for you to digest.
October 28, 2007 @ 11:15 pm | Comment
6
By Raj
Ivan makes an interesting point.
October 29, 2007 @ 3:35 am | Comment
7
By Qin Shi Huangdi
“Ann Coulter isn’t evil.
….
Michelle Malkin, however, is evil. She is a throwback from an earlier, more violent age and her posts often constitute an overt cry for our descent into barbarism.”
How do you figure this? As far as I can see, BOTH constitute an overt cry for our descent into barbarism, and though neither is particularly sane, Coulter usually seems to be the really psychotic one of the two.
October 30, 2007 @ 1:11 am | Comment
8
By Vpffefer
Richard, how is Anne Coulter different from Michelle Malkin?
One is evil, one is not?
October 30, 2007 @ 2:56 am | Comment
9
By richard
Ann Coulter is not at all evil. Not even a little bit. She is a harmless clown. Sick, depraved, pathetic, but not evil. She is joking and she never rallies the masses. Malkin mobilizes people by arousing their most base instincts. She plays on their emotions and manipulates them in a way that corresponds directly to the techniques of Joseph Goebbels and, even more so, Julius Streicher. Ands I can prove this.
October 30, 2007 @ 1:15 pm | Comment