Sunday, April 24, 2011

More Quote of the Day Honorable Mention, Part 260

Special "A Question of Balance" Edition

Moe Lane at
"It’s actually very entertaining to watch The Daily Beast try to offer a ‘balanced’ look at the Trig Palin situation... The Left is starting to realize just how bad Trig Trooferism looks, you see. The not-totally-brain-dead portions of it don’t want this issue getting any more press... particularly since it will complicate any sort of ‘look at the crazy Birthers’ narrative. So… suppress the Trig Troofers now, and keep them suppressed. Which is the primary reason for The Daily Beast’s damage control efforts, of course. You see, The Daily Beast recently hired Andrew Sullivan away from, and Andrew Sullivan is easily the most notorious Trig Troofer out there. And I do mean‘most notorious’: Andrew Sullivan obsesses over Sarah Palin’s reproductive system to a degree that puts most heterosexual Casanova-types in the shade. It’s not going to be all that great for Tina Brown if her prized ‘get’ shows up just as the controversy that he’s most known for is being slammed for the pernicious nonsense that it is, all across the blogosphere…"
Dana Loesch at Big Journalism:
"Apparently mothers and fathers standing up for a special needs child is a ‘mob,’ according to Sullivan. Birther Sullivan calls mocking a toddler ‘fearless free speech?’ No, it’s cowardice asinine rhetoric. You cowards pick on the toddler because you’re outmatched by the child’s mother."
Cliff Kincaid at Family Security Matters:
"What drives a left-wing blogger to mock a little boy with a disability? Is it just hatred for Sarah Palin, a pro-life mother who exposes what is at stake in the battle over the ‘right to choose?’ Or is it that a mother would bring a child with Down syndrome into the world? This controversy is important because of what it says about the progressive mentality. The progressives, who like to think of themselves as guardians of the most vulnerable and defenseless among us, do not have any sympathy for people they believe should not exist or be born. They believe that a mother should terminate the life of a baby with potential defects. This is not only because of their belief that women’s rights always trump the rights of the unborn, but because it is too costly to take care of them, once they come into the world. They support Big Government and higher spending, except on babies whose visible and active lives would make left-wing feminists, a key part of their constituency, feel uncomfortable. The Wonkette controversy goes far beyond a blogger with bad taste and no conscience. It tells us a lot about the mentality of the progressives in charge of the federal government who are moving ahead with implementation of Obamacare."
Andrew Marcus at Big Government:
"It hadn’t occurred to me before, but it’s the tiny minority of progressive Democrats who are knuckle-dragging, mouth-frothing, and terminally deranged with hatred for Sarah Palin, who were the original birthers! The Obama birthers are knock-offs of the original birther movement."
Susannah Fleetwood at Parcbench:
"Every liberal entertainer, professor and pundit that most liberals respect call Republicans ‘teabaggers’ and ‘racists’, say horrific things about Sarah Palin, and even spread internet rumors about her son... or her husband... (and yes -- Andrew Sullivan and Bill Maher are both mainstream liberal figures -– they are not the fringe). Therefore, many of them don’t know anybody who doesn’t think that this is unacceptable behavior, so they assume that ‘everyone is doing it’ or would approve of it. So now, they think that anything goes for liberals expressing their point of view... If someone is disagreeing with you, shout them down. If you don’t like a politician, call them a four letter word and attack their family. If someone is arguing with you at a protest, then curse them out–and maybe even hit them in the head with a sign for good measure. Who is going to call you out on it, The New York Times? Please... And as far as Sarah Palin goes, well, you can pretty much say anything that you want about her, because The New York Times thinks that she’s an accessory to murder for using the same kind of target maps that Democrats use, because… well, they don’t agree with her. (See how it works?)"
Noel Sheppard at NewsBusters:
"Maybe this will finally teach these vulgarians that children shouldn't be used as pawns in this dirty game of politics."
Little Miss Attila:
"The only thing left is to challenge the often-repeated assertion, recycled by Layne and Steuf, that Palin uses Trig as a ‘political prop’. We’ve been told this for a long time, originally by Mr. Andrew Sullivan... What these jokers need to tell us is what their suggested policies are for handling infants on the campaign trail, and for handling the mentally challenged on the campaign trail. What. Are. Your. Rules? They won’t do it, because 1) if they spelled them out, they’d have to follow them, and 2) if they spelled them out, they would look completely absurd."
Jim Hoft at Gateway Pundit:
"Stay strong, Wonkette. We are all enjoying your humiliating public meltdown."
Peter Ingemi at Datechguy's Blog:
"One might think that would be a story, and it likely would be if the major public figure was named Clinton or Obama and the web site involved was conservative. Alas, the public figure is Sarah Palin and the Web Site is Wonkette. This makes it a twofer. It portrays the left in a poor light for a start and any such story might create sympathy for her at a time when the Republican Nomination is up in the air. So starting with ‘Morning Joe’ and continuing with all the MSM’s morning shows this has become a non-story. Not even a scroll at the bottom of the screen."
Herman Cain via Twitter:
"All life is precious. @, you have many friends on both sides of the aisle standing with you. "
B. Daniel Blatt at Gay Patriot:
"It’s not anti-gay to hold someone to account for crossing a certain line. And Wonkette went way over the line in mocking the child of a prominent conservative leader reviled on the left. As would a conservative blogger who mocked the president’s children — or the children of any Democratic politician. It’s one thing to criticize Sarah Palin and take issue with her ideas, it’s quite another to attack her children. It is telling that they’re now playing the anti-gay card. Their critics have won the argument. Instead of conceding the point and acknowledging their error, they choose to personalize the matter. They just can’t let the right win. But, here it’s not the right that’s ‘won’, but common decency that’s won out."
Jennifer Harper at The Washington Times:
"Yes, there are limits, even in the blogosphere."
Rick Moran at American Thinker Blog:
"I didn't think anything I read on the internet could shock me. This did... Where's Think Progress on this scandal? Or Digby? Or Steve Benen? Or Jane Hamsher? Or Kos? Or any other liberal blogger who can find the time to trash the right for even the most minuscule of transgressions, but stays silent as a colleague attacks a baby in the most shockingly illiberal manner. No outrage about making fun of a special needs child? Or the insinuation of incest?"
Steven Nelson at The Daily Caller:
"Wonkette post mocking Trig Palin drudges up Journolist"
William Jacobson at Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion:
"Don't Cheer Wonkette's Removal of Latest Post Mocking Trig Palin... First, the point for me was not to get the post taken down, it was to hold Ken Layne, the owner of Wonkette, responsible for a long history of mocking Trig Palin at Wonkette. The most recent post was not even the worst. The other posts mocking Trig Palin, linked in my prior posts, remain active. The writer this time, Jack Stuef, did nothing worse than other Wonkette writers and editors have done repeatedly. Second, there is no true regret or acknowledgement by Layne. Even in this belated removal, in reaction to advertisers pulling ads from Wonkette, Layne cannot hide his disdain. The actions of Layne are nothing more than a post-conviction apology from someone who is upset only that he got caught."
- JP

No comments:

Post a Comment