That's
Michelle Malkin reacting to Keith Olbermann's bizarro-world
claim that she is a "big mashed up bag of meat with lipstick" --
and this is the super-clever stuff that guarantees Olby's appeal
to those enlightened, sophisticated people, you see.
Olbermann compared Malkin to Fred "God Hates Fags" Phelps,
for crying out loud! How else to explain it except as envy, the
unpopular Olbermann spitefully abusing the popular Malkin?
As I wrote Monday:
Without very much effort, I could grab a stack of business cards
out of my desk drawer and give you the names of two dozen
influential people in Washington as conservative as Michelle
Malkin. But they're not TV-famous, you see, and so they're spared
that kind of venom.
People who are TV-famous are attacked because, in the minds of
the more idiotic viewers, they are not human beings, but rather
symbols. . . .
Part of this, honestly, can only be understood as envy or sour
grapes: "She's famous. I'm not. I hate her."
Envy is a phenomenon you encounter in all walks of life, at every
level of society, but given that the entire economic agenda of
the Left is based on envy, I suppose we shouldn't be surprised to
find embittered twerps like Olbermann among the Left's most
prominent spokesmen.
The sad thing about this particular episode is how it distorts
who Malkin actually is. She isn't just another pundit. She is a
businesswoman, an entrepreneur.
Go back to 2001, when Michelle Malkin was just one of a
couple-dozen promising younger conservative commentators out
there. She saw the opportunity of the blogosphere, invested her
labor and resources into it, and has reaped the reward, combining
the Internet, TV and print into something like a one-woman
multimedia empire.
When ideological idiots like Olbermann look at Malkin, though,
they don't see that Dagny Taggart factor. All they see is
"successful Republican," and it's like doing a Rorshach inkblot
test with Charles Manson. Which is exactly the way they react to
. . . who?
Rush Limbaugh!
Mark Steyn explains:
More to the point, when I began guest-hosting for Rush, I was
amazed to discover that George Soros pays a team of
stenographers, many of them called Zachary, to work their
tippy-tappy fingers to the bone for three hours transcribing
everything Rush or his fill-ins say in the hope that their
efforts will one day be rewarded and he will deliver the big
career-detonating soundbite. Among the afficionados of this
service are, as I discovered recently, America's "newspaper of
record," which faithfully follows the George Soros typing pool
and dutifully plasters any potentially damaging bon mot on page
one.
If Malkin is the Dagny Taggart of conservative New Media, then El
Rushbo is John Galt. The man quite literally invented
the medium of talk radio as we know it today. The use of
"actualities" (sound bites), the rock "bumper" music, the
personality monologue with listener call-ins (as opposed to the
guest-interview format) -- none of that had ever been tried as a
national radio format before Rush Limbaugh did it.
Now there are dozens of imitators who earn their livings paying
tribute to the man who, after more than 20 years in national
syndication, is still head-and-shoulders above the rest. Which is
why the "George Soros typing pool" transcribes every word.
It ought to be the ambition of every young conservative in the
communication business to emulate innovative media entrepreneurs
like Malkin and Limbaugh, to become so successful as to compel
liberal fat-cats to pay people just to keep track of your daily
activities. And when the liberal stooges smear you, wear it as a
badge of honor -- they hated Ronald Reagan the same way, you
know.
