Michelle Malkin is a conspiracy theorist

From http://realtruthonline.blogspot.com/2008/03/michelle-malkin-is-conspiracy-theorist.html



Michelle Malkin is a conspiracy theorist

Larry Simons
Wednesday, March 5, 2008

Neo-con sycophant Michelle Malkin is blowing her hot air again on both of her websites; one, ironically called “hotair.com” and this website. Malkin, quick to call anyone with an alternative version or theory a “left-wing loon”, has now joined the loonies by suggesting that the videotape of the Marine, David Motari, who is now infamous for tossing a puppy over a cliff, has been doctored.

Malkin says this on her site, “Watch the clip closely. The puppy doesn’t move. It’s clear to me that it’s either dead or a stuffed toy. The sound effects of a dog yapping seem to have been dubbed in.”

Isn’t it amazing that whenever someone else has a different opinion, alternate view or theory about something that Malkin gatekeeps for like 9-11, the war on terror, internment camps, the Iraq war, etc….she goes on the immediate defensive and attacks, attacks, attacks and is quick to call the freethinker a “nut”, a “loon” or whatever other word she parrots from her fellow Neo-con slugs. But, when a “theory” would suit her agenda, then all of a sudden being a conspiracy theorist isn’t such a bad thing after all. Typical of The Incredible Mrs. Limpet.

(Article continues below)


What I found unsurprisingly interesting is that on that same page (scrolled down) she says this, “Will they give equal time to the story of Marines rescuing Iraqi pups?” How she can compare rescuing puppies with savagely killing them is beyond me. How many times do we see cats being rescued from trees on the news? I’ll tell you…never. Why? Because we are SUPPOSED to be humane and treat animals with respect and dignity. It’s really not a big news story to report on behavior that is expected.

If someone savagely pulled the cats from the trees and tossed them from cliffs, or beat them with baseball bats, would this not be newsworthy? Of course it would, because it’s barbaric and inhumane. Malkin wants us to believe that a story of rescuing an animal would have the same emotional intensity as viciously murdering an animal. Unbelievable.

The bottom line here is that Malkin will say anything, take any side or hold any view when it serves her agenda. When others step outside the box, think for themselves and support views that Malkin rejects, they are “loons” who should be silenced. It matters not if the video evidence debunks her conclusions and opinions. If she thinks it, it’s fact. Evidence doesn’t matter.

On the other side of the coin, if we have video evidence that supports any view we hold, that also doesn’t matter to Malkin because the only litmus test she uses to discern truth from lies is ‘whatever she feels’. What a miserable existence that must be.