See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Trackbacks

1. Semi-Intelligent Thoughts
2. The Caretaker

Trackback URL

Comments

1. #1
   On July 27th, 2004 at 10:34 am, Blogbat aka Martin said:

   Nor could I really imagine the contortions of the same if say, a group of neo-hip anarchist militant homosexuals were set up for the same ridicule by those Amish- or for that matter we had been privy to the thoughts the Amish were thinking when they first had the pleasure of the company of our fine MTV rudeness-nazis.

2. #2
   On July 27th, 2004 at 10:41 am, ccwbass said:

   Even more dispicible, if I interpret the ads correctly, is that the show appears to want to focus on a storyline wherein the the Amish aren’t merely ridiculed, but - how to put this? - seduced away from their Amishness.

   The sheer hostility that MTV has towards any religion that doesn’t issue fatwas is remarkable. Or perhaps not remarkable at all.

3. #3
   On July 27th, 2004 at 10:51 am, Nascarfan said:

   Did I miss something about MTV? I don’t really watch it that much, but are they really really muslim or something?

4. #4
   On July 27th, 2004 at 10:58 am, nochizmo said:

   Same thing with the movie ‘Saved’. Substitute Muslim for Christian and voila! you have a lawsuit. Unfortunately anyone siding with MTV in this case will tell you to lighten up, that it’s just a show and you need to learn to take a joke.

5. #5
   On July 27th, 2004 at 11:00 am, Chris said:

   I remember when MTV used to play music videos….
   I really dont like to watch tv anymore. My favorite channel used to be The Discovery Channel, but even that has gone to reality style shows.
   The whole reality thing is tired. I need to start reading more again…

6. #6
   On July 27th, 2004 at 11:07 am, Bithead said:

   Your points are well taken, Michelle, and I agree with your main thrust, here.

   But let’s be honest; the key to the whole thing is the positioning of an Amish person… someone who supposedly has foresworn Technology, in the bastion of Technology that is the city of today.

   I don’t know if the *religion* per se’ ever really enters into it in the producer’s minds. (though I grant it certainly enters that of the veiwer…)

   Rather, what is central is the ‘fish out of water’ concept, that drives such as Paris Hilton and her freind into the country environment that the Amish kids would find themselves more at home in. Looks form here the premise of these two shows are the same, only reversed.

   The comparison is not an idle one; I propose it, to ask a question: In the case of my example, who is it who is being projected as the “normal’ ones?

7. #7
   On July 27th, 2004 at 11:17 am, Martin aka Blogbat said:

   Dittos, Nochizmo. The trouble is that if we could take a joke, MTV wouldn’t want to go where we’d want to take them.

   As for what Chris bemoans, I say likewise with the History Channel. Once a neat little place to watch shows about history, it now has devolved into two basic plots running 24/7 short on originality, loooong on �PC�: The war against Hitler and how America is evil.

   Basically, this is how each show runs: It begins with black and white movies of some battles and a few spooky Nazi marches. Then, it might for variety show some “glorious” Soviets liberating Eastern Europe (oops, by killing 20,000 Polish and raping little girls in Berlin).
   The only way to see something you haven’t seen before, say the story of Attila the Hun par example, is to set your TEVO for 4 O�clock in the morning.

   …Which is why I now call the History Channel the “All Hitler, All the Time” Channel, and as you mentioned return to my books for a good bit of historically interesting information.

8. #8
   On July 27th, 2004 at 11:26 am, bruce said:

   I don’t like the heading though…any form of religious ridicule is not acceptable.

9. #9
   On July 27th, 2004 at 11:49 am, Duane said:

   A little reading comprehension folks. The show is on UPN not MTV.

10. #10
    On July 27th, 2004 at 11:57 am, Martin aka Blogbat said:

    …maybe we wanted to bash MTV

11. #11
    On July 27th, 2004 at 12:08 pm, americankitty said:

    BASH BASH! HULK SMASH!

12. #12
    On July 27th, 2004 at 1:05 pm, CrazyFool said:

    Michelle, You can probably expect the CAIR (not to mention ACLU) police at your door at any minute for even suggesting such a thing featuring devout muslims….

    How can this be called ‘Reality TV’ when the whole thing is staged?

13. #13
    On July 27th, 2004 at 1:24 pm, actus said:

    “That, of course, sets up the premise of “Amish in the City,” which is to see what happens when a bunch of narrow-minded, shiftless, materialistic ignoramuses are brought together under one roof with people who live a life characterized by deep faith and strong tradition.”

    Sounds like they’re ridiculing the non-religious people.

14. #14
    On July 27th, 2004 at 1:34 pm, Paralloyd said:

    The “professional grievance mongers” would probably equally upset if the series was about Hasidic Jews, Mormons, Buddhists, Catholic priests, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Rastafarians, Southern Baptists, Hindus, Shinto monks, or fundamentalist born again Christians from Missouri. Would there be an uproar if the show was about Vietnamese refugees instead of Amish? Or Aboriginies? Or poor whites from the Appalachians?

    Why do you constantly berate Muslims, Michelle? The show is about the Amish, not Muslims, and the reason why there aren’t protests is because the Amish don’t watch TV and they are a passive culture that refrains from protest. Why do you insist on making issues of non-existent “what if” situations? Next time, before you type the letters “M-U-S-L-I-M” replace it with “J-E-W” and consider how your tone might be perceived.

15. #15
    On July 27th, 2004 at 2:06 pm, americankitty said:

    She’s not berating the Muslims at all in this post. She’s simply pointing out the media bias regarding religions.

    I could see them doing the same thing with Orthadox Jews, to be honest. No one would bat an eyelash.

16. #16
    On July 27th, 2004 at 2:09 pm, meep said:

    Ah, yes, the Hitlery Channel. I got sick of that stuff a while back, but they have had other excellent programs. The series on the Tsars was really cool. And I liked Simon Schama’s History of Britain. And though I got sick of Hitler, the WWII program The Color of War was very interesting as well.

    One should spice up one’s viewing schedule anyway. I regularly watch the Science Channel (where Discovery has shunted all their old Science programs, it seems), Cartoon Network, Food Network, and the History Channel. Mainly. Lots of good stuff on TV, really, and much better than what’s on tap on PBS.

17. #17
    On July 27th, 2004 at 2:11 pm, Julie Anne Fidler said:

    I know this won’t be a popular view, but considering my house in right smack dab in the middle of Amish farms, I think it sounds very amusing!!

18. #18
    On July 27th, 2004 at 2:21 pm, abel said:

    Michelle have this thing against muslims.
    Making up words like “islamofacist’, “islamic protectorate…”

19. #19
    On July 27th, 2004 at 3:51 pm, John said:

    The point is that the ACLU (and other neolibs) spend their lives working to remove any semblance of Christianity from our culture. Then we have activist judges like Phyllis Hamilton ruling that it’s OK to force students to practice Islam for 3 weeks. Throw in the fact that Christian Fundamentalists and Catholics are labeled “right wing religous extremists”, and you should see Michelle’s point. On the other hand, it is politically incorrect to mock Muslims. It is politically incorrect to be suspicious of a stranger’s activity just because he/she is middle eastern, even though there’s probably 10,000,000 Muslims in the world who would nuke New York if given the chance.

    If 19 Catholics had committed the mass murder on 9/11, and the Pope had declared a Jihad against America(and the USS Cole, and Lockerbe)I as a Catholic would have no problems with profiling based on religion. I would not complain if I were singled out while boarding a plane. But try to detain more than 2 Muslims who are acting suspiciously in an airport, and you’re breaking the law.

20. #20
    On July 27th, 2004 at 5:06 pm, The Liberal Avenger said:

    You’ve got to admit, though, that the Amish are pretty damn amusing.

    Especially when the young ones buy crystal methamphetamine and wreak havoc all around Centerville.

21. #21
    On July 27th, 2004 at 5:10 pm, CrazyFool said:

    Because there wouldn’t be a media outrage if it were Christians, or Jews.

    But there certainly would be if it were muslims, or homosexuals, transgender, or any of the other ‘Politically Correct’ groups. You would hear cries of Racism from shore to shore (even tho none of those groups are a ‘race’). The ACLU might even get involved.

22. #22
    On July 27th, 2004 at 5:29 pm, nonymous Al said:

    1. - Michelle does not “make up words” to call Muslims.

    *Islamo-fascist* and the like have been around for a long time.

    — — —

    2. - It is NOT anti-Muslim to use such coinages to distinguish the Muslim majority from the very substantial Muslim minority who are indeed like fascists and nazis, seeking to eliminate everyone who is not Muslim from the planet.

    Quite the opposite, it is CHARITABLE to Muslims to AVOID calling the hijackers and baby-murderers and prisoner-behraders simply “Muslims”.

    … As in “Muslims murdered a Buddhist nun in Kashmir today, after raping and torturing her.”

    — — —

    IOW, “Islamo-fascist” and other such words are what a charitable people use who nevertheless insist on NOT CENSORING THE NEWS - as is done in the liberal media, which refuse to report on Kashmir and/or Sudan and/or the Philippines … … or any other such theaters in the Islamo-fascist War Against “Kafir”.

23. #23
    On July 28th, 2004 at 1:58 am, Jim Martin said:

    Me thinks paralloyd would prefer mullahf**ker to Muslim. How about Osama Does Las Vegas, or vise versa? That would be funny!

    Because the vast majority of muslims are not causing problems right now, doesn’t mean they agree with us. On the contrary, you should read the difference between Islam and Christianity at http://www.AsiaOnline.com, which has a very interesting article on the subject: Why we are losing.

24. #24
    On July 28th, 2004 at 2:03 am, Jim Martin said:

    Correction: It is http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/FD27Ak01.html