Me conservative, me no read books
This is Pat Schroeder, the old feminist Democrat who cried when she withdrew from a presidential bid in 1987, retired from Congress in 1997, and now serves as President and Chief Executive Officer of the Association of American Publishers, where they think it is wise to trash and mock conservative consumers. What does she think of you and me? We’re Neanderthals, of course:
Liberals read more books than conservatives. The head of the book publishing industry’s trade group says she knows why—and there’s little flattering about conservative readers in her explanation.
“The Karl Roves of the world have built a generation that just wants a couple slogans: ‘No, don’t raise my taxes, no new taxes,’” Pat Schroeder, president of the American Association of Publishers, said in a recent interview. “It’s pretty hard to write a book saying, ‘No new taxes, no new taxes, no new taxes’ on every page.”
Schroeder, who as a Colorado Democrat was once one of Congress’ most liberal House members, was responding to an Associated Press-Ipsos poll that found people who consider themselves liberals are more prodigious book readers than conservatives.
She said liberals tend to be policy wonks who “can’t say anything in less than paragraphs. We really want the whole picture, want to peel the onion.”
Here’s the poll Schroeder’s referring to, but the gulf in book reading that Schroeder perceives is not backed up by the actual poll results:
Among those who had read at least one book, liberals typically read nine books in the year, with half reading more than that and half less. Conservatives typically read eight, moderates five. By slightly wider margins, Democrats tended to read more books than Republicans and independents. There were no differences by political party in the percentage of those who said they had not read at least one book.
And then there’s this:
Who are the 27 percent of people the AP-Ipsos poll found hadn’t read a single book this year? Nearly a third of men and a quarter of women fit that category. They tend to be older, less educated, lower income, minorities, from rural areas and less religious.
No indication on what these non-readers’ political affiliations are.
This is also noteworthy:
The Bible and religious works were read by two-thirds in the survey, more than all other categories. Popular fiction, histories, biographies and mysteries were all cited by about half, while one in five read romance novels. Every other genre — including politics, poetry and classical literature — were named by fewer than five percent of readers.
So while Schroeder uses the poll to extol liberal readers as learned “policy wonks,” political books are a blip on the screen.
Can’t wait for her reaction to the fact that the Bible and religious works were the most widely read books among those polled.
Peel that onion, Patty.
***
Update: Allah links to the crosstabs–not that we Neanderthals know anything about how to read them.
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.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
‘Patriotic Millionaires’ Still Begging Government to Take Their Money
June 8, 2011 04:15 PM by Doug Powers
97 CommentsSo That’s Why Bono Calls it the ONE Foundation
September 23, 2010 02:57 PM by Doug Powers
41 CommentsDirtbag of the Week: Man Robs Kids’ Lemonade Stand
July 22, 2010 09:53 AM by Doug Powers
54 Comments
Solitaire-playing lawmakers defend their “momentary diversion”
September 2, 2009 04:31 AM by Michelle Malkin
52 Comments
Moron alert: L.A. Lakers fans celebrate with riots, arson, attacks on police
June 15, 2009 01:20 AM by Michelle Malkin
79 Comments
Categories: Idiots
Pundit & Pundette
» Obama's war on conscience, cont'dBabalu Blog
» Greece is BurningBetsys Page
» Cruising the WebPatterico
» NYT hails the safety net: Poor hardest hitDaily Caller
» Inside Media Matters: Sources, memos reveal erratic behavior, close coordination with White House and news organizationsAmSpecBlog
» Weekend Political Wrap-UpJustOneMinute
» I Guess I'm Still Stuck On StupidThe Hill
» Rep. Ron Paul not conceding Maine vote
Libs have a foolish idea of what intelligence is. I can tell you this, it isn’t the ability to memorize and quote policy manuals. That’s a freak genetic trait, it’s not intelligence.
Who can forget the memorable scene in The Paper Chase when a Harvard Law student brags to his professor that he has a “photographic memory.”
John Houseman the professor smacks him down, “a photographic memory will get you nowhere in this class.
I read one less book than the average liberal because I also fall into the “gainfully employed” category. It’s easy to read an extra book a year with all that government assistance.
Pat Schroeder = Yawn, I care about what this woman thinks just as much as to any comments Rosie O’ might have. People like her IMHO are “irrellevant”.
That number drops dramatically once you account for multiple re-readings of Michael Moore’s “Dude, Where’s my Country?” and Che “esta muerto” Guevara’s “The Motorcycle Diaries.”
Besides, reading Zinn, Chomsky and Churchill isn’t exactly the path to erudition.
Interesting that the type and length of the book that each party affiliate reads is not mentioned. Last time I checked the communist manifesto was less than 100 pages. And note to Ms. Schroeder, it takes a lot more thought to read the Bible then it does a harlequin romance novel (which my Financee reads in less than 2 hours).
And since when was the last time taxes had been mentioned on this blog? I don’t think Schroeder has a clue about the other issues of modern conservatives support.
I wonder if all these liberal geniuses have read these particular books yet:
Invasion: How America Still Welcomes Terrorists, Criminals, and Other Foreign Menaces to Our Shores
Unhinged: Exposing Liberals Gone Wild
In Defense of Internment: The World War II Round-Up and What It Means For America’s War on Terror
I bet they have not. El Mustachio certainly hasn’t. Heh.
/suckup off
Isn’t Patsy Schroeder the one who wanted to refer to women as “gyno-Americans”?
Good one!
Wow, that poll wasn’t very hard to tear apart, eh?
I’ve read at least ten books in the last year. I also read 50-100 pages of “stuff” at work each day, in addition to recreational blog/news reading.
They probably couldn’t reach many conservatives over the phone because we were too busy working to pay into the welfare state.
Peeling onions makes me cry too. This woman is the one who went to the floor of the House and said that Rush Limbaugh wants old people to eat dog food, and take away their SS checks. What a liberal hack.
I live in a very liberal college town. Most of the people I work with are East Coast-educated leftists like Schroeder. I always expect them to be smart, because that’s the narrative we hear: liberals smart; conservatives dumb. But I am always — and I mean always — disappointed in the shallow, anti-intellectual positions my colleagues take when we discuss politics or issues like immigration. I go home time and again and say to my husband, “These people haven’t read a thing since Mao’s ‘Little Red Book.’ They know nothing of history, have absolutely no understanding of the world’s religions, have no idea how civilizations behave over time. Honestly, I think they’re…stupid.”
Then, later, I engage them again, still expecting to hear a reasoned, intellectual response, and again, I get the depth of Jane Fonda. For example, few leftists have any knowledge whatsoever of Cambodia’s killing fields and they can’t read an economic report and see that federal tax receipts increase when taxes decrease. They just do not understand how most things work.
It’s interesting, but I think that as the left continues to abandon genuine study of issues for a perusal of websites like DailyKos, they will become dumber and dumber. I read those leftist sites, and they are as anti-intellectual as any writing can be. Sadly, though, I think it’s a dangerous stupidity.
Is she still alive?
You know, I worked, did not live, in Denver when Patsy was in Washington. Funny thing was how much she promised the welfare receipants to get elected. Now if these are the readers she is refering to, no wonder the count is lopsided.
Excellent point, Kevin,Patty’s spin on this is absurd.What one reads is far more important than how much one reads.As far as conservatives wanting slogans,and liberals talking in paragraphs,try reading liberal writings.Conservatives state their case clearly and concisely ,then move on.Liberals concept of “getting the whole picture” means saying the same thing over and over,using different words.It takes a book for lib to say what a con. says in an essay.Maybe that’s why the dems in Congress can’t get anything done,Ya think?
I can guarantee you that I read a lot more than any given liberal.
When you consider: Blogs, news sites, news papers, documents (any variety), contracts, magazines, political forums, and any other reading material you can think of.
The fact is, this “poll” is based on book readers only. What’s more, I’ve probably re-read a number of books, that would probably put me right up there with these so-called “well read” liberals.
Quality versus quantity also comes to mind. I’m sure people here have read thick books, such as Blackhawk Down, versus Heather Has Two Mommies.
The poll is a shallow attempt to promote the left over the right.
If the left is so smart, why can’t they be intellectually honest? Why do they support organizations like the Daily KOokS? Why do they support the idiotic “man made global warming” nonsense? Etc…
Sorry for the rant. It just had to be said.
I too noticed there was no further info presented about “WHAT” the respondents to the poll read …
They must have counted the pamphlets on how to fill out your welfare forms in that book count?
I read a average of 2 books each month … I suspect that most here read regularly as well … anyone here get polled?
There is a joke in that somewhere, but I’ll leave it to your imaginations:)
No, But I did stay at a Holiday Inn last night.
Were you polled at the Holiday Inn?
Schroeder eh? still reading pulp fiction I suppose?
Liberals are so stupid they think their lies are opaque..,
Good morning everyone, and that would be a no, brian72…
The New York Times best-seller list seems to be dominated by books written by conservatives, so Libs must be reading lots of smut. Books written by liberals get about as much attention as Air America.
I read a lot of books for the amount of time I have to read, but I also tend to be pretty narrowly focused. I read books related to my work and work interests.
For example I read books like “The Elegant Universe” and “The Fabric of the Cosmos” by Brian Greene, “The Road to Reality: A Complete Guide to the Laws of the Universe” by Roger Penrose,
I recently read a great book, a true story, set against the background of the French Revolution called “The Measure of All Things, The Seven Year Oddyssey and Hidden Error That Transformed the World” by Ken Adler about the quest to create a standard unit of length for the world and a 200 year cover up of an error in that unit of length. Great book, if you are involved in the sciences or engineering I highly recommend it.
The thing is, with work and family commitments, my time to read is limited and you don’t go through books like that quicky so since I wound up at about 7 last year. I guess I am one of those dumb conservatives who doesn’t read much.
Good for you aj. I’m in a weird mood today, I guess:)
Back on topic, this is from the Maha Rushie:
Peel that, Patsy.
I read 50 to 100 books a year. I have been known to go on a reading binge over a weekend and down 4-8 books. So according to Pat Schroeder I must be a die hard Liberal but I am not. Demagogues use the pretense of Science to push their illogical spittle. Pat Schroeder’s emotional appeal seems to be “conservatives are simpletons” verse “liberals are deep thinkers that want to peel the onion.” What kind of science thesis is “your better than others because you read books”? It stands toe to toe with those that the past used the shape of your skull or features on your face to measure intelligence.
I’d love to read that poll. Anyone have any idea how to read? I ordered a government pamphlet called “How to Read”, but…
Funny, it takes them a whole paragraph to say nothing at all…..
Me republican….. Me read Bible to look at pictures…… Me no understand complex books like Origin of Species…… Me drop out of school in 4th grade and marry me cousin……
– Kevin
Yeah, I was going to mention that too. . .then I noticed that in spite of being employed, I still read more books in 2 months than the average liberal (or conservative) reads in a year.
This doesn’t make sense. Liberals know everything – they just can’t stop reminding us of this fact – so why would they need to read anything?!? Why waste time on things you already know when there is a socialist Utopia waiting to be built?
↑ ↑ ↓ ↓ ← → ← → B A Start
Are the libs counting “graphic novels” as books now?
OMG, do I remember Patty when she was in the senate. Have you listened to her talk?
It’s pain full. She sounds like she’s 90 yrs. old, whine whine whine. Liberal, I guess she IS LIBERAL!! I was never so glad to see anyone leave the senate.
I know I used to read alot more books before I became a stay at home mom with a house, a husband, two kids and a dog. Guess it depends on your priorities.
Zombietime has a photo essay about a bookfair in San Francisco in ’06. I don’t think I should link to it, because there are some profane themes from some of the stinky anarchist hippie types. The books on the tables are interesting though.
Visit if you dare, here are some titles:
A child’s guide to nihilism: a coloring and activity book
Libertarian Communism
The meaning of Atheism
The Arab-Isreali Debate: Toward a Socialist Solution
The Case Against Isreal
These are who Patsy was praising?
What an absurdity – her now claim to fame that democrats read more than republicans?
Exactly WHO did she ask?
There are possibly two theories to consider;
In the public school system of our great country, those that cannot or will not read are from uneducated families. Most would fall in the category of DEMOCRATS, I dare to say.
Contradictory isn’t it?
If she is only considering the adult population, again, perhaps MORE Republicans are working versus Democrats. Most unemployed folks are minorities.
If there is a remote possibility that Democrats read more books, I dare to say that she is including magazines in her “STUDY”……Penthouse, Playboy, etc., you know, the ethical stuff.
Whatever. She is a has been or a wanna be. Maybe she needs to reread the CONSTITUTION as well as her fellow Democrats.
Comprehension doesn’t equate reading.
#4 Insomniac:
But “A History of the English-Speaking Peoples” is amazing!
What? Ward Churchill? Never mind.
HA HA HA HA HA Here’s one for you Patty !!!
I was a liberal and barely read ANYTHING until 1991. Then when I was exposed to Rush (an alternative view point that challenged my beliefs) I WENT TO THE LIBRARY 3 times a week for a full year in 1991.
All my reading changed me to conservatism and I understand economics 101 better than any
leftistDemocrat in Congress and even some Republicans.What else do I understand? The atmosphere, energy, electricity, physics, chemistry, climate, race, environment, and that government spending has gone UP every year in every category of spending for over 6 decades. Therefore when I hear a
leftistDemocrat LIE about cuts/slashes/reductions in spending I understand it as a lie because of all of the black and white pages I’ve seen showing the budget numbers !!!All that despite my gainful employment for the last 21 years.
Big distinction between the two Churchills. Readers of one have never read the other, I would wager.
This woman disgusts me….she is the reason I only receive a little more than 1/2 of my military retirement.
No details necessary; that’s enough.
tommad,
You give the other half in alimony to her???
I feel for you bud. You need a support group!!
Funny you should mention that. I credit a strong understanding of economics as one of the primary reasons I’m conservative today. Liberal ideologies w/r/t handling of our money just don’t make any sense. It seems to be one of the areas (history of nations being the other) that many liberals I argue with are completely illiterate. Or maybe they read revisionist history/economics books
Well, she’s breathing, talking and walking. Her brain on the other hand…
hasn’t shown any sign of life for years.
I read as many books in a week as her so called well-read liberals do in a year! And that is no joke. And these are books. That does not include magazines and newspapers.
But I don’t have time to read as much as I did when I was single and ‘gainfully employed’. Being a Mom of 3 and caretaker for my parents takes alot more time than 9 to 5 (Kevin, Yasmak.. shame on you both. Stereotypes are ugly.)
I manage to read so much because I read fast. My husband is dyslexic. He gets irritated that the book that took him 3 weeks to finish I sat down and read in a night. That and I get little sleep
Reading is better than just staring at the ceiling and worrying.
Well read at 9 books a YEAR? What the heck are they doing with their lives? Watching television all night? Ya that’s a great use of their liberal ‘brainpower’.
I suppose if ‘See Jane Run’ can be defined as a book that might be true.
Liberals don’t read great literary works, if they did they wouldn’t be Liberals.
Besides: Well done is better than well said. Benjamin Franklin
MM, you rock!
I confess, I had to give up that one extra book a year so I could read MichelleMalkin.com and HotAir.com. The sacrifices we conservative readers make…
It would be nice if these liberals would spend a little time reading history. Due to their ignorance of history, liberals constantly doom us to repeat mistakes again and again. Their solutions do not work.
Another image from that “book fair” in SF is just too perfect. I wish I could just put the image here for all to see.
There is a table, with a flagpole. On the flagpole is a red flag with a yellow sickle&hammer. A large cardboard sign in front has a lot of articles taped to it and is headed with this phrase:
“US Troops: A History of Shame”
another reads “unsubscribe from the Bush regime”, next to it is “subscribe to revolution”
Some more book titles:
From Reform to Bayonets
Karl Marx and Marxian Science
A Socialist in Congress: His Conduct and Responsibilities
SLP & the USSR
WAR and Unemployment: Capitalism the Cause, Socialism the Future
War and the Workers
The Last Year of MalcomX: The evolution of a Revolutionary
Stalin and the Kirov
The Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844
Reader in Marxist Philosophy
…and a newsletter titled “Fighting Words”…with a black cleched fist on the header.
Such literary genius is hard for my little conservative brain to handle.
Most of these “books” are just glorified pamphlets. Do they count?
What the heck? I spoke to my experience, and didn’t cite, promote, or otherwise mention ANY stereotypes. I don’t know which is uglier, stereotypes or baseless accusations!
I forgot the numerous “biographies” of Lenin. Priceless.
I haven’t met many well-read liberals. I have met a lot of pretentious liberals who think that mastering the lefty talking points demonstrates their intellectual superiority, but their knowledge of their positions is bumper sticker thin. Not only do they not read books, they don’t read magazines or newspapers, nor do they watch the news on TV. They get their current events from comedy routines on The Daily Show.
That’s too much!
In the past 3 mth I have read MM’s Invasion, Bankrupt,State of Emergency, Che Guevara and the useful idiots that idolize him, Godless, Culture Warrior and now I’m reading Outrage. Hmmm I guess I’m just an uniformed conservative….
Wow.. we are just racking up the stereotypes today aren’t we.
I have 3 children in public school. My middle child didn’t learn to read until the 3rd grade. Years after his younger sibling. Why? Because he a learning disability. They say he’s not dyslexic (his father is) but no one could manage to teach him to read. Myself included. He would listen to someone read it and then ‘read’ it back to them from memory. He didn’t really read the words. It wasn’t until he was put into a special education class and taught whole word reading (instead of reading phonetically) that he finally got it.
Less than a year later he scored better than 90% of all children nationally on the MAT’s in reading.
He still doesn’t care to read much… well.. much compared to the rest of us. But he still beats the 9 books a year that the ‘liberals’ are reading.
Do not assume that those with reading problems come from uneducated families. Children from all walks of life have learning disablities. Some are easier to overcome than others. But to say something as blatently stereotypical as that makes you sound well.. uneducated.
Most any moonbat can read 9 comic books a year, but I doubt any moonbat reads any book with sentences longer the five words, or requires more then on sentence to express an idea.
All kidding aside there’s literary merit and some solid philosophy in
graphic novelscomic books if you pick the right ones. “The Dark Knight Returns”, “300″, “Watchmen” and “The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen” for starters. And even though it seems simplistic these days Stan Lee was on the right side of most issues in the 60′s and 70′s. Ronald Reagan cemented my conservative status, but it was Spider-Man and Captain America that made me receptive to the message.Thank you, oh stereotype yard duty.
Pat (I never met a tax that I didn’t like) Schroeder…I was in the military during her tenure as a representative. She was a thorn in our side from day one. She thought the military was her personal “Social experiment”. She is a real piece of work. I don’t know of ANY liberal that reads more than I do. I am constantly amazed that so many liberals put themselves up on some sort of pedastal…maybe that way, they can justify trying to make everyone think the same way they do. I have so much fun baiting liberals…it has become a sport for me….from family gatherings to work related social events, I have only to wait for some enlightened lib to start quacking…doesn’t take much to pin them to the mat…they have no substance…and Pat S is the queen of no substance…I guess the only quesiton I have is: why do we care what this has been hack says?…
Schroeder belongs to the generation that never grew up. Her childish, narcissistic , self-centered personality betrays her and all of the moonbats of her generation. Her and the rest of the moonbats of her generation should be labeled the generation that never grew up.
Really? So what would you call this?
Sure looked to me like you were backing up Kevin’s accusations that the reason that ‘liberals’ could read more books was that they were NOT gainfully employed.
Perhaps your idea of stereotypes and mine is different. But as I am not ‘gainfully employed’ I took offense to your remark. So you go ahead a be upset at my baseless accusations. And I’ll just go back to work.
Clever taxation reference….. I love it!
So we started “Bush lied, people died” and “No blood for oil”?
Fascinating.
Stupid git of a woman…
Read between the lines a little…..good ol’ Bush Bashing rears its head again. Is she trying to call conservatives Nazis by calling us ‘anti-book-ers’ ??????
So I was on the phone a few minutes ago with my wife and I was telling her about this thread and I told her I had said I read about 7 per year and she started laughing. She then started pulling out of the stand next to my chair in the den all the books I have read since about the first of the year, including the one’s I mentioned above there were about 20. I am trying to figure out when I found the time!
I am mostly focused on the science and engineering books but I did read the two books by Thomas Barnett on the Pentagon’s New Map and Friedman’s The World is Flat.
I do want to get the book Michelle mentioned “The Death of the Grownup” that looks good.
Maybe Michelle should put together a recommended book list that we could contribute to. Break it into different categories and let the people here input their favorites. Maybe update it once a month. Might be interesting to see what everyone is reading and recommending
OK back to work now.
-3Steps
Ah, I see where you’re coming from now. It wasn’t, however, meant seriously. It was merely a sarcastic response to the condescending nature of the Pat Schroeder article.
Also, you shouldn’t be so sensitive about your status. I’ve always considered raising kids a full time job, and every bit as important as ‘bread-winning’ is to the health of a family.
Next thing we’ll here is that liberals see more documentaries…
If only we’d like Michael Moore’s movies…
The book I have been reading lately is called “The Trivium” by Sister Miriam Joseph. Quite a book about grammar, logic, and rhetoric. Not for any weak-minded liberals
oops. I meant “hear” not “here”. What an illiterate I am !
I should have never read what that stupid moonbat said. All it did was piss me off. I would venture a guess that most of the people reading this blog are conservatives and have read at least 3 or 4 difficult books on some technical subject and a dozen or so for entertainment. Reading jah’s comment I went back and counted some of the books I read last year. Seven technical books on math and programming, the Qur’an, and about one Science Fiction book a week
It would be interesting to see a list of the books Schoder read last year then quez her on the books. I bet the moonbat would start crying.
3Steps,
Since you have jumped to a conclusion, let me remind you of exactly what was said. I said that MOST kids who cannot read or will NOT read are from Democrat families….minorities in particular.
I did NOT mention ONE word about handicaps or disorders.
I have taught Language Arts in the public schools for many many years.
I know what I said is a FACT.
I think Liberals believe there are only two books that Conservatives do read:
1. The Bible
2. My Pet Goat
Seems to be the only reading material referenced in liberal blogs when discussing conservatives….
We haven’t read the 9/11 report…..
We haven’t read the Iraq Study Group …
( Amazingly, when you read the liberal comments – it appears that they haven’t either… )
Same here. I have read more in the last 4 years since I have been hooked on blogs!
She can stick that on a poll and sit on it!
On August 22nd, 2007 at 12:22 pm, On-my-soap-box said:
ShePat Schroeder can stick that on a poll and sit on it!Sorry, I fixed it!
I’m in full agreement with Tantor in #50 above. The beauty of being a member of the [Alternative] “Reality-Based Community is how easily the illusion becomes reality, and vice versa.
I’m also in full concurrence with those who have pointed out that it’s not reading in and of itself, but the quality of what is read that is key. That the poll in question doesn’t differentiate between the Federalist Papers and a comic book makes it impossible to rely on it as a guage of anything meaningful.
Ann Coulter in her book Slander addresses a point that Schroeder unwittingly reinforces so poignantly: the primary appeal of liberalism is to snobbery. Specifically, the desire to feel morally and intellectually superior, without necessarily engaging in the skull-sweat required to actually earn either of those qualities.
This attitude of “feeling is good enough” leads inexorably to one of the Hobgoblins of Liberal Minds: Mental laziness. Which in turn leads to casually perceiving conservatives in terms of unexamined assumptions, malicious caricatures and deliberate stereotypes – just like Schroeder does.
For her to look down her nose at conservatives as only looking for slogans to live by, while turning a blind eye to liberals’ critical dependence on the same, is projection at its most pathetic. Take away liberals’ crutches of slogans, canards, cliches and logical fallacies, and their ability to debate quickly breaks down into comparing others to historical Nazi figures.
On a related note, in the same book mentioned above Coulter provided numerous examples of how this false presumption of a priori superiority leads liberal publishers and book reviewers to reflexively insert “surprise” before “best seller” when the authors are conservative – as if to say, “Oh my gosh, you mean that some of them can read AND write?!?”
Liberals claim to hate hypocrisy; I say there’s something even worse, and I see it all the time in libs like Schroeder: pretentiousness.
/rant
Everybody has a “photographic memory.” Some just don’t have any film.
HAHAHAHA! Michelle write funny Title to post. Me laugh long time!
I do not doubt for a second that self-identified liberals buy more books. It is a type of status in those circles. Whether they read more is another question. Since real people work, I wonder if reading on the job counts. I do about 200 pages a day in multiple areas. Hmmm
I actually think this photo would be better for this article then the caveman one
http://hotair.cachefly.net/hotair.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2006/11/carry-large.jpg
Yes, Pat: My husband and I – both conservatives – have a personal library of over 1,000 books.
When we go anywhere, we each always have at least one book with us.
She’d probably lobby to reduce the number of religious books available – can’t have people reading things she disapproves of!
Keep in mind that, when conservatives and Republicans debate liberals and Democrats and the liberal/Democrat is losing – they resort to name-calling, outlandish theories, and hysteria.
Yeah – those are the marks of well-read individuals.
I read an average of 10-15 books a year, both fiction and non-fiction. Definitely not a liberal.
I see the Cavemen in that balcony-setting commercial, having a different conversation….
Caveman #1: “What did you expect?”
Caveman #2: “What, reading books makes me less of a caveman?”
Caveman #1: “I think, just a little loyalty, is what we’re talking about.”
Caveman #3: “Hey guys, Michelle Malkin and Laura Ingraham are here – we’re gonna do shadow hand puppets!”
Caveman #1: “Not now”
Looks like the Yahoo news version of this story may have been revised.
At the bottom now, an editor’s note reads: “This version CLARIFIES that people in the West and Midwest are more likely to read at least one book a year, but that Southerners who do read tend to read more books.”
me zorg.
me kunservutiv.
me say buks gud.
gud gud gud.
me lik tu reed buk about spot.
spot run.
run run run.
Cavemen #3 must be a liberal. If Michelle and Laura walked in the room the last thing on my mind would be shadow hand pupets!
Did you reed the seekwal bout Jane?
The old quote “quality, not quantity” comes to mind. I could read more books if I wasn’t working!
me reed jane buk to.
jane run aftur spot.
run run run.
Conservative reading: “Run Spot Run”
Liberal Reading: “Why Conservatives Make Spot Run”, by PETA.
pee ess.
nukles sore.
nukles drag on grownd.
no walk up rite yet.
You guys are getting to worked up about some old ,dried up, lying, liberal,c$%&. If I said it Michelle would ban me for life.
Standard stuff. Outrageous claim, carefully selected data taken somewhat out of context, political agenda transparently displayed – about what you’d expect from the American Left these days.
Myself, my reading has dropped off since getting married. I doubt I read more than three or four books per year now. Lots of other stuff, tho. Blogs, newspapers, magazines, etc.
Seems to me the Bible should count as more than one book.
“Myself, my reading has dropped off since getting married. I doubt I read more than three or four books per year now. Lots of other stuff, tho. Blogs, newspapers, magazines, etc.”
Isn’t that the point the left makes when there’s discussions about how there’s a drop-off in reading liberal media material like the NY Times?
Who is to say that – even if these numbers are correct – that conservatives are any less readers of material from other sources?
What types of books are the reading? ….who gives a hoot how many books you read! Go-Dog-Go and The Cat in The Hat, shouldn’t count.
PS..A Million Little Pieces by James Frey shouldn’t count either….
haha speaking of non-reading liberals, this one will apply directly to you, michelle!
you came and spoke at my school (Loyola Marymount) last year. Of course, all of the “intelligent” liberals who hate you had never even been to your website or even touched one of your books.
I was walking to class with a liberal “friend” and she asked me what i was doing that night. I told her i was going to go see michelle malkin. Her highly intellectual response was: “But isn’t she like, racist?” I told her no, just because someone is conservative doesn’t make them racist, and I asked her if she had ever read any of your books or blogs. She of course said no! So i told her to go check our your stuff and then decide for herself.
It was equally amusing when the next morning i went to class, and my “downtrodden minority” teacher asked if anyone went to see you speak, and I was the ONLY ONE, out of the entire class who even went! Then my teacher proceeded to insult you and talk about how wrong it is that our school is “endorsing” your beliefs (during “free speech” week…i guess only liberal speech is free speech). I told her that she shouldn’t be talking since she didnt even take the time to go hear what you had to say. she had no response.
wow, this is getting long…sorry. the point is that liberals don’t bother to read sh*t, and don’t even know what they are arguing against most of the time. its like they have a manual of “people to hate” and then spout off “racist,sexist, homophobe, xenophobe, nazi, fascist, etc.” when they hear the trigger name. it is pathetic.
The emperor has no clothes. These liberals feign intellectualism, but what little of it cloaking them is being excorticated by the truth. Funny thing is, they are doing all this to themselves. Let them keep talking while we revel in the irony.
So glad you changed the picture! The one I saw this morning was really scary.
err.. ya.. you are right. I am overly sensitive about it due to the fact that liberals tend to treat stay at home moms as complete morons. Sorry.
I have no idea how many books I have read over the last year. Having been a grad student/elementary ed major, a lot of my reading over the last two years was textbooks. But, I’ve read other stuff, too. Since graduating, I’ve done reading for entertainment and reading of children’s lit. Right now, I’m reading Home of the Brave by Casper Weinburger. Most of my “heavy” reading of current events/politics comes from the internet. When I read a book, I’m generally wanting to get away from all the “heavy” of what is going on in the world today…
Point being, I wasn’t polled, and even if I had been, I’d have been hard-pressed to give an accurate count of “books read” over the last year. The fact that I’ve read at least a dozen children’s books over the last year shouldn’t count the same as someone who has read an equal number of “adult” reading. Who was it that brought up “quality vs. quantity”?? Of course, one can’t underestimate some children’s lit’s subtle (or not) attempts to indoctrinate children to liberal views. That’s precisely why I’m reading all those children’s books – I want to know what kind of reading material I’m either providing or recommending to students…
So Pat thinks that that reading nine books a year (as the average book-reading liberal does) is “peeling the onion” but reading eight books a year (the average book-reading conservative) isn’t. What does that make the five-book moderates? She must think they’re one step from brain dead.
Way to woo those swing voters, Pat.
I Perfur to be called a troglodyte