Michelle Malkin » $%^&*!!: Civility and tolerance in the Age of Obama

$%^&*!!: Civility and tolerance in the Age of Obama

By Michelle Malkin • April 22, 2009 09:55 AM

My syndicated column today looks at the outbreak of Obama-esque discourse across the country. Couldn’t even mention some of the misogynist sleaze prompted by the Tea Party movement because newspapers wouln’t print it. And they call us an “unhinged mob?”

***

Civility and tolerance in the Age of Obama
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2009

They told us if Barack Obama were elected, the nation would come together. Souls would be fixed. Spirits would be healed. Public discourse would be elevated. Welcome to civility and tolerance in the Age of Obama:

* Celebrity leech/trash blogger Perez Hilton took to the Internet and TV airwaves to humiliate a beauty pageant contestant who gave what he considered an “offensive” answer about gay marriage. Hilton, inexplicably serving as a judge of the Miss USA contest, had asked Miss California Carrie Prejean whether she supported the legalization of gay marriage. Prejean respectfully answered: “I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. No offense to anybody out there, but that’s how I was raised.” President Obama, by the way, defines marriage the same way Carrie Prejean does.

No matter. Hilton immediately lambasted Prejean as a “dumb b*tch” in a viral YouTube video he taped after the pageant Sunday night. He apologized the next morning for the attack, then retracted his apology, then escalated his divisive rhetoric. On Tuesday afternoon, Hilton told an MSNBC female anchor that he was thinking of an even more vulgar epithet – the “c-word” – as he listened to Prejean’s answer. The female anchor said nothing. Basking in his new role as thought and speech enforcer, Hilton told CNN’s Larry King that beauty pageant contestants must bow to the tolerance mob: “Yes. I do expect Miss USA to be politically correct.”

And apparently, the Miss USA organizers agree. Instead of apologizing for pageant judge Perez Hilton’s vile behavior, the pageant director of the Miss California contest, Keith Lewis, sent a note to Hilton throwing Prejean under the bus: “I am personally saddened and hurt that Miss CA USA 2009 believes marriage rights belong only to a man and a woman…Religious beliefs have no place in politics in the Miss CA family.”

But gutter profanity and misogyny do?

*At the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill last week, former GOP congressman Tom Tancredo came to speak against legislative proposals to provide illegal alien students in-state tuition discounts not available to law-abiding Americans and legal immigrant students. Protesters at the institution of higher learning responded by blocking Tancredo with massive banners and screaming “No dialogue with hate.” Adults in the room stood by while students smashed a window a few feet from where Tancredo stood. Physically threatened, Tancredo was forced to leave without delivering his remarks.

According to campus reports, leftists had prepared for a week to mount a speech-squelching demonstration. The same thuggish tactics have been used at Columbia University, Georgetown University, and Michigan State University to shut down speakers who support strict immigration enforcement. The UNC administration apologized for the students’ tantrum, but took no steps to examine its own culpability for fostering a climate of intellectual vandalism and intolerance.

*The nightly airwaves turned into a soft-porn cesspool last week as liberal journalists derided and slimed hundreds of thousands of Tea Party protesters across the country who oppose reckless taxing and spending by both major political parties. Award-winning CNN anchor Anderson Cooper, mimicking his bottom-of-the-barrel competitors at MSNBC, smugly indulged in sexual puns about “teabagging.” MSNBC devoted the entire week to sophomoric sexual slang and innuendo with references to “nuts,” Dick Armey, and “full-throated” protesters.

And White House adviser David Axelrod calls the Tea Party folks “unhealthy?”

Speaking of unhealthy, angry white liberal actress Janeane Garofalo venomously played the race card: “It’s about hating a black man in the White House. This is racism straight up and is nothing but a bunch of teabagging rednecks.” The theme was echoed by Jeffrey Kimball, a professor emeritus of history at Miami University in Oxford, Ohio, who castigated the “extreme right” for organizing against President Obama because “he’s black and he’s liberal.“ Tell that to the thousands of activists in South Carolina who practically booed and heckled white Republican Rep. Gresham Barrett off the stage at a Tea Party in Greenville last Friday night for supporting the trillion-dollar TARP and embracing the pork-laden stimulus law after voting against it. “Go home!” they shouted. The only color that mattered to protesters: the red ink of government debts.

But in the age of Obama, there’s no room for such nuance and inconvenient truths. A decent young woman is a “dumb b*tch” for holding the same view of marriage as the Obamessiah. A conservative campus speaker is bullied as a hatemonger by wild-eyed hatemongers. A grass-roots movement is debased as a bunch of racist vulgarians by a media mob of racists and vulgarians. Civility and tolerance have taken a left-hand turn down a one-way street. So much for changing course.

***

B. Daniel Blatt at GayPatriot:

Why do so many refuse to acknowledge the legitimate objections some people have to state recognition of gay marriage and hesitate to challenge them on the level of ideas? Why do they resort to name-calling as a means of discourse?

Their preference for slurring gay marriage opponents parallels the way they and their peers respond to the Tea Parties. Instead of listening to their adversaries’ arguments and acknowledging the sincerity of their concerns, they treat them as a bully treats the defenseless kid on the playground.

They think they can get away with it because the MSM encourages their insults. And doesn’t hold them to account for their mean-spirited attempts to demean their adversaries.

Our society could gain by a serious discussion of gay marriage. Gay people in particular would benefit from such a conversation. Yet, the supposed advocates of this change would rather score points in some imaginary contest with conservatives than make a point about the social benefits of extending the benefits of marriage to same-sex couples.

Posted in: Double standards, Tea Party

Printer Friendly

comments (333)

trackbacks (49)

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

Trackback URL

Comments

« Older Comments

#301

On April 22nd, 2009 at 5:30 pm, zeroangel said:

Though I can’t say for certain, I am sure anyone he has “outed” would or has condemned him.
#302

On April 22nd, 2009 at 5:30 pm, jim m said:

The one legal analyst on Fox said she might be able to sue for mental distress and injury based on an employment discrimination claim (Title VII). The others, including the judge, said that she has no case at all.

She almost surely has no defamation case because Hilton’s words would very likely be considered opinions and because it’s quite likely that she’s actually benefitted financially from this, rather than being damages.

And the Title VII situation only applies to discrimination in employment. I think it’s a stretch to say she wasn’t employed by the Miss America organization (or whatever organization) because of her religious beliefs. I don’t think Miss Americas are actually employed by those organizations.
#303

On April 22nd, 2009 at 5:33 pm, thelcabroadside said:

Perez makes a living by being incredibly vulgar and immoral. He loves to play the part of the victim but victimizes everybody who doesn’t agree with his warped sense of morality. Prop. 8 failed because the PEOPLE wanted it to fail.
#304

On April 22nd, 2009 at 5:38 pm, Flag2911 said:

Oh well, just another reason to vote against marriage for homosexuals. Sorry, Perez is such a dork. Wonder why his mother didn’t abort him?
#305

On April 22nd, 2009 at 5:38 pm, Gorebot said:

For people who insist “War is not the answer”, a lot of these L’il Libbies can be exceedingly militant.

The haters exhort hateful outrage. The sexists exhibit barrel-bottom sexism. The free-speechers physically threaten speakers. The tolerant take no prisoners.

And with the help of the LameStreamMedia, they succeed in tagging us as mentally ill (?!?).
#306

On April 22nd, 2009 at 5:38 pm, Mookie said:

I haven’t seen anyone in the gay community condemn him. Helloooo Elen? Rosie? Getting tired of playing by two sets of rules.

Rosie and Perez hate each other.
#307

On April 22nd, 2009 at 5:40 pm, Gorebot said:

BTW, I think I finally figured out where this birth defect “Perez Hilton” came from:

Rosie O’Donnell had a “powerful bad” bowel movement.

My hate speech for the day!
#308

On April 22nd, 2009 at 5:40 pm, ITookTheRedPill said:

Excellent post, as always, Michelle.
#309

On April 22nd, 2009 at 5:41 pm, DBNinKY said:

Americans, on the whole, feel better about their country now than they did just months ago, and the changing of the guard had a lot to do with that.

But that can’t be attributed to Obama’s election alone; the first few months of every new administration brings about a sense of renewed optimism.
#310

On April 22nd, 2009 at 5:43 pm, MNUSMCDavid said:

Can’t wait until they prove a gay gene( well, maybe)…. then the liberals penchant for abortions due to DNA based abnormalities will bite them in the butt….. but there is no gay gene…darn it!
#312

On April 22nd, 2009 at 5:48 pm, prendad said:

Anyone who defends human garbage like this should be forced to marry them (attention OMU, LGM). And, oh by the way, Mario Armando Lavandeira, Jr., I was just wondering, are you still reporting that Castro is dead?
#313

On April 22nd, 2009 at 5:51 pm, ITookTheRedPill said:

As most people know, Perez Hilton is himself a homosexual. So to allow him to ask (and judge) a question about gay marriage in a beauty pagent is a sign of the level of of demoralization (a.k.a. de-moral-ization) that has permeated our society.

And whether people realize it or not, that plays directly into the plans of the Communists.

4 Stages, from De-Moral-ization to Normalization

—

Militant Homosexual KGB “Sleeper” Agents Described Over 25 Years Ago
#315

On April 22nd, 2009 at 5:54 pm, reshas1 said:

She needs to say, when interviewed, that she has the same beliefs that Pres. Obama does”. See what kind of reaction she gets from that.
What low class scum, the girl is all of 20-21???
#317

On April 22nd, 2009 at 6:01 pm, Ragspierre said:

Please, folks…

this is a awful distraction, in some respects, from stuff that is SO much more significant.

If an airliner were hijacked over American air-space, would any of this matter for the next week?

I’m not saying our cultural morality isn’t important…only that other things are far more important, and this is sometimes a distraction.

This Hilton cat…he’s still a member of the human race. If your a religious person, he’s still a child of God, and he could turn around and become something other than the thing he’s chosen to be so far.

Yeah, he’s a despicable little creep…I think almost by acclimation here. He apparently is making a very good living at it, and he’s certainly generated a lot of heat here.

I’m just not certain how much light…
#318

On April 22nd, 2009 at 6:03 pm, Living in the PSRK said:

On April 22nd, 2009 at 2:48 pm, ArizonaNeanderthal said:
There is NO religion that “sanctifies” a marriage between two people of the same gender

Unless you consider the Metropolitan Church. I have always thought that there is a special place in hell for that particular group of blasphemers.

There will be a lot of company for your Metro-Peeps. I got into it with some of the members of that “church” back when I protested at their Pride Marches. (My boys were teens and insisted that we should. I investigated and SAW WITH MY OWN EYES NAMBLA “proudly” marching in the streets of Los Angeles. I had my own big banner and belt even.

I met some good people – mostly other protestors, but a few bystanders, too.)

That there are folks in all religions that are preverting what some believe are “divine Scripture” is really, really twisted. I am so beyond disgusted with Rabbis (I am a Jew) who think that synagogues should have “commitment” ceremonies, that I have “opted out” of joining either of the ones in my town. (There is no Orthodox shul here.)

We even have God’s Word in the Original Language (Hebrew) and it CLEARLY says that it is an abomination. (You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a woman; it is aa abomination (to’evah) Leviticus 18:22)Is that not CLEAR enough for the Rabbis? Do they need a new set of Stone Tablets written by God Himself?!?! (Lesbian acts are denounced in the Talmud and writings of RAMBAM as acts mimicking those in Egypt, which we are forbidden by Torah law.

And there is something from the Midrash:
“Rabbi Huna said in the name of Rabbi Joseph, ‘The generation of the Flood was not wiped out until they wrote marriage documents for the union of a man to a male or to an animal.’”

God promised to never wipe us out by flooding the earth again, but there are still a few other “plagues” up His Sleeve, I assure you.
#319

On April 22nd, 2009 at 6:05 pm, feebiebabe said:

this question shouldnt have been asked, period. didnt the producers clear these questions before? at any rate, Perez (the sexist pig) needs to focus on his mommy issues and stop with his vile.
#320

On April 22nd, 2009 at 6:15 pm, Ragspierre said:

Little bit ago I heard Miss CA express her love for Perez.

Class.

v.

Classless.

She wins.
#322

On April 22nd, 2009 at 6:17 pm, Jeff2161 said:

Hannity has a great interview with her on KFYI. Internet connection available on website.
#323

On April 22nd, 2009 at 6:17 pm, Jeff2161 said:

http://www.kfyi.com/cc-common/ondemand/player.html?world=st
#324

On April 22nd, 2009 at 6:18 pm, Jeff2161 said:

Actually, Miss USA probably has a case since, no one is interviewing her.
#325

On April 22nd, 2009 at 6:21 pm, Chief1942 said:

Nothing Perez says can change the reality that this young lady, no matter the label put upon her, is so far above Perez and his ilk that it isn’t even a contest. She did well not to lower herself into the sewer that they inhabit. No title or crown is worth that.
#327

On April 22nd, 2009 at 6:26 pm, Ragspierre said:

Maybe she will develop into as fine a person as a certain Alaskan beauty we all know…
#328

On April 22nd, 2009 at 6:31 pm, AlohaGuy said:

It’s the religous aspect they hate. Her answer is EXACTLY that of Obama. She gave her opinion, was nice about it, and I suspect will go on with her life. My guess is Hilton will find his core fans less adoring in the future since he basically called them all the C word.
#329

On April 22nd, 2009 at 6:47 pm, FireBlogger said:

Attack, retract, attack again. Looks like the little lady Perez missed a dose of Midol.

Where is Trump on this? He should show he has a pair and stand up for the runner up.

Unless he does he cannot claim to be a real leader, in any capacity.
#330

On April 22nd, 2009 at 6:51 pm, publiuswarmac9999 said:

Jim M: A bunch of excellent points regarding the use of the law. However, you also note that there is a dispute regarding whether certain law applies — and that is part of the reason for a law suit. First, and most important, is to get a complete set of facts. At this point, there is a lot of speculation about the potential for fraud, slander, and discrimination/harassment. Second, how those facts relate to potential arguments under the law is always part of the process as defendants are dropped and added based on findings. Essentially, the law changes as the case develops.

My key point involves not only the potential for damage to Prejean, but to every one of the contestants. If you have to answer based upon whatever shifting sands of political correctness are involved, then you are really in trouble in what is supposedly a freedom loving America. Since we know for sure that Prejean’s freedom of speech was used against her, we can also assume that it was used against someone else and will be done so in the future. I would rather see the Miss USA Pageant gone than tolerate such suppression.
#331

On April 22nd, 2009 at 7:01 pm, inspiredhome said:

The culmination of the insane left finally left me no choice but to write up my own rant. No longer am I going to sit idly by without a word. I am madder than a ferret after a bath!
#333

On April 22nd, 2009 at 7:06 pm, Mookie said:

On April 22nd, 2009 at 6:05 pm, feebiebabe said:

this question shouldnt have been asked, period. didnt the producers clear these questions before?

They did clear them and approved the question.
#335

On April 22nd, 2009 at 7:34 pm, T-Bone said:

But apparently, they didn’t clear the answer.
#336

On April 22nd, 2009 at 7:37 pm, Misscheryl said:

My guess is Hilton will find his core fans less adoring in the future since he basically called them all the C word.

I wish that were true. You are over-estimating the kind of women who follow this…person. I can’t imagine who or why this guy is even in the public spot light. Who is he and why does anyone care. Proof positive our humanity hasn’t kept up with our technology. I’m assuming it is because of the internet that this guy is known on any level..right?
#337

On April 22nd, 2009 at 7:40 pm, Ragspierre said:

If the producers cleared that question…

and threw in the Flaming “Burning branch” they knew had a rep as a trash-talker with an agenda…

IT WAS A SET-UP…!!!

If you knowingly set stuff in motion, you are liable when it happens.

It’s called “foreseeability” in the law, and it’s all over this if what you say is true.
#339

On April 22nd, 2009 at 7:51 pm, Mookie said:

On April 22nd, 2009 at 7:40 pm, Ragspierre said:

If the producers cleared that question…

and threw in the Flaming “Burning branch” they knew had a rep as a trash-talker with an agenda…

IT WAS A SET-UP…!!!

If you knowingly set stuff in motion, you are liable when it happens.

It’s called “foreseeability” in the law, and it’s all over this if what you say is true.

How is it a setup if they didn’t know who would receive the question?
#340

On April 22nd, 2009 at 7:55 pm, Ragspierre said:

How is it a setup if they didn’t know who would receive the question?

It doesn’t matter if it is a dead-bang certainty, or a probability.

If you put in the ingredients and stir the pot…

you are liable for what comes out.

In this case, I can readily see that there were cynical people…believe me, I know the type…who hoped (prayed) for the result they got.

And, it’s working to a fair-thee-well. Look at this thread, for crying out loud!
#341

On April 22nd, 2009 at 8:07 pm, T-Bone said:

Its a setup because if she gave the answer they like, they advanced their agenda by getting Miss America to endorse it. If the contestant does not give the answer they like, they can induce ridicule, shame, call names… and advance their agenda.

Are you sure you can’t see that?
#342

On April 22nd, 2009 at 8:14 pm, Mookie said:

On April 22nd, 2009 at 8:07 pm, T-Bone said:

Its a setup because if she gave the answer they like, they advanced their agenda by getting Miss America to endorse it. If the contestant does not give the answer they like, they can induce ridicule, shame, call names… and advance their agenda.

I’m more inclined to believe that then the conspiracy theories that say she was specifically targeted.
#343

On April 22nd, 2009 at 8:27 pm, T-Bone said:

They may have specifically targeted her. I don’t know. Maybe they knew how she would answer and that’s the answer they really wanted so they can show hate, fear etc. Kinda depends on how they decide the questioner turns etc. That would really be a shame if they went after her.
#344

On April 22nd, 2009 at 8:30 pm, Ragspierre said:

How many contestants at that phase of the pageant?
#345

On April 22nd, 2009 at 8:31 pm, right4life said:

On April 22nd, 2009 at 5:12 pm, Mookie said:
sounds like wishful thinking on your part ‘honey’

think again, I like em under 300lbs..
Hook, line and sinker.

more like TRUTH HURTS.
#346

On April 22nd, 2009 at 8:37 pm, right4life said:

On April 22nd, 2009 at 7:51 pm, Mookie said:

How is it a setup if they didn’t know who would receive the question?

post your proof. lets see it, put up or shut up. ya got nothing…except a few (quite a few) extra lbs….
#347

On April 22nd, 2009 at 8:46 pm, Jeddite said:

post your proof. lets see it, put up or shut up. ya got nothing…except a few (quite a few) extra lbs….

If you’re making the accusation that the question was a set up, the burden of proof falls on the prosecution, not the defense.

Suppose this became actual litigation, the court is not going to demand that the defense prove that it was not a set up – it would be the counsel of the plaintiff to make a case (beyond reasonable doubt) with the onus of proof. The defense would need only establish that there is insufficient evidence to demonstrate that, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the question was a set up.
#348

On April 22nd, 2009 at 9:17 pm, Ragspierre said:

Suppose this became actual litigation, the court is not going to demand that the defense prove that it was not a set up – it would be the counsel of the plaintiff to make a case (beyond reasonable doubt) with the onus of proof. The defense would need only establish that there is insufficient evidence to demonstrate that, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the question was a set up.

A little confusion here about the burden of proof.

You are citing the criminal burden.

Civil litigation involves only “a preponderance” of proof…for most issues. Sometimes, “clear and convincing” for punitive damages.

But once you establish a colorable case by proof, the burden can shift in civil litigation.

But, all that stuff aside, this is…if anything…a court of public opinion. No real rules.

Thus quoth the trial lawyer…
#349

On April 22nd, 2009 at 9:41 pm, Ragspierre said:

C’mon…anybody…

How many contestants at that phase of the pageant when the question was asked?
#351

On April 22nd, 2009 at 10:06 pm, jangar said:

Where’s Omu? This topic should be his paradise!
#352

On April 22nd, 2009 at 10:11 pm, sonofdy said:

Political correctness run amuck. Miss california could have lied and gotten the title, but she stood by her beliefs. Good for her. This confused half little boy, half little girl, simply proved the tyranical nature of the gay brown shirts.
#353

On April 22nd, 2009 at 10:22 pm, feebiebabe said:

Mookie said:

They did clear them and approved the question.

The question shouldn’t have been cleared and shouldn’t have been asked to any contestant. It was a tacky, incendiary question.

And this answer was coming from a gal who lives in California (liberalville)…I can’t imagine the answers would have differed amount any of the contestants much except from maybe Ms. Vermont, Hawaii or Massachusetts.

At any rate, he (it) was completely out of line calling this gal a b and a c word just because the little ingrate didn’t like her answer. Perez is a sexist Pig. After viewing his clip, Ms. California looked like Einstein next to this baffoon.

I know three year olds with a better sense of fashion than this little turd.
#354

On April 22nd, 2009 at 10:23 pm, undresiege said:

Perez Hilton: 37
Those that hate him: 0

He’s loving this. We’ve all done our part. clap, clap, clap, clap, clap,…
#355

On April 22nd, 2009 at 10:26 pm, Ragspierre said:

Miss california could have ~~lied~~ done the PC fence-walk and gotten the title, but she stood by her beliefs. Good for her.

She knew what she was doing, too. Her interviews show she has more stones than most members of Congress.

She expressed Christian love for Perez, and that was class.
#356

On April 22nd, 2009 at 10:27 pm, Mookie said:

The question shouldn’t have been cleared and shouldn’t have been asked to any contestant. It was a tacky, incendiary question.

And this answer was coming from a gal who lives in California (liberalville)…I can’t imagine the answers would have differed amount any of the contestants much except from maybe Ms. Vermont, Hawaii or Massachusetts.

I agree that it should have never been asked but apparently, it has been asked at other pageants. I found that surprising.

Either way, this is the best thing that could have happened to either one of them.
#357

On April 22nd, 2009 at 10:30 pm, undresiege said:

Either way, this is the best thing that could have happened to either one of them.

Y E P
#358

On April 22nd, 2009 at 10:31 pm, Ragspierre said:

Geez, people….

Somebody has to know how many contestants were in this phase of the pageant….

I don’t watch these things, but somebody has to know…
#359

On April 22nd, 2009 at 10:48 pm, Ignatius Reilly said:

Perez Hilton just wanted to be a sissy but now he’s become a c***.
#361

On April 22nd, 2009 at 11:49 pm, fuseman said:

Where is Trump on this? He should show he has a pair and stand up for the runner up.

o’riley is going to interview trump tomorrow.
#363

On April 23rd, 2009 at 2:10 am, miron said:

Why doesn’t the gay/lesbian community have their own “beauty pageants” and leave the Miss USA/America pageant alone? They have to infiltrate everything! Just like they forced eHarmony to serve them against company policy. They are getting so used to inserting themselves where they don’t belong.
#364

On April 23rd, 2009 at 2:31 am, greenLibertarian said:

The ugliness and intolerance of the Left is beyond belief.

If any state goes for secession, I am there!

Seriously, I think the non-Left needs to secede and re-form the USA. Let the Left have the new USSA.
#366

On April 23rd, 2009 at 9:19 am, right4life said:

On April 22nd, 2009 at 8:46 pm, Jeddite said:
post your proof. lets see it, put up or shut up. ya got nothing…except a few (quite a few) extra lbs….
If you’re making the accusation that the question was a set up, the burden of proof falls on the prosecution, not the defense.

simple logic, something that liberals seem to lack…

the organizer’s and the judge’s attitude toward this girl is very obvious…they didn’t want her to win, and they rigged it….

how hard is this???

given that neither of us have access to exactly what went on…lets see liberals rig elections, they rig hollywood so conservatives don’t get jobs…

what would EVER make anyone think these good libs would do ANYTIHNG wrong..
#367

On April 23rd, 2009 at 9:20 am, Ragspierre said:

They are getting so used to inserting themselves where they don’t belong.

Nothing further need be said….

Really.

Nothing. Please.