Mike Veeshir (mail):
Are you pulling a lysistrata on him until he condemns all Muslims or something? If so, throw down. Or go down.

I love Dean like a brother, actually, I like him more than my brother. But he's been attacking strawmen for a couple of weeks now.

I'm beginning to wonder if it's some sort of test or something.
9.28.2006 8:42am
Rosemary, Queen of All Evil (mail):
No. I'm sick of his shit. Out of respect, I won't shit on him in his comments but I will say it like it is here. I will not let his attack on conservatives pass. What does he want from us? Maybe all of our posts should mimick Seinfeld's approach to homosexuality? Not that there is anything wrong with that...

I'm beginning to wonder if it's some sort of test or something.

NO. It's typical (I can but you can't)Dean. He attacks people most personally, then has a fit of temper when he gets it in return. I HATE that about him.
9.28.2006 9:09am
Mike Veeshir (mail):
I have a feeling dinner at the Esmay household tonight is going to be interesting.
9.28.2006 9:24am
Rosemary, Queen of All Evil (mail):
Nah, neither one of us has ever held back. He will be completely unsurprised by my reaction. Trust me.
9.28.2006 9:44am
Mark Adams, who's always correct, get used to it. (mail) (www):
Mike, this ain't nothing new. It may have just come to the surface (again) because Rose has been putting too much roughage (spinach) in his diet. ;-)

That boy needs Zoloft, period.
9.28.2006 10:13am
double-plus-ungood (mail) (www):
This may be news to some, but I have had some diffulties with Dean on a couple of occasions. But kudos to him for his stance on Muslimophobia. It's an honorable position, and must be tough taking fire from those who are usually on his own side.

But the overreacting thing? Well, yeah, duh.
9.28.2006 1:31pm
double-plus-ungood (mail) (www):
By the way, if anyone wants examples of what Dean's talking about, compare her recent defense of some Indonesian terrorists versus her earlier condemnation of different Indonesian terrorists. The ones she defends? Christians. Guess what religion the ones she condemns are?

She's a buffoon.
9.28.2006 1:36pm
Dean Esmay (www):
It ain't no fucking straw man. Michelle Malkin has publicly stated that she no longer uses the terms "muslim extremists" or "radicals" or "Islamo-fascist" and usually only refers now to Muslims.

What do I want? I want her and others who have the same habit to stop it. I'd like her to stop it. I'd like Rusty Shackleford to stop it. I'd like Rosemary Esmay to stop it too. Since all of those bloggers and more are guilty of this behavior, it doesn't seem at all unreasonable to ask them to stop. Spitting on our allies is no way to win a war.
9.28.2006 1:55pm
Mike Veeshir (mail):
Michelle Malkin has publicly stated that she no longer uses the terms "muslim extremists" or "radicals" or "Islamo-fascist" and usually only refers now to Muslims.

I don't read Michele much, but that doesn't sound right.

Links please.

Also, "usually only...", what other terms does she use?
9.28.2006 2:12pm
Rhianna (mail) (www):
Bwahahahaha.

That boy needs Zoloft, period.


I'm sorry that just tickled me beyond the norm. I don't doubt that spinich, raw "fresh" spinich has reared it's ecoli head around the Esmay household of late. ;)


Even when Rose and I disagree, which is actually not that unusual, I respect her. She stands her ground and I don't doubt for a second Dean knows it, and probably gets tired of being called a spade when he's actin' like a spade. The fact you pissed him off proves something you said hit home...and he doesn't like that very much.
9.28.2006 2:46pm
Rosemary, Queen of All Evil (mail):
It ain't no fucking straw man. Michelle Malkin has publicly stated that she no longer uses the terms "muslim extremists" or "radicals" or "Islamo-fascist" and usually only refers now to Muslims....What do I want? I want her and others who have the same habit to stop it. I'd like her to stop it. I'd like Rusty Shackleford to stop it. I'd like Rosemary Esmay to stop it too.

You are full of shit. I do not purposely refer to terrorists as simply muslims. I go out of my way to not paint ALL muslims as knife wielding psychos.

So, put up some links or seriously shut the fuck up.
9.28.2006 3:08pm
Juliette (mail) (www):
LOL, Rosemary. Now that's love!
9.28.2006 3:17pm
Sandi (www):
Dean,
It ain't no fucking straw man. Michelle Malkin has publicly stated that she no longer uses the terms "muslim extremists" or "radicals" or "Islamo-fascist" and usually only refers now to Muslims.
Yeah, that's similar to what you said on your blog, and when asked for a link you there your reply was:
It was recent but I can't find it. So you'll just have to take my word for it. Or just look at her recent pronouncements: does she make a distinction between everyday Muslims and the murdering fascist bastards? I don't think she does.
WTF kind of answer is that after making such stinging charges?

I've always had a lot of respect for you Dean, but it had dropped a few notches. I know that probably doesn't matter to you, but it does to me, and it makes me very sad.
9.28.2006 3:30pm
Sandi (www):
And BTW if I was going to make such strong charges I would certainly not submit the post until I could point to an example or two (and I think just about any other blogger would do the same).
9.28.2006 3:34pm
derek:
It's really not that difficult to find the Michelle Malkin comment Dean wrote about (but didn't reference himself).

"But I stopped using the terms "Islamic fascist" and "Islamofascism" a while ago, though, because they obscure rather than clarify. The views held by the Muslim jihadis who want to destroy us are not marginal views held only by a minority of "Islamic fascists."" (The threat level of jihad, Aug 8, 2006)

Apparently, the word she's using now is jihadis(ts). It's not a collective "Muslims". It's a specific group. From the same post....

"Contrast Eteraz's (Link added) insights with this worthless piece of jihadi apologism in the Washington Post from one Ahmed Rashid.

"For jihadists, every day is a Code Red day. Jihad has been knocking for centuries."


From a post written today, she suggests "As in real life, it seems some liberals think President Bush and patriotism are greater threats than jihadists and terrorism". (How do liberals sleep?, Sep 28, 2006)

I may have missed it, but I don't recall her ever saying that all Muslims are jihadis.
9.28.2006 4:18pm
Mark Adams, who's always correct, get used to it. (mail) (www):
Boy are they gonna have GREAT make-up sex after all this foreplay.
9.28.2006 4:35pm
double-plus-ungood (mail) (www):
I may have missed it, but I don't recall her ever saying that all Muslims are jihadis.

She does seem to think that the majority are, though:
The views held by the Muslim jihadis who want to destroy us are not marginal views held only by a minority of "Islamic fascists."
Which would support Dean's point.
9.28.2006 4:37pm
derek:
Possibly. But I'd offer that "not marginal" is not the same as "all encompassing."
9.28.2006 4:48pm
Rosemary, Queen of All Evil (mail):
Which would support Dean's point.

Well, it would help if Dean supported his point with what we bloggers like to call links. "You'll have to take my word for it" just doesn't fly.
9.28.2006 4:49pm
pam (mail) (www):
++- Did you miss the part where the statement was in reference to this poll?
9.28.2006 4:52pm
derek:
It wasn't that hard to find the post. "Stopped" and "terms" in the search box pulled it right up.

It also would have helped if the comments had maintained the tone hoped for in the first paragraph of the original post.
9.28.2006 5:01pm
pam (mail) (www):
Mark- Nice :)
9.28.2006 5:10pm
double-plus-ungood (mail) (www):
Pam: ++- Did you miss the part where the statement was in reference to this poll?

What exactly is your point? The poll seems to disprove Malkin's statement.
9.28.2006 5:39pm
double-plus-ungood (mail) (www):
...it would help if Dean supported his point with what we bloggers like to call links. "You'll have to take my word for it" just doesn't fly.

Well, yes, I think I've mentioned Dean's online style a few times, have I not?
9.28.2006 5:40pm
snelson (mail):
Oh, don't worry, Michelle is taking him as seriosly as he deserves.


I'll take Brigitte and Wafa Sultan and Aayan Hirsi Ali and Nonie Darwish over the Dhimmi Esmays of the world any day.
9.28.2006 10:17pm
Tom Hawkson (mail) (www):
"You'll have to take my word for it" just doesn't fly.

I'd like to point out that Dean's memory was, however, basically accurate. We did find the quote, didn't we?

As far as the general point, I think Dean and I both condemn Communism in general. Not militant extremists who hijacked Communism. Communism. Period. Does that mean we betrayed the billion Communist Chinese who were our allies during the Cold War?

I know it's not a perfect analogy. Analogies are, by their nature, imperfect. But I think it is useful to compare and contrast.

Yours,
Wince
9.29.2006 10:32am
double-plus-ungood (mail) (www):
Does that mean we betrayed the billion Communist Chinese who were our allies during the Cold War?

Say what? Allies? Your? Huh?
9.29.2006 10:41am
Mark Adams, who's always correct, get used to it. (mail) (www):
Just for fun, in case you missed this smack-down (or is that, "Ack-smay Own-day?").
9.29.2006 10:45am
Tom Hawkson (mail) (www):
++ungood,

Yes, after Nixon played the China card, they were our allies against the Soviets.

Yours,
Wince
9.29.2006 10:56am
Mark Adams, who's always correct, get used to it. (mail) (www):
Wince, OMG did I ever read that too fast.

In my head I substituted WWII for Cold War, and Stalin's USSR for Mao's China -- because I literally couldn't wrap my head around what you actually wrote.

Don't help, Wince. Seriously, don't help.
9.29.2006 10:58am
Tom Hawkson (mail) (www):
Mark,

Another good example. Have Dean and I betrayed the hundreds of millions of Communists who were our allies during WWII?

Yours,
Wince
9.29.2006 11:19am
derek:
I'd like to point out that Dean's memory was, however, basically accurate. We did find the quote, didn't we?

Yes, "we" found the quote. No, his memory was not basically accurate. He got it half-right, and got his knickers in a a knot over something she didn't say.
9.29.2006 1:33pm
double-plus-ungood (mail) (www):
Yes, after Nixon played the China card, they were our allies against the Soviets.

I thought you weren't a drug user. And can I have some?
9.29.2006 1:53pm
Mark Adams, who's always correct, get used to it. (mail) (www):
Wince, Dean has to get himself out of this pickle. Nothing you can say will rehabilitate this self-destructive episode.

His baser instincts showed their ugly head for the world to see, and his reputation, quite justly, has taken a long awaited kick in the ass.

His argument was weak and unsubstantiated. His lack of class and self-resraint led him not only to accuse an erstwhile ally of treason, but also allowed his anger to spill over to his comment section in a manner he usually reserves for private e-mails instead of public consuption.

He's going to take some well deserved licks for this. But of course, as a newly published author any publicity is good, especially when you're between jobs.

As for your non sequitur re: communism. There is a difference, as you well know, between disagreement and betrayal.

I'll also note that it's often the case where someone who takes an extreme position against a particular idea, like communism, becomes obsessed with a reactionary phobia condemning that idea and anything remotely associated with it. It's irrational, yet understandable. Unfortunately it closes one off to any semblence of moderation.
9.29.2006 2:19pm
Tom Hawkson (mail) (www):
Mark,

Nothing you can say will rehabilitate this self-destructive episode.

I'm not trying to rehabilitate the episode. I would like to convince Dean to behave differently. But that almost never works. Sometimes I think the only person around here other than myself who has changed his or her behavior due to my influence is you.

It's not a non sequitur, either. The form of the argument is the same as the form of the argument Dean made. Therefore if Brian Macker is a traitor against our Islamic allies, Dean and I must be traitors against our Communist allies. I think that is ridiculous, so consider it reductio ad absurdum against Dean's position.

Yours,
Wince
9.29.2006 2:48pm
pam (mail) (www):
Mark- I actually have a greater appreciation for what you have been saying about Dean.
9.29.2006 3:04pm
Mark Adams, who's always correct, get used to it. (mail) (www):
Wince:
so consider it reductio ad absurdum against Dean's position.


Doh! Sorry dude. This actifed I'm taking for my head cold is clouding my brain. Of course it was ridiculous. What's even more ridiculous is me thinking you were serious. My bad.

Pam! Atta girl!
9.29.2006 4:23pm
Tom Hawkson (mail) (www):
++ungood,

I thought you weren't a drug user. And can I have some?

Well, I'd like to avoid the jail time, but Actifed is working for Mark.

Yours,
Wince
9.29.2006 4:41pm