ash sent this letter to Mike and her readers with a scanned copy of the article she’s responding to to demonstrate that she had a hard copy version of the paper on the day in question. No, she didn’t buy one. She received one apparently as an enticement to subscribe, though it was mere weeks after her cancellation. It seems that, in the classic formulation of the right hand working separately from the left, nobody bothered to check whether she made a likely candidate. In fact, later that day, the paper called to offer her quite a discount. Not surprisingly, she declined:
Goodness gracious. All that eliminationist language poking through the veneer of steely resolve, righteous defiance, and super-patriotism in Michelle Malkin’s latest “column.”
I put “column” in quotations because, until I encountered it in our paper, I assumed Malkin’s instant artifact of lousy literature was a section lifted from the assorted hysterical rantings on her blog. Indeed, I first read it on a liberal website framed by hilarious ridicule so penetrating that Malkin, were she capable of embarassment on both the concept and execution levels, would have begged to retract the whole unsalvageable mess. Or, short of that, labeled it satire, if poorly done at best.
And did you notice? Even a conservative, pseudo-feminist Malkin would have dubbed herself the “JANE Doe” alternative to Everyman John. I suppose we should credit her with consistent prejudice against her own demographics. While in this instance it was gender, some years ago the ethnically Oriental Malkin wrote an entire book defending Japanese-American internment during World War II. No doubt the irony of self-loathing in the context of lashing out at The Foreigner is lost on Michelle.
While Malkin’s magnificent manifesto may be useful as a litmus test for liberal vs. conservative self-identification (did you shake your head in astonishment or cheer her on?), essentially the essay serves as a prototype for what I call flunking The Purpose of Life.