The Radio Equalizer: Brian Maloney

20 November 2005

When To Respond?

FIGHTING BACK

Leftist Attacks Increasingly Personal



Michelle MalkinSparking a rare Sunday blogswarm, Michelle Malkin today pounds leftist critics who've recently been stepping up personal attacks:



During one of countless book-related radio interviews this week, a liberal radio host insultingly asked me whether I write my own column. His question was prompted by vicious anonymous bloggers who portray me as a greedy Asian whore/dupe/brainwashing victim who simply parrots what my white slavemasters program into my empty little head. These critics have stepped up attacks on my husband Jesse as a fanatical right-wing puppeteer orchestrating all I do and say.

I assume these tinfoil-hat wearers also think I'm secretly wired during my TV and radio appearances, speeches, and debates-- you know, just like George Bush.



While I've long felt the best defense is a good offense, when to ignore or respond to critics is always open for debate. Today, Malkin forces the issue to the surface.

If liberals have any real guts, perhaps they'll consider questioning Michelle directly when she appears on WRKO's (680 AM in Boston) Pundit Review, tonight at 9pm EST.

Clearly as a result of her background, Malkin's been subjected to an unusual level of scrutiny in the last several years. However, the lefty oppo research techniques applied to her, are increasingly being used against the rest of us.

One would think we were running for the US Senate, given the time and energy put into this campaign.

How do you know you've made their target list? Look for these signs:


--- When background investigations are no longer limited to mere Google searches, instead heading into the realm of hardball campaign politics. Obtained information suddenly goes beyond your political positions and into personal details.

In the Malkin example, this became clear when opponents began researching her parents, hometown, college record and children, in addition to the extreme (and hypocritical) scrutiny applied to husband Jesse.


--- When every element
of your CV or biography is examined in an effort to find exaggerations or outright dishonesty. If they can't dig up sleaze, they'll resort to enormous leaps.

Case in point: last year, I was nominated for a 2005 Payne Award For Ethics In Journalism. It seemed odd to me, because the University of Oregon program has an ultraliberal reputation. Based on what they consider courage under fire in newsroom settings, the award honors those who've stood their ground in hostile circumstances.

Sure enough, some on the left assumed I'd nominated myself and without any evidence, spread this across the Internet. Simply because someone could do this meant that I must have. That's lefty "logic" in action.


--- When your press
coverage is mischaracterized and taken out of context.

On July 7, 1997, I was compared to Rush Limbaugh in Time Magazine. If you take only the exact story passage, it can be used to make me look like a fringe extremist. Put back into context, it's clear leftist writer Walter Kirn was seeking to make all Nevadans look like redneck loose cannons.

Sure enough, that's what my critics have been recently doing, digging up the original story from now-ancient Internet archives.


--- When they look for the slightest on-air or Internet comment to wildly twist out of proportion.

Recent attacks on Bill Bennett and Bill O'Reilly provide the best examples. Bennett wasn't calling for black babies to be aborted, nor was O'Reilly demanding Islamists destroy San Francisco (not a terribly important global terror target anyway).

Because the left wanted this to be case, however, they simply repeated the statements out of context until most of the public believed it. Intellectual dishonesty at its finest.


--- When anti-blogs are set up to trash yours.

While read by relatively few, these already exist to oppose Michelle, as well as other major bloggers. I've no idea why these people waste their time. There's now an anti-Radio Equalizer site, as well, so I'm happy to join the club.


Even President Bush has realized critics can't always be ignored. Recently, he's begun taking them head-on, a smart move, even if a bit late.

For the rest of us, it's a question of what to ignore and when to respond.



Your Amazon orders that begin with clicks here, regardless of your final purchase selections, help to support this site's efforts. Thanks again!

The Radio Equalizer also recommends the (free) Mozilla Firefox web browser. Packed with features such as tabbed browsing, SessionSaver (makes computer crashes less painful) and dual Google/Yahoo (both at once!) search extensions, I can't imagine using anything else.

18 Comments:

  • Brian,

    I'll bite. Who did nominate you for the Payne Award and why? Would you post a copy of the nomination?

    The Payne Award rules make it clear that anyone can nominate anyone for any reason. So, merely being nominated isn't in itself much of an honor.

    I for one would be interested in reading your nomination.

    By Blogger Krononum, at 20 November, 2005 15:44  

  • The Payne Awards staff at the UO School of Journalism and Communication contacted me in September, 2004.

    Based on research they did into my termination from Seattle's KIRO-AM, the staff wrote an entry. I had the opportunity to decline the nomination if I chose.

    Judging is unrelated to the staff, done mostly by newspaper editors from around the country. The awards have a very leftist reputation, so it did feel a bit strange to be nominated.

    I don't think it's necessary to prove to my detractors that I was legitimately nominated for an award, so I think this explanation is generous enough.

    We conservatives could certainly begin to question your would-be award nominations in the same way, but frankly, it's tacky, so why bother?

    By Blogger Brian Maloney, at 20 November, 2005 17:13  

  • Liberals are punks; they'll even pull this kind of crap on their own (i.e. Alan Colmes). Brian, you and Michelle are just better people than these punks, and they know it.

    By Blogger twin_daddy, at 20 November, 2005 17:17  

  • Hey Brian - this gave me a good laugh, thanks:

    "--- When they look for the slightest on-air or Internet comment to wildly twist out of proportion."

    Things like taking "evidence" like fundraising to conclude Air America is going out of business?

    By Blogger Lyin' Baloney, at 20 November, 2005 17:41  

  • Dear Loserest:

    you wrote:
    --- When your press coverage is mischaracterized and taken out of context. ---

    On July 7, 1997, I was compared to Rush Limbaugh in Time Magazine. If you take only the exact story passage, it can be used to make me look like a fringe extremist. Put back into context, it's clear leftist writer Walter Kirn was seeking to make all Nevadans look like redneck loose cannons.

    You are the one who mischaracterized your mention in Time to make yourself seem impressive in your bio. If the writer of the piece did a liberal hatchet job on you why do you feature that mention in the first line of your bio?

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHa

    also, I love how you weave yourself into your narrative of how right wing pundits are being subjected to the same tactics the right has been using without accountability for years.

    Understand this- you are not a pundit- you are an idiot.I've explained to you, people don't attack you because you are dangerous to anyone. People attack you because you are so deluded, because you are a perfect metaphor for the chickenhawks, the corrupt, the faith based and the irresponsible that are the essence of your ilk. But mostly cause it is so easy and enormously entertaining.

    There will be more and more response to your smears. Board up that glass house, buddy.

    In the meantime enjoy the free publicity- isn't this what you kept emailing me about in the first place?

    By Blogger samseder, at 20 November, 2005 18:58  

  • By Blogger Dick Tuck, at 21 November, 2005 00:07  

  • Leftist racism is quite vile and disgusting.

    By Blogger RUMPLEMINTZ, at 21 November, 2005 00:36  

  • And they seem to flock here, for some odd reason.

    Like shooting fish in a barrel.

    By Blogger Sailor Republica, at 21 November, 2005 04:08  

  • This is not surprising. When people in power have become arrogantly drunk with that power; they respond in a vitriolic and hostile manner in order to maintain that power when they start to lose that power. This is typical of governments, as well.

    Similar to a cornered animal, they feel desparate and will become crazed in order to save themselves. It is a sign of fear, not of strength.

    By Blogger Mark, at 21 November, 2005 05:46  

  • I think you can hear last night's appearance by Michelle right at the main page of the Pundit Review website (I didn't know she was going to be on,
    but will check it out now)

    By Blogger raccoonradio, at 21 November, 2005 13:50  

  • http://www.punditreview.com

    By Blogger raccoonradio, at 21 November, 2005 13:51  

  • My biggest issue with the far Left is, if they don't like someone or something (such as Malkin or Brian's blog), why don't they simply try to beat it fair and square? You know, come out with a news channel of their own to whip Fox News in the ratings.

    Instead, they display an overemotional "off with their heads" mentality that's somewhere between amusing and disturbing.

    For instance, it's not enough to simply dislike Bill O'Reilly -- they want him FIRED, FIRED, FIRED! It's not enough to disagree with Clarence Thomas' decisions -- they want to characterize him as an UNCLE TOM, a SELLOUT! It's not enough to reject Michelle Malkin's ideas -- they want to paint her as an UNHINGED MOONBAT!

    This all seems to stem from the attitude that "anyone who doesn't believe the way I do is obviously an idiot," and it utterly mocks their claim of embracing diversity.

    All I'm saying is, mudslinging is a childish, losing strategy. If you want your power back, offer the American public more than a coiffed New England windsurfer who talks like a Shakespearean actor and disses everything Bush has done since he first came home from the hospital.

    Present some original ideas and strategies that appeal to the average voter ... or a TV network that people actually want to watch. Or a talk radio station that gets better ratings than the Caribbean music format that preceded it.

    Overcome -- don't overkill.

    By Blogger The4thEstate, at 21 November, 2005 14:29  

  • so, the4theestate, what do you then think of the main focus of this blog - to "bring down" Air America Radio and celebrate its failure?

    By Blogger TJ, at 21 November, 2005 15:17  

  • This has gotten surreal!

    "My biggest issue with the far Left is, if they don't like someone or something (such as Malkin or Brian's blog), why don't they simply try to beat it fair and square? You know, come out with a news channel of their own to whip Fox News in the ratings."

    Like say - sign on Air America Radio? Who has to contend with the "off with their heads" mentality here.

    We've got bloggers who have dedicated large portions of time and energy to "bringing down" the aforementioned radio network along with applying intense (and invariably negative) scrutiny to every move they make who then whine when peope start questioning their credentials and self proclaimed "accomplishments?"

    Re: O'Reilly - he didn't like San Francisco's actions and statements, so he said a good idea would be to tell terrorists they're now free to attack that city.

    The man advocates the murder of innocents whose "crime" is to have a difference of opinion with the right, and you take issue with people who think he should lose his job?

    Simply incredible.

    By Blogger Lyin' Baloney, at 21 November, 2005 15:33  

  • Brian sez:

    I don't think it's necessary to prove to my detractors that I was legitimately nominated for an award, so I think this explanation is generous enough.

    My response:

    Brian, your points are once again spurious. You have a lot a nerve claiming that your comment is a generous explaination. You ape people who claim to be journalists. You don't even have the guts to prove or show who nominated you for this "award". That shows you for the coward and possible liar you are.

    You accuse Franken and AAR of every little crime. YOu bleat regularly that you want them to "prove" every accusation you make of these people. Now its your turn put up or shut up. Your refusal to do clouds your "nominination". If you did it yourself thats ok, but be honest about it....do what you want others to do. Bet you won't. This shows how gutless and worthless you are in the public domain regarding communication. Get a real job. Quit pretending to be a pundit and get back to doing a lousy job on radio.

    By Blogger DOC, at 21 November, 2005 15:39  

  • While read by relatively few, these already exist to oppose Michelle, as well as other major bloggers. I've no idea why these people waste their time.

    Those who can, blog. Those who can't, troll.

    There's ample proof in every thread of this blog.

    By Blogger V the K, at 22 November, 2005 09:21  

  • The4thEstate wrote:
    My biggest issue with the far Left is, if they don't like someone or something (such as Malkin or Brian's blog), why don't they simply try to beat it fair and square? You know, come out with a news channel of their own to whip Fox News in the ratings.

    Lyin' Baloney wrote:
    Like say - sign on Air America Radio?

    Well, not exactly ... obviously you'd need a TV network to compete with the Fox News channel.

    However, if you're talking about radio -- specifically talk radio, sure Air America is a stab at competing with the conservatives. It's just not a very effective one.

    Regardless, my point is this: Instead of working so hard to try to get O'Reilly fired, Dr. Laura off the air, etc., why don't you liberals just tune to Air America and help its Arbitron ratings? If enough people feel the way you do, you'll succeed ... and if not, that should tell you how popular your viewpoint is across America.

    Lyin' Baloney wrote:
    Who has to contend with the 'off with their heads' mentality here.

    I just gave you several examples in my last post.

    Lyin' Baloney wrote:
    We've got bloggers who have dedicated large portions of time and energy to "bringing down" the aforementioned radio network along with applying intense (and invariably negative) scrutiny to every move they make who then whine when peope start questioning their credentials and self proclaimed "accomplishments?"

    Welcome to the wonderful world of competition, Lyin'. Gee, isn't this a bit like all those folks on the Left who have dedicated large portions of time and energy to bringing down President Bush, his administration, Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, conservative talk radio in general, Clarence Thomas ... need I go on?

    Let's not pretend to be sweet and innocent here. This is EXACTLY what people on your side of the aisle have been doing for decades. It just isn't working as well nowadays because you no longer have a near-monopoly on the media. And you don't enjoy it much when the mirror is being held up to your own behavior.

    Most of what Brian's doing, however, amounts to giving the other side of the news -- i.e., reporting on Air America's mistakes, misdeeds and mishaps. That's not exactly a campaign to bring down the network; it's more a case of giving us what we're not getting in the mainstream media ... because the mainstream media are so much in bed with the Left, they probably kiss Al Franken goodnight before going to sleep.

    Lyin' Baloney wrote:
    Re: O'Reilly - he didn't like San Francisco's actions and statements, so he said a good idea would be to tell terrorists they're now free to attack that city.

    The man advocates the murder of innocents whose "crime" is to have a difference of opinion with the right, and you take issue with people who think he should lose his job? Simply incredible.


    Oh, please ... spare us the sanctimonious "I'm shocked -- SHOCKED!!!" reaction. That wasn't O'Reilly's point, and you know it. (Either that, or you truly didn't get it the first time.)

    O'Reilly was sarcastically pointing out the hypocrisy in opposing military recruiters in your city, yet expecting that same military to protect you against this nation's enemies.

    Get it now?

    By Blogger The4thEstate, at 23 November, 2005 18:20  

  • TJ wrote:
    so, the4theestate, what do you then think of the main focus of this blog - to "bring down" Air America Radio and celebrate its failure?

    -- Well, I don't think that IS the main focus of this blog. I think Brian presents news and information about the broadcast industry from a right-of-center perspective ... and I think he provides plenty of material that we never get from CBS News, CNN, The New York Times, etc.

    If Brian were really striving actively to "bring down" Air America Radio, he'd be urging people to participate in e-mail and letter-writing campaigns, etc.

    As it is, he's a guy with opinions and a blog -- y'know, like thousands of other people around the world. Those who don't like Brian are free to go to www.Google.com and look for a blog that's more to their own tastes.

    But remember ... Al Franken is a guy with opinions and a radio show. Keith Olbermann is a guy with opinions and a TV show. And, like Brian, they're all competing in the marketplace of ideas, hoping to garner the biggest audience.

    There's nothing wrong with that -- on either side of the aisle. That's America.

    My issue with the far Left is that they seem to spend more time trying to destroy successful conservatives than trying to create a more successful alternative.

    Fact is, if Al Franken resonated with the American public as well as Rush Limbaugh does, Air America wouldn't have to go borrowing money from a Boys & Girls Club.

    By Blogger The4thEstate, at 23 November, 2005 18:36  

Post a Comment

<< Home



 
Page Rank Checker

Powered by Blogger