I completely missed Michelle Malkin’s column on Kathleen Sebelius until I stumbled on the Raw Story’s attack on Malkin for writing it. Tom Bogg gratuitously brought up a video Malkin made many years ago because it served his purpose to find stuff he thought he could use to make her look stupid.
(For the record, I disagree with Malkin when she preaches war as if anything we’ve done in the last decade has had any effect other than degrade our national security—which was the point of her cheerleader video. So I’m not defending her here out of some kind of ideological loyalty.)
The other thing Bogg uses against Malkin is her rhetoric. She is a “rage sprite.” Malkin allegedly portrays Sebelius as “some kind of Russian Czarina thug gangster dominiatrix.” She fails to be “subtle and nuanced” because she uses the word “thuggery” in her headline and refers to Sebelius as a “Czarina.” Oddly, I remember mainstream news reporting in 2009 about Obama appointing a large number of “Czars.” So it isn’t like Malkin invented the term in the context of the Obama Adminstration. It has come up before.
But Malkin also used “brass knuckles” and “whip” as metaphors for Sebelius intimidation tactics. What is missing from her piece is any reference to the S&M imagery that Tom Bogg mixes in with his critique of Malkin’s rhetoric. I can’t figure out what Bogg is thinking. If it Malkin’s word-imagery is wrong, then his is worse. So what is left of his criticism? It is self-refuting.
Bogg thinks he needs to use his degrading sexual imagery to respond to Malkin for simply using the wrong rhetoric. Compare that to Malkin in her original column who is responding to real deception and abuse of power—intimidation tactics designed to keep the truth hidden. She writes that,
Sebelius wrote America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), the national association of health insurers, “calling on their members to stop using scare tactics and misinformation to falsely blame premium increases for 2011 on the patient protections in the Affordable Care Act.” The threatening cease-and-desist letter commanded: “I urge you to inform your members that there will be zero tolerance for this type of misinformation and unjustified rate increases. … Simply stated, we will not stand idly by as insurers blame their premium hikes and increased profits on the requirement that they provide consumers with basic protections.”
The “misinformation” was, of course, completely true, and the media is admitting to it now. Sebelius used her office and her leverage to censor speech. Again:
Health care policy analyst Merrill Matthews points out that Sebelius cracked her whip against health insurer Humana even before the law had passed. When the insurer warned seniors that an Obamacare proposal to cut reimbursements could harm their Medicare Advantage benefits and coverage, Sebelius demanded that the company “suspend potentially misleading mailings to beneficiaries about health care and insurance reform.”
Once again, the claims Sebelius opposed were utterly true.
Malkin also documents several other brutalities. She proves Sebelius is a lying, bullying, false-accuser. It isn’t funny. And Sebelius isn’t anything so poised as a dominatrix. She’s just a control-freak sociopath. This doesn’t bother Bogg, but Malkin’s “ragesplaining” does.
Bogg, if you don’t feel rage, you’re either really stupid or a sociopath too. Think about your priorities. I’m sorry that someone you despise as much as Michelle Malkin happens to be right on an important issue on which you have been blind, but the mark of maturity (that you seem to want to ascribe to yourself) is to receive the truth no matter who says it or in what form. Just because you don’t think much of Malkin doesn’t justify Kathleen Sebelius.
She’s a witch and you know it.