But you’re a hater, too

Recovered from the Wayback Machine.

Last of the posts related to Malkin, I promise, but I did want to address one more comment from the “In Defense of Malkin” post. And then I’ll bid this particular topic of discussion good-bye. (I have a bet with someone that Malkin will be in the Technorati Top 20 by the time the election occurs–helped more by those who disagree with her, than those who agree–and wouldn’t want him to think I’m loading the boards.)

Jeneane left the following comment:

I think, quite frankly, she is a perfect example of not being able to take what she dishes out.

She writes – “What I take away from all this is that the Democrat Party waterboys in the media are in full desperation mode.”

What I take away from it is that the Republican Party sorority girls are in the “oops–I got caught chewing gum and twirling my hair” mode.

What continues to blow my mind is HOW any individual of any ethnicity other than REALLY WHITE can support the current administration, which has such a vehmently fundamental misunderstanding of the Bible that they really, honestly don’t believe some of us belong here.

How you can be anything other than REALLY WHITE FUNDAMENTALIST CHRISTIAN and still support Bush–I don’t understand. How do you parse Ashcroft, Rummy, Cheney, and George with who you are? I’m interested in hearing how.

Michelle Malkin isn’t white (her parents are immigrants from the Philippines), and is a vehement supporter of George Bush. Jeneane doesn’t understand this, or how anyone who isn’t white or fundamentalist Christian could vote for Bush. (Malkin is a religious conservative.)

I expect there to be any number of non-white, non-Christian supporters of Bush, for whatever reason. In nine weeks, I believe we’ll have one of the closest Presidential races we’ve had in history. Which means that unless we want to accuse half the country of being evil, stupid, or morally bankrupt, we’ll just have to assume that those who choose not to vote ‘our way’, whatever ‘our way’ is, will have good reasons for their vote.

My father is a Republican. He’ll be voting for George Bush. Though he is white, he’s not a fundamentalist Christian. He’s not evil, either, but he’ll still vote for Bush.

My mother is also a Republican, but this year I helped convince her to vote for John Kerry. Go me. Now, to Republicans, they shouldn’t assume that because my mother is voting for Kerry that she’s evil.

Now, me? I am evil. Bwahahahahaha!

Sorry. This isn’t to belittle Jeneane’s question because her comment is critical to our discussions now. I hope those who are not Christian and/or white and who are voting for Bush, in fact all people voting for Bush, will take a moment and respond–thoughtfully– to Jeneane in the comments or their own weblogs. To be honest, I wouldn’t mind hearing from folks why they’re voting for Bush myself. Those voting for Kerry are invited to do the same.

Among all the screamers on both sides of this fence, the intolerant and the angry and the unforgiving and those filled with absolute surety of rightness, there must be reasonable people who understand that those who choose differently are not evil or stupid. If not, I worry about what will happen in nine weeks when almost 50% of the country is disappointed when their man is not picked. We can’t continue to maintain this level of animosity.

The world will be watching this election, and many will be reading what we say. Those outside our borders should also be able to read why we’re making the decisions we are in nine weeks – but without the accompaniment of invective, and accusations of ‘traitor’ and ‘hater’.

In another comment about Malkin, I read, …Malkin is a hater. No different than any KKKer–that’s truly what makes her most unattractive.

So spoke someone who would be shocked if you quietly said to him, “But you’re a hater, too.”

Print Friendly, PDF & Email