By Ben Cohen
Michelle Malkin's latest wheeze is take on Matt Taibbi in a battle of the talking heads. The problem is, Michelle Malkin has the prosaic flair of a retarded chimpanzee, while Taibbi is almost universally recognized as the sharpest satirist around.
Taibbi acutely captured Malkin in his recent post on the 'Tea Baggers', referring to her as 'A mean little dunce who’s wedged herself into a nicely paying career as
a GOP spokesclown.'
Malkin shot back as best she could, calling Taibbi a 'Vulgarian', then attempting to pay him a back handed compliment when comparing him to Anderson Cooper (who has got in on the Tea Bag jokes himself):
Taibbi at least had the courage of his sexual predelictions not to hide coyly behind innuendo.
Anderson Cooper doesn’t have the ba…
I suspect Malkin's use of three moderately sophisticated words (predilictions, coyly, and innuendo) and thinly veiled homophobia is an attempt to prove herself a worthy wordsmith. Deep down, Taibbi's assessment of her writing (quote: "Michelle Malkin’s writing was on the edge of unreadable; she’s sort of
like Ann Coulter, only without that tiny fraction of P.T. Barnum/Mick
Jagger-esque self-promotional flair that makes Coulter at least vaguely
interesting") has made her feel slightly insecure. Malkin directs her viciousness mostly at Anderson Cooper because she knows getting in to a slanging match with Taibbi would be suicidal.
Malkin undersatnds full well why she is successful - she appeals to stupid white people who love to see minorities bash other minorities. Once she ventures outside of this safe haven of anti intellectualism, her vulnerabilities as a third rate journalist become all too apparent. While sickly sweet CNN liberals won't say much, serious journalists with real talent will. So Michelle, a word of advice. Stick to the shallow end of the pool, and don't dive into the deep end. You'll drown pretty quick.