A teenager in Pakistan gets shot in the head by the Taliban. She is flown to Britain for emergency medical attention and so she can be protected from the threatened follow up attacks.
All 14-year-old Malala Yousufzai wants is for girls in Pakistan to be able to attend school.
The Taliban has issued threats that state Malala will be a target in the future if she continues to promote what they describe as “Western thinking”.
Meanwhile, “progressives” in America continue to cling to the “Islam is a religion of peace” fallacy their tenured, grey pony-tailed “progressive” college professors brainwashed them into believing.
So much so that the Obama White House is conducting a foreign policy based on the unfounded fairy tale that if westerners are just 
nice enough to people who will kill young girls for wanting to go to school, then Islamofascists will like and forgive the west for not being Islamists and not attack the west.
These “progressives” are the same group who believe the vaporous illusion that Islamofascists as reasonable people with whom it is possible to negotiate peace.
They are also the same crowd that insists on fomenting the lie that Conservatives are waging a war on women because Conservatives believe a thirty year old Georgetown University law school graduate should buy her own contraceptives.
Naturally, “progressives” remain steadfastly incapable of understanding why Conservatives find them a bit lacking in the perception, common sense and moral center departments.
You cannot fix stupid, but you can vote it out of office.
Be sure to vote it out of every single office at every level of government on November 6, 2012.
https://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/10/18/progressives-no-puzzle/
Good column Micheal. I can’t understand for the life of me why pro-women liberals champion people like Fluke and not this young girl who just wants to go to school. Incidently, the Taliban who shot her may be 13 or 14 years old himself. The train them young to hate over there.
This article is based on the false assumption that A)liberals can only support one type of person and B)there is no difference between a fundamentalist idiot and a person who practices a religion. As a liberal I think it is terrible that a young woman was shot for going to school. I think her attacker should be punished severely. I also don’t think it was his religion, but how his religious leaders interpreted that religion (mix that with poverty and easy access to firearms, and that’s a problem. I know you probably don’t like Obama’s God and guns comment, but there is an underlying truth to that). We see in this country when homegrown fundamentalist idiots suggest violent acts. In North Carolina a minister at a Baptist church suggested that parents should beat the gay out of homosexual children. Because we have a cultural understanding of Christianity because we live in a predominately Christian culture we know that this fundamentalist idiot’s comment does not reflect the values of all or most Christians. When I was 11 I sat in a Catholic church and listened as my priest extemporaneously commented on how shooting an abortion doctor was wrong if your intention was to kill, but if you were going for a wound it was fine. Of course I knew that his views did not reflect all or most Catholics. One thing you might learn from grey pony tailed tenured professors is perspective. We generally only hear about atrocities like this, because no one takes a picture of a car that isn’t on fire.
As for Sandra Fluke, she was not a 30 year old Georgetown University Law School graduate, she was a 30 year old Georgetown University Law School student, whose contraceptives were not covered by her medical insurance policy that she was paying for through the school. That was the problem. I think most conservatives don’t really understand the issue she was discussing. I didn’t necessarily think she was a hero for discussing this problem until Rush Limbaugh used his considerable platform to say some pretty ugly things. For the life of me, I don’t know why he is still considered relevant. He’s a drug addicted felon who makes up for it by being fat and mean. Anyway, the person who wrote the article suggested that stupid should be voted out of office. I would suggest that the person in office now generally understands nuance and complexity, and that voting in a reactionary individual with a complete dearth of core beliefs would be a terrible mistake.
Here’s more “progressive” hypocrisy for you to defend…good luck.
This morning, as MSNBC’s Morning Joe came to an end, co-host Mika Brzezinski had some praise for colleagues and the company she works for. “We’ve been talking a lot this week about women and equal pay and all these issues,” she said. “I have to say, in all seriousness, I’m very lucky to be working with you [co-host Joe Scarborough] and for a company [MSNBC] who has actually dealt with this problem transparently.”
Which basically amounts to Brzezinski saying that she is “lucky” to get paid half as much as Joe Scarborough.
After all, according to the Daily Beast (whose editor, Tina Brown, is a frequent guest on the show), Scarborough makes a cool $4 million per year, while Brzezinski’s salary is half as much, coming in at $2 million per year.
Brzezinski’s colleague Andrea Mitchell made this point on air yesterday–that pay disparity exists at MSNBC. Politico reports:
During an interview Thursday, Mitt Romney senior adviser Barbara Comstock told Andrea Mitchell that “we know here at MSNBC the guys get paid more” — and the MSNBC host replied, “We certainly do.”
For Brzezinski’s part, it’s more than a bit odd that she would play down the problems at MSNBC now.
After all, her public dispute with MSNBC about pay equity has been well known. In fact, she’s made it herself on her own show.
“We make less than our male counterparts,” said Brzezinski last year. “I found out on this show that I made a lot less than Joe. 14 times less.”
https://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/msnbc-host-lucky-get-paid-half-much-her-male-co-host_654987.html
Thanks, through your failed attempt to draw moral equivalence between Islam and Christianity, for demonstrating this to be true:
Naturally, “progressives” remain steadfastly incapable of understanding why Conservatives find them a bit lacking in the perception, common sense and moral center departments.
Additional thanks for demonstrating your personality cult devotion to the current White House occupant and your complete inability to comprehend that he is totally out of touch with mainstream America. There is no doubt you support his most recent comments made on The Daily Show.
I was not trying to suggest a moral equivalency between the two religions, but I was trying to suggest that characterizing an entire group of people by a whacked out fringe is not appropriate. If the tables were turned this would be tantamount to all of Muslims viewing Christianity by the actions of the Westborough Baptist Church. If that basic misunderstanding of a large group of people is indicative of what mainstream America thinks, than that just means most mainstream Americans only think about these issues in the aftermath of something terrible.
Also, I do support the president’s recent comments on the Daily Show, simply because I still have listening comprehension skills.
Your listening and comprehension skills are definitely in urgent need of repair.
Were you to review the history of Islam with an objective mind, including reading the Koran and comprehending what it actually says and what it really means, you would see that the intolerance and violence perpetrated by Islamofascists is not isolated and is not being practiced by a whacked out fringe.
Are you suggesting that the entire government is Iran is a whacked out fringe? How about the Muslim Brotherhood, which is the group from which the new Egyptian President emerged and still belongs? Are you suggesting that entire countries in the Middle East are being run by members of a whacked out fringe?