Just long enough to regurgitate this astonishing display of urban bigotry;
…Sarah Palin … fit of pique … the white trash vote … sexual inadequates … she isn’t even female really … Alaska hillbilly … “white trash” … trailer trash … rural, loud, proudly unlettered … toned-down version of the porn actress … overtreated hair, puffy lips … “pramface” … roughneck fuckin’ redneck … prodding his daughter … ratboy … fizzing with rage and revenge … vicious and profoundly dishonest … good fast listing… nervous wreck with deeply strange hair … the hick vote … ordinary hillbilly … racism? … racism … “rectal fissure” … tense no-hoper ladies … white female marginals …
And we’re forced to pay for this crap.
*Any offense to swine is purely unintentional. Pigs are, in fact, both intelligent and useful – traits that cannot be convincingly attributed to Ms. Mallick.
Couldn’t this be construded as interferring in the US election. It is certainly worse than telling the truth re Obama’s stmt to cancel NAFTA.
Watching dion sputtering and using the word liar over and over again, compare that to PMSH with a family in BC. Cute kids. If the conservatives stay warm and cuddly and just start replaying dions words and threats back at him, majority here we come. If that happens, I hope PMSH breaks a promise and cancels the money for the cbc a few years early. At least he should never increase their budget. MSNBC demoted 2 overly partisan hacks, maybe Heather can be sent for re-education.
Maybe it is the name, read a report yesterday on all the dirty tricks Heather Mills played during her divorce.
Notice it is the women who have the vilest comments re Sarah. Saw Hillory speaking today, and what a difference, buggy eyes, stern face, shrill voice, but she did not attack Sarah, just the ticket.
We all know she want Obama to lose, but now has to decide how to do it, and go after Sarah in 2012.
I’m gob-smacked. It can only be a matter of time before the CBC is put out to pasture.
What I found most annoying: Our author actually thought she was being cutting and clever. She was neither.
Any white trash out there want to volunteer to file a complaint with the Human Rights Commision about this bit of hate speech? 🙂
MaryT has EXACTLY the same idea I did! If enough Americans raise a stink about it, it will:
1. Force a [minor] international incident, because it will appear that an employee of Canada’s CBC is trying to influence an American election through hate speech.
2. Make the corrupt CBC and all on the ultra left in Canada look like completely hypocrites (go back to the article and look at the favourable comments toward Mallick [Sort by First to Last] – beyond ridiculous!!!)
3. Disgust more than a few Canadians against the left, which can only help Stephen Harper.
Mallick’s column was a tipping point … or more accurately could become a tipping point that would help both nations.
An outspoken Conservative MP like Jason Kenney or James Moore should hold a press conference and say something like this: “I am absolutely disgusted that a member of the CBC would say such vile, horrific things about a woman who may become the next vice-president of our largest trading partner. I demand that she sincerely apologize and call upon Stephane Dion and Jack Layton to condemn her actions as well!”
Any white trash out there want to volunteer to file a complaint with the Human Rights Commision about this bit of hate speech? 🙂
Posted by: MikeD at September 9, 2008 3:02 AM
All ready done.Mind you,I don’t expect much to come of it.After all,how can the CHRC go against one of their own?
Regarding a CHRC complaint.
I’d love to file a complaint against Mallick. This screed of hers is hate speech.
However;
I will not sanctify the existence of the CHRC with a complaint of any sort.
Mallick is demented enough to be a useful tool for the leftists in legitimizing the CHRC. By posting screed such as this, and getting the right to react to it, some flunkie in the CHRC will justify their pension.
An election is upon us and the leftogonists are afraid for their entitlements.
Let the CBC and CHRC die from within. Now is not the time to feed them.
hahahahahah, Heather is way out of her league attacking Palin. Palin is everything Heather could never be. It is like the depressed evil girl in school who starts rumours about the popular one, because she is jealous of her beauty and accomplishments. The whole column just reeks of plain Jane jealousy. The more the feminist attack Palin, the more thier twisted passive agressive behaviour is shown to us. Palin is that woman they want to be, but are too lazy, and not intelligent enough, to be.
Ugh.
Yet more left-wing unhingedness on the taxpayer dime.
This time at the CBC. Cue the violins, of course.
Fire. Them. All.
Why are we paying that useful idiot to write such crap?
She should just get a blog if she wants to spew such bile and assorted ignorant, pea-brained filth.
Like I’ve been saying about the Left lately, they’ve really lost it and have become more unhinged than ever before. It’s as if a leftist-specific brain virus has quickly infected and continues to infect leftists everywhere, causing sporadic fits of bizarre psychosis… I mean, we’re witnessing it all day, every day now. It’s surreal!
And all it took for this to happen was the selection of a great woman as the running mate for John McCain…
One would’ve thought the “progressives” would’ve praised the choice as something like “Finally, the glass ceiling is shattered!”, but no; the “progressives” aren’t what they claim to be at all.
I trust Heather checks her own comment thread. What a hoot!
Canadian Broad, casting stones in a glass house —
of ill repute.
Gee, hateful speech from the Left. Its unprecedented! I’m shocked, simply shocked I tell you.
Oh, wait…
Urban bigotry? Is that like when someone advises drug addicted street people to share needles in order to hasten there deaths, as Kate McMillan did, resulting in her denunciation by the Premier of Saskatchewan?
Anyway, I’m having fun alerting everyone to the kind of commentary Kate McMillan is attracting these days. I guess that’s what did Carol Skelton in, eh?
Not a word about Palin achieving the VP ticket, and how it advances the cause of feminism.
Once again proving that it was never about women’s hopes and aspirations. It was always about Liberalism.
At least their showing their true colours to the rest of us trailer trash.
Carry on!
“Is it racism? I’m told that it is, although I find racism so appalling that I have difficulty identifying it.”
The above lines simply astonish me. Wow.
Anyway, I’m having fun alerting everyone to the kind of commentary Kate McMillan is attracting these days. I guess that’s what did Carol Skelton in, eh?
Posted by: Liberal at September 9, 2008 7:29 AM
You carry on doing that,Lieberal.It is your CBCpravda that allows BOTH Mallick to spew her crap,and Kate to respond.Oh wait.Lefties don’t like to be exposed!
Come November 4th, Sarah Palin could very well be the new VPOTUS, and Heather Mallick will still be, well, Heather Mallick….how sad for her.
The salt in the wound is that CBC is funded by tax dollars. Were it privatized I wouldn’t be half as miffed at Mallick’s putrid ravings.
Harper: privatize the CBC, all of it, now!
I wondered where the trolls were. THanks for showing up.
That said, I will abide by the blog owner’s wishes and not say what comes to mind.
And Heather? There are MA degrees? What a BA was not useless enough?
We know the caliber of person the malicious Mallick represents, she’s bared her soul and it ain’t pretty.
Problem is she’s working on our dime for the CBC and we need someone in that Liberal/Left organization to distance themselves from trash journalism and FIRE HER.
We have an election campaign going on here, plenty to REPORT, or, in the case of CBC et al SPIN.
Why are the Liberal/Left so worried about US politics since we have no vote there and no influence either? The problem with the Liberal/Left they can’t stand the possibility of Conservatives in power on both sides of the border, they’re in panic mode.
What malicious Mallick wrote is uncalled for slander, pure character assassination and worse, I do not want her on our payroll.
From the comments”
“Great article and keep it up. If people don’t like it, they don’t have to read it.”
No, we don’t have to read it. Just shut up and pay for it. Every year. Ad nauseum.
“couldn’t this be construed as interfering in the American election.”
Yeah, on the side of McCain Palin.
Hmmm … Heather Mallick . This reminds me of a joke I heard in 1980’s Finland.
Nikita Khrushchev goes to visit a pig farm outside Moscow and the Russian news reporters tag along. When the reporters return they have a picture of Khrushchev amongst the pigs. They try several captions … Khrushchev visits pig farm … no not good enough … Khrushchev among the pigs etc. Finally they settle on a caption … “Khrushchev 3rd from the right”
In this case it should be Mallick … 3rd from the right.
Mallicks article posted to http://www.hotair.com with interesting commentary by Ed Morrisey re: the hypocrisy of the HRC under the unfortunate heading Hatred in Canada Alive and Well.
Mallick is a mentally ill whore for the liberal media and she looks like hell.
But….I thought attack dogs were outlawed in Ontario?
The filth referred to as Mallick’s journalism is only symptomatic of the left. The disease is pure hatred.
They’re in love with hate. Nobody knows how to hate better. Everything they pen is powered by one thing. Hate.
So the subordinate haters who commented positively on her rant have a queen bee hater to speak for them.
“I’m a feminist who understands that women can nurse terrible and delicate woman hatred.”
Need more be said?
With her opening words “I assume” Ms.Mallick says it all. In her delusional mind this rant allows her to justify all that is lacking in her shallow, moraless world.
It can not be without consequences that such hate and ignorance be funded public funds.
Hockey parents unite,less CBC, more redneck areans!
“A Mighty Wind”….Ms Mallick Queefs out another article.
This is the lowest of lows. I have done a lot of reading about Sarah Palin and checked out the comments. The most vilest comments seem to come from when. It seems that they can not stand any woman raising above her class, “that they put them in”.
HRC was running as a candidate. Hero to women but what was her actual accomplishments. Very few, her most famous was the forgiveness of BC about the oval office incident.
SP is the potential VP of the USA. Since she has arrived, she has to contend with the most vilest comments I have ever seen on a person in politics.
I think the caption not only relates to Heather, it relates to all of them that have their face in the trough.
Mallick: “I’m a feminist who understands that women can nurse terrible and delicate woman hatred.”
Doesn’t that say it all? “Woman hatred.”
Ever since the feminazis wormed their way into the fabric of the Canadian governmental/media/educational bureaucracies, woman hatred–against any woman who DARED to think, say, or do anything contrary to their radical feminist manifesto; against any woman who DARED to be feminine and who loves her husband as a full partner in life–has been their modus operandi.
The CBC’s really outdone itself: CrapBoldlyCrapped. Mallick is a disgrace. FIRE. THEM. ALL.
PRONTO!!
Mallick gets paid for what she writes. The small dead trailer trash may not like what she writes, but there it is. Freeloading farmers, on the other hand, get their swill just for being farmers. There’s a big difference between being at the trough and having a real job.
Methinks Heather’s a little jealous that Palin fills out a skirt better than she….
Watching and listening to her and her ilk gives further credence to the theory of a human sub-species.
This story has now spread south as well:
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/09/09/hatred-in-canada-alive-and-well/
It would seem that “the white trash” is tutored at “the University of Toronto” and studies “English literature”. Gets its news facts from “The Colbert Report”
Of course all of that is necessary in order to have a view that looking down on people can be said with certain tone of sophistication as not to insult the senses and the feelings of the socialist/fascist cadres in the upper crusts of self admiring society in the circles populated by the CBC.
The ‘journalist’ does the usual out of context quotations, omits to include the sense of what other people write.
The ‘journalist’ is wholly inadequate so far as facts, though in the ‘journalists’ defense, this is common in ‘journalism’.
The ‘journalist’ did not do research for the article, the ‘journalist’ simply picked what sounded good for the purpose, so, of necessity came up with the ‘article’ that shows ignorance.
I’ve always been bemused and rather perplexed by this urban condescension toward those living in rural areas. I grew up in a small mining town myself and I must say that, being on a frontier of sorts, it attracted some of the brightest, most adventurous, hard-working, and resourceful individuals I’ve met. Likewise, was my time spent working in the eastern arctic where I rubbed shoulders with intelligent, well-travelled, adventurous individuals aplenty. While parochial individuals do exist, they were no more prevalent than in urban areas.
Is this disdain the result of some deep-seated insecurity — a knowledge that in a lifeboat scenario the rural dwellers have more of the basic skills and make more of the essential contributions needed for actual human and human social survival? Where does the supposed intelligence change occur when moving from rural to urban environment — at the green belt, at the suburbs, at the urban core? Do rural professionals — doctors, engineers, managers get their professional training at some mythical University of Bella Coola?
Perhaps some urban sophisticate from the Toronto area could inform me. This ex-rural rube awaits the enlightenment.
Is this the tolerance and diversity the left is so famous for?
What’s the real issue here? It must and can only be your resentment of the CBC. And if the issue is solely that this opinion emanates from publicly funded media, I think you have a point. However, the issue can’t be that Ms. Mallick has an opinion. It can’t be that you find it is derisive. Surely, it can’t even be that some of you find it “ignorant”, however one wishes to codify “ignorance”.
Free speechers around here seem to want to advance a speech without contraint. You wallow in the very same hatred against which you now rail. You will fight for Mark Steyn’s right to articulate his version of hatred. Why react with such sanctimonious indignation? Why not simply expose her ideas as fallacious and unfounded? BTW, to Irwin Daisy, quoting a piece of her text and saying “need more be said” is not a terribly good rebuttal. I mean the idea that historically women have been complicit in keeping women in their place, or that women are capable of “masculine” qualities like hatred and aggression doesn’t seem overly contentious to me. At least something worth debating.
Perhaps, at issue here is that Ms.Mallick sounds a little too much like your queen bee, Kate. She’s feisty, unconventional (Ms. Mallick spoke out in very politically incorrect terms. She voiced her own strong opinion, one which I’m sure is NOT endorsed by the CBC, which has increasingly become a shill for Liberal politics) and full of satire. I think the real issue around her is that Kate’s drones are confused. It talks like Kate, walks like Kate but is saying something entirely different from Kate. You hate it when progressives don’t sound and act like your version of progressives. Agreed, I’m unsettled too when a conservative utters something worth paying attention to. And it occasionally does happen… :-))
At least there is no illusions as to who and what she is. She has the credibilty of Micheal Moore and class of Andrew Dice Clay. No one but other leftist radicals take her seriously. In the free market, she would only be employed at places like KOS or DU.
What I find far more corrosive are the reporters who are able to better pretend to be fair and objective.
“Freeloading farmers”, says “manny”, go to your local Farmers’ market and yell that one out. Shame on you.
I stopped reading Mallick’s drivel about two years ago when, applying her extensive knowledge of climatology, she blamed the CPC for a windstorm that uprooted trees in Stanley Park. I believe in freedom of speech, and I would have no problem with Mallick posting her uninformed opinions on a self-funded blog in some obscure corner of the WWW. I do have a problem with our “national broadcaster” featuring Mallick on their main news page, grinning in her pearls, and spewing her vitriolic hatred of anything she views as damaging to the feminist cause. Even a modicum of balance from the Broadcorping Castration would work toward silencing my criticism. I nominate you, Kate, to write “viewpoints” alongside Mallick’s. You could airbrush a set of pearls around your neck in one of your hunting photos.
Exactly the kind of garbage and filth I’ve come to expect from Heather Mallick.
And while the article is purportedly an attack on Sarah Palin and the Republican Party, it really smears people who are not rich, who live in rural areas and don’t have university degrees. Over and over, Heather Mallick refers to them as ‘hicks’, ‘trash’ and ‘hillbillies’.
Shame on you, Heather.
Re: Bill Stewart (10:18 am)
Bill, the issue isn’t Mallick’s tone, or content. The issue is that we’re paying for it. Please note the swine that accompanied the post. It doesn’t mean that she looks like a pig, or acts like a pig. It’s a symbol of those (like Mallick) who benefit from the public trough (i.e. taxpayer dollars).
Yes, we resent the CBC. We don’t expect it to mirror our views. But is it too much to ask that it present a balanced viewpoint? Mallick’s attack on Palin for being too “rural” is, in effect, an attack on all rural people. These same people pay taxes which fund the CBC.
Let Mallick get her own website. Then we’ll have a true debate.
Some people miss the point completly.
No Liz, shame on them for wallowing in all that swill. And shame on you for supporting such hypocrisy.
To the contrary, Bill S, I hope that Heather Mallick keeps going and the others at CBC follow her lead.
Her type of satire is poorly done. There is no humor or wit just obnoxious words from a bitter old feminist.
No, bill stewart – the issue isn’t freedom of speech. You are, as usual, missing the point.
The issue is both WHAT Heather Mallick is saying as an authorized opinion piece (she’s in the public eye as speaking from the CBC) and the fact that her speech is ungrounded, unfounded and personally malicious. AND that we, the taxpayer, are paying for it. Neither of these problems has anything to do with freedom of speech.
It’s obvious that she’s a deeply ignorant woman. Her previous job at the Globe and Mail, as an opinion writer, also provided us with bigoted and incredibly empty fluff. She also wrote articles about her favorite activity, shopping at Holt Renfrew. She’s both ignorant and dumb. She got her job via the usual- friends/contacts.
Your attempt to equate her with Kate is unfounded. Kate doesn’t talk/write in ignorance. Neither does she resort to vicious and malicious name-calling.
Equally, your assertion that Mark Steyn writes his ‘version of hate’ is ungrounded. What does that sentence of yours mean?
The issue is that her vicious and malicious opinions are being paid for by us, the taxpayer. People here don’t ‘resent’ the CBC. What a trivialization of the issue. People reject the CBC because it belongs to us, the people, and yet, it is not fulfilling its duty to us. Instead, it has been taken hostage by a cabal of leftists, who use our money to spew out biased, ignorant hatred. We reject that.
You are the one who is reacting with ‘santimonious indignation’. Telling us, pompously, to rebut her ‘ideas as fallacious and unfounded’. Nonsense. She isn’t offering us any ideas to rebut.
Her whole text is nothing but a spew of personal insults. You cannot rebut that! How can you rebut such name-calling as:
“.. rural, loud, proudly unlettered … toned-down version of the porn actress … overtreated hair, puffy lips … “pramface” … roughneck f*ckin’ redneck … prodding his daughter … ratboy … fizzing with rage and revenge … vicious and profoundly dishonest … good fast listing…”?
Are you supposed to go through each name, and say: no, her lips aren’t puffy, no, her hair isn’t over treated, no…. What if Palin lips WERE puffy? What would that have to do with her ability as VP?
These aren’t arguments~! They are sheer ‘ignoratio elenchi’..irrelevant personal insults.
Actually, Ms Mallick isn’t unconventional; she’s very much a mindless follower of the leftist feminists, of socialism…and unable to critically analyze her own texts.
She’s not ‘progressive’ but regressive. She doesn’t think; she doesn’t analyze; she doesn’t base her opinions on anything other than her own biases.
Try again.
Todays Independent Gallup Poll has White Women at 68% for McCain/Palin. So much for Ms. Mal-lick’s Vagina Theory.
No, bill stewart, you are the one being smug and sanctimonious.
Heather Mallick’s post had no ideas in it to rebut; it was pure ad hominem. Nothing but malicious name-calling.
Do you seriously think that one can rebut calling someone ‘puffy lips’..’overtreated hair’? These aren’t ideas; they are personal attacks.
We don’t resent the CBC; we reject it for its refusal to represent Canadians. It belongs to us; we pay for it. Instead, it’s been highjacked by the left who use it to broadcast propaganda. And malice against people/issues whom they don’t like. endless anti-Americanism, endless support for ‘global warming’…and so on.
Heather Mallick’s post wasn’t an opinion piece. There weren’t any opinions; just pure malicious name-calling. Nothing to do with freedom of speech either. Just that we are paying for her to write empty vicious garbage.
I take it Ms Malice must be going after the grand prize in the upcoming annual Demented Canadian Leftard Awards show. After that article, I think she is a shoe-in to win.