The technology is a little complicated, but it the process is basically this:
Which is how Michelle Malkin ends up trashing things like the President speaking at a memorial for 6 innocent victims.
Branding the Tucson massacre: “Together We Thrive” in white and blue; Updated: Liveblogging the bizarre pep rally; Gov. Brewer booed; in sum: right speech, too late, boneheaded venue (WOOT!)
"Bizarre Pep Rally?" It's actually shocking that she used the words "right speech," thge Malkin Machine must have a slight malfunction. But too late? Should he have given the memorial speech before the people were killed?
Boneheaded venue? Where should he have given it? Somewhere other than the site of the memorial? That would make sense.
President Obama used to preach that there was no “Red America” and no “Blue America,” just one America.
But tonight at the memorial for the Tucson massacre victims, it will be a sea of blue as the White House unveils the “Together We Thrive” logo and slogan.
Granted, "Together We Thrive" is a pretty retarded theme for what is basically a huge funeral, but seriously, you object to the logo being blue?
Of course, there's also this little detail:
Update: As noted above, the University of Arizona announced the Together We Thrive event — and a few readers write in to say that the campus initiated the logo/campaign.
Hmmmmm. . . the U of A came up with the slogan and the logo. But still, it must somehow be Obama's nefarious doings.
. . . a few readers write in to say that the campus initiated the logo/campaign. Given U of A president Robert Shelton’s embarrassing, thinly-veiled partisan cheerleading for Obama tonight, it may indeed be a 100 percent-campus-initiated campaign. Given the Obama White House’s meticulous attention to stage prop details, however, I would say the odds of involvement by Axelrod/Plouffe & Co. are high.
Damn, the machine is hitting on all cylinders now! Either Obama is responsible, or the if the University is responsible then Obama is still responsible.
Now, I seem to remember the headline to this "liveblog" thing including the phrase:
Gov. Brewer booedAnd yet, according to your account of the events, this happened:
Gov. Brewer takes the stage to polite applause and pays tribute to the victims. The shooting “pierced our sense of well-being.” Arizona’s hope “will not be shredded by one madman’s act of darkness.”(emphasis added by me)
Brewer brings reverence and sobriety to the event, God bless her: We will go forward “in prayer, unbending and unbowed.”
And immediately, the sobriety is broken by massive whoops and hollers for Janet Napolitano.
I will agree with Malkin on one point, whoops and hollers for anyone are really unseemly at a memorial service. Just tacky and disrespectful to those who are in mourning. But why lie about Governor Brewer's reception? What the hell is the point of that?
Speeches and leadership are not the same thing.
Obama delivered one tonight, but failed at the other over the past three days as Pima County Sheriff Dupnik, Democrat Party leaders, and media abettors poisoned the public square with the very vitriol the president now condemns.
See, now that's just being dishonest. What Sheriff Dupnik and others have said, and probably incorrectly in this particular case, is that the steady stream of hate and violent rhetoric from right-wing blowhards like, for instance, Michelle Malkin, can be dangerous in that it can inspire acts of actual violence. That's not vitriol. That is a condemnation of vitriol.
Also, why is it that when barack Obama speaks at a memorial he is politicizing the event, but when Jan Brewer speaks at the same memorial she is " bring[ing] reverence and sobriety to the event"?