Canadian Columnist's Palin Joke Draws Fox News Outrage

NY Times:

Heather Mallick, an opinion columnist for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation's Web site, is known for her use of humorous exaggeration. But last week after removing a column by Ms. Mallick, which said that Gov. Sarah Palin has "a toned-down version of the porn actress look" and suggested that Republican men were sexually inadequate, the government-owned CBC ruled that its opinion writers had to stick to the facts even when they were joking around.

Although the broadcaster's Web site, www.cbcnews.ca, has relatively few readers in the United States, Ms. Mallick's comments became an issue last month on the Fox News Channel, which, because of Canadian cable TV rules that limit its distribution, has relatively few viewers in Canada. Greta Van Susteren, the host of "On the Record," condemned the column as "beyond vicious" and repeatedly referred to Ms. Mallick as "a pig." A right-of-center columnist for The National Post, of Toronto, also criticized the column.

The CBC ombudsman, Vince Carlin, said in a report that his office had received more than 300 complaints about the column.

Read the whole story: NY Times

Comments

[Pupadup4oBama]

HA HA HA!!! I LOVE it - republican men are sexually inadequate!

Awww...poor widdle babies.

[skipptown]

Hey, this isn't the first time that a prominent female Republican has been tied to porn. Remember when Bush was trying to get Harriet Meyers confirmed and all of those copies of "Dirty Harriet" suddenly surfaced?

[notb observer]

I found Mallick's comments a little over the top, and lacking in meaningful analysis. A lot of what she said might be true in a general way, but it taking broad swipes at segments of the American electorate does nothing to elevate the issues underlying her piece. There is no doubt that Palin appeals to a certain "segment" of the population, but to call them "rednecks" and "white trash" is really not much different from racial profiling, is it ?
So, after all the fuss, we are left no more informed about the makeup of Palin's supporters, or why they would see fit to vote for a woman with no demonstrated curiosity, and very dubious leadership credentials, either at the local, state, and most importantly, federal level. The argument that "she's someone I can connect with" is nothing more than a well conceived neo-con sales pitch. While I agree that there's something special about an elected official who can connect, that ability should be secondary to competence. In this respect the pro-Palin camp has their priorities backwards.
Finally, I find it hypocritical that Fox would pass judgement on a foreign news network during an interview with a 3rd party, accusing it of being left wing, when they themselves are the epitome of partisan reporting for the right. It's an excellent example of the sort of double standard that we have come to expect of Fox.

[moonbay]

Just a quick note. Long term studies (all the way back to '68 as far as I know) show that the truth is that the higher an education a person has, the more likely they are to vote DEMOCRATIC. Contrary to popular belief - AND acknowledging the obvious cases of Republican college graduates - the better educated a person is, the more able they are to think critically, and the more likely they are to vote as a Democrat. Which is not to say that less educated people don't know enough to vote Democratic; I have known my share of "overeducated fools." Now, if you weigh your data towards class, instead of level of education, THEN you see more Republicans.

That is why the Republican party, years ago, decided to attack higher education. What was the first thing Ronald Reagan did upon becoming governor of California? He started dismantling (witholding funds, replacing education-focused Regents,.....) our state education system. This was not some idea of his or his campaign, he was carrying out a stated Republican plan. There was a wonderful series of articles on this entire subject some years ago, perhaps someone with more internet experience than I, can find them

[notb observer]

Yes, that comes as no surprise ! People fail to recognize that the neo-con movement flourished under Reagan, Bush 41 and now Bush 43. It's not a new phenomenon, and in fact, a lot of the key players around today were simply mere minions under Reagan's administration.
One word you used touched off a though for me. Regent... Is anyone aware that this is also the name of an "institution of higher learning" ? More correctly, it is more of a mind shaping center, run by Pat Robertson, and formerly by Oral Roberts (ORU). This "university" has spawned the likes of Monica Goodling, a so-called "lawyer" who ended up waaayy up in the food chain of the DoJ under Speedy Gonzales. Of course she was nowhere near qualified for her job, but her fundamentalist brainwashing made her a perfect candidate for following orders without question, something any real lawyer is usually very reluctant to do.
As it turns out, there were tons of these such "university graduates" from Regent who ended up in Iraq under Bremmer as the US settled in to mismanage the situation.
Here we have a real twist on the law of "separation of church and state" ? People were being sought out, not because of their religious views, but because those views would make them easily manipulated pawns.
Add this to the long and growing list of reasons that the Bush administration should spend some quality time in jail after Nov. 4th.

[jmndodge]

Our beloved President Ford is rarely mentioned, but it is his had selected minions who have accomplished the destruction of the American economy and our prestige in the world. Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rove, and yes the openings for the Bush family all were given their positions under president Ford. Nixon was the distraction which prevented us from looking to closely at his administration -- what a price we have paid since, and most of it is on the credit card, only now the bills are coming due.

[Ramirez]

Higher educated people tend to end up in education, and the education industry is dependent on the State for its existence. This is one reason why any theory about higher-educated Americans being overwhelmingly Demcrats will always turn into a plea for more funding for education.

This is also why Demcrats are so passionate about politics. Republicans can usually prosper under any administration; Democrats not so much.

Because if Democrats don't win, they don't eat.

[HST]

All I know is the Repubes have won the last 8 years and most of the middle class can't afford to eat.

Please explain how the repubes are "prospering" under the current administration while holding their hands out to the big bad government. You know the one that Palin says should just get out of the way.

[mouselion]

If the Republicans win -- nobody eats.

[Chalkeater]

I love what passes for journalism ethics at Fox News. Name calling is despicable, unless it's aimed at a liberal like Barney Frank.

[sarimn00]

And yet Fox doesn't have a fit about the "joke" from a Republican columnist in Virginia that was disgusting and racist. He should have been fired.

[strandwolf]

Here's a Mallick quote circa 2005 which I found in my files:
"And as Canada transforms itself into a nation that
discards civil liberties and leaves Muslim prisoners
starving themselves to death . . . , a country that
has the permission of the Supreme Court to treat
autistic children as waste products and a country that
may well force me to hitchhike to Alberta for a speech
this fall, I am starting to dislike this place." --
Heather Mallick
Could be there's a book of her columns.

[kate99]

would not expect anything less from fox hell they make a career out of attacks look at hannity and o'reilly

[mbaker42]

Here is the letter I sent to the cbc (can't find mallick's email):

Dear CBC,
As an Obama supporter, a political progressive, and a Canadian citizen (also American), I am deeply offended by Heather Mallick's recent column. Not the part comparing Palin to a porn star, which was perfectly fair in my opinion, but the part in which she repeatedly labels people as "trash" simply because they are less fortunate economically than herself. Her additional terms of derision ("hick," "hillbilly," etc) are not much better. This kind of mean-spirited, adolescent elitism is exactly the reason why I no longer live in Canada. Attacking politicians is fair game, but demeaning human beings on the basis of their socio-economic status is just disgusting. By the way, you should know that lower-income people overwhelmingly vote Democratic; Republican support comes disproportionately from the rich. Get a clue.

[NTO08]

No, her comment about Palin makes her out to be a pig...

[cindyw]

But "slattern" is okay?

[totalliberal]

Wow. Get a life.

[thegirlnextdoor]

And my personal congradulations to Heather Mallek for being called a mean name by Greta van Susteren. You must be doing something right. Oh, wait, I just remembered my favorite van Susteren comment that Canadians should not critize the USA because they let us exist here in North America.
You think they'll invade us now?

[kybo88]

They were probably more upset with her jab at their sexual prowess than about the Palin remarks.

[Pupadup4oBama]

I think you are correct - doesn't matter what they say about a woman - but cut down a man's manhood - and you're outta there!

[JahLenin]

Republican males doth protest too much, methinks!

[Frannyvida]

No kidding and anyone would think SP looked good if you spent your days looking at Van Susteren.

[DrYRHead]

LOL, Sarah Palin is the GOP(Gas and Oil Party)'s new calender girl. She has replaced Condi Rice in that regard. BTW, Condi already has an EXXON supper-tanker named after her, so do not be surprised if Palin gets one named after her next.

[loha]

That's all Faux News is, outrage, anger and lies.

[hilary916]

FOX was mad? No! Say it ain't so!

[Rule Of Law]

And we care what they think, why, exactly....

[Ramirez]

No one will ever say that Heather Mallick looks like a porn actress.

[ContraEgoiste]

No one will ever say that cons elect intellectuals.

[notb observer]

...and no one will ever accuse you of being the bright one.

Your sexist remark is as obnoxious as Mallick's generalizations about your fellow sheep.

I wonder why are you here. Are you upset that your party is going to get their a$$es handed to them in November because Obama isn't a "home-grown terrorist" ? Are you harboring feelings of jealousy because you think you're smarter than Sarah and you didn't get vetted ?

And why aren't you hiding in your burrow ? Your neo-con overlords have told you time and time again that you are not safe ! Bad, bad little lemming ! Back under the rock with you !

Oh, but before you go, the McCain campaign needs help rearranging deck chairs. Why don't you go give them a hand with that !

[Pupadup4oBama]

being called a porn actress is not a compliment.
But I guess since you're a rethug- you would know best.