Media Blog

Yep – More Gaskets to Blow

Keith Olbermann’s latest “WPITW” is equating Michelle Malkin to terrorists:

But the winners tonight, Dunkin Donuts of Canton, Massachusetts. We told you yesterday about this, the unbearable Rachel Ray in an ad for the donut and coffee chain, to which the lunatic fringe responded in an apoplexy of xenophobic paranoia, because that, that thing around her neck, that is not just a stupid scarf; they think that is what Yasser Arafat used to wear on his head. See, it‘s jihadist chic. Having already driven business to Dunkin Donuts by applauding its supposed stance in favor of tough immigration laws, the right threatened to boycott.

So what did Dunkin Donuts do? They folded. They were as weak as their decaf. “In a recent online ad, Rachel Ray is wearing a black and white scarf with a paisley design. It was selected by her stylist for the advertising shoot. Absolutely no symbolism was intended. However, given the possibility of misperception, we are no longer using the commercial.”

They pulled the ad because of the possibility of misperception by the right wing equivalents of jihadists, the people in this country who most closely share the mentality of the terrorists, who act the most like Middle Eastern nut jobs, who rail against diversity, try to murder dissent, and care more about flags than about people. You know, the Michelle Malkins of the world. You gave in to them because they merely mentioned the possibility of a boycott? How about this, how about the rest of us boycott Dunkin Donuts for giving in to fascists like Michelle Malkin and for giving weight to perhaps the most absurd idea the lunatic fringers have ever belched forth, that there are terrorist scarves, terrorist scarves!

Dunkin Donuts, time to stop buying the donuts, today‘s worst persons -terrorist scarves—in the world.

Obermann’s shtick bashing the right is predictable, but what the heck does he have against Rachael Ray?

Recommended

The Latest

Rat Patrol

Rat Patrol

Illegal leaks of classified information should be treated as a serious offense. But they would be easier to prevent if less information were classified.