<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Dunkin&#8217; Dhimmitude</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.theagitator.com/2008/05/28/dunkin-dhimmitude/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.theagitator.com/2008/05/28/dunkin-dhimmitude/</link>
	<description>It rankles me when somebody tries to tell somebody what to do.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 17:17:28 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Judi</title>
		<link>http://www.theagitator.com/2008/05/28/dunkin-dhimmitude/comment-page-1/#comment-122431</link>
		<dc:creator>Judi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 31 May 2008 20:55:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theagitator.com/?p=10056#comment-122431</guid>
		<description>By the way, don&#039;t we have more important things to think about like say for instance, what restaurant are we going to tonight...or what&#039;s playing at the Cinema?

If you wear black anbd white, you represent terrorist...blue, it&#039;s the Cripps gang, red, the Bloods...

I was going to wear rainbow colors...but would that mean I represent homosexuality?

Obviously, I need some FASHION ADVICE! Maybe the NUDISTS have had it right all along. 

Wait a sec...that might be a color too.

Someone HELP ME, I have NOTHING TO WEAR!

Geesh...GIMME A BREAK!

While I am on a roll and the subject...speaking of POLITICAL CORRECTNESS...

Not sure where this came from but I wanted to SHARE it:

&quot;Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional,
illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream
media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible
to pick up a turd by the clean end.&quot;

&#039;Nuff said.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>By the way, don&#8217;t we have more important things to think about like say for instance, what restaurant are we going to tonight&#8230;or what&#8217;s playing at the Cinema?</p>
<p>If you wear black anbd white, you represent terrorist&#8230;blue, it&#8217;s the Cripps gang, red, the Bloods&#8230;</p>
<p>I was going to wear rainbow colors&#8230;but would that mean I represent homosexuality?</p>
<p>Obviously, I need some FASHION ADVICE! Maybe the NUDISTS have had it right all along. </p>
<p>Wait a sec&#8230;that might be a color too.</p>
<p>Someone HELP ME, I have NOTHING TO WEAR!</p>
<p>Geesh&#8230;GIMME A BREAK!</p>
<p>While I am on a roll and the subject&#8230;speaking of POLITICAL CORRECTNESS&#8230;</p>
<p>Not sure where this came from but I wanted to SHARE it:</p>
<p>&#8220;Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional,<br />
illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream<br />
media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible<br />
to pick up a turd by the clean end.&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8216;Nuff said.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Judi</title>
		<link>http://www.theagitator.com/2008/05/28/dunkin-dhimmitude/comment-page-1/#comment-121969</link>
		<dc:creator>Judi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 31 May 2008 07:01:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theagitator.com/?p=10056#comment-121969</guid>
		<description>I find myself wondering if they are going to bew checking our underwear to see if the color or pattern is POLITICALLY CORRECT!
 
Just make sure you listen to your mom...ALWAYS WEAR CLEAN DRAWERS!  Ya never know.
 
So I decided to check my wardrobe for POLITICAL CORRECTNESS...so far I have been forced to discard 10 pairs of pants, 8 pairs of capris, 5 blouses, 3 pairs of socks, 2 headbands and a PARTRIDGE IN A PEAR TREE!

Perhaps we should consider wearing CELLOPHANE!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I find myself wondering if they are going to bew checking our underwear to see if the color or pattern is POLITICALLY CORRECT!</p>
<p>Just make sure you listen to your mom&#8230;ALWAYS WEAR CLEAN DRAWERS!  Ya never know.</p>
<p>So I decided to check my wardrobe for POLITICAL CORRECTNESS&#8230;so far I have been forced to discard 10 pairs of pants, 8 pairs of capris, 5 blouses, 3 pairs of socks, 2 headbands and a PARTRIDGE IN A PEAR TREE!</p>
<p>Perhaps we should consider wearing CELLOPHANE!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tokin42</title>
		<link>http://www.theagitator.com/2008/05/28/dunkin-dhimmitude/comment-page-1/#comment-121791</link>
		<dc:creator>Tokin42</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 31 May 2008 00:34:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theagitator.com/?p=10056#comment-121791</guid>
		<description>http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2008/05/30/1211654279497.html

This scarf isn&#039;t the same thing either, but it&#039;s close.  Notice who complained and the reasonings btw.

(someone is gonna have to fill me in on the quote tags because I can&#039;t seem to get them to work in firefox)

&quot;...&quot;A Palestinian customer came up and asked me if I&#039;m wearing this scarf as a fashion statement or for political reasons.

&quot;I had no idea what he was talking about because I don&#039;t follow politics at all. I just laughed it off.

&quot;Two days later he called and complained about it.&quot;&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2008/05/30/1211654279497.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2008/05/30/1211654279497.html</a></p>
<p>This scarf isn&#8217;t the same thing either, but it&#8217;s close.  Notice who complained and the reasonings btw.</p>
<p>(someone is gonna have to fill me in on the quote tags because I can&#8217;t seem to get them to work in firefox)</p>
<p>&#8220;&#8230;&#8221;A Palestinian customer came up and asked me if I&#8217;m wearing this scarf as a fashion statement or for political reasons.</p>
<p>&#8220;I had no idea what he was talking about because I don&#8217;t follow politics at all. I just laughed it off.</p>
<p>&#8220;Two days later he called and complained about it.&#8221;"</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Nieporent</title>
		<link>http://www.theagitator.com/2008/05/28/dunkin-dhimmitude/comment-page-1/#comment-121753</link>
		<dc:creator>David Nieporent</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 May 2008 22:28:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theagitator.com/?p=10056#comment-121753</guid>
		<description>UCrawford: I sympathize with your position; for instance, I never &quot;got&quot; the idea that Ann Coulter was supposed to be attractive.  I don&#039;t think Malkin is quite at the same level, though.

Tokin:&lt;i&gt;The black and white crossed patterned keffiyah is a scarf worn by people all across the planet in support of the palestinian cause. If Ray had worn a red one (like I have), a plain white one, or any other variety of color then it wouldn’t have even been questioned.&lt;/i&gt;

The problem is that both premises are untrue.  

1) She wasn&#039;t wearing a &quot;black and white crossed patterned keffiyah&quot;; if you look closely, you&#039;ll see that while it is black and white, it isn&#039;t the pattern in question.

2) And in fact Malkin and others do &lt;i&gt;not&lt;/i&gt; limit their denunciations to people wearing black and white ones, even if you assume she just made a mistake about what Ray was wearing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>UCrawford: I sympathize with your position; for instance, I never &#8220;got&#8221; the idea that Ann Coulter was supposed to be attractive.  I don&#8217;t think Malkin is quite at the same level, though.</p>
<p>Tokin:<i>The black and white crossed patterned keffiyah is a scarf worn by people all across the planet in support of the palestinian cause. If Ray had worn a red one (like I have), a plain white one, or any other variety of color then it wouldn’t have even been questioned.</i></p>
<p>The problem is that both premises are untrue.  </p>
<p>1) She wasn&#8217;t wearing a &#8220;black and white crossed patterned keffiyah&#8221;; if you look closely, you&#8217;ll see that while it is black and white, it isn&#8217;t the pattern in question.</p>
<p>2) And in fact Malkin and others do <i>not</i> limit their denunciations to people wearing black and white ones, even if you assume she just made a mistake about what Ray was wearing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve</title>
		<link>http://www.theagitator.com/2008/05/28/dunkin-dhimmitude/comment-page-1/#comment-121706</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 May 2008 20:34:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theagitator.com/?p=10056#comment-121706</guid>
		<description>I doubt Dunkin&#039; Donuts and Rachel Ray had any intention of using the scarf for nefarious symbolism.

Still, am I the only one who thinks that the fringed scarf looks like something a grandma would wear?  It&#039;s not something to put on an attractive woman in her 30s.  I&#039;d have canned the commercial for purely aesthetic reasons.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I doubt Dunkin&#8217; Donuts and Rachel Ray had any intention of using the scarf for nefarious symbolism.</p>
<p>Still, am I the only one who thinks that the fringed scarf looks like something a grandma would wear?  It&#8217;s not something to put on an attractive woman in her 30s.  I&#8217;d have canned the commercial for purely aesthetic reasons.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: C. S. P. Schofield</title>
		<link>http://www.theagitator.com/2008/05/28/dunkin-dhimmitude/comment-page-1/#comment-121414</link>
		<dc:creator>C. S. P. Schofield</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 May 2008 12:31:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theagitator.com/?p=10056#comment-121414</guid>
		<description>While on the one hand I think that connecting any black and white checked scarf to terrorism is a stretch, such scarves HAVE been marketed with that explicit connection. And I must admit I get a little tired of the airhead fashion for Mao jackets, Che shirts, and other romanticizing of mass murdering thugs.

I think people like Malkin are overreacting, but I think they are overreacting because they are legitimately sore at a media establishment that fails to criticize - or even notice - celebrities with clothes and etc. connected to trendy leftwing murderers.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>While on the one hand I think that connecting any black and white checked scarf to terrorism is a stretch, such scarves HAVE been marketed with that explicit connection. And I must admit I get a little tired of the airhead fashion for Mao jackets, Che shirts, and other romanticizing of mass murdering thugs.</p>
<p>I think people like Malkin are overreacting, but I think they are overreacting because they are legitimately sore at a media establishment that fails to criticize &#8211; or even notice &#8211; celebrities with clothes and etc. connected to trendy leftwing murderers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: UCrawford</title>
		<link>http://www.theagitator.com/2008/05/28/dunkin-dhimmitude/comment-page-1/#comment-121398</link>
		<dc:creator>UCrawford</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 May 2008 11:57:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theagitator.com/?p=10056#comment-121398</guid>
		<description>David,

&lt;blockquote&gt;Michelle Malkin, whose only claim to fame is being an attractive conservative minority woman&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Personally, I&#039;ve never found shallow, screeching harpies to be all that attractive.  Physically, maybe so, but her personality and the crap she spouts make her a hag to me.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>David,</p>
<blockquote><p>Michelle Malkin, whose only claim to fame is being an attractive conservative minority woman</p></blockquote>
<p>Personally, I&#8217;ve never found shallow, screeching harpies to be all that attractive.  Physically, maybe so, but her personality and the crap she spouts make her a hag to me.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Nieporent</title>
		<link>http://www.theagitator.com/2008/05/28/dunkin-dhimmitude/comment-page-1/#comment-121048</link>
		<dc:creator>David Nieporent</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 May 2008 01:39:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theagitator.com/?p=10056#comment-121048</guid>
		<description>I lost any respect I might have had for Malkin when I read &lt;a href=&quot;http://michellemalkin.com/2006/07/06/william-f-buckley-said-what/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;this post&lt;/a&gt; a couple of years ago, in which she told William F. Buckley to &quot;shut up.&quot; (*)

Buckley was not a saint who couldn&#039;t be questioned, of course, but I&#039;m pretty sure Michelle Malkin, whose only claim to fame is being an attractive conservative minority woman, isn&#039;t the one to do it.


(*) And yes, I recognize that she was quoting the words &quot;shut up.&quot;  But she endorsed them, and directed them at Buckley.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I lost any respect I might have had for Malkin when I read <a href="http://michellemalkin.com/2006/07/06/william-f-buckley-said-what/" rel="nofollow">this post</a> a couple of years ago, in which she told William F. Buckley to &#8220;shut up.&#8221; (*)</p>
<p>Buckley was not a saint who couldn&#8217;t be questioned, of course, but I&#8217;m pretty sure Michelle Malkin, whose only claim to fame is being an attractive conservative minority woman, isn&#8217;t the one to do it.</p>
<p>(*) And yes, I recognize that she was quoting the words &#8220;shut up.&#8221;  But she endorsed them, and directed them at Buckley.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tokin42</title>
		<link>http://www.theagitator.com/2008/05/28/dunkin-dhimmitude/comment-page-1/#comment-121027</link>
		<dc:creator>Tokin42</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 May 2008 01:06:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theagitator.com/?p=10056#comment-121027</guid>
		<description>This video kinda proves my point.  The only person on the planet that can make bill o&#039;reilly (and his female clone malkin)  look contemplative, moderate, and intelligent....Olbermann.

http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=104583</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This video kinda proves my point.  The only person on the planet that can make bill o&#8217;reilly (and his female clone malkin)  look contemplative, moderate, and intelligent&#8230;.Olbermann.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=104583" rel="nofollow">http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=104583</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew Williams</title>
		<link>http://www.theagitator.com/2008/05/28/dunkin-dhimmitude/comment-page-1/#comment-121026</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew Williams</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 May 2008 01:06:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theagitator.com/?p=10056#comment-121026</guid>
		<description>Damn. I thought that paraphrase of Robin Williams&#039; line in *Good Morning Vietnam* was choice. Where&#039;s the love, people?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Damn. I thought that paraphrase of Robin Williams&#8217; line in *Good Morning Vietnam* was choice. Where&#8217;s the love, people?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: UCrawford</title>
		<link>http://www.theagitator.com/2008/05/28/dunkin-dhimmitude/comment-page-1/#comment-120872</link>
		<dc:creator>UCrawford</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2008 20:54:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theagitator.com/?p=10056#comment-120872</guid>
		<description>Tokin,

&lt;blockquote&gt;The fact that she said she was willing to give the business the benefit of the doubt hardly makes her statement incendiary or over the top.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

If she was willing to give the business the benefit of the doubt, she never would have brought it up.  There is &lt;i&gt;absolutely zero&lt;/i&gt; reason to tie Rachael Ray to Palestinian terrorists.  She&#039;s a celebrity cook who endorses cooking products and to my knowledge she&#039;s never uttered a single word either for or against anything that happens in the Middle East (nor has Dunkin Donuts).  But yet Malkin felt compelled to make that statement in a national forum, question the chain&#039;s political leanings because their apolitical pitchman wore a scarf, and demand an explanation.  How is that giving Rachael Ray or Dunkin Donuts the benefit of the doubt?

&lt;blockquote&gt;Just because someone is a tool doesn’t mean everything they say has to be blown out of proportion.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Nor does somebody being a tool mean that we should give them a pass for the stupid things they say.  But you do bring up a valid point...in fact I think I&#039;ll just go back to ignoring her.  Discussing it is probably counterproductive anyway if the goal is for her to go away.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tokin,</p>
<blockquote><p>The fact that she said she was willing to give the business the benefit of the doubt hardly makes her statement incendiary or over the top.</p></blockquote>
<p>If she was willing to give the business the benefit of the doubt, she never would have brought it up.  There is <i>absolutely zero</i> reason to tie Rachael Ray to Palestinian terrorists.  She&#8217;s a celebrity cook who endorses cooking products and to my knowledge she&#8217;s never uttered a single word either for or against anything that happens in the Middle East (nor has Dunkin Donuts).  But yet Malkin felt compelled to make that statement in a national forum, question the chain&#8217;s political leanings because their apolitical pitchman wore a scarf, and demand an explanation.  How is that giving Rachael Ray or Dunkin Donuts the benefit of the doubt?</p>
<blockquote><p>Just because someone is a tool doesn’t mean everything they say has to be blown out of proportion.</p></blockquote>
<p>Nor does somebody being a tool mean that we should give them a pass for the stupid things they say.  But you do bring up a valid point&#8230;in fact I think I&#8217;ll just go back to ignoring her.  Discussing it is probably counterproductive anyway if the goal is for her to go away.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew Williams</title>
		<link>http://www.theagitator.com/2008/05/28/dunkin-dhimmitude/comment-page-1/#comment-120815</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew Williams</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2008 19:22:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theagitator.com/?p=10056#comment-120815</guid>
		<description>Let&#039;s send keffiyahs to Michelle Malkin!

That woman is in more desperate need of a lay than any woman in Western civilization. Except Ann Coulter.

Seriously. All that sand in her vagina is backing up into what is left of her brain.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Let&#8217;s send keffiyahs to Michelle Malkin!</p>
<p>That woman is in more desperate need of a lay than any woman in Western civilization. Except Ann Coulter.</p>
<p>Seriously. All that sand in her vagina is backing up into what is left of her brain.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Max D.</title>
		<link>http://www.theagitator.com/2008/05/28/dunkin-dhimmitude/comment-page-1/#comment-120776</link>
		<dc:creator>Max D.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2008 18:17:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theagitator.com/?p=10056#comment-120776</guid>
		<description>So I can go ahead and wear a Che Guevara T-shirt?

You people and your little thumbs-down buttons. Meh.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So I can go ahead and wear a Che Guevara T-shirt?</p>
<p>You people and your little thumbs-down buttons. Meh.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David</title>
		<link>http://www.theagitator.com/2008/05/28/dunkin-dhimmitude/comment-page-1/#comment-120674</link>
		<dc:creator>David</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2008 16:32:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theagitator.com/?p=10056#comment-120674</guid>
		<description>One thing that bothers me about this whole blowup is the assumption by Malkin et al that the average person is as wrapped up in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict/GWOT/Liberal as she is.   It would never occur to her that for 99% of people, a scarf is just a scarf rather than a symbol of support for a cause in another country.  

And that&#039;s leaving aside the fact that the U.S. is not(has never been)  at war with Palestine.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One thing that bothers me about this whole blowup is the assumption by Malkin et al that the average person is as wrapped up in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict/GWOT/Liberal as she is.   It would never occur to her that for 99% of people, a scarf is just a scarf rather than a symbol of support for a cause in another country.  </p>
<p>And that&#8217;s leaving aside the fact that the U.S. is not(has never been)  at war with Palestine.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ChrisK</title>
		<link>http://www.theagitator.com/2008/05/28/dunkin-dhimmitude/comment-page-1/#comment-120588</link>
		<dc:creator>ChrisK</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2008 14:57:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theagitator.com/?p=10056#comment-120588</guid>
		<description>Hold on here, so you&#039;re saying I can show my displeasure with how the Israelis treat Palestinians (walled in cities, restricted travel, no economic potential) by just wearing a scarf?  
AWESOME!
Where do I find one of these?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hold on here, so you&#8217;re saying I can show my displeasure with how the Israelis treat Palestinians (walled in cities, restricted travel, no economic potential) by just wearing a scarf?<br />
AWESOME!<br />
Where do I find one of these?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: witless chum</title>
		<link>http://www.theagitator.com/2008/05/28/dunkin-dhimmitude/comment-page-1/#comment-120518</link>
		<dc:creator>witless chum</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2008 13:12:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theagitator.com/?p=10056#comment-120518</guid>
		<description>#34, 
While I reject Malkin&#039;s entire worldview, I think it might be a more comphrehensible complaint if Ray was wearing the same scarf Yasser Arafat used to sport. But it isn&#039;t even the same scarf, which is why even if the PLO=Nazis it would still be different than your example of swastika bedsheets.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>#34,<br />
While I reject Malkin&#8217;s entire worldview, I think it might be a more comphrehensible complaint if Ray was wearing the same scarf Yasser Arafat used to sport. But it isn&#8217;t even the same scarf, which is why even if the PLO=Nazis it would still be different than your example of swastika bedsheets.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tokin42</title>
		<link>http://www.theagitator.com/2008/05/28/dunkin-dhimmitude/comment-page-1/#comment-120367</link>
		<dc:creator>Tokin42</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2008 10:03:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theagitator.com/?p=10056#comment-120367</guid>
		<description>#30

I&#039;m not sure how I got stuck defending malkin and I don&#039;t know why you and I keep going around but here we are again. You almost got it with your sheet analogy.  If someone is wearing a sheet over their head,in blackface, or a swastika on their purse, then yeah they should have it pointed out to them that that really isn&#039;t appropriate.  I didn&#039;t link that specific patterned keffiyah to the palestinian cause, the palestinians and the rest of the world did.  Trying to wave it off as &quot;everyone in the M.E. wears one&quot; is disingenuous. 

Maybe you could point out in her statement what she said that you have a problem with. What EXACTLY did she say that was out of line?  The fact that she said she was willing to give the business the benefit of the doubt hardly makes her statement incendiary or over the top. She didn&#039;t call for a boycott or firebombing she asked for an explanation.  Her statement doesn&#039;t even rise to the level that starbucks/slutbucks campaign did a couple of weeks ago.  Just because someone is a tool doesn&#039;t mean everything they say has to be blown out of proportion.

BTW, not to you exactly but the others, how did my post #29 get negative karma? Pointing out reality hurt peoples feelings?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>#30</p>
<p>I&#8217;m not sure how I got stuck defending malkin and I don&#8217;t know why you and I keep going around but here we are again. You almost got it with your sheet analogy.  If someone is wearing a sheet over their head,in blackface, or a swastika on their purse, then yeah they should have it pointed out to them that that really isn&#8217;t appropriate.  I didn&#8217;t link that specific patterned keffiyah to the palestinian cause, the palestinians and the rest of the world did.  Trying to wave it off as &#8220;everyone in the M.E. wears one&#8221; is disingenuous. </p>
<p>Maybe you could point out in her statement what she said that you have a problem with. What EXACTLY did she say that was out of line?  The fact that she said she was willing to give the business the benefit of the doubt hardly makes her statement incendiary or over the top. She didn&#8217;t call for a boycott or firebombing she asked for an explanation.  Her statement doesn&#8217;t even rise to the level that starbucks/slutbucks campaign did a couple of weeks ago.  Just because someone is a tool doesn&#8217;t mean everything they say has to be blown out of proportion.</p>
<p>BTW, not to you exactly but the others, how did my post #29 get negative karma? Pointing out reality hurt peoples feelings?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: e. brown</title>
		<link>http://www.theagitator.com/2008/05/28/dunkin-dhimmitude/comment-page-1/#comment-120288</link>
		<dc:creator>e. brown</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2008 08:05:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theagitator.com/?p=10056#comment-120288</guid>
		<description>ah. so malkin is an asshole for making an over-the-top slam of rachel ray for wearing something malkin doesn&#039;t like.....

but balko is a righteous defender of freedom for continually slamming scalia (&quot;scalia&#039;s new professionalism&quot;) for having once said something balko didn&#039;t like. 

got it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>ah. so malkin is an asshole for making an over-the-top slam of rachel ray for wearing something malkin doesn&#8217;t like&#8230;..</p>
<p>but balko is a righteous defender of freedom for continually slamming scalia (&#8220;scalia&#8217;s new professionalism&#8221;) for having once said something balko didn&#8217;t like. </p>
<p>got it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Markley</title>
		<link>http://www.theagitator.com/2008/05/28/dunkin-dhimmitude/comment-page-1/#comment-120236</link>
		<dc:creator>John Markley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2008 06:24:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theagitator.com/?p=10056#comment-120236</guid>
		<description>jwh,

&quot;If the only idiot here is MM, why did DD pull the commercial? If there truly was nothing to be concerned about from either a commercial, or PR, perspective, DD should’ve held their line and kept the commercial…….me thinks DD must’ve had other information available to them, other than the sage advice of these here bloggers……..&quot;

Yes, they had other information.  Specifically, they knew that the country is filled with hysterical idiots who will make a lot of noise if not appeased, and that ditching the ad and pretending to feel about setting off the hysterical idiots was a cheap way to shut them up.

Proctor and Gamble changed their logo- which they had used for over a century- because of religious nutjobs who were claiming that it was a covert reference to the Beast of the Book of Revelations.  Does their failure to &quot;hold the line&quot; mean there&#039;s probably something to that claim, too?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>jwh,</p>
<p>&#8220;If the only idiot here is MM, why did DD pull the commercial? If there truly was nothing to be concerned about from either a commercial, or PR, perspective, DD should’ve held their line and kept the commercial…….me thinks DD must’ve had other information available to them, other than the sage advice of these here bloggers……..&#8221;</p>
<p>Yes, they had other information.  Specifically, they knew that the country is filled with hysterical idiots who will make a lot of noise if not appeased, and that ditching the ad and pretending to feel about setting off the hysterical idiots was a cheap way to shut them up.</p>
<p>Proctor and Gamble changed their logo- which they had used for over a century- because of religious nutjobs who were claiming that it was a covert reference to the Beast of the Book of Revelations.  Does their failure to &#8220;hold the line&#8221; mean there&#8217;s probably something to that claim, too?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fûz</title>
		<link>http://www.theagitator.com/2008/05/28/dunkin-dhimmitude/comment-page-1/#comment-120124</link>
		<dc:creator>Fûz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2008 03:51:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theagitator.com/?p=10056#comment-120124</guid>
		<description>&quot;Dunkin’ Donuts decided it’d be easier just to yank the ad.&quot;  

That should summarize it.  

Oh by the way, the keffiyeh, and the shemagh, are getting popular among bitter, God-fearing gun-clingers such as myself:

http://search.cheaperthandirt.com/search?q=shemagh&amp;site=firsttest&amp;txthide=1&amp;output=xml_no_dtd&amp;client=firsttest&amp;btnG=Search&amp;access=p&amp;ip=69.146.199.107&amp;proxystylesheet=firsttest&amp;getfields=price&amp;getfields=image&amp;oe=UTF-8&amp;filter=p
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_gw?url=search-alias%3Daps&amp;field-keywords=shemagh&amp;x=0&amp;y=0
http://www.uscav.com/ProductInfo.aspx?productid=7193&amp;utm_medium=shoppingengine&amp;utm_source=googlebase&amp;cm_mmc=Google%20Base-_-Products-_-SF-_-V1

There seem to be a lot of gun-clingers interested in them.  

At $15, I could use a couple, though in colors other than the Palestinian-symbolic black and white.  They appear to be practical in the high plains of Eastern Wyoming, which are blown with strong dusty winds.  

Seems like some folks are getting worked up over something slightly more than nothing but still not enough to call something, again.  I wish people would just keep their frigging pants on.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Dunkin’ Donuts decided it’d be easier just to yank the ad.&#8221;  </p>
<p>That should summarize it.  </p>
<p>Oh by the way, the keffiyeh, and the shemagh, are getting popular among bitter, God-fearing gun-clingers such as myself:</p>
<p><a href="http://search.cheaperthandirt.com/search?q=shemagh&#038;site=firsttest&#038;txthide=1&#038;output=xml_no_dtd&#038;client=firsttest&#038;btnG=Search&#038;access=p&#038;ip=69.146.199.107&#038;proxystylesheet=firsttest&#038;getfields=price&#038;getfields=image&#038;oe=UTF-8&#038;filter=p" rel="nofollow">http://search.cheaperthandirt.com/search?q=shemagh&#038;site=firsttest&#038;txthide=1&#038;output=xml_no_dtd&#038;client=firsttest&#038;btnG=Search&#038;access=p&#038;ip=69.146.199.107&#038;proxystylesheet=firsttest&#038;getfields=price&#038;getfields=image&#038;oe=UTF-8&#038;filter=p</a><br />
<a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_gw?url=search-alias%3Daps&#038;field-keywords=shemagh&#038;x=0&#038;y=0&#038;tag=theagitator-20" rel="nofollow">http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_gw?url=search-alias%3Daps&#038;field-keywords=shemagh&#038;x=0&#038;y=0&#038;tag=theagitator-20</a><br />
<a href="http://www.uscav.com/ProductInfo.aspx?productid=7193&#038;utm_medium=shoppingengine&#038;utm_source=googlebase&#038;cm_mmc=Google%20Base-_-Products-_-SF-_-V1" rel="nofollow">http://www.uscav.com/ProductInfo.aspx?productid=7193&#038;utm_medium=shoppingengine&#038;utm_source=googlebase&#038;cm_mmc=Google%20Base-_-Products-_-SF-_-V1</a></p>
<p>There seem to be a lot of gun-clingers interested in them.  </p>
<p>At $15, I could use a couple, though in colors other than the Palestinian-symbolic black and white.  They appear to be practical in the high plains of Eastern Wyoming, which are blown with strong dusty winds.  </p>
<p>Seems like some folks are getting worked up over something slightly more than nothing but still not enough to call something, again.  I wish people would just keep their frigging pants on.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

