Before The Left Attacks Malkin

Michelle Malkin has received word from the University of Arizona that blogger Deborah Frisch has resigned her position. You can read more at link above. But before the Left starts attacking Michelle for this - and they will, she being the most visible drum they like to beat on at times like this; everyone should pause and give this some thought.

Frisch made some reprehensible and ultimately extremely disturbing remarks, particularly with the whole Jon Benet story as related to Jeff Goldstein's two year old child. And there was more.

No public servant, military man or woman, public school teacher, or even corporate employee would be able to make such remarks without some serious consequences. At the very least, they would likely be mandated to attend some form of counseling, or possible psychiatric evaluation - and it is, first and foremost, the Left which fosters the kind of thought policing today which makes that so.

Deborah Frisch is not a victim in this. She is a well-educated, experienced, professional adult. Over time she has apparently displayed a consistent irresponsible, if not genuinely disturbed, pattern of behavior in and around political discourse while on line.

She resigned either out of instability, or a desire to not face the consequences for her actions in this latest incident. Neither Michelle Malkin, nor any other blogger has the authority to fire Frisch - that's a decision that would have been left to the University of Arizona.

By resigning, Frisch has short-circuited any such process. And that's her right. But doing so does not in any way make her a victim in this case, of Malkin's, or of anyone else. In the end, what Deborah Frisch appears to be is a victim of herself. And beyond encouraging her to take a look at herself and possibly get some help, there should be little more to say about this whole affair, on the Left, or on the Right. It's more sad than it is instructive in any real regard.

Bill at PunditGuy is concerned about what this type of thing does for blogging in general.

Comments

[SinCerely]

Michele is the one who walks away from this with her head high.

[Florida Patty]

and here I was on a cruise to Alaska and a lovely three nights in Seattle. Alas, I wasn't sleepless and missed all the fun. Now I have some catching up to do.

It's always the kids that take the hits. ..shees

[S. Weasel]

Whaddya mean, EVEN corporate employee? In my experience as an humble cubicle monkey, the real world is far, far mor strict about matters of discretion and public behavior that might reflect badly on the company. I have to sign the professional conduct policy once a year, and it now explicitly has reference to online conduct. And, yes, they enforce it. I'm frequently astonished by the demeanor of government employees and acadamics online. Out here on the frozen tundra, freedom of speech doesn't mean "talking like a damn fool in public wearing the company t-shirt."

[rwilymz]

Damn. How can I get a stalker?

[Mike]

Out of curiosity I went to her site and read her excuses.....how can any rational person use the words "joke" and "Death of a Toddler" in the same sentence?

[Lesbiencestmoi]

I have posted on several blogs today regarding this disturbing attack. I am a part of what nearly every blog I have visited has called the "unhinged left" and I am sickened by what this woman did. It would never occur to me for a moment to support someone who has made these types of threats and committed what I believe to be an illegal and immoral act. This is not about the unhinged left, it is about the unhinged Debbie Frisch, adjunct instructor of psychology at University of Arizona.

Question her humanity...and certainly her emotional stability. But by demoting this to merely a political difference you, in actuality, give those like Frisch a wider avenue to commit these inexcusable acts because you give her a stronger voice, you give her credibility - as though she belongs to some larger group that would subscribe to her maniacal and disgraceful behavior. Don't give her that. And I have put these thoughts front and center on my very liberal blog.

[Buzz]

Hmmm...I wonder what Malkin/Goldstein, et al, have to say about Ann Coulter sayiing Tim McVeigh should have bombed the New York Times (think any reporters would have died in that building?), or suggesting someone should poison Justice Stevens (where's Lucretia Borgia when you need her?), or that Congressman Murtha deserves to be fragged (blown up with a fragmentation grenade, not that there's anything wrong with that).

But, wait, she was just "joking," right? Like Fritsch was "joking"? No moral equivalency, here; move along, nothing to see.

[rwilymz]

"Congressman Murtha deserves to be fragged (blown up with a fragmentation grenade, not that there's anything wrong with that)"

For the record, Mr Lightyear, "fragged" means to be killed by your own men, by whatever means.

"But, wait, she was just "joking," right? Like Fritsch was "joking"? No moral equivalency, here; move along, nothing to see."

Like it or not, we have laws that distinguish between making veiled threats against adults and veiled threats against chilluns.

You can think there shouldn't be such a distinction, and in some ways I think there shouldn't be such a distinction, but we do make that distinction. And Frisch's comments were a veiled threat -- several of them -- against a child. That's beyond poor form.

[Don]

These women, Coulter and Malkin, are in real life, very nice people from people that know them. Not at all as they appear in their writings, and/or Tv.