See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Trackbacks

1. Old War Dogs
2. Business » MoveOn.org and Company’s attacks on Rep. Brian Baird intensify
3. Michelle Malkin » Another Democrat visits Iraq, sees success…and will soon be a MoveOn punching bag

Trackback URL

Comments

1. #1
   On September 20th, 2007 at 9:39 pm, AlohaGuy said:

   Win without War - sort of reminds me of Whip Inflation Now (WIN) buttons. Let’s see, I’ll hold my breath until Iraq is stable, and keep holding it until Iran gives up it’s nuclear ambitions. Then I’ll be Blue. Hmmm. Maybe Blue Staters are suffering from lack of oxygen.

2. #2
   On September 20th, 2007 at 9:40 pm, katieanne said:

   Rep. Baird gets my respect. These left groups are out to destroy our country. I am hoping that people are paying attention to what is going on and the left will end up destroying itself; people will see the left for the anti-American haters that they are. The left tolerates no views but its own.

3. #3
   On September 20th, 2007 at 9:41 pm, ajmontana said:

   I just sent an e-mail thanking him, also mentioned my sister and three neices live in washington state and will speak with them regarding his stand. We need more like him with backbone not jellyfish.

4. #4
   On September 20th, 2007 at 9:53 pm, hadsil said:

   They’re upset they can’t call him a chickenhawk.

5. #5
   On September 20th, 2007 at 10:01 pm, katieanne said:

   Does it not occur to these Democrats who are too afraid to speak out against Moveon and these radical left groups that voters will probably come to the conclusion they don’t have the guts to make the hard decisions if they would get to the Oval Office? Good grief. These cowards are too afraid to appear on FOX News debates. They should be running the country?

6. #6
   On September 20th, 2007 at 10:07 pm, IrishEi said:

   MoveOn is a cancer that grew out of the festering boil and curse upon this country: the Clintons. It must be excised along with the surrounding pus that begat it.

7. #7
   On September 20th, 2007 at 10:08 pm, michael griggs said:

   You are right Michelle,they are like the Hadjis,they slaughter their own.He doesn’t deserve this but what will they do,get behind some shill with no experience that gets blown out by the real majority of voters in that district.The more they act like this the better I like it.The people I know see through this kind of crap.

8. #8
   On September 20th, 2007 at 10:18 pm, bear1909 said:

   Another nail in the coffin of elite skepticism and secular values.

   The list doesn’t represent one single grassroots movement of resistance.

   And the public knows this more and more as “prop” organizations such as Code Pink are used to trot out MoveOn’s message *everywhere*. This is no different.

   And who is the brainiac behind using an “imported” makeshift front group such as “Win Without BallsWar” in local papers to make a political point with a paid ad?

   Ever been to Olympia? It might be left leaning in its elected offices, but it is not exactly Berkeley or San Fran Cesspool. There are thousands of good, basic, decent, down home folks who care about *their* community despite what the imported usual suspects think.

   Again, MoveOn is overplaying its hand with the faceless ads in the paper- no matter what the cause, it is a drive by swipe that comes off as sleazy and elitist- “Here, take the money and print this ad. We’re getting our message out.”

   Well, what about making a connection with people you want to vote your way? Whatever happened to that style of building coalitions and grassroots powerbases?

   The Howard Dean fiasco, despite huge fundraising excesses on the Internet, didn’t help him or Candleface get into the White House. They pose as populist- but they don’t take the time to build the relationships that will help them represent.

   MoveOn is making the wrong move by making the war the issue. The Dhimmicrats are traditionally soft on defense. They should leave Baird alone and let their ranks stabilize on Capitol Hill so that they can point to somebody who has a spine on defense.

   Instead, the Dhimmi Party is letting MoveOn eat their own in order to establish some kind of absurd “NO WAR” absolutist party.

   That dog will not hunt with the majority of Americans- especially in the face of NutJob’s antics in Syria (Sarin Gas? Alot of people have seen Sean Connery’s movie “The Rock”- they know how bad Sarin is) and at the UN.

   I wonder if there is a tie between Soros and NutJob, Soros and Chavez, Soros and Assad(a) in Syria.

   MoveOn is making some huge blunders backing these thugs by default.

   There has got to be some way to get them over the money they have. But who will investigate?

9. #9
   On September 20th, 2007 at 10:30 pm, Snooper said:

   Brian Baird spoke to us the other night at dinner when the Vets For Freedom received our In Briefings.

   I will NEVER forget one of many statements he made. He was asked if he feared losing his congressional seat. This is what he said…verbatim…

   “I can always get another job. I can’t get another country.”

   That statement says and means quite a bit.

   Soldier On, Brian Baird. Soldier On.

   The below is my post after that meeting…

   http://takeourcountryback-snooper.blogspot.com/2007/09/vets-for-freedom-in-dc.html

10. #10
    On September 20th, 2007 at 10:33 pm, ajmontana said:

    Snooper
    I will NEVER forget one of many statements he made. He was asked if he feared losing his congressional seat. This is what he said…verbatim…

    “I can always get another job. I can’t get another country.”

    That statement says and means quite a bit.

    Soldier On, Brian Baird. Soldier On.

    How cool is that!?

11. #11
    On September 20th, 2007 at 10:49 pm, DirkBelig said:

    If America was truly being ruled by a repressive, totalitarian, theocratic dictatorship as the Can’tMoveOn.Argh/Soros/Kos/Sullivan/etc. groups constantly shriek that we are suffering under the yoke of, all these political outfits like Can’tMoveOn.Argh; Treason Media outlets like the NY Times and WaPo; and celebutards like Bill Maher and Sean Penn would be rounded up, shut down, tried, imprisoned and executed for their seditions and treasons.

    The fact that they aren’t being silenced is the ultimate proof of the invalidity of their claims.

    In other words: If we can’t easily get away from 24/7 news reports about them complaining about their stifled speech rights, then there is nowhere near the level of repression being falsely advertised.

    In four letters, Can’tMoveOn.Argh and Pals need to STFU.

12. #12
    On September 21st, 2007 at 2:04 am, CommentGuy said:

    Even the left wing sites are pointing at Move on.

    This comes from the blog DownWithTyranny

    According to an article in today’s Congressional Quarterly MoveOn is polling its members to see how they feel about going after especially bad DINOs (Democrats in Name Only). MoveOn has already done very effective TV advertising in southwestern Washington state after Brian Baird started voting with Republicans on the war and spouting GOP talking points on television.

    Baird could have plenty of company: 59 House Democrats voted in May against a bill that would have required President Bush to withdraw all troops from Iraq within six months. Meanwhile, 41 Democrats in the House and 16 in the Senate endorsed last month’s expansion of the administration’s authority to conduct warrantless surveillance of terrorism suspects– a move that “capitulated to President Bush and politics of fear over wiretapping,” in MoveOn’s view.

    If the membership were to approve the strategy, MoveOn would keep a close eye on how Democrats voted this fall on the next efforts to end the war, while gauging their vulnerability in a primary challenge.

13. #13
    On September 21st, 2007 at 2:09 am, CommentGuy said:

    This comment from Matt Stroller over at Open Left

    This is terrific to see.

    Democrats opposed to the war held their tongues about Baird last week. But on Thursday, Rep. Pete Stark, D-Calif., told Congressional Quarterly: “I’ll give Brian a gun and let him go to Iraq and shoot whoever he wants.”
    When asked about Stark’s comment, Baird said, “What was that all about?”

    Democratic colleagues attacking Baird personally in his local press market is real progress. And then there’s this.

    Meantime, Baird has so many requests for interviews that he already has offered a two-hour media availability Monday, after Petraeus and the U.S. Ambassador to Iraq, Ryan Crocker, testify before the House.
    Gross.

14. #14
    On September 21st, 2007 at 2:12 am, CommentGuy said:

    More from Paul Abrams over at HuffPo

    Congress will press Petraeus on the proper benchmarks to use, and whether security has indeed improved.

    That will be the debate. The big question, should the US pursue the military solution to Iraq or start drawing down troops, will then be addressed in the context of those benchmarks—do we REALLY have evidence of progress or not? With no clear answer, “doubt” will favor the position of no change of policy. Congressman Brian Baird (D-WA) is the first Democrat to buy that line.

    Once again, the Dems will have been snookered into a debate on THEIR terms. And, once again, more American sons and daughters, more US mothers and fathers, will lose their lives and limbs to serve the vanity of George Bush and Dick Cheney. [Or, as we have just learned, so that "ol' George can replenish the ol' coffers."]

15. #15
    On September 21st, 2007 at 2:13 am, CommentGuy said:

    Donald Douglas at Burkean Reflections observes

    In the Hell Hath No Fury sweepstakes, groups like MoveOn.org are gearing up to take on a new set of perceived traitors in their midst–Democrats who have acknowledged some success from the troop surge in Iraq.

    Chief among the targets is Washington Congressman Brian Baird, whose indiscretion was recognizing progress on the ground, despite having initially opposed the surge and having opposed the war in the first place. After a recent trip to Iraq, Mr. Baird said: “One of the things that gets very little attention is that virtually every other country I visited says it would be a mistake to pull out now.”

16. #16
    On September 21st, 2007 at 7:32 am, Ralph Gizzip said:

    I happen to agree with Lt. Gen. Gard. We should heed the lessons of Vietnam. But those lessons should be: unleash the military to do what it does best and ignore the brainless and lopsided reporting of the MSM. The Viet Cong themselves said they were crushed after the Tet Offensive but Walter Cronkite’s reporting of the event gave them hope (well-founded as it turned out) they could outlast the US in the overall war. Once McNamara and LBJ started micro-managing the war from DC the military’s hands were tied and there was no way they could win.

17. #17
    On September 21st, 2007 at 8:00 am, englishqueen01 said:

    “Win Without War”?

    Are these people serious? Do they not know the only way to “win” without war is to become part of the caliphate?

18. #18
    On September 21st, 2007 at 8:06 am, On-my-soap-box said:

    I imagine that most of the criticism he is getting are from people who have NOT visited the troops. It boggles the mind how these people can even have an opinion about his position. I have an opinion based on what he did and I emailed him and thanked him.

    As for my position on the war, it is based on the word I get from the men and women on the ground (not polls like our liberal friends) and all I get is favorable so, I have a favorable opinion of the war.

    For our liberal friends out there here is a clue. If the Rainbow/Push Coalition is in favor of something, you should distance yourself from it.

    GOD Bless our troops and President!

19. #19
    On September 21st, 2007 at 8:15 am, pgtips said:

    I have a question. There are many milblogs that support the mission in Iraq. Sites like Blackfive, etc.

    Are there any sites where active duty troops (i.e. the real boots on the ground) disagree with the war? I have not come across any, perhaps I’m looking at the wrong place?

20. #20
    On September 21st, 2007 at 8:17 am, locomotivebreath1901 said:

    God bless America. The system works - and highlights the vindictive vitriol that exemplifies the left.

21. #21
    On September 21st, 2007 at 8:45 am, lgm said:

    Anti war ads are not a cancer. Political debate is not a disease. Moveon.org does not own the Democratic party or vice versa.

22. #22
    On September 21st, 2007 at 9:04 am, aaron2 said:

    It might be more helpful to think of the Ww/oW types as a cult than a political movement. They’re not really capable of evangelicizing so much as they focus on whipping up their existing membership into a funds-giving frenzy. A key part of that movement is preventing your current members from “defection” from the group norms and the group identity. Baird must be punished, far far worse than a neocon chickenhawk, because he has seen their light and known their truth and after all that, he has chosen to reject it in favor of objective reality.

    Pragmatically, like Lieberman and Harman before him, Baird can find out that every congressional district in America has more *sane* people in the middle than far-left crazies. His flip-flop on the war will essentially make him bulletproof from left or right next year.

23. #23
    On September 21st, 2007 at 9:55 am, Godzilla said:

    Anti war ads are not a cancer.

    Except for when you defame and insult an American military general which provides “comfort and aid” to our enemies and classifies as that silly little “treason” thing! I know, I know - that’s so passé and neocon of me!

    Political debate is not a disease.

    Agreed! Yay, bi-partisanship! Is someone arguing that it IS a disease? Would you care to point that out? Other than, of course, the insane political leftist groups great American political groups Michelle has listed above who seem to think that disagreeing with them IS a disease?

    Moveon.org does not own the Democratic party or vice versa.

    And thank God they don’t! They do, however, own a number of leftist (including some presidential candidates!) and they (Moveon) viciously attack anyone who disagrees with them - Mr. Baird for example! How dare he not tow the political anti-war rhetoric cable! Gosh!

    Also, from another post:

    “I can always get another job. I can’t get another country.”

    That is an AMAZING and humbling quote. Just… Wow. And that right there is what it’s all about.

24. #24
    On September 21st, 2007 at 9:59 am, Marshall Russ said:

    I posted this yesterday. These people are motivated and highly funded. Go and read the full article at the link.

    MoveOn: “We Bought” the Democratic Party
    By Ben Johnson
    FrontPageMagazine.com | Friday, December 10, 2004

    A standard “action alert” has provided a rare glimpse inside the mind of the Shadow Party.

    In a December 9th e-mail signed by “Eli Pariser, Justin Ruben, and the whole MoveOn PAC team,” the Soros front group stated: “In the last year, grassroots contributors like us gave more than $300 million to the Kerry campaign and the DNC, and proved that the Party doesn’t need corporate cash to be competitive. Now it’s our Party: we bought it, we own it, and we’re going to take it back.”

    To clarify, the hysterical Left believes not only that America’s oldest political party is for sale, but that George Soros has already made the down payment.

25. #25
    On September 21st, 2007 at 10:06 am, franksalterego said:

    My two-bits…

    Some Democrats have compared the MoveOn.org ad to the Swift Boat Veterans’ criticism of John Kerry.

    Completely forgetting, John Kerry IS a Swift Boat Veteran.

    Who is better qualified to criticise, than those he served with?

    And, what qualifies MoveOn.org to criticise Petraeus?

    The comparison is ludicrous.

26. #26
    On September 21st, 2007 at 10:45 am, Marshall Russ said:

    Right on franksalterego.John Kerry dropped the lawsuit against The Swiftboaters after he said he wouldn’t. Funny thing about going to court,you have to deal with facts as opposed to he said ,she said.

27. #27
    On September 21st, 2007 at 10:53 am, On-my-soap-box said:

    Let’s not forget Jon Cary showed his support for the troops yesterday with a “nay” vote. Traitor!

28. #28
    On September 21st, 2007 at 6:05 pm, duff65 said:

    moveon.org is so bad that it is hard to express it. We may have “1st ammendment freedoms” but they violate them. Going after a sitting congressman with a reasoned position on the war is just the tip of the iceberg. There must be something about their funding that could be used to shut them up.

29. #29
    On September 21st, 2007 at 6:12 pm, geminicontender said:

    What will drive the moonbats crazy is those of us on the right who actually do thank Rep. Baird for sticking to his principles. Nothing worse than a ‘righty’ congratulating a ‘lefty’ on a job well done:):):)

30. #30
    On October 3rd, 2007 at 2:57 pm, sassyassdad said:

    Brian Baird is my representative. Not that I ever voted for him, but alas they only give me one vote.

    It is, however, a real pleasure to see him do the right thing for a change.

    I even felt obliged to send him my thanks. Doubt that it will evolve into a vote, but …