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.

Comments

1. #101
   On October 3rd, 2007 at 1:22 pm, dakine said:

   orlando, sorry, no sale brotha. To equate the credibility of Rush Limbaugh with General Clark is to put it bluntly, ridiculous. I said I’d give Rush the benefit of the doubt on this one (very skeptically I might add), but I’m sorry, he’s an entertainer by and large, and to equate him to a guy with the credentials and background of a Wes Clark is pretty weak. General Clark forgot more yesterday about military strategy and foreign policy than Limbaugh will ever know in his entire life. And he still got out of going to Vietnam because he had a boil on his ass. Just because a guy is on the radio spouting stuff you want to hear doesn’t make him worthy of anyone’s respect. As far as I know Limbaugh hasn’t done anything in his life (beyond being a blowhard on the radio) remotely resembling General Clark’s list of accomplishments.

   Like I said previously, criticize away with respect to Clark’s political positions (and I disagree with many of his positions) or his stand on the particular issue at hand, but to attack his character is shameless and without honor.

2. #102
   On October 3rd, 2007 at 1:49 pm, PAUL TROMMER said:

   I Listened to Clark lie and totally misrepresent Limbaugh.
   His knowledge of the military is eclipsed by his dishonesty.
   A liar is simply a liar–put some stars on his shoulder if you like, but he is still a liar.

3. #103
   On October 3rd, 2007 at 1:59 pm, RetFireman said:

   Let’s also not forget that this is a guy who got out of going to Vietnam because he had a boil on his ass.

   This very statement, that the military hating Left decided to adopt during Kerry’s campaign and who have bastardized it in the debates concerning the war saying that those who did and do not serve are incapable of supporting the war (without acknowledging the hypocrisy of the vast majority of them not serving yet seeing no issue with speaking against the war and the troops) is basically going to get them into trouble, and become moot for them.

   They actually lost the abitlity to castigate anyone under that premise when they not only elected an admitted draft dodger who also protested against his own country on foreign soil, to two terms as a President, but their front-runners also did not serve in the military. All the Left’s lies about Bush’s service should be held to their own candidates standard. (I think that came out right). Hillary did not serve in any shape or form in the military, and is actually on record as disparaging and insulting the military on numerous occasions before, during and after being the FIrst Lady. Obama and the Ambulance Chaser also had plenty of opportunity to serve and chose not to. These are the people that the Left wishes to run this country during a time of Islamic uprising that began with the forming of the Islamic Brotherhood and their stated goal of acheiving a Global Caliphate through violence and intimidation. These people are the ones they wish to lead our military while we are at war with fanatics that Islam declared on us in 1998, and has repeated the declaration numerous times along with heinously cowardly attacks on innocent civilians.

   I think it is time for everyone on the Left to finally admit and face up to their hypocrisy. It is bad enough for them to insult every sinlge person serving in the Guard every time they insult Bush for his service, belittling it, but it is even worse to claim the moral high ground about people’s service when they are flush with people who not only did not serve, but actively treated the military with contempt and disdain for over 40 years, and have plans to continue to do so in future “rallies”.

   No where does it say that anyone’s right to speak or hold an opinion on the war is permitted only if you have worn the uniform of this country.

   Knock it off.

4. #104
   On October 3rd, 2007 at 2:04 pm, RetFireman said:

   Also, Dakne, I recommend you do some research into how “great” Clark was concerning his little campaigns in Eastern Europe. I think you will find he was not exactly the great and powerful general and leader the Left holds him up to be.

   Also, it is hypocritical of the Left to laud Clark’s record after what they did and are doing to Petraeus. You can not have it both ways. Either all of it is on the table or none of it.

5. #105
   On October 3rd, 2007 at 3:20 pm, dakine said:

   What the “left” says about Rush or Clark is only interesting to me insofar that I’m interested in hearing all sorts of points of view. I said it on another thread, but I’ll say it again here, so you know where I’m coming from. I’m an independent, and in the current political environment I guess I would be considered a moderate who is slightly right of center on most issues and a bit left of center on a couple. Push me and I’d described myself as an “old school” conservative with libertarian tendencies and a dash of “classic/very old school” liberalism thrown in for good measure. At the end of the day, I’m pragmatic and more interested in solutions and results than rigid ideology.

   Of course, it goes without saying that Limbaugh, Clark and everyone else in the public eye, or otherwise, is entitled to an opinion. However, some opinions have significantly more weight than others, and when I want to hear the “pro-war” side of the Iraq issue, Rush isn’t going to cut it for me. I’ll listen to someone such as Hugh Hewitt or John McCain…an individual with credentials and integrity in other words. And, yeah, Rush worming his way out of serving his country based on a pimple on his ass makes anything he says regarding the military suspect to me. As I said before, I come from a big, long-time military family and I think the guy is a big coward and a phony.

   BTW, RetFireman, if your handle indeed mean that you are a retired firefighter, thank you very much for your service. I have the utmost respect for your profession and its members. In another life, I’d love to have been a firefighter.

6. #106
   On October 3rd, 2007 at 3:30 pm, dakine said:

   “insofar as” I should say.

   Sorry for the horrible grammar.

7. #107
   On October 3rd, 2007 at 3:41 pm, NJRepublican said:

   #87 My senators are on the list, surprise, surprise. At least I’ll get a non-response response from Lautenberg. I haven’t heard back from Menendez on any topic.

   Not surprised at all. I never got a response from either when I called about shamnesty. I called and asked “As a US citizen, which laws am I allowed to break?”

   It would be nice if our State would WAKE UP and vote for Senators who would be better representatives.

8. #108
   On October 3rd, 2007 at 5:04 pm, dmartin said:

   dakine said:
   As I said before, I come from a big, long-time military family and I think the guy is a big coward and a phony.

   I listen to Rush pretty much daily, and I’m not hearing what your hearing. First, he’s done nothing but support the troops. He admits that what he does is nothing compared to the sacrifice of our military men and women. He says this almost daily. Rigid Ideology? What are you talking about. It sounds like you never listen to him. He’s very practical, and that’s his apeal.

9. #109
   On October 3rd, 2007 at 5:05 pm, dmartin said:

   appeal

10. #110
    On October 3rd, 2007 at 5:11 pm, RetFireman said:

    That’s what it means. Disabled retired fireman, from on-the-job injury

11. #111
    On October 3rd, 2007 at 7:13 pm, AlohaDaze said:

    Lovely. Both Akaka and Inouye [Hawaii] jumped on the Crush Rush resolution.

    I realize that Hawaii is liberal, but I keep hoping that maybe these two won’t blindly follow the pack.

    I’ve been hopeful, but the situation is actually hopeless.

    RLR

12. #112
    On October 3rd, 2007 at 7:43 pm, Buck I said:

    I can’t stand Rush,or Hannity, but you gotta let the free market and advertisers decide who speaks on the airwaves. Anything else is simply unAmerican. First, Rush, next YOUR favorite Deejay or talkshow host is gone, then nobody is happy. The dems need to quit being wimpy and scared yet bullying at the same time. Even though it may be hard to tell from blogs and callers most Americans can think for themselves. If conservative radio was so dominant, there wouldn’t have been the Clinton years, and then the election of 06. The democrats in Congress are panicking, scrambling, and actin a fool for no good reason at all. This Congress has been a joke so far, and blown opportunies.

13. #113
    On October 4th, 2007 at 12:04 am, RetFireman said:

    I gotta tell you, after watching “The War” on PBS, Inouye has more than earned the right to be a putz. He was a true hero 67+ years ago. It doesn’t make him right, nor does it give him a pass, but damn…what he did, and how he served…my hat is way off to the man and anyone else who has served, especially in that war. It is too bad he has not learned the lesson of what happens when you appease tyrants and evil.

14. #114
    On October 4th, 2007 at 9:06 am, general company said:

    One of my Sen signed the letter, Mary Landrieu. I am very disapointed, I had thought she was a “sane” Dem, but I guess not.
    The letter I wrote:

    How dare you represent us with untruths. You have disgraced us by investing in the lies told by the socialist like Soros and other far left organizations. I had always thought you were a real leader, I guess I was wrong. I will work tirelessly to replace your vision based on lies, with TRUTH. Condemn the lies and the liars, be a true leader!!!