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. #1
   On March 12th, 2008 at 9:53 pm, Ralph Gizzip said:

   How could she not know about the Internet?!? Hell, her buddy Algore invented the darned thing.

2. #2
   On March 12th, 2008 at 9:54 pm, dartagnans_blade said:

   So the mob screams “offensive remark…see racist” and you defend mock her? Regardless of her fringe past we should be defending her today. I don’t get you Michelle. Kinda like cutting off your nose to spite your face.
   Wait it’s kinda like BillO and his Sharpton buddy….yeah?

3. #3
   On March 12th, 2008 at 9:58 pm, see-dubya said:

   This may seriously damage her political career.

4. #4
   On March 12th, 2008 at 10:03 pm, Michelle Malkin said:

   dartagnans_blade: here’s what i said yesterday…

   Geraldine Ferraro opened her mouth and said something that would have gotten any Republican who said it drummed off the public stage…Live by identity politics, die by identity politics.

   And yes, yes, I will mock her for whining about her comments getting wide dissemination.

   see-dubya:

   ha.

5. #5
   On March 12th, 2008 at 10:05 pm, corona said:

   The Daily Breeze has never recovered from losing That’s Jake.

6. #6
   On March 12th, 2008 at 10:05 pm, ajmontana said:

   lol @ #3….

7. #7
   On March 12th, 2008 at 10:19 pm, DesertLover said:

   Once again the libs have had their words parsed by their own MSM zealots and must pay the price …

   The need for parsing all started when Billy Boy … coming up with new definitions for words like “sex” … parsed every word of every question and its answer trying to avoid the truth at every turn …

   Now it has evolved into any level of criticism of BO is racist and any level of criticism of HRC is chauvinistic …

   You reap what you sow … and the Dems are finally having to reap 50 some odd years of their manipulative ways … it is all coming home to roost …

8. #8
   On March 12th, 2008 at 10:19 pm, teresafromtejas said:

   Yep, the internets is everywhere. Beware!

9. #9
   On March 12th, 2008 at 10:21 pm, dartagnans_blade said:

   Mock away but in the end we will all sow what she reaps. Any and I do mean any comments deemed “offensive” will be brought before the altar of Sharpton and everyone, again see BillO, will recoil at the percussions.
   We should defend her right to say it at the same time as we remind her, as the ever persuasive Larry Elder did today, of all the times she didn’t. But defend her first.

10. #10
    On March 12th, 2008 at 10:27 pm, dartagnans_blade said:

    Reap what she sows….lol
    Sorry I’m beat, long day with a tired sick horse…lol

11. #11
    On March 12th, 2008 at 10:29 pm, rooster said:

    This race issue is playing right into Barrack playbook. He has 20 years of listening to his pastor talk about bad white America.

    McCain is incapable of criticizing B Hussein Obama.

    Be very afraid….affirmative action under an Obama POTUS will not go away, but will shut down the already silent majority!!!

12. #12
    On March 12th, 2008 at 10:33 pm, pubscout said:

    Actually, her statement was inaccurate. Obama is not black. He’s HALF black. We just never hear about the white half.

13. #13
    On March 12th, 2008 at 10:37 pm, Tennessee Dave said:

    Also: There’s this thing called the Internet, which even little, non-national newspapers publish on now.

    Maybe she needs to talk to the inventor of the internet and get the scoop on how the world works nowadays.
    Of course, that’s only if the Goracle hasn’t gotten so big he has his own satillites now.

14. #14
    On March 12th, 2008 at 10:51 pm, BrianNY said:

    #12 pubscout said:

    Obama is not black. He’s HALF black.

    As an American of overly proportionate whiteness, is it silly of me to be immensely proud of Obama’s 50% whiteness? I mean, when is the last time we’ve had a 50% white guy actually have the chance to possibly become our next President of the United States? Jessica Alba can keep her “brown” baby…I mean, c’mon…Obama’s half white!

    Here’s a shout-out to all my half-white homies: say it loud, “I’m half white and I’m proud!”

    Yes we can!!

15. #15
    On March 12th, 2008 at 10:53 pm, BrianNY said:

    Come to think of it, now that Michelle Obama has never been prouder of her Country, is it only 50% of the time?

16. #16
    On March 12th, 2008 at 11:16 pm, Alphonse said:

    Obama support riding on racism

    RACISM: Edward Mulindwa

    After all the crisscrossing opinions about Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, I have not failed to notice one poignant factor in all these deliberations. As Africans/Blacks, we are often ready to identify with people we think are more like us rather than with what will benefit us.

    If Obama was standing for presidency in an African country, all those from his ethnic group would identify with him. In that case, we would call it tribalism.

    Now that Obama is standing in USA where tribes don’t matter, we see 90 per cent of African-Americans voting for him. But rather than call it racism, we claim he is a unifier.

17. #17
    On March 12th, 2008 at 11:35 pm, Tuesday said:

    Let’s say Obama was any other ethnicity but Black. Do you suppose Oprah would campaign for him? On what basis? Is there any compelling issue that Obama embraces that Oprah and the rest of the Obamanation sees as their issue, too? Just askin’.

18. #18
    On March 12th, 2008 at 11:46 pm, Jim M. said:

    Won’t take long for Gerry to realize she should be attacking the real culprit – Al Gore – for inventing the damn internets!

19. #19
    On March 13th, 2008 at 6:49 am, mlnicosia said:

    Lots of BHO supporters here lately. Even MM seems to be unable to give GF any credit.

    GF is standing up against racism – she’s simply pointing out that many people are supporting BHO simply because he is black and that is a racial decision.

    MM has not made any credible remarks that go to the heart of what GF said. All accounts here are just hateful rhetoric because GF is a liberal.

    MM says: Geraldine Ferraro opened her mouth and said something that would have gotten any Republican who said it drummed off the public stage…

    So somehow that makes GF wrong? Because even though it was right on the money we as conservatives won’t support the truth when it comes from the mouth of a liberal?

    MM doesn’t tell us what is incorrect about GF statements she just attacks and adds nothing to support her attack except to say that a republican couldn’t get away with it. Some logic.

    All polls show that clearly BHO gets more votes than HRC because he is black – i don’t like either one but facts are facts.

    There is a lot of racism in the dem party and that is what GF refers to and that is what MM should attack – not the truth.

20. #20
    On March 13th, 2008 at 7:42 am, dartagnans_blade said:

    Exactly………..

21. #21
    On March 13th, 2008 at 8:21 am, erbarker said:

    Actually, this is very good. The whole world is learning what a bunch of hypocrites and racist the democrats are. Think you Geraldine!

22. #22
    On March 13th, 2008 at 8:24 am, rooster said:

    Those that think Ms Malkin has to point out the lefts infatuation with gender and race miss her point on GF.

    It is always about race and gender with the dems, now they are living and dieing by their creed.

    Who and why is Barrack even a front runner except for the fact he is black and too many Americans feel a nostalgic guilt. A guilt that has been paid for in a Civil War, and the Civil Rights Acts of the 60′s.

    We are 50 years past affirmative action and the civil rights act and the dems keep living off of fears,anxieties and lies of the minorities.

    I worked for UPS in Bamberg, Germany for 3 years, when applying for the job they asked; “What is your citizenship”? No racial or ethnic questions. When we make it back to this point we will overcome the reverse racism that is settling into our society.

23. #23
    On March 13th, 2008 at 8:26 am, JHSII said:

    I see both mlnicosia and dartagnans_blade missing Michelle’s point entirely – dartagnans_blade more than once.

    The point isn’t what Geraldine said; the point is that she said in a place where she really truly thought that nobody would hear it except the very limited audience that was there.

    The point is that Geraldine Ferraro opened her mouth and said something that would have gotten any Republican who said it drummed off the public stage…

    Michelle was exactly correct on both counts.

    Geraldine didn’t think anyone else would hear what she said because she’s used to the old media covering for her – regardless of the veracity of her statements. And yes, if a Republican or Conservative even came close to saying what many democrats and liberals say, they are villified and demonized by the old media.

    Welcome to the new world of the internets, baby!

24. #24
    On March 13th, 2008 at 9:04 am, and Im all out of bubblegum said:

    JHSII – exactly, you beat me to it.

    Michelle is eloquent and clear enough to point out the right/wrong of a statement that GF (or any Dem)made; that’s not the point. What is the point (like Michelle said) is that if a conservative said the exact same thing, we’d probably be seeing a headline on Drudge saying “XX says Obama’s blackness not enough“, with some other outlets chastising XX for not being cognizant enough about reality to know of the far-reaching scope of the internet.

    That’s the point; the duplicity.

25. #25
    On March 13th, 2008 at 9:05 am, duff65 said:

    Has political correctness this bad? She makes a statement that is 100% correct in every detail and it provokes this kind of a firestorm.

26. #26
    On March 13th, 2008 at 9:10 am, mlnicosia said:

    JHSII #23 you are really naive if you believe that a political maven like GF knows less about the consequences of public speech than you do.

    You are the one who is obviously off the mark if you think what she said is less important than where she said it – its so absurd i can’t say anymore about that.

    The fact that many of us believe that a republican who says it would be ‘villified’ as you say only detracts from the message. It serves no purpose unless your purpose is to whine.

    The fact that she is being ‘villified’ by both sides – including you and MM – defeats your argument anyway.

    I saw GF on H&C and she was not whining as MM says – she was angry that she was being called a racist becuase she pointed to an obvious fact that people are voting for BHO because they see him as a black man – substance not withstanding.

    I appreciate MM most of the time but she has it wrong this time – i see nothing in her blog that really deals with the factual statements – the intellectual argument – made by GF and the implications it has for both parties and the country. Just vitriolic criticism along party lines.

27. #27
    On March 13th, 2008 at 9:16 am, mytake said:

    I’ve been away for awhile. Just got back to see nothing has changed. Two more Democrats have been caught in their own webs. Babye…. Geraldine and Elliot! And the beat goes on!

28. #28
    On March 13th, 2008 at 9:22 am, mlnicosia said:

    # 24 so that is your political argument? The idea that “What is the point (like Michelle said) is that if a conservative said the exact same thing…” they can say it and we can’t?

    Well obviously the firestorm around this has shown that the democrats don’t want to hear any implications of racism so i don’t see how you make a logical argument.

29. #29
    On March 13th, 2008 at 9:31 am, JHSII said:

    mlnicosia #26 – you still don’t get it.
    Geraldine Ferraro didn’t care about the “political consequences” because she honestly believed there would be none. It also doesn’t matter if what she said is true or not.

    Have you ever heard the name Senator Joseph McCarthy? Everything that the senator said was exactly 100% correct, and proven correct by Venona.
    But…just look up the word “McCarthyism” and tell me what happens to a Republican when he speaks the truth. Senator McCarthy didn’t have the internet to get the truth out.

    As for the way things are today, I hear all the times people saying things they don’t think will make it out into the public awareness. Geraldine got caught.

    Note that I am not comparing the honorable Senator Joseph McCarthy with Geraldine Ferarro. The comparison is only the media treatment of them, and the media treatment they each expected.

30. #30
    On March 13th, 2008 at 9:33 am, mytake said:

    Clinton tried to squeak it through by having a white female say it, but it didn’t fly because half-black trumps senior white female in this crazy game of Demodrat political chess.

31. #31
    On March 13th, 2008 at 9:34 am, mytake said:

    Demodrat! I meant Demorat. I mean Democrat!

32. #32
    On March 13th, 2008 at 10:04 am, walterc said:

    A little off topic, but last night O’Reilly was blaming the increase in prostitution (amongst politicians I think, he was talking to Laura I about Spitzer) along with the general decline in society morals, on the internet. As the internet has made advertising/marketing of sleaze much easier and widerspread, I tend to agree with him on that issue.

    My thought was, since Al Gore invented the internet, can we blame him for the moral collapse of society?

33. #33
    On March 13th, 2008 at 10:05 am, geminicontender said:

    Al Gore invented the Internet so that must mean that Al Gore will be responsible for the downfall of the Democratic Party as the Internet has freed up the rest of us that don’t fall in line with the ‘norm’. THANK YOU AL GORE.

34. #34
    On March 13th, 2008 at 10:12 am, mlnicosia said:

    Where do you get the chutzpah to say “Geraldine Ferraro didn’t care about the “political consequences” because she honestly believed there would be none.”

    How do you know this for a fact? Its a big statement for you to make considering the charges of racisim being made. So what makes your statement fact vs just propaganda?

    Considering whats at stake and for the cause of truth and logic in political argument how can you seriously make a statement like “It also doesn’t matter if what she said is true or not.”

    Your point that “The point is that Geraldine Ferraro opened her mouth and said something that would have gotten any Republican who said it drummed off the public stage…” is meaningful in what way? She has been drummed off the stage? So to imply that somehow she is being treated differently doesn’t have any basis in fact or logic – just more propaganda.

    This should prove helpful to you:
    http://www.answers.com/political+argument?cat=biz-fin

35. #35
    On March 13th, 2008 at 10:39 am, mngirl said:

    # 19 – This is a ridiculous statement and not based on fact:

    All polls show that clearly BHO gets more votes than HRC because he is black – i don’t like either one but facts are facts.

    One: BHO doesn’t get more votes than HRC in every state, that’s why its close race.

    Two: Many people of all races are voting for him because they like his politics (I don’t but I genuinely like the guy and would vote for him over HRC), not his race.

    Three: Early in this race, during HRC’s period of “inevitability” pundits were saying that some african americans were not voting for him because they simply didn’t believe a black man could go all the way. So how many votes from the black community did he lose because he’s black? Duh, maybe more than he’s received because he’s black?

    Or maybe -shocker- people vote for him because they like his politics and the way he communicates? But, back to GF, no way is he ahead because he’s black.

36. #36
    On March 13th, 2008 at 10:41 am, Boomer said:

    I really enjoy when the PC culture the liberals have worked so hard to cultivate comes around to bite them in their PC butts. Hey Geraldine Karma is a harsh mistress isn’t it?

37. #37
    On March 13th, 2008 at 10:43 am, Tommygun said:

    In simple terms, while it has its upside to see a liberal getting caught in the PC net, it is, more importantly, a travesty to see her so attacked for telling the truth.

    It’s interesting, though, to see this on a supposedly conservative website like this. It just shows how far to the Left that American Conservatism has moved.

    Sincerely,
    A confirmed reactionary.

38. #38
    On March 13th, 2008 at 11:04 am, JHSII said:

    mlnicosia #34 said:

    Where do you get the chutzpah to say “Geraldine Ferraro didn’t care about the “political consequences” because she honestly believed there would be none.”

    Since when is it “chutzpah” to state a fact?

    How do you know this for a fact?

    If it wasn’t a fact, then she would never have said it. If she knew the conequences – from the left – then she’s smart enough to keep her mouth shut.

    Its a big statement for you to make considering the charges of racisim being made. So what makes your statement fact vs just propaganda?

    Did you even bother reading what I posted?
    The issue isn’t racism.

    Considering whats at stake and for the cause of truth and logic in political argument how can you seriously make a statement like “It also doesn’t matter if what she said is true or not.”

    You again miss the point. Maybe you should read what I said IN CONTEXT. If you want to start doing that, then maybe we can have a conversation.

    Your point that “The point is that Geraldine Ferraro opened her mouth and said something that would have gotten any Republican who said it drummed off the public stage…” is meaningful in what way? She has been drummed off the stage? So to imply that somehow she is being treated differently doesn’t have any basis in fact or logic – just more propaganda.

    My point is fact – no propaganda from me. At this point I’m starting to think that you are a troll. Care to prove me wrong?

39. #39
    On March 13th, 2008 at 11:07 am, mlnicosia said:

    mngirl # 35 wow – how clever of you to take my statement out of context.

    I clearly made a point that “many people are supporting BHO simply because he is black and that is a racial decision.”

    As for the polls – yes – there have been numerous polls that clearly show he gets more votes for being black. That was not an opinion its an easily researched fact.

    You don’t see HRC getting 90% of the white vote or 90% of the women vote. So GF is simply putting it on the table – in total he gets more votes and he is leading by votes because he is a black man.

    Your right tho – he does not get more votes in every state. Not all states have a large enough black population or ultra liberal whites to put him ahead (VT for one).

40. #40
    On March 13th, 2008 at 11:08 am, JHSII said:

    Tommygun – nobody here is attacking Geraldine Ferraro. Where did you get that from?

41. #41
    On March 13th, 2008 at 11:26 am, mlnicosia said:

    JHSII # 38 – calling me a troll is commonly done on the Kos site. I see that nutroot argument is now taking hold here – don’t disagree or you’ll be called a troll.

    Well i’ve been writing in support of Mitt for so long… just do a search pal.

    Your statement that “If it wasn’t a fact, then she would never have said it. If she knew the conequences – from the left – then she’s smart enough to keep her mouth shut.” is just more opinion. Theres no ‘fact’ there. If anything your statement seems dichotomous – was she “smart enough” or not?

    There are many people on both the left and right who agree with her. I do. Your opinion that she would not have said it if she knew the consequences is nothing more than your opinion – thats not obvious to you so we are done.

42. #42
    On March 13th, 2008 at 11:33 am, mlnicosia said:

    Tommygun – thanks for your service in Kosovo. Your so right – there seems no logic to the attacks against GF.

    I certainly don’t support her overall agenda but she is spot on regarding BHO’s success.

43. #43
    On March 13th, 2008 at 11:53 am, JHSII said:

    mlnicosia #41

    JHSII # 38 – calling me a troll is commonly done on the Kos site. I see that nutroot argument is now taking hold here – don’t disagree or you’ll be called a troll.

    I didn’t call you a troll until you repeatedly, deliberately and purposefully took things out of context in order to take shots at Michelle and other posters here. Now that you’re accusing me of acting like those at the daily kos you’re proving me right.

    You have proven yourself to be a liar and a troll and from now on I will treat you as such.

44. #44
    On March 13th, 2008 at 12:08 pm, mytake said:

    Of course he is getting more votes from blacks because he is black. Doesn’t anyone remember the OJ case? Open and shut guilty according to whites and open and shut innocent according to blacks. If you look through the history of the speeches by Obama’s reverend, I’m sure he has one ranting against the “false” evidence produced by that “racist” detective.

45. #45
    On March 13th, 2008 at 12:24 pm, and Im all out of bubblegum said:

    Wow, I go away for a couple hours…

    mlnicosia #28: I don’t recall making a political argument … (backtracking, proof reading) … nope, nothing there. Unless you’re reading into something that I’m unaware of (and as it was my post, I’d say not likely).

    What I did say, so there’s no room for confusion through implication on your part, is that, in agreement with Michelle and JHSII, if a conservative had stated the same thing as GF did, the media would have gone to town with it and brought out the nooses for a lynching (or am I not allowed to use that analogy?). The underlying duplicity is in the kid gloves the media uses for their favored sons and (former) daughters .

    Now back to your “political argument”; of course the dems don’t want to “hear any implications of racism” because they’re still trying to push the big happy family atmosphere to everyone, so naturally they can’t have one candidate (‘s staff member) call out the other on the basis of skin color – that would just be spiritual non-creaminess. Duh! Is that what kind of “logical argument” you’re looking for?

46. #46
    On March 13th, 2008 at 1:30 pm, AlohaGuy said:

    Slightly OT

    JHSII # 38 – calling me a troll is commonly done on the Kos site. I see that nutroot argument is now taking hold here – don’t disagree or you’ll be called a troll.

    Or a liar – which is what you called me when I posted an easily verifiable fact about your boy Mitt. BTW, are you still clinging to him like one of his custom made shirts? Never mind, what you do with your “Mitts” in the privacy of your own home is none of my business.

    But to complain about “…vitriolic criticism…” is certainly hypocritical on your part.

    /OT

    PS – I actually do think GF was right, but dumb not to think that the further left wouldn’t make her pay.

47. #47
    On March 13th, 2008 at 2:25 pm, mlnicosia said:

    #45 Well i guess you don’t get around the internet much. The fact is GF is being skewered by the left (what you prefer to call a lynching). So you are factually wrong – thats all i’m saying.

    And we agree on the dems agenda. Still, you don’t seem to understand what a ‘political argument’ is.

    http://www.answers.com/political+argument?cat=biz-fin

48. #48
    On March 13th, 2008 at 2:35 pm, mlnicosia said:

    You are sadly mistaken – i never called you a liar and if you ever made an easily verifiable comment i would have acknowledged it.

    Your decision to call me a liar and to make disparging remarks alluding to sex acts is vitriolic. I know you don’t understand that but most people would.

    I won’t respond to your posts unless they are directed at me.

49. #49
    On March 13th, 2008 at 3:05 pm, AlohaGuy said:

    #48,

    You are sadly mistaken – i never called you a liar

    January 23, 2008

    When you say Romney “personally profited from investments that involved selling a maker of national defense technology to a Chinese company that supported Saddam and the Taliban.” that is an outright lie.

    I did not call you a liar, but did make disparaging remarks…

50. #50
    On March 13th, 2008 at 4:33 pm, Tommygun said:

    On March 13th, 2008 at 11:08 am, JHSII at #40.

    People here are calling her “racist” for simply stating her perspective on the question. Liberals have made certain facts and certain opinions forbidden because they do not support their agenda on race relations, and to offer an objective opinion that opposes it makes one “racist.” The objective truth of the matter is irrelevant.

    Now we see the “conservatives” going along with that. erbarker (apparently NOT a Democrat) at #21 is a perfect example:

    Actually, this is very good. The whole world is learning what a bunch of hypocrites and racist the democrats are. Th[a]nk you Geraldine!

    This person calls her “racist,” and yet all she did was offer an objective opinion on the nature of Hussein’s success. It is NOT racist to suggest people are reacting a certain way toward someone due to their race. Yet because her statement undercuts the alleged ability of a “person of color” to succeed by universal means, it is racist. If a person suggests people are voting for Hillary because she is White, they are not considered racist; rather, they are accusing some Hillary supporters of racism.

    It is a Left-favoring double standard, and “conservatives” here and elsewhere are adopting it.

51. #51
    On March 13th, 2008 at 4:54 pm, JHSII said:

    Tommygun #50 – erbarker #21 didn’t call Ferraro a racist. He was thanking Geraldine for exposing the racism of the democrat party.

    There is no “double standard” for conservatives. You’re reading into things things which are just not there..

52. #52
    On March 13th, 2008 at 7:18 pm, and Im all out of bubblegum said:

    mlnicosia #47:

    Not to be too snarky, but I actually have a job which requires my attention most often (hence the lack of many posts from me), therefore your “you don’t get around the internet much” is true, but not in the way you tried to cleverly (sic) present it. The lynching analogy was me attempting to be sarcastic, which I thought you would get…guess not.

    Your link: “Political arguments are used by academics, media pundits, candidates for political office and government officials. Political arguments are also used by citizens in ordinary interactions to comment about and understand political events.” I wasn’t arguing (sic) with you about politics, but rather I was stating my agreement with Michelle and others about the MSM’s slant toward certain public officals and their leanings – not necessarily political as per your definition. It could have been about dog food, or the price of rice, and my argument would have been the same had you not seen the underlying theme of what Michelle was trying to say.

    You say that GF is “getting skewered by the left”, and that may be true (once again, with me having no time really to “get around the internet”), but a quick check to the major news sites (MSNBC, CNN, FoxNews, even DailyKos)at 18:00 Central and the only thing is an apology from HRC to all the black voters on CNN. Skewered?