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. Barack Obama, Pennsylvania Voters and Liberal Elitism | conservativeintelligencer.com
2. SnOb-ama Merchandise! « GOP ftw
3. Snob: Obama ‘08 « Blogs for McCain
4. US Presidential Campaign 2008 - Page 44 - TeakDoor.com - The Thailand Forum
5. Health Care BS - SNOBAMA & SHRILLARY
6. » Snobama
7. Church and State
8. SNOBama « Buttle’s World
9. This Way To « The Reluctant Optimist
10. Jules Crittenden » Marx Lite(weight)
11. Obama SNOBwear: Timely and Appropriate:
12. Balloon Juice
13. BizzyBlog » This Guy Is a Kaus on Fire, and He Doesn’t Even Get to the ‘Bitter’ Part
14. SNOBama « Blogs 4 Brownback
15. Ain’t Nothin But A “E” Thang…….. « TheJOTUS
16. Michelle Malkin » Introducing Barack “Arugula” Obama; Update: CafePress says, “No, you can’t”
17. Barack Obama’s Bitter Remark Editorial Cartoons « BUUUUURRRRNING HOT
18. I want one! « Blog de Ford
19. Michelle Malkin » YES! The ultimate Obama endorsement!
20. Barack Obama Snob T-Shirts, Coffee Mugs and More! — Kooky Liberals

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: « 1 [2]

101. #101
     On April 13th, 2008 at 11:55 pm, Jim M. said:

     Back to Obama.

     There are more than a few people on this thread who cannot deal with the fact that Obama (Mr. “Just Words?” and “Words matter”) may actually mean what he says.

     His words are not being taken out of context. To the contrary, when viewd in the context in which they were spoken, those words are all the more damning.

     This is the same man who, earlier in his campaign, emphasized that the voters should rely upon his superior judgment rather than his lack of experience. Now that his judgment has been called into question, he has morphed once again into trying to convince people that he is a “man of the people”. Raised by a single mother (not really, but it conjures up visions of a working mother holding down 3 jobs to make ends meet) and borrowing money to advance himself through education (many of us did the same thing, but opted for a more affordable school over $30,000 a year in tuition).

     Of course, some people cannot deal with the truth. Or facts. Those are the same people who would have us believe that Obama attended Trinity Church for over 20 years and counted Jeremiah Wright among his friends as well as his spiritual mentor, and NEVER had a clue that Wright preached hatred of Jews and white people. Those are the same people that have either never read Obama’s books or hope the rest of the world does not. Unfortunately, Obama has painted quite a vivid portrait of himself in his books as one who is closely aligned with his spiritual mentor.

     And let’s not forget about his largest fundraiser prior to his Presidential run. Another “friend”. Or his “friends” who were convicted of domestic terrorism and who to this day have zero remorse for their deeds (hell, they think they should have planted more bombs).

     Obama is just another sleazy Chicago politician whose greatest asset WAS the fact that little was known about him.

102. #102
     On April 14th, 2008 at 7:50 am, behiker said:

     SNOBwear was just discussed on Fox and Friends.

103. #103
     On April 14th, 2008 at 7:58 am, DaveC said:

     Dakine, Mookie..

     you missed the South Park explaining that AIDS if finally funny..

     Watch this.. it will explain it all..
     THEN you can talk about AIDS again..

     http://www.stansdad.com/season6/episode2/

104. #104
     On April 14th, 2008 at 7:58 am, gunslingerpatriot said:

     snobama wear–
     God I love this captialistic country! It brings a tear to my eye that there is some Ferengi left in us after all.

     GSP

105. #105
     On April 14th, 2008 at 8:03 am, DaveC said:

     small jim m..

     way to cut and paste.

     anyway.

     good for you.. you DID get into your school of choice..

     what have you done since then? bust your hump to get ahead? or p1ss and moan like you are doing now..

     there are many, many colleges and universities in this country.. you know what you do if you can’t get into your school of choice? you MOVE ON!.. TRY ANOTHER SCHOOL, and if that doesn’t work, TRY AGAIN!!

     a college degree is worthless if you don’t have the determination to back it up…

106. #106
     On April 14th, 2008 at 8:04 am, DaveC said:

     GSP,

     you sound like a true Star Trek fan..

107. #107
     On April 14th, 2008 at 8:06 am, TexasTiger said:

     On April 13th, 2008 at 8:26 pm, dakine said:

     TexasTiger, you used to be funny, but you’ve recently jumped the shark into sort of cruel and bigoted attempts at humor.

     Sorry, bud. I admit that I find ABSOLUT jokes, Team America and monkeys to be funny…sometimes hilarious. The great thing about life is that we can walk through it with a smile on our face and a song joke in our hearts.

     If you can’t laugh a humanity’s foibles and shortcomings, then maybe you’re taking yourself too seriously.

108. #108
     On April 14th, 2008 at 8:15 am, TexasTiger said:

     On April 14th, 2008 at 7:58 am, DaveC said:

     Dakine, Mookie..

     you missed the South Park explaining that AIDS if finally funny..

     Bless you for trying, but I fear your efforts are fruitless wasted.

     Near the start of this thread a troll posted his belief that conservatives–especially those who post here–are bitter and angry. As the course of this thread demonstrated, it’s the lefties who are humorless, bitter, angry name-callers.

     I say we hoist the MISSION ACCOMPLISHED banner and keep laughing!

109. #109
     On April 14th, 2008 at 9:02 am, gunslingerpatriot said:

     Lets just say I used to wear the costumes, collect sci-fi stuff and still occasionally go to the cons!

     I nominate Quark as the next head of the Federal Reserve Board to relieve Alan Greespan….hehehehe

     GSP

110. #110
     On April 14th, 2008 at 9:05 am, jim m said:

     The elitism in Michelle’s article is simple: She thinks she is entitled to a racial preference in admission because she is from the Phillipines. And she thinks the people who disagree are “pink skinned bigots”.

     Do you think that people who disagree with racial preferences are “pink skinned bigots”?

111. #111
     On April 14th, 2008 at 9:12 am, gunslingerpatriot said:

     On second thought…
     Secretary of State: Deanna Troi
     Secretary of Defense: Worf
     Ambassador to the UN: Jean Luc Picard
     Surgeon General: “Bones” McCoy
     Federal Reserve Board: Quark
     Head of the Department of Education: Q (John Delancie)
     Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff: Beverly Crusher

     Just my ST thoughts…
     GSP

112. #112
     On April 14th, 2008 at 9:13 am, ajmontana said:

     dltdhyotwo jim m.

113. #113
     On April 14th, 2008 at 9:35 am, TexasTiger said:

     aj:

     Methinks jim m pushes doors marked PULL.

114. #114
     On April 14th, 2008 at 9:44 am, wighttrasch said:

     I don’t understand; are Obama’s toadies trying to justify his actual words, or his intentions? From the posts above, it seems both! Sheesh–I wish I had someone to do that for me…

115. #115
     On April 14th, 2008 at 10:04 am, artist said:

     What do bitter people in Big cities cling to?

     Big Government?

116. #116
     On April 14th, 2008 at 10:06 am, bert5507 said:

     This is the best logo yet.

117. #117
     On April 14th, 2008 at 10:09 am, lollington said:

     How many of these have actually sold? Just curious…

118. #118
     On April 14th, 2008 at 10:20 am, chief said:

     Michelle is an elitist? Yeah, right. You are going to have to come up with a better attack line than that. Michelle is exactly what the liberal elite of this Country despise. A minority who does not walk in lock-step with liberal beliefs, and ideals. That is what I love the most about Michelle. She is who she is, and that is not going to change.

119. #119
     On April 14th, 2008 at 10:27 am, DougT said:

     jim m., at first I didn’t understand what you were trying to get at with that column reprint. I remember that column. I remember the battle over I-200.

     I had a completely different take on the column than you’ve had. MM was arguing that the position of the supporters of affirmative action in school enrollment shifted their definition of “minority”.

     She pointed out the irony of being subjected to racial slurs when she was younger and being told that she was a “minority”. Later (in 1998) she found that the definition changed for political purposes.

     She pointed out the hypocrisy of affirmative action zealots of all colors fearing that another minority would be over-represented in a meritocratic selection process. Zealots that include d members of that minority.

     Her use of the term “pink skin bigots” was derisive for sure, but derisive was what she meant to be. She wasn’t arguing for preferential treatment. She was arguing for race-free decisions.

     The fact that meant that Asian-Americans would not be considered a minority in classic affirmative action was a bit much to stomach for those of us watching the debate.

     Sometimes I miss the old days in Seattle, when the arguments were simpler and we only had to worry about King and Pierce county voters screwing things up.

120. #120
     On April 14th, 2008 at 10:41 am, DougT said:

     wighttrasch #114, I hope you aren’t labelling me an “Obama toadie”. That would be unwarranted, not to mention untrue.

     What is the difference though between actual words and intentions? How does the former have any meaning without the context of the latter?

     If I follow that they are independent then I could wind up doing a jim m. and saying that MM used the phrase “pink skin bigots” and therefore is racist. But we know better because her intentions were clear.

     Despite all the spin (from the three corners of the Obama camp, the Hillary attack of opportunity, and the Right’s offended reaction) we can probably believe that he would not intentionally insult people he was trying to win over.

     I don’t think he made any more outrageous statements than anyone else would make when they believe that everyone believes that government is the answer to all of our ills. He’s only being elitist in the political sense; along the same lines of “we’re from the government, and we’re here to help, cause, you know, you’ll be bitter if we don’t.”

     But again, the image and the sentiment on the logo are pretty darn funny.

121. #121
     On April 14th, 2008 at 10:55 am, wighttrasch said:

     ‘…we can probably believe that he would not intentionally insult people he was trying to win…’ (emphasis mine)
     What’s this ‘we’ stuff?

122. #122
     On April 14th, 2008 at 11:04 am, DaveC said:

     On April 14th, 2008 at 9:05 am, jim m said:

     The elitism in Michelle’s article is simple: She thinks she is entitled to a racial preference in admission because she is from the Phillipines. And she thinks the people who disagree are “pink skinned bigots”.

     You missed the entire point of the column..

     you took one or two paragraphs and that is your entire opinion of MM..

     It’s pretty obvious that someone hasn’t read anything else of hers to you in a long time..

123. #123
     On April 14th, 2008 at 12:05 pm, krist77 said:

     Michelle is not an elitest- she has never belittled people. She was trying to promote and fight for RACE FREE decisions and not injecting race into the political options that people are deciding on.
     Obama made HIS OWN statements. Obama supporters are making it sounds like it was a ‘right wing’ conspriacy, that somehow put the words in Obama’s mouth.
     This is simply not true. He was answering a question, of his own free will. And the story was broke by the huffington Post, which is NOT a conservative media outlet.
     He may not have meant what he said- but I believe that improv answers to questions are more telling that anything that pre-written. His emotions and his true thoughts come out alittle more each time he talks…

124. #124
     On April 14th, 2008 at 12:09 pm, IndependentTom said:

     Hmmm…..I have to laugh at the “Snobama” product line. Political and social satire DOES have a place in the election discourse. Thanks for the grin on this monday morning.

     As far as Obama’s comments are concerned?

     Wasn’t he speaking at a private fund raiser in San Francisco? Isn’t this more about his pandering to his audience in order to raise campaign cash?

     I guess he wasn’t expecting his comments to be made public. Now he has to resort to spinning and backtracking.

     As does Hillary…As does John McCain…when their gaffes are made public. It makes me think that “political elitism” can’t be separated from a general elitist view.

     I fear that this elitist view of governing fosters a “We’re from the government and we know better than you do as to what’s best for you” attitude.

     And the fact that the efforts of the candidates to clean up the verbal piles are so simplistic,transparent, and obvious just reinforces the feeling that they do have a certain contempt for the public.

     As to MM’s comments being perceived as “racist”……They didn’t seem that way to me. But that’s only my opinion.

125. #125
     On April 14th, 2008 at 12:22 pm, Misscheryl said:

     Obama means exactly what he says…..a quote from his book says alot about this man:
     “People are satisified so long as you were courteous and smiled and made no sudden moves. They were more than satisified, they were relieved-such a pleasant surprise to find a well-mannered young black man who didn’t seem angry all the time.”

     “Seem” being the operative word here - This is what Obama and his wifey practice in front of the cameras. Behind them saying…”stupid whitey.”

126. #126
     On April 14th, 2008 at 1:09 pm, kardinal said:

     Did Cafepress yank the shirts? I tried to buy one and it says it’s not available.

127. #127
     On April 14th, 2008 at 1:27 pm, Jewels said:

     I’m getting the same message. They seem to be yanked? Or is there an error??

128. #128
     On April 14th, 2008 at 4:25 pm, KaosKlerik said:

     On April 14th, 2008 at 9:05 am, jim m said:
     The elitism in Michelle’s article is simple: She thinks she is entitled to a racial preference in admission because she is from the Phillipines. And she thinks the people who disagree are “pink skinned bigots”.

     Do you think that people who disagree with racial preferences are “pink skinned bigots”?

     Read it again.

     Whitewashing Asians out of the post-209 college admissions equation allows for simpler, more inflammatory rhetoric. Thus, The Seattle Times can look at California and conclude that proponents of race-neutral policies in Washington state want to “preserve preferences of greatest advantage to white males and to eliminate those that benefit women and racial and ethnic minorities…

     Members of minority groups who have overcome barriers to success - and who oppose being tallied by race…are effectively “white” and simply don’t count.

     Asians were being excluded from the list of minorities becuse they succeeded WITHOUT racial preferences, which undermines the liberal argument for race-based quotas.

     In the name of diversity, they share President Clinton’s concern that race-free, merit-based admissions could lead to universities filling “their entire freshmen classes with nothing but Asian Americans.”

     Unbelievable. Never could I have imagined growing up that I would see the day when brown- and yellow-skinned people would stand on the side of pink-skinned bigots railing against the problem of too many of “them.”

     The “them” is “Asian-Americans“. The pink-skinned bigots are the one in FAVOR of affirmative action.

     To sum up, Michelle was arguing against racial preferences in admission, which negates your argument she was demanding it for herself. The pink-skinned bigots are the liberals demanding recial preferences, not those in opposition.

129. #129
     On April 14th, 2008 at 7:47 pm, scooter56 said:

     On April 14th, 2008 at 12:05 pm, krist77 said:

     Michelle is not an elitest- she has never belittled people.

     This made me laugh!

130. #130
     On April 14th, 2008 at 11:46 pm, SHoward said:

     What about it made you laugh, scooter?

     Do you feel be-littled? Can you cite actual be-littling comments made by our hostess?

Comment pages: « 1 [2]