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 September 29th, 2008 at 4:10 pm, et said:

   Don’t confuse me with facts, I’m a democrat.

2. #2
   On September 29th, 2008 at 4:11 pm, Atlanta Media Guy said:

   What happens if the McCain camp catches the Obama camp in a lie? Would the prosecutor do his job and prosecute? The Show me State has been rather revealing the past few days. This partisan rancor needs to stop.

3. #3
   On September 29th, 2008 at 4:17 pm, md1964 said:

   I guess this makes Missouri “THE SHOW ME, only what I want to see” State.

4. #4
   On September 29th, 2008 at 4:19 pm, BlameAmericaLast said:

   So now interpretation of legislation is still grounds for a lawsuit and prosecution?

5. #5
   On September 29th, 2008 at 4:22 pm, right4life said:

   these democrats in the st. louis area are scum, they’re just chicago thug democrat wanna-bees…st. louis is a mess, after decades of ‘caring’ democRATic rule…

6. #6
   On September 29th, 2008 at 4:23 pm, sambo said:

   He used the example of the sex education for kindergartners. He believes that Barack Obama supported legislation that would protect kindergartners from inappropriate touching and not a wide spectrum of sex education in that age group.

   You should have put him citizens arrest!

7. #7
   On September 29th, 2008 at 4:24 pm, Dexter Alarius said:

   Why read the actual legislation when the DNC talking points can tell you what it says?! Sheesh!

8. #8
   On September 29th, 2008 at 4:25 pm, JustAThought said:

   So, um… Am I the only person that sees a public official or two openly threatening the public they are supposed to serve? You know, the TAXPAYERS? Is that not at least a little bit of a conflict of interest when they have come out and said they favor BHO? Perhaps just a smidgen over the line of fair and balanced, equal enforcement and equal protection under the law?

   Nah, must just be me…

9. #9
   On September 29th, 2008 at 4:27 pm, talkin_bout said:

   If the MSM reported on a tenth of stories like this, the election would be wrapped up. *Sigh*….

10. #10
    On September 29th, 2008 at 4:28 pm, Paul Revere said:

    It’s only funny because you can’t make it up.

11. #11
    On September 29th, 2008 at 4:29 pm, John Ansell said:

    I guess Cliff notes for Legislation is better.

12. #12
    On September 29th, 2008 at 4:34 pm, Goldwater Knight said:

    A type of thinking straight out of Mao Tse Dung’s little red handbook.

13. #13
    On September 29th, 2008 at 4:35 pm, DesertLover said:

    I guess he missed a couple of classes in law school so he didn’t realize that “interpretation” of law is under the purview of the courts not the prosecuting attorneys of this world …

    Someone needs to educate this Missouri prosecutor to that fact …

14. #14
    On September 29th, 2008 at 4:35 pm, Dexter Alarius said:

    Well, when the “Fairness Doctrine” becomes law, at least Rush can afford to put some barges outside the territorial waters from which to broadcast Radio Free Rush. We can tune in huddled in our basements with our contraband receivers. Hopefully, our kids won’t be too indoctrinated by their Obama Youth service to turn us in.

15. #15
    On September 29th, 2008 at 4:35 pm, Goldwater Knight said:

    I guess Cliff notes for Legislation is better.

    I like that.

    What about “Legislative Bills for Dummies”

16. #16
    On September 29th, 2008 at 4:36 pm, Adlib said:

    On September 29th, 2008 at 4:10 pm, et said:
    Don’t confuse me with facts, I’m a democrat.

    Awesome!

17. #17
    On September 29th, 2008 at 4:44 pm, Simmer said:

    It would stand to reason that if “anybody can analyze legislation any way they want”, then no one (including Obama’s opposition) can be lying about the legislation.

18. #18
    On September 29th, 2008 at 4:45 pm, ClearlyNow said:

    I fervently hope that both Governor Blunt and at least one reporter with integrity are aware of McCulloch’s admitted ignorance and prospective abuse of authority.

19. #19
    On September 29th, 2008 at 4:51 pm, Flyoverman said:

    On September 29th, 2008 at 4:10 pm, et said:
    Don’t confuse me with facts, I’m a democrat.

    Alternate translation: You expect me to read with comprehension? I went to law school.

20. #20
    On September 29th, 2008 at 4:51 pm, mchristian said:

    I asked if he read the legislation. He said “no.”

    If you don’t read it, you don’t have to lie about it.

21. #21
    On September 29th, 2008 at 4:54 pm, fulldroolcup said:

    He went into the idea that anybody can analyze legislation any way they want and that my analysis may not be correct.

    There’s yer basic po-mo denial of objectivity, right there.

    If “anyone” can analyze any way they want, then why do we need lawyers to do what anyone can do?

    How can a prosecutor say he will prosecute based on AN interpretation, when anyone can interpret any way they want? What makes HIS interpretation the “correct” one?

    We’re dealing with a dangerously stupid man here. Dangerous, since he has the power of the state to back him up. So stupid it’s hard to see how he ever graduated law school or passed a bar exam.

    But that’s what we get for letting Crit-Lit and Multi-culti and all the other crap the leftist academicians have been shoving down our throats.

22. #22
    On September 29th, 2008 at 4:55 pm, greenfairie said:

    The MO goon squads are afraid of 527s tying Obama in with William Ayres, the full monty sex ed for kindergarten kids, and voting against the Born Alive Act. There are a lot of socially-conservative, religious people in Missouri (I know, I went to school there) and those kinds of ads can be devastating.

23. #23
    On September 29th, 2008 at 4:57 pm, RedDog said:

    Wow. Notice the downturn in lefty posts to MM? Probably because they are the few who do have a sense of shame. The rest are over the cliff.

24. #24
    On September 29th, 2008 at 4:58 pm, spackle said:

    Ah yes. Moral relativism in full bloom.

25. #25
    On September 29th, 2008 at 5:09 pm, AlohaGuy said:

    I asked if he read the legislation. He said “no.”

    At least he’s honest. An ignorant tool, but honest…

    Those aren’t the facts he knew…

26. #26
    On September 29th, 2008 at 5:16 pm, englishqueen01 said:

    He went into the idea that anybody can analyze legislation any way they want and that my analysis may not be correct.

    So wait, if we can interpret legislation many ways, does that mean it’s a free-for-all as far as laws are concerned? Do we now get to pick and choose what legislation we obey, based upon our interpretation of it?

    All that “living, breathing” Constitution crap has really polluted this lefty’s thinking. Now laws are subject to personal interpretation? I think most judges, and most non-fascist law enforcement officers, would beg to differ.

    

27. #27
    On September 29th, 2008 at 5:24 pm, WarEagle82 said:

    In Obama’s world the government gets to tell us what to think, why to think it and when to think. And most importantly, Obama gets to tell us when to shut up and stop asking questions.

    I can’t believe this could happen in America!

28. #28
    On September 29th, 2008 at 5:27 pm, HeatherRadish said:

    The MO goon squads are afraid of 527s tying Obama in with William Ayres, the full monty sex ed for kindergarten kids, and voting against the Born Alive Act.

    …and why in the world aren’t there any?

29. #29
    On September 29th, 2008 at 5:35 pm, BruceB said:

    Do I need to call 911 to get arrested?
    I mean do I call St Louis 911 and tell them that Obamma is a lair.
    Since the Dist attn. has stated it’s a crime to do so, I don’t think they could prosecute me for a frivolous 911 call.

    And if he/she doesn’t arrest me then I ought to be able to file a complaint with with the stae that they are not doing their job.

30. #30
    On September 29th, 2008 at 5:44 pm, jegjr said:

    He went into the idea that anybody can analyze legislation any way they want and that my analysis may not be correct.

    and if that is your stance, then you can’t call anyone a liar.

31. #31
    On September 29th, 2008 at 5:49 pm, kss1505 said:

    That’s just peachy. I live in St. Louis County. So now we’ve got a DA that is a member of the Gestapo and swims in that yummy Odopey Kool-Aid? Ducky, just ducky.

32. #32
    On September 29th, 2008 at 6:09 pm, NJ-Aviator said:

    McCain should make a commercial about that. It paints a pretty clear picture of how they operate.

33. #33
    On September 29th, 2008 at 6:11 pm, av8tr said:

    Missouri – The Sue-Me state.

    Pathetic.

34. #34
    On September 29th, 2008 at 6:24 pm, richardbo said:

    It’s going to be a long, unpleasant five weeks. After that doesn’t look any better–just longer.

35. #35
    On September 29th, 2008 at 6:26 pm, vickisoup said:

    On September 29th, 2008 at 4:17 pm, md1964 said:
    I guess this makes Missouri “THE SHOW ME, only what I want to see” State.

    I like that.
    All kidding aside, this exchange is a perfect example of what is wrong with the whole idea of getting law enforcement and the DA’s office involved as arbiters of truth in campaign advertising.
    A: That’s not their job
    B: WTF??
    C: That’s not their job
    D: All of the Above.

36. #36
    On September 29th, 2008 at 6:41 pm, John Ansell said:

    How will Obambi’s goons get to this guy? My, what a purdy little song that there bird is signing. Tweet Tweet….

37. #37
    On September 29th, 2008 at 6:58 pm, vickisoup said:

    Wouldn’t that be great, John? More likely is that Obama’s promising Rezko a quick, down ‘n dirty pardon once he’s elected. Scoundrels, all.

38. #38
    On September 29th, 2008 at 7:19 pm, Helene said:

    “I asked if he read the legislation. He said “no.”

    Why would anyone in their right mind take a strong stand, rouse his followers, threaten lawsuits, without even reading the document he plans to defend?

    Let’s take this to a higher level. Suppose this guy decides to put together a bicycle for his kid for Christmas, but does not read the instructions. When the bicycle is finished, a bunch of loose parts are on the floor. This is what happens when you move forward with a plan without doing the homework.

    Scheesh….

39. #39
    On September 29th, 2008 at 7:21 pm, zorro said:

    Great update Michelle.

    Obama’s supporters are really beginning to sound like Brown Shirted Goons.

40. #40
    On September 29th, 2008 at 7:27 pm, DesertLover said:

    Helene …

    re: your bike analogy …

    the bike was fine … the loose screws on the floor were from the assembler …

41. #41
    On September 29th, 2008 at 7:57 pm, Artbyruth said:

    If these Dems are truly post-modernists…then they cannot prosecute or condemn anyone for telling a lie since truth is relative.

    To condemn anyone for defending what they believe to be truth is fascist.

    I thought they were anti-fascists?? So, what they will be against is anyone who does not support their idea of what truth is….and that sounds eerily close to absolute truth.

    And only a Sith thinks in absolutes!!

42. #42
    On September 29th, 2008 at 8:15 pm, right_on said:

    And there it is folks. If Democrats think anything is a lie, it is! Why? Because they want it to be so. There is no changing their minds…They are by nature, contrarians, that’s why they belong to this morally, and ethically corrupt party.

43. #43
    On September 29th, 2008 at 8:17 pm, John Ansell said:

    LOL Vickisoup, It would be great if some real news broke about Odumbo and Rezko but I think the one that needs to worry the most is Gov. Bag-o-chips. Then he’ll turn on what he knows about Obambi. Hell, they might even be able to take down Daley.

44. #44
    On September 29th, 2008 at 9:33 pm, Republicanvet said:

    On September 29th, 2008 at 4:19 pm, BlameAmericaLast said:

    So now interpretation of legislation is still grounds for a lawsuit and prosecution?

    Of course. Any interpretation of legislation is automatically grounds for a suit if it differs from a moonbat view.

    Even if the moonbat changes its mind from day to day, Republicans would still be wrong, just because.

45. #45
    On September 29th, 2008 at 9:35 pm, Republicanvet said:

    On September 29th, 2008 at 4:29 pm, John Ansell said:

    I guess Cliff notes for Legislation is better.

    You must mean Cliff from the DNC?

46. #46
    On September 29th, 2008 at 9:57 pm, Republicanvet said:

    On September 29th, 2008 at 7:19 pm, Helene said:

    Let’s take this to a higher level. Suppose this guy decides to put together a bicycle for his kid for Christmas, but does not read the instructions. When the bicycle is finished, a bunch of loose parts are on the floor.

    This nitwit would likely sue the manufacturer then when little Johnny crashed the bike because the front wheel fell off.

47. #47
    On September 30th, 2008 at 8:48 am, flaming_o said:

    This banana

    Bob McCulloch, Missouri prosecutor

    will sue someone whose factual reading of the bill differs from his opinion of it?? Goon squad is right! This is rank, stank, mindless intimidation. Pure Stalinism as I see it.

48. #48
    On September 30th, 2008 at 12:53 pm, ammo john said:

    “Are We Lumberjacks” has a great poster on his site concerning this. I won’t be like a liberal and steal it and take claim for it, but you can find it here, titled ‘Masking tape’:

    http://arewelumberjacks.blogspot.com/

49. #49
    On September 30th, 2008 at 12:54 pm, ammo john said:

    My bad. I meant “Duct Tape”.