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 February 17th, 2009 at 7:42 pm, Major O said:

   It’s not a matter of hoping that it works, it’s certainty that it won’t.

   Apparently, that’s not true. Not if you “believe” enough, anyways. Just act dumb and pretend you don’t understand. And eventually, it will all work out.
   Trust him.

2. #102
   On February 17th, 2009 at 7:45 pm, FilmLadd said:

   In other Socialist / RHINO news…

   John McCain and Lindsey Gramnesty support nationalizing banks!

   Where’s Bill Grant when you need him?

   Still think it’s smart to support Rhinos to help PREVENT socialism? How are they any d&$&med different than Obama?

   McCain is a collectivist, same as Obama!

   Nationalisation, long regarded in Washington as a folly of Europeans, is gaining rapid ground among US opinion-formers. Stranger still, many of those talking about federal ownership of banks are Republicans.

   Lindsey Graham, a Republican senator for South Carolina, said that many of his colleagues, including John McCain, the defeated presidential candidate, agreed with his view that nationalisation of some banks should be “on the table”.

   Read more…

3. #103
   On February 17th, 2009 at 7:49 pm, DigitalCameras said:

   7/4/2009

4. #104
   On February 17th, 2009 at 7:49 pm, rightwingmom said:

   Why shouldn’t children be in the protest…we’re (Democraps) are screwing up their future!

5. #105
   On February 17th, 2009 at 8:08 pm, MNUSMCDavid said:

   Chap… I hope the bill fails for what it is. All pork, no assistance and no short term effect. No one…. no one can tell me that this is a stimulus bill.

6. #106
   On February 17th, 2009 at 8:14 pm, carole said:

   Enough about children at event. This is not frivilous..Thank goodness the children were there.
   They will be proud of their parents.
   Passion is not just for loonies….Patriots have passion too.

7. #107
   On February 17th, 2009 at 8:20 pm, Right By-The-Sea said:

   Glad to see this protest…wish I could have been there.

   Fwiw, those of us in California need to do some “protesting” of our own. The demoncrap-controlled legislature wants to set us taxpayers up for a good reaming…

8. #108
   On February 17th, 2009 at 8:21 pm, Marc said:

   I have said this before. The “stimulus” bill is a disgraceful example of government nepotism, cronyism, backroom deals and outright corruption. But why, please tell me, should the hog family be linked to this monstrosity? For those of you who have never been on a hog farm, you are missing something. The hogs are smart, independent, kindly and contrary to popular belief, they do not eat more food per their body size than many other animals. I grew up with a family member who owned a hog farm. Every child should experience the love and affection that the piglets give to children. The piglets are far more gentle and kind with children than are cats and dogs. When the hogs become adults, they have individual personalities, they are smart and often kind and gentle. So why do these wonderful animals have to be associated with a new law that is a 1400 page pile of horse manure? What did the hog family do to deserve such a fate? I will gladly give anyone a tour of my cousin’s hog farm and you are welcome to watch the hogs enjoy their daily meals. Yes, they have hearty meals and they do have big stomachs to fill. That is not their fault. That is just what God gave to them. But given their physiques, their metabolism and their digestive systems, they do not eat to excess. Anyone who says otherwise is a yuppie who eats arugula from the Whole Foods and does not know what he or she is talking about. Please don’t use these beautiful animals as a symbol of protest against a crappy law.

9. #109
   On February 17th, 2009 at 8:30 pm, Mercy4Me said:

   People! PEOPLE!

   What we need to do next is protest at our state capitols when they are suppose to get the money from DC.

   We need to do that and put pressure on our loser Governors who are sucking the ding-ding of emperor O dumbo. Mine is loser Crist!

10. #110
    On February 17th, 2009 at 8:31 pm, jjmurphy said:

    This whole business boils down to the sad fact that the U.S. government is spending money that is not authorized to spend. It doesn’t matter if the stimulus package will work or not. (It won’t) It doesn’t matter if it is pork or not. (It is.) It doesn’t even matter is we have the money to spend. (We don’t) It matters that the U.S. government is not constitutionally authorized to do what it is doing. No, I am not a constitutional scholar, like our beloved leader, but I can read the document.

    For a refresher read the incredible speech by Rep. Davy Crockett. (Yes, that Davy Crockett.)

    It is called “Not Yours To Give“

11. #111
    On February 17th, 2009 at 8:52 pm, bjc said:

    *As I have said before, this stimulus package will have about as much effect on the economy as a necropheliac, in the apex of his perversion, stimulating the object of his desire.
    *I have read about Grahamnesty being alright with nationalizing the banks; I don’t know if he has been playing “catch” with Barney Frank or what, but Michael Steele needs to call him out; Forget the 11th commandment.
    *I may not attend any of the protests as I have to keep the business going, but I will take some of what I earn to support those on the right side of this issue going into 2010 and 2012; Rep. Marsha Blackburn comes to mind.

12. #112
    On February 17th, 2009 at 9:00 pm, ks55 said:

    What a great event – the pictures are priceless – Thank you all

13. #113
    On February 17th, 2009 at 9:01 pm, BigDaddy99 said:

    Freedom March 2009 — How about a march on D.C. next Fourth of July? (Saturday) I bet Michael Steele would love to organize it and millions would follow Sarah Palin to Hell and back, I bet ‘cha! We’re losing so many freedoms by the little “o” that we’ve got to do something!

14. #114
    On February 17th, 2009 at 9:12 pm, chapoutier said:

    It matters that the U.S. government is not constitutionally authorized to do what it is doing. No, I am not a constitutional scholar, like our beloved leader, but I can read the document.

    Maybe freshen up on Article One, Section 8, Clause One. Then read up on US v. Butler and its progeny.

15. #115
    On February 17th, 2009 at 9:17 pm, katablog said:

    Great job Denver!

    Watch for Stimulus II after we get done with Automaker Bailout II, Bank Bailout II and Mortgage Bailout I.

16. #116
    On February 17th, 2009 at 9:23 pm, rightisright said:

    I am sure that is exactly what the people at Kos say about posters like you…

    That was a childish reply on your part chap, i have noticed you do that at times when you obviously don’t have a strong intellectual or humorous reply. That one looked like a 5 yr. old justifying their position…”you did it too” .
    And don’t try and equate substituting an off colored(is that racist? if so tuff noogies) name for the real name to wishing and or advocating someone would die…big difference. Doubt you’ve seen deathly hate on this site…if you did, it’s a troll acting out.

17. #117
    On February 17th, 2009 at 9:35 pm, jjmurphy said:

    Maybe freshen up on Article One, Section 8, Clause One.

    The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

    Lots of controversy over the “general welfare words. I’m pretty sure I do not interpret them the same way you do, Chap.

18. #118
    On February 17th, 2009 at 9:36 pm, chapoutier said:

    That was a childish reply on your part chap, i have noticed you do that at times when you obviously don’t have a strong intellectual or humorous reply. That one looked like a 5 yr. old justifying their position…”you did it too” .

    First off, I am not doing anything. I have never called Bush an evil fascist, nor Obama a Marxist Nazi or whatever hyperbolic terms you want to toss around.

    My point is that no one recognizes the silliness THEY spew, because to them it is the truth. Those that make absurd statements about Bush and Democrats are just as bad as your ilk that make equally absurd statements about Obama. And the defense on either side is “B..b…but I’m justified because I’m right!” Just as you did.

    Doubt you’ve seen deathly hate on this site…if you did, it’s a troll acting out.

    Huh. Really? Just a few trolls? How many comments were there on that thread about Pelosi’s trip hoping her plane crashes. You tried to excuse it as politics just being a “very emotional subject” but of course no such quarter is given to any kossack or HuffPo poster that would post something similar. No. Of course not. They are to be taken exactly at their word and condemned as hate-filled. And again it comes down to nothing more than you think you are right.

    So do they, sport. So do they.

19. #119
    On February 17th, 2009 at 9:38 pm, chapoutier said:

    Lots of controversy over the “general welfare words. I’m pretty sure I do not interpret them the same way you do, Chap.

    Well, unfortunately for you, the Supreme Court for many many years has seen fit to see it my way, as did Alexander Hamilton and our first President by the way, to name a few.

    Feel free to argue that it is stupid spending. Feel free to argue that it is wasteful spending. But any argument that it is unconstitutional spending is on very very shaky ground.

20. #120
    On February 17th, 2009 at 9:49 pm, jjmurphy said:

    But any argument that it is unconstitutional spending is on very very shaky ground.

    Gotta disagree. Your side is in charge now, but it doesn’t make it right. Besides, there are other opinions by other Founders and Justices that would disagree.

    Considering how shredded the Consitution is, it is a moot point now.

21. #121
    On February 17th, 2009 at 9:59 pm, zorro said:

    More pics from El Marco and here’s vid from El Presidente at Slapstick Politics:

    Great stuff Michelle!! Love the no lipstick, but bbq sauce line, that was great. BON APPETIT!

22. #122
    On February 17th, 2009 at 10:00 pm, chapoutier said:

    Your side is in charge now, but it doesn’t make it right.

    This has been the established interpretation of the taxing and spending clause long before the current Dem administration. Interestingly in Butler, which is the case that all subsequent cases interpreting that clause spring from, 5 of the 6 Judges in the majority were Republican appointed.

23. #123
    On February 17th, 2009 at 10:00 pm, FilmLadd said:

    On February 17th, 2009 at 9:38 pm, chapoutier said:

    Feel free to argue that it is stupid spending. Feel free to argue that it is wasteful spending. But any argument that it is unconstitutional spending is on very very shaky ground.

    I for one argue that it is immoral collectivist spending.

    The only action (or spending) by any State that is moral is that which protects individual liberty and property – i.e., police, army, the enforcement of contracts between individuals, etc.

    Everything else is cronyism, theft by the State, thugocracy.

    It is not a coincidence that the most collectivist of the politicians today are also the most corrupt.

    Collectivism eventually contracts societies and economies until there are only two classes: the politician that gets to dole out the benefits, and the pathetic starving dogs, begging for table scraps.

    Slaves to the State.

    Keep on propagandizing for the collectivists; maybe, just maybe, fortune will smile on you in the future, and you won’t end up on the begging side of the table.

    Good luck.

24. #124
    On February 17th, 2009 at 10:04 pm, FilmLadd said:

    On February 17th, 2009 at 10:00 pm, chapoutier said:

    …5 of the 6 Judges in the majority were Republican appointed.

    A capital “R” besides one’s name does not a lover of freedom make, and if justifying evil by declaring that “those other guys did it” is the best of your arguments, then might I suggest practicing law on the playground with little Billy and Mary-Sue.

    I’m sure there’s a bully caught in the act of committing a wedgie to defend somewhere.

25. #125
    On February 17th, 2009 at 10:07 pm, chapoutier said:

    A capital “R” besides one’s name does not a lover of freedom make, and if justifying evil by declaring that “those other guys did it” is the best of your arguments, then might I suggest practicing law on the playground with little Billy and Mary-Sue.

    My point is that this is not some new fangled Democratic notion, as was the implication. You are free to take a different interpretation of that clause. That and a buck fifty will get you a cup of coffee.

    I’m sure there’s a bully caught in the act of committing a wedgie to defend somewhere.

    Of course, under that pesky “Bill of Rights”, he would be entitled to competent defense. Why do you hate the Bill of Rights?

26. #126
    On February 17th, 2009 at 10:24 pm, allrsn said:

    ya know I have been to many pig roasts and I myself but on a 2 pig roast with a level full sized pickup bed of sweet corn and 16 16′s of beer.

    I know pig roasts.

    That was the ugliest roasted pig I have ever seen, looked like it was roasted at too high a tempurate. I hope only the exterior was burned and the interior remained tender and juicy. Pigs should be roasted at 225 to 250 degrees for 8 to 12 hours depending on its size.

27. #127
    On February 17th, 2009 at 10:27 pm, allrsn said:

    I am so glad we freedom lovers are starting to stand up and be heard. We rarely do this. Soros and crew and followers are very well organized, time we start to organize as well. It is very very important we not only support but also attend these rallies, even if it means taking a few hours off of work! Our bosses should support this at all pratical costs!

    TIME TO MOVE IT FREEDOM FIGHTERS!!

28. #128
    On February 17th, 2009 at 11:16 pm, mdt said:

    Is this really happening? I watched tv news (fox, cnn,….) from 7-11pm EST (yes, I am feeling bit under the weather) and saw not one mention of this.

29. #129
    On February 17th, 2009 at 11:29 pm, Joy said:

    FilmLadd said:

    Where’s Bill Grant when you need him?

    Banned maybe? I’ll never give up hope.

30. #130
    On February 17th, 2009 at 11:31 pm, happy2behere said:

    The protest was so close, I wish I could have been there, but I have a business to run.

    Unlike those who feed at the public trough.

31. #131
    On February 18th, 2009 at 12:31 am, FilmLadd said:

    On February 17th, 2009 at 10:07 pm, chapoutier said:

    My point is that this is not some new fangled Democratic notion, as was the implication.

    From what I can tell, most of the MM posters are not arguing against the evils of collectivism because they are championed by one “team” or another.

    The “team” doesn’t matter.

    Lots and lots of posts on McCain, Graham, and Bush’s collectivism… lot of “R’s” have had a hand in birthing this great evil.

    You are fighting straw men of your own creation, and failing to address what people are really posing to you.

    The strawman tactic may work in 20 second soundbites to a television audience. But in a comments section it either makes you look mentally deficient, paid to propagandize, or afflicted by attention deficit disorder.

    Of course, under that pesky “Bill of Rights”, he would be entitled to competent defense. Why do you hate the Bill of Rights?

    Weak. Another straw man.

    Defending the evil of collectivism is not the same as providing counsel for the defense under The Bill of Rights.

    Why can’t you bring yourself to argue with what’s really been posed? Too fevered by the allure of collectivism, the hatred of freedom?

32. #132
    On February 18th, 2009 at 12:47 am, Elm Creek Smith said:

    Hope is not a plan. Not all change is good.

    The “stimulus” bill is a hodgepodge of liberal wish lists and payback to their supporters. The infrastructure spending won’t provide jobs anytime soon. The lack of real tax relief will not stimulate anything. This monstrosity won’t do what Da One, Pelosi, and Reid claim it will. It will drive the markets even further down and will slow the recovery.

    The resistance is here. The resistance is now. RESIST!!!

    ECS

33. #133
    On February 18th, 2009 at 4:41 am, jbirish said:

    Where’s the media reporting on the porkulous protests? Even Fox has ignored these protests by the “folks”.

34. #134
    On February 18th, 2009 at 7:47 am, chapoutier said:

    Film Ladd,

    Couple points, what exactly, do you think we should be arguing? Someone made an argument the spending is unconstitutional. I didn’t bring of up. I merely said they were wrong. They then implied that my constitutional interpretation was somehow tied to the current Democratic admin. I again merely showed them they were wrong. You really need to study up on what “strawman” means cause you are not even close.

    As for my other little comment, don’t be obtuse. That was just a little shot at your silly attempt to attack me and oh-so-cleverly-for-about-the-millionth-time try to gain debate points by pointing out my profession.

35. #135
    On February 18th, 2009 at 11:13 am, MarcoPolo said:

    I just don’t really think we should make them walking political billboards and ascribe to them opinions which they could not have possibly reasonably formed yet because it makes for a cute photo-op.

    I respectfully disagree. I want to be sure my kids have enough inormation to form opinions. The media and the schools aren’t much interested in facts.

    It it makes for a pic good enough to get the message in front of a few more people, then so be it.

    Getting the kids involved in politics brings the process alive for them. I would never make them endure city hall meetings, or expect them to remain content at an 8 hour rally, but running around waving signs is fun for them.

    And in the long run, my kids will know that I actually tried to do something to stop this cancer in our country.

36. #136
    On February 18th, 2009 at 11:51 am, Andy said:

    On February 17th, 2009 at 4:19 pm, drivingjack said:
    SNIP
    Be careful what you prop up. We slammed the left for using their children in protests (granted these kids are NOT human shields). If we are to claim their kids were pawns what does that make our kids? Just asking.

    On February 17th, 2009 at 4:21 pm, chapoutier said:
    SNIP
    It looks like it was a successful event, but can anyone fill me in again on when its okay to use children as political props and when its not?

    On one hand, it’s a matter of perspective, however, lefties tend to use the kids for the wrong reasons (emotional/lacking a reasoned approach), thus kids wind up as political props. To whit, that poster-family for SCHIPs a couple of years ago. The family’s so-called dire straits was a sham. Likewise the skanks using kids as shields.

    On the other hand, taking my kids to protest a violation and or abuse of our rights/inheritance is hardly a political prop. I have no problems with kids protesting pork, abortion, segregated schools/lunch counters etc. It’s all part of training them to discern right from wrong, just from unjust, good from evil…

    I’m not saying conservatives aren’t guilty. They just don’t tend to use kids as props. Come to think of it most lefty protests tend to consist of spoiled kiddies trapped in adult bodies.

    Jos 24:15 & 2Ti 2:15 comes to mind.

37. #137
    On February 18th, 2009 at 12:01 pm, cheapseat said:

    chap, we have a constitution which gets INTERPRETTED by black robed gods every day. they have interpretted that the right to bear arms doesn’t mean we have the right to own and carry weapons. they have interpretted a right to privacy which permits the murder of viable late term children. they have interpretted that the u.s. constitution is superceded by the world court and prevailing liberal thought. they have interpretted that the government has the right to take your property and deed it to someone else because that person pays me bigger bribes. so don’t get too far into the constitutional argument about taxes. they have been interpretted, not written in stone. our founding fathers knew and said this republic was designed to operate ONLY if we were a moral society guided by like beliefs. that is no longer true.

38. #138
    On February 18th, 2009 at 2:03 pm, chapoutier said:

    chap, we have a constitution which gets INTERPRETTED by black robed gods every day.

    Absolutely. We have no choice but to interpret because the language is not, nor could it ever be, crystal clear in all situations. And my point was that a certain interpretation is the one that has won.

39. #139
    On February 18th, 2009 at 3:34 pm, ITookTheRedPill said:

    On February 17th, 2009 at 4:08 pm, frostrt said:

    My favorite is the “I don’t want to pay for the Swindle Us Package (I’m only 10 years old)”.

    Ditto.

40. #140
    On February 18th, 2009 at 5:03 pm, Divapalooza said:

    Keep up the good work Michelle! I don’t know how you do it, but just keep doing it. Nebraska says No More Pork too!