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 March 13th, 2009 at 11:20 am, ITookTheRedPill said:

   I challenge Barack “Barry Soetoro” Obama to explain how his agenda is in any way different from the agenda of the Communist Party USA:

   The problems of exploitation, oppression, and survival facing humankind can only be solved, ultimately, by the elimination of the exploitative system of capitalism. Our survival depends on a transformation to socialism. The U.S. working class, with a long revolutionary history and many powerful mass movements and organizations, has the potential to make this transition happen. That means building unity for peace, for protecting and expanding democracy, for living-wage jobs, for universal health care, for real equality for all those who are nationally or racially oppressed and women, for an end to the political control of the ultra-right over our political institutions, and for an end to the economic rule of the transnational corporations. Building and strengthening organizations of and alliances between the working class and its allies, winning real unity in the course of struggle, is the path from our current struggles towards socialism.

   A Communist Party is essential for Marxists to test revolutionary theory through practice. We are not a debating society wrangling over obscure texts. We are a political movement, and we welcome all who accept our program. As Marx said, “The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point, however, is to change it.” The Communist Party USA is about changing the world.

   (Emphasis mine on three concepts spoken by Obama: transformation, universal health care, change)

2. #102
   On March 13th, 2009 at 11:31 am, denver republican said:

   I was “highly optimistic” about the long term, too, until this jackass added a trillion dollars to our debt.

3. #103
   On March 13th, 2009 at 11:37 am, mytake said:

   Now that he has gotten his way with spending our money and moving us into deeper debt and more socialism, he is all sweetness and light. What a crock!

4. #104
   On March 13th, 2009 at 11:40 am, thejim said:

   It’s the “Agenda”, Stupid.

5. #105
   On March 13th, 2009 at 11:43 am, TXGator said:

   My mole’s getting larger. Should I tell the dems since they want to tax all growth?

6. #106
   On March 13th, 2009 at 11:48 am, RedDog said:

   WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Citigroup Inc Chairman Richard Parsons said on Thursday that the bank does not need any more capital injections from the government and expressed confidence that Citi would remain in private hands.

   Wow. This whole thing is very suspicious. Methinks Buffet et el are coaching this guy in 1984 doublespeak. Clearly he is getting schooled in how to pull off the con without destroying their own wealth along with ours. This quote from Parsons is similar Madison Avenue smoothtalk malarky to “calm” the markets.

   They’re pulling the wool over our eyes. I consider Buffet, Obama, and all the other secular-progressives now in power to be traitors.

7. #107
   On March 13th, 2009 at 11:59 am, flmom said:

   Well lgm, still no response. I can’t say I’m surprised. You leave me no choice but to conclude what we all here know to be the truth. You have no critical thinking skills, all you ever post is talking points from the DNC, which has been spoon-fed to you via the MSM.

8. #108
   On March 13th, 2009 at 12:23 pm, dan708 said:

   I used to think Bill Clinton was the all-time Waffle Champion. But Obama takes the cake!

   I hereby suggest a new nickname for Mr. President:
   Eggo-Bama!

9. #109
   On March 13th, 2009 at 12:35 pm, tre said:

   Well, good golly miss molly! Duh One is sure good! It took him just a month to take the “worst economy since the Great Depression” and turn it around to “recovery!”

   *SARC*

10. #110
    On March 13th, 2009 at 12:38 pm, tre said:

    Proverbs 26:4 Do not answer a fool according to his folly,
    or you will be like him yourself.

    On March 13th, 2009 at 11:59 am, flmom said:
    Well lgm, still no response.

    Flmom, there’s my response to lgm. There’s nothing more to say about it.

11. #111
    On March 13th, 2009 at 12:41 pm, lgm said:

    conservativesRus said (#89):

    we’re doing has never worked anywhere else.

    Sweden had a financial meltdown and did a full (temporary) bank nationalization at great (temporary) cost to the Swedish taxpayer. Their system recovered. Banks were taken off receivership, taxpayers got much of their money back. It worked.

    In 1929, Republicans tried what Republicans are advocating today. It didn’t work then and they were swept out of office two years later.

    You can argue about either of these, but “It hasn’t worked yet” is not necessarily a reason not to try it now.

    Answering flmom: Bush neglected to administer the laws of the land — to regulate the banking industry. He presided over a huge growth in deficits — both government and trade — that weakened our financial system and made it harder for us to act when we really need to.

12. #112
    On March 13th, 2009 at 12:44 pm, flmom said:

    tre said:

    Agreed, but I’ve made it a point of asking libs to explain their positions, especially when I hear them repeat ad nauseum the talking points that have obviously come from the DNC or MSM. I think the silent responses I always get speaks volumes.

13. #113
    On March 13th, 2009 at 1:01 pm, ITookTheRedPill said:

    Bush neglected to administer the laws of the land — to regulate the banking industry

    Nice try, but wrong.

    Replublicans tried to regulate, while Democrats opposed and played the race card in order to cover up corruption.

14. #114
    On March 13th, 2009 at 1:07 pm, corkie said:

    On March 13th, 2009 at 9:44 am, lgm said:

    If the economy tanks, you say it’s because of Tarp and stimulus & I say it’s because Bush made a huge mess.

    Obama just stated that the economy isn’t as bad as everyone thinks. So, if the economy does get worse, then it’s obviously his own fault.

    It also means that Bush blamers must admit that they are over-blaming Bush.

15. #115
    On March 13th, 2009 at 1:08 pm, On-my-soap-box said:

    On March 13th, 2009 at 12:41 pm, lgm said:
    Bush neglected to administer the laws of the land — to regulate the banking industry.

    Yo, idiot, Bush and his admin tried to reign in the problems with banking. It was the Dems who shot it down. Don’t let that fact get in your way.

    He presided over a huge growth in deficits — both government and trade — that weakened our financial system and made it harder for us to act when we really need to.

    You cashed your check in 2001 I bet. After the checks went out, 9/11, and your dems voted in favor of supporting the war in Iraq (and all of them were screaming WMD’s before Bush and Repubs gained control). That started the deficit. You all could have sent back your checks. I bet a thousand dollars your spent yours and now complain about Bush’s deficit. Hypocrite.

16. #116
    On March 13th, 2009 at 1:09 pm, flmom said:

    Thanks ITTR, having difficulty with the linky thingy, but wanted to add the September 11 2003 NYT article for lgm’s edification, which juxtaposes nicely with your link.

17. #117
    On March 13th, 2009 at 1:09 pm, corkie said:

    Yahoo finance and Reuters received their marching orders. Check out the main yahoo finance headline (at least for now).

    Consumers’ Mood Edges Up Unexpectedly in March- Reuters

    Expect the market to rally everyone!!!!

18. #118
    On March 13th, 2009 at 1:43 pm, rambler said:

    He’s THE ONE! He does everything well, so why should flip-flopping be any different. He just wants to be the best flip-flopper.

19. #119
    On March 13th, 2009 at 2:00 pm, feebiebabe said:

    Sweden had a financial meltdown and did a full (temporary) bank nationalization at great (temporary) cost to the Swedish taxpayer. Their system recovered. Banks were taken off receivership, taxpayers got much of their money back. It worked.

    What lgm fails to mention is when this happened, the stockholders and those responsible for the crisis were bled dry and prosecuted (you know, held accountable for tax payers having to shell out in the interim). And the money was given back to the tax payers when the banks did recover.

    I could be mistaken, but Govt wasnt front and center in the Sweden scenario (different case entirely from us) and I wont hold my breath about getting any money back – the same folks who were involved in this mess are the same folks responsible for the oversight of these institutions now. Fox-Hen House.

    What makes you think they are going to give us our money back when they were taking it all along (and continue to do so) as we speak?

    You do you see being taken to task for any of this??? (crickets)

    NYT Article:

    Sweden did not just bail out its financial institutions by having the government take over the bad debts. It extracted pounds of flesh from bank shareholders before writing checks. Banks had to write down losses and issue warrants to the government.

    Makes me question which country is capitalist vs. socialist sometimes…

20. #120
    On March 13th, 2009 at 2:03 pm, DBNinKY said:

    In 1929, Republicans tried what Republicans are advocating today.

    Um, you’re not very clear here – are you saying Republicans favor Obama raising taxes in a downturn like Hoover did, because that’s what happened?

    Bush neglected to administer the laws of the land — to regulate the banking industry.

    Nor are you clear here: Are you saying President Bush disbanded the Fed Reserve? Because that’s pretty much all the control the Feds USE to have over our once non-nationalized banking system.

    Blaming deregulation is an out-of-hand response that shows little consideration for the fact Democrats used legislation and the tools of government, mainly low income home ownership/urban renewal policies and Fannie & Freddie, to circumvent the forces of the free market by replacing sound accounting principles and practices in determining credit worthiness, such as assets to liabilities and acid test ratios, with government mandates and quotas.

21. #121
    On March 13th, 2009 at 2:05 pm, feebiebabe said:

    You do you see being taken to task for any of this??? (crickets)

    should have been: Do you see anyone being taken to task for any of this???

22. #122
    On March 13th, 2009 at 2:24 pm, DBNinKY said:

    “I don’t think things are ever as good as they say, or ever as bad as they say,” Obama added.

    So is he saying he’s coolly detached, or just doesn’t have an opinion?

23. #123
    On March 13th, 2009 at 2:25 pm, ITookTheRedPill said:

    So I ask, is President Obama the New Coke?

    The electorate seemed to want change in 2008 and Obama seemed to represent the change they wanted. This change was about politicians moving beyond partisanship to get things moving again in Washington –it was not about big government solving everyone’s problems.

24. #124
    On March 13th, 2009 at 2:30 pm, ITookTheRedPill said:

    the electorate thought they were getting one thing in Obama and instead got something very different. In other words, they wanted the change he said he would bring, but dislike the change he is actually bringing and actually believes in.

25. #125
    On March 13th, 2009 at 2:39 pm, corkie said:

    This reminds me of an old joke.

    Question: Do you know why the world still has so many problems?

    Answer: Because the people with all the great solutions are stuck driving a cab or tending a bar.

    Obama reminded me of the cabby/bartender during the election. He was too naive to know that his solutions wouldn’t work.

26. #126
    On March 13th, 2009 at 3:04 pm, drjohn said:

    To paraphrase Satchel Paige:

    “How bad would this economy be if you didn’t know how bad this economy was?”

    Dr. Obama has induced Stockholm Syndrome on America.

    It’s malpractice.

27. #127
    On March 13th, 2009 at 3:14 pm, TXGator said:

    DBNinKY,
    Spot on and well played.
    It’s a shame the libs will refuse to understand a concise and factual rebuttal to their emotional spew.

28. #128
    On March 13th, 2009 at 3:16 pm, RetFireman said:

    One of the most entertaining things on this site, is when the trolls attempt to sound intelligent. Every time they take a small break from their usual childish antics to use big words and complete sentences, you just know they spent a whole 15 seconds on Google, cutting and pasting the very first thing they find on whatever subject they decided was worth the 15 seconds in an effort to appear smarter than they really are.

    So far, I have yet to see any of them actually come up with anything that matches what point they are trying to make, or come up with something that cannot be shot down by any number of posters here who actually DO keep up on events and politics.

    It is HILARIOUS to me…seriously. Just take LGM’s example above. It was just something he found on Google, but cannot back up. It looked good at first glance, so he stuck it here. He won’t be able to expound on it, won’t be able to defend the statement and most assuredly will not answer any questions presented to him regarding it, simply because it is not his own thought, but something he glanced on a website that he imagined would make him appear older than 12.

    Just classic.

29. #129
    On March 13th, 2009 at 3:37 pm, John Deaux said:

    On March 13th, 2009 at 3:16 pm, RetFireman said:
    One of the most entertaining things on this site, is when the trolls attempt to sound intelligent.

    My two favorite things are the randomly made up statistics and directly linked correlations.

    i.e. Everybody knows that 42% of all orange juice profits go to organized crime and Tom DeLay once owned an orange tree, so you can see the culture of corruption.

    My other favorite is obscure falsehoods presented as fact.

    i.e. During the Mau Mau uprising, it was the unjustified provocation of the settlers that caused the sinking of the U.S.S. Maine.

    I think that because liberals know that other liberals aren’t too bright and won’t challenge them on anything if it supports their point of view, they project that to everybody. Somehow, they think they won’t be challenged if they present that same falsehood to conservatives.

30. #130
    On March 13th, 2009 at 3:44 pm, right4life said:

    i.e. Everybody knows that 42% of all orange juice profits go to organized crime and Tom DeLay once owned an orange tree, so you can see the culture of corruption.

    if you eat meat from cows that inhale second-hand smoke you’re 1.234% more likely to die in agony…

31. #131
    On March 13th, 2009 at 4:14 pm, Red Ted said:

    OK, so he talked it down long enough to pass these monstrosities, ruined our 401(k)s, and now tells us it’s not so bad because some focus group tole him to. Leadership at its best!

32. #132
    On March 13th, 2009 at 4:45 pm, lgm said:

    OK. You have a point. Hoover was more responsible than modern Republicans. If a government is going to do no good, it at least should do no harm -> balanced budgets.

    Republicans controlled congress until 2006 and passed all kinds of things Democrats objected to. But somehow they could not pass financial reform laws. Anyway, it wasn’t Fannie and Freddie took huge unhedged CDS positions. SEC failed to uncover Madoff’s fraud.

33. #133
    On March 13th, 2009 at 5:20 pm, corkie said:

    On March 13th, 2009 at 4:45 pm, lgm said:

    Balanced Budgets? You’d get no argument here. In fact, I’d support a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution. Would you, lgm?

    YOU can’t blame Republicans for not forcing certain reform laws against the cries of racism from the left. WE can. YOU can’t.

    …it wasn’t Fannie and Freddie took huge unhedged CDS positions.

    Is that some sort of pathetic attempt to imply that Fannie and Freddie weren’t significantly involved in causing this mess???? BTW, Fannie and Freddie are still conducting all sorts of stupid, damaging business.

34. #134
    On March 13th, 2009 at 5:21 pm, corkie said:

    On March 13th, 2009 at 4:45 pm, lgm said:

    SEC failed to uncover Madoff’s fraud.

    BTW, this statement is too stupid to address.

35. #135
    On March 13th, 2009 at 9:43 pm, Dimsdale said:

    On March 13th, 2009 at 4:45 pm, lgm said:

    (snip)…If a government is going to do no good, it at least should do no harm -> balanced budgets.

    Bring that up at your next Obamakumbaya meeting, would you?