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 May 13th, 2009 at 12:55 pm, spaceycakes said:

   Talk about ‘picking your battles’–sounds like the GOP only wants to pick those that fit into the enemy’s perception of idiots!

2. #2
   On May 13th, 2009 at 12:56 pm, Rogue Cheddar said:

   “Always dressing for the wrong occasion!”

3. #3
   On May 13th, 2009 at 12:58 pm, Rogue Cheddar said:

   Way to go restoring the “brand.”

   An abject lesson in futility. Time for a new brand.

4. #4
   On May 13th, 2009 at 1:00 pm, hawkeye54 said:

   sounds like the GOP only wants to pick those that fit into the enemy’s perception of idiots!

   Yeah, and our’s too!

   Way to go restoring the “brand.”
   

   and that would be “The Stoopid Party”.

5. #5
   On May 13th, 2009 at 1:03 pm, zorro said:

   The word “hapless” comes to mind. Dumbbells is my second choice.

6. #6
   On May 13th, 2009 at 1:04 pm, hawkeye54 said:

   Time for a new brand.

   Paraphrasing an old TV variety show skit, satirizing an equally old cigarette commercial:

   Two cops knealing over a body:

   Detective: “Sarge, the guy’s dead.”

   Sarge replies (contemplating the cigarette he’s smoking): “Yeah, but not as dead as this cigarette party!”

7. #7
   On May 13th, 2009 at 1:12 pm, RedDog said:

   It’s never about what is best for America, only what is best for the special interests. I have always said that most politicians, like most corporate titans and self-interested Americans, will cut and run when the going gets tough.

   Corporate interests are already lining up, hoping against hope that they will get chosen for a government work detail instead of the gas chambers. We are being sold out on a daily basis. I’m frankly surprised it took the communists so long to work their plan to its conclusion.

   Sparta lasted 700-800 years. It looks as though America won’t even make it 250.

8. #8
   On May 13th, 2009 at 1:14 pm, Paul Revere said:

   It’s sort of like killing a soldier after the battle is over. Weird!

9. #9
   On May 13th, 2009 at 1:17 pm, RedDog said:

   The GOP is literally a dead chicken staggering around with it’s head cut off. Get a clue morons. You’re fighting a gun battle with wiffle bats.

10. #10
    On May 13th, 2009 at 1:56 pm, Pasadena Phil said:

    They are “listeners” now. “Doers” is just not in their DNA.

11. #11
    On May 13th, 2009 at 1:57 pm, legalbgl said:

    In addition, three Democrats who would support Hayes were absent — Sens. Edward M. Kennedy (Mass.), John Kerry (Mass.) and Barbara Mikulski (Md.).

    Wait, three dems who support his nomination could not be bothered to vote and its the republican’s who obstructed the nomination and are playing political games? Anyone think that maybe these dems were told not to vote to make it LOOK like the republicans obstructed the vote?

12. #12
    On May 13th, 2009 at 2:00 pm, right4life said:

    who cares who they stopped?? at they had the guts to finally stand up against the dems…

13. #13
    On May 13th, 2009 at 2:01 pm, right4life said:

    at they

    at least they….sorry

14. #14
    On May 13th, 2009 at 2:41 pm, lawhawk said:

    Hold the phone Michelle,

    This wasn’t a party line vote, and the story has been misreported.

    This is about Reid being incapable of counting the votes. He knew that Kerry, Kennedy and Mukloski were absent – and had two of the three been present, Hayes would have passed.

    The vote could have been delayed until that was the case, but instead, this was a political trick to make the GOP look bad – and the media aided and abetted with their shoddy reporting.

    Besides, it wasn’t a party line vote – given that two of the GOPers voted to approve Hayes (Snowe and Kyl).

    If you want to cast blame on the vote failing, it rests squarely on Harry Reid and no one else.

15. #15
    On May 13th, 2009 at 3:14 pm, WarEagle82 said:

    GOP = WHIG.

    These clowns do the wrong thing for the wrong reason more often than not.

    This is another of the reasons I am no longer a Republican…

16. #16
    On May 13th, 2009 at 3:44 pm, simcoe said:

    A thought:

    This actually had less to do with Obama really wanting David J. Hayes in the slot and more about payback for favors Hayes did for O.

    Putting Hayes’ name up for appointment knowing he most likely wouldn’t make it paid back whatever political favor Obama thought he owed Hayes. It cost Obama nothing and now the slate is clean.

17. #17
    On May 13th, 2009 at 3:51 pm, lgm said:

    This post would get MM branded as a RINO, especially because I agree with her on this. There’s hope for the world.

18. #18
    On May 13th, 2009 at 4:43 pm, Member-VRWC said:

    On May 13th, 2009 at 3:51 pm, lgm said:
    This post would get MM branded as a RINO, especially because I agree with her on this. There’s hope for the world.

    As usual, lgm, you’ve got it wrong and demonstrate you don’t even know what a RINO is. Unlike liberals who march in lockstep in support of all things Democrat and in disagreement with all things Republican, conservatives have no problem expressing their disgust at either party when they are stinking up the joint.

    When conservatives complain about the spending binge the government is on, liberals say why didn’t you complain when Bush was POTUS. The fact is this forum had plenty of people commenting negatively on Bush’s entitlement spending, lack of border enforcement, etc. We criticized then and we’re going to criticize now that BO owns the current disaster. And whether you, the fawning Obama-obsessed media, and BO himself want to admit it or not, he owns it now.

    MM is sticking up for principles, something neither a RINO nor a Democrat would ever do. You agree with her simply because she is commenting on the GOP’s lackluster performance… again. You’ll always agree with that POV.

    But you taking a critical look at the Democrats when they do something that erodes the foundation of this country? It’s not possible. You lack the thinking gene.

19. #19
    On May 14th, 2009 at 10:46 am, Dasher said:

    One question I have is why does the US government own or claim to own vast expanses of land within the various states. i.e. Why are there national parks. Why isn’t Grand Canyon for example an AZ State park?

20. #20
    On May 14th, 2009 at 10:58 am, Storm Chaser said:

    Perhaps I am wrong, but my understanding is in the beginning the government owned virtually all of the land. Titles passed to private individuals through homesteading and purchases. Much of the West was never thickly settled, and the government kept the land. It leases property for grazing, energy exploration and other uses.

    National parks belong to all of the people and we pay for their maintainance.

21. #21
    On May 14th, 2009 at 9:28 pm, ScottyDog said:

    The Constitution never authorized the federal Government to own any land except that was needed to preserve and protect this country.

    All of the vast holdings of the Feds is unconstitutional.They should have been auctioned or sold of privately.