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 December 16th, 2009 at 10:52 pm, rocketman said:

   ***
   The flight attendants are not there as waiters, drink servers, etc. They are there to keep passengers alive if something goes wrong–witness how fast they got people out of the plane that “ditched” in the Hudson river.
   ***
   Turning off the cell phones and games prevents possibilities of them “jamming” navigation, GPS, radio, and fly-by-wire control systems. Some aircraft have been lost due to these types of Radio Frequency Interference (RFI) problems.
   ***
   The flight attendant wasn’t a b***h–but Schmucky Schumer was a real d**khead.
   ***
   John Bibb
   ***

2. #102
   On December 16th, 2009 at 10:55 pm, purealchemy said:

   Jeddite, blue sparks in not defined on Urban Dictionary
   nor was fisting kits but fisting was.

   Signed,

   Ma Kettle

3. #103
   On December 16th, 2009 at 11:01 pm, purealchemy said:

   On December 16th, 2009 at 10:52 pm, zeroangel said:
   …ok and MM is hot. There I said it, you know every male here thinks it

   So is Mrs. zero.

   Is that why you come here?

4. #104
   On December 16th, 2009 at 11:15 pm, zeroangel said:

   Pure:

   So is Mrs. zero.

   That goes without saying.

   Is that why you come here?

   No, these days I mainly come here to antagonize you and a few others. However, I’d be lying if I didn’t admit that years ago (before I met Mrs. Zero) one of the things I first noticed about MM was that she is a beautiful woman.

5. #105
   On December 16th, 2009 at 11:18 pm, purealchemy said:

   However, I’d be lying if I didn’t admit that years ago (before I met Mrs. Zero) one of the things I first noticed about MM was that she is a beautiful woman

   BUSTED!

   and now, something for our French poodle friend, chappy..

   hang on……

6. #106
   On December 16th, 2009 at 11:22 pm, purealchemy said:

   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s–PNQFsp3k

   This one is for Chappy.
   Local St. Louis musicians I have been truly priveleged to experience.

   Absolutely gorgeous!

7. #107
   On December 16th, 2009 at 11:47 pm, purealchemy said:

   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMLm4MzWPDQ

   more beauty

8. #108
   On December 17th, 2009 at 12:34 am, valleygreaser said:

   On December 16th, 2009 at 5:38 pm, jjmurphy said:
   Something I have noticed about Chap’s comments on a lot of threads. He will come in with a comment that will throw the discussion away from whatever it was that Michelle posted about.

   That’s the intent. It’s called trolling. The cure is to ignore the trolls but few here seem to do that. As a result practically every discussion is controlled by Chap and/or Zero. Their posts do not argue the point of the original topic but merely destroy any real examination of the issue at hand. The first rule anyone should learn on any discussion board is don’t feed the trolls.

9. #109
   On December 17th, 2009 at 1:05 am, backwoods conservative said:

   I like what Andy Hefty had to say about it.

10. #110
    On December 17th, 2009 at 1:24 am, Bob Mc said:

    Of course Chucky thinks it’s OK for him to call a woman who is just trying to do her job a b****.
    Don’t try calling Chuck a schmuck though, even when he’s being one. You can ask Al D’Amato about that.

11. #111
    On December 17th, 2009 at 1:27 am, Bob Mc said:

    Or a putz. Or whatever it was he called him.

12. #112
    On December 17th, 2009 at 2:12 am, Papa Louie said:

    Schumer and his seatmate, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), were chatting on their phones before takeoff when an announcement indicated that it was time to turn off the phones.

    Both senators kept talking.

    At least they’re consistent. If the announcement had indicated that it was time for everyone to pay their taxes, I’m sure they would have ignored that as well.

13. #113
    On December 17th, 2009 at 7:46 am, zeroangel said:

    valleygreaser:

    Their posts do not argue the point of the original topic but merely destroy any real examination of the issue at hand.

    Sorry, no. We were still busy discussing the topic in the “Public school lunacy of the day” up until the bitter end (400+ comments).

    Besides, in many threads, no real examination goes on anyways. The posts all seem to agree with MM (even Chap and I agree). What’s the harm in going off topic (I assure you, it’s seldom intentional) in those threads, especially when everyone else wants to go off topic?

    Often, it seems the defintion of a “troll” is one that gets threads off topic AND disagrees with your politics. Curiously, only Chap and I were mentioned by you, none of our “partners in crime.”

14. #114
    On December 17th, 2009 at 8:40 am, jangar said:

    Question:
    What does Chuck Schumer and Muslim terrorists have in common?

    Answer:
    Many things, but most notably the refusal to turn off electronic devices prior to takeoff, and calling the flight attendant a sexist name.

    Put them all in the same bucket, then toss them out.

15. #115
    On December 17th, 2009 at 8:56 am, Rogue Cheddar said:

    On December 16th, 2009 at 10:09 pm, chapoutier said:
    And I finally got the peanut brittle right…without a thermometer. I rule.

    What’s the matter chap, can’t find the thermometer? Now think real hard, where would a liberal put something like a thermometer? It’s always in the last place you look, init?

16. #116
    On December 17th, 2009 at 9:49 am, floridaobserver said:

    Even in a thread about another jerky government official, there are gems such as the wonderful youtubes of Elsie Parker and the Poor People of Paris.
    Merci, merci, merci!!!!!
    Je t’aime!

17. #117
    On December 17th, 2009 at 10:24 am, spaceycakes said:

    And I finally got the peanut brittle right…without a thermometer.

    So, somewhere between ‘hard ball’ and ‘soft crack’?

    Nice.

18. #118
    On December 17th, 2009 at 10:27 am, chapoutier said:

    Their posts do not argue the point of the original topic but merely destroy any real examination of the issue at hand.

    Don’t be stupid. There is NO “issue at hand” in this post. It is merely a personal shot at a senator. And what was the “discussion” about that up until I made my accurate and salient point that MM treats these type of incidents in a very biased fashion?

    Poster 1: Schumer sucks!

    Poster 2: Yeah Schumer sucks!

    Poster 3: We already knew Schumer sucked!

    Poster 4: I’d just like to point out that I too am of the opinion that Schumer sucks.

    And on and on and on…

    Don’t delude yourself into thinking there was any sort of “topic” or any sort of “discussion” there. At least not one more sophisticated than your average elementary school yard.

19. #119
    On December 17th, 2009 at 10:38 am, Weary Citizen said:

    On December 17th, 2009 at 10:27 am, chapoutier said:

    But Schumer does suck. It may not be analysis but it is accurate.

20. #120
    On December 17th, 2009 at 11:23 am, corkie said:

    I think Schumer sucks, too, and he shouldn’t have called her a b!tch.

    However, it’s possible that this flight attendant did act like a b!itch. And are we sure she was correct in claiming that he was legally required to obey her specific instruction?

    At what point during the flight evolution are passengers legally required to obey “flight safety” instructions from the flight crew, and was her instruction legally considered a flight safety instruction?

    If I was forced to guess, then I would side with the flight attendant. However, we aren’t forced to guess.

21. #121
    On December 17th, 2009 at 12:02 pm, Connie said:

    “Jerk” doesn’t quite cover Schumer after he nudged the housing bubble into a collapse by causing Indy Bank to fail.

22. #122
    On December 17th, 2009 at 12:05 pm, DBNinKY said:

    There is NO “issue at hand” in this post.

    Yes, there is. MM is calling out the MSM for not taking Schumer to task for using a sexist term to demean a young lady in the performance of her duties and who was in no position to answer back, like they would have any male Republican rep who had used the term in a similar situation. (Only a few of the MSM news sites I’ve seen today have covered Schumer’s Neanderthalish behavior.)

    BTW: What’s up w/ all the hyper-criticism you’ve been hurling at MM lately, are you trying make yourself into the next LGM?

23. #123
    On December 17th, 2009 at 12:17 pm, FirstSkirt said:

    Yes, DBNinKY – I agree that there IS a topic. ANOTHER ARROGANT elected official who thinks the rules are meant for the “little people.” The only way we can rid ourselves of these elitists is to vote them out.

24. #124
    On December 17th, 2009 at 12:22 pm, greenfairie said:

    They should have thrown the douchebag off the plane.

25. #125
    On December 17th, 2009 at 12:22 pm, DBNinKY said:

    …rules are meant for the “little people.”

    And we’re getting littler everyday…um, night… as that’s when the Dems like to pass legislation. That so-called jobs stimulus they passed last night will do nothing but spend us deeper in debt.

26. #126
    On December 17th, 2009 at 12:25 pm, chapoutier said:

    MM is calling out the MSM for not taking Schumer to task for using a sexist term to demean a young lady in the performance of her duties and who was in no position to answer back, like they would have any male Republican rep who had used the term in a similar situation. (Only a few of the MSM news sites I’ve seen today have covered Schumer’s Neanderthalish behavior.)

    Really? I don’t see at all where MM mentions the MSM.

    BTW: What’s up w/ all the hyper-criticism you’ve been hurling at MM lately, are you trying make yourself into the next LGM?

    Huh? Gee, I said right here that for important issues, I think she plays it pretty fair. I said that when it comes to posting things simply to attack ones character, she seems to lob her grenades almost exclusively to the left. That is “hyper critical?”

27. #127
    On December 17th, 2009 at 12:34 pm, DBNinKY said:

    Really? I don’t see at all where MM mentions the MSM.

    Really! Use your inference skills.

    …she seems to lob her grenades almost exclusively to the left. That is “hyper critical?”

    a.) She’s a conservative and the liberals are in power. Why would she waste time throwing stones of change at the powerless?

    b.) You seen to dwell on it, here of late. You’ve mentioned it at least twice that I can remember, in the last six weeks.

28. #128
    On December 17th, 2009 at 12:46 pm, chapoutier said:

    Really! Use your inference skills.

    Since when has MM not been totally blunt about pointing out media bias when she thinks its there? I think she even has a tag for it.

    a.) She’s a conservative and the liberals are in power. Why would she waste time throwing stones of change at the powerless?

    So if I go back to the archives to 2006, I will find many stories like this, except they will all be lobbed at Republicans?

29. #129
    On December 17th, 2009 at 1:24 pm, purealchemy said:

    RED ALERT!

    zero, Santa had an official briefing this morning at Norad.

30. #130
    On December 17th, 2009 at 1:30 pm, purealchemy said:

    On December 17th, 2009 at 9:49 am, floridaobserver said:
    Even in a thread about another jerky government official, there are gems such as the wonderful youtubes of Elsie Parker and the Poor People of Paris.
    Merci, merci, merci!!!!!
    Je t’aime!

    De rien!
    They have two CDs but nothing compares with their live performances.
    Was a nod to our resident francophile chapoutier for his conquest of peanut brittle.

31. #131
    On December 17th, 2009 at 2:20 pm, Major O said:

    On what basis is MM “required” to point out bias everywhere she sees it? That there are occasions where the media has some how managed to be biased in favor of conservatism, I guess for completeness’ sake I’d have to concede.
    But to argue that the presence of a few instances “in our favor” equates to parity with the bias shown liberalism has to be supported.

    I think MM has done an excellent job adding yet MORE proof that today’s MAINSTREAM MEDIA is biased beyond all doubt to the Left.

32. #132
    On December 17th, 2009 at 3:47 pm, chapoutier said:

    On what basis is MM “required” to point out bias everywhere she sees it?

    Where did I say she was?

33. #133
    On December 17th, 2009 at 5:20 pm, rightisright said:

    On December 16th, 2009 at 9:18 pm, purealchemy said:

    Jesus loves you.
    Everyone else thinks you’re an @sshole.

    Excuse me, I take that as your calling me an @sshole, where did that come from? You and I have never had conversation?

34. #134
    On December 17th, 2009 at 5:35 pm, purealchemy said:

    Excuse me, I take that as your calling me an @sshole, where did that come from? You and I have never had conversation?

    Who was that masked man?

35. #135
    On December 17th, 2009 at 7:11 pm, rightisright said:

    I missed your intend there…your not saying you go around calling people an @sshole for making a comment are you?
    Oh the tolerance!

36. #136
    On December 17th, 2009 at 7:52 pm, purealchemy said:

    I was the one who left the @sshole comment, not chaps.
    It was a joke.

    

    Heard that line once in a comedy routine. Comes in handy in a lot of situatuons.

37. #137
    On December 18th, 2009 at 8:26 am, rightisright said:

    I realize what chappie said, “Jesus loves you”..and you added the rest, that was my concern, why? I obviously missed the humor…ha ha. I saw it as unprovoked and and uncalled for remark.

38. #138
    On December 18th, 2009 at 8:31 am, rightisright said:

    I am glad you aspire MM to have the same intellectual integrity as Kos and Huff, you know… my type of sites that I never visit.

    chappies, not your best effort at trying to stir the pot,by putting words into my mouth, shame on you counselor.

39. #139
    On December 18th, 2009 at 10:54 am, DBNinKY said:

    Since when has MM not been totally blunt about pointing out media bias when she thinks its there?

    But you’re the one who said this post/thread lacked an “issue!” Your statement supports my point.

    Since when has MM not been totally blunt about pointing out media bias when she thinks its there?

    Are you serious? She even criticized our side’s flag bearer, President Bush for starting this stimulus & bailout mania!

40. #140
    On December 18th, 2009 at 3:53 pm, theProject said:

    At the risk of changing the subject momentarily, could I just point out that Marie-Antoinette, in all likelihood, is not the source of the utterance “let them eat cake”? It’s one of those common misattributions that’s so oft-repeated and never corrected.