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. #301
   On February 8th, 2010 at 7:41 am, jangar said:

   I used to be an avid Winter Olympics fan; even taking days off just to sit and watch it all (on ABC). These days, I have no interest in it. When is it anyway? I fear too much politics in it.

   A agree. It’s become United Nations on parade…and all that goes with it.

2. #302
   On February 8th, 2010 at 8:02 am, floridaobserver said:

   The Olympics used to be every 4 years and was exciting. Now you see ice skating every week, etc., and there is not much to look forward to in that regard.

3. #303
   On February 8th, 2010 at 8:10 am, misterbee241 said:

   On February 8th, 2010 at 7:19 am, graysonret said:

   Same here. I used to enjoy the Olympics until they openly let professional athletes in. That finished it for me. I can see professional sports anytime.

4. #304
   On February 8th, 2010 at 8:52 am, John Deaux said:

   On February 7th, 2010 at 9:37 pm, frontierguy said:
   Considering everything I’ve read of your posts it sounds like your woman is much more manlier than you, I wouldn’t throw stones princess.

   You do realize you posted your excitement at having found a Playgirl magazine, don’t you?

   On February 7th, 2010 at 9:03 pm, frontierguy said:
   You know jangar, it is not fair. When we were kids, we had to work hard to catch some nudity. I remember when I was 15 I found a Playgirl in a dumpster and there was not a single trash dumpster in town after that that I did not just about dive head first into just in case I got lucky again.

5. #305
   On February 8th, 2010 at 9:59 am, frontierguy said:

   John, I was embellishing a lot as in making a comedic point of the difference life is irt before and after internet. I understand sarcasm and jokes are hard to relay when you are typing, and I get some people get their shorts wadded up over some things, so lighten up. I will be much more serious when I come in here from now on, or I will put taglines on my posts to make sure you understand that it is all in fun. So, have a good week.

6. #306
   On February 8th, 2010 at 10:35 am, plymouthacclaim said:

   Wow, I missed a lot. That’s what I get for going to work last night.

   1.) Noam Chomsky is a “libertarian socialist,” NOT a libertarian. It’s just a fancy way of saying anarchist.

7. #307
   On February 8th, 2010 at 10:36 am, DBNinKY said:

   The topic is often presented with a certain bias, it only appears that I have a bias, because I ask questions.

   That’s called deception, because your “questions” are guided.

8. #308
   On February 8th, 2010 at 10:39 am, plymouthacclaim said:

   Sorry, hit “submit” instead of “preview.”

   2.) The Audi ad scared the feces out of me. I’m sure the eco-statists got thrills running down their legs, but I got image of an enviro-nazi police state. I think I’m going to throw away a plastic bottle just out of spite.

   Hoard incandescent bulbs.

9. #309
   On February 8th, 2010 at 11:00 am, DBNinKY said:

   How much grief did he get for that, but now he is getting praise.

   Which only proves he lacks instrumental leadership skills: a real CC would have made that decision within hours and been sure of it. And the praise you mentioned – it’s not coming from the majority of average voters!
   

   He was specific on his ‘how’ and I’d like to hear her specifics on ‘how’.

   I disagree. He was AOL on the issue until time ran out.

   Remember: Top-down listeners place their focus on the speaker, allowing personal opinion or prejudice to color and distort the speaker’s message; bottom up listeners focus on a speaker’s message, using analysis and synthesis to discern the content of the message.

   Where Sarah Palin is concerned, you appear to be a top-down listener.

10. #310
    On February 8th, 2010 at 11:26 am, swede said:

    plymouthacclaim said:
    The Audi ad scared the feces out of me. I’m sure the eco-statists got thrills running down their legs, but I got image of an enviro-nazi police state. I think I’m going to throw away a plastic bottle just out of spite.

    Heh. Yeah, when heading up to bed last night I turned off the lights, then thinking of this ad, turned them back on and went to bed. Come ‘n get me!

    The most bizarre thing to me is I can’t imagine who would be induced to buy an Audi based on this loony toon. Only the far left would possibly buy into this, and they are 20% of the population. You’d think when spending $2 Mil+ for 30 seconds to reach the biggest TV audience of the year you would shoot for a bigger percentage of the AUDIence.

11. #311
    On February 8th, 2010 at 11:44 am, zyzzyg said:

    On February 8th, 2010 at 10:36 am, DBNinKY said: #310

    That’s called deception, because your “questions” are guided.

    My questions are below and I fail to see where the deception is. The questions are straightforward. And, what is ‘guided’?

    Did you watch Sarah Palin’s speech at the Tea Party Convention? What did you think? Would you like to hear and learn more details?

    The questions are open ended. I did not offer only two possible responses.

    You are welcome to respond with a ‘yes’, a ‘no’, or a ‘maybe’ and more importantly I would hope that anyone would provide substance to support their answer, whatever it might be.

12. #312
    On February 8th, 2010 at 12:02 pm, plymouthacclaim said:

    On February 8th, 2010 at 11:26 am, swede said:

    I posted that same comment on that video on youtube and it was deleted within 5 minutes. hmmmm…

    Also, remember that “turn your lights off and we’ll take a sat photo” night.

    Not only did I turn on ALL of my lights, I also got out my dual 500W halogen worklight and aimed it at the sky.

13. #313
    On February 8th, 2010 at 12:05 pm, plymouthacclaim said:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3Xv_fgPhlI

    My response to the Ed Begley Jr Census video.

14. #314
    On February 8th, 2010 at 12:18 pm, zyzzyg said:

    On February 8th, 2010 at 11:00 am, DBNinKY said: #312

    Which only proves he lacks instrumental leadership skills: a real CC would have made that decision within hours and been sure of it. And the praise you mentioned – it’s not coming from the majority of average voters!

    But, he did make the decision to ‘act’ on Pakistan. You do realize that he could not ‘act’ on Pakistan until he became President?

    The praise is coming from those who took him to task over saying we should ‘act’ on intelligence against the terrorists, even if they are in Pakistan. They poo-pooed the idea because Pakistan is an ally, and now they are cheering because we are targeting the terrorists in the Swat Valley of Pakistan.

    First, people complained about him wanting to ‘act’ in Pakistan, and now it is those same people who are now saying what he is doing is a good thing.

    I disagree. He was AOL on the issue until time ran out.

    I am not following you. When did time run out on Pres Obama wanting to ‘act’ with regard to the terrorists in Pakistan?

    Remember: Top-down listeners place their focus on the speaker, allowing personal opinion or prejudice to color and distort the speaker’s message; bottom up listeners focus on a speaker’s message, using analysis and synthesis to discern the content of the message.

    Very well then, be a bottom up listener and tell me what you thought of Sarah Palin’s speech. Use analysis and synthesis to discern the content of her message. I am interested in what you think.

    I am not guiding anything, in fact I am using your words. Again, it is an open ended question. There is no right answer and no wrong answer. Just your thoughts and opinions.

    Where Sarah Palin is concerned, you appear to be a top-down listener.

    When have I placed my focus on the speaker showing my personal opinion to color what the speaker says? I said, more detail would be good. I said, the speech was full of red meat and platitudes. Not sure how this tells anyone my personal opinion of Sarah Palin.

    What I did do was take some of her words, analyze and synthesize them to discern what her message was. One thing She said was, ‘we fight and they lose’. OK, how does that happen? Without specifics it is just a slogan and a platitude.

    The only personal opinion that might be revealed is that I would like questions answered, or at least addressed. Do you think questions should be asked and answered? Would answering that question reveal your personal opinion and prejudices?

    Finally, I am a literalists. I hear what people say. I do not assign motive, make assumptions or mis-characterize. When I do not understand and require additional information, I ask questions.

    I never knew asking questions and getting answers would ever be difficult.

    [Note: Take a look at MM's thread on the Illinois Lt Gov mess. I asked a question, it got answered, and what did I do? I said thank you.]

15. #315
    On February 8th, 2010 at 4:46 pm, corkie said:

    On February 8th, 2010 at 12:18 pm, zyzzyg said:

    But, he did make the decision to ‘act’ on Pakistan. You do realize that he could not ‘act’ on Pakistan until he became President?

    Are you implying that the prior President didn’t ‘act’ in the area?

    Your point is stupid. Obama’s campaign speech was clearly implying that he would something different than Bush. What is he doing different than Bush in the area???????

16. #316
    On February 8th, 2010 at 11:02 pm, jangar said:

    What is he doing different than Bush in the area???????

    Acting Pakistani

17. #317
    On February 8th, 2010 at 11:04 pm, jangar said:

    I never knew asking questions and getting answers would ever be difficult.

    We ignore you.

    Children should be seen… not heard.

18. #318
    On February 9th, 2010 at 11:25 am, DBNinKY said:

    I am a literalists.

    OK, that explains a lot.

    BTW – did you not see the “exact words” episode of the Brady Bunch? Abandoning inference for literal interpretation, can lead to a lot of unnecessary problems from the intentional understanding of rather basic communication.