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. #201
   On February 24th, 2011 at 8:57 am, granite said:

   No one deserves to be hit.

   Actually, Tabitha, that statement, standing alone, is not true.

   There are likely many thugs/dangerous, evil people who deserve to be hit; and, this particular thug is without doubt one of them.

2. #202
   On February 24th, 2011 at 9:01 am, RedDog said:

   On February 24th, 2011 at 4:29 am, ted said:
   I watched the video. It should have been called “When Sean Connery Attacks!”

   Looks like a young Sean Connery but the real Connery would have flattened his nose for hitting a woman.

3. #203
   On February 24th, 2011 at 9:04 am, poppop said:

   These thugs are real tough guys. They seem to only attack those they see as weaker i.e. a guy in a wheelchair or a petite young female. They are cowards!

4. #204
   On February 24th, 2011 at 9:08 am, granite said:

   On February 24th, 2011 at 9:01 am, RedDog said:

   …the real Connery would have flattened his nose for hitting a woman.

   Very likely.

   Connery is a bit over 6’2″, and had been a bodybuilder in the early 50s before he got into films.

5. #205
   On February 24th, 2011 at 9:16 am, Badger40 said:

   Unfortunately I think as more & more leftists stop getting their way, & the gravy train starts breaking down, we’re going to see a LOT more of this.
   Get ready for it folks.
   2012 is probably going to get very nasty.

6. #206
   On February 24th, 2011 at 9:20 am, ITookTheRedPill said:

   Tabitha retweets:

   RT @Gunservatively
   Vicious Female FreedomWorks Activist Assaults Innocent UnionMember Using Kung-Fu & Secret Ninja Arts
   http://bit.ly/f1LVob

7. #207
   On February 24th, 2011 at 9:27 am, dadmin said:

   Radicals operate from their own set of rules. Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals, Rule #4 says, “Make opponents live up to their own book of rules. ‘You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.’” If Darwin’s “survival of the fittest” is the modus operandi for union activists, there is no shame in getting violent with turn-the-cheek passivists. Violent confrontation is an equally viable solution to non-violent confrontation. There is only one possible explanation why Christians haven’t been exterminated from the earth before now; the hand of God turning the hearts of murderous thugs from sin. May God turn the heart of this thug before it’s too late for him.

8. #208
   On February 24th, 2011 at 9:30 am, BaltoConservative said:

   Maybe I missed it, but I hope Tabitha:
   a) Files assault charges against the union sissy. He’ll do well in prison.
   b) Files a civil suit against him individually, and against his union if it’s legally feasible.
   Take that scumbag broke and ruin his life!

9. #209
   On February 24th, 2011 at 9:32 am, IndyRich said:

   should be prosecuted for assault.

   I don’t want to be nit-picky here, but isn’t the proper term “battery” in this case?

   I believe that “assault” is threats and “battery” is physical contact – from the legal aspect, that is.

   I’d like to see him to prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law – not just for assault.

10. #210
    On February 24th, 2011 at 9:37 am, spaceycakes said:

    um, after reading Tabitha’s own words, I’m still waiting for PeterPrincipleDem and thutmose’s reaction. You know, since they seemed to have first hand knowledge of how it all went down. Guys?

11. #211
    On February 24th, 2011 at 9:46 am, granite said:

    On February 24th, 2011 at 9:32 am, IndyRich said:

    Agreed.
    That’s what i thought yesterday.

    I was somewhat surprised when our lawyer son told me a year or two ago that when a person feels threatened by the words or action of another, that that, by legal definition, constitutes an “assault” by the other.
    “Battery” refers to the actual striking…the “laying on of hands”, or brass knuckles, or baseball bats,….

12. #212
    On February 24th, 2011 at 9:51 am, TrueLiberal said:

    On February 24th, 2011 at 9:16 am, Badger40 said:
    Unfortunately I think as more & more leftists stop getting their way, & the gravy train starts breaking down, we’re going to see a LOT more of this.
    Get ready for it folks.
    2012 is probably going to get very nasty.

    Bring it on.

13. #213
    On February 24th, 2011 at 10:02 am, GladzKravtz said:

    … as more & more leftists stop getting their way, & the gravy train starts breaking down, we’re going to see a LOT more of this.

    Then, it’s an indication that we are making progress.

    Bring it on.

    Yes, do.

14. #214
    On February 24th, 2011 at 10:04 am, granite said:

    On February 24th, 2011 at 9:51 am, TrueLiberal said:

    On February 24th, 2011 at 9:16 am, Badger40 said:

    …we’re going to see a LOT more of this.
    Get ready for it folks.
    2012 is probably going to get very nasty.

    Bring it on.

    Agreed.
    Bring it on.

15. #215
    On February 24th, 2011 at 10:17 am, gunslingerpatriot said:

    On February 23rd, 2011 at 7:15 pm,
    

    Pixel_Dust_1776 said:
    Simple answer for that thug….
    173 grain, boat tail.
    The Second Amendment is there for a reason.

    Rio
    Semper Fi

    I am a little biased, an F/A 18 with a couple of MOABS would do the trick. If not; 9mm Federal Gold Dot Hydroshocks coming from a Sig P226 with Crimson Laser Sights would work too!

    hehehe!

    GSP

16. #216
    On February 24th, 2011 at 10:29 am, Paratus said:

    “Bring it on”.In the street there are no fight rules.A street fighter has in his mind about his enemy,”I know where you live”.

17. #217
    On February 24th, 2011 at 10:38 am, passingruffian said:

    Obviously CWA wears red in case it “gets a little bloody”.

18. #218
    On February 24th, 2011 at 10:38 am, max said:

    where is this guy now i wonder. because i would just like to meet him.

19. #219
    On February 24th, 2011 at 11:07 am, drbulb said:

    Yes, bring it on losers. The conservatives in this country have been quietly living their lives (and being responsible, self-sufficient, and making use of the guarantees of the 2nd Amendment, etc.) for the past 40-50 years. We are now awake, angry, and motivated and clearly see that the biggest threat to the America we love comes from within. We have met the enemy and they are YOU! I used to just shake my head and walk away when someone would spout some mindless liberal feel good or hate America rant. Now I get right in their faces and blow them into a mushroom cloud of unicorn hide and fairy dust with logic and FACTS (AKA: the TRUTH). So by all means, bring it. We’re ready…

20. #220
    On February 24th, 2011 at 11:21 am, GladzKravtz said:

    Obviously CWA wears red in case it “gets a little bloody”.

    Passingruffian, like wearing red when you are eating spaghetti. Actually, I don’t get my own symbolism there but just had to say.

21. #221
    On February 24th, 2011 at 11:55 am, RyanInSanJose said:

    For the newcomers..

    Even if he agrees with a post here, a certain commenter has to then find aspects about said post/comments he disagrees with. There cannot be 100% agreement. That’s just the way it is – all you can do is get used to it

22. #222
    On February 24th, 2011 at 11:57 am, AlohaGuy said:

    Article IV, Section 4

    The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.

    Unless of course the President decides to help subvert the democratic process by busing in goons to help his thug allies. The Constitution is optional right?

23. #223
    On February 24th, 2011 at 11:58 am, spaceycakes said:

    what?? no answers yet? I am stricken!

24. #224
    On February 24th, 2011 at 11:59 am, AlohaGuy said:

    spaceycakes said:

    what?? no answers yet? I am stricken!

    To what? (I’m no longer going back and searching all these posts…)

25. #225
    On February 24th, 2011 at 12:03 pm, chapoutier said:

    Even if he agrees with a post here, a certain commenter has to then find aspects about said post/comments he disagrees with.

    I find it is usually worthwhile to add something unique to a conversation. Perhaps you disagree.

26. #226
    On February 24th, 2011 at 12:16 pm, spaceycakes said:

    Aloha–I asked a question at #40, and I noted several more posts after that from others who made comments that were addressed (nearly to the word) by Tabitha…

27. #227
    On February 24th, 2011 at 12:43 pm, Ilovemycountry said:

    Yep, looks like you folks got yourselves a real mess now:

    http://www.channel3000.com/news/26979885/detail.html

28. #228
    On February 24th, 2011 at 1:08 pm, spaceycakes said:

    what do you mean ‘you folks’?

29. #229
    On February 24th, 2011 at 1:25 pm, Paratus said:

    Ilovemycountry Mrs.Paratus is always saying that to me.

30. #230
    On February 24th, 2011 at 1:44 pm, Catnip said:

    On February 24th, 2011 at 9:01 am, RedDog said:

    …the real Connery would have flattened his nose for hitting a woman.

    Sadly, the following is a Connery quote:

    I don’t think there is anything particularly wrong in hitting a woman, though I don’t recommend you do it the same way that you hit a man.

31. #231
    On February 24th, 2011 at 2:06 pm, SHoward said:

    On February 24th, 2011 at 12:43 pm, Ilovemycountry said:

    So, a Republican implying he may use a time-honored leftist-Democrap trick (although he said nothing about agitation himself, the idiot caller did) has us folks in a real mess? Or is it the fact that one police official wants ‘answers?’

    Or perhaps, maybe, you’re grasping for straw?

32. #232
    On February 24th, 2011 at 2:23 pm, amyshulk said:

    On February 23rd, 2011 at 7:29 pm, thutmose18 said:

    I guess people don’t like having video cameras shoved in their face?

    Seems to me you and those that agree with you didn’t read what she said:

    “I was not as close as the video implies (it was cropped from a vertical iPhone video so it would fit on youtube).”

    And I don’t recall seeing any of those violent/hateful/racist Tea party people /s reacting to being filmed in this manner.

    I now know WHY the left has been pushing “back story” all these years – it’s so you can rationalize behaviors that should be shunned!!!

    Arrested development has taken over the left – and they will only escalate as they are shown as the children they truly are.

33. #233
    On February 24th, 2011 at 2:59 pm, right_on said:

    The thug is carrying a sign that reads;

    “Taking a stand for Justice.”

    Good. He should turn himself in, and plead guilty to battery then. Uh-huh…don’t hold your breath.

    Do notice that it’s always little guys, and women that get assaulted by these cowards. Ah…would one of them just try it on me…cameras rolling, please! I’m just a 6’3″, 225 lb. “little guy” that no longer turns the other cheek…I will not be bullied!

34. #234
    On February 24th, 2011 at 3:29 pm, passingruffian said:

    You got it, gladz. Getting out those pesky stains is way too much work for your average CWAer. Trust me. I know. I am a CWAer that has turned in his resignation as a result of all of this crap. I don’t want another dime of my money going to Dems or their causes nor do I want to be in any way associated with Trumka and his thugs.

35. #235
    On February 24th, 2011 at 4:39 pm, Ronbo said:

    I’m wondering if the identity of the Union Goon who hit the nice young patriot has been discovered? I heard FreedomWork had put out a $10,000 reward for his I.D. and location.

36. #236
    On February 24th, 2011 at 11:21 pm, ChapBix said:

    Some have said that the WI protests are similar to the Egypt protests in that they are in defense of rights and freedom. I would beg to differ. When union thugs are bussed in from other states, they are like the thugs sent in to rough up the Egyptian protesters. Since the WI union protesters are one in spirit with Obama and his ilk, that would also put them on the establishment side. The taxpayers who were at the WI state capitol are the ones who are truly wanting freedom.

37. #237
    On February 25th, 2011 at 12:10 am, Jet Jaguar said:

    On February 24th, 2011 at 12:05 am, chapoutier said:

    You sound like my 76 year old mother. She supports my depraved narcissistic sister who is a non-functional libtarded adult. Sometimes she roughs her up to get what she wants. My mom tells me, “Well, when she hit me it didn’t hurt that much.”

    Don’t be stupid. I never defended him or said he should “get away with it.” It si my understanding a police report has been filed. Cool beans.

    How could I be considered stupid by simply observing that you reminded me of someone?

38. #238
    On February 25th, 2011 at 8:34 am, shimauma2 said:

    I hate legislation, but this guy needs to be sued so hard, the union coffers will be emptied to defend him, or better, I’ll bet the union decides not to defend him and he loses personal time and money. That would be a reality check in his twisted world

39. #239
    On February 25th, 2011 at 3:13 pm, Rjulio said:

    Typical union moron – dumn a$$ look on his face and sht for brains. Bring it on you stupid sht.

40. #240
    On February 25th, 2011 at 4:46 pm, HopeIsMyMiddleName said:

    After I read Michelle’s article and watched the video I thought CWA = Cowardly Woman Attacker

41. #241
    On February 26th, 2011 at 10:17 am, lacool said:

    This is stunning to me and I’ll tell you one thing. This is probably not the first time this person has attempted or actually hit a woman. It was too easy. No hesitation at all and he did it twice. For the men in my life and my family, raising your hand to a woman is as unthinkable as purposely wetting your pants in public. It’s just not acceptable in any circumstance. Never. Almost physically impossible.