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 February 7th, 2012 at 10:00 am, RedDog said:

   “You round-eye alway so stupid. We have owe you nothing. Why you not come back four, five year? Maybe we give you work to do. Wash our clothes. Something. OK?”

2. #102
   On February 7th, 2012 at 10:02 am, RedDog said:

   LOL. Actually, I think it is a great commercial. The girl was hot, and her statement was correct.

3. #103
   On February 7th, 2012 at 10:05 am, RedDog said:

   Every time the Left b*tches about Republican non-PC remarks, the long laundry list of their outrageous comments should be pulled out, religiously, for them to explain.

4. #104
   On February 7th, 2012 at 10:25 am, Misscheryl said:

   What the ad lacks in tatsefulness is overwhelmed by it’s hypocrisy.

   Your uppitiness is overwhelmed by your ignorance…or – your alligator mouth has overwhelmed your hummingbird ass.

5. #105
   On February 7th, 2012 at 10:34 am, Misscheryl said:

   10:05 am, RedDog said:

   Every time the Left b*tches about Republican non-PC remarks, the long laundry list of their outrageous comments should be pulled out, religiously, for them to explain.

   Ditto – shine the light. Just the facts ma’am. The truth will be shown for those who want to see it.

6. #106
   On February 7th, 2012 at 10:49 am, RedDog said:

   Also, the actress’ monolog was not “broken english”. It was simple and understandable.

7. #107
   On February 7th, 2012 at 11:16 am, zyzzyg said:

   On February 7th, 2012 at 10:25 am, Misscheryl said: #104

   Your uppitiness is overwhelmed by your ignorance…or – your alligator mouth has overwhelmed your hummingbird ass.

   Are you kidding?

   The ad is about spending. Hence the names of the websites mentioned.

   Did Rep Hoesktra vote for the Prescription Drug Bill? Yes, the bill that was incompletely funded and required borrowing from China to fund?

   Has Rep Hoesktra been neck deep in earmarks over his career?

   You are more than welcome to attack me ad hominem, though you would be well served and more deserving of praise if address the facts and what I said.

   Rep Hoesktra’s ad is a model of hypocrisy based on his record.

8. #108
   On February 7th, 2012 at 11:31 am, zyzzyg said:

   On February 7th, 2012 at 9:56 am, RedDog said: 100

   Rep Hoekstra has voted for fiscal recklessness, indebtedness, and outsourcing of jobs.

   Cite some references please then compare them to the policies of Stabenow and other MI reps.

   I have issues with the policies Sen Stabenow advances, though that is not what I addressed in my post. I did not say the ad was less than truthful. When MM posts a blog on Sen Stabenow I may comment.

   He voted for the Prescription Drug Bill. Yep, incompletely funded and required borrowing from China to pay for it. And, then there are the earmarks.

9. #109
   On February 7th, 2012 at 11:39 am, AlohaGuy said:

   A former shipmate of mine married a gal from India.

   He is now a welder at Pearl Harbor Shipyard.

   She is head of Pediatrics at a Honolulu hospital.

   Any sign yet of a birth certificate. I mean, she’s there and all…

10. #110
    On February 7th, 2012 at 11:43 am, Misscheryl said:

    Are you kidding?

    Ahh actually no. Please knock of the self-righteous indignation..It’s lost on us…but my all means cite references and by the way – earmarks do not simply equal big spending…please be aware – I lived in Michigan.

11. #111
    On February 7th, 2012 at 11:53 am, Misscheryl said:

    Oh and PS – while your at it, please elaborately expound as only you can do re: its tatsefulness (sp) and not the tatsefulness (sp) of that gutter guy Biden.

12. #112
    On February 7th, 2012 at 1:22 pm, ignatzk said:

    Leftist are whining because the ad is effective.

13. #113
    On February 7th, 2012 at 1:42 pm, Misscheryl said:

    The left’s moral superiority far exceeds that of any Christian dogma and let’s not mention their guilt trips.

14. #114
    On February 7th, 2012 at 1:58 pm, RedDog said:

    On February 7th, 2012 at 11:31 am, zyzzyg said:
    … He voted for the Prescription Drug Bill. Yep, incompletely funded and required borrowing from China to pay for it. And, then there are the earmarks.

    Precious few who did not. Kind of hard to buck the status quo when that is how the “game” is played though. Stabenow and others took advantage and played with a lot more gusto, Stevens and Murkowski included.

15. #115
    On February 7th, 2012 at 2:11 pm, zyzzyg said:

    On February 7th, 2012 at 1:58 pm, RedDog said: #114

    Precious few who did not. Kind of hard to buck the status quo when that is how the “game” is played though. Stabenow and others took advantage and played with a lot more gusto, Stevens and Murkowski included.

    I am not going to disagree with you.

    However, when your ad takes another to task over the things that you have done yourself, that is hypocrisy.

    And, ‘more gusto’ is not a defense. Did you, or didn’t you(spend)? It amounts to being . . . a little bit pregnant.

16. #116
    On February 7th, 2012 at 2:50 pm, ModerateSuccessfulDem said:

    So Ms. Malkin, your answer to the “less than tasteful” (that’s putting it mildly, I must say) ad is, “The Democrats do it too!!!!” Addressing tangent, strawmen arguments, is a lot easier, I guess.

17. #117
    On February 7th, 2012 at 3:41 pm, Misscheryl said:

    On February 7th, 2012 at 2:50 pm, ModerateSuccessfulDem said:

    No, no, no. Follow me…it was brought up by Michelle because it was the democrats that took issue with it…you know…like – why do they have such a problem with it when they’ve done it too. Once again, you see things backwards.

18. #118
    On February 7th, 2012 at 4:49 pm, ModerateSuccessfulDem said:

    it was brought up by Michelle because it was the democrats that took issue with it

    Misscheryl, if you look at MM’s blog post, the Right also had a problem with it – “Both left and right are up in arms:”

    It is irrelevant who is “up in arms” about it. Address the issue, please.

19. #119
    On February 7th, 2012 at 5:11 pm, Misscheryl said:

    On February 7th, 2012 at 4:49 pm, ModerateSuccessfulDem said: the Right also had a problem with it

    oh I get it…the dems brought it up and then Michelle commented but the right and the left take issue with it but it’s irrelevant who is “up in arms” just address the issue…

    palm to forehead…

20. #120
    On February 7th, 2012 at 10:09 pm, Blackstone said:

    On February 7th, 2012 at 2:11 pm, zyzzyg said:

    And, ‘more gusto’ is not a defense. Did you, or didn’t you(spend)? It amounts to being . . . a little bit pregnant.

    What a ridiculous comment. So being in debt to 1% of GDP is no better than being in debt to 150% of GDP. Glad we have public policy geniuses like you to explain these concepts to us.

    By the way, it’s quite telling that you have plenty to say about the supposed “hypocrisy” of Hoekstra spending a few pennies on the dollar of what Stabenow likes to spend, but nothing about the rank hypocrisy of the Left in their fake outrage against this ad.

21. #121
    On February 7th, 2012 at 11:48 pm, zyzzyg said:

    On February 7th, 2012 at 10:09 pm, Blackstone said: #120

    So being in debt to 1% of GDP is no better than being in debt to 150% of GDP. Glad we have public policy geniuses like you to explain these concepts to us.

    Yes, spending is spending. Have a spine. Do you want to cut spending or not? Do you want to be just a little bit pregnant? Does such thing exist?

    You are welcome to psrse debt. I don’t wish to do so. Are you against debt or are’nt you? Be consistent, for cying out loud.

    For goodness sake, do you want to cut spending or not?

    By the way, it’s quite telling that you have plenty to say about the supposed “hypocrisy” of Hoekstra spending a few pennies on the dollar of what Stabenow likes to spend, but nothing about the rank hypocrisy of the Left in their fake outrage against this ad.

    When MM posts a blog discussing the hypocrisy of the left I may comment. Accept that this blog post is about an endorsed ad by a candidate for the Senate from Minnesota.

    Sen Stabenow has her problems and I have issues with them, however a candidate cannot complain about another candidate who has the same problems. Hoekstra is a spending phenonmenon.

    http://www.progressmichigan.org/blog/2011/08/who-is-hoekstra-today-pork-barrel-pete.html

    I am not of the left, besides who cares what they think?

    I care about what Republicans say, their policies and how they present the issues of the day. When a Republican takes a Democrat to task over spenfing, they better have a spotless and consistent record on what they are saying.

    Do you agree?

    Or maybe, you agree that you can be a litle bit pregnant?

    The ad is hypocritical based on Hoekstra’s record.

22. #122
    On February 7th, 2012 at 11:54 pm, Blackstone said:

    On February 7th, 2012 at 11:48 pm, zyzzyg said:

    On February 7th, 2012 at 10:09 pm, Blackstone said: #120

    So being in debt to 1% of GDP is no better than being in debt to 150% of GDP. Glad we have public policy geniuses like you to explain these concepts to us.

    Yes

    And there you destroy what little credibility you may have had.

23. #123
    On February 8th, 2012 at 12:09 am, Straight_Talk_Luigi said:

    Red Dog

    I’m part Asian, and I’m not offended by this ad. I find it to be painfully accurate, not because of race, but at how we are mortgaging our country to foriengers and the fed Your statement about how the Chi-coms view the dumb “round-eyes” is spot on.

    Black ministers and Asian activists have decried the commercial.

    Both left and right are up in arms:

    (laughs)

    The only missing was her falling head over heels for a nice, strong white, black or Hispanic male.

    Just imagine how high the pitch from racially-sensitive bubble dwellers would have been.

24. #124
    On February 8th, 2012 at 12:13 am, Straight_Talk_Luigi said:

    So Ms. Malkin, your answer to the “less than tasteful” (that’s putting it mildly, I must say) ad is, “The Democrats do it too!!!!” Addressing tangent, strawmen arguments, is a lot easier, I guess.

    You’re assuming she thought the ad was distasteful. I didn’t see her say or mean that.

    But yes, the double standard is pretty obvious, and where the hell were you after Biden and Beckels comments on Jindal? In front of your TV laughing?

25. #125
    On February 8th, 2012 at 12:22 am, zyzzyg said:

    On February 7th, 2012 at 11:54 pm, Blackstone said: #122

    So being in debt to 1% of GDP is no better than being in debt to 150% of GDP. Glad we have public policy geniuses like you to explain these concepts to us.

    Yes

    And there you destroy what little credibility you may have had.

    Are you a liberal? Do you accept debt as long as it is only 1% of GDP?

    Very simple, do you accept debt? Yes, or no?

    Where is your credibility? And, consistentcy?

    Go ahead, make my day day, do you accept debt? At 1% or at 150% of GDP? Relativity is not an issue for me. Could be for you.

    Debt is debt at 1% or at 150%.

    Or, maybe you are just a little bit pregnant. Go ahead, explain that. Are you 1% pregnant, or 150% pregnant?

    Liberals can explain and parse that. Be the Liberal you are and do it.

26. #126
    On February 8th, 2012 at 8:41 am, Blackstone said:

    What would you rather have, a head cold or brain cancer? You mean you accept disease? Do you? You’re telling me you can be only “a little bit sick”?

27. #127
    On February 9th, 2012 at 3:05 am, BFC Cpl Jack said:

    Let’s see the change in attitude when instead of a lone young comely woman riding that bicycle it is instead a horde of young Chinese soldier with bayonet affixed rifles slung across their back.

    Just who/how would they prefer to see/hear, some body like Sean Penn? Would that be an effective commercial? I notice that it isn’t the message that is criticized only the messenger. How LIBERAL !!

28. #128
    On February 9th, 2012 at 11:45 am, AlohaGuy said:

    BFC Cpl Jack said:

    Let’s see the change in attitude when instead of a lone young comely woman riding that bicycle it is instead a horde of young Chinese soldier with bayonet affixed rifles slung across their back.

    Let me introduce you to the new Big Red Machine. Hordes of comely women with machine guns and white go-go boots. (40 seconds in.)

29. #129
    On February 9th, 2012 at 8:25 pm, ModerateSuccessfulDem said:

    You’re assuming she thought the ad was distasteful. I didn’t see her say or mean that.

    Then you should actually read her blog more carefully. I quote: “Is the ad less than tasteful? Yes.”

30. #130
    On February 24th, 2012 at 12:15 pm, William said:

    On February 7th, 2012 at 10:02 am, RedDog said:
    LOL. Actually, I think it is a great commercial. The girl was hot, and her statement was correct.

    I noticed the same as you, RedDog.

    The Asian-Oriental woman is charming, pleasan, warm, and likeable, as well as attractive, feminine, gentle, and pretty.

    What is nont to like about her?

    What is so offensive about her “broken english?”

    I have frequently been in the company of Chinese people. I hear broken English, and so forth, from them from time to time. The older generations tend to speak with a more broken English and clearly different pronounciation from many other US citizens.

    When it comes to pronounciation of English and broken English, blacks and Hispanics do their fair share, as do quite a few Caucasians here in the USA.

    Also, like you said, what the woman states in the video clip, her statement is true.

    Regarding the pronounciation and grammer in the video clip, I have seen this not only from Chinese people here in the USA, but also among Vietnamese, Japanese, Filipinos, Koreans, Indians, and so forth. I don’t think anything of it. Imagine how US citizens who speak only English would sound to people in Japan, China, Vietnam, India, Korea, the Philipines, and so forth.

    What I see in this story and the outrage against it is the ignorance, and rampant, deep racism throughout the core of those who express their outrage. They are so racist, bigoted, malicious, and prejudiced within themselvves, that they’ve got “Racism on the brain.”

    They are sick in the head, and deranged, and cannot help themselves but be perpetually outraged and create their own boogie men.

    If they truly were concerned with racism they would be confronting the Democrat Party, the Entertainment Industry, and the two most racist ethnic or racial groups in the USA, blacks and Hispanics, who are so racist that they are excessively ethno-racial centric and hate Caucasians and Asians so much that they cannot refrain from perpetually finding something racist in them, and behaving in a racist, prejudicial, bigoted manner toward them, and even create false racist charges against them, virtually 24/7.