Opine away.

Michelle led off with the Talking Points Memo, which spelled out why we need the John Doe protection that the Democrats unwisely scuttled. If the GOP is smart (work with me here, ok?) they’ll get major mileage out of that issue next year.

I’m leaving the Memo out to focus on the first two segments, because they are important in shedding light on what we’re up against. Notice in the first segment how the Arab American Institutes’s advocate, Rebecca Abou-Chedid, has no problem with the flying imams’ lawsuit, and attempts to draw our attention away from the suit’s intent, which is to frighten future John Does out of speaking up. That enables terrorists to attack. Michelle called her on it repeatedly, but keep in mind: The AAI advocate is one of the so-called “moderates,” but here she is on national TV running interference for a lawsuit designed to have a chilling effect on anti-terror vigilance. She even tried to trap Michelle by suggesting that the John Doe legislation is really aimed at Muslims alone. A basic question arises from this: Whose side is the advocate and her Institute really on?

In the second segment, we get another “tell.” Rev. Gregory Livingstone repeatedly blurs the distinction between US citizens and illegal aliens and never directly answers Michelle’s basic question, whether he favors deporting illegal alien criminals or not. Of course he doesn’t favor that. He’s a police-basher who says he’s not on any criminal’s side even while he’s marching to protest common sense measures like allowing local police to assist the feds in enforcing immigration law against criminal aliens who are already in jail.

In both cases, the guests tried jedi mind tricks to take over the issue and frame it more favorably to their side. In both cases, they failed.