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. #1
   On November 8th, 2007 at 9:11 pm, ajmontana said:

   just tuned in and saw my Senator, oh joy.sheesh. blah blah Boxer.

2. #2
   On November 8th, 2007 at 9:13 pm, ajmontana said:

   90 Seconds of waterboarding, spilled the beans and he’s doing jusssst fine now….. this is sickening.

3. #3
   On November 8th, 2007 at 9:31 pm, John Ansell said:

   Just turned it on and there is Chucky

4. #4
   On November 8th, 2007 at 9:32 pm, John Ansell said:

   Listen Chucky, is he qualified or not? That’s all you have to decide. Now shut the pie hole.

5. #5
   On November 8th, 2007 at 9:34 pm, ajmontana said:

   well at least Feinstein is getting it right. nite all.

6. #6
   On November 8th, 2007 at 9:35 pm, John Ansell said:

   Chucky, with the way you pulled that Cheney insult out of your A@@ you should teach that to Barny Frank.

7. #7
   On November 8th, 2007 at 9:39 pm, John Ansell said:

   Good Night Aj

8. #8
   On November 8th, 2007 at 9:44 pm, feebiebabe said:

   Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), one of two Democrats on the Judiciary Committee to support Mukasey’s nomination, tonight made an impassioned plea for his confirmation,

   Oh, boy. If that is not a huge red flag.

9. #9
   On November 8th, 2007 at 9:49 pm, Speakup said:

   Some liberals in charge of the Judiciary committee is like Charley Manson in charge of a parole hearing.

10. #10
    On November 8th, 2007 at 9:53 pm, feebiebabe said:

    #9 – oh, that one was funny.

11. #11
    On November 8th, 2007 at 10:02 pm, mileslibertatis said:

    It is sad that even the Congress can get caught up with sensationalism instead of, oh, say, the Constitution.

    For example, shouldn’t someone be talking about whether the Attorney General has any bearing on the President’s prosecution of a war and the treatment of non-citizens in that due prosecution? Also, since the Attorney General acts at the pleasure of the President, he is not exactly entitled to differ on significant policy issues. I forget the legal term – unitary executive maybe? – but there is a principle under which no one can sue “ministers” because they are only exercising the President’s Constitutional agency.

    But it is a lot more politically expedient, I suppose, to discuss something the U.S. has done to at most 3 TERRORISTS WHO COMMITTED ACTS OF HORRIFIC MURDER AGAINST THE UNITED STATES.

12. #12
    On November 8th, 2007 at 10:07 pm, John Ansell said:

    Gramnsety swaying side to side is making me sea sick

13. #13
    On November 8th, 2007 at 10:13 pm, John Ansell said:

    Doesn’t Sen Sanders have some chicken to go fry up? I think the democrats are playing a game to see how many times they can say waterboarding.

14. #14
    On November 8th, 2007 at 10:22 pm, John Ansell said:

    Sen Barking got his “waterboard” in.

15. #15
    On November 8th, 2007 at 11:44 pm, its vintage duh said:

    michelle,

    will you post a link to the roll call vote when it is available?

    i just tried searching for it on thomas and i cant find it.

16. #16
    On November 9th, 2007 at 12:09 am, Tipper said:

    Remember Schumer’s excuse for voting for SCOTUS justices Alito and Roberts? “I was duped!”

    okay, but this is also their excuse for voting in favor of the war — they were duped by the lying President

    Not their lying eyes? Because they saw the same intelligence and were warning us about Saddam before Bush was elected.

    So. Duped democrat = stupid person = not fit for public office?

17. #17
    On November 9th, 2007 at 12:35 am, puhiawa said:

    Someone tell the Dems Ramsey Clarke was unavailable.

18. #18
    On November 9th, 2007 at 12:37 am, Michelle Malkin said:

    Roll call vote added.

19. #19
    On November 9th, 2007 at 12:51 am, CommentGuy said:

    So after all the time they wasted on their Judicial Committee passion play they got their butts handed to them.

    After watching some of the hearing quite frankly there were a lot of other questions I would have liked to pose to the nominee but I had to go out on the net to do just plain old research to find out what I wanted to know.

    All just political grandstanding for the nutroots and in the process really letting the country down as far a quality oversight.

    But where else where you hear that except for some right side bloggers and commentary columns.

20. #20
    On November 9th, 2007 at 1:01 am, swj719AWG said:

    Cornyn didn’t vote?

    I don’t get it.

    Though I understand every other non-vote.

    and Bayh, Carper, Feinstein, Landrieu, Nelson (NE), and Schumer can expect the most vile adds possible next time they are up for election…

21. #21
    On November 9th, 2007 at 1:24 am, Michelle Malkin said:

    See my update. Looks like Cornyn was at a fund-raiser in Texas with the president.

22. #22
    On November 9th, 2007 at 2:01 am, rw said:

    Somehow, I don’t think that the netroots that fell for all of the Judiciary Committee will really schedule hearings on impeachment and that the House Dems did not just vote to save Cheney spin will buy into the idea that there just weren’t enough votes to filibuster the nomination. It’s hard to rationalize numbers. It’s either 41 votes or it’s not.

    If the GOP doesn’t take back either house in ’08, then at least the Dems will be stuck with Reid and Pelosi as their leadership again.

23. #23
    On November 9th, 2007 at 2:31 am, swj719AWG said:

    Ahhhhh.

    Then I suppose that makes sense he’d miss it… But can’t they proxy their vote?

24. #24
    On November 9th, 2007 at 6:18 am, ajmontana said:

    Waking up to good new’s but sure is alot of crapweasels on the nay list and some of their arguments were just ridicules, bunch a mamby pamby’s. and dimes to donuts they dont give a flyin fig about this one issue that they politisized and whined over. Like President Bush said stop listening to the pinko’s and kos’ites and get busy…
    non-voters,shame on you again. TB’s

25. #25
    On November 9th, 2007 at 6:23 am, ajmontana said:

    In this electronic age, there should be no reason not to have a set-up for these crapweasels to vote. Voting should be required period, how many now has Obama weaseled out on?

26. #26
    On November 9th, 2007 at 6:45 am, conservativesRus said:

    AJ – they are afraid their vote might be hijacked if they didn’t have to give it in person showing proper ID. Just like regular voting which requires proof of citizenship like say – a drivers license which can be gotten only if you are legally in the country.

    Oh sorry – musta fallen asleep there, waking up now.

27. #27
    On November 9th, 2007 at 6:59 am, ajmontana said:

    Watching c-span the past 9 months could be considered torture.

28. #28
    On November 9th, 2007 at 7:33 am, ajmontana said:

    geez, and after all of Dudds blathering he didnt vote. These guy’s are too much.
    Holy Carp…..dissssssgusting.

29. #29
    On November 9th, 2007 at 8:06 am, Boomer said:

    Senate was finally able to pass something color me unimpressed due to all the BS and high drama these self absorbed crapweasels put any nominee for a presidential appointment through. Well at least we have a new Attorney General now let the subpoenas fly for those that have continually provided aid and comfort to our enemies. He can start with the leadership of the House and Senate. This just continues to prove Congress needs a cleansing it is way past time to throw the bums out!

30. #30
    On November 9th, 2007 at 8:12 am, ajmontana said:

    Being better than Gonzales or an acting attorney general is not enough qualification for the job, said Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass.

    “The next attorney general must restore confidence in the rule of law,” he said. “We cannot afford to take the judgment of an attorney general who either does not know torture when he sees it or is willing to look the other way.”

    This overbloated bag of noxious gas doesnt have a problem looking the other way enforceing laws on the books regarding immigration. What a hypocrite, restore the confidence in the rule of law? that people like him ruined?!!! TBer.
    yes boomer “throw em out! now.

31. #31
    On November 9th, 2007 at 8:20 am, On-my-soap-box said:

    The same non-voters on the pork fill water bill (that I now have to pay for) are the same non-voters here. Strangly, once again, Olbama and Shillary did not vote. Nothing like letting people (voters too) know where you do not stand.

    *Grunt.hack.spitooy

32. #32
    On November 9th, 2007 at 8:20 am, Barry F. said:

    So, one of my senators, Lamar Alexander, didn’t see fit to vote on a nominee to fill such an important vacancy?

    Oh, yes! I forgot. 2008 is election year for Lamar Alexander in Tennessee. He must be hoping to garner some Democrat votes, if Harold Ford, Jr. were to decide to run against him for the Senate in ’08, like he did the junior Senator that beat Ford in ’06, Bob Corker.

    Alexander has always been a weak Republican and a non-existent conservative.

33. #33
    On November 9th, 2007 at 11:30 am, Ditkaca said:

    Why is there not more emphasis on the non-voting record of the candidates who are running for “Leader of the Free World”?

    How can any semi-literate voter make a informed decision if you don’t know where the candidates stand?

    I would think you would have to have a record for voting on a minimum of 90% of the issues to even be considered to run for president.

    How can you serve the citizens of the greatest county on the planet if you are afraid to stand behind your beliefs.

    I consider anybody unwilling to take a stand on these issue unfit for the job of President of the United States

34. #34
    On November 9th, 2007 at 12:54 pm, ArmoredCAV said:

    As always, I am embarassed by my two wonderful senators from the great state of Washington, who have never been on the “right” side of a vote yet. One day we’ll get rid of King County, and get the state back under control. (Sigh)

35. #35
    On November 10th, 2007 at 1:07 pm, Alphonse said:

    Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts
    absolutely.

    Give the government power to torture and abuses become routine.

    Certainly men of good will might act extra-legally in extraordinary circumstances. A mercy killing by a spouse of an aged and hopeless cancer victim suffering final agonies might be a good example. But the circumstances should be reviewable by a prosecutor and/or jury to be sure it isn’t just a plain old murder for insurance.

    Torture should be a last resort by men of good will. Cheney, Rumsfeld, and the war party in general seems to lean more toward the thuggish side to me, and the president somewhat amoral. Not the kind of people you want running secret torture facilities. Torture should always be illegal, but reviewable in extraordinary cases for mitigating circumstances.