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 January 17th, 2008 at 4:32 pm, geminicontender said:

   Ellison is one of those. Next he will want reformed jihadists receiving housing prior to our troops. Get rid of these Dem’s….soon.

2. #2
   On January 17th, 2008 at 4:35 pm, John Ansell said:

   I think it should read “there were 28 traitors that voted against putting Heros above convicted felons.” But that’s just the way I see them. Traitors.

3. #3
   On January 17th, 2008 at 4:38 pm, astonerii said:

   The deomcrats are only trying to protect their own. Criminals by far vote Democrat and it is in the interest of the Democrats to cater to their peers base.

4. #4
   On January 17th, 2008 at 4:39 pm, Papa Louie said:

   It’s not that these 28 Democrats hate the troops, they just love convicted felons more. Absolute insanity!

5. #5
   On January 17th, 2008 at 4:41 pm, astonerii said:

   Ellison is one of those. Next he will want reformed jihadists receiving housing prior to our troops. Get rid of these Dem’s….soon.

   Will not be too soon. I watched a focus group of Democrats and what the candidates said in the debate and the things the focus group heard them say were not even with-in the same galaxy. It is just amazing how detatched from reality some Americans have become.

6. #6
   On January 17th, 2008 at 4:41 pm, hatelibs said:

   And people vote for these butt wipes. No excuse…simply no excuse!

7. #7
   On January 17th, 2008 at 4:43 pm, cpodug said:

   It comes as no surprise that my representative(?) – hereinafter known as CINO(congressman in name only), Stark-raving-mad would be on that list. As far back as I can remember he has been a staunch hater of the military. I can’t think of anything he’s ever said in praise of the Armed Forces. As far as he’s concerned, the military is a waste of money that could be put to better use – i.e., handouts, government-subsidized healthcare, housing, and sundry other social programs. What he has never realized, and never will, is that it is that very military that he despises so much that allows him the freedom to mouth off and slander the troops.

   The same could probably be said for all of the names on that list. And I see that the comments are already pouring in.

   Folks, we get the kind of government we deserve – if we’re not smart enough to see the kind of idiots and hatemongers we’re electing, then we really DO deserve them. Please note that I am using “we” in the sense of the entire country, not those of us who are sane enough to see through this crap.

   There are enough people who keep believing their promises and keep re-electing them to make our ranting completely ineffective.

   Like children, they see the ice cream man, and want their ice cream, but they don’t see how hard the parents have to work for the money to buy that ice cream.

   I spent the better part of my adult life defending the rights of these idiots, guaranteeing them their right to slander me. That doesn’t mean I have to like it.

8. #8
   On January 17th, 2008 at 4:43 pm, bloghooligan said:

   The first step was to get them housing. The second step is to get them voting rights.

9. #9
   On January 17th, 2008 at 4:47 pm, hatelibs said:

   On January 17th, 2008 at 4:43 pm, bloghooligan said:
   The first step was to get them housing. The second step is to get them voting rights.

   Yep. Remember fast Eddie Rendell doing exactly that in 2004. He had his people in the prisons registering voters.

10. #10
    On January 17th, 2008 at 4:55 pm, rightisright said:

    28 dem no votes and criminals… hmmm…(jail)birds of feather stick together

11. #11
    On January 17th, 2008 at 4:57 pm, katieanne said:

    The Democrats wanted to give housing preferences to convicted felons,…

    And the Dems claim they support the troops. Right. They can’t be any more blatant in showing their lack of support by preferring to give help to felons instead of troops coming home from fighting for our country.

    What is wrong with these people?

12. #12
    On January 17th, 2008 at 4:57 pm, J S Ragman said:

    There were 28 Democrats who voted against the measure to put troops above convicted felons.

    Naturally, convicted felons can still make bigger campaign contributions than homeless veterans.

13. #13
    On January 17th, 2008 at 4:58 pm, jcflindsay said:

    A more complete list of the usual scumbag suspects one could not find.

14. #14
    On January 17th, 2008 at 4:58 pm, rightisright said:

    Their democraps katieanne and your surprised?

15. #15
    On January 17th, 2008 at 4:58 pm, graysonret said:

    It’s pretty obvious the democrats want to help their voting base. Troops tend to be anti-democrat. I understand why those democrats voted the way they did, but I abhor the reason. Jim Moran, a very liberal democrat in Arlington, Va. used to send me his newsletter, until I wrote a blistering condemnation of his use of push/pull polling in his district. He was once at a Celtic function I attended. Walking around and shaking hands, he came up to me, extended his hand, and said, “Hi, I’m Jim Moran.” I replied, “Sorry to hear that”, and walked away. Made my day.

16. #16
    On January 17th, 2008 at 5:15 pm, realitycheck said:

    Diana DeGette on the list. Doesn’t surprise me one bit. She’s about as left-wing a moonbat as they come.

    Kinda makes me ashamed to be a Coloradan. Fortunately, Tom Tancredo balances her bad karma out.

17. #17
    On January 17th, 2008 at 5:20 pm, MTNEER said:

    I’m surprised the Honorable William Jefferson’s name wasn’t on this list. You’d think he’d vote his self interest here, wouldn’t you?

    Alcee Hastings seems to be missing also.

    Strange, Very Strange……..

18. #18
    On January 17th, 2008 at 5:21 pm, On-my-soap-box said:

    There were 28 Democrats who voted against the measure to put troops above convicted felons.

    I am shocked mind you SHOCKED! Sure I am.

19. #19
    On January 17th, 2008 at 5:42 pm, 30 pcs of silver said:

    It looks like Kucinich and Richardson haven’t learned anything from their stint in the race to become POTUS.

    Sour grapes? Perhaps.

    What legitimate excuse does the Crapweasels 28 have for voting against this measure?

20. #20
    On January 17th, 2008 at 5:57 pm, katieanne said:

    On January 17th, 2008 at 4:58 pm, rightisright said:
    Their democraps katieanne and your surprised?

    Not surprised, rightisright, just continually disgusted.

21. #21
    On January 17th, 2008 at 6:00 pm, Chief RZ said:

    What??!!! These people are helpless. The only antidote to these Democrats is exposing their votes.
    Thanks Michelle.

22. #22
    On January 17th, 2008 at 6:16 pm, Papa Louie said:

    It’s a good thing for Democrats that there are two Americas. Do you think any of them would have voted this way if there was any possibility a convicted felon might move in next door?

    Because everyone’s equal, it is quite OK for hardcore criminals to move into the barn with the other animals. But because some are more equal than others, there’s no chance these convicted felons will get to share the farmhouse with the priviledged pigs.

23. #23
    On January 17th, 2008 at 6:35 pm, Duke of Pronia said:

    First off, as a veteran and an army brat, it is criminal that our active and veteran Soldiers ever have to rely on public housing. It really frosts my behind.

    Secondly, we really don’t want well trained, honorable people that know how to defend themselves living in the cesspool that is public housing. Criminals and drug dealers might have to start peddling their wares elsewhere and THEN where would the economy be. I mean, really! Someone could get hurt. /sarc

24. #24
    On January 17th, 2008 at 6:53 pm, tom scott said:

    Well, gee ain’t this sweet.
    

    -Who are subject to a lifetime registration requirement under a state sex offender program

    So the group from the “three tykes you’re out” crowd gets preference over the military.

25. #25
    On January 17th, 2008 at 7:13 pm, Don Miguel said:

    It looks like Kucinich and Richardson haven’t learned anything from their stint in the race to become POTUS.

    I think you have the wrong Richardson, unless somehow the governor of New Mexico can now vote in Congress.

26. #26
    On January 17th, 2008 at 7:27 pm, mngirl said:

    geminicontender said:
    Ellison is one of those. Next he will want reformed jihadists receiving housing prior to our troops. Get rid of these Dem’s….soon.

    Yes, everyone’s favorite Muslim congressman. I live in his district. Unfortunately, as much as we would like, its an uphill battle to get rid of him. The uber-liberal U of Minnesota is in this district. And, effective or not, he’s a poster boy for the Democratic Party nationally and locally. They aren’t going to let him go easily.

    The clown will get a note from me on this one though, his district also has the highest crime rate in MN (thanks to fmr County Attorney Amy Klobuchar who never met a criminal she wanted to convict – she now resides in the US Senate for MN), I suppose this vote wanted to protect his constituents (felons) over Soldiers.

27. #27
    On January 17th, 2008 at 8:01 pm, Blind_Mule said:

    Just another example of the left’s skewed thinking. Why should felon’s even get in to government subsidized housing at all if your a felon you can’t vote so why should a felon be able to recieve any government benefit?
    Over 50% commit other crimes and return to prison not a very good track record I’d say.

28. #28
    On January 17th, 2008 at 8:45 pm, Just A Grunt said:

    Stand by for the next wave of righteous outrage from Katrina survivors. You know that is who the Republicans were targeting.
    / need I? Although I am sure one of those fine Dems will trot it out

29. #29
    On January 17th, 2008 at 8:48 pm, englishqueen01 said:

    Remember this when the Democrats bloviate about “caring for the poor” – clearly, their definition of poor and mine differ.

    Housing opportunities like this are meant for people who’ve fallen on hard times – not those who inflicted poverty on themselves by breaking the law.

30. #30
    On January 17th, 2008 at 9:35 pm, Tennessee Dave said:

    On January 17th, 2008 at 4:57 pm, katieanne said:
    And the Dems claim they support the troops. Right. They can’t be any more blatant in showing their lack of support by preferring to give help to felons instead of troops coming home from fighting for our country.

    What is wrong with these people?

    Remember, according to the liberals, anti-war types, and some congressmen, all us military types are criminals anyway. But then, they suffer from rectal-cranial inversion.

31. #31
    On January 18th, 2008 at 1:13 am, LC said:

    Honda is on the list…that would be “my” representative here in Santa Clara, CA. What a jerk.

32. #32
    On January 18th, 2008 at 2:41 am, graysonret said:

    Duke brings up a good point. What are our veterans doing having to go to public housing anyway? They might as well re-enlist and go back to Iraq; a whole lot safer there, and you can defend yourself. In some public housing, you have a better chance getting shot than on patrol. At least in Iraq, you don’t have to worry about your family.

33. #33
    On January 18th, 2008 at 5:38 am, Lifeofthemind said:

    Do not assume that convicted felons can not vote. That is a matter of state law and the left have been pushing for years to roll back any bar to universal suffrage. Remember they even want aliens to have the vote.

34. #34
    On January 18th, 2008 at 8:06 am, gollumclone said:

    Wonder what happened to my esteemed congressman Robert Wexler? Perhaps too busy planning impeachment hearings for Bush and Cheney? But of course all the scumwads remain in office because they reflect their moonbat constituents’ views.