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 June 8th, 2009 at 5:03 pm, 24Klady said:

   If it were only that easy in Washington! Good grief, those fellas better hide. Somebody will be looking for them.

2. #2
   On June 8th, 2009 at 5:14 pm, malkin_fan said:

   Just politicians doing whatever it takes to keep themselves happy. I do NOT approve of a politician changing their allegiance once voted in. It is a smack in the face to the people that elected them.

3. #3
   On June 8th, 2009 at 5:22 pm, sonofdy said:

   I do NOT approve of a politician changing their allegiance once voted in.

   Seconded.

4. #4
   On June 8th, 2009 at 5:26 pm, et said:

   If it were only that easy in Washington!

   It is that easy in Washington. All it will take is for a few more state pension funds to go belly up in Obama’s sea of change and politicians will desert the democrats in droves.

5. #5
   On June 8th, 2009 at 5:27 pm, chapoutier said:

   NOT approve of a politician changing their allegiance once voted in. It is a smack in the face to the people that elected them.

   Your implication is that their allegiance is to those that voted them in?

6. #6
   On June 8th, 2009 at 5:47 pm, okiedokie said:

   Hmm, did the voters vote for the PARTY or for the PRINCIPLES that the candidate stands for?

   Not sure where I stand on candidates switching parties during the term.

7. #7
   On June 8th, 2009 at 6:12 pm, Hangfire said:

   I approve heartily of Liberals changing their allegiance once voted in, and soundly condemn it when Conservatives do the same.

   Anyone who disagrees with me can say so to one of my faces.

8. #8
   On June 8th, 2009 at 6:17 pm, AlohaGuy said:

   The article cited is poorly written but I take it someone is trading their vote for power…business as usual.

9. #9
   On June 8th, 2009 at 6:23 pm, flenser said:

   This same situation happened in (I believe) Kentucky recently. Only there it was a GOPer who defected to the Dems and gave them control of the state legislature.

   According to the story the Dem leadership promised not to try to pass gay marriage, and reneged on their promise. This prompted the defection.

10. #10
    On June 8th, 2009 at 6:24 pm, flenser said:

    Gay marriage is a political loser for the Dems. It says a lot about the power of the gay mafia that they are so committted to advancing it all the same.

11. #11
    On June 8th, 2009 at 6:39 pm, jencab said:

    Coincidentally, this occurred after Palin came to NY.

12. #12
    On June 8th, 2009 at 6:44 pm, jangar said:

    Finally, change is on someone’s horizon. May it spread to epidemic proportions.

13. #13
    On June 8th, 2009 at 6:45 pm, BlameAmericaLast said:

    I’m thinkin’ Obama’s wheels are going to come off the wagon sometime this year. It’s starting to crumble now…

    They’re scrambling about the economy, and the media is (very mildly) starting to catch on. Give it time.

14. #14
    On June 8th, 2009 at 6:45 pm, jangar said:

    the gay mafia

    This should remain a focal point for ALL conservatives to remember.

15. #15
    On June 8th, 2009 at 6:46 pm, Pasadena Phil said:

    Meanwhile, back at the Vichy Republican ranch, Laura Bush supports Sotomayor

    She also thinks Michelle Obama is doing “a great job”.

    Must be a “girlz” thang.

16. #16
    On June 8th, 2009 at 7:01 pm, AlohaGuy said:

    Finally, change is on someone’s horizon. May it spread to epidemic proportions.

    Well apparently the Europeans took a good at Obama…

17. #17
    On June 8th, 2009 at 7:23 pm, 24Klady said:

    Phil #15
    Heard the blip about Laura Bush’s endorsement of the wise-latina-on-crutches earlier and the first thing that came to mind was that she reminded her of little George’s nanny back in Texas.

    Sorry, ‘Bambi is going to have to rid himself of this obviously clumsy person. She is too old to warrant treatment under his new/revised/recycled medical plan.

18. #18
    On June 8th, 2009 at 7:30 pm, 24Klady said:

    Phil #15 – forgot to add:
    Laura’s enthusiasm for the great job Michelle ‘Bambi is doing – if you’ve seen the picture floating around the ‘net of Mrs. Sarkozy being scornfully looked on by MO – it shows what a well-bred, sophisticated, worldly, arugula eating 1st Spouse we have. America disgraced again by a moron. What did she do with her charm class money anyway?

19. #19
    On June 8th, 2009 at 7:33 pm, tarpon said:

    Ships headed to the bottom, scramble to be on top.

20. #20
    On June 8th, 2009 at 7:43 pm, nbarry said:

    One of the ship-jumping senators, Hiram Monserrate, is under indictment for assaulting his girlfriend. Not that such conduct is unusual among New York legislators. Another Dem senator, Kevin Parker, who has not switched, is also under indictment for violent behavior.

21. #21
    On June 8th, 2009 at 8:36 pm, rotarymunkey said:

    As I read the story, the 2 Dems in particular didn’t change parties, they simply stood and voted with the minority party on a procedural vote to challenge the control of the Senate.

    That’s not “jumping ship”, that’s just plain old common sense breaking out!

22. #22
    On June 8th, 2009 at 8:45 pm, T-Bone said:

    I do NOT approve of a politician changing their allegiance once voted in.
    Seconded.

    Thirded.

    But thats also part of how politics work nowadays. You vote with the caucus so to speak. See Nancy Pelosi for how to take it to an art form including blackmail, extortion, intimidation, bullying, blacklisting, subpar assignments, etc.

23. #23
    On June 8th, 2009 at 11:02 pm, DanVanSmak said:

    A caller to a local talk show suggested that Tom Golisano may have offered to help pay the legal bills of the two gentlemen who switched parties (evidently, the NYS Dem Party would not), thus there may be a something-for-something here. The host of the show said that this scenario is plausible, but there’s no way to prove it likely (at least for now). As for this being triggered by gay marriage, maybe, but, then again, if Golisano, who *still* has business interests in NYS (Paychex, Buffalo Slugs ERRRRR Sabres) did this just to take a jab at one party rule in NYS as he heads down to Florida, well, maybe gay marriage isn’t such a hot-button issue after all.

    *out*

24. #24
    On June 8th, 2009 at 11:03 pm, Flyoverman said:

    I would normally give a Fourth, but it’s time for a little payback so………

25. #25
    On June 9th, 2009 at 3:53 am, Micheleeroo said:

    cool!
    and I hope for another 1994 in 2010. I think there is a lot of national angst about the complete steamroller job the democrats are doing to America!

26. #26
    On June 9th, 2009 at 6:50 am, RetFireman said:

    You know, the fact that the Democrats in New York acted like spoiled children over the issue is the really telling thing. The way they shut off the lights and the Internet on the way out so as to delay and make the whole thing more difficult was nothing less than embarrassing.

    Anytime the Democrats don’t get their way, they act like spoiled little children. They throw little tantrums, and to the equivalent of holding their breath. Look at how they acted in California concerning the loss of Prop. 8. Just can’t wait till the vote on the racist, sexist person that Das Fuhrer has been threatening the Republicans with. I am sure it will be yet another exercise in adult politics. God help us if there is several Democrats who just happen to be getting tired of what the Dems are doing in Congress, and who want to defect. I am sure there is at least one or two already and they are terrified as to what will happen to them.

27. #27
    On June 9th, 2009 at 8:39 am, englishqueen01 said:

    Hmm, did the voters vote for the PARTY or for the PRINCIPLES that the candidate stands for?

    I think that’s the question. The party is, often, a fixed behemoth that does not change its principles, even when people want it to.

    If these politicians ran on principles that no longer meet with the principles of the party, switching allegiance is not a slap in the face of voters, because I doubt these politician’s entire campaign platform was simply, “Vote for me, I’m a Democrat.”

28. #28
    On June 9th, 2009 at 9:18 am, cabrerski said:

    On June 9th, 2009 at 6:50 am, RetFireman said:
    Anytime the Democrats don’t get their way, they act like spoiled little children. They throw little tantrums, and to the equivalent of holding their breath.

    Amen to that, brother! Remember in Texas when their legislative Dems were going to lose but had to vote, so they ran away. Literally! They had to send the Texas Rangers (not the baseball team) to round them up.

    And last August in the federal Congress, Pelosi killed the lights and C-Span cameras in the House to prevent further discussion on the Energy Bill.

    These are the equivalent to: “I’m taking my ball and going home!” That behavior always came from the whiny little kid on the block who could never understand why no one else liked him.

    Whereas these are reprehensible behaviors by both parties, the Dems seem to have developed it into a high art form.

29. #29
    On June 9th, 2009 at 9:29 am, RobM1981 said:

    These two “democrats” are well known as opportunists. The term “snake” has been used to describe them for years.

    Gingrich is wrong: this is not the time for equivocating on conservative principles simply to gain power. This is the time for conservatives to be conservative – and this is most definitely NOT what just happened in Albany.

    If this doesn’t backfire on these RINO’s, I’ll be amazed…

30. #30
    On June 9th, 2009 at 12:02 pm, MarkD said:

    When Jeffords does it, it’s OK. When Spector does it, it’s OK. If a Democrat does it, it’s outrageous, possibly criminal, and a betrayal.

    Look, both parties are composed primarily of people manipulating the system for power and personal gain. Look at the amount of money from out of New York poured into Aubertine’s race.

    We have the most expensive government money can buy, and I’m convinced we’d do better if we selected names at random from people who were not lawyers or convicted felons.

31. #31
    On June 9th, 2009 at 4:26 pm, TooMuchTime said:

    When Jeffords does it, it’s OK. When Spector does it, it’s OK. If a Democrat does it, it’s outrageous, possibly criminal, and a betrayal.

    That’s exactly what happened. When Reagan was President, a democrat congressman from Texas (can’t remember the name) sided with Reagan on his economic policies. The democrats howled and actually removed him from some important committees. So he switched parties.

    However…and this is big. He had been elected as a democrat. He switched parties and went back to his constituents and asked to be re-elected as a Republican. There was a special election and he was re-elected. He thought enough of the voters to give them the choice.

    It wasn’t the party, it was the principle.

32. #32
    On June 9th, 2009 at 4:36 pm, iamgman said:

    Amen to that, brother! Remember in Texas when their legislative Dems were going to lose but had to vote, so they ran away. Literally! They had to send the Texas Rangers (not the baseball team) to round them up.

    They did it more than once. After the first time, Governor Perry threatened to send the Rangers for them. So they decided to flee their jurisdiction entirely. And this wasn’t just over a petty bill, it was over the Constitutionally mandated redrawing of election lines. It made me thank God that my 4 year old is more mature.