McCain: I don’t see any GOP votes for the stimulus in the Senate
posted at 1:45 pm on January 30, 2009 by Allahpundit
Too good to check? Maybe, but I don’t think Maverick’s bluffing this time. So craptastic is this crap sandwich that Democrat Ben Nelson felt obliged to warn The One this morning that he can’t count on a straight party-line yes from his own side, hint hint.
And to add insult to injury, he chose Fox News as the network on which to deliver that message. Heart-ache:
“I don’t even know how many Democrats will vote for it, as it stands today,” Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., told FOX News…
“What I’m hoping to do is bring together a bipartisan group of Republicans and Democrats and offer changes that will attract others and improve the bill,” he told FOX News. “People want this to succeed.”…
One item that likely will be discussed is an amendment that would add billions of dollars to infrastructure projects. Nelson is crafting that measure with Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash, and Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif, both on the Appropriations Committee.
And Nelson doesn’t want to stop there. He wants to pluck out what he says are extraneous projects in the stimulus bill to pay for the amendment. Providing hundreds of millions of dollars for prevention of smoking and sexually-transmitted disease — though they may be worthy causes — does not create jobs. Nelson even is willing to remove popular Pell Grant increases, saving them for annual spending bills later in the year.
I’m sure this is a bluff — the Democrats aren’t going to humiliate Obama with a close vote on his signature legislation — but if they strip enough crap out of the sandwich, the decision to vote against it will be significantly harder for the GOP than it is now. On the other hand, who cares? The bill’s bound to pass anyway, so anything that can be done to de-pork it is all to the good.
Note, by the way, how careful Republicans are being to blame the bill’s failure on the House, on Pelosi, on Rahm Emanuel (“Rahm hates us and lets us know it, and we hate him back”) — anyone but Obama. That’s a testament to The One’s approval ratings, but also evidence of how they’re maneuvering already to run on this in the midterms. Anyway, two clips here, with the stimulus bit in the first; I included the second just because it’s fun hearing Maverick sound constipated in having to defend Rush Limbaugh.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
It was a partial assessment of the STIMULUS… but it was 100% accurate over the fact that very little of the $355 billion in SPENDING PROJECTS would come before 2011.
Plus you flat out lied and said the unnamed CBO aide in the HuffPo article was Peter Orszag- who is actually head of the OMB.
Hack.
Chuck Schick on January 30, 2009 at 2:41 PM
I just love the way this is exposing Obama as a partisan. The Republicans don’t need to – RIGHT NOW.
marklmail on January 30, 2009 at 2:41 PM
If you factor out time women don’t work due to child bearing, and consider all factors equally, experience, ability, education, etc, women earn at least the same as men in any given job.
wildcat84 on January 30, 2009 at 2:41 PM
Its good news, but don’t let it go to your head. Something has got to be this completely F’ed up for Mac to see it. The next “not really so bad” liberal/dem bill that comes up, and it’ll be back to reaching across the pile.
Itchee Dryback on January 30, 2009 at 2:41 PM
If they can’t afford their own damn converter box then they should go get a job or two instead of sittin around watchin T.V. someone else is payin for.
Not to hard for the Illegal aliens to figure out, whys’ it so hard for the New Orleans crowd? (Toilet Paper!)
dhunter on January 30, 2009 at 2:42 PM
This bill can’t be filibustered. :-(
toliver on January 30, 2009 at 2:43 PM
So now the Democrats get 100 percent of the credit for this wonderful, incredible, sensational, supercalifagalisticexpialidocious piece of legislation. You should be unbelievably happy and printing bumper stickers letting everyone know that whatever the aftermath of the bill, all the credit should go to Obama, Pelosi and Reid.
Or all the blame. That’s the bet the Republicans are making. Let’s see who’s right 19 months from now.
jon1979 on January 30, 2009 at 2:44 PM
This woman & equal pay is garbage.
Women seem to make less bcs they choose to work less, stay home with the kids when they’re sick etc.
They get paid the same.
Badger40 on January 30, 2009 at 2:44 PM
So like not shooting your own children is doing nothing?
the_nile on January 30, 2009 at 2:45 PM
And high-caliber whores make way more than me
LimeyGeek on January 30, 2009 at 2:47 PM
EXACTLY! I’m glad I didn’t have a mouthful of milk when I heard that.
OUR conservative movement… conservative???
He trashed conservative values in almost every way possible during his campaign, with McCain – Feingold, and especially McCain – Kennedy. What a joke – OUR (sic) conservative movement.
fred5678 on January 30, 2009 at 2:47 PM
Badger40 on January 30, 2009 at 2:44 PM
Very insightful post, ma’am.
Why are all the Trolls still so bitter and upset? Maybe it is because they see their President and Congress self-detructing right before their eyes. So much for Barry and the gang trying to say they’re Moderates.
kingsjester on January 30, 2009 at 2:48 PM
You guys really don’t give a sh*t about the people suffering under this economy, do you? We are losing thousands of jobs every day and your reply is “get another job, lazy welfare libs!” well there’s gonna be about 6 senate and 20 house repugs who will need joblessness advice of their own in November 2010.
Noneya on January 30, 2009 at 2:48 PM
I agree – apply the F-word!
Dems did it to Bush on lousy appointments and we have been very bi-partisan in approving the appointees that Obama wants. There is our bi-partisan track record.
Repubs will get the ‘base’ squarely back in our camp if we show them we can stand on principle on spending this big.
Otherwise, if we continue to show that there is not a dime’s worth of difference (which is what I hear from the bubbas at the fishing tournaments) and the only difference is ‘I might get a check from US Treas’ why support the Rs?
ElRonaldo on January 30, 2009 at 2:48 PM
Lets’ see which campaign paid the women less than men?
Seems it was the campaign of Senator 1/2 and 1/2!
dhunter on January 30, 2009 at 2:49 PM
Insty also noted that this stimulus also kills welfare reform. What is this POS? The Return to 1979 time machine act of 2009?
joeindc44 on January 30, 2009 at 2:49 PM
The public is with us on this. It’s your side that’s going against what the public wants. And when the spending won’t even be seen until next year, it’s nonsense to claim this is a bill that will help.
Surely even in your partisan fury you can see that.
Since when is TARP 2 a fresh idea?
Esthier on January 30, 2009 at 2:49 PM
Actually, I pray that the poor die starving and shivering every Christmas.
LimeyGeek on January 30, 2009 at 2:50 PM
This is true. Not to start an OT debate, but any discrepancy in wages or salaries that actually may exist might be made up and even exceeded by the fact that women outlive men by something like 6 yrs, which means they deplete the pension and retirement funds for an extra 6 years longer than men, even though the supposed higher pay means that the men paid in more and receive less of those benefits.
I have doubts as to the actual wage discrepancies that exist for actual equal work and tasks. Just my opinion.
Itchee Dryback on January 30, 2009 at 2:52 PM
So, let me get this straight.
Ben “Gang Bang” Nelson is once again saddling up his gang to ‘fix’ this crap sandwich. There’s no fixing, flush it.
The only bill that republicans need to vote for are tax cuts and more tax cuts.
HornetSting on January 30, 2009 at 2:54 PM
Women should earn a little less than men because we have to put up with their incessant chuntering in the workplace.
LimeyGeek on January 30, 2009 at 2:55 PM
Reject the politics of fear.
Jim Treacher on January 30, 2009 at 2:55 PM
…co-sponsored by Mister Peabody and Sherman.
Laura in Maryland on January 30, 2009 at 2:57 PM
Me too.
Jim Treacher on January 30, 2009 at 2:57 PM
That’s OK – we know who’s to blame for the PorkFest.
uncivilized on January 30, 2009 at 2:57 PM
Ah Limey, you little geek. Women should be paid more because we always have to REPEAT DIRECTIONS over and over so that men can understand them.
HornetSting on January 30, 2009 at 2:57 PM
Actualy, we care deeply. Problem is that these exact same “solutions” have been tried before AND DID NOT WORK!
Now, lets see, the Dems want to do somthing that history shows does not work, but as a consequence will grow the Government, create new entitlements, and SERIOUSLY grow the Federal Debt…
So, they are throwing money away, on payoffs, for the people who voted for them, NOT fixing the problem.
Want to fix the Economy? Lower Business Taxes, and take money and make the same NO interest loans you are making to banks, available to BUSINESS! INVEST the money, don’t just give it away so people will spend it.
One of the primary problems we have is that we Judge the economy on GDP, which is how fast money EXCHANGES hands… not whether that same money is creating somthing.
If PRICES go up? So does the GDP, even if that same money is buying, or producing, less product.
So, the Government wants more spending, because that how they measure success… instead of investing looking at PRODUCTION which is a more valid measure of the strength of an economy.
Romeo13 on January 30, 2009 at 2:58 PM
I still don’t like Captain Amnesty. They at least have the sense not to step in something that smells like **that.
I’ll bet few Dems in the Senate will go to bat for the POCULUS bill.
dogsoldier on January 30, 2009 at 2:58 PM
Huh, could you repeat that… I didn’t get it…
/smile
Romeo13 on January 30, 2009 at 2:58 PM
because our govt. services are flush with cash right now and we don’t need the funds? or because people spend spend spend like crazy when the economy is tanking?
Noneya on January 30, 2009 at 3:00 PM
ROFL Awesome :)
LimeyGeek on January 30, 2009 at 3:00 PM
/giggle
HornetSting on January 30, 2009 at 3:01 PM
I once described you as a “demented liberal Turing test”….I was joking at the time, of course.
Now I’m not.
LimeyGeek on January 30, 2009 at 3:02 PM
This is bull sh!t, Noneya. This stimulus won’t even be spent this year, so for you to rail like this is pure ignorance. Read the d@mn thing and then tell us this is proof the Democrats give a sh!t about the poor. Show us where the hell they showed concern for poor people losing their jobs.
Can you?
Esthier on January 30, 2009 at 3:02 PM
I don’t give a rat’s royal ass what McCain has to say.
JonRoss on January 30, 2009 at 3:03 PM
You have to repeat them because your screeching has damaged our inner ears….so not only should you earn less, you should pay us compensation.
LimeyGeek on January 30, 2009 at 3:04 PM
Oh noneya, you really are CLUELESS. Allow me to educate you.
When the government lowers taxes, the revenue to the government actually increases. When you reduce taxes, you reduce the burden to businesses and they are able to hire more people, purchase more equipment, create more projects, and that means MORE JOBS, MORE MONEY GOING INTO THE ECONOMY.
Giving money to:
ACORN
STDS
GLOBAL WARMING MODELS
CONDOMS
THE ARTS
AND THE OTHER BS IN THIS BILL IS NOT GOING TO STIMULATE THE ECONOMY!
HornetSting on January 30, 2009 at 3:05 PM
You are bad.
HornetSting on January 30, 2009 at 3:06 PM
Not with that attitude.
loganthompson on January 30, 2009 at 3:06 PM
What part of “stimulus” is lost in this discussion? It’s spending that the government is hoping people will do. That’s the only reason they’re giving out “bailouts” in the first place.
And yes, when people have more of their own money to spend, historically, they spend. It’s not rocket science.
Esthier on January 30, 2009 at 3:07 PM
McCain who?
grapeknutz on January 30, 2009 at 3:07 PM
Only in the ‘good’ sense ;)
LimeyGeek on January 30, 2009 at 3:08 PM
You really don’t give a sh*t about the future generations of Americans who will be condemned to a lower standard of living and drowning in debt because of this bill, do you?
Mike Honcho on January 30, 2009 at 3:08 PM
Esthier on January 30, 2009 at 3:02 PM
I’m sure Nancy Pelosi was thinking about the poor with every Botox injection she received.
And Robert Byrd, heck, his rallies were legendary back in the day….big bonfires and everybody was wearing white.
Don’t worry, if Mr. President and his puppet master, Mr. Soros, have their Socialist way, we’ll all be poor. Only the Government and their benefactors will have any money.
kingsjester on January 30, 2009 at 3:08 PM
I will be absolutly shocked if the republicans
actually have any balls left to stand up to the gag messiah and his evil witch and dare to oppose them..
I will wait to see
For about 18 months at a minimum
jcila on January 30, 2009 at 3:14 PM
I’m late here but ROFLOL!
ThackerAgency on January 30, 2009 at 3:15 PM
Hmm…where shall I begin?
My dear, you are quite delusional. The president is not – not – trying to “save our economy”. Saving our economy is the absolute LAST thing on his mind – or Ms. Pelosi’s or Mr. Reid’s, for that matter. What you are witnessing in this “big bucket o’ pork” stimulus bill is nothing more than the “want list” of the special interests who did all of the dirty work involved in getting the president elected. (Not “wish list”, mind you, but “WANT” list – as in, “we get what we WANT, and nobody gets embarrassed”.) In the spirit of FDR’s “New Deal”, he has presented us with yet another government spend-fest, the “Raw Deal”, in which we print billions and billions of dollars in order to pay for gimmes and freebies and hand-outs to the aforementioned special interests. In the meantime, our freshly-printed billions of dollars become less and less valuable, which means those of us who actually work/have worked/are retired have to have many more of those dollars in order to purchase what we need/want. When those dollars are not forthcoming – since, for example, the “upgrade of ATV trails” will be finished at some point, and the minimal number of temporary jobs will come to an end – we won’t be able to purchase those needs/wants at all. When we don’t purchase them, the companies that produce them will be forced to cut back or close completely, as they have wants/needs of their own (payroll and utilities, for example) that they won’t be able to satisfy. This will, in turn, further limit the number of those dollars that we, the working/looking for work/retired population, will have in our possession to fund those needs/wants. Thus, the endless cycle begins – by then, of course, the digital converter box won’t matter, as we won’t be able to afford televisions, anyway.
uncivilized on January 30, 2009 at 3:15 PM
When the economy is bad, people hoard their $, they don’t spend it. With consumer confidence this low, tax cuts would do NOTHING right now, except strip us of more services. How is every repug with an AM radio an economist these days, sheesh….
Noneya on January 30, 2009 at 3:19 PM
I’m so happy to hear that McCain believes Snowe and Collins will vote against this bill. As a proud RINO, Snowe and Collins make me happy with their zigging and zagging. And there has never been a more appropriate place for them to zig to the right than on this bill. To vote against this bill would make me wonder if they are in the wrong party.
thuja on January 30, 2009 at 3:20 PM
I find nothing about McCain’s weak presentation to be happy about. McCain is whining about the lack of bipartisanship instead of exposing the evils of the Pork package.
When asked why Obama is going after Limbaugh, he specifically answered: “I DON’T KNOW”. What a missed opportunity! McCain sucks, always has, always will.
jay12 on January 30, 2009 at 3:20 PM
How is every 3rd-rate ‘social science’ graduate an economist these days, sheesh…
LimeyGeek on January 30, 2009 at 3:21 PM
Don’t fret, noneya. You’ll still get your government cheese.
Tax cuts stimulate the economy, but dems and people like you are all about ‘freebies’ and welfare programs sustaining the people, not hard work.
HornetSting on January 30, 2009 at 3:22 PM
No actually the belief is that most of the spending here will do nothing to create jobs, and that the eventual spike in interest rates to pay off all the debt created by this spending will end up increasing the cost of everything, devaluing the average person’s income and savings and return the country to the stagflation of the Carter years.
On the other hand, Harry and Nancy think all this stuff will turn America into Shangra-La. Obama’s now got to decide how much he believes in that view, and if he wants to be part of the Democratic coalition that goes it alone (if he/you win, he/you get all the credit. If they’re wrong…)
jon1979 on January 30, 2009 at 3:22 PM
Try meditation, or maybe aromatherapy and massage..it may help with your irrational anger issues. Conscious breathing may help too. When very disturbed, the “Breath of Fire” exercise is quite helpful in aligning your chakras.
Afterward, treat yourself to a nice organic smoothie, and find your “Happy Place”.
You can do it…I believe in you!
Itchee Dryback on January 30, 2009 at 3:22 PM
Yes You Can!!!
uncivilized on January 30, 2009 at 3:25 PM
Your advise is far worse, Noneya. There is NOTHING in this bill that would even begin to help us until right before Obama needs to be re-elected. The money won’t even start to really be spent until next year.
How is that helpful?
And again, spending is exactly what this bill is hoping people do. How else are more jobs to be created if people are hoarding money? Jobs aren’t free. I’m sure you know that.
Esthier on January 30, 2009 at 3:29 PM
Its not about spending, Noneya, its about working. If you cut the tax rates, people work harder, and take more of the risks that pay off. Granted, the welfare checks that P.BO confuses with tax cuts won’t help, and, in fact, will hurt.
Actually, one way to boost the economy would be to tax the pour–but only if you get rid of all of the entitlements, unemployment pay, and the minimum wage. It would be painful, but it would work.
A big thing that congress could do to help the economy right now would be to outlaw all unions as monopolies. Though it would help if pensions were treated as bad investments.
Count to 10 on January 30, 2009 at 3:31 PM
Channel nine said last night that Gregg was being considered for Commerce Sec. I can’t believe that Gregg will vote against Obama’s wishes with that carrot dangling there. However, I think it’s just that, a way to entice him to vote and then cut him loose.
jeanie on January 30, 2009 at 3:32 PM
Won’t matter much – the economy will be in the shitter. Just hope they don’t quit paying the military.
izoneguy on January 30, 2009 at 3:32 PM
Obama wants business to fail. He can’t wait to have the justification to step in and control the oil industry. He will probably have the military do that.
When that happens goods will stop flowing to the US. So buying a 52″ LCD HDTV won’t really matter. Neither will buying a car from the Big 3. Obama will take those over to start building his millions of windmills.
izoneguy on January 30, 2009 at 3:36 PM
Still. Dead. To me.
madmonkphotog on January 30, 2009 at 3:36 PM
If Gregg takes the Commerce Sec at this point in time, I would view it as stabbing the Republican Party in the back. Gregg should be shunned by all Republicans if he takes the post. I’m proud to be a RINO and I like having dissent and diversity in the Republican Party, but we also need to put some breaks on what Obama can do.
thuja on January 30, 2009 at 3:39 PM
I called Ben Nelson’s office yesterday to tell him to vote against this thing. Glad to see he’s listening.
He enjoys quite a bit of popularity in Nebraska, but I think that support would dry up pretty fast if he voted to approve the stimulus package as it currently stands. Especially considering that all of our Congressional reps voted no and that our other senator is likely to do so, as well.
HuskerNate on January 30, 2009 at 3:40 PM
Spend spend spending is what tanked the economy. The only thing it will do now is prolong the pain and increase debt.
chunderroad on January 30, 2009 at 3:41 PM
Read the stimulus, you knothead.
There’s almost $300 billion in tax cuts. That’s the only thing they can actually pull off in a timely manner.
Only $26 billion of it is direct spending from the government this year. The economy will turn around on its own before you fools decide where to waste it.
And your argument about tax cuts “stripping services” is hilarious. Every single penny Obama’s going to spend on tax cuts or services is borrowed- so obviously nothing is getting stripped whatsoever.
Chuck Schick on January 30, 2009 at 3:41 PM
So, watching TV is a right now? Can you tell me which article in the Constitution covers television.
Johan Klaus on January 30, 2009 at 3:44 PM
No. Spending money they didn’t have is what formed part of the problem.
The flow of real cash is the literal lifeblood of the economy. When people stuffed mattresses with money during the Depression, it all went tits-up. You’ve gotta spend your own money to survive.
LimeyGeek on January 30, 2009 at 3:46 PM
Did JFK’s tax cut help. Did Hoover’s and FDR’s tax increases help. Did Reagan’s tax cuts help.
Johan Klaus on January 30, 2009 at 3:47 PM
Noneya – The president isn’t trying to save our economy. This is a power grab plain and simple. He wants you dependent on the government for all things, because when you depend on him you have to vote for him. It’s an insideous form of slavery. If he wanted to save our economy he wouldn’t have put the “Buy America” Smoot-Hawley BS in the bill – guaranteed to set off a nuclear trade war. If he were trying to save our economy the STD and Contraceptive nonsense wouldn’t have been in the bill. If he cared at all about America, he would have written a bill himself that was targeted, small and swift rather than a cumbersome pork-laden POS guaranteed to beggar our children and grand children for generations to come. Do you even read the posts on this site? Some of them are quite edifying.
…
Obama is commiting national suicide with this bill. It must be killed. If it passes? We are finished as a nation. We – liberals and conservatives – are all going down together on this. Wake the hell up and do some research.
BrideOfRove on January 30, 2009 at 3:51 PM
I just keep hoping that this Stimulus bill is just one big Rickroll.
flyoverland on January 30, 2009 at 3:54 PM
Agree that Gregg would be a snake in the grass if he takes it in the face of what would have been solid GOP rejection–but, do not think O’s offer is genuine. Obama is NEVER genuine, he’s a practiced opportunist to put it kindly. But, Gregg may think so. Time will tell. If he votes with Obama it will probably go over well with many in NH. I am not one of these. Do think that in spite of his possible kiss a– with O, he would, otherwise, make/have made a good Commerce Secretary. I am holding my breath over this one.
jeanie on January 30, 2009 at 3:55 PM
Honest-to-god. This bill is the purple kool-aid test of all tests.
BrideOfRove on January 30, 2009 at 3:57 PM
I posted this on another thread, but the same applies here:
In 1982, I was shot and lived on credit cards for a year, while I recovered. I started back to work and payed off the debt. Four years ago, while riding my motorcycle to visit my son in Kansas, I was hit by a drunk driver who ran a red light. Another year living on credit cards, while recovering. Back to work; repaying debt. Two years ago, I had major a surgery (Whipple). Another year living on credit cards, while recovering. Back to work.
Morale; sh*t happens. I had to get my butt back to work. My problems are my problem, not your problem, nor the rest of the tax payers problem.
Johan Klaus on January 30, 2009 at 1:22 PM
Johan Klaus on January 30, 2009 at 3:59 PM
+100.
O/T-Johan, you need to become a shut-in. Wow, some luck.
HornetSting on January 30, 2009 at 4:04 PM
That’s odd: Vernon Crapapple used pretty much the same insult over on another thread.
Hmmm…
Obviously, we “repugs with an AM radio” are far better economists than morons like you!
You’ve chosen to forget how well the tax cuts worked for JFK, Reagan and GWB, haven’t you?
We weren’t stripped of services with those, either.
In fact, under President Bush and his tax cuts, federal revenues hit record highs.
People would quit “hoarding money” and the economy would stop tanking if NObama would stop yapping about “how bad it is” and how humongous government “intervention”/stimulus is needed to correct it.
The American people have figured out that not only won’t it create jobs and not only won’t it help the economy, but that it will make things even worse in the future because our taxes will have to fund it all.
It’s a lose/lose proposition.
When a DemocRat Senator like Ben Nelson starts to question the efficacy of the stimulus bill, you know you’ve got trouble in River City.
Jenfidel on January 30, 2009 at 4:10 PM
We may never know whether the government’s $700 billion bailout of the financial industry worked, according to a new report from congressional auditors
Ah well, what’s $700B?
MB4 on January 30, 2009 at 4:11 PM
Steve Z on January 30, 2009 at 4:11 PM
Apparently it was the appetizer.
Chuck Schick on January 30, 2009 at 4:16 PM
Steve Z on January 30, 2009 at 4:18 PM
Well, this “repug with an AM radio” (which is currently tuned to the wonderful Michael Medved) was reminded to call her Senators and tell them to vote “NO!” on the porkulus bill.
Thanks, noneya!
Jenfidel on January 30, 2009 at 4:27 PM
Spending bill can’t be filibustered. It’s a criminal compromise. What Bush should have been doing was putting spending bills on the same footing on all other bills for filibuster rather than his absolutely silly and insane attempt to remove the filibuster for judicial appointees.
I’m just waiting for the right-wing of the party to come to its senses and realize that the Republicans in the Gang of the 14 were defenders of the conservative vision and shouldn’t be subject to attack for defending the filibuster.
thuja on January 30, 2009 at 4:30 PM
You might want to avoid categorical statements like that.
DrSteve on January 30, 2009 at 4:33 PM
thuja- I think spending bills can be filibustered because they are new laws like anything else. The federal budget cannot be, but it can be vetoed.
Chuck Schick on January 30, 2009 at 4:34 PM
Sean Hannity has had on several Senators the last couple of days. They all pretty much concede that Olympia Snowe at a minimum will vote with the Democrats.
Personally, not one cent from the GOP Senate re-election fund should be spent on any Senator that votes for this legislation. This package is far too important to get passed in its present form and any RINO that thinks otherwise is welcome to go to Hell if they don’t get it!
highhopes on January 30, 2009 at 4:43 PM
Sorry, but those rat bastard traitors denied qualified jurists a place on the bench. You stand alone in your admiration of these bastards.
highhopes on January 30, 2009 at 4:45 PM
So, now McCain is a reformed Gang member?
Maquis on January 30, 2009 at 4:51 PM
Hey McCain, why did you rush back to Washington to vote for the Bailouts that didn’t work?
Why don’t you retire and let J.D. Hayworth, an actual CONSERVATIVE replace you?
nelsonknows on January 30, 2009 at 4:52 PM
The worm has turned on this one. The Dems don’t have the cojones to go it alone, with “bipartisan” opposition!
drunyan8315 on January 30, 2009 at 4:56 PM
If John were sitting in the oval office right now, he would be doing the same thing as The One.
Believe it.
JeffinOrlando on January 30, 2009 at 5:10 PM
The Maine sisters will probably back Porkulus and the motion for closure. Not sure on the other RINOS if McCain’s not on board–they tend to take their cues from him, but the Maine sisters alone will probably be enough to force closure.
Now, assuming we do get closure on the debate, before the final vote, if I’m McConnell, I’m calling all the Republicans in the Senate together and I’m holding a bunch of change of party affiliation forms in my hand and I’m telling them: Either vote against this bill (especially if it’s unchanged and we still have all that pork), or take one of these forms and change your party affiliation to Democrat or whatever here and now, because as far as I’m concerned, you’re no longer a member of the Republican caucus and you will be frozen out of all future party business.
Now, as to whether he has the guts to do that or not…
Matt Helm on January 30, 2009 at 5:12 PM
You need to add that you can’t spend your way out of debt. This is what made me so mad at the repubs when they were in power. Instead of cutting wasteful spending and cutting into our out of control national debt, they just added to it.
Corsair on January 30, 2009 at 5:26 PM
Has anyone else seen this???
Found – tah dah – on DU, at the VERRRRY top…
Government Grants for Democrats
uncivilized on January 30, 2009 at 5:26 PM
Strategically that’s unwise. Olympia Snowe may be a RINO but you don’t force her out of the party that bluntly with the thin margin separting the Rats from a fillibuster-proof majority. You just make it clear that her votes won’t provide her with reelection funding. If she’s doing what she’s doing because of her constituency, they can pay for her reelection while the GOP finds a more suitable candidate to oppose her in the primaries.
highhopes on January 30, 2009 at 5:58 PM
If you:
Killed your babies in the womb and now have no offspring to help suport you,
chased away your babies’ daddy by being a horrible shrew,
are being financially crippled by court-mandated child support because you couldn’t keep it in your pants,
support business-destroying unions,
support business-destroying affirmative-action,
support business-destroying minimum-wage,
support business-destroying labor laws,
believe illegal immigrants should have access to this suddenly dwindling job pool,
are a shiftless dropout who wasted even your pitiful socialist schooling,
got a degree in “Liberal Arts,” or some other equally worthless elitist degree,
collect any form of socialist entitlement,
and/or voted for Democrats & RINOs,
then no, I really don’t.
TMK on January 30, 2009 at 5:58 PM
People who care about those within 200% of the poverty level can still have disagreements about the best way to formulate policy. Your comment belies a real lack of intellectual honesty or maturity or perhaps both.
DrSteve on January 30, 2009 at 6:05 PM
I HOPE The One’s ego gets in his way and He insists on the bill as passed by the House. Then let him get splattered with another BIPARTISAN rejection.
The poll numbers on this crap sandwich are dropping as people with the intellect to read begin to see thru the smoke and mirrors.
GarandFan on January 30, 2009 at 6:09 PM
The only way to stop folks like Noneya is to not acknowledge or answer their nonsense. If any of us said stuff like that on the thin skinned lib web sites, we’d have been banned long ago.
jeanie on January 30, 2009 at 6:11 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »