Pence: America, we can win this fight

posted at 2:45 pm on March 18, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

Is the ObamaCare debate over if the CBO score is favorable to Democrats? Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN) isn’t ready to give up quite yet. He gave another speech on the House floor early this morning, exhorting Democrats on the fence to vote no and start over from scratch. He also warned Democrats that while Republicans may be a minority in Congress, opposition to this bill is a majority in the country as a whole:

“This is a remarkable moment in the life of our nation. After years of runaway federal spending, deficits, debt, borrowing, bailouts and takeovers, against the opposition of a clear majority of the American people, the Democrats in Congress and in this administration are prepared to ram through a $1 trillion government takeover of health care.

“It’s just hard to believe. Ignoring the will of the American people, twisting the rules of the House and the Senate into a pretzel, we are headed for a showdown this weekend. But I got to tell you, I like our chances.

“The reason House Democrats don’t have the votes is because the American people know this is a government takeover of health care. Mandating that every American purchase health insurance whether they want it or need it or not, passing hundreds of billions of dollars in job-killing tax increases, providing public funding for abortions, and setting into motion government-run insurance that will cost millions to lose the insurance they have is a government takeover of health care.

“Let’s have the debate. A minority in Congress plus the American people equals a majority. America, we can win this fight.”

Pence has been on fire this week. He has continually reminded people that ObamaCare is nothing less than a government takeover of the health-care system, predicated on the fact that the federal government will have for the first time the power to force every resident to purchase a service as a requisite of residing in the US. It’s an amazing act of governmental arrogance, one that is most likely unconstitutional.

Can Americans win this fight? It’s not over yet, but we’re getting down to the make-or-break moment. And if Nancy Pelosi calls for a vote this weekend, I’d have to assume she thinks she has the votes.

Update: The Boss Emeritus notes that the GOP muscled a privileged question onto the House agenda this afternoon to force an up-or-down vote on Demon Pass.  The House endorsed it, 223-203.

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: 1 2 3

1 R vote yes means bipartisan.

lorien1973 on March 18, 2010 at 3:20 PM

And they also know it would be the end of their time in their seat.

upinak on March 18, 2010 at 3:21 PM

someone please post the list of 222 Liberal Socialist Democrats who voted Against the U.S. Constitution and are the votes that will pass NObamaCare Health Deform

mathewsjw on March 18, 2010 at 3:22 PM

And they also know it would be the end of their time in their seat.

upinak on March 18, 2010 at 3:21 PM

They don’t care. They get to keep their premium health care coverage for life. :(

capejasmine on March 18, 2010 at 3:23 PM

Romeo13 on March 18, 2010 at 3:18 PM

They haven’t been following the rules since this whole thing began why start now.

Brat4life on March 18, 2010 at 3:23 PM

Like Rush said yesterday…IF this passes…it’s OVER

Yea we will fight in courts and stuff but the seed will planted and we will never be able to uproot it completely.

What a horrible SAD DAY if this passes.

LordMaximus on March 18, 2010 at 3:23 PM

upinak on March 18, 2010 at 3:21 PM

Isn’t Cao that LA rep who crossed the aisle last time?

He won’t be voted out because of this.

And don’t discount the “bipartisan” in front of this. It’d be huge.

lorien1973 on March 18, 2010 at 3:23 PM

What’s the significance of the number 223?
Jvette on March 18, 2010 at 3:21 PM

I’m not sure – maybe it refers to 5.56 NATO?

Chip on March 18, 2010 at 3:23 PM

Remember that original house bill vote was only won by 3 votes and they thought it was a lock then.

Skywise on March 18, 2010 at 3:18 PM

I’m not so sure, Sky. I’ve always thought they had some Democrats in reserve. They may not have as many in reserve now as they did then, but I wouldn’t be surprised if they have the votes.

The only question (for them) is which ones get to vote against the final bill? Will it be by seniority? or polling? or what?

ConservativeTony on March 18, 2010 at 3:24 PM

And don’t discount the “bipartisan” in front of this. It’d be huge.

lorien1973 on March 18, 2010 at 3:23 PM

Oh I don’t discredit.. but Snowe and the “others” are on thin ice and it is looking to be a lovely spring.

upinak on March 18, 2010 at 3:24 PM

LordMaximus on March 18, 2010 at 3:23 PM

It’s not just that. It gives DC the door to regulate every part of your life as a “cost saving” measure. It’s the birth of the nanny state. Want DC debating salt content in your food? Then you’ll love Obamacare.

lorien1973 on March 18, 2010 at 3:25 PM

someone please post the list of 222 Liberal Socialist Democrats who voted Against the U.S. Constitution and are the votes that will pass NObamaCare Health Deform

mathewsjw on March 18, 2010 at 3:22 PM

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2010/roll129.xml

capejasmine on March 18, 2010 at 3:25 PM

This isn’t going to end well….This isn’t Europe, and we don’t respond like Europeans.

Dr Evil on March 18, 2010 at 3:25 PM

Don’t assume anything, Ed.

You know what it does to both of us.

Stepan on March 18, 2010 at 3:26 PM

Man, there would have been Canes a swinging in Congress if this had been 150 odd years ago.

Chip on March 18, 2010 at 3:26 PM

mathewsjw on March 18, 2010 at 3:22 PM

Roll Call.

notropis on March 18, 2010 at 3:26 PM

Obama is going to need to postpone his June trip until December so he can oversee the riots resulting from his power grab

cntrlfrk on March 18, 2010 at 3:28 PM

Oh I don’t discredit.. but Snowe and the “others” are on thin ice and it is looking to be a lovely spring.

upinak on March 18, 2010 at 3:24 PM

Awesome! I love Conservative humor. So witty and always on-the-mark deadly.

ConservativeTony on March 18, 2010 at 3:28 PM

I think it’s a bluff right now. IF they had the votes, Obama wouldn’t be trying to court Cao!

capejasmine on March 18, 2010 at 3:19 PM

Insurance.

angryed on March 18, 2010 at 3:29 PM

Hannity just named to congressmen who are retiring. Tanner was one name, can’t remember the other. Tanner is getting an ambassadorship to NATO, and the other, I think he said NASA? So there ya go. The bribes for yes votes. Who else will be getting what in exchange for their votes?

capejasmine on March 18, 2010 at 3:29 PM

Obama is going to need to postpone his June trip until December so he can oversee the riots resulting from his power grab

cntrlfrk on March 18, 2010 at 3:28 PM

Nope. Phase 2 – He has to ram the reconciliation bill through the Senate or the House Dems look stupid and it appears they don’t have the votes in the Senate.

Skywise on March 18, 2010 at 3:30 PM

Student Loan Add-On Includes Special Deal for North Dakota [Stephen Spruiell]

They’re already calling it the Bismarck Bribe:

The legislation contains provisions apparently designed to ensure votes from wavering Democrats. As outlined in the House version, the compromise plan would give nonprofit loan providers in several states the right to participate, along with for-profit loan companies selected through a competitive process, in helping the Education Department distribute loan money to students.

A new element, included in the plan issued on Thursday, would give a specific right to the Bank of North Dakota to issue federally subsidized student loans, meaning that it would be the only lender remaining outside of the Education Department’s direct-lending system.

The Bank of North Dakota is a state-owned lender that Democratic aides described as representing the type of nonprofit entity they want to encourage. Critics of the loan bill suggested the provision was designed to win the support of a key Democrat, Sen. Kent Conrad of North Dakota, chairman of the Senate Budget Committee.

03/18 03:18 PM

NRO.

Wethal on March 18, 2010 at 3:30 PM

Like Rush said yesterday…IF this passes…it’s OVER

Yea we will fight in courts and stuff but the seed will planted and we will never be able to uproot it completely.

What a horrible SAD DAY if this passes.

LordMaximus on March 18, 2010 at 3:23 PM

Stalin and Lenin slaughtered something like 50 million people to forge a “permanent” empire and it imploded before its 80th birthday. Never say never.

Chris_Balsz on March 18, 2010 at 3:31 PM

Bah, the board keeps eating my comments…

So this how liberty dies: with thunderous applause.

CatsGodot on March 18, 2010 at 3:31 PM

capejasmine on March 18, 2010 at 3:29 PM

Bart Gordon. And if the jobs require Senate confirmation, Tom Coburn has promised to block the nominations.

Wethal on March 18, 2010 at 3:31 PM

Yea we will fight in courts and stuff but the seed will planted and we will never be able to uproot it completely.
What a horrible SAD DAY if this passes.
LordMaximus on March 18, 2010 at 3:23 PM

WTF? Glad you weren’t George Washington’s adviser.

This isn’t going to end well….This isn’t Europe, and we don’t respond like Europeans.
Dr Evil on March 18, 2010 at 3:25 PM

Like you, I have better stuff to do with my day also, but I will be on the field with you.

AZ_Redneck on March 18, 2010 at 3:32 PM

There won’t be socialist health care in this country if it passes. It will bankrupt America, and then we’ll find ourselves in default on everything — Social Security, Medicare, roads, and schools.

The inner cities will burn when the welfare checks run out. Lots of old folks are going to be warehoused into very, very grim nursing homes. The Federal government’s grip on every part of our lives will be weakened, if not destroyed altogether.

And I, for one, don’t mind a bit. From the ashes will rise our country, reborn again. We survived the Civil War. We’ll get through this, too.

bonnie_ on March 18, 2010 at 3:34 PM

…the GOP muscled a privileged question onto the House agenda this afternoon to force an up-or-down vote on Demon Pass. The House endorsed it, 223-203.

In other words, 223 members of Congress just violated the first part of the oath they took when they were elected to Congress.

You know the part that goes…

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States.”

pilamaye on March 18, 2010 at 3:34 PM

We survived the Civil War. We’ll get through this, too.

bonnie_ on March 18, 2010 at 3:34 PM

I hope so. The Civil War decimated half the nation…what’s coming up is likely to hit everywhere by the time it’s over.

Dark-Star on March 18, 2010 at 3:36 PM

capejasmine on March 18, 2010

I’m sorry I can’t remember the name of the Republican senator who said that any house member who votes yes and gets a federal appointment will have that appointment held up in the Senate. They won’t collect on their bribe.

Extrafishy on March 18, 2010 at 3:37 PM

I think the GOP are idiots for drawing attention to the Slaughter rule and instigating a vote on it.

Here is my reasoning. The Dems control the House and the House rules. If they want to persist in using the Slaughter rule to pass Obamacare so be it and it will be challenged in the SC. But by calling for a vote on it and losing it, the GOP just gave Pelosi cover; now she can argue that the House “authorized” the Slaughter rule by this vote, so if she does use it, instead of an up and down vote, that she is only complying with or abiding with the wishes of the majority.

Stupid, stupid, stupid!

technopeasant on March 18, 2010 at 3:38 PM

Thanks, Wethall, I couldn’t remember it was Coburn.

Extrafishy on March 18, 2010 at 3:39 PM

Sickening. Vile trash has invaded Congress.

andy85719 on March 18, 2010 at 2:45 PM

Nope, they were voted there.

WisCon on March 18, 2010 at 2:57 PM

Yep, you’re absolutely right. In fact, I’m sure you can blame my grandparents. Despite the fact that they’ve been dead and buried for over 20 years (paternal ones, at least), I’m sure they voted for most of these traitors, and several times in a row, too.

Yep, 100% the voter’s fault.

CatsGodot on March 18, 2010 at 3:39 PM

There won’t be socialist health care in this country if it passes. It will bankrupt America, and then we’ll find ourselves in default on everything — Social Security, Medicare, roads, and schools.

The inner cities will burn when the welfare checks run out.

Lots of old folks are going to be warehoused into very, very grim nursing homes. The Federal government’s grip on every part of our lives will be weakened, if not destroyed altogether.

And I, for one, don’t mind a bit. From the ashes will rise our country, reborn again. We survived the Civil War. We’ll get through this, too.

bonnie_ on March 18, 2010 at 3:34 PM

It will be very, very ugly.

Unlike the time of the Great Depression, the people of this generation are addicted to their entitlements. They will be very angry when there is nothing for the government to give them.

It will collapse.

Jvette on March 18, 2010 at 3:40 PM

I see Slaughter voted for her own rule. If this POS passes, she will go down in history as a traitor to this country.

Her fanily must be so proud.

ConservativeTony on March 18, 2010 at 3:40 PM

*family

ConservativeTony on March 18, 2010 at 3:40 PM

Isaiah 40:31 (King James Version)
31But they that wait upon the LORD shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run, and not be weary; and they shall walk, and not faint.

DO.NOT.GIVE.UP! Pray…..

sicoit on March 18, 2010 at 3:40 PM

Us Amish people wish you well in your new government subsidized future.

Wanna buy a fireplace?

lorien1973 on March 18, 2010 at 3:00 PM

You’re cracking me up with the Amish thing today. LOL

So when have the Amish been allowed to use electricity, and use computers? LOL

capejasmine on March 18, 2010 at 3:02 PM

Must be a liberal ordnung.

tom on March 18, 2010 at 3:41 PM

Nope. Phase 2 – He has to ram the reconciliation bill through the Senate or the House Dems look stupid and it appears they don’t have the votes in the Senate.

Skywise

I don’t think so Sky, as Rush’s been saying once it passes the House and Obama signs it, it’s law. Period. He’ll never mention it again and you’ll never see it in the Senate, they don’t need to.

Question. if/when it passes when do our taxes for this start? This year or next? This month maybe?

E9RET on March 18, 2010 at 3:41 PM

Rules Committee staffer tells WSJ house leaders will ignore or “blur” the 72 hour rule.

Senate now has to approve the fictional law that the house just made up….up to a week.

Next friday, 26th…..they go home for Easter. According to wsj, dem leadership terrified of that…..hence it won’t be posted for 72 hours.

andy85719 on March 18, 2010 at 3:42 PM

Has the House Parliamentarian ruled on the Slaughter rule?

ConservativeTony on March 18, 2010 at 3:44 PM

technopeasant on March 18, 2010 at 3:38 PM

Maybe, but it also calls attention to all those that voted for this. Now we know who to go after, for their vote on this. They’ve exposed themselves as Constitution shredding, America hating, communists.

The bigger they are, the harder they’ll fall!

capejasmine on March 18, 2010 at 3:44 PM

Wait. There is some uncertainty. Developing…

andy85719 on March 18, 2010 at 3:45 PM

Question. if/when it passes when do our taxes for this start? This year or next? This month maybe?

E9RET on March 18, 2010 at 3:41 PM

When has a government who inacts a law concerning taking your money ever not jumped in and took it right away?

Watch what happens if it passes… people are going to freak on how much they do not have in their paychecks.

upinak on March 18, 2010 at 3:45 PM

testing. tar and feathers.

tigerlily on March 18, 2010 at 3:45 PM

OPINION: JOHN FUND ON THE TRAILMARCH 18, 2010, 1:51 P.M. ET
Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, Don’t Vote, Don’t Debate
Democrats are ready to abandon a promise to allow lawmakers 72 hours to read and evaluate the heath-care bill before a vote.

Democratic leaders are staunchly defending their possible use of a parliamentary maneuver to avoid a traditional vote on health care. Are they also getting ready to abandon a promise that lawmakers would have at least 72 hours to read and evaluate the language of the health care bill?

House Democrats are moving ahead with a package of budget reconciliation changes to the Senate bill that would let members enact the Senate bill by reference. A Democratic staffer tells me House leaders tentatively plan to ignore or blur the 72-hour rule when the long-delayed final analysis is delivered to them sometime this afternoon.

The Rules Committee will meet on Saturday to set the rules for debate. Following the letter of the 72-hour rule would mean no vote before late Sunday, but Democrats have allowed themselves an out. “The Democratic leadership has declared ‘martial law,’” Poltico.com reports, “allowing leaders to bring legislation straight to the floor on the same legislative day.” That could mean a vote as early as Saturday, with a floor debate of just four hours. The public and members of Congress would have only 48 hours or even less to examine the bill.

Democrats are in a rush for two reasons. One, the longer they wait, the iffier their chances of assembling a majority of 216 House members. Two, they’re also in a hurry because the Senate needs a minimum of a week of floor debate to pass the expected reconciliation bill full of legislative “fixes.” With Congress set to begin its two-week Easter recess on March 26, Democratic leaders don’t want members leaving town before the issue is settled, fearing a pummeling by angry constituents back home that will weaken their resolve.

Cutting short the period for legislators and the public to evaluate the bill would raise hackles. But Democratic leaders are prepared to take the hits. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer signaled as much last Friday on the House floor in an exchange with GOP Whip Eric Cantor. “We will certainly give as much notice as possible, but I am not going to say that 72 hours is going to be the litmus test, per se, because that which we have voted on already in the House and the Senate have given Members months of notice and the American public months of notice on the substance of the propositions that are pending before us,” Mr. Hoyer said.

To longtime Congressional observers, Mr. Hoyer was clearly saying he is not going to be bound by the 72-hour rule if he thinks following it will break the momentum to jam the bill through.

Yesterday, President Obama told Bret Baier of Fox News: “I don’t spend a lot of time worrying about what the procedural rules are in the House or Senate.” But both members of Congress and the American people have been given repeated assurances they would have at least 72 hours to look at the final language and numbers. Mr. Obama may not spend much time fretting about whether that promise is kept, but voters may think otherwise.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704207504575129812729080380.html?mod=WSJ_latestheadlines

andy85719 on March 18, 2010 at 3:46 PM

Like Rush said yesterday…IF this passes…it’s OVER

Yea we will fight in courts and stuff but the seed will planted and we will never be able to uproot it completely.

What a horrible SAD DAY if this passes.

LordMaximus on March 18, 2010 at 3:23 PM

If this passes, your choices are to learn to like socialism; to spend decades fighting it incrementally in the courts and at the ballot box; or

cut your ties to the dumb b&stards who want to suck at the gov’t t*t.

I’m leaning to the last alternative.

james23 on March 18, 2010 at 3:46 PM

Wait. There is some uncertainty. Developing…

andy85719 on March 18, 2010 at 3:45 PM

No, please. I don’t think I can go another round.

DING. . . . .

ConservativeTony on March 18, 2010 at 3:48 PM

i’m feeling a little ill…

ugh

cmsinaz on March 18, 2010 at 3:48 PM

Is it possible, if these morons force this thru, using the slaughter rule, and the lawsuits come flying in….a judge, or judges can rule that this bill be held in limbo, til a judgement is rendered?

capejasmine on March 18, 2010 at 3:48 PM

Are they also getting ready to abandon a promise that lawmakers would have at least 72 hours to read and evaluate the language of the health care bill?

They’ve abandoned the promise on every single bill this year. Why would anyone expect them to hold to it now?

lorien1973 on March 18, 2010 at 3:48 PM

I am not following Pence? How can anyone fight it if -

Plus, the House endorses the Slaughter strategy 223-203.

This means they can deem it passed without voting so I really don’t see where anyone could apply any push back….until next November.

Dr Evil on March 18, 2010 at 3:50 PM

Thanks, GOP, for doing such a great job while in power to open the door for such numerical majorities in both houses of Congress that the majority of Americans are effectively underrepresented.

BuckeyeSam on March 18, 2010 at 3:50 PM

It’s called an injunction. It halts implementation of the bill, including tax collection.

andy85719 on March 18, 2010 at 3:50 PM

This must be what they mean by the phrase a “Constitutional Crisis”

Dr Evil on March 18, 2010 at 3:50 PM

capejasmine on March 18, 2010 at 3:44 PM

But by exposing these folks now you may have locked them into a position when they were actually undecided. I could make the argument that if someone voted for the Slaughter rule, he/she might have been on the fence regarding Obamacare but felt he/she had to support the rules as laid down by their party’s leadership in the House. And because they did this, Pelosi and Obama (his reps) can now go up to them and say, “Hey, Tom (Mary)do you think the GOP opponents in your district are going to make any difference between your positive vote on the Slaughter rule and the actual vote? Do you think the voters are that smart? You know which side your bread is buttered on-stay with us-if you voted to enforce the Slaughter rule you need to stay consistent-at least you won’t be primaried?

technopeasant on March 18, 2010 at 3:52 PM

Roll Call.

notropis on March 18, 2010 at 3:26 PM

So much for “conservative” democrats like Colin Peterson… I’m sure he now enjoys being nothing but a b!tch of the corrupt Chicago machine.

MNHawk on March 18, 2010 at 3:53 PM

The Rules Committee will meet on Saturday to set the rules for debate. Following the letter of the 72-hour rule would mean no vote before late Sunday, but Democrats have allowed themselves an out. “The Democratic leadership has declared ‘martial law,’” Poltico.com reports, “allowing leaders to bring legislation straight to the floor on the same legislative day.” That could mean a vote as early as Saturday, with a floor debate of just four hours. The public and members of Congress would have only 48 hours or even less to examine the bill.

The house is out of frakking control… I realize the House handles its own rules/laws but this is malfeasance if not treasonous behavior. It’s completely unethical/unfeasible to dump multi-thousand page bills onto the floor of the house for same day voting.

The legislature CANNOT properly do its job this way, they’ll be voting on UNSEEN and UNREAD bills without even the appearance of a 72 hour reading period.

Skywise on March 18, 2010 at 3:53 PM

Watch what happens if it passes… people are going to freak on how much they do not have in their paychecks.

upinak on March 18, 2010 at 3:45 PM

Problem is that most of this is funded by higher fees, not direct taxes…

PRICES for healthcare go up, as those taxes are passed on, but it will take awhile for those prices to be reflected in health insurance prices… which will skyrocket.

Then your employer looks at the costs of Health Insurance for you, sees that it is ONLY a $2000 fine per employee not covered… phases out your coverage while giving you a “raise” for the rest of what it used to cost him…

Of course, THAT is taxable income… and you will also have to pay for your own health insurance, or pay a fine yourself.

However, the personal fine is only $2800, and insurance companies MUST cover pre existing conditions…

Thus… many people will not get health insurance, and pay the penalty… taking more off the rolls, which forces the REST to pay higher premiums.

So… Gov will get $2000 + whatever extra income tax you have to pay… PLUS an extra $2800 if you don’t get insurance… plus all the extra taxes they put on Health Equipment in this bill…

And LESS healthy people will have insurance (as it makes no sense to buy it economicly… and just look at how many people don’t buy CAR insurance)…

And Insurance Rates skyrocket due to having to cover pre existing conditions, WITH smaller pools of healthy folks in the Insurance pool.

CRISES.

Romeo13 on March 18, 2010 at 3:54 PM

So much for “conservative” democrats like Colin Peterson… I’m sure he now enjoys being nothing but a b!tch of the corrupt Chicago machine.

MNHawk on March 18, 2010 at 3:53 PM

oxymoron you speak.

upinak on March 18, 2010 at 3:54 PM

Just posted a test for the words tar and feathers.

I think I just got censored for posting that I hope the tar and feathers come out for the senate GOP (Girls of the Party) who can take full credit for allowing the Senate bill to pass to the House on Christmas Eve. They need to take full credit for not blocking obamascar with every parliamentary maneuver available to them.

THEY ALONE, if they had the courage of one man among them, could have held up this monstrosity in the Senate TO THIS DAY.

If obamascar passes, the destruction of our nation is on them, not on the rabid leftists who are acting on their sick instincts.

No, the “conservatives” were supposed to know better, and stand in the breach when our Republic was threatened from within their very chambers.

When men of courage were needed in an hour of dire need, all we had were the Senate GOP “Girls of the Party”

tigerlily on March 18, 2010 at 3:54 PM

This must be what they mean by the phrase a “Constitutional Crisis”

Dr Evil on March 18, 2010 at 3:50 PM

This is what they meant by “Taxation without Representation”

Skywise on March 18, 2010 at 3:55 PM

These criminal thugs are not even trying to be subtle. This country is terminally ill.

rplat on March 18, 2010 at 3:55 PM

No, “tar and feathers” wasn’t it. It may have been that I changed Mitch McConnell’s first name to something that I think is more fitting. It starts with a “b”. I left it out of my last post and it went through.

tigerlily on March 18, 2010 at 3:56 PM

technopeasant on March 18, 2010 at 3:52 PM

I don’t know, but I think the Dems seriously underestimate the intelligence of Americans. We are involved, we are watching, reading, listening, and learning. They’re gambling…and I think they’ll lose.

capejasmine on March 18, 2010 at 3:57 PM

Romeo13 on March 18, 2010 at 3:54 PM

All we can do is wait and see. Oh joy. /s

upinak on March 18, 2010 at 3:57 PM

(filtered for words?)

I wonder if this will be one of those moments, where (and I’m too young for the first two questions), just like the deaths of Martin Luther King, JFK, or the attack on 9/11. I can imagine, years from now, a child asking me:

“Do you remember where you were when democracy was killed?”

To which, thinking back, to where we are right now, my response, in a low, quiet voice: “Hush, child; we shouldn’t speak of such things.”

Melodramatic? Probably. But, sadly, far more a reality, and far more prophetic, than that I think at anytime since the birth of our nation that we have ever seen. The Constitution, an afterthought? The overwhelming will of the American people, not even a consideration? This isn’t the temper-tantrums of Lefty children, blinded by Bush Derangement Syndrome; this is a hardcore reality that we have never seen before. Certainly not within my lifetime, within my own generation.

CatsGodot on March 18, 2010 at 3:59 PM

The Hill has the NOs back up to 37 (with leaners).

Undecideds are 49.

Assuming all the leaning yes and nos stick, Pelosi needs 48/49 undecideds or it fails.

I really don’t think it’s a coincidence Democrats are one shy of the kill zone. No one wants to be that vote. I think there’s alot to John Fund’s article. There are plenty of undecideds that are really no’s and don’t want the entire caucus and White House after them. They are saying that to keep them away until the last 72 hours.

Chuck Schick on March 18, 2010 at 4:00 PM

I really don’t think it’s a coincidence Democrats are one shy of the kill zone. No one wants to be that vote. I think there’s alot to John Fund’s article. There are plenty of undecideds that are really no’s and don’t want the entire caucus and White House after them. They are saying that to keep them away until the last 72 hours.

Chuck Schick on March 18, 2010 at 4:00 PM

Maybe the GOP could give them cover in some way… Y’know… for America

Skywise on March 18, 2010 at 4:02 PM

God help us all

MyImamToldMeToDoIt on March 18, 2010 at 4:03 PM

Chuck Schick on March 18, 2010 at 4:00 PM

I wished I had more definitive answers to all of this, but I don’t. The fact that Dems overwhelmingly voted for the use of the slaughter rule is telling. They don’t want to vote at all. It doesn’t mean they don’t support the bill, they just need political cover, and the slaughter rule provides that.

capejasmine on March 18, 2010 at 4:04 PM

These criminal thugs are not even trying to be subtle. This country is terminally ill.

rplat on March 18, 2010 at 3:55 PM

Nope Just Our Congress have you seen their approval rating?

Their corporate masters don’t care what this does to them they just want to turn us upside down and shake the money out of our pockets.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/126809/Obama-Approval-Rating-Lowest-Yet-Congress-Declines.aspx

Americans’ views of President Obama are the most negative since Obama took office last year — 46% approve and 48% disapprove in the latest Gallup Daily three-day average. Meanwhile, Congress’ 16% approval rating is just two points above its all-time low.

Dr Evil on March 18, 2010 at 4:06 PM

Has the House Parliamentarian ruled on the Slaughter rule?

ConservativeTony on March 18, 2010 at 3:44 PM

I don’t know. But the White House just annouonced he’s been appointed the new US Ambassador to Fiji.

sdd on March 18, 2010 at 4:07 PM

I’m not sure how to respond to may of the post here that pretend that “deemed” to pass is something new. Much of this “Oh your violating the Constitution” talk would seem more sincere if the same standards had been applied to republican decisions to use the rule over 100 times. No offense intended but it sounds like the only standard many of you have is which party pulls the stunt.

If your going to make this kinds of complaints at least be consistent. That goes for Democrats and Republicans, god I’ve come to hate the two party system.

NextGen on March 18, 2010 at 4:07 PM

Can Americans win this fight? It’s not over yet, but we’re getting down to the make-or-break moment. And if Nancy Pelosi calls for a vote this weekend, I’d have to assume she thinks she has the votes.

Despite all the speculation (mine included as of this moment), and trying to remain optimistic, it appears as though this debacle will get passed.

That being said, talk about the imminent fall of our country, civil war, States leaving the Union, is nothing but nonsense.

We have a mechanism that has served us well up to this point. Let’s use the voting machine to make the necessary changes to our government.

Not the type to wish time to pass quicker than it already does, but November can not come soon enough.

rukiddingme on March 18, 2010 at 4:07 PM

No, “tar and feathers” wasn’t it. It may have been that I changed Mitch McConnell’s first name to something that I think is more fitting. It starts with a “b”. I left it out of my last post and it went through.

tigerlily on March 18, 2010 at 3:56 PM

All it means is Allah has to personally look at your comment before it posts.

csdeven on March 18, 2010 at 4:09 PM

I’m not sure how to respond to may of the post here that pretend that “deemed” to pass is something new. Much of this “Oh your violating the Constitution” talk would seem more sincere if the same standards had been applied to republican decisions to use the rule over 100 times. No offense intended but it sounds like the only standard many of you have is which party pulls the stunt.

If your going to make this kinds of complaints at least be consistent. That goes for Democrats and Republicans, god I’ve come to hate the two party system.

NextGen on March 18, 2010 at 4:07 PM

Perhaps, being the enlightened poster you are, you could cite when the deem rule was used by Republicans.

Specifically, when the deem rule was used to deem a Senate Bill passed without voting on it.

(I’ll save you your leftist hand wringing, the answer is, it never has… it was only used to amend already voted on bills)

Skywise on March 18, 2010 at 4:10 PM

NextGen on March 18, 2010 at 4:07 PM

Nice trolling, but it’s been done and every point you brought up, shot down. Might want to listen to some news or talk radio once in a while. 4/10. Might read again, not but likely.

CatsGodot on March 18, 2010 at 4:10 PM

DO.NOT.GIVE.UP! Pray…..

sicoit on March 18, 2010 at 3:40 PM

Also, from New American Bible, Daniel 3: 41-45

“… we fear you and we pray to you.
Do not let us be put to shame,
but deal with us in your kindness and great mercy.
Deliver us by your wonders,
and bring glory to your name, O Lord:
Let all those be routed
who inflict evils on your servants;
Let them be shamed and powerless,
and their strength be broken;
Let them know that you alone are the Lord God,
glorious over the whole world.

PRAY PRAY PRAY

BitterClinger on March 18, 2010 at 4:11 PM

How much do you all want to bet that the concept of following “procedures” that these demrat bastards are so lax about will be suddenly too important to circumvent when we try to get medical services or stand in front of the death panels?

csdeven on March 18, 2010 at 4:13 PM

Congress’ 16% approval rating is just two points above its all-time low.

Why so low? Because they obviously don’t work for us…but we can change that next November.

John McCain on Neil Cavuto St Patrick’s Day

CAVUTO: You know, there’s also — I haven’t seen the final draft and whatever the CBO is scoring. I have no idea what it is, and — but we’re told that in the writing here is that you can’t rescind, reverse or chop this up. In other words, when it goes into law, if it were to go into law, then future Congresses, assuming Republicans gain seats, some even insist – - your colleague John Boehner in the House says there’s a good shot Republicans get control of the House — who knows — but that they can’t dismantle it, it’s etched in stone.

Is that true?

MCCAIN: No, it’s not true.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,589619,00.html

Dr Evil on March 18, 2010 at 4:15 PM

We have a mechanism that has served us well up to this point. Let’s use the voting machine to make the necessary changes to our government.

Not the type to wish time to pass quicker than it already does, but November can not come soon enough.

rukiddingme on March 18, 2010 at 4:07 PM

Remember when Social Security got repealed? yeah… that was a good day.
Medicare?
Income Tax?

Entitlements don’t get repealed.
They’re nationalizing health care. The only way to reverse this “through the process” is to privatize it and as soon as you try, the leftists will scream that you’re MURDERING PEOPLE.

Try to get a vote through that.

Skywise on March 18, 2010 at 4:16 PM

Perhaps, being the enlightened poster you are, you could cite when the deem rule was used by Republicans.

Specifically, when the deem rule was used to deem a Senate Bill passed without voting on it.

(I’ll save you your leftist hand wringing, the answer is, it never has… it was only used to amend already voted on bills)

Some of you really should get your news from more than once source. Newt used this rule almost 25% of the time.

Skywise on March 18, 2010 at 4:10 PM

When Republicans took power in 1995, they soon lost their aversion to self-executing rules and proceeded to set new records under Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.). [Naturally, Gingrich can now be seen everywhere on cable television complaining about such mischief.] There were 38 and 52 self-executing rules in the 104th and 105th Congresses (1995-1998), making up 25 percent and 35 percent of all rules, respectively. Under Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) there were 40, 42 and 30 self-executing rules in the 106th, 107th and 108th Congresses (22 percent, 37 percent and 22 percent, respectively). Thus far in the 109th Congress, self-executing rules make up about 16 percent of all rules.

NextGen on March 18, 2010 at 4:17 PM

Skywise on March 18, 2010 at 4:10 PM

Exactly! And it’s my understanding, that when this was used, they were bipartisan efforts, and on small things. Not a government take over of health care in this country.And certainly not when a majority of Americans were screaming loud, and clear….WE DON’T WANT THIS!!!

capejasmine on March 18, 2010 at 4:17 PM

BitterClinger on March 18, 2010 at 4:11 PM

AMEN AMEN AMEN. We can’t forget Who is really in charge.;-)

sicoit on March 18, 2010 at 4:20 PM

PRAY PRAY PRAY

BitterClinger on March 18, 2010 at 4:11 PM

That’s always good advice, and while people are praying they should be calling their “Representatives” who will have this stain like a scarlet letter on them if it does get passed deemed.

Which actually makes voting next November a lot easier.

The House vote on the Slaughter Solution: Update: Constitution-butchers prevail, 222-203; Roll call vote added; Calling out Dems Altmire, Lynch

take note of who voted for “Slaughter House Rule” mark your calendars and vote accordingly next November.

Dr Evil on March 18, 2010 at 4:20 PM

Here is why the United States is in the predicament it is now.

There is a game called rock, paper, and scissors.

The ROCK are Obama and the Dems, the PAPER are Sarah Palin and other conservatives with ideals and principles, and the SCISSORS are the RINO’s and most GOP members of Congress.

The way the game works-PAPER beats ROCK-thus the reason Palin has been able to undermine and delay Obama and his agenda-but SCISSORS defeats ROCK-helping Obama by neutralizing the impact of Palin, other conservatives and the Tea Party movement, and ROCK always tops SCISSORS, thus allowing Obama and the Dems to ultimately succeed.

The only way our side can ever win is if the RINO’s and GOP members of Congress unite with PAPER and forsake being SCISSORS.

technopeasant on March 18, 2010 at 4:22 PM

when this was used, they were bipartisan efforts, and on small things. Not a government take over of health care in this country.And certainly not when a majority of Americans were screaming loud, and clear….WE DON’T WANT THIS!!!

capejasmine on March 18, 2010 at 4:17 P

Now that is a fair argument, should it be used in this situation? I wasn’t endorsing it’s use, heck I want people to be on record one way or another. My only point was that to scream that it’s illegal *after* it’s been used so often is kinda of closing the barn door after the horse it out.

Again, my larger point was be consistent and don’t let which party is doing something define it’s legality.

NextGen on March 18, 2010 at 4:23 PM

Am I the only ones that want these tools in Congress prosecuted for even attempting this, let alone carrying it out?

Go On Nan “Open Pandora’s Box” I am sure there is something in there – that’s going to bite back.

Dr Evil on March 18, 2010 at 4:24 PM

Dr Evil on March 18, 2010 at 4:20 PM

1. Call reps – check
2. Take note of who voted for “SHR” – check
3. Mark your calendars – check
4. Vote accordingly next November – open
5. PRAY PRAY PRAY – CHECK

;-)

sicoit on March 18, 2010 at 4:24 PM

When Republicans took power in 1995, they soon lost their aversion to self-executing rules and proceeded to set new records under Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.). [Naturally, Gingrich can now be seen everywhere on cable television complaining about such mischief.] There were 38 and 52 self-executing rules in the 104th and 105th Congresses (1995-1998), making up 25 percent and 35 percent of all rules, respectively. Under Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) there were 40, 42 and 30 self-executing rules in the 106th, 107th and 108th Congresses (22 percent, 37 percent and 22 percent, respectively). Thus far in the 109th Congress, self-executing rules make up about 16 percent of all rules.

NextGen on March 18, 2010 at 4:17 PM

That’s fascinating… Now, how many times was the self-executing rule used in lieu of an actual vote to pass a bill into law.

Answer NONE.

How many times were those self-executing rules used to amend ALREADY PASSED BILLS (as I pointed out, but you went and wrung your hands anyway because that’s the purpose of the self-executing rule…), ALL of them.

Now… perhaps you can tell me who filed a lawsuit against Republicans use of the self-executing rule and claimed it was unconstitutional and unethical?

Nancy Pelosi and Louise Slaughter.

Got any repartee now?

Skywise on March 18, 2010 at 4:24 PM

when the deem rule was used to deem a Senate Bill passed without voting on it.

Some of you really should get your news from more than once source. Newt used this rule almost 25% of the time.

NextGen on March 18, 2010 at 4:17 PM

And perhaps you can take a course in reading comprehension?

When, previously, has the “self-executing rule” been used to deem a Senate bill passed, without a vote?

Also, when you cut-and-paste, a link would help your credibility.

notropis on March 18, 2010 at 4:25 PM

Now… perhaps you can tell me who filed a lawsuit against Republicans use of the self-executing rule and claimed it was unconstitutional and unethical?

Nancy Pelosi and Louise Slaughter.

Got any repartee now?

Skywise on March 18, 2010 at 4:24 PM

Thank you, I was hoping you would get to this fact. Yes you are quite correct, by the way how did that turn out?

Yep, it turned out in favor of the republicans, perfectly legal.

See we agree!

Not liking it does not make it illegal, sorry.

NextGen on March 18, 2010 at 4:28 PM

Again, my larger point was be consistent and don’t let which party is doing something define it’s legality.

NextGen on March

The Supreme Court just over turned a 100 year law….

In 1907, Congress passed the Tillman Act that banned direct contributions by corporations to federal candidates – there was no ban on independent political expenditures in the law. “Contributions” are funds given directly to candidates for their election campaigns; independent expenditures are funds spent by third parties on things like political advertisements without any coordination with the candidate.

There are 3 branches of Government if a suit is filed to decide the “Constitutionality” of the Slaughter Rule, and it’s found Unconstitutional then it would be illegal. In turn it’s application for example used to pass Obamacare would be thrown out- Null Void.

Dr Evil on March 18, 2010 at 4:30 PM

NextGen on March 18, 2010 at 4:23 PM

I don’t condone it’s use in any case. The reason the founding fathers set things up as they did, was to avoid this. It forced government to stay small. However it was used, but in bipartisan fashion.

But…to use it now, on something so large, and so controversial, is wrong in so many ways, and they know it. This isn’t about health care…this is about expanding government immensely, and we are against that. If this passes, it will be far worse than I think we can imagine. Especially when it’s apparent that most of the dems don’t know a thing about dollars, and cents, or sense for that matter.

They will render a good majority of the tax payers in this country to poverty status…and still force more taxes on us. We’re heading back to the days of Tyrants, and peasants with nothing in between.

capejasmine on March 18, 2010 at 4:30 PM

Am I the only ones that want these tools in Congress prosecuted for even attempting this, let alone carrying it out?

Go On Nan “Open Pandora’s Box” I am sure there is something in there – that’s going to bite back.

Dr Evil on March 18, 2010 at 4:24 PM

Yes, you are. I, for one, am totally open to waiting until November before acting. After all, I also believe the surest way to stop a fire is to sit around and pray for rain, rather than using a fire extinguisher.

CatsGodot on March 18, 2010 at 4:31 PM

All the screaming, yelling and gnashing of teeth won’t change the fact. The rule is legal and that won’t change. Please continue to tilt at windmills if it gives a sense of accomplishment but in the end, it won’t change. I’m not saying the bill will pass, only that the use will stand up (if they choose that route)as legal. Again, back to my original point, be consistent.

NextGen on March 18, 2010 at 4:31 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3