Here you go, Cao. I believe you are due 30 of these.
Posted on 11/07/2009 10:49:54 PM PST by Poparhoid
THE REPUBLICAN THAT VOTED WITH OBAMA-PELOSI-REID AND THE REST OF THE DEMOCRAT COMMUNIST PARTY
* Posted by gary on November 8, 2009 at 1:44am in General, Uncategorized Town Hall * Add as Friend View Discussions
JUST LIKE COMMUNIST VIETNAM HE CAST HIS VOTE WITH THE AMERICAN COMMUNIST
A Prized Republican on the Ropes
Joseph Cao was hailed six months ago as the future of the GOP. Yesterday, he voted to rebuke Joe Wilson. Can the most endangered Republican in the House survive? By Benjamin Sarlin.
As he made his way to the podium to give his health-care speech last Wednesday—a speech that would draw boos from Republican lawmakers, trigger Joe Wilson’s now-notorious outburst, and eventually be likened to Nazism by angry protesters—President Obama was able to find at least one friendly Republican face in the crowd. “I love this guy!” Obama announced to Republicans gathered nearby as he shook hands with Rep. Joseph Cao (R-LA).
The president had plenty of reasons to praise the freshman representative from New Orleans. On issues large and small, Cao has been among the most White House-friendly Republican politicians in the country. There is a very real possibility that he will be the only member of his party to jump ship and support the president’s health-care plan.
“We have to be approachable to the average American family,” GOP Rep. Joseph Cao says of the Republican Party. “Unfortunately, I don’t believe our message has been that. It’s been somewhat anti-immigrant, it’s been oftentimes too pro-business and anti-family.”
Will he cop to being Obama’s favorite Republican? “I'm looking for real solutions to America's problems and my politics has never been partisan,” Cao said. In other words, he’s not running from the label.
Cao’s willingness to play ball with the White House has a lot to do with his status as the most vulnerable incumbent of any party in 2010.
Cao won his seat in December 2008 in a majority African-American district that had not elected a Republican since 1890—thanks to a serious scandal. The incumbent he defeated, William Jefferson, had been indicted for a litany of corruption charges, leading many Democrats to either stay home or cross party lines in protest. In addition, the decisive vote was not held on the same day as the presidential election—meaning Obama wasn’t the ticket to boost turnout.
House Minority Leader John Boehner distributed a memo entitled "The Future is Cao" while Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell touted Cao's election in a January speech as a sign that "a revival is already taking place" for the party.
Cao, for his part, seems to at least agree that the party is in need of a new look.
“I would hope that...if the future truly is Cao, then we have to be approachable to minorities,” he said. “We have to be approachable to the average American family. We have to be approachable to the average American. Unfortunately, I don't believe our message has been that. It's been somewhat anti-immigrant, it's been oftentimes too pro-business and anti-family.”
Despite their early enthusiasm, Republican leaders seem to have largely forgotten about Cao as the party has taken a sharp turn to the right, waging all-out partisan warfare over health care and rising up in opposition to Hispanic Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor—in ways that didn’t help the pro-minority message. Despite his criticisms of the party, Cao has remained upbeat about the GOP. He doesn’t buy into the notion that the Republican brand has become defined by its more extreme element—or that its leadership was undermining health-care reform to score political points.
“I think it’s simply media hype,” Cao said. “At the end of the day I can’t think of one congressman that will obstruct this whole process simply for the cause of obstructing it.”
Nonetheless, there’s an undeniable tension between Cao's Republican loyalties and his district’s Democratic leanings—which makes him an unpredictable vote. He backed an expansion of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program, voted for new hate-crime legislation, and says he would have supported the Troubled Asset Relief Program had he been in office when it came to a vote. But he opposed Obama's signature legislation, the stimulus package, a vote that could come back to haunt him in 2010.
The politics of the health-care debate are tricky for him. Cao says he is “leaning toward supporting the [administration’s] bill,” though he hopes it will include stronger language prohibiting funds from going to abortion and abandon an employer mandate to provide health care.
He’s also been careful to put distance between himself and his party’s conservative wing at some key moments. This month, he took to the House floor to defend Obama's speech to schoolchildren after widespread hysteria from conservative media figures and politicians alike who claimed the event was socialist “indoctrination.”
“I was shocked and I believe that it was uncalled for,” Cao said of the protests. “The office of the president must have the respect of not only members of Congress, but of the people.”
Hoping to win over his African-American constituents, Cao has sought membership in the Congressional Black Caucus. But like other non-black members who have attempted to join, he's yet to be accepted.
“They said I'm always welcome to join the Black Caucus but obviously there might be some meetings where I cannot attend. But I have not made my decision whether or not to continue the push to be a member,” he said.
GOP leaders have exerted pressure on him to toe the party line, but ultimately they understand his unique situation, Cao said. Party independence is the key to the Cao “brand”—an asset he hopes will propel him to another surprise victory next November. He believes his “chances are very good,” despite being panned by political analysts. But the competition is already lining up: State Democratic Reps. Cedric Richmond and Juan LaFonta have announced plans to seek the seat.
“I believe that the people of the district see me as a strong leader, a leader that they can trust,” Cao told The Daily Beast. “I believe that people are coming around from seeing me as simply just another Republican.”
what a suckup coward..he is in for the money
Payback time is coming Cao.
I think that Tea Party members should remind him that his vote was cowardly.
It appears that he Cao-Tau to Obama.
This guy will be the next “Profile in Courage” winner.
When Cao was elected, a lot of folks thought he was the best thing since sliced bread, I warned them to hold off on judgment until he started to vote. He was already giving off warning signs throughout the year that he wasn’t with us, and this was the crowning vote.
I think he honestly believes he has a shot at winning reelection next year by moving far-left. As far as I’m concerned now, he’s given comfort to the Democrats to shove a monstrosity and abomination down our throats, and his reelection now no longer matters to me. He could’ve voted the right way and preserved his viability for another LA office after he loses reelection next year, stood on principle, but now he will lose anyway because Republicans won’t support him, and the Dems will have no use for him, preferring a Black Dem in this seat, so he just destroyed his own political future either way. What a shame.
>> This guy will be the next “Profile in Courage” winner.
A distraction for the tyranny.
Here you go, Cao. I believe you are due 30 of these.
One by one the RINOs continue to fall by the wayside.
Brick him
He really is clueless on conservatism and “the average American family”.
He is however in the know about all things Democrat.
A quick witted FR poster on another thread regarding this topic said: ....”Ciao Cao”.
CQ rates Cao as very vulnerable next year. He is one Republican I will not be sorry to see go.
I am actually getting fund raiser letters from him. I am not in his state. In these letters he is actually claiming to be some kind of conservative and against Pelosi’s agenda! What a laugh. Not only would he never get a penny from me but I would not give to the NRCC now.
He represents a majority African American district that normally votes Democrat. His votes undoubtedly reflect the views and desires of his constituents. If he does not vote for their interests when the major bills come to vote, he will lose his bid for reelection.
News reports indicate he withheld his vote until it was clear the Democrats had the majority they needed to pass the legislation. One could infer he was prepared to vote against the bill if his vote would have changed the outcome.
Unfortunately we do not have a color blind society. African American majority districts have been gerrymandered throughout the country. Given the predisposition of African Americans to vote in a block for race and the Democrat party it is nearly impossible for a non African American Republican to be elected to office in these districts. If the Republican party is to have any chance of capturing more minority voters it must take advantage of these opportunities, recognizing to preserve the seat the representative will have to serve his/her constituents. I’d rather have an Republican of any race who votes conservative 20% of the time representing this district than a Democrat of any race who votes far left 100% of the time. The 20% is better than nothing and over time we have the open up the minds of the voters in that district to new ideas.
The Democrats are capturing “white” southern districts with their blue dog strategy. They don’t get 100% allegiance from these representatives but they do get enough support on key votes to pass the critical elements of their agenda as we’ve just seen.
To return to majority status, Republicans will have to capture some moderate to left leaning districts. We cannot win and capture those districts without representing the wishes of those voters.
Recognize today the Republicans have no leadership and are coming across to the public as having no ideas. They are playing defense and showing up as the party of “no”. The party lost the elections of 2006 and 2008 because it gave the people nothing to vote “for” and they had been fiscally irresponsible during the time they had majorities in Congress. The Democrats came to power with a promise of “change” and the public responded to that agenda, giving the Dems large majorities in the legislature as well as the Presidency. Until the Republicans move from the party of “no” to a positive message, we have no chance to shift the balance of power. While a Republican alternative health care plan was defeated yesterday, who knew anything about it?
While I’m disappointed Cao didn’t stand with the rest of the party on this vote, I don’t blame him. Had he voted no on principle, he would have assured his loss in the next election and received nothing in return. This way, he voted with his constituents as they elected him to do. He can fight his opponent with a record of serving his constituents without the corruption of his predecessor. He will have given them reasons to vote for him rather than against him. A Congressman actually representing the preferences of his district. What a novel concept!
He represents a majority African American district that normally votes Democrat. His votes undoubtedly reflect the views and desires of his constituents. If he does not vote for their interests when the major bills come to vote, he will lose his bid for reelection.
News reports indicate he withheld his vote until it was clear the Democrats had the majority they needed to pass the legislation. One could infer he was prepared to vote against the bill if his vote would have changed the outcome.
Unfortunately we do not have a color blind society. African American majority districts have been gerrymandered throughout the country. Given the predisposition of African Americans to vote in a block for race and the Democrat party it is nearly impossible for a non African American Republican to be elected to office in these districts. If the Republican party is to have any chance of capturing more minority voters it must take advantage of these opportunities, recognizing to preserve the seat the representative will have to serve his/her constituents. I’d rather have an Republican of any race who votes conservative 20% of the time representing this district than a Democrat of any race who votes far left 100% of the time. The 20% is better than nothing and over time we have the open up the minds of the voters in that district to new ideas.
The Democrats are capturing “white” southern districts with their blue dog strategy. They don’t get 100% allegiance from these representatives but they do get enough support on key votes to pass the critical elements of their agenda as we’ve just seen.
To return to majority status, Republicans will have to capture some moderate to left leaning districts. We cannot win and capture those districts without representing the wishes of those voters.
Recognize today the Republicans have no leadership and are coming across to the public as having no ideas. They are playing defense and showing up as the party of “no”. The party lost the elections of 2006 and 2008 because it gave the people nothing to vote “for” and they had been fiscally irresponsible during the time they had majorities in Congress. The Democrats came to power with a promise of “change” and the public responded to that agenda, giving the Dems large majorities in the legislature as well as the Presidency. Until the Republicans move from the party of “no” to a positive message, we have no chance to shift the balance of power. While a Republican alternative health care plan was defeated yesterday, who knew anything about it?
While I’m disappointed Cao didn’t stand with the rest of the party on this vote, I don’t blame him. Had he voted no on principle, he would have assured his loss in the next election and received nothing in return. This way, he voted with his constituents as they elected him to do. He can fight his opponent with a record of serving his constituents without the corruption of his predecessor. He will have given them reasons to vote for him rather than against him. A Congressman actually representing the preferences of his district. What a novel concept!
He will have given them reasons to vote for him rather than against him. A Congressman actually representing the preferences of his district. What a novel concept!
________________________________________________________
Now lets see if Cao can count on his supporters to pay for his next election. Since they pay no taxes, I bet they are good for about three or four hundred dollars. NO MONEY FROM THE GOP!
this cat must go.
I wonder if this idiot knows what a black sheep is ?
What if your choice was a Republican who votes conservative 20% of the time vs. a Democrat who votes conservative 80% of the time?
The 20% is better than nothing and over time we have the open up the minds of the voters in that district to new ideas.
Those 20 percenters are called RINOs and they arent good for anything except for losing to Democrats. And they never open the minds of anyone to vote Republican much less convince some to accept some or any conservative ideas.
we have so many Pub haters out here that its like the threads on rape......the victim is the first to be blamed, questioned, ridiculed,investigated....
and the perp just sits there twiddling his thumbs...
we attack a generally conservative pub over his vote yet we leave the 217 ratholes to sit there twiddling their thumbs....
people better understand that our system of govt. is set up for only TWO parties...and if you are constantly attacking the one party its having a damaging effect on that party, and that party is the ONLY one that can lead us away from communism.....
put the attacks where they belong...on the 217 rats...
As I remember, Joseph Cao was educated to be a priest before he changed his mind and got married. The Catholic Church has sent mixed signals about this bill — trumpeting the “need” for healthcare reform while lamenting the provisons for taxpayer funded abortions contained within the Bill. I suspect that this has a lot to do with Cao’s vote.
Once the taxpayer paid abortion measures were removed, there was no reason for Cao to oppose the Bill. I’m sure that he saw it as a way to help people. I don’t agree with that, but I suspect that is how he saw it.
Mr. Cao should watch to see how fast those abortion clauses and put right back into thel Bill in conference.
ARE put right back in.
1 republican is not bi-partisan....the gop should let this cat know that NO, (none) GOP funds will be coming to him...get out and join the demenies
Can’t blame this guy or even democraps for communizing the country, I can blame people that stayed home over the past few election cycles because they felt the republicans weren’t pure enough to vote for.
Elections have consequences, one of which is this type of legislation. Next will be Cap and Tax and if they maintain enough of a majority, the next few rounds of “spendulus” will make the first look like a cup of coffee.
We have nobody to blame but the holier than thou people would couldn’t hold their noses and vote for McCain and other Republicans. Maybe this will be a lesson.
He could have voted “present” like his constiuents’ hero was wont to do.
Yeah Yeah yeah...the same strategy has given us losses in both houses.
Just WHAT has he actually DEFEATED?
How have his ‘brave conservative stands against Nancy Pelosi’s agenda’ done a thing to further freedom from these fascist euro loving socialists except to be a member with R after his name and not a very reliable one at that?
“Cao, R-La. Cao has tried to convince his overwhelmingly Democratic constituency that he is an independent, moderate Republican. Congressional Quarterly found that through August, Cao sided with most Republican colleagues against most Democrats on just 58 percent of party-line votes, the lowest “party unity” score among GOP Members.” [Yahoo News]
Screw him and the horse he rode in on.
Principles have to mean something or we are certainly doomed. We may already be doomed,,,,but thats another post.
.....
A Congressman actually representing the preferences of his district. What a novel concept!
Bad post Soul.
Several points.
A)Screw what they may think, they're wrong. Most of them don't think at all or else they wouldn't vote heavily democrat. Harsh? True. Sheeple need conservative representatives to protect them from their own MSM fueled ignorance.
B)It's most certainly NOT in their "interest" that this passes. This bill would lead to heath care rationing for the poor. Only the insurance companies that own the DNC benefit from this.
C)Most of the 49% of people in the low turnout election that actually voted for Cao likely do not support this and are not happy with this vote.
D)He's not going to win reelection anyway. If he did it wouldn't be by voting identically to a democrat. Urban voters need an alternative to liberalism. Me to RINOism is pointless and will never succeed in electing Republicans in heavily rat areas.
Now it's possible several rat nay votes here were "catch and release" meaning if Pelosi had needed their votes she would have gotten them.
Assuming there were none (which is likely not true, perhaps Cao was catch and release for the GOP side) then we failed stopping this by 3 votes.
1 lost NY special election (the rat that succeeded Gillibrand voted nay, the newly elected Owens voted yay), 1 stolen Ohio seat in 2008 and 1 Cao. Or alternatively 1 Rosanna Pulido, David Harmer, and Betty Chu away (more lost special elections all in dem districts, only Harmer got major support and it was too little too late). Boo. GOP allowed the rats to steal a few too many seats.
Also if Cao votes “his district’s preference” on everything that means he’d have to vote for Pelosi as Speaker.
I think we are focusing why too much on this one Republican. The objective of the Dems was to get socialized medicine passed. Yeah, this guy needs to taken to the woodshed but we now need to focus on getting as many Democrats out of office as possible in 2010. Let’s focus on who the true enemy to this nation is.
Impy’s points are all good ones. The most important one from a practical, selfish perspective, which is the reason Cao voted as he did, is that a rep should vote thinking of the voters he’ll face the next election, not the time before. Cao has no chance of winning reelection in that district (unless somehow William Jefferson wins tge Democrat nomination from prison, and even then Cao may lose), and his next real race, assuming tgat he wishes to stay in politics, will be before much more conservative voters.
Look at it this way: Democrat Congressman Artur Davis represents a black-majority district in Alabama, and has until recently had a reflexively liberal voting record, but Davis voted for Stupak-Pitts and against passage of Obamacare despite being from a district very similar demographically to Cao’s. Why was that? Because Davis is running for governor, and voting like a typical urban liberal would make him unelectable statewide.
Cao supporting Obamacare won’t increase his odds of reelection in the LA-02 at all and kill any chance he had of being elected statewide.
I believe Nazi P had the votes or she would not have risked the bill. Despise tho I do, she does know how to play the game.
Cao lets them crow that it was “bipartisan”, because the stupid among us don’t bother to do more than scan headlines. If he is going to vote with the dumbles, it doesn’t matter one whit that ooooo, he is a wepublican.
I am disgusted.
I’m willing to cut him some slack on most votes, but this was a make-or-break vote for our nation’s history.
What you say is true, we should tolerate dissent on economic issues and a few others from Cao. I didn’t even think his vote against Joe Wilson was a big deal. But this vote was different. It’s a full-scale takeover of the medical care system and a major part of our private lives. He should have known better.
Give us a yell when they actually start doing what you claim they are doing.
However, Impy's also right that if Cao voted “his district’s preference” on everything that means he’d have to vote for Pelosi as Speaker. I don't know his ACU rating since it's his first year in office, but I'd say it's close to 65% conservative as compared to Kirk's 40%. I would certainly guess Cao's overall record is to the right of the "average" voter in his district.
Cao had been saying for weeks that although his constituents want universal health care, he can't in good conscience vote for any legislation that would fund abortion. The Catholic church applauded him for that. Then the Stupak amendment passed, and it gave pro-life Democrats and Cao "cover" to vote for this bill like their liberal constituents demanded. The thing to watch for is whether abortion funding gets put back into the bill during conference committee (that's assuming the Senate passes the bill anyway, though Joe LIEberman and Lindsey Graham say it will never make it thur the Senate). If the bill comes back the House with the Senate version, Cao and the pro-life Dems will have to vote against.
Personally if I was in Cao's shoes and represented a super liberal moonbat district that always elects commies, I don't think I'd support universal health care but I'd probably lay low during major legislation up for a vote during my freshman term (this bill would be a good excuse to be on a "fact finding" mission about "AIDS relief"). If he somehow managed to survive re-election, he probably won't be secure in Congress enough to vocally oppose his constituency on major bills until 3 or 4 terms into office. Bottom line is every time he puts his neck out there for the GOP he's giving his RAT oppositon ammo to use against him in the next election.
Bottom line is yes, cowardly act by Cao, but he's still 10X better than a full fledged moonbat in that district and as the Republican represented the most lopsided district in the country (no Republican has won that seat since the 1870s!) I understand the problems he has dealing with a moonbat constituency constantly attacking him.
In 2010, a Repbulican should be able to defeat Congresswoman Melissa Bean, of Illinois’ 8th District. Phil Crane, a conservative, had that seat for 35 years. The majority of the state legislators, in that district, are Republicans.
Very good point, Phil. If we're going to look at "punishing" anyone for voting in favor of Obamacare, the first priority should be the RATs in formerly GOP held seats that voted for it. People forget that as recently as 6 years ago we had a 11-9 GOP majority delegation from Illinois in Congress. Bean, Foster, and Halvenson all represent formerly GOP held seats, and all three voted in favor of Obamacare.
There have been some excellent GOP recruits in Foster and Halvenson's district. Bean could finally face a real challenger too, as opposed to the failed strategy of running bored zillionaires "from the private sector" the GOP has employed the last two election cycles. One particularly interested candidate running against Bean is Long Grove Mayor Maria Rodriguez. She's lived in the district for 25 years, solid track record as mayor, good conservative positions on all the major issues (2nd amendment, deporting illegals, anti-Obamacare, anti-cap n' trade, etc.), suburban mom, empathic speaker, and spanish-sounding last name will drive the race-baiting RATs nuts. The only BIG negative I see is that apparently she endorsed RINO Mark Kirk in the primary for Senate (and I always see that one as a biggie warning sigh... in much the same way Field is wary of any Republican who supported Romney for President)
http://www.mariarodriguezforcongress.com
Thoughts?
Mayor Maria Rodriguez sounds promising. I’m glad she’s conservative and engaging and I’m willing to let her endorsement of Mark Kirk slide, considering the district. My only concern is that Long Grove only has some 7,000 people, limiting her name I.D., but she still sounds promising.
I understand your position, but there are a number of problems with it. First of all, this was an absolutely horrible bill, it is antithetical to our freedoms. It is about the government’s attempts to nationalize 1/7th of our economy, dangerously Marxist. In supporting this, Cao, who fled a Marxist country ostensibly to find “Freedom”, has voted for something that he sought to escape. It’s offensive in that regard.
Also, pandering left does not earn a Republican anything. It destroys any credibility they have with the GOP base, and they become a useful idiot for the Democrat/Left, and they are then quickly deposed for their (Dems) favored candidate at the next election and are quickly forgotten. Cao could vote 100% liberal and it would NOT save him in this district. So he has now not only assured his defeat (because Republicans will not support him, and Black Dems want a Black Dem), he has killed any political future he has in Louisiana that might’ve been winnable for him (statewide office). He not only disemboweled our freedoms, he slit his own throat. I have no sympathy for someone who does that, he has rightly earned our enmity.
We last held that district from 1889-1891. It was the last GOP held district in the state until Dave Treen won 82 years later in the 3rd (actually, Treen almost beat Hale Boggs in this 2nd).
My first question now when I approach IL politics isn’t “How Conservative are they ?” it is, “Are they a Combiner ?” If they’re a Combiner, I can’t endorse them in good conscience, regardless of how Conservative they claim to be. Being a Combiner tells me you have no problem making common-cause with corruption.
Yeah. McKenna is a conservative. And combine superscum.
Then go door to door and tell her story and show the treason that is taking place in the White House and in the Congress. Those that don’t want to be euthanized by the death panels of Hitler Pelosi et al. may back her.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.