McCain: I don’t see any GOP votes for the stimulus in the Senate

Hot Air ^ | 01/30/2009 | Free America

[Free America52]

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.

[Frantzie]

The RINOs in the party better wake up and NOT vote for O’s nightmare pork-a-thin.

[RobRoy]

If that RINO sez it, there may be no joy in Mudville.

[cripplecreek]

When I hear McCain taking a principled stance I always suspect he’s doing so because the democrats can pass something without his vote.

[rabscuttle385]

The Juan McCain Truth File. "I have great respect for Al Gore." —John McCain, October 2, 2008 FR Keywords: mccaintruthfile, mcqueeg, mcbama Please tag all relevant threads with the aforementioned keywords. This can be a very high-volume ping list at times. To join the ping list: FReepmail rabscuttle385 with the subject line add  mccaintruthfile. (Stop getting pings by sending the subject line drop mccaintruthfile.) Republican Commissar’s Warning: By joining this ping list, you may be subjected to the delusional rants and ramblings of McCainiacs, of "moderate" Republicans, of pragmatic conservatives resigned to voting for the lesser of two Democrats, and of countless GOP shills who simply want to meet a new overlord.

[tcrlaf]

Meanwhile, Stephanapolous JUST was quoted on ABC News, just seconds ago, as saying they will get “At Least” 1 or two Republicans voting FOR it.

[penelopesire]

According to this article a few republican senators already voted for it in committee!!

Some I would not have suspected.

Thad Cochran and Kit Bond!

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/dems-gop-will-pay-political-price-for-stimulus-vote-2009-01-29.html

TIME TO GET ON THE PHONE FOLKS!! SEND FAXES OVER THE WEEKEND!!

[usmcobra]

It’s sad but that is so true.

[Lady GOP]

[Smogger]

I think being hammered for two elections straight was a good wakeup call to the party, who seems to have rebounded from years of largess and are slowly returning to their roots.

Also they are being very smart to pin it on Pelosi and Reed. These two do nothings have nowhere near the popularity of the 0ne, so the GOP should run hard against Congress.

[Smogger]

I think being hammered for two elections straight was a good wakeup call to the party, who seems to have rebounded from years of largess and are slowly returning to their roots.

Also they are being very smart to pin it on Pelosi and Reed. These two do nothings have nowhere near the popularity of the 0ne, so the GOP should run hard against Congress.

[Retired Greyhound]

Yup. I think McLame knows the bill is going to pass.

I’m sure that one of the witches of Maine or Specter will get it thru.

[Sybeck1]

I just called Cochran. Spoke with the girl I spoke with daily on amnesty. She said he wants it to to the full senate. I told her if I wanted someone to vote with Obama, I should have voted for Fleming last November......

[cripplecreek]

I’m sure that one of the witches of Maine or Specter will get it thru.

The democrats should be made to own this disaster 100%. If even one republican votes for it we'll hear nothing but how it passed with bipartisan support.

[Danae]

Quite honestly its the House and Senate, Democrat run for the last three years, that CAUSED the worldwide economic meltdown. You can trace it all to Nancy and Barney, and the quotas imposed on Banks for Sub-Prime Mortgages. It diluted currency and values WORLD WIDE, ALL on Democrats watch, in fact they created it DELIBERATELY to gain power through Crisis.

I hope hell on them and their descendants for 7 times 7 generations.

[Lady GOP]

Here's another lu-lu: Congress wants to spend $600 million more for the federal government to buy new cars. Uncle Sam already spends $3 billion a year on its fleet of 600,000 vehicles. Congress also wants to spend $7 billion for modernizing federal buildings and facilities. The Smithsonian is $83 billion for the earned income credit for people who don't pay income tax. While some of that may be justified to help poorer Americans ride out the recession, they aren't job creators.
As for the promise of accountability, some $54 billion will go to federal programs that the Office of Management and Budget or the Government Accountability Office have already criticized as "ineffective" or unable to pass basic financial audits. These include the Economic Development Administration, the Small Business Administration, the 10 federal job training programs, and many more.
Oh, and don't forget education, which would get $66 billion more. That's more than the entire Education Department spent a mere 10 years ago and is on top of the doubling under President Bush. Some $6 billion of this will subsidize university building projects. If you think the intention here is to help kids learn, the House declares on page 257 that "No recipient . . . shall use such funds to provide financial assistance to students to attend private elementary or secondary schools." Horrors: Some money might go to nonunion teachers.
The larger fiscal issue here is whether this spending bonanza will become part of the annual "budget baseline" that Congress uses as the new floor when calculating how much to increase spending the following year, and into the future. Democrats insist that it will not. But it's hard -- no, impossible -- to believe that Congress will cut spending next year on any of these programs from their new, higher levels. The likelihood is that this allegedly emergency spending will become a permanent addition to federal outlays -- increasing pressure for tax increases in the bargain. Any Blue Dog Democrat who votes for this ought to turn in his "deficit hawk" credentials.

[Lady GOP]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123310466514522309.html

[byteback]

Sounds about right. A bill needs to get out of committee for a floor vote so hopefully this was a procedural vote. Vote it to the floor then vote against it.

[penelopesire]

That sounds ridiculous! The democrats have enough members on every committee to get it out of committe WITHOUT republican votes..do they not?

[penelopesire]

“A bill needs to get out of committee for a floor vote so hopefully this was a procedural vote. Vote it to the floor then vote against it.”

Ok..educate me please. I truly don’t know all of the ends and outs. Don’t they have enough democrats in every committe to pass what-ever they want without republicans? They have a majority.