Two More Dems (announce opposition to ObamaCare - "no" votes up to 31...need 10 more)

National Review ^ | November 7, 2009 | Robert Costa

[GOPJ]

The blue dogs will let it pass by one vote.

You might be right - they'll let those in the tightest races opt out - so they can be re-elected.

[randita]

Bart Stupak is on record (as of last week) as saying he would vote against if it included funding for abortion. Anyone know where he stands today?

[dfc1]

I went to school with Bart Gordon and I don’t trust him. He might still change his mind again.

http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NjY4NjNmYTI1ZGYxYmU1YWNhYmJiYTg3MzZmZTRlYTI=

[CaliforniaCon]

RE: “EMAIL BLUE DOGS- just copy and past and send to ALL the Blue dogs at once !!!!”

*****

Already did that — only about 5 or 6 came back undeliverable. Everybody keep e-mailing. Phoning is impossible — I couldn’t get thru and tried for two hours straight.

[mware]

Conyers who said he didn’t have time to read the bill and even if he did he would not understand it.

[mwl8787]

No, indeed. You guys need to read the blog Doctor Doctor over at National Review to stay current. The vote on Stupak is not assured either - if it fails, Blue Dogs will have their escape hatch. If Stupak passes, as is likely, it causes more problems for the RATS down the road.

[No Left Turn]

Do the blue dogs really think that letting this thing slip through by a vote will spare them in the next election, even those who already voted for cap and trade? The simple message is that the Democrats can't be trusted to run all parts of government, and the blue dogs voted Pelosi in as speaker. Game, set, and match. They should be fighting like dogs to ensure this thing doesn't pass.

The next several months will be spent poring over this bill and telling Americans how screwed they are thanks to the Democrats.

[Republic of Texas]

The Dems would have made sure it passed by one vote even with Hoffman. It’s going to pass, and they are going to provide cover for as many Blue Dogs as possible. It’s not a Republic any more. Sorry Ben, we couldn’t keep it.

[St. Louis Conservative]

Were you expecting anything different?

[alloysteel]

This is how it must have felt back in 1933, when elements of the New Deal were being rammed through, with practically no debate.

Of course, a lot of that legislation was found later to be unConstitutional, by the Supreme Court, a fate this POS legislation would probably not suffer today.

[Dr. Bogus Pachysandra]

Maybe she “specks” English as a second language? :)

I’m keeping my fingers and toes crossed!

[staten island ny]

As much as I want this to fail the upside is huge for 2010. The Senate will punt this turkey into never land, but the damage will be done to all those who are vulnerable.

[loungeSerf]

If Stupak passes, as is likely, it causes more problems for the RATS down the road.

If Stupak passes, how does it cause more problems down the road? If the leadership removes Stupak in conference the post-conference final vote would still be easier to pass for the leadership, I would think. I could be missing something.

[mware]

Yeah, I saw it after I posted.

Damn, I am so angry I can't spell right.

[HarleyD]

I agree but we need to make a point that this is THEIR idea and THEIR party. They did nothing to oppose it.

[Krodg]

I donated from Ohio (twice) and I just couldn’t figure out why he quit when he did.

[moondoggie]

Even if this passes, it will end up in the garbage because the Senate's version won't look anything like this bill.

But we need to keep track of some of the more outrageous things some of the House Dems put in this monstrocity which could still come back to bite them in the butts!

[combat_boots]

I now understand the pure hatred my folks felt for FDR.

[lt.america]

Agree. This does not survive in the senate. Especially if they aren’t taking it up until 2010.

[Nervous Tick]

Say... does anyone recall those wascally House Wepubwicans and their own precious Prescription Drug Health Care Boondoggle?

“The bill was introduced in the House of Representatives early on June 25, 2003 as H.R. 1, sponsored by Speaker Dennis Hastert. All that day and the next the bill was debated, and it was apparent that the bill would be very divisive. In the early morning of June 27, a floor vote was taken. After the initial electronic vote, the count stood at 214 yeas, 218 nays.

Three Republican representatives then changed their votes. One opponent of the bill, Ernest J. Istook, Jr. (R-OK-5), changed his vote to “present” upon being told that C.W. Bill Young (R-FL-10), who was absent due to a death in the family, would have voted “aye” if he had been present. Next, Republicans Butch Otter (ID-1) and Jo Ann Emerson (MO-8) switched their vote to “aye” under pressure from the party leadership. The bill passed by one vote, 216-215.”

Congress, as an organization, is a nest of evil snakes. On BOTH sides of the aisle. It’s quite true the ‘Rats are vermin for this current trampling of our constitutional rights, but there were quite a few vermin on the other side of the aisle that set the big-government tone for this debacle six years ago — and in very nearly the exact same way.

The drama in the House tonight will very likely unfold in a similar fashion, IMO.

I hate them all. Particularly the ‘Rats, but there’s blood on the hands of the other side too. I haven’t done a count, but congress being the retirement home that it is, I’d bet that 90% of those (R) voting today were present back then for this debacle, and quite a few of them voted against the Constitution and the taxpayer back then.