If The Obamakazis Don't Have The Votes, Does Pelosi Pull Back the Bill?

[paul in cape]

If they are a few votes short, but believe that the country is behind them, wouldn't it make more sense to try to get the votes thru normal procedures? The Obamakazis (don't you just love that word!!) know that their collective gooses are cooked unless they actually have a vote.

[buccaneer81]

Then we start the impeachment proceedings for Obama for gross corruption.

Never going to happen in a million years. Obama could be shown to have committed any heinous act imaginable, but will never be impeached. Why not? Race, my FRiend. Race trumps all.

[kjam22]

Yes.... if they vote then we know it will pass.

[SoCal Pubbie]

If it passes, taxes will rise and businesses will begin laying off employees and dropping their heathcare. The deficit will continue to mount. All this with no discernible benefit to the taxpayer. Republicans will sweep into office in November. Add in a few wars and terrorist strikes, and if Obama’s lucky enough to actually stay in office long enough to run for a second term, he loses in 2012 and the GOP controls Washington even more than the Rats do now. The healthcare scheme ends by Congressional action in 2013 before it ever has a chance to begin.

[Dutch Boy]

I have been thinking about this too. It’s almost like he is intentionally provoking the people into this way of thinking. Obama has done nothing except create chaos since he took office. He is bankrupting us, alienating our allies, and placing communists and marxists in powerful positions. He has all side fighting against each other while he unelected minions quietly dismantle this country from inside the beltway. Chaos causes people to be distracted from the actions of the enemies from within.

I think the only way to avoid an all out revolution is for a massive defeat of the dems in November followed by a very stong willed GOP investigating and convicting those that broke laws. I would start with a forcing the long form BC for Obama.

If the GOP was in charge of at least one house, they should refuse to act on any bill until the long form was released. That would kill any legacy that Obama and his masters could hope for. There is no covering up of a fail that large.

[bigbob]

I can’t see it passing by only one vote. If she can get enough votes to pass, there will be a bunch of others piling-on. Sorta like a firing squad, no one will know who was the one that did the deed.

[kjam22]

Our party has a lot of money. Surely we could have bought 5 yes votes and switched them to “no”... but told them to not announce it. I’m in favor of buying them, because the other side is buying theirs.

[spectre]

"Yes, if they vote then we know it will pass".

Bingo!

Because, my fellow Dissidents, if they don't have the votes to win, they simply won't vote.

[Truth is a Weapon]

The House members who are most in fear for being re-elected are just tired of this issue. They want it to go away.

What if one, two or three indicate they will vote “yes” but then vote no? That is the only way to truly make this go away. Reconciliation is going to take weeks unless the Senate betrays them right off the bat.

If they don’t have the vote right and it fails by one, there will be a stampede of members trying to change their votes to no.

[meatloaf]

I’d love to see that.

[Truth is a Weapon]

That is a very good point. But which Democrat wants to be that one or two extra votes above what is needed? You voted yes for this abomination and your vote wasn’t needed? That would make a good ad. Every moderate Democrat would be that extra vote. He didn’t do it to support his party leadership, he did it because he loves this bill. All the crap in the bill would be hung around his or her neck.

[Cboldt]

-- The courts will not consider the Art.1 Sect 7 argument. --

Maybe true. But there is precedent for "peeking behind the enrollment."

That Marshall Field didn't prevent the court from considering the bill-passing process is confirmed by United States v. Ballin, 144 U.S. 1 (1892). Ballin was decided later in the same term as Field, which it approvingly cites. And yet the court considered the question of whether a bill had passed with a proper quorum that was properly recorded, and relied on the house journal to answer that question.

MJW @ March 19, 2010, 9:03 pm

[Thermalseeker]

Once the vote starts, it’s too late to pull it back

Most of the congresscritters who intend to vote for this monstrosity will be fighting tooth and nail to NOT be the one who puts it over the top. They think that will save them come November. Watch it on C-Span when the actual vote comes and you'll see people sprinting to the well to not be the one that casts the passing vote.....

[Thermalseeker]

I’m in favor of buying them, because the other side is buying theirs.

A cheaper route would be to use the unbecoming photos of said congresscritter to entice them to vote no......

[9YearLurker]

Or if you know this is your last best (weekend) chance before the Easter recess, when all hope is lost—and you think you can stare down the last few votes.

[Nick Danger]

Time is NOT on her side.

She has almost a week. If they don't have the vote before the Critters go home for Easter, it'll never pass and she knows it. But tomorrow isn't the deadline. She can continue to twist arms for several more days yet.

I think there might be votes that she thinks are 'yes' that are really just hedging their bets. If I'm a Critter and I think she isn't going to get to 216, why should I piss her off by telling her I'm a 'no'? I tell her I'm a yes, figuring she'll never call the vote anyway. If she does end up calling the vote, my choice is between pissing her off by voting 'no,' or pissing off my constituents by voting 'yes'. The bet I'd take is that Pelosi won't be in a position to exact revenge come November.

[Mr. Wright]

Any chance this scenario might play out. A RAT who does not like Pelosi announces to Pelosi he will vote for the bill — giving her the needed 217; then on the House Floor, he votes Nay — giving her only 216 votes. Do you think it could happen?

[CAluvdubya]

Nah, Pelosi would call for the vote immediately if she had the numbers. No way she’d wait until Sunday. Also, Obama wouldn’t waste his time going to the Senate today. He’s a busy man, donchaknow...

[I_Like_Spam]

Every moderate Democrat would be that extra vote. He didn’t do it to support his party leadership, he did it because he loves this bill. All the crap in the bill would be hung around his or her neck.

__________________________

Even those moderate democrats who vote “nay” need to be targeted if this thing passes.

The assumption should be that they were given a pass on voting “aye” for political advantage.

If this bill had come up during President Bush’s term, they ALL would have voted “aye”- they would have figured it to be a free vote as it would be vetoed anyhow.

[tayper]

AMEN

[Truth is a Weapon]

You are right. They should not be given a pass. But the campaign against them should be a simple, “he or she put Nancy Pelosi in charge of the House.”