Posted on 07/19/2011 5:53:36 PM PDT by silentknight
The 234-190 vote sends the "cut, cap and balance" plan to the Democratic-controlled Senate, where it has virtually no chance of passing.
(Excerpt) Read more at google.com ...
So she made no move to add an amendment to the Bill to defund Obamacare, just magically expected it to happen because *stomp* *stomp* *stomp* added it a pledge AFETR setting out the three points she’d vote yes on? Oh brother... like I said- naive.
Good for them.
She wants things that she knows aren't going to happen, yet pretends to sign a pledge in "good faith", whilst shredding it. That's worse than flip flopping.
What a surprise, another Palin supporter who wants people to think they’ve been objectively looking at Bachmann but have doubts with her that they don’t have with Palin. There’s lots of them around here these days.
Discussion is liable to be a whole lot more like speculation without the text of the legislation to read and cite:
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112hr2560ih/pdf/BILLS-112hr2560ih.pdf
"Those in power at this time" have never been in power before.
Did you sleep throught November's election?
What a surprise, you crying about Palin again on a Bachmann thread. You whine more about Palin than Obama does about Bush.
(b) Exempt From Direct Spending Limits- Direct spending for the following functions is exempt from the limits specified in subsection (c):
`(1) Social Security, function 650.
`(2) Medicare, function 570.
`(3) Veterans Benefits and Services, function 700.
`(4) Net Interest, function 900.Stick THAT in your pipe and smoke it, Barry!
“But how naive was it to believe a full repeal would be in THIS bill?”
It doesn’t matter how naive it was, because she didn’t believe a full repeal would be in there. At the time she first stated she would oppose any effort to raise the debt ceiling that did not include a repeal of Obamacare, the cut cap and balance petition was not even an issue, and the cut cap and balance bill had not been introduced.
Once the bill came along, she opposed it, just like she said she would.
It doesn’t require her to be naive to oppose it, it just requires that she stand by her earlier statement that she would oppose it.
If there is ever a cut cap and balance bill, that also repeals Obama care, then by this logic she would support it. But that doesn’t require that she expects it to happen. She is just being consistent with the statements she’s made.
You don’t have to expect something to happen to support it.
Do YOU want to control the growth of government this year?
YES.
Do YOU expect that we will?
NO.
I think she's doing better than I thought she would. Despite the expected bashing from the MSM.
How does this vote today stop the debt ceiling from being raised? Or are you one who believes we have to raise the debt ceiling or the country will go to hell in a handbasket?
SEC. 319. ENFORCING GDP OUTLAY LIMITS.
(a) Enforcing GDP Outlay Limits- In this section, the term `GDP outlay limit' means an amount, as estimated by OMB, equal to--
(1) projected GDP for that fiscal year as estimated by OMB, multiplied by
(2) 21.7 percent for fiscal year 2013; 20.8 percent for fiscal year 2014; 20.2 percent for fiscal year 2015; 20.1 percent for fiscal year 2016; 19.9 percent for fiscal year 2017; 19.7 percent for fiscal year 2018; 19.9 percent for fiscal year 2019; 19.9 percent for fiscal year 2020; and 19.9 percent for fiscal year 2021.
To be fair, I did see, after I posted that she did add that, said that it should be included. Seems that the pledge was simple though insofar that any bill had to meet three qualifications. It clearly did and she voted no. ObamaCare is a whole different ballgame and will take unity in both houses and a Conservative occupying the Presidency for the repeal to be enacted. So to include that on her own seems monumentally naive as it's an entirely different battle. We can't win the war without winning a multitude of battles.
JMO
“I don’t do links, never have done. And she did say it, but fine, just ignore my posts. LOL”
And you have yet to be able to quote it, LOL! So we should all just believe your unsubstantiated claims, LOL! And your posts don’t really prove anything anyway, LOL! So I guess we can just ignore them, LOL!
Only because Palin KADs show up here all upset about Bachmann’s vote - as if you really care anyway.
The rider does have the function of serving notice that her support demands something more radical than the proposal, and thus any move to water things down will also bring forth a no vote—this is the opposite of most dem votes, which are a call to water things down. Assuming all 9 Republican noes were of this mindset, it means that 181 dems will only vote for something weaker, 9 pubs will only vote for something stronger (MB, Paul, and Mack certainly indicated this), and 229 pubs and 5 dems like this, but would be willing to consider something else.
Cut, Cap and Balance will never pass the Senate. Obama said he would veto it. Isn’t that a losing battle too then? Does anyone who voted yes actually think this is going to become law?
I was open to Bachmann and looking forward to her rebutal of Obama's SOTU speech. I didn't care much for that and my view of her has gone downhill from there; rather quickly, of late.
You're right. I don't care... about Bachmann anymore.
Did the bill that the house just passed actually contain an increase in the debt celing? If so, I don’t think I could support it. 100 billion in cuts this year simply isn’t enough. A balanced budget requirement would force Congress to balance the budget at least within 5 years, which means that Congress would need to cut at least 300 billion this year alone to comply with the BBA.
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.