The Boehner for speaker whip count [14 against so far]

Washington Post ^ | January 5, 2015 | By Aaron Blake

[Jim Robinson]

~~snip~~

Voting against Boehner (10)

Gohmert*

Yoho*

Rep. Steve King (Iowa)

Rep. Jim Bridenstine (Okla.)*

Rep. Dave Brat (Va.) (freshman)

Rep. Walter Jones (N.C.)*

Rep. Gary Palmer (Ala.) (freshman)

Rep. Thomas Massie (Ky.)*

Rep. Paul Gosar (Ariz.)

Rep. Marlin Stutzman (Ind.)

Said prior to 2014 election that they would vote against Boehner (2)

Rep. Jody Hice (Ga.) (freshman)

Rep. John Ratfliffe (Tex.) (freshman)

Voted against Boehner in 2013/haven't weighed in (2)

Rep. Steve Pearce (N.M.) (spokesman says he's "undecided")

Rep. Justin Amash (Mich.)

Voted against Boehner in 2013/will support him (3)

Rep. Mick Mulvaney (S.C.)

Rep. Raul Labrador (Idaho)

Rep. Tim Huelskamp (Kan.)**

[Norm Lenhart]

You posted about letting their voice be heard. It has been heard and rejected. At some point we have to accept that all it does is spread evil.

Now if we are OK with continuing to let evil flourish through a conservative site in the name of free speech, I would say thats helping the spread of evil.

There is no point to trying to spread conservatism while supporting evil.

[Blue Highway]

John Boehner's meltdown after realization he loses speaker of the house Tues Jan 3rd 2015:

1

2

3

4

5

Someone make sure he gets a cab as he will be hitting the sauce pretty hard!

[Norm Lenhart]

So same old then.

[Marak]

Add Curt Clawson (FL-19) to the list.

‏@RepCurtClawson

"After caucusing with my colleagues tonight, I will be voting for a change in House Leadership tomorrow. Now is a good time for change."

[leapfrog0202]

Add Curt Clawson (FL-19) to the list. ‏@RepCurtClawson "After caucusing with my colleagues tonight, I will be voting for a change in House Leadership tomorrow. Now is a good time for change." ------------------------ Great news! I really hope there are more against Boehner that are just choosing not to broadcast where they stand.

[OneWingedShark]

You posted about letting their voice be heard. It has been heard and rejected.

Then why the hell are we in such a regulated crony-capitalist state pushing toward full-blown socalism and thereby communism?
Rejected my ass.

At some point we have to accept that all it does is spread evil.

Question: is ignoring the constitution to do that a-ok?
Question: are Constitutional restraints dependent on if we agree with them?
These aren't theoretical, in 1919 the USSC declared that the prohibition on Congress's authority to pass a law respecting speech [and print] wasn't stringent.

We admit that, in many places and in ordinary times, the defendants, in saying all that was said in the circular, would have been within their constitutional rights. […] The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent. […] When a nation is at war, many things that might be said in time of peace are such a hindrance to its effort that their utterance will not be endured so long as men fight, and that no Court could regard them as protected by any constitutional right.

So the court says that normally everything would be ok, but because we're at war that no court wold hold the speech [dissent against the legitimacy of conscription; esp. given the 13th Amendment] as protected.

Now if we are OK with continuing to let evil flourish through a conservative site in the name of free speech, I would say thats helping the spread of evil.

I'd say that your mode of thought is dangerously close to that of the Supreme Court's — and that is the promotion of lawlessness.

There is no point to trying to spread conservatism while supporting evil.

Is there a point in trying to spread conservatism when you degrade the spirit of the law?

[flaglady47]

“Another GOP stooge returnes after a long absence.

The Stalker is on this thread and active. I see you stalked another victim on this thread a little earlier. Stalking people you disagree with appears to be your favorite pasttime. That’s unfortunate for both you and your designated victims. Time for you to do us a favor, withdraw your fangs and disappear.

[Norm Lenhart]

Stuff it fraud. Your actions are all in your post history.

[FR_addict]

Yeah! Thanks for the update.

[Norm Lenhart]

The majority of FR rejected the lesser evil crap. FR is what we are talking about.

[Art in Idaho]

I hope Labrador comes through. We'll see. .

[Hardens Hollow]

I need to find my soon-to-be rep in East Tennessee. We are escaping mexifornia and have a wonderful but old house on 18+ acres nestled in the mountains. I don’t know how we’ll live, since we are just quitting work to quit feeding the fascist beast and become self-sufficient. But it’s the right thing to donate this stage. And I can’t wait to live in heaven ;)

[leapfrog0202]

All the newly elected Repubs are on this list that RedMDer posted. Hope it helps.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3243802/posts

[OneWingedShark]

The majority of FR rejected the lesser evil crap. FR is what we are talking about.

And I never said to embrace the lesser of two evils.

[tennmountainman]

You will love East Tennessee.
18 Acres sounds like great start to me.
Welcome to East Tennessee!

[ozarkgirl]

The majority of FR rejected the lesser evil crap. FR is what we are talking about.

As usual, I disagree. lol Imagine that!

I used to be much more of a purist, then we got Obama and I realized it's better to get some of what we want than none of what we want. I see lots of folks on FR who feel the same. I only see a handful of people as pure as yourself, those who are willing to give all of it up and completely ruin America. It's a struggle to be sure but look at what we (the non-purists) have done. We got a few folks in there who are willing to buck Boehner. It's a start.

[Blue Highway]

I sure am hoping their strategy is of covert ambush re:Boehner tomorrow. If not then we are up sh*t creek without a paddle.

[Eva]

As I said before, what I am seeing is that an awful lot of Congressmen that ran as Conservatives are really Libertarian. The idea seems to be to push the conservatives out of the party and make the conservatives the third party.

I am ready to go there.

[Norm Lenhart]

I didn’t say you did. What I am saying is that by letting that run unchecked evil is being spread. Conservatism suffers. Now if that is true, and factually it is, then advocating people be allowed to do it based on free speech also assists evil.

And since this isn’t a public site, free speech does not apply in any way shape or form. Judging by my reading of FR’s position, lesser evil isn’t in it. Conservatism is. Either isn’t my call. But my opinion which I believe the facts show, is that allowing it has damaged conservatism and conservative candidates to the benefits of rinos.

[Norm Lenhart]

Take it up with Finny. She crunched the numbers that prove it.