Posted on 03/19/2010 6:59:03 AM PDT by Siena Dreaming
i did. As I said, I got lost in his count.
They voted on the rule already and they got 228 votes for it.
Sometimes you have to use your eyes to read and your brain to think.
See what clicking link source woud have shown this:
I come to this site to get my news, not to be told that there is a good news article somewhere else on the World Wide Web.
Besides, if you have ever tried to access Washington Examiner from a Blackberry, you would know why I said what I did.
On review near the top he says the leadership is short but I couldn’t find by how much.
My fault with him is that he often makes a presentation with no result. This time he did say they apparently aren’t there yet.
I didn’t even know this took place yesterday.....and I’ve been paying attention. Lord help us.
I had a blackberry.
Got rid of it for just that very reason.
Problem + brain = issue solved.
Damn, I should have asked the mods to put me on the Special Spoon Fed List.
Boccieri of Ohio switched this morning.
No, they did not vote on the rule. They voted on a GOP proposal to prohibit introducing the rule. It's convoluted and somewhat semantic, but there is a difference.
Or better yet, use the posting guidelines and post up to 300 words of the article, instead of blog pimping.
Problem solved.
So now they are going to vote on “deeming” it passed? Or are they going to vote on passing the Senate version?
Crap, I hate when I inadvertently pass on wrong info. I apologize.
See #34. I messed up.
I don’t want to get in a pissin’ match with you, my rage concerning the way this crap is being rammed down our throats is spilling over this trivial matter.
But I do want to finish with fact: It wasn’t a blog pimp.
Here’s my analysis:
Democrats voted for the rule by a 222-28 margin; all 175 Republicans were opposed. Six members, three Democrats and three Republicans, did not vote; each can be counted on to support his or her party on a final vote.
Of the 28 Democrats voting no, 16 voted against the House health care bill last November: Bright (AL 2), Davis (AL 7), Kosmas (FL 24), Minnick (ID 1), Melancon (LA 3), Kratovil (MD 1), Childers (MS 1), Taylor (MS 4), Adler (NJ 3), Teague (NM 2), McIntyre (NC 7), Shuler (NC 11), Boren (OK 2), Holden (PA 17), Herseth Sandlin (SD 1), Nye (VA 2). To judge from The Hill’s whip count, almost all of these 16 look like solid noes on the bill, with only Kosmas in doubt. Defying the leadership on a vote on a rule is a pretty clear indication of opposition on the merits. And it’s going to take a lot of persuading to get a member who has cast two safe-harbor no votes to switch, under the glare of publicity, to yes.
All but Cooper and Michaud face serious election challenges; their no votes may have been cast to give them political cover against yes votes on the final vote, or they may be a sign that they’re ready to switch. But we’re still seeing only one November no vote switched publicly to yes—that of Dennis Kucinich, one of two Democrats who opposed the House bill from the left (with the other, Eric Massa, no longer in the House).
We’ve seen more November yes votes switching publicly to no. Lynch is one I wouldn’t have predicted. This looks like the toughest challenge the House leadership has faced since Nancy Pelosi was elected Speaker in January 2007.
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.