I believe you.
I believe you.
I believe you.

I will not question you again.

I want to believe you.
I want to believe you.

I want the bill dead: wooden stake, holy wafers, silver bullet, and soaked in holy water dead.
I want the bill dead: wooden stake, holy wafers, silver bullet, and soaked in holy water dead.
I want the bill dead: wooden stake, holy wafers, silver bullet, and soaked in holy water dead.

All three panelists on the Fox News show tonight said the bill is going to pass. At least two of them want the bill as dead as I do.

We need to keep fighting!
We need to keep fighting!
We need to keep fighting!

exactly.

That’s my take only of course. I’d like Dan Perrin’s response to your question to see if he still agrees or to let us know if something’s changed.

Prohibit Slaughter Procedural Vote
Substantive Vote

Two interesting questions to ponder:

How many people voted N now (against the Republicans) just to keep leadership off their backs so they can vote N on the substantive vote?

How many voted Y now (with the Republicans) just to position themselves for a Y vote later?

I think the answer to question 1 will surpass the answer to question 2.

If you want to hide from Pelosi, voting N on the procedural vote makes absolute sense if you know you are going to vote N on the substantive vote. After all, you wouldn’t want Pelosi to catch on, and voters will forget about this 222-205 if you vote to kill the bill.

Its hard to think of a rationale for voting N/Y unless you merely position yourself to say that I wanted to vote for the Senate bill straight up. I don’t hear anyone in the House praising the Senate bill.

This is all good news.

If you look at who voted how, there are at least 9 ‘yes’ votes of Dems who voted ‘no’ in November, represent significantly red districts and have, in the last 48 hours, reiterated their firm opposition to the Senate bill (in fact a couple of them just voted ‘no’ in the Budget Committee on Monday)

On the other hand, Lipinski (who is down on whip counts as being a ‘no’ but who I figured was really squishy ’cause he voted yes last time) voted against the rule. Harry Mitchell from AZ was a yes in Nov and voted against the rule.

Look, I recognize with the carrot of pork and patronage and the stick of broken body parts, this will be a struggle to the very end. But the bottom line is that the expectation of party fealty on procedural votes (and that’s what this was) is even *higher* than it is on final votes. That’s why someone like Ike Skelton, who was a ‘no’ in November, and who just firmly reiterated his opposition a couple of days ago, voted for the leadership position on this. He’s the Chairman of the powerful Armed Services Committee and for him to snub the leadership on a leadership vote would have been the ultimate apostasy.

I look at this and am shocked that there were 28 Dems who stepped to the plate and opposed their leadership on a procedural vote which party leaderships *rarely* lose.

vote like this is even more of an apostasy than voting against them on the bill itself.

It would’ve been nice to have killed this thing right on the spot but the math is still tough for them. They’ve only had 1 no flip to a yes, 10 yes’s have flipped no, there are 8 undecideds who voted no the first time and they’d have to flip them all, AND we don’t know how many of the remaining undecided’s who voted yes last time are part of the Stupak dozen.

This ain’t over till it’s over but the fact that they’re going after Cao tells me they’re still scrambling.

But they are doing their best to convert the ones they need. That’s a big reason that Obama isn’t leaving town.

Maybe they think Cao is a weak “no.”

n/t

His Oneness may have promised Cao a free ride in exchange for the Republican’s vote on HCR. Cao, you’ll recall, won in the freak election in one of the most densely populated African American districts in the Nation after the Refrigerator Scam killed off the sitting Dem.

Naturally, the Dems won’t keep their word, but Cao’s a newbie and the CBC wants that seat back. Obama may have told the CBC to back off for one cycle. That’s the way I would play it were I Obama and Rahm.

Is that your count?

We are short five.

But they are in a more difficult spot.

I know why Sunday is important to us….but the “immigration reform” proponents have been planning and pushing this Sunday for awhile. The main hIspanic caucus guy even brought it up to the Big O while he was trying to buy his vote. Man these two groups don’t play well together. Ok, someone tell me these events are not happening on the same day.

Here’s the deal. Rep King said SUNDAY @ NOON for the final rally. But Americans for prosperity is taking buses for a Saturday day trip. We need to get coordinated and have everybody there together ! How ? I don’t know ! I think Sun. would be best b/c that is when vote will be. But if AFP is taking bus loads on Sat. That would be huge too.

If they were going to approve Slaughtering the Constitution anyway, than why not just pretend to care?

As far as last November – how many townhalls did you see? How many protests did you witness? Never, ever underestimate the will of the people.

If you want to give up in what may be the last round – go right ahead. Your choice, however, don’t try and suck the fight out of others with “we’re doomed”.

When you give up the fight you have no reason to think of how to stop it – you just resign yourself to the outcome.

You go ahead, give up the hope. Personally, I am in the fight until there are NO options left.

I think that fact will awaken enough activists to make this possible to defeat.

The only thing we can do is keep fighting.

So far, I haven’t been surprised by any of them, and I have consistently predicted that HCR will not pass.

Spouting off generalities (looking at “past several decades”) and defeatism isn’t exactly hard to do. However, I would hope that you have better things to do with your time.

You are all smoke and no fire. We have a real problem here, and that problem has specific components. Being persistently negative may make you feel smart, but it actually doesn’t do any good.

Yes, the MSM is unfair. Yes, few libs have any apparent principles. Yes, the country is at stake here. So what are you going to do about it? I think you are absolutely wrong about the outcome, However, whining about it is not going to inspire you or anyone else to pick up a phone, visit DC, or take any other action.

There are several moments in US history where this country was saved by miraculous circumstances. We don’t need a miracle here, but we do need the “We are doomed” types to get out of the way and not dissuade us.

How many times has the MSM acted as if this was inevitable?

How many times have Obama, Pelosi, et al declared in a matter of fact manner that HCR would pass?

How many times so far have the losers identified above been WRONG?

Do you like sounding like a lefty?

If you were a liberal coming to this site to make people dispair, what would you say that is different from you what you are saying?

Think about it, and the impact that your words can have on the spirits of others.

If you ever read Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings, it is quite clear what character you closely resemble. Safe to say he was not involved in actually saving the day, but the day was in fact saved.

one of two things – either go to a respected source like The Hill and start doing your own research focusing in on the numbers of no’s to yes’s and yes’s to no;

or,

go drink yourself into oblivion for the next 30 years. The rest of us have a battle to fight and your constant drumbeat of negativity isn’t ‘enlightened’, it’s morale-killing.

Glad you weren’t on our side at the Battle of Bastogne when things *really* looked hopeless.

would be a NO.

I think not. He’s a vote against HCR because his constituents would crucify him,, but he’s a vote for them on everything else. Spike Ike in 2010.

No Stupak is not an exception.

The bottom line here is that even if Stupak got language in the bill that said “No Federal money can ever be used, directly or indirectly to pay for an abortion for any reason.” The language would be redlined out in the next budget bill or “must pass” legislation. It would be included in a clause on military readiness on page 4400.

It’s called letting the camel get his nose under the tent.

Though I hope Boccieri was taken into account in whatever latest tally shows us winning!

sorry about the erring post below…;(

That’s a good way to generate momentum: 2 for the price of 1.

Its sickening, compare the media attention that NOs got compared to YEAHs today. Childer and Arcuri and Lynch and Rush.

Lynch got attention because that was a huge defection. Rush isnt for real but its newsworthy and no one is covering it. Arcuri and Childers are getting half of the press of Markey, Barton and Guitierrez.

Someone today is being spun as a good day for Dems. Look at the FDL chart. They are completely squeezed. GOP needs two or three or more solid NOs from a list of about fifteen and its done.

I must admit he was saying all last summer than there would be a very small bill for HCR. Not really, Charles. So I see what you are saying.

I am still holding out hope and am trying to decide if I should join all the sad sacks now or wait for a body blow on Sunday.

On the surface, Ocare looks like it will be able to succeed at running all the red lights. It’s been running red lights for 14 months now. So.

I think we are now into a chaotic environment. And that butterfly on Barbados has turned its wings just so the sun could dry them.

See Ausonius’ beautiful diary,

http://www.redstate.com/ausonius/2010/02/07/conservatives-and-the-butterfly-effect-or-why-chaos-is-better-than-control/

---

Activists Taking Action: Unified Patriots