Mar 03 2010

Liberals Run Amok Bribing For Votes In Congress

Published by at 10:41 pm under 2010 Elections,All General Discussions,Obamacare

Dust off the impeachment laws, it looks like the liberals in DC are openly bribing members to get the votes they need. First we had the Louisiana Purchase for $300 million. Then the Corn huckster bribe and the Florida Advantage exceptions. Not to mention the union exceptions to health care taxes on their cadillac plans.

Now this:

Tonight, Barack Obama will host ten House Democrats who voted against the health care bill in November at the White House; he’s obviously trying to persuade them to switch their votes to yes. One of the ten is Jim Matheson of Utah. The White House just sent out a press release announcing that today President Obama nominated Matheson’s brother Scott M. Matheson, Jr. to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.

The Chicago corrupt way. Democrats who want to save their party from the liberal madness now have to make a decision. Either go with the corruption or go with America – no more waffling.

You are either with us, or against us.

Update: More over at Hot Air by AllahPundit

Update: As if to underscore my previous post on how the certainty of political annihilation in November has freed many centrist democrats from the oppression of their liberal leaders, a retiring Democrat demonstrates how centrist Dems could reject Obamacare as one of their final acts heading out of Congress:

As House Democratic leaders cast around for votes to pass the Senate’s healthcare reform bill (followed by a reconciliation measure that “fixes” parts of the bill), the three Democrats who voted against the bill last fall and plan to retire after this year are prime targets for lobbying. But if Rep. Brian Baird, D-Wash., is any indication, that may mean the bill is in trouble.

In a brief interview with Salon Tuesday night, Baird didn’t sound particularly enthusiastic about the prospect of switching his vote. “I get all these people advocating, calls and letters, saying vote one way or the other,” he said. “I don’t know how they know what’s going to be in it — because I sure don’t.”

When the liberal democrats decided to sacrifice their majority on this foolish mission from Marx, the inadvertently lost all control over their caucus. Apparently the polls are right, a majority of Americans are not willing to go to government rationed health care. A majority that spans from center-left to far right. And this reality is reflected in the House as well (duh!). I think this mess is about to implode and doom Obama and the liberals to the dustbin of history. But then again I am notoriously bullish on America, and have been wrong before (see election in 2006 and 2008).

Update: More democrats jumping ship here and here.

Update: Ed Morrissey has more on the state of Democrat defections.

18 responses so far

18 Responses to “Liberals Run Amok Bribing For Votes In Congress”

  1. kathie says:

    This was a George W. Bush idea. Why don’t we hear about it?

    Wednesday, March 03, 2010
    From 200 in 2006, Retail Clinics Now Top 1,200 For First Time Ever; An Amazing 6X Increase in 3 Years
    Professor Mark Perry reminds us of private sector innovation:
    At the end of 2006, there were only 200 retail clinics in the United States. As of March 1, 2010 the number of retail clinics operating surpassed 1,200, which is an amazing 6-fold increase in just over 3 years for the number of convenient, affordable retail clinics operating in the U.S. At the same time that Congress and the President orchestrate a government takeover of America’s health care system and capture all of the media attention, a more silent revolution is taking place, as market-based alternatives like convenient, low-cost retail clinics are expanding daily, saving American consumers millions of dollars and putting Americans back in charge of their health care spending.

  2. Frogg1 says:

    This all just stinks to high heaven. I don’t think I can take much more of it.

  3. Frogg1 says:

    Michele Bachmann calls for independent investigation into White House

  4. gary1son says:

    Rush “I hope he fails” Limbaugh is looking extremely prescient at this point.

  5. […] Under Should But Won’t Happen March 4th, 2010 The comment section of this piece at The Strata-Sphere provided a link to this information: Michele Bachmann asks “What in the […]

  6. WWS says:

    I believe Obama has just made the greatest tactical error so far – typical for an inexperienced and overconfidant leader, his mistakes keep getting bigger and bigger.

    Here’s what he’s done – after playing coy for a year and trying to dodge responsibility (that’s why he put all the responsibility off on Congress) he’s now come forward and finally made this bill his own – and he’s even publicly welcomed the hyperpartisan tactic of reconciliation to get what he wants.

    But he’s done this just in time for the House Dem’s to fall apart – I don’t think it can work. I don’t think the house will pass it – which means this big public move to the left by Obama will have been for nothing. What an intelligent leader would have done would have been to realize the big bill was going down and make a virtue of it by coming out for a small bill – but this is just going to make him look even more weak and ineffective than he already is.

    He’s traded away the last shreds of his credibility for nothing.

  7. kathie says:

    I thought Obama had a smaller bill, that’s what Nancy said. Where is it? I would never count on dems to derail this bill.

  8. joe six-pack says:

    If President Obama is stopped with health care he may be forced to re-direct his energy into foreign policy. At least he can’t be overruled like domestic issues.

    I don’t like government run health care, but I am also fearful of what President Obama will do if he directs more of his efforts into issues that are the cause of the wars. Withdrawal is not going to end them. Our enemies will be coming to us.

  9. oneal lane says:

    Someone please help me out here. I am a little confused about what needs to happen for OBAMACARE to pass.

    It’s my understanding that all that needs to happen is the House to pass the bill the Senate already passed. Obama can sign it and the horrible takeover is complete.

    Largely what the Senate does regarding fixes is moot. If the Senate fails Obamacare will still be off and running, and will look like the original Senate version. Is this correct?

    All this talk about Obama’s new version? Would not a new version have to go back to the House and Senate again?

    Thanks in advance

  10. WWS says:

    Oneal, your understanding is correct. All the House needs to do is pass the Senate bill and it is law. And this tells you something very important.

    If the House could have passed this, it would have passed already. Why has there been no vote? Because Pelosi knows the vote would fail. All of these machinations are attempts to maneauver House members like Stupak into voting for something they have said that they will not vote for. Because the House knows that once they vote for this, the Senate will do nothing and they will all have been sold down the election losing river.

    That’s why reconciliation is a farce – nothing but a bluff. And you’ve put your finger on why this cannot get through the House.

  11. oneal lane says:


    As I thought. There is a great article on Fox news website this morning about how the reconciliation fuss is a diversion.

    You make a point I had wondered about. If they have the votes why are not they voting today?

    She does not have the yet, but the bribery and threats being discharged today.

    Lets all pray she fails.

  12. MarkN says:

    Reconciliation is one BIG CON JOB. That is why the house has not done anything. The members realized they were being played for suckers. Now all the dems have left is bribes. SAD

  13. […] Betsy’s Page, The Lonely Conservative, RedState, JOSHUAPUNDIT, Moonbattery, Michelle Malkin, The Strata-Sphere and Another Black Conservative SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: "Is Obama selling Judge Seats to pass […]

  14. Redteam says:

    WWS said:
    He’s traded away the last shreds of his credibility for nothing.

    He had any credibility? I never knew that.

  15. Terrye says:


  16. daniel ortega says:

    I wonder if they will try to force me to buy a policy.
    I am American citizen but I live and work in England 100%
    of the time.

    Of course I am covered by their not ever so good
    NHS and I do buy a Britissh private insurance policy,
    in case I really gget sick,

    but I could still see the IRS insisting I buy an (unconstitutional)
    American policy.

    I will say NO.

    And I won’t pay any fine either.

  17. WWS says:

    “He had any credibility? I never knew that.”

    heh – I was being nice.

    But I think my point was with this move he will lose what he had even among those on the left who believe in him. A failure this big is going to resonate for years, and he will become hated by the left, who will blame him for the death of their dreams. Angry mobs always turn on their one-time leaders as soon as things start going downhill for them.

  18. Fai Mao says:

    I am in the same boat. I live in Hong Kong and have used the NHS clone Hong Kong health system. In my case it is worse. My wife is not a US citizen and the IRS gives us all sorts of grief. I would almost vote for Obama if he would remove the laws that require US citizen, who have no domestic financial obligations or residence to still file and in many cases pay US taxes.

    I pay more taxes the Hong Kong government than I would in the US because even though the rate is lower there are far fewer deductions. That doesn’t bother me because I live here. I despise having to fill out 1040 forms for a place I haven’t lived in since 1991. Yet the IRS, in what i believe to be a violation of my constitutional rights to be considered innocent until at least charged with a crime, assumes that any ex-pat US citizen is a tax cheat. They openly say that as though living out side the the US is prima facia evidence of criminality.