Posted by Anthony Gregory on 01/28/09 4:30 PM   [Newer: Will Obama Stop the Medical Marijuana Raids? ] [Older: Republicans Rediscover Fiscal Conservatism ]

Joined by eleven Democrats, the 177 House Republicans voted against Obama's monstrous stimulus bill, but they could not defeat the 244 Democrats in favor. It passed and is heading to the Senate.

Posted 01/28/09 4:37 PM Mattchew 99 Chickasha, OK

Suddenly the Republicans decided to get principled. They'll haggle over $819 billion, but don't care about the $5+ trillion that they have heaped onto the national debt. Cowards and political hacks. I am to the point where I think that the sooner we swallow the poison that the government keeps fostering (bailouts and the forthcoming inflation and debasement of the dollar), the sooner it will collapse and the sooner people can begin to build a new government more suitable to preserving liberty.

Posted 01/28/09 4:38 PM ammorris Reynoldsburg, OH

Oh good, they finally grew a pair. Too bad it was too late to make a difference. We're on a runaway train now, and I don't know if there is a way to stop it.

Posted 01/28/09 4:40 PM canam San Rafael, CA

Kucinich needs some phone calls from his constituents in Ohio.... after this speech on the house floor, he voted in favor of the stimulus. http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=9462 There are eleven democrats who voted no, they need just as many phone calls & letters to show overwhelming SUPPORT for their No-Votes, especially since they didn't toe the democrat party line. If they know they have backing from the people in their districts, they will not be as easily bullied by the higher-ranking democrats.

Posted 01/28/09 4:42 PM smashysmashy dover, NH

Mattchew - Agreed Canam - Agreed as well. Do you know where I can find a list of the house reps by vote?

Posted 01/28/09 4:44 PM awake , Canada

Steamroller - try and stop'em

Posted 01/28/09 4:53 PM Freedom4ever Dublin, OH

Change. That's we'll have left in our pockets once Obama had his way with us.

Posted 01/28/09 4:53 PM Philip State College, PA

I actually consider this a bit of a victory. Are the republicans simply political opportunists, only opposing this garbage when it's from Obama and not Bush? Well sure. Step one, however, is getting them to vote the right way. Getting them to think the right way will take a little time.

Posted 01/28/09 5:30 PM Shirkdog Belcamp, MD

I have to amend my statement about The Maryland representatives. Roscoe Bartlett is a hero for standing up to President Obama, and he also voted against this State Bailout. Frank Kratovil, a House Democrat, also voted against this State Bailout. So I now can say there are two good representatives from the state of Maryland in the House. Someone has to stand up on principle. smashysmashy: please bookmark http://www.govtrack.us Here is the link to the House Vote: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2009-46

Posted 01/28/09 5:48 PM Linda APO AP, Japan

At the link to the house vote Shirkdog gave, you can sort by party and then go down the list for the nay votes. Here they are: Allen Boyd, FL-2 Bobby Bright, AL-2 Jim Cooper, TN-5 Brad Ellsworth, IN-8 Parker Griffith, AL-5 Paul Kanjorski, PA-11 Frank Kratovil, MD-1 Walter Minnick, ID-1 Collin Peterson, MN-7 Heath Shuler, NC-11 Gene Taylor, MS-4

Posted 01/28/09 5:57 PM Michael Salvi Elkins Park, PA

to quote a great 21st century philosopher... "this is great news....for me to poop on!"

Posted 01/28/09 6:21 PM roserty Orem, UT

Let's not give up too soon. I know there's little chance the Senate will vote this bill down, but at least if we flood them with messages then they'll know next time they are up for reelection that they lost because they didn't listen to us on this very important issue. I discovered from the comment board on my local news site that a great deal of people are dang mad at our senator for voting for the bailout plan. We should also all thank our representatives who voted against the bill. My representative is new and I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. I also hope to teach him a few of the principles of liberty before he leaves office.

Posted 01/28/09 6:27 PM msoliday blacklick, OH

Sometimes people have to hit rock bottom before they can start that long climb back up. This country is a slow moving beast, but i have to believe people are educating themselves on this economic chaos. I see Dr. Paul all over the news now -his this truth stands alone in stark contrast to everyone else out there. I just hope people can understand capitalism was not to blame, and that economic planning has backed us into a corner.

Posted 01/28/09 6:59 PM IndiJones Moss Point, MS

Way to go Taylor! That's my rep!

Posted 01/28/09 7:11 PM coolwise Sun Valley, NV

Those 11 Democrats who voted against Pres. Obama stimulus bill now have their seats in jeopardy. He will more likely find some other district Democrat to challenge them in 2010 primary. At least all the Republicans voted against this bill. Pres. Obama isn't getting the bi-partisan support he wish for. One could only hope the Republicans in the Senate can filibuster this bill.

Posted 01/28/09 7:24 PM Sovereignty Fort Worth, TX

I know the bailout result was discouraging but this is the time to start inundating your Senators with emails, phone calls and fax's. Coolwise is correct, They will be hunted by the DNC in 2010. Anyone who is a constituent of the Democrat's that voted against this bill needs to send them a thank you and remember their names.

Posted 01/28/09 7:28 PM schaef350 Conestoga, PA

If you live in an area with a Dem. Rep or Senator get on their web site, send them a message, and grill them a little on this. The Liberals that voted for these jokers are to lazy to do the same so our voice should be rather loud. I could be wrong but either way its worth a shot...

Posted 01/28/09 8:33 PM scotty Mount Juliet, TN

I sent my congressman, Jim Cooper, an email thinking him for his no vote today. The weeks leading up to the election, I upheld my promise put thousands of business cards on cars asking people not to vote for him because he voted for the 700 billion dollar bailout. I made sure at least one made it back to him. I also personally took one to his office. Since then he has voted against the auto bailout and this stimulus bill. I would like to think I had a small part in these votes. If not, I needed the exercise. P.S. Using Business cards for this is great. They are cheap. The small size is great to put between the the glass on the drivers size window. The small size also forces you to condense your message into something a person will read.

Posted 01/28/09 8:48 PM Mike in Virginia Fredericksburg, VA

I wouldn't get too excited about the 11 Dems who voted no. There's a little game they play in Congress. Before the vote, those 11 go the the party whip and say, "I completely support the president and the party, but if I vote yes on this, my constituents will be livid and I might not get re-elected." The whip says he will get back to them. Once the whip determines that there are enough votes to pass the measure without those 11, he goes back to them and says, "Your support for our party is noted. You can vote no on this and we will know that it is really a yes vote." So, those 11 get to assured of re-election, even though they don't give a hoot about the interests of their constituents. All that counts in DC is appearances.

Posted 01/28/09 9:17 PM scotty Mount Juliet, TN

Oh, I didn't get excited... I'm fairly certain he would've towed the party line if it was going to be close. I still like think he went to the trouble to vote no partly due to pressure he felt from a constituent that magnified his voice.

Posted 01/28/09 10:18 PM alan.lockett San Marcos, TX

So the amazing part is that ALL the Republicans voted no. Not some, but ALL. And we have to ask ourselves why. It can't be because they've all come around on principle, although there may well be many of them experience what Jim DeMint termed "buyer's remorse" on the TARP. So it must be that there is something in this bill that every single Republican found so objectionable that they could not vote for it. What might that be? That's what I would like to know. The first thing might be the creation of a national health database, which is clearly a precursor to nationalized or single-payer health care. But maybe there were other things? It also strikes me that if this weren't the first major legislation proposed by Obama, there may have been more dissension or opposition by Democrats as well. In other words, just what is Obama trying to get by us this time? Any thoughts?

Posted 01/29/09 01:42 AM Jstme Melbourne, FL

Haven't we learned that they can pass these bailouts without really committing to exactly where when or how the money will be spent? Sure there are breakdowns, but there is no accountability and no oversight. I see this as a blank check for all the democrats pet projects (socialism). Maybe those few democrats who voted against it have no plans on running again. Or maybe they listened to the outcry of their constituents because if they didn't, they knew they'd have no shot of getting re-elected if they continued with these bailouts. The republicans are just playing a political game. Crying foul when they know they now hold no power. They believe they have nothing to lose and everything to gain. This is all a game and the only losers are We the People. Like addicts, we'll have to hit rock bottom before we can begin to rebuild.

Posted 01/29/09 05:28 AM mlang52 Robinson, IL

alanlocket, You're form Texas and you still think Ron Paul voted no because it was a long party lines? You did say all of the republican votes, you know! There could have been a change of heart in the others, because his message is getting through! But, I agree that most, if not all, but Dr Paul, voted along plain old party opposition lines. The democrats were fairly elected. Now we will see the philosophy in action. I worry about the new gun laws they might think up! Any hunter who voted democrat is nuts! I guess there will be a lot more of them using bows and arrows!

Posted 01/29/09 06:04 AM WarIsARacket Boynton Beach, FL

Party Politics...sorry that is all this is.

Posted 01/29/09 06:18 AM Peale09 Valparaiso, IN

I think some of this indicates a slight shift in the Republican mindset, but mostly this is a political gamble. In the next election cycle, if (when) the economy is still faltering, Republicans can use this as an example of why we should vote for them. Likewise with Obama and the Democrats. They are betting the economy will improve, and if it does, they can point to the Republicans as obstructionists. Politically, I think the Republicans made a smart bet.

Posted 01/29/09 06:26 AM coolwise Sun Valley, NV

Remember it was the majority of the Republicans who vote "Nay" on TARP even though some defected on the second round of voting. The House Republicans voted "Nay" due to the amount of spending than it was to be "stimulus" and tried unsuccessfully to remove much of the spending. Once can only ask is the Republican Senators to fight the bill by filibuster.

Posted 01/29/09 06:36 AM Rix Rix Winston Salem, NC

So what do we have here… a sudden return to fiscal conservatism? Or were the repubs simply hoping the bill would fail so that they could add some more pork before they passed it the next time around? It's too bad repubs have lost all credibility.. Otherwise there might have been some good news here. And by the way, when the only republican for the stimulus package is George Bush, doesn't that automatically mean it's a bad idea?

Posted 01/29/09 08:19 AM TravisDicken Laughlintown, PA

Sadly, that was all just a display of partisanship. The republicans still don't have any kind of principles, and are very must just neo-conservatives masquerading as fiscal conservatives. Just wait until the next vote on Iraq or defense spending comes up, see how they vote. It makes me mad, because that would have been something if their no votes had been based on principle.

Posted 01/29/09 08:44 AM Space Patriot Webster, TX

jigawatt said: "I think the Republicans are interested in limited government only when they're not in power. Remember the early Clinton years?" Right on, jigawatt! The Republicans are trying to regain the "moral majority" position that swept them into power in 1994. Unfortunately for them, the only reason it worked was because the Democrats had controlled the Congress for decades leading up the 1994 election and the people were fed up with it, especially the conservative Christians. I think we will see the Republicans move back to the old standard issues (abortion, guns, small government, etc.), even going so far as drafting a new Contract with America (just wait, it will happen). But, ultimately, this will not have a sweeping effect like in 1994 because demographics and social views have changed so much in the last 15 years and the Republican name is so toxic, due to the last 8 years. The conservative coalition has fractured and may never be rebuilt to 1994 levels of power and influence. It's time to build a coalition around issues of liberty, freedom, and personal responsibility instead of purely conservative social issues.

Posted 01/29/09 09:17 AM Andrew76 Ballwin, MO

As to Obama, ram this fact in all his supporters' faces: the man is a politician and a LIAR. "This will be the presidency of NO EARMARKS!!" Really? Within his first ten days he forces a "stimulus" package on us all that is ***DEFINED*** by earmarks. Obama took Emanuel's "You can't let a good crisis go to waste," advice to heart and bestowed your money to every Democrat's pet projects, no matter how wasteful or unnecessary. As to the Repubs... at least they're finally listening. Sure, you might not win every fight, but at least you stood for something and that something wasn't just some Bush styled, arbitrary, unreasoned position that you took "just to look tough." Like, who was going, "Wow, that George W. Bush sure is stubborn. I'm impressed! Let's follow him. I love a guy who pulls a position out of thin air and sticks to it!" The Republicans need to square with their constituents and say something like, "Hey, look, ... we screwed up. Under the Bush administration we were about as Republican as Mussolini, or a college campus Socialist club. We lost our way." Maybe they found it again? I'm not holding my breath. And I'm tentatively with those who feel that this bill's passing could be a good thing in the "let's just get it over with so this whole thing can collapse and we can just start over," sense. However, what happens in the collapse? Who here honestly thinks it's likely to be peaceful and quick? Do we honestly have that much faith in Obama that he'll realize his mistake and go, "Y'know... I was wrong. What the hell, back to completely free markets, sound money and a non-interventionist foreign policy everyone! Hoorayyyy!" We have every reason to believe that a collapse, or at least the kind that would be necessary will be painful, possibly violent and could take years or even decades to correct. I truly hope this isn't the case.

Posted 01/29/09 09:30 AM ifthenwouldi Wendell, NC

Getting ready to call Rep. Shuler to thank him.

Posted 01/29/09 10:53 AM BruceLayne Lexington, KY

Politics as usual. For almost all of the NO voting Republican representatives, this was just a calculated partisan political show. My senator is Senate Minority Leader Mitch "The Weasel" McConnell (R-KY). He not only voted for the last big bailout (against steep political opposition from the local and vocal Campaign For Liberty folks), but he also lobbied hard for the previous bailout and twisted a lot of arms to get the other Republicans to vote for Bush's socialist bailout. Now, McConnell is very much against Obama's bailout, just two months later. What's the difference? Maybe the pork in Obama's bailout isn't flavored to McConnell's taste? The vast majority of our senators and representatives have no honor, and no principles. I think most of them have no soul.

Posted 01/30/09 10:16 AM LocalBoy Noblesville, IN

It is not an issue of which party did what. Why do we care if the GOP acts in unison ? Our position should be that the congress, the house in this case, has acted. The question is simple :What did MY representative do ? The macro thinker need not waste time with trivial things such as party politics. We have mountains to climb and the obstacles are irrelevant.