Michelle Malkin » The $15B Porkulus II cloture roll call vote: Scott Brown, the Voinovich pay-off & business as usual

The $15B Porkulus II cloture roll call vote: Scott Brown, the Voinovich pay-off & business as usual

By Michelle Malkin • February 22, 2010 10:33 PM

Scroll for updates…Sen. Brown’s Facebook comment thread in full revolt…

Here is the roll call vote on the Senate’s Porkulus II cloture motion this evening:

The Republicans who joined the Dems to end debate on the phony jobs boondoggle that even the Associated Press points out will create a puny number of jobs:

Scott Brown, Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe, and retiring Sens. George Voinovich and Kit Bond.

Yes, sigh, Scott Brown. Looks like he hasn’t taken up my suggested D.C. itinerary. But those of us who knew all along what we were getting — a game-changer who vowed to torpedo Demcare, but who was not an ideological conservative — are not surprised. And I pointed out Brown’s moderate record several times on Fox and on this blog during the campaign.

What I want to know is: When will all the lefties who are now gloating and praising Brown retract all the hysterical attacks on him as a “radical” “right-winger?”

My next question is for Sen. Brown: You vowed to end business-as-usual in Washington. But Dingy Harry Reid bought off Voinovich with a business-as-usual legislative bribe. How is this change, Sen. Brown?

Voinovich, who is retiring at the end of 2010, said he agreed to back the bill after getting a commitment from Reid “that he will bring the reauthorization of a multi-year surface transportation bill to the floor for a vote this year.”

Moreover, as I pointed earlier this month, the Reid jobs bill is not the final version of the bill, but a “work in progress” that will inevitably be crammed with more pay-offs in backroom deals before the final vote. Republicans were not allowed to amend the bill.

Smells like more of the same old, same old.

Tea Party folks, pay attention and get on the phones. There are more votes to come, via The Hill:

Democratic lawmakers have tried to address the concerns of allies by promising to pass additional legislation.

“This is not the end of our debate on creating jobs through legislation this year, it’s the beginning of that debate,” said Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.).“There will be another package a few weeks from now, and another package [after that],” said Sen. Jeff Merkley, a Democrat from Oregon, which has an 11 percent unemployment rate.

Labor leaders and liberal advocacy groups have expressed concern that Senate Democrats may not be able to muster the 60 votes necessary to pass additional jobs bills.

***

Scott Brown’s Facebook commenters are in full revolt. A sample:

***

This is Sen. Brown’s D.C. phone number. Use it:

202-224-4543.

~ For the latest breaking news, be sure to join Michelle's e-mail list ~

Posted in: fiscal stimulus

Printer Friendly

comments (115)

See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Comments

« Older Comments

#101

On February 23rd, 2010 at 3:16 pm, 24Klady said:

And, when those fabulous jobs don’t magically appear, who will they blame? Not only will the jobs not appear but MA is on the hook to help pay for it. Pay back is a royal pain isn’t it now?

Just another idiot missing his village.
#102

On February 23rd, 2010 at 3:19 pm, EdDantes said:

What a bunch of idiots in Washington.

It’s great to see that they give tax breaks for hiring new employees, but I doubt the breaks will be enough to offset the cost of the employee. This is another example of creating artificial demand (cash for clunkers) to try and revive the economy.
#103

On February 23rd, 2010 at 3:31 pm, Ed Mahmoud abu al-Kahoul said:

Nevada “Tea Party” running Senate candidate is a Democrat run front to help Dinghy Harry Reid.

I’m not a big fan of running third party candidates, even when we have Republican squishes, mainly because the Democrats are communist traitors who hate America, and we don’t have time to grow a new party. Obama will, if he can, assume dictatorial powers, and free elections are threatened.

But even worse, now we see Democrats have figured out how to snag the unwary and uninformed, to split the vote in favor of the communists.
#104

On February 23rd, 2010 at 3:39 pm, Ed Mahmoud abu al-Kahoul said:

Brown will probably lose his seat to the Dems in about 3 years anyway.

Principled opposition to the Obammunist might have been his one chance, but why will the indepedents that chose him over a Democrat not choose the official Democrat if offered a choice between a Dem-Lite and the real thing.

On the other hand, it is New England, and he’ll probably screw the GOP and the nation less than Olympia Snowe.
#105

On February 23rd, 2010 at 4:07 pm, granite said:

On February 23rd, 2010 at 3:31 pm, Ed Mahmoud abu al-Kahoul said:

Nevada “Tea Party” running Senate candidate is a Democrat run front to help Dinghy Harry Reid.

I seem to remember reading some time ago that Joseph Kennedy, Sr. had put up and financed a third candidate with the same, or a similar-sounding, name as that of his son’s (?JFK?, or ?”Teddy”?) opponent (?Lodge? – I think another name) in a Massachusetts senate race in the 50s/ early 60s, so that the vote against his son would be split, thus helping his son get elected.
But, I can’t find that info on a quick internet search…so, either my memory fails me, or posiibly the internet info has been scrubbed, and washed down the memory hole….
#106

On February 23rd, 2010 at 4:23 pm, Ed Mahmoud abu al-Kahoul said:

No, Joe Kennedy paid a man with the same name as the Republican to register and run to help JFK win in his first ever House race.

I remember that well.

Anybody can claim to be “tea party”…
#107

On February 23rd, 2010 at 4:23 pm, Ed Mahmoud abu al-Kahoul said:

I wasn’t born yet, but I recall reading it…
#108

On February 23rd, 2010 at 4:56 pm, rightwingrocker said:

Every single congressman should plain and simple be voted against and new ones put in, regardless of who they are. The “good” ones that get voted out should be considered collateral damage, and can earn a vote again in their following election.

Call it the “Clean House Campaign”. Torch ‘em all and start all over.

I think this would suit you just fine. I like it a lot myself – a new idea that could very well catch on.

RWR
http://www.rightwingrocker.com
#109

On February 23rd, 2010 at 5:09 pm, rightwingrocker said:

I tried to warn everyone about Scott Brown, but it fell on deaf ears.

I did as well, and was excoriated for it.

Roland is right that he recognized the liberal tendency in Brown, and I respect his support for him on that basis, but those who refused to accept Brown not only for who he was, but for who he OPENLY SAID he was, are now learning the lesson.

As I said during the Brown campaign, it is a mistake to look at this guy as the second coming of Ronald Reagan as many here were doing. If you are going to vote for him, you might as well go in without illusions (as Roland may have done had he lived in Massachusetts). The time to prepare for your disappointment is BEFORE you cast your vote, regardless of whom you cast it for.

RWR
http://www.rightwingrocker.com
#110

On February 23rd, 2010 at 5:11 pm, rightwingrocker said:

A Fan of The Spinners, are we?

I actually like the Spinners. Made quite a bit of dough on that Philly sound, to be sure!

RWR
http://www.rightwingrocker.com
#111

On February 23rd, 2010 at 5:13 pm, rightwingrocker said:

Scott Brown has shown that our government can’t be fixed via elections alone. The people in power need to be held accountable by more than just an election, or they will continue to misrepresent themselves to get elected then do whatever best fills their personal pocketbook once elected.

Sadly, the mechanism the Founding Fathers put in place to do this (the Second Amendment) has been largely torn to shreds.

RWR
http://www.rightwingrocker.com
#112

On February 23rd, 2010 at 5:16 pm, rightwingrocker said:

we don’t have time to grow a new party.

If it’s decided that a new party is necessary (and a lot of people are leaning that way), it will not be necessary to have much time to “grow” it, especially given the sharp decline in numbers currently being experienced by both the Ds and Rs.

RWR
http://www.rightwingrocker.com
#113

On February 23rd, 2010 at 6:58 pm, Bruce said:

I cannot for the life of me understand why anyone is surprised at this. We (most of us on the right, anyway) knew full well a “classic” small government conservative could not win in Mass. They settled for a “sometime” Republican in the line of his mentor Romney and McAmmnesty.

Which also causes me to wonder aloud, “why the hell did Romney and Paul finish 1 and 2 in the CPAC straw poll, with Sarah a distant 3rd? Neither are conservatives. What were those people thinking?
#114

On February 23rd, 2010 at 7:08 pm, Random63 said:

I guess Mr. Brown has already learned the “ways of Congress.” His voicemail is full and no calls can be made. His Boston office is not answering the phone. I guess he’s already been taught how to ignore the people who elected him and how to avoid him. He’s not only a traitor to his constituents and donors that helped him get elected, he’s a bonifide congressional coward.

Sigh…when will we actually find an honorable person to serve in Congress?
#115

On February 25th, 2010 at 7:41 am, ammonrae said:

You guys still don’t get it. This is about FEUDALISM. This isn’t about socialism or communism. This is about turning America into a futuristic feudal Europe. Poverty now, poverty today, poverty forever…..