Yes, but our newly elected "Democrat" from Alabama, Bobby Bright, voted against it, one of two (even one of the AL-Repubs voted for it). Bright even voted against the Ledbetter bill -- and she is from Alabama.

Stinking Blue Dogs, we can't even win when we win down here. Though I will say for the record, I didn't vote for him.

I guess the GOP is going through a Umwertung aller Werte moment - time to reëvaluate all values.

They are self serving dicks, every single one of them.

Seriously, everyone that voted against it was a Repug. If anyone notices a Dem on that list, let me know. But I just saw all Repugs.

Reminds me of a remark in "The Last Hurrah" where Skeffington is discussing a local noteworthy who had been a member of the Klan. "I think he quit when he found out he had to buy his own sheet. Things like that will drive a man to Tolerance."

If our Republican Party ... shrinks from reaffirming its defining principles... the party of the Great Emancipator -- will not only lose the next election. It will lose its soul.

It would be a mistake to conclude McCotter lost his soul in the last three months.

Y'know, every Republican has been saying, "We can't do this! We can't pass this law! It would be against what the Republican party stands for at its core; against Republican beliefs!"

What, exactly, are the Republican beliefs now?

but good ol Steve King can be counted on to fight to the bitter end!

"This misguided bill is a victory for illegal immigrants and wealthy families, but a defeat for needy children," King said. "Speaker Pelosi used budget gimmicks and debate suppression to ram a bill through the House that gives illegal immigrants and wealthy families taxpayer-funded handouts. Taxpayer dollars designated for children's health care welfare should go to children in need, not illegal aliens or families with high income levels."

Rep. Thaddeus McCotter said: "... Democrats will continue their push to shackle Americans with a bureaucrat-centered health care system ..."

Americans are already shackled to a bureaucrat-centered health care system, namely the for-profit medical insurance industry that is "centered" around bureaucrats whose job is to deny as much health care to insured individuals as possible and generate as much wealth for ultra-rich insurance company CEOs as possible.

A universal, single-payer, nonprofit medical insurance system under open, transparent, efficient, accountable public administration would dramatically reduce bureaucracy, not increase it.

However, since both Democrats and Republicans are determined to prevent a move to single-payer public nonprofit medical insurance system, and preserve the profits of the insurance corporations, Rep. McCotter's statement is actually true of both Democrats and Republicans.

Both of them are pushing to keep Americans shackled to the healthcare-denial bureaucracy of the medical insurance corporations.

What, exactly, are the Republican beliefs now?

This might help you:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0PY7N4iRgLQ

...insidious forms of governmental dependence.
*********
Why that'd be YOU, McSnotter, and the pay packette you bring home every 2 weeks, courtesy of the government. Dependent on the tax-payers? You ought to know! Checked your cushy US government helath benefits lately? Hypocrite.

What, exactly, are the Republican beliefs now?

CLINTONS BAD! BUSH GOOD! WAR GOOD! FIRE BAD!

-Z

Two Legs Bad!! Four Legs Good!!! Two legs Bad!! Four Leg Good!!

until they weren't if you remember the story correctly.

Yesterday, McCotter voted for the exact same S-CHIP bill.
Letting Obama and the Dems take the heat for crippling the country with overspending at a time when we're already deep in the hole and getting deeper. Politics over fiscal responsibility.

"Politics over fiscal responsibility."

Republican values in a nut shell.

I keep saying that it is going to be very hard for the Republicans to keep their caucus in unanimous opposition to popular legislation. When they were in charge, they didn't let popular, liberal legislation come to a vote. When they had 49 votes, they could take advantage of Reid's weakness to "filibuster." Way harder with 41.

"Way harder with 41."

Exactly, which is why I consider GOP talk about filibustering to be so much hot air. It's very easy to maintain filibusters when you have 49 seats in an almost evenly divided Senate and have a President of your own party (no matter how unpopular) backing you up. When you have only 41 seats and have a popular President of the opposing party using the full power of the office against you, it's become oh so much more difficult.

"a popular President of the opposing party using the full power of the office against you"

It has yet to be proven Obama will do that. So far he's bent over backwards to placate the GOP.

I should have written "It is yet to be proven..."

THis shows another benefit of Deans fight them everywhere policy. The Dem didn't win but the Rep. has been force to move toward the center and vote with the Dems. Cool.