TPMDC
Cao To Steele: Come And Get Me -- Just Remember You Need My District
Versha Sharma | November 8, 2009, 1:26PM
Rep. Joseph Cao (R-LA)
Share
Send to a friend!
Rep. Joseph Cao (R-LA), the lone GOP vote for the House health reform bill that passed late last night, has responded to RNC Chairman Michael Steele's warnings about stepping outside of party lines. (WATCH Steele: "We'll come after you.")
Cao told CNN that Steele retains "the right to come after those members who do not conform to party lines, but I would hope that he would work with us in order to adjust to the needs of the district and to hold a seat that the Republican party would need." He represents the second congressional district of Louisiana, a solidly Democratic district that includes New Orleans. Cao said earlier today that he put the needs of his district over what was popular with his own party.
Cao's opponent was former Rep. William Jefferson (D-LA), who was under indictment on corruption charges at the time of the election, widely seen as the sole reason the Republican was able to triumph in this specific district. His unique victory was celebrated by Steele and other GOP leaders, a fact which the young lawmaker is not letting party leadership soon forget.
On November 5, Steele issued the following warning to Republicans considering voting for the House Democrats' health bill:
Candidates who live in moderate to slightly liberal districts have got to walk a little bit carefully here, because you do not want to put yourself in a position where you're crossing that line on conservative principles, fiscal principles. Because we'll come after you. You're gonna find yourself in a very tough hole if you're arguing for the president's stimulus plan or Nancy Pelosi's health plan. There's no justification for growing the size of government the way this administration and this Congress wants to do it.
And according to CNN, the freshman Republican from Louisiana isn't fazed in the slightest:
Cao chuckled when asked about the comment and said he "would like to remind" Steele that he and other Republican leaders trumpeted Cao's upset win over Democrat William Jefferson last December as a symbol of party diversity. Cao is the first Vietnamese-American member of Congress.
In the same interview where Steele sounded his GOP watchdog alarm, he also said that he wants to "partner as much as possible" with tea partiers -- a potent combination that would be sure to stir up some fun reactions in Cao's district, which voted 75% to elect Obama in 2008.
Cao told CNN that President Obama called him around noon yesterday to personally ask for his vote on the bill. Read Cao's statement on his vote here.
Other Stories Featured at TPMDC
Join the Conversation!
Leave a comment
Follow us!
PollTracker
Most Popular
- Where Does This Leave Us?
- Lieberman Repeats Claim That Public Option Not Part Of 2008 Presidential Campaign
- Senate Agrees To Debate Health Care Bill
- Sarah Palin Goes Rogue With Bill O'Reilly
- Lincoln: "I'll Filibuster A Public Option Bill"
- Bernie Sanders: 'My Vote For The Final Bill Is By No Means Guaranteed'
- Stewart Takes Down KSM Trial Fearmongerers
- Owens Winning The Absentee Ballots In NY-23
- HCAN: "It's a Shame Not a Single Republican" Voted To Allow Debate
- All About the 60
- Lincoln: "I'll Filibuster A Public Option Bill"
- Landrieu To Reid: No Triggers, No Bill--Negotiating Compromise With Schumer
- Lieberman Repeats Claim That Public Option Not Part Of 2008 Presidential Campaign
- Reid Slams Broder As A Retiree Who 'Writes A Column Once In A While'
- Senate Agrees To Debate Health Care Bill
- 60! Blanche Lincoln Says She'll Support Health Care Debate
- RATIONAL RATIONING
- Senate Debates Historic Health Care Bill
- Sarah Should Take Her Shirt Off
- Bernie Sanders: 'My Vote For The Final Bill Is By No Means Guaranteed'
TPM Stories Now Surging on Digg.com
TPM Top News
© 2009 TPM Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.
johnmccsf
November 8, 2009 1:30 PM
Moon Unit Landrieu could use some of that spine
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
November 8, 2009 4:44 PM in reply to johnmccsf
Will you people stop with the "Cao has courage; Cao has a spine" bullshit!!
He's a right-winger who won by accident in a district that went 75% for Obama. He's trying to save his career!!
I don't want him to switch parties and vote like the Blue Dogs we have to tolerate. I want his ass outta there, replaced by a real Democrat who will vote like a liberal Democrat!!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Joe Wise
November 8, 2009 5:04 PM in reply to FreeRider
His victory was "accidental" just as President Obama's victory was accidental because GWB screwed up.
Who cares if the man is a republican? Give him some credit when credit is due, dude. he followed his conscience. that is more than the 39 dems and the 177 gop who betrayed us for their corporate masters.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
geofu54
November 8, 2009 6:13 PM in reply to Joe Wise
Don't go that far... I would have bought that if his had been a decisive vote, but it wasn't.
It was nice to get a Republican vote after all the "Super Bowl of Freedom" crap and Cantor's "no single Republican vote" rant. And I don't mean to take anything from the guy. But the truth is he voted Yes for the same reason most of those 39 Dems voted No. It's the flip side of the same picture.
(I concede that he is "courageous" in that he now probably has to worry about his safety more than those 39 Dems after his vote).
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
November 8, 2009 7:47 PM in reply to Joe Wise
Bullshit! Cao won against Jefferson ONLY because the run-off election was in December (a month after the regular election) and most folks forgot to vote. The man has no conscience. Look at his congressional voting record since coming to the house.
Conscience my ass! Why should we accept a right-wing fuck who votes with the Dems 5% of the time to represent a liberal district when we could have a liberal who votes with the Dems 100% of the time?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
BeeClone
November 8, 2009 9:39 PM in reply to FreeRider
Yes, he got an ear full from the voters in his districk after his no vote on the stimulus, he is just trying to hold onto his job.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Joe Wise
November 8, 2009 10:47 PM in reply to FreeRider
did you expect disgraceful dollar bill jefferson to win? is that what you are about: supporting liberals like jefferson? no one is arguing that cao is a tree hugging liberal, but i take him over dollar bill jefferson any day. look at the list of liberals who are being investigated by the house's ethics committee. do you support them, too?
Oh, I get it, anyone who does not agree with you is a wingnut, right? is obama a wingnut, too? after all, he has continued many of the bush's policies; he may even escalate war in afghanistan, too; and his economic policy is not much for liberals to write home about.
Give cao credit when credit is due. even biden has enough sense to know not to judge people's motive, for it only only shows one's ignorance. how is your judging cao's motive different from mullah limbaugh's attacking obama's going to dover as a photo op?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Joe Wise
November 8, 2009 10:49 PM in reply to Joe Wise
the above message was meant as a reply to freerider.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
November 8, 2009 11:20 PM in reply to Joe Wise
You're an idiot! This is not a choice between Corrupt Jefferson and Cao. This is a choice between Cao and the Democrat they will nominate next time.
Jefferson is in jail. 2010 has nothing whatsoever to do with him. That's a straw man argument.
Fuck Cao!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Joe Wise
November 8, 2009 11:39 PM in reply to FreeRider
touchy, feely, aren't we!
my point is simple: give credit when credit is due and don't judge people's motive. what is your proof for calling cao a right wing? your name-calling and rhetoric is not different from the braindead wingnuts. one angry bunch.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AJM
November 9, 2009 12:15 AM in reply to Joe Wise
He voted with the right wing in 90% of the last crunch votes according to Progressivepunch.org according the Googles Oct. 31 cache. And his record of voting with progressives is 40% -- far worse than most of the Blue Dogs.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
November 9, 2009 8:39 AM in reply to Joe Wise
Fuck you and your right-wing toady Cao!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Joe Wise
November 9, 2009 11:27 AM in reply to FreeRider
Is this the best that you can represent your liberal values? Nice way to win friends and influence people. I am sure you make all the libs here proud. way to go.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
November 9, 2009 2:07 PM in reply to Joe Wise
I don't want you for a friend and I don't want Cao in the House.
Got that?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
roxanne
November 8, 2009 8:49 PM in reply to Joe Wise
It that were the case then McCain would have won. No, Obama won because he was an exceptional candidate an intellectual! But, you keep telling yourself that bullshit if it makes the ass kicking the GOP got last year easier for you. You problem voted for McCain and thought he'd win because she's a woman. What you didn't realize is that she's straight up trash, she's uneducated despite attending 5 colleges. Go back to faux news where you all share a collective brain!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
roxanne
November 8, 2009 8:55 PM in reply to roxanne
Forgive my typos but, I'm watching the Cowboys/Eagles game while trying to type. I don't want to be mistaken for a teabagging, rightwing idiot!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Joe Wise
November 8, 2009 11:49 PM in reply to roxanne
keep up the anger and one day you will be a wingnut, too.
my point is simple: sure, cao won because his opponent messed up, but do you think he would win if the economy didn't collapse?
we can sit and pontificate all day about this ... but at the end of the day, there is one fact: cao won!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Joe Wise
November 8, 2009 11:50 PM in reply to Joe Wise
the second "he" refers to obama.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
November 9, 2009 8:43 AM in reply to Joe Wise
Another moronic statement from another moron! YES! Obama would have won even if the economy had not collapsed. From May-November, there were 2-3 polls out of 200 where McCain led Obama.
Obama would have won because (a) the Republicans were incompetent turds (b) McCain was an addled, angry old man (c) Obama ran a much better campaign.
Unlike Cao, his win was not a fluke.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
November 8, 2009 6:22 PM in reply to FreeRider
Unfortunately it won't happen down there. I have a good friend in the area down there and he said a progressive/liberal candidate cannot get elected.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
November 8, 2009 7:49 PM in reply to lousgirl84
That's not true! It's a very, very heavily Democratic district. Jefferson was liberal but he was also a crook. We can get a liberal who is not a crook. We don't need that asshole representing that district.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AhTrini1
November 9, 2009 10:17 AM in reply to FreeRider
LMAO
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AhTrini1
November 9, 2009 10:19 AM in reply to FreeRider
LMAO
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JeffB
November 9, 2009 1:27 PM in reply to FreeRider
Is Health Care legislation D.O.A in the Senate?
http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=6460
.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ttarleton
November 8, 2009 1:48 PM
Time to switch parties, Mr. Cao : : :
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
kash79
November 8, 2009 1:56 PM in reply to ttarleton
and positions on some issues, like may be abortion rights.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
johnmccsf
November 8, 2009 2:12 PM in reply to kash79
Jesuit from NOLA???
Flying pigs over Tchoupitoulas Stree
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
geofu54
November 8, 2009 2:45 PM in reply to kash79
Abortion is an emotive issue. Though I'm a pro-choice myself, I could at least understand it if they are sincerely against it from religious or whatever reasons. What I cannot stand is rather intellectual dishonesty of those wingnuts who, while aganist women's reproductive rights (and using it to their political benefit), are busy cutting public support to children.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Stroszek
November 8, 2009 2:56 PM in reply to geofu54
The sadder reality is that many of those right-wingers are sincere in their beliefs as well. Many American "conservative" churches (including the C Street group of which Stupak is a member) prescribe to "prosperity theology" which teaches that God wants poor children to be poor because he doesn't like them. I know that sounds like a joke, but just google "prosperity theology" for a peek inside the absolutely warped mind of the Christian right.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CT Voter
November 8, 2009 3:05 PM in reply to Stroszek
Thanks for that tip. I did just that, and found:
It implies both that people who are favored by God will be materially successful, and also that materially successful people are successful because God favored them
Interesting. Hard work, sacrifice, discipline? No. It's because God favors you.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
roxanne
November 8, 2009 9:00 PM in reply to CT Voter
Which is sad because I don't believe in god. I also don't believe in sticking my nose into other womens wombs! That doesn't sound right! Abortion is a personal issue. I'd no sooner tell a woman what she could or couldn't do with her body anymore that I'd tell a man to get a penile implant. It's just none of our business!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
geofu54
November 8, 2009 4:18 PM in reply to Stroszek
Thanks for the tip. So in a nutshell it preaches "God does not love his children equally"? Whoa. Sounds very biblical...
By the by, for starters I went to Wikipedia first, and found this.
(one of the citations there is this http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-11-07-televangelist-probe_N.htm)
which makes me momentarily confused. So what was the conclusion of the "probe"? Gotta get back to google.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mikedrevguy
November 8, 2009 5:12 PM in reply to Stroszek
yeah, that prosperity theology is a load of crap - and has helped the Church establishment damage more honestly grace seeking children of God -. Preached this week on the Abundant sufficiency of God's blessing. 1Kings 17: 8-16. we're not promised, nor can we expect anything else. God's grace is sufficient - and does not yield itself to financial pro$perity - plain and simple!!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
kash79
November 8, 2009 3:04 PM in reply to geofu54
My point was CAO could change parties for the remainder of his term, but I see no point in giving this district away to at best a moderate republican when a progressive liberal with aligning positions can win the seat.
Politically, it sounds ridiculous to organize and donate to progressive candidate to win against conservative democratic candidate in hardcore conservative district. That means both wasting too much money, and risking even a hardcore teabagging republican win the seat.
Similarly, it doesn't make sense to let a moderate republican to run on a democratic ticket in what seems to be a district which would vote for a more progressive candidate.
My point was about the politics of keeping the majority.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
geofu54
November 8, 2009 4:26 PM in reply to kash79
Got ya. And I totally agree.
Personally, I would welcome him should he want to switch (at least he is not a Jesus freak). But that does not mean we would need to support his re-election. In fact, I don't think he is doomed either way in that district. With the "Yes" vote, he as a Republican won't survive if primary-challenged by a wingnut, and with his other votes he as either a Republican or a Democrat won't survive there either.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
geofu54
November 8, 2009 4:29 PM in reply to geofu54
I meant to say, "I think he is doomed either way."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
agio
November 9, 2009 12:53 PM in reply to kash79
It might be worth the melodrama if the Lilly white Republican party actually tried to drum him out of their ranks. I don't think it will happen, though.
My guess is Democrats take the district back in '10.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
bluebell
November 8, 2009 3:13 PM in reply to geofu54
Oh, I get the pro-lifers. Most actually have a principle they are trying to defend. What I can't understand are the faux pro-choice Democrats who sell out reproductive rights on every difficult vote. They have NO principles.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
junkmailqueen
November 8, 2009 4:52 PM in reply to bluebell
What I can't understand are the faux pro-choice Democrats who sell out reproductive rights on every difficult vote. They have NO principles.
You're right. No principles. And when a compromise must be made in order to be all cozy and "bipartisan" with conservatives, women are ALWAYS the first sacrifice of choice.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
BeeClone
November 8, 2009 4:56 PM in reply to geofu54
Yes. The rights of the unborn are very high on their list, but helping children not so much see the vote on SCHIP.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Andreams
November 9, 2009 9:29 AM in reply to geofu54
They're also putting children in prison for life and think the death penalty is totally justified.... strange people, those wingnuts.
I'm not saying one position is wrong or right but if you truly believe in taking away a woman's right to choose because life is so precious, how in the world can you support killing these same people when they're grown?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jdb316
November 8, 2009 3:18 PM in reply to kash79
If you're going to be "pro-life," you have to understand that there is a lot more to that than simply being against abortion rights. Mr. Cao seems to understand that.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AJM
November 9, 2009 12:21 AM in reply to jdb316
Right. He was willing to let the people in his district die if it meant preventing women from getting abortions. He only voted for the bill after the Stupak Amendment.
To get it you have to understand that the old pro-choice joke that for a Right to Lifer life begins and conception and ends at birth describes their policy decisions accurately.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
BeeClone
November 9, 2009 10:52 AM in reply to AJM
Well put!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AJM
November 9, 2009 12:16 AM in reply to kash79
Why bother -- Obama doesn't support abortion rights judging by Obama's actions on this bill --- or didn't you notice?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
agio
November 9, 2009 12:55 PM in reply to AJM
Obama hasn't done anything but cheerlead, as is his place.
If Pelosi could have passed the bill without the Stupak Amendment I think she would have.
This is how the sausage gets made. Hopefully the amendment can be stripped or at least minimized in conference.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AJM
November 9, 2009 2:22 PM in reply to agio
Hope and donation to Obama will get you the Stupak Amendment.
"Cheerleading",as you naively call it, is making the political call on what you are willing to sacrifice in order to get a bill. What Obama was willing to sacrifice was the right of women to make their own decisions.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
DonDavis
November 8, 2009 2:16 PM
GOP Splits on How to 'Get Even' With Joseph Cao
http://satiricalpolitical.com/2009/11/08/gop-splits-on-how-to-get-even-with-joseph-cao/
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CT Voter
November 8, 2009 2:59 PM
This is hilarious.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CT Voter
November 8, 2009 3:01 PM in reply to CT Voter
Argh. Damn html tags.
symbol of party diversity
That's hilarious.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Kuyleh
November 8, 2009 3:14 PM
A Republican with balls? What's the temperature downstairs, anyone know?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rynato
November 8, 2009 4:01 PM
Yes, I agree with ttarleton; Cao should switch parties if Steele goes after him.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
tootles
November 8, 2009 4:32 PM
It seems strange that a black man would even utter the words
"we will come after you" (BOY)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
idlemind
November 8, 2009 4:41 PM
It seems strange that the Archbishop, so committed to the sanctity of life, had nothing to say about the impact of the bill on the lives of the uninsured and sick. Not like Jesus ever taught anything about helping the sick -- he was all about saving the unborn.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
BeeClone
November 8, 2009 5:20 PM in reply to idlemind
It's not about following Jesus, it's about the power.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Stroszek
November 8, 2009 6:30 PM in reply to BeeClone
Exactly. As any progressive evangelical will tell you, there's no quicker way to marginalize yourself in America than by preaching for social justice.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
cat
November 8, 2009 4:57 PM
I like Cao. Everytime I see him interviewed it sounds like he hearts Obama. Obama has been lobbying him for votes since his inauguration when he knew he would need votes to pass the stimulus. I think Cantor set on him and wouldn't let him vote yes on that, but it is funny to me that Cantor couldn't control Cao's vote after he promised the mob of Teabaggers that "No Republican will vote for this bill." HuffPo said Cantor ran out of the chamber after Cao voted yea and the Dems cheered for him. Wish there was video of that.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Joe Wise
November 8, 2009 10:53 PM in reply to cat
I agree. the man is well educated and at times very thoughtful.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
November 8, 2009 11:36 PM in reply to cat
Oh, please! Cao is an opportunistic asshole. He made it perfectly clear that he would ONLY vote for the bill if it was already going to pass.
What kind of conscience is that? If he believed it was right, he would have helped it pass but he sat on his hands until the end.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Joe Wise
November 9, 2009 1:36 PM in reply to FreeRider
Your comments are just as vile and thoughtless as many of the comments on the right wing blogs.
those who have followed the debate knows that going into the night a) the dems had enough votes to pass the bill (do you think pelosi would be stupid enough to bring it up to vote if she didn't have enought votes?), b) that cao has been leaning toward voting for it (check out his video on youtube); cao made up his mind 15 minutes before the vote and told the gop leaders that he would vote for the bill after the dems has gotten 218 votes.
so it really doesn't matter when he vote for the bill, since its passage is already determined. the real question is why did he wait til the end.
use your brain and stop shooting with your potty mouth. you are just as ideological as the wingnuts.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
November 9, 2009 2:09 PM in reply to Joe Wise
Fuck you and your right wing toady!
That seat should be held by a Democrat who will vote like a Democrat, not some wingnut who voted like a Democrat one time to save his sorry life!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
eyewonder
November 8, 2009 6:06 PM
This guy waited to the last minute to vote. When he knew the bill had already passed.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
barrelhse
November 8, 2009 6:37 PM in reply to eyewonder
He didn't have to then, did he? He showed a lot more balls than you seem to have.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Saint Augustine
November 8, 2009 6:56 PM in reply to barrelhse
No balls actually. Had he voted before there were already 218 votes would be a slap in the face to the republiscums.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
storm
November 8, 2009 8:56 PM in reply to Saint Augustine
you don't think he is going to have to face eddy 'tea bagger - i promise no r votes' cantor?
The man should wear a cup. Or better, find W's mission accomplished cod piece.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
kfreed
November 9, 2009 2:23 AM in reply to Saint Augustine
There's a non-argument if ever there was one.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Overreach THIS!
November 9, 2009 5:13 AM in reply to Saint Augustine
Oh, come on! You don't slap somebody who could come back and hurt you badly if know that some big ape is going to smack him with a 2x4 in the coming 15 seconds! He seems to have promised his vote to Obama at Noon and while he was much relieved not to have been #218, that doesn't mean he wouldn't have pulled the switch if he had to.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
OceanDog
November 8, 2009 7:57 PM
A key piece of info missing is that Cao voted yes because the Stupak-Pitts amendment passed. Had that been defeated, he would've voted NO on the health care reform bill.
Constituents of the Dems who voted FOR Stupak-Pitts but voted NO for the reform bill should all be flooding their phone systems, telling them their double-whammy vote will have repercussions.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
USgreentech
November 8, 2009 11:09 PM
Michael Steele is an idiot.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Indie Pro
November 8, 2009 11:10 PM
He's an honest conservative who voted for a conservative bill.
He should quit the far right wing looney republicans and join the conservative democratic party.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Stroszek
November 8, 2009 11:26 PM
Off-topic, but why is Josh posting false info on the front page? The letter from "BK" is completely wrong. The mandates don't go into effect before 2013. TPM needs to lay off the tea bagger sensationalism and read the bill before more anti-reform propagandist play you guys for suckers.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Indie Pro
November 9, 2009 12:13 AM in reply to Stroszek
he updated it:
Late Update: I realize that the original version of this post wasn't entirely clear. It was not my understanding that mandates and the exchanges are staggered in the way that BK suggests. And I've just confirmed that that is not the case. The issue is that few of the structural changes go into effect before the 2012 election. Bans on denial of coverage for pre-existing conditions, dropping people as soon as they get sick ("recision") will go into effect earlier, basically new regs cracking down insurance companies' behavior. And those should be popular for a lot of people. But the stuff that really tackles cost and other aspects of availability won't go into effect during this presidential term. That's problematic politically for the Democrats. And I think it also raises the real prospect that the insurance companies will start pulling various pricing shenanigans in advance of 2013, hoping they can create the political climate for repeal before those parts of the legislation come into effect.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Stroszek
November 9, 2009 12:21 AM in reply to Indie Pro
Excellent.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
kfreed
November 9, 2009 2:29 AM in reply to Indie Pro
"And I think it also raises the real prospect that the insurance companies will start pulling various pricing shenanigans in advance of 2013, hoping they can create the political climate for repeal before those parts of the legislation come into effect."
I'm pretty sure that rasing premiums in the interim would have the opposite effect. If anything, it would have people salivating for the public option by 2013.
And yes...BK's analysis of the bill was entirely incorrect, and am not sure why TPM decided to pull this one opinion out of the bag. They should know better.
TPM: Do your homework.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
kfreed
November 9, 2009 2:13 AM
I know little to nothing about Rep. Cao, and therefore cannot speak as to any ulterior motive other than the one he gave us for crossing the aisle (as some suggest).
I WILL say this for him: if he is one in support of the pro-life cause, and understands that being pro-life means being pro "LIFE", then his vote in support of H.R. 3962 makes perfect sense to me. He appears to embrace the notion that the "right to life" is not limited to the unborn.
Though I may not agree with whatever he may or may not do in future, on this issue I will gladly extend him the credit he deserves. Bravo to you, Congressman Cao!
For the record, I am pro-choice. One other thing: the anti-abortion clause in the bill did not diminish the rights of women in the slightest, it merely upheld the laws already in place prohibiting the use of federal funding for abortions. It has always been thus. Certain factions of Congress wanted to turn the health care debate into yet another knock-down-drag-out over abortion and it had no place in this legislation. That is a seperate issue and another fight entirely. Losing votes for health care reform over this issue would have been beyond stupid. Pelosi did what she had to do.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Overreach THIS!
November 9, 2009 5:26 AM in reply to kfreed
You're right, it's perfectly consistent. He seems to be a very moral man. This from my blog http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/mare_nostrum/2009/11/the-tao-of-cao-a-iighthearted.php might interest you if you haven't seen:
"UPDATE: The truth is always struggling to get out our mouths and it takes a substantial and constant effort to contain it. Cao was able to say little about the real reason for voting aye for the first six and a half minutes of this video but around 6:30 he spills the beans, http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/11/08/cao-says-he-put-his-districts-needs-over-his-partys-wishes/ or some of them: he has worked with Obama on Katrina reconstruction and thinks he can get more aid for New Orleans by playing along, and also for the Vietnamese community nationwide. In addition to not being tarred and feathered in his heavily Democrat district, that is."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?