Free Markets, Free People

The Stretch To Call Porkulus “Bi-Partisan”

For the Washington Post, it only takes 3 Republicans (out of approx 218 Congressional Republicans) to declare the “stimulus” bill to be a “bi-partisan” achievement.

As I said yesterday, and the WaPo article validates,  those three who will vote for this give the veneer of bi-partisan legitimacy to the bill and something the left and its fellow travelers will use to give them cover.

Calling this bill “bi-partisan” is like calling Andrew Sullivan’s obsession with Sarah Pallin “rational”.  But WaPo dutifully tries to frame the narrative:

The bipartisan deal was cut after two days of talks and would cut more than $100 billion from the $920 billion bill, dropping its cost to about $820 billion, if amendments added on the Senate floor are retained.

Of course the key phrase in that sentence is “if amendments added on the Senate floor are retained“. The bill must now be negotiated with the House and all of that which was cut may very well end up back in there. As Carl Cameron pointed out last night, you might expect bills with similar totals to be an easily negotiated, but that’s not the case. Different programs make up the amounts in each bill, and historically these negotiations haven’t lowered the totals for the final bill, but, instead, increased them – sometimes dramatically. And it is certainly possible those amendments added by Republicans could be discarded.

If that happens, and it is entirely possible, what will the three RINOs do then?


9 Responses to The Stretch To Call Porkulus “Bi-Partisan”

  • “If that happens, and it is entirely possible, what will the three RINOs do then?”

    Well the 3 RINOs will vote for it anyway.  After all they will claim that they are acting in the best interest of the country.  Meanwhile Dems will get the political cover they need over this “Bipartisian” crap sandwich.

  • If that happens, and it is entirely possible, what will the three RINOs do then?

    — They’ll vote for it anyway.

    Drum them out of the caucus.


    This is actually one of the few times where the party can afford to have these kind of purges.

  • PS- Who called it? I said many times “bipartisian means what they want it to mean”. All they need is 1 RINO to ring the bipartisian bell

  • NPR this morning was pushing the same “Senate bipartisanship” meme.  They referred to a “gang of” and “several” republicans crossing the aisle to support the bill.  This all makes me ill.

  • I’m waiting for Spector, Collins and the other RINO’s to be annointed “mavericks” by MiniTru.  Poor John McCain; how it must feel to no longer be MiniTru’s fair-haired boy.

  • It seems to me that the opposition to the bill in the House is more bipartisan than the support for it in the Senate. So if bipartisanship is the goal, shouldn’t the House action be the standard?