Republicans who didn't vote for Violence Against Women Act say they did anyway because why not?

Let's say you're a Republican. (Sorry, I know there's no greater insult, but stick with me here.) So you're a Republican, and you've just voted against reauthorizing the Violence Against Women Act'which has always, in its two-decade history, enjoyed broad bipartisan support because, until your party was hijacked by the uber-wingnuts, combatting violence against women was considered uncontroversial and, you know, good. Despite your best efforts to exclude not-white, not-straight women from the bill, it finally passes anyway.

So what do you do? You just lie and say you voted for it anyway. Hey, Michele Bachmann, why don't you show us how it's done?

"Rep. Bachmann recognizes the importance of giving local law enforcement and nonprofit programs the resources they need to fight against domestic violence and sexual assault, which is why she supported the stronger House version of the Violence Against Women Act," said Bachmann spokesman Dan Kotman.

Well, no. The "stronger" House version of VAWA was the one that actually passed. The one that provided protection for all women. The one Bachmann voted against.

And she's not the only one who's trying to get credit for supporting a bill she voted against. Apparently, several of her colleagues in the House got the same genius idea. Just boast of supporting the amendment proposed by Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, the one that only covered some women, the one that was never going to get through the Senate, the one the president said he would not sign'and ignore those pesky "no" votes they cast when the House voted on the real bill. Who will know the difference, right?

Head below the fold for more Republicans patting themselves on the back for votes they didn't actually cast.