Dold, Schneider Join Budget Debate
With scant support for bipartisan proposal, Dold votes for Ryan Republican budget. Schneider claims bill hurts seniors and middle class.
Photos
After joining a failed bipartisan effort to adopt a broad approach to rein in the country’s financial condition Wednesday, Rep. Robert Dold (R-Kenilworth) voted for the Republican House budget proposed by Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) Thursday.
Dold’s decision to go along with the House Republican majority after the initial idea did not get much support from either party drew criticism from Deerfield management consultant Brad Schneider, Dold’s Democratic opponent in the Nov. 6 general election.
Dold joined a group of Democrats and Republicans to introduce a proposed budget for the next fiscal year based on recommendations two years ago by President Barack Obama’s deficit reduction commission, known as the Simpson-Bowles Commission.
The latest rendition of a bipartisan approach to the budget, know as Cooper-LaTourette, lost, 382-38.
“I support the Cooper-LaTourette budget because my constituents are crying out for us to find common ground and advance solutions on a bipartisan basis,” Dold said. “I was pleased to work with some of the Democrats on this serious proposal that puts everything on the table for discussion.”
The idea coupled spending cuts and entitlement reforms with changes to the tax structure.
Schneider called Dold’s decision to back the House Republican plan, which passed with a 228-191 vote, “unfortunate” because of its treatment of Medicare and the undue burden it places on middle class and older Americans.
“We should not balance the budget on the backs of families and seniors who can afford it the least, especially while we keep giving out tax breaks to those who simply do not need them,” Schneider said.
Schneider would begin by ending favorable tax treatment for companies which transfer jobs outside the country, reduce subsidies to oil companies and eliminate military spending already approved by Defense Secretary Leon Panetta.
“I know with smart policy decisions, we can cut spending and balance the budget in common sense ways that protect the middle class,” Schneider said. “We have an obligation to our children to get our deficit under control as well as a duty to our seniors to protect Medicare.”
Recognizing the House leaves Medicare intact for those 55 and over, Dold joined his fellow Republicans voting for the proposal because it helps contain the country’s debt.
“I voted to support the Republican budget proposal because this blueprint provides a clear vision of what this country needs to do to get our skyrocketing debt and deficits under control and put us back on a path to prosperity,” Dold said. “I appreciate the importance of both looking at the big picture and the pragmatic need to find a way to get things done.”
RB
9:50 am on Friday, March 30, 2012
On one hand, the Republican's say they don't want to leave their children with debt,on the other- they change programs that today benefit everyone, not just seniors. Under the Ryan plan, employees will begin paying taxes on the employer paid portion of healthcare premiums.
Instead of spending so much time on a budget that won't go anywhere, why don't the Republicans begin addressing problems in a true bipartisan way?
Mr. Dold signed a contract (see pledge to Grover Norquist) that he would never vote to raise revenue. So, how can he be bipartisan ? Answer: only during election season.
Deep Dish Pizza
10:12 am on Sunday, April 8, 2012
The Republican Ryan plan that Dold voted for actually makes the debt worse with more tax giveaways to the uber-wealthy.
Dold knew this bipartisan budget thing would go down in flames but at least he can use it like a prop so his vote record is only Tea Party 9 times out of 10 instead of 10 for 10.
If Dold really was a moderate he would've voted AGAINST the Ryan plan out of principle (it would've passed anyway). But no.
Dold voted for the Tea Party on the Republican Ryan disaster plan. AND he voted for it last year too!
RB
9:55 am on Friday, March 30, 2012
The budget Mr. Dold voted for takes away money from many programs that aid people but does not take away tax subsidies for Giant Oil Companies.
David
5:51 pm on Friday, March 30, 2012
RB, Bob voted for the Simpson Bowless act, a bi-partisan solution that ends the tax breaks for big oil. http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/budget/218361-centrists-offer-bipartisan-bowles-simpson-budget-amendment-?tmpl=component&page=
Deep Dish Pizza
10:15 am on Sunday, April 8, 2012
David - that was a throw away vote.
9 times out of 10 Dold votes with the Tea Party.
Just like the Planned Parenthood vote last year Dold made a huge deal out of his "moderate" vote on a throw-away vote. Then he flip-flopped and voted with the Tea Party on the real vote (the final vote).
Dold did the same thing here on this budget circus. Throw-away vote on a meaningless thing that he knows won't go anywhere so he can "appear" moderate and send out a bunch of press releases.
Then on the real vote Dold flip-flops and votes with the Tea Party anyway.
Ellen Beth Gill
10:27 am on Friday, March 30, 2012
This assumes that Cooper-LaTourette was a compromise and a moderate approach. That's a pretty large assumption and is based on the ratio of spending cuts to tax reform and compares it to Bowles-Simpson. However, as James Horney, Vice President for Federal Fiscal Policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities points out, the two bills use different standards for measuring tax reform to spending cuts. Cooper-LaTourette assumes the Bush tax cuts are extended. As Horney has said, "On the same baseline on which Bowles-Simpson is 1:1, the Cooper-LaTourette plan is 2:1 — that is, two dollars in spending cuts for every dollar in tax increases, or far more tilted toward spending cuts, and far less toward tax increases, than Bowles-Simpson."
Ellen Beth Gill
10:34 am on Friday, March 30, 2012
Cooper-TaLourette would have made larger cuts to discretionary programs than Bowles Simpson and takes less out of our already inflated "security" spending and created targets that if not met would have automatically triggered deep cuts in important programs, including health care programs. So, Dold trying to use his initial support for this bill to show how moderate he is, well that's just another falsehood.
Louis G. Atsaves
10:44 am on Friday, March 30, 2012
So which bill did Schneider claim to support? Gill has been falsely portraying Dold for three years now. When called on those falsehoods, she banned certain individuals who disagreed with her on her blog, leaving it one big echo chamber, i.e. you either agree with her extremist views or you get booted!
Deep Dish Pizza
10:16 am on Sunday, April 8, 2012
Poor sad little Louis.
No matter how hard he tries to spin for his buddy Bobby Dold the facts don't lie.
Dold votes with the Tea Party 9 times out of 10.
RB
10:56 am on Friday, March 30, 2012
I want a Representative willing to look at all solutions. Spending cuts and revenue increases. If Mr. Dold had merely campaigned about 'not wanting higher taxes', I could understand his effort to appear moderate. But, Mr. Dold campaigned as a signer of the Norquist pledge never to raise revenue. Never, ever. Strong words. Plus, he signed a contract and pledge. If he voids it, he will have the wrath of Mr. Norquist. What's left for him to do?
So, now he's wanting to appear moderate. Has he released The District from the strangle-hold of such a pledge? No, his signature is still there.
Any attempt by him to appear moderate is simple campaign rhetoric when his signature and alliegence to Grover Norquist say something else.
Deep Dish Pizza
10:19 am on Sunday, April 8, 2012
RB - don't forget that in 2010
-- Dold told the Tea Party he's more conservative than he can admit to the public
-- Dold forced the Illinois Tea Party magazine to make him appear more moderate when they did their candidate ratings
-- Dold got caught by the Daily Herald for having his supporters spam comment boards with fake talking points (looks familiar like maybe he's still doing it to the Patch too)
Dold can try to """appear""" moderate all he wants.
His vote record shows he votes with the Tea Party 9 times out of 10.
Dan Jenks
11:33 am on Friday, March 30, 2012
RB, I agree with you that the answer is a combination of spending cuts and tax increases. As an independent voter, I will vote for the candidate who most closely hews to the philosophy of Bowles-Simpson. I believe that we, as Americans, aren't paying for what we consume in government services (defense, entitlement programs, etc.). I don't believe we can raise taxes on the rich enough to solve the problems we face with regard to our entitlement programs, in particular, Medicare.
By supporting Cooper-LaTourette - which appears to call for tax increases - Dold has effectively reneged on his pledge to Norquist - good for him. Asking him to formally renounce the pledge and his party in general is just silly.
We have 2 good candidates in this race - I look forward to hearing their ideas on fiscal policy. I agree with you RB that I don't want to hear more platitudes like "we can never raise taxes" or "we can never reform entitlements".
RB
12:46 pm on Friday, March 30, 2012
Its only 'silly' to expect him to renounce his pledge if he did not take it seriously in the first place. Plus, renouncing his pledge will bring the wrath of Norquist and those voters who thought he did take it seriously. Dold is simply playing both sides of the street unless he does renounce his pledge. It is a big deal and not silly at all.
Dold votes with the Republican pack, is not an independent thinker, is not a moderate and is not who I care to have Represent the District.
william brown
11:49 am on Friday, March 30, 2012
Dold votes as Dold is TOLD
Dan Jenks
2:16 pm on Friday, March 30, 2012
RB, the problem in this country is that we discourage politicians from compromising. Tea Partiers are probably calling Dold a sell-out for supporting Cooper-LaTourette, you say he is "playing both sides of the street", as if this was some elaborate conspiracy by Dold.
How does the conspiracy work? Dold has to convince people that he is a moderate so he supports legislation that he really opposes but knows will lose so that he will appear a moderate and still be able to vote for the legislation he likes all along. Huh?
Similar lines of attack will happen to Schneider if he decides to compromise on entitlement reform. The Move-on people will accuse him of being a sell-out ("Republican lite"), the right-wingers will say that he is "playing both sides of the street." Is this really what we want in our politics? Don't we want people to compromise? Isn't that the way to a solution?
RB
2:36 pm on Friday, March 30, 2012
I think compromise is absolutely the real solution. That's how things have worked in Washington for years. Until recently. Once the Tea Party and the Republican Freshmen showed up, compromise ended. Everyone is so wrapped up in ideology that nothing is getting done.
One way for Compromise to bloom this Spring would be for Mr. Dold to remove his approval of the Norquist demand of no new revenue under any circumstances. That would be a start. As it is, he can't compromise without breaking his pledge. Wouldn't you rather he break the pledge now so that he can compromise when necessary.
Gary
2:51 pm on Friday, March 30, 2012
"Don't we want people to compromise? Isn't that the way to a solution?"
It depends on what that compromise is. Compromise without principle or without consideration for the long term effects may not be a very good solution.
All of our "compromises" end up being the most politically expedient solution, which usually means dumping the problem on the next generation by:
1. Raising taxes to fund entitlements, which essentially turns the screws on the next generation to pay for the Ponzi scheme we put in place.
2. Raising requirements for entitlements, which is a form of default.
3. Deficit spend and sell more treasuries, which pushes the debt out to the future where the next generation has to pay for it.
4. Make unsustainable, unfunded promises to huge numbers of people, which will create the environment for a generational war.
"Don't we want people to compromise?" ... is the wrong question to ask. Exactly who's compromising what?
If the issue were free speach, would you want someone to compromise? How about civil rights? Freedom? How much will you give up to pay for a bridge to nowhere? You know, just to compromise.
The better question to ask is: "Will our representatives obey the laws, protect our rights, spend our money responsibly, and vote to build a country that will be sustainable, strong, and free in the future?"
I have no intention of compromising on any of that.
Louis G. Atsaves
3:22 pm on Friday, March 30, 2012
RB on the one hand talks about compromise. He then along with Gill falsely labels Dold as a Tea Partier. It takes an honest political debate to reach compromise. Falsely exaggerating Dold's positions or refusing to consider other points of view gets us no place..
Want to raise government revenues? Grow the economy, add more taxpayers.
RB
3:38 pm on Friday, March 30, 2012
'Add more taxpayers', would that be through low tax rates for the job creaters? That's a Republican no compromise stance I believe. Well, I've got news for you. The Job Creaters have had the tax rate for 10 years now. Where are the jobs? They banked the money. Demand creates jobs. If employers have no need to more capacity, they won't add jobs.
Falsely exaggerating Mr. Dold's positions? Ask Mr. Norquist if signing the pledge was not a serious stance. If he signed it, it was not really a serious deal. I think you'll find that Mr. Norquist will disagree that his pledge is an exaggeration.
When did I label Mr. Dold a Tea Partier? I said he appealed to the Tea Party back when he ran the first time, by signing the Grover Norquist Pledge.
Oldest and tired argument about growing the economy with your trickle down approach. The recession is proof that does not work. End regulations? The banking crisis is proof that does not work.
Louis G. Atsaves
7:11 pm on Friday, March 30, 2012
RB, I said nothing about tax breaks for job creators. Even Norquist agrees to adding more taxpayers into the system. More people working means more taxpayers. And while other candidates who ran in the GOP primary courted the tea party, Dold did not.
I know you like to repeat the same arguments ad nauseum, but telling fibs about Dold is not political debate. Neither is putting words in the mouths of your opponents that you would like them to say, i.e. the straw man argument.
The spend and borrow approach has buried our Federal Government and State Governments, both controlled by Democrats. Now the "Party of No" is the Democratic Senate in Washington! Someday they may even pass a budget. They have had nearly four years to do so!
My, my, my!
RB
7:39 pm on Friday, March 30, 2012
Louis, the following link shows that Dold identified himself as a Tea Party Candidate first time around...later wanting to be identified as a moderate. no fib there.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/10/15/us/politics/20101015-tea-party-groups.html
You described trickle down economics and you're right, I assumed your economic tax stance as the usual Republican Party line of putting money in the hands of job creaters will create jobs. If you don't believe that, you are correct. Demand creates jobs. I'm sorry for that assumption.
Louis G. Atsaves
9:28 pm on Friday, March 30, 2012
RB, Dold asked a tea party group NOT to rate him and the liberal NYT in ONE article felt that was proof he was a tea partier in disguise, and you call that proof? I remember that incident very well.
Let's see how often Schneider demands the same from super liberal groups and I will be quick to turn the tables on him using that crazy logic.
Where are the jobs? Ask Obama who didn't even bother to try to help the middle class until his approval ratings plunged. Ask Obama who hasn't prosecuted a Wall Streeter for causing the big crash, probably because the Wall Streeters donated to his campaign over McCain's by a 3-1 margin. Ask the poor and the middle class about those Obama policies that have now given us record high gas prices.
So keep changing the subject. Obama must be shown the door and the Obama enablers like Schneider and Duckworth must be told "thanks, but we've had enough!"
RB
10:16 pm on Friday, March 30, 2012
Louis, you changed the subject to Ms. Duckworth and I can't believe you support Joe Walsh. Makes me wonder just how 'moderate' your Mr. Dold could be to garner your support.
My my
RB
10:30 am on Saturday, March 31, 2012
Louis, regarding your wanting to defeat Ms. Duckworth. Did you catch what your candidate Joe Walsh said about Ms. Duckworth? I'll paraphrase it for you. "she's a wounded war vet, what else has she done?" Well, for one, she served the Veterans within the VA. Surprised he would minimize such a job. Mr. Walsh IS a Tea Party candidate and I don't think you're going to be able to dispute that.
I guess is still have some difficulty with how you can help the District determine whether Mr. Dold is a moderate or not, when you support someone as extreme as Mr. Walsh.
Deep Dish Pizza
10:20 am on Sunday, April 8, 2012
Dold votes with the Tea Party 9 times out of 10
RB
3:55 pm on Friday, March 30, 2012
Some people are willing to shut the Government down and have our credit rating reduced instead of compromising and accepting a very reasonable solution just because it "compromises" their promise to Grover Norquist.
Too much emphasis on what you give up vs. what you gain by compromise will get you a deadlocked Congress just like we have today.
Our system works that way and when ideology gets so extreme that people we elect vote to allow the country to default instead of a little give and take we are in for just what we've been getting, no real work by Congress.
Dold could take a leading role by saying he is willing to vote for some new revenue in a sensible tax reform and spending reduction plan by renouncing his pledge. He can't have it both ways.
Gary
4:19 pm on Friday, March 30, 2012
I guess you weren't paying attention. We raised the debt ceiling, spent faster than ever before, and our rating was still cut, BECAUSE we raised the debt ceiling and the ratings agency could see we would not be fiscally responsible. We did not vote to default. We would not have defaulted.
The people with money are scared to invest it because they are afraid of this administration and it's unilateral lawless belligerence toward business.
"a little give and take" !!! You have to be kidding. Obama is spending over $1 trillion per year more than we're taking in. That's not a little. That's a whole lot. I'm supposed to compromise with that? Please define "extreme spending" without referring to Obama's spending spree.
RB
5:05 pm on Friday, March 30, 2012
Gary, I was paying attention.
Why would I define 'extreme spending'? is it extreme to pay for 3 wars without a raise in revenue? Is it extreme to give tax breaks to big oil while they rake in profits? Is it extreme take away so much freedom in the name of 'freedom' and liberty? Is it extreme to vote for a budget that makes families pay taxes on their employers costs for healthcare, while the same budget keeps those tax subsidies for big oil?
I'll leave those decisions to you and thankfully many others who vote.
No, I'm not kidding you....Mr. Dold is!
David
6:36 pm on Friday, March 30, 2012
RB,
Any of these tax hikes proposed in Congress would be detrimental to small business in the 10th district. Bob Dold has worked to cut taxes for small business, which will create economic growth. You do understand higher taxes does not mean higher revenue? Ever hear of the laffer curve, it highlights people will just stop working if taxation is too high. The people of the 10th have a 10% sales tax, 9% state income tax and 25% federal income tax and countless other small business taxes! Bob understands the best way to raise revenue is to get more people working.
He is consistently rated as one of the most centrist Republicans in the House.
http://www.cq.com/graphics/weekly/2012/01/16/wr20120116-02prezsupport-cht4.pdf
Bob Dold broke party lines for Simpson Bowless. And the tax hikes proposed would inhibit small business growth in the 10th district, because many small businesses file as individuals.
Bob is moderate Republicans who looks out for the interests of the tenth district, the facts don't lie.
David
6:46 pm on Friday, March 30, 2012
In response to your "it quacks like a duck" You fail to cite any of your sources, also I encourage you to do research and find out what defines a Tea Party Republican. RB, is every Republican a Tea Party member? Is Mark Kirk? I am sure the 10th disgarees with your slandered views, read the articles and stop making up information Dold is one of the most moderate members of Congress. http://www.cq.com/graphics/weekly/2012/01/16/wr20120116-02prezsupport-cht4.pdf Bob Dold consistently breaks with party lines to get bills passed, http://www.nationaljournal.com/voteratings2011/searchable-vote-ratings-tables-house-20120223 Please read those articles and tell me what about them spells Tea party. Bob Dold works for the people of the 10th, not the Tea Party. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/bob_dold/412420 Stop spreading lies, and notice you did not cite any of your skewed stats
Ellen Beth Gill
4:29 pm on Friday, March 30, 2012
The Hill classified Bob Dold as one of the Tea Party Freshman in 2010. Dold had a townhall with Americans for Prosperity, the Koch Brothers funding arm for the Tea Parties. Dold got support from the Palatine Tea Party and the Tea Party Patriots. Dold himself spoke of his high regard for the Tea Party on Fox News back in February 2010. Now that the tea parties have lost members and respect, Dold is running as fast as he can away from the tea party, with the help of the mainstream media that calls anything from IL-10 a moderate, but he cannot change history.
David
5:37 pm on Friday, March 30, 2012
Ellen, The Hill consider every Republican and some moderate democrats to be Tea Party members. Bipartisanship > Partisanship.
Can you being to cite your sources and maybe back up your false claims with false statistics?
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/bob_dold/412420
Ellen Beth Gill
4:31 pm on Friday, March 30, 2012
Ooops, forgot to mention that Dold met with and accepted support from the Cook County Tea Party.
David
5:38 pm on Friday, March 30, 2012
Ooops! You forgot to mention Bob isn't part of the Tea Party
http://www.nationaljournal.com/voteratings2011/searchable-vote-ratings-tables-house-20120223
RB
6:39 pm on Friday, March 30, 2012
Mr. Dold attended Tea Party Fund Raisers and was endorsed by Freedom Works. His name is on Tea Party endorsed Website listings. Was he endorsed by the Tea Party? Koch Brothers? Phylis Schafly.....yes, he was. If it quacks like a duck.....
Ellen Beth Gill
4:36 pm on Friday, March 30, 2012
AND Dold was on the list of NYT tea party candidates on October 14, 2010.
David
4:56 pm on Friday, March 30, 2012
Ellen, I would love to see where you get these sources. You could not be more off. Bob Dold is one of the most moderate members of Congress. http://www.cq.com/graphics/weekly/2012/01/16/wr20120116-02prezsupport-cht4.pdf Bob Dold consistently breaks with party lines to get bills passed, http://www.nationaljournal.com/voteratings2011/searchable-vote-ratings-tables-house-20120223 Please read those articles and tell me what about them spells Tea party. Or do you think everybody that isn't a progressive a Tea Party member? Bob Dold works for the people of the 10th, not the Tea Party. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/bob_dold/412420 Stop spreading lies, and notice you did not cite any of your skewed stats.
RB
6:27 pm on Friday, March 30, 2012
David, if Mr. Dold is so bipartisan why does he remain a supporter of the Grover Norquist pledge of no new revenue. It seems to me that if Mr. Dold does have the interests of the District in mind, he would renounce his pledge so that he would be free to vote in the District's best interest. It's really very simple. Is his allegiance to Norquist going to get in his way of voting in our best interest? One way to make sure that it doesn't is to remove his name from the contract. He's bound to Norquist unless he renounces his pledge.
RB
7:27 pm on Friday, March 30, 2012
David, this link may show where some of your confusion comes from. It seems Mr. Dold identified himself as a Tea Party Candidate in the Primary. He started changing his stripes for the General Election. He wanted them to start calling him a moderate. Sound familiar?
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/10/15/us/politics/20101015-tea-party-groups.html
David
4:58 pm on Friday, March 30, 2012
Schneider consistently plays partisan games, everybody here has to read these articles and understand Bob Dold is consistently working for the people of the 10th.
Bipartisanship > Partisanship.
http://www.cq.com/graphics/weekly/2012/01/16/wr20120116-02prezsupport-cht4.pdf
http://www.nationaljournal.com/voteratings2011/searchable-vote-ratings-tables-house-20120223
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/bob_dold/412420
RB
7:12 pm on Friday, March 30, 2012
David, here's a link that ID's Dold as one of only 32% of Tea Party Candidates who won their elections....
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2010/11/03/5403120-just-32-of-tea-party-candidates-win
Here's another one where Dold is ID'd as a Tea Party Candidate
http://www.redstate.com/wilsonwrs/2010/11/10/tea-party-beats-the-average-in-competitive-races/
He was identified as a Tea Party Candidate and now he wants us to forget that. Hopefully, there are enough people in the District willing to investigate for the truth.
Cynthia
11:45 pm on Saturday, March 31, 2012
RB and all of you defying logic. You are citing blogs. I am using INDEPENDENT STUDIES. Can you show me an independent study that shows he is a tea party republican. I will give you some studies to look at, maybe you will learn Bob Dold is moderate, working for the people of the tenth.
http://www.nationaljournal.com/voteratings2011/searchable-vote-ratings-tables-house-20120223
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/bob_dold/412420
RB
8:17 am on Sunday, April 1, 2012
Defying logic? Mr. Dold was endorsed by the Tea Party last go around. He would like us to forget it, but he was. Freedom Works? Front and center. Now, he is trying to come across as moderate. A moderate hoping to get votes on the North Shore typically does not vote to defund NPR. Joe Walsh could probably get away with it in his old district, but Dold in the 10th. Really? Can you show me some of your independent research that shows he did not vote to defund NPR? I'll show you mine....he did. Mr. Dold voted to defund NPR.
http://politics.nytimes.com/congress/votes/112/house/1/192
RB
8:21 pm on Friday, March 30, 2012
While researching Mr. Dold's support from the Tea Party during his election I ran across an interesting tid bit. Mr. Dold voted to de-fund NPR.
Cynthia
11:46 pm on Saturday, March 31, 2012
Was it from another Blog? How about an independent study?
Cynthia
11:46 pm on Saturday, March 31, 2012
I am happy the people of the 10th don't believe the blogs, but rather independently done studies.
RB
8:04 am on Sunday, April 1, 2012
Cynthia, the truth is the truth. Here's the link that will show the complete vote and that Mr. Dold voted to defund NPR....right along party lines. Go do some independent research and you'll find lots of info out there about Mr. Dold.
http://politics.nytimes.com/congress/votes/112/house/1/192
RB
12:54 pm on Sunday, April 1, 2012
Mr. Dold has received money from Koch. A moderate? Give me a break. Here's an interesting article about the Koch brothers....
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/03/31/the-koch-brothers-and-the-theft-of-the-american-dream/
C
1:18 pm on Sunday, April 1, 2012
Can you show the 10th an independent study that supports your claims? Not a biased blog website?
RB
2:48 pm on Sunday, April 1, 2012
Independent study? No blogs? I really don't get it. Do your own research if you value your vote. Here's the data you requested, by the way. The 10th will appreciate knowing his 62nd largest contributor....Koch Industries!
http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cycle=2010&type=I&cid=N00031103&newMem=N&recs=100
Sam Joesph
6:52 am on Monday, April 2, 2012
RB and Progressive extremists have been doing everything but supplying truth to the political discourse. Ignoring the facts, advocating for coercive action by the federal government, and supporting the diminishing of our freedoms have been a pillar of the left.
http://www.cq.com/graphics/weekly/2012/01/16/wr20120116-02prezsupport-cht4.pdf
http://www.nationaljournal.com/voteratings2011/searchable-vote-ratings-tables-house-20120223
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/bob_dold/412420
RB
8:01 am on Monday, April 2, 2012
Coercive action by the Federal Government? That's a Tea Party line isn't it? Just what coercive action by the Federal Government have I advocated? Funding NPR? Is that coercive? Actually, the coercive act is de-funding NPR, which Mr. Dold tried to do.
RB
7:55 am on Monday, April 2, 2012
Dold voted to defund NPR, Dold took money from Koch Industries. What's not truthful about that? Progressive extremists? Compared to Koch Brothers right wing extremism? The Koch Brothers are funding the right wing dissolving of the middle class all in the name of 'freedom' the Democrats want us to keep our freedom (and NPR), the Koch Brothers and the right wing are trying to destroy it and basically just because it has some public funding. The freedom to choose? That's not one of the freedom's the right wing cares about is it? There is nothing extreme about my position.
Louis G. Atsaves
8:59 am on Monday, April 2, 2012
While RBI continues his wild spinning and bounces from issue to issue in a blind, incoherent style, let us return to a question I asked at the the start of this thread: Which budget plan did Schneider support? All that pandering and he never really said!
Funny how the only ones still trying to claim Dold is a Tea Partier are using ancient surmisings back in the day when Dold was an unknown. Now that he is a known person with a record that the Tea Party is not happy with, the only ones calling him a tea partier are the serial fibbers around here.
What is the next big lie? That in spite of his record, he has declared war on women, children, families and your little dogs too?
In Greece they felt that government could take care of everything and fix everything through a wild spend and reckless borrowing policies. Kind of like the way the Democrats ran the governments in Washington and Springfield.
RB
9:15 am on Monday, April 2, 2012
Louis, a 'moderate' voting to defund NPR, accepting Koch Brothers funding, signing the Grover Norquist Pledge, allowing the country to default....does not get my vote and once the District sees his true conservative right wing positions, he'll be back spraying bugs.
RB
9:31 am on Monday, April 2, 2012
Mr. Romney says the Koch Brothers are the financial engine of the Tea Party. Why would Mr. Dold accept funds from them? Why would they pick Mr. Dold to fund?
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/11/03/360433/romney-koch-tea-party/
Dan Jenks
9:51 am on Monday, April 2, 2012
RB, can you say something nice about Dold? Like the fact that he, along with 37 other representatives, including Illinois Democrats Quigley and Lipinski, supported a bipartisan plan to reduce future deficits? See Trib editorial http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/editorials/ct-edit-quigley-20120401,0,930290.story
Deficit reduction is the big issue, not NPR. My wife and I have been NPR supporters for as long as I can remember. I enjoy NPR. I don’t like the fact that Dold voted to limit how NPR uses its money – but the federal (and state) government often limits how private organizations (like Planned Parenthood, the Catholic Church, etc.) use public funds and this is no different. Were the context different – as part of a deficit reduction plan – I would even be okay with cutting NPR. It isn’t the end of the world.
As for the Koch brothers support, did their $5,000 contribution buy our congressman? I hope that if Dold sells out, he is smart enough to ask for more money. Moreover, did the Koch Brothers support Cooper-LaTourette? Did the Tea Party? I would doubt it.
Finally, I guess because people like Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn support Barack Obama, the President must be in their pocket. If a “guilt by association” argument against a liberal sounds fallacious, it is probably equally fallacious when made against a conservative or whatever Dold is.
RB
6:21 pm on Monday, April 2, 2012
Dan, I understand that Mr. Dold is positioned more moderately than some of the other Freshmen Republicans (JOe Walsh is much more extreme, for instance). Where I have the most trouble with Mr. Dold is that he has not released the District from the anchor of Grover Norquist. If he really wants a bipartisan solution to the budget crisis, don't you think that should include his ability to vote for a revenue increase? Whether or not you think a revenue increase is necessary or not, having a Congressman who has signed a pledge to Never vote for a revenue increase limits his effectiveness as a Congressman.
If he thinks tax and budget reform could include a revenue increase, wouldnt he be better prepared to represent the District if he renounced his pledge?
He probably signed the pledge to garner votes. He probably wants to come off as more moderate to garner votes this go around. Renouncing the pledge would go a long way toward that.
He has some defenders on here who are Joe Walsh supporters. You may or may not be one. Defending Mr. Dold's moderate creditials would best be done by people who can better recognize them.
Something nice about Mr. Dold? Yes, he has missed very few votes. He voted for the end of DADT (a truly moderate position) and later voted against the chaplain training issue related to DADT. An informed decision. His votes tend to skew toward middle. Other critical votes (NPR, budget deficit, for instance) he voted with the right wing Republican position.
Dan Jenks
7:10 pm on Monday, April 2, 2012
RB, thank you for the nice comments about Dold. I'm still confused about Dold and voting for tax increases. Isn't that what Dold did by voting for Cooper-LaTourette? According to the Tribune, the bill would "[c]ut the federal deficit by more than $4 trillion during the next 10 years. About two-thirds of the reduction would come from spending cuts and one-third from tax increases." By my calculation, it seems that Dold voted for roughly $1.3 trilliion in tax increases. Doesn't this put an end to his pledge? What am I missing? Would it really be that much better if he said "I renounce the pledge" on top of voting for this bill?
I think one has to have reasonable political expectations of candidates. I don't expect Dold to formally renounce Grover Norquist or the Tea Party, I don't expect Schneider to renounce anyone on the left. What I would like to hear from Schneider is his thoughts on Cooper-LaTourette and his willingness to buck his party.
RB
8:00 pm on Monday, April 2, 2012
He does have a conflict. I don't know how he will resolve it. My understanding is that Norquist may plan to place candidates in races that have someone like Mr. Dold (if he were to renounce the pledge). It's probably too late for any impact from that, so renouncing the pledge may still be possible for him if he no longer feels the way he did when he signed it. Would that get my vote? No. Respect? Yes.
I still see Mr. Dold voting with Cantor and Boehner when push comes to shove. it will also be interesting to see if he takes Koch Brothers money in the primary.
Louis G. Atsaves
11:56 am on Sunday, April 8, 2012
Wow "deep dish pizza" posted 17 times on this old article this morning alone. Posted nothing of consequence other than the National Democratic spin lines about Congressman Dold which are well short of being factual. Too bad even the Tea Party disagrees with the National Democrats on Dold's record.
But clearly, Deep Dish will not be confused by facts in spinning those false talking points.
Is "Deep Dish Pizza" a paid Democratic staffer with nothing to this fine Spring Easter morning? Hmmmmmmmm!