Oh Yeah, A Title…

ArchPundit December 3, 2007 No Comments

Hanania:

In reality, Dan Lipinski’s voting record has been mainstream Democratic, and certainly not the Bush shill he is portrayed falsely to be by the Floggers.

Lipinski is 100 percent with the AFL-CIO, Children’s Defense Fund, Breast Cancer Coalition, and Alliance for Retired Senior America. He’s 92 percent with the League of Conservation Voters (maybe the Floggers can’t read either and think that’s “Conservative” Voters).

The National Journal analyzed all the voting records and concluded that Lipinski is “more liberal” than 71 percent of other members of Congress, and that puts him in the mainstream of America.

Uh…no. It puts him in the mainstream of an incredibly conservative run Congress. The votes are from the 208th Congress, not the 209th Congress.

It gets better though if you look at the disaggregated ratings which National Journal divides into three categories: Economic, Social, and Foreign Policy.

Going to the generic numbers, one thing to note. Of the 43 below him in overall scores, 21 are Southerners, 9 are from Border states meaning outside of the South, he’s one of the most conservative Democratic Members of Congress. Only four of the 13 are in urban centers, though 2 of those are from Fresno and Bean is the other one.

He’s also in the most Democratic seat percentage wise compared to the rest of those below him.

In other words, not only is he a conservative Democrat, he’s the most conservative one in a heavily Democratic district. It’s one thing to be conservative in Utah or Mississippi, it’s another to be that conservative in Chicago. Why would a Member of Congress from Chicago vote like one in Mississippi?

Going to the breakdowns, he is the most socially conservative Democrat in Illinois. Costello and Bean are both more progressive.

Foreign Policy? Only Bean is more conservative amongst Democrats. She’s in a Republican +6 District, he’s in a Democratic +10 District.

What raises his overall score to what it is are the economic issues. Otherwise his record is conservative and quite mediocre. Even on economics he’s the 4 most conservative with Bean, Rush, and Costello below him.

It’s more than that though–it’s not just his overall voting record, but his voting record on key issues. Taking these rating, his record is more troubling. On Patriot Act amendments to restrict records seizures–Lipinski voted with Republicans. He voted against extending non-discrimination rights against Telecoms. He voted to bar the federal government from enforcing a court ruling regarding prayer in Indiana government. He didn’t just disagree, he voted to stop the spending of money to enforce the law. He couldn’t even take a position on a Constitutional Amendment to ban same sex marriage. He voted to remove the authority of federal courts over Pledge of Allegiance cases. So, again, it’s not the point of arguing over whether the Pledge is constitutional, it’s about whether the Courts can hear a case concerning the 1st Amendment. He voted to prohibit the awarding of attorneys’ fees in lawsuits against government officials involving the First Amendment protection of the free exercise of religion. So the government could violate your rights, but it wouldn’t have to pay for attorney’s fees when it loses.

Add to this his hostility to Reproductive Freedom, Stem Cells, and a horrible anti-gay record, he’s an embarrassment. Oh, and he voted for FISA including warrantless wiretaps on Americans.
It gets worse–on a vote to prohibit funds for military operations against Iran unless Congress has declared war, he voted against it. He wants to give George Bush more blank checks.

On two critical bills dealing with our international arms reduction treaties, he voted with Bush–in one case he voted to approve a deal with India on nuclear energy despite India’s violation of the Non-Proliferation Treaty which is itself a violation of the NPT. And he has voted to fund the deployment of the space based anti-missile system which violates the ABM treaty. Of course, that system doesn’t even work so it’s hard to figure what he was voting for deploying other than a neat idea.

Lipinski votes like a Congressman from the south–not a Member of Congress from a solid Democratic district in the Midwest. Oh, and his entire apparatus is corrupt.

They Never Learn

ArchPundit December 3, 2007 No Comments

[kml_flashembed movie="http://www.youtube.com/v/173B1vzoub4" width="425" height="350" wmode="transparent" /]

But let’s point out something about Pera’s run for State House in 1996 and being included in his literature.  So was his opponent:

Sun Times, October 21, 1996

State Rep. Eileen Lyons (R-Western Springs), who ousted Democratic incumbent David B. McAfee by 1,560 votes in 1994, is part of the movement that has transformed suburban politics. Her victory helped Republicans win control of the Illinois House for the first time since 1980.

Lyons, 55, a mother of four daughters who became a leader in school and civic activities in Western Springs, was urged to run by people who wanted more women in public office. “People kept telling me that we needed more women in government,” she said.

In Springfield, Lyons has been active in women’s health issues. She sponsored legislation that requires insurance and HMO coverage for at least 48 hours of inpatient care for mothers following a standard delivery of a newborn and 96 hours following a Caesarean section. When another legislative candidate proposed a similar idea at a recent forum, Lyons noted that Gov. Edgar recently had signed her legislation into law.

She co-sponsored tax caps for Cook County, legislation for Chicago school reform, and welfare reform.

Lyons also has taken a leadership role on environmental issues. When a group of constituents asked her to help block the construction of incinerators in the western suburbs, she responded. “I felt as though it was my obligation to help this community to halt this threat,” she said.

She was among the sponsors of legislation that repealed the Retail Rate Law that gave incinerator operators a no-interest, 20-year subsidy. Rep. William O. Lipinski (D-Ill.), who credited Lyons with helping block the proposed incinerators, has displayed her photograph in his campaign literature.

Lyons also worked with Lipinski to oppose the expansion of the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District’s sewage reservoir in the McCook quarry.

Despite her accomplishments, Lyons is locked in a very tight race for re-election with Democrat Mark Pera, a lawyer and former member of the Western Springs Utilities Commission. Both candidates favor changing the way public education is funded and oppose a new regional airport at Peoton

3rd District Poll Demonstrates This Isn’t Your Father’s Third District

ArchPundit November 20, 2007 4 Comments

(UPDATE: GRUMBLE, GRUMBLE–entirely my fault, I forgot to indicate the poll isn’t fresh–meaning it was done a while ago conducted Sept. 19-24 The particular questions below are not likely to be affected by the time passage so I thought it was reasonable in this case). And it was done by Pera, which I cannot believe I didn’t mention. My apologies.

Let me make a point that what I find most interesting about this is that the District isn’t that socially conservative District some insist it is. (end Update)
I didn’t see the entire poll, but I had enough questions answered regarding methodology to feel confident passing along the results I did see from the poll.

401 Likely Democratic Primary voters +/- 5%

Lipinski Re-elect 35 percent
Wrong Track: 81 percent

Generic Congressional Approval: 37 percent

82 percent Less likely to vote for Lipinski on the issue of choice once they learn that he opposes a woman’s right to choose and supports criminalizing abortion even in cases of rape or incest

83 percent Less likely they would vote for Lipinski after they learned that he voted for the Bush energy proposal and voted to allow drilling in the Artic National Wildlife Refuge

76 percent Favor a mandate calling for a pull-out of troops from Iraq beginning immediately with all troops out within a year as well as a cap on war funding to ensure the Bush Administration meets that goal

17 percent Favor a proposal calling for a complete pullout within five years and no cap on funding.

To put these in context, the District is rated +10 D by Cook, voted for Al Gore with 58% of the vote, and voted for Kerry with 59% of the vote.

This is a progressive District and those claiming it is the District are correct. This is not the District that went for Reagan. And more than that, the percentages between the City portion of the District and the suburban portion of the District are not significantly different.

Dan Lipinski is out of touch with Democratic voters in the Third and so he’s also out of touch with the entire District.

Oops

ArchPundit November 13, 2007 3 Comments

Schock Admits Mistake

Schock held steady, though, on his stance to stop the Iranian regime from getting nuclear weapons. He wants to provide training and assistance to the majority of Iranians who oppose the ayatollahs who rule them and pressure China and Russia to live up to their responsibilities on the UN Security Council and vote for a third set of economic sanctions on Iran.

“We must get China’s attention that preventing Iran from becoming a nuclear terrorist nation is one of our utmost national security concerns,” he said.

And all credit for standing up and saying I goofed.

But let’s make something clear, it wasn’t just one policy that was a problem in the *27* page speech.  His strategy for Central and South America is to lecture them more.

His strategy in the Middle East is based on some sort of idea that if you argue long enough with them, Arabs will change their mind (let’s not even start on Persians/Afghans, etc)

He misrepresented Iran’s history with WMD’s implying they had used them before. They have not, they have been the victims of chemical warfare.

He said that Iran is likely to have a nuclear weapon within a year, something no one has claimed who is familiar with their program. Most estimates range from 3-10 years.

He completely butchered the ethnic background of Iran.

He endorsed a doctrine not of preemptive war, but of dealing with eventual threats immediately.  This is a radical and dangerous concept that would destroy nearly all international norms.

And that is just in the foreign policy section.  I don’t expect Members of Congress to be experts on foreign policy, but I prefer they know what they don’t know. And there Schock fails miserably.

Schock as Major T.J. “King” Kong

ArchPundit November 13, 2007 No Comments

SJR Schocklove Cartoon

Flippity-Floppity, Schock Has a Consistency Problem

ArchPundit November 11, 2007 1 Comment

He voted against the State of Illinois divesting pension funds for Iran with the argument while voting for divestiture from Sudan:

“I don’t believe that state government ought to be getting involved in foreign policy,” Schock told me later.

He also said his local police and fire pension boards told him that a previous bill banning pension investments in Sudan had required them to unload good investments in large, well-known companies.

“With each additional restriction that’s placed on a pension fund in Illinois, it further prohibits those pension managers’ ability to make wise decisions, to keep those pension systems solvent,” Schock said.

The final version of the Iran bill applies only to the five state pension systems, not local police and fire pension systems.

Though he said the General Assembly shouldn’t delve in foreign policy, Schock said that doesn’t mean he would vote against all resolutions in that field.

“Ultimately, you have to make a decision based on what you’re presented with,” he said. “But I don’t think it’s wise for us to get involved with foreign policy, as a rule of thumb.”

This is all very baffling because US law has far stricter rules on doing business with Iran–US Companies cannot (well, except that Halliburton company that violated the law under Dick Cheney) do business with Iran and even international businesses are limited with how much business they can do with Iran and operate in the United States. Divestiture would be far easier in the case of Iran than Sudan, and as Bernie points out, the Iranian bill only applied to five statewide pension funds. So, perhaps this is one of those things he pulled out of his pocket.

Via Rich,  Bill, and Yellow Dog 

Oh, and Schock Would Violate the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces Treaty

ArchPundit November 9, 2007 1 Comment

One of the more obvious problems with the Shocklove’s idea is that, Ronald Reagan signed the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty in 1987 and it was ratified in the US Senate in 1988. The INF Treaty banned Intermediate Range Nuclear Missiles and the last one was destroyed (outside of museum pieces) in 1991. IOW, we haven’t had any Pershing Missiles since Aaron Schock was 10 years old.

Developing new intermediate range missiles would violate the INF Treaty and cause a rather serious and significant problem in our relations with Russia.

But you know:

.” In a phone interview, Schock’s manager Steve Shearer added that Schock’s proposal is “not just something that he pulled out of his pocket … It’s a deeply thought-out policy.”

I’d hate to see what’s in the pocket.

Screw Divestment—Send in the Nukes!

ArchPundit November 9, 2007 No Comments

Bill Dennis adds to the fun with a great catch:

On May 31, 2007, the Illinois House of Representatives voted 80-2o to approve its version of SB 1621, a law that requires state pension funds to divest their holdings in foreign companies that are doing business with Iran’s energy industry, which is financing Iran’s efford to develop nuclear weapons.

Schock was among the 20 who voted against this measure.

Yesterday, Schock sent out a press release questioning whether his opponent in Republican primary for the 18th District seat on Congress might be better suited for another party and otherwise wrapped himself around the flag:

This story is tailor made for Bill

But making a few changes to a pension fund’s portfolio? But that’s wrong.

Well, you know how young people are these days. One day, they can’t get enough the hip-hop music, the next they spend all their waking hours advocating selling nuclear weapons, the next the spend all day playing video games. It’s hard for them to stay focused.

Via Capitol Fax where Rich said

So, Schock would threaten nuclear holocaust with China over Iran but wouldn’t vote for economic pressure? Oof.

Deeply Thought-Out Policy

ArchPundit November 9, 2007 No Comments

House Race Hotline

 Dr. Schock-Love
McConoughey accused rival Schock of making “a very serious and reckless statement” when the 26-yo state Rep. proposed offering nuclear arms to Taiwan if China doesn’t go along with U.S. policy toward Iran in a speech 10/27. McConoughey said Schock’s comments “reflect a level of inexperience and overall lack of judgment and poor leadership.” McConoughey, asked why he thinks Schock made the comments: “My guess is, you know, he’s 26. And it’s a level of immaturity about what nuclear threat really can be to the United States and how it destabilizes the economic interests of the world.”
11/8 Schock “did not back down.” His camp issued a statement with the headline: “Schock: It’s Naive for My Opponents to Sit Still While Iran Builds Nuclear Weapons.” From the release, Schock said he does not plan to go to Congress “and sit idly by while Iran gets nuclear weapons. The fulcrum here is China. We need to introduce new diplomatic prods to China to get them to do what is right. The one thing that gets (China’s) attention is Taiwan.” In a phone interview, Schock’s manager Steve Shearer added that Schock’s proposal is “not just something that he pulled out of his pocket … It’s a deeply thought-out policy.”

Errrr…that makes it worse.