Joe Walsh and Tammy Duckworth may be one of the most heated Congressional races in the nation for Election 2012 and that was even before Tuesday evening's debate.
Meanwhile, the Chicago Tribune has endorsed Judy Biggert over Bill Foster for the "new" 11th District that was part of a political redistricting process by Illinois Political Mafia Dictator Michael Madigan.
Biggert is a more reliable vote against federal government borrowing and spending. She has focused on science, education and financial services. She is a voice for tolerance and for economic restraint. She was one of the few Republicans to vote to end the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy on gay service members. Unlike Foster, she opposed stimulus spending and Obamacare.
A vote for Biggert would be a vote for fiscal restraint. And her re-election would be a constant, nagging reminder to House Speaker Michael Madigan and the rest of his crafty mapmakers that the voters don't like being used as pawns.
Watch Judy Biggert and Bill Foster debate before the editorial board at chicagotribune.com/11thcongress.
15 comments:
I've been a Biggert supporter for 10+ years; she's a reasonable, moderate legislator who is NOT controlled by the Tea Party.
I'll be voting for her.
I'll also be voting for Kifowit. She's also NOT controlled by the Tea Party--unlike Pat Fee.
Let's see, the Tea Party is concerned with this nation's future and not burdening our children and grandchildren. I guess I'll be voting for Pat Fee.
Yep, Judy Biggert is for allowing insurance companies to drop you as soon as you get sick, refuse to cover you because they might have to pay out, decide whether or not you can have a certain procedure based on whether it'll hurt their profits or not, pay the executives huge salaries and bonuses, spend high percentages of the premiums received on administrative costs and overhead and not on medical care, etc. Biggert is on the record for allowing insurance companies to do all those things.
Pat Fee a tea partier, no way!
Pat is a moderate.
I am a modrate democrat, no way will I vote for Kifowt, she is clueless!
Yep, Judy Biggert is for allowing insurance companies to drop you as soon as you get sick
This is a total lie. It is against the law!
Pure political, partisan B.S.
The GOP around here is very middle of the road.
Lauzen - NOW moderate, supporting public employee salary increases that will either divert money form services or require a future tax increase as well as a large bump in pension obligations.
Hurtado - Geez just a few years ago he ran two campaigns as a democrat. Fiscally conservative and socially liberal.
Pat Fee - seems middle of the road to me
Randy Hultgren - moderate who leans liberal - record of tax increases and wild spending when in Springfield.
Beth Goncher - please, she does not even have a platfrom that is anything but a cut and paste job form other candidates.
Judy Biggert - LIBERAL not moderate
Kay Hatcher - moderate
Jim Oberweis - finally a conservative.
Terry Hunt - probably a conservative
An Mitt Romney - a liberal
Moderates should have a field day this race.
This is a total lie. It is against the law!
Pure political, partisan B.S.
10/10/12 8:16 PM
Yes, it's against the law -- the law commonly called Obamacare. When Biggert voted to repeal Obamacare, she voted to repeal the law allowing insurance companies to drop you.
As far as partisan BS, you're right -- you ARE spewing partisan BS. On the other hand, I'm not a democrat. I'm just telling the truth -- in a NON-partisan fashion.
No insurance company can drop you for developing an illness - they never could even before Obamacare.
You are full of it.
9:19 your head is in the sand. They did it all the time.
Pat Fee most certainly is a Tea Partier!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/15/tea-party-chicago-hundred_n_187500.html
Also, she was the featured speaker at a Joliet/Lockport area Tea Party meeting earlier this year.
Like the saying goes, if it walks like a duck & quacks...
6:42 all you need is to give a specific example and file with the state. they will be heavily fined - period. What you are saying does not happen and is a propagandist fairy tail youhave bought into. 10 years ago I was a medical claims adjustor. I never saw it. I saw many times a procedure was denied and then reviewed sometimes it was then allowed other times still denied but always with review by the state in accordance with the policy.
There are problems with private insurance, but being dropped from coverage is not one of them.
Ah, so 1:34 admits to being part of the claim denial process. The propagandist fairy tale is the one you're trying to spin. Anyone who works for the insurance industry has NO credibility. The insurance industry wants to kill Obamacare because they want to have total control of what healthcare is provided to protect their profits. All the talk about Obamacare "Death Panels" was propaganda from the insurance industry -- which has ALWAYS maintained their own death panels. All the talk about Obamacare putting the government between the patients and their doctors was bull crap, because we've already GOT the insurance companies between us and our doctors. We've had procedures recommended by MULTIPLE doctors turned down by the insurance company. "Oh, that can be ordered by our pet specialist who won't order it because we don't want him to; it would cut into our profits too much, and the president of our company really needs that new Cadillac".
10:35 is obviously a liberal troll.
11:51 is not only wrong, but is obviously either a shill for the insurance industry, or someone who just can't handle the truth.
Problem is 1:34 is right. An insurance company cannot drop you because you need treatment for an illness - it is illegal to do so.
Post a Comment