Bentivolio votes YES on debt ceiling deal

3sfp3h.jpg
 
supermario21 said:
This was definitely an awkard vote, RINOs voting no, good guys voting yes. And to the above comment, Amash voted Labrador for Speaker and Mulvaney has been an ally of ours endorsed by Tom Davis many times. This was more of a strategic vote than a policy vote. I wish they would have voted no, but let's see how committed they are to cutting spending when that fight inevitably comes.
Click to expand...

I didn't mean to say Jordan/Labrador/Mulvaney/Price/Schweikert/Gosar/whoever else were RINOs, they are usually doing a great job. Just saying that a couple of the people who voted NO on this legislation don't have very good records.
 
Good guys voted yes because they think they have an assurance from Boehner on a 10 year balanced budget and the sequester to go into effect.

I think this is a strategic vote.

We all know Boehner's assurances are worth sh*t and he will sell them out and pass something with 60 Republicans suppoting it and the Democrats. Already they did with Sandy and Fiscal cliff bill so why not again.
 
Every congresssman needs to forge his own path, i'm not really disappointed in this because many of them voted for it on the belief they will get something in return and further down the line, that's politics for you.

Don't expect complete purity from someone who just won his race by 5 points and is considered vulnerable
 
itshappening said:
Every congresssman needs to forge his own path, i'm not really disappointed in this because many of them voted for it on the belief they will get something in return and further down the line, that's politics for you.

Don't expect complete purity from someone who just won his race by 5 points and is considered vulnerable
Click to expand...

I have a hard time believing anyone on this forum would have supported Kerry in July 2012 if they knew he would vote to raise the debt ceiling in 2013. I don't think he would have gotten any tea party support either. They could have just got behind Cassis.

If he voted badly on something he didn't really campaign on or specifically promise, that's one thing (like the Boehner vote). But he made a promise and broke it in less than a month!
 
Just wait and see how he does on other votes, this wasn't that big of a vote.

I don't expect complete purity from Kerry because he's in a tough spot if he wants to survive what is sure going to be a primary campaign against him and if they remove Kerry they will come after Amash next, you can bet on that.
 
EBounding said:
"My primary focus is going to be on cutting the debt and having the best constituent service program," Bentivolio said. "I think we've been kind of short on that for a while. My job is protect our rights — not take them away."

From The Detroit News: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20130106/POLITICS03/301060313#ixzz2Ipxu6VqB
January 6, 2013 at 5:40 pm
Click to expand...

They're all saying that but voted for it because they're hoping to get something further down the line.

There is much bigger battles to come.
 
supermario21 said:
Yeah, Jim Jordan, Labrador, Mulvaney (all good guys) voted for it..33 Republicans voted against the deal.
Click to expand...

Also Tom Graves.

NONE of these guys are fiscal moderates by any stretch. They are among the biggest debt hawks. After looking into Labrador he is probably the most pro-liberty Congressman after Amash, Massie, and possibly Broun. He is aligned with us on ALL of the issues, including foreign policy and civil liberties, and of course economics and spending.

My theory is that they have something they are working on that requires this temporary extension, or there is some mechanism to the bill that will help get debt reduction going some way.

Do not go after these people yet....it doesn't seem like the whole story has been told yet.

However, as far as Kerry B goes, I don't think he is the brightest guy in the world after not knowing the voting procedure for Speaker.
 


So, technically it didn't raise the debt ceiling.... it just let them continue borrowing DESPITE it.
 
Last edited:
itshappening said:
Good guys voted yes because they think they have an assurance from Boehner on a 10 year balanced budget and the sequester to go into effect.

I think this is a strategic vote.

We all know Boehner's assurances are worth sh*t and he will sell them out and pass something with 60 Republicans suppoting it and the Democrats. Already they did with Sandy and Fiscal cliff bill so why not again.
Click to expand...

EXACTLY.

This is stategic, and I'm not talking about getting elected or power. It is obviously strategic in their goal to get spending under control.
 
SpreadOfLiberty said:
After looking into Labrador he is probably the most pro-liberty Congressman after Amash, Massie, and possibly Broun. He is aligned with us on ALL of the issues, including foreign policy and civil liberties, and of course economics and spending.
Click to expand...

Labrador and Broun are better than most, but aren't aligned with us on all foreign policy issues, Labrador is open to military spending cuts (Broun, not so much), they are good on foreign aid and opposed the Libya military intervention, but both are quite hawkish on Iran which is a major foreign policy issue. Jimmy Duncan and Walter Jones are much better on foreign policy.
 
compromise said:
Labrador and Broun are better than most, but aren't aligned with us on all foreign policy issues, Labrador is open to military spending cuts (Broun, not so much), they are good on foreign aid and opposed the Libya military intervention, but both are quite hawkish on Iran which is a major foreign policy issue. Jimmy Duncan and Walter Jones are much better on foreign policy.
Click to expand...

Well, I don't know about Labrador's Iran stance. It might be similar to Rand Paul's.

I do know he has spoken out against being in Iraq and Afghanistan and Libya, and has co-signed a letter to cut spending from the military. And he is against indefinite detention, internet spying/regulation, and the Patriot Act.

Broun isn't with us on foreign policy(except globalist organizations), though I didn't claim he was. However, he wants to abolish the Fed and is with us on all domestic issus. McClintock is similar to Broun on voting but less activist.

Duncan and Jones are the best on foreign policy, but often lacking domestically (but aren't bad at all).

Based on both foreign and domestic policy I still have to rate Labrador #3, with Amash #1A and Massie #1B. There is a reason Amash voted him in for speaker.

We will have to see on KerryB and find out his true colors, meanwhile Steve Stockman and Ted Yoho are extremely promising and we have a good nucleus growing. Along with the usual allies like Mulvaney, Schweikert, Jordan(Massie is a big fan of his), and Huelskamp.
 
I stand by my earlier statement that I think Kerry's heart is in the right place, but that he is not very intelligent and thus is easily manipulated. Remember that this is a guy who was thrust into the spotlight literally out of nowhere.
 
Some liberty candidates get a big push from up top, and others who may have deserved it haven't had that wind in their sails and have even been marginalized.

So who pushed the Bentivolio candidacy?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top