News Center

April 16th, 2012
 

Vilsack Continues To Hide From Her Liberal Agenda

Christie Vilsack has always been proud and vocal about her support of President Obama’s re-election, his wasteful spending sprees and crushing hyper-regulatory regime. However, Vilsack continues to pretend she won’t already continue this consistent support as she dodges taking a stance on Obama’s big-government healthcare overhaul:

“‘I don’t go back and try to figure out what I would have voted for,’ Vilsack said.” (Ames Tribune, 4/12/2012)

Clearly, Vilsack’s fear of political repercussions has forced her to try and hide her allegiance to taxing, spending and regulating. However Iowans know her true priority is to defend President Obama’s healthcare takeover:

“…Vilsack believes Americans will support the reforms as they learn more about them.” (Washington Post, 4/13/2012)

“‘It’s always good to make a bill better, but you can’t make a bill better if you don’t have it in the first place,’ Vilsack said.” (Ames Tribune, 4/12/2012)

NRCC COMMENT: “It shouldn’t be that difficult for Vilsack to admit she would have voted for the government takeover of healthcare, but this politician continues to cover up her true addiction to the toxic big-government priorities that have increased healthcare costs, cut Medicare and caused families to lose the care they have.” — NRCC spokeswoman Andrea Bozek

MORE EXAMPLES OF VILSACK HIDING FROM HER LIBERAL SELF:

Vilsack has asked constituents to answer their own questions, declined to give specific policy stances, said her priorities “aren’t important” followed by saying she has “a lot to learn.”

Stu Rothenberg Said He Found A Candidate Who “Would Not Take A Position On Whether She Would Have Supported The Obama Healthcare Bill; The Colombia, South Korea And Panama Free-Trade Agreements; Or Raising The Debt Ceiling.” “Naturally, I was excited to meet Vilsack, given her reputation. I found a candidate who is serious, measured in her responses and on message. I also found a candidate who would not take a position on whether she would have supported the Obama health care bill; the Colombia, South Korea and Panama free-trade agreements; or raising the debt ceiling.” (Roll Call, 10/27/2011)

Vilsack Said She Is Not In Congress So She Doesn’t Have To Say How She Would Vote, Even Refused To Say If She Would Have Supported The Civil Rights Act! “Her response each time was that she wasn’t in Congress so she didn’t have to decide how to vote. (In frustration, I jokingly asked her about the 1964 Civil Rights Act and received the same sort of response.)” (Roll Call, 10/27/2011)

Stu Rothenberg Says Vilsack’s Behavior Screams That She Is A Liberal, But Doesn’t Want Voters To Know.” “[W]hat I got was a classic rope-a-dope strategy on big, ideological issues — the kind of issues that people often use to characterize candidates. To me, that screamed out, ‘I’m a liberal, but I don’t want voters to know it, so I’ll couch everything in local and noncontroversial terms.’ We’ll see whether voters have that same reaction.” (Roll Call, 10/27/2011)

Enhanced by Zemanta

About the Author

The Iowa Republican





blog comments powered by Disqus