IL-14: Lauren Underwood Receives Harshest Criticism from Left on NDAA Amendment Vote

Lauren Underwood

“Your belief in bipartisan compromise with the KKK and literal Nazis shows that just because your skin is black doesn’t mean you have the interests of the downtrodden at heart.”

The above quote is from a Twitter user who goes by the Twitter name IanWAPrice and stated his disapproval on a vote by Congresswoman Lauren Underwood yesterday. Here is the author’s Twitter page:

Yesterday, the House passed the FY 2021 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) as part of the FY 2021 budget process. The final passage of NDAA was genuinely bipartisan:

Source: California Target Book

But what specifically brought the ire of Ian W A Price was the Pocan amendment, and Underwood’s vote against it. Congressman Mark Pocan (D, WI-02) is the co-chair of the House Progressive Caucus and he offered his amendment to, as summarized by congress.gov:

“An amendment…to reduce overall authorization level by 10%. Excludes military personnel, DoD federal civilian workforce, and defense health program accounts from the 10% reduction.

Source: Congress.gov
.

So, as the Leftists in Congress and across the country have been calling for with their “Defund the Police” mantra, the Left wanted to defund the armed forces, excluding civilian and healthcare workers. “Defund the Military” if you will. The Pocan amendment was soundly defeated:

Source: California Target Book

With the exception of Libertarian Justin Amash’s vote in favor, the remaining 92 Democrats voting for Defund the Military were nearly all of the Leftist members of the House. The only one voting against the amendment of note was Congresswoman Sylvia Garcia (D, TX-29), who has the most liberal voting record in the entire House, according to UCLA Voteview.

Clearly, Underwood, and Congressman Sean Casten voted against the Pocan amendment, but Casten didn’t draw the Left’s open criticism, that was posted through the Left’s “Resistbot” app on Twitter. Here is Ian W A Price’s complete criticism of Underwood:

Source: ResistBOT tweet with postcard meme embedded

And here is the tweet the above meme was included, posted at 10:56PM CDT last night:

COMMENTARY: This is not the first time Underwood has been criticized from Leftists, but is the first time I have seen her singled out, and it was very explicit singling out bringing up Underwood’s skin color.

Last year, a Leftist/”progressive” blog included Underwood and 40 other Democrats as a member of the “concentration camp caucus” after she voted for a Republican amendment to H.R. 3239 stating the Customs and Border Protection was doing a good job.

Clearly, this Ian W A Price individual is “out there” in their description of Underwood as a “bipartisan compromise” on the vote against the amendment. As pointed out many times on McHenry County Blog she is not “bipartisan” but calls everything passed in the House “bipartisan”.

Coming into this week, Underwood was ranked #16 on UCLA Voteview’s ideological metrics, and The Lugar Project ranked her #344 out of 437 House members in this Congress for all of 2019.

And the writer is inaccurate concerning impeachment, as the House did impeach President Trump last year. The Senate acquitted the President and denied removal.

But the writer points out something on healthcare that is accurate compared to the latest rhetoric from Republican challenger Jim Oberweis. Underwood does not support Medicare-for-All.

Underwood, to date, is against Medicare-for-all and even the “public option” being pushed by many Democrats. Oberweis, as recently as on the July 5 broadcast of At Issue on WBBM radio, inferred Underwood supported Medicare-for-all:

Jim Oberweis

“…her idea of going to government providing healthcare-for-all is a failed idea…”

At Issue, 7/5/20 broadcast, around 26 minute mark
.

So in spite of how off-the-wall Ian W A Price clearly is, there was a grain of truth in what he said that all should note for the fall campaign.

External references:


Comments

IL-14: Lauren Underwood Receives Harshest Criticism from Left on NDAA Amendment Vote — 38 Comments

  1. This is the dumbest most pointless political post ever posted to this website.

  2. Oh, your vote of confidence just told me it’s one of the best!

  3. Oh nos!

    A couple of folks on twitter are made at Underwood!

  4. Bama –

    It’s actually 1 person who tweeted something through an open-letter bot.

    I just went through this guy’s twitter feed.

    Most all of his tweets get no likes, no comments, no RTs. This dude is a nobody.

    Every now and then he will get 1 like and that’s it.

    Even Lopez calls him “off the wall” and “out there.”

    That being said, Lopez still wrote a full length blog post about this guy…. a nobody…. and what he has to say about Underwood.

    Now that I think about it, when you consider the depths Lopez had to go to find the one left wing critic of Underwood makes me think….. this might actually be Pulitzer worthy?

  5. Actually, he set the stage for several points, not just his BOT message. And it pointed out something of Oberweis that he has been misstating since the primary.

    Do I believe this Ian character is really going to primary Underwood, of course not. They’re just mad. Could be something to say if you live by the far Left (like Indivisible groups), you’ll die by them, and some other things Underwood has done recently may point in that direction.

    It’s going to be a fun fall.

  6. “They’re just mad.”

    Who is “they?” No, John…. He is just mad. He. Your post references one person. As you point out, he is also “out there” and “off the wall” so I don’t know if you mean “mad” like angry or “mad” like insane.

    Indivisible hasn’t turned on Underwood.

    Quite the contrary but you know that.

    You know their twitter feed. https://twitter.com/IndivisibleIL14

    Last thing: Journalist/blogging note for you Lopez:

    If your point is to show that Oberweis is misstating Underwood’s position on healthcare, it should be done by a way other than referencing one nobody on Twitter who gets an obvious objective and well known fact wrong (impeachment).

  7. Even if it’s only one tweet from one person, the mob eventually will come for her as they do with everyone.

    I don’t think the non far left democrats will know what hit them when it eventually happens.

    They don’t realize the pandoras box they opened by thinking they could control the radicals.

  8. The mob eventually will come for her as they do with everyone.

    Is this a comment about how the right is coming for one of it’s own in #3 ranking house GOP member Liz Cheney?

    Or is this a comment about how democracy is messy and not everyone on the left will agree with everything a Dem does and how not everyone on the right will always agree with everything a Republican does?

  9. They don’t realize the pandoras box they opened by thinking they could control the radicals.

    This 100% is about the bat-S crazies in the Tea Party taking over the Republican party.

  10. ** Could be something to say if you live by the far Left (like Indivisible groups), you’ll die by them, and some other things Underwood has done recently may point in that direction.**

    1 – Indivisible is hardly “far left”. That is laughable. Indivisible is a mainstream moderately progressive group (with a very diverse “membership”) that has had one primary goal – protecting all of us from Donald Trump. They’re not the far left. Most of them are not even even Sanders progressives/Democrats.

    2 – Lauren Underwood is going to be just fine with Democrats of all stripes (moderate, progressive, etc).

  11. The right has thier crazies too, but why do you think it’s the tea party?

    Obviously it’s the position that is opposite the democrats, so it must be if you don’t agree with big government you must be crazy.

    If anything it’s a shift in the republican party back towards how our constitution says it should work.

    You might not agree but it’s hardly a crazy position.

    Why is surprising people are sick of rhinos who never actually do anything to support their values?

  12. “The mob eventually will come for her as they do with everyone.”

    Applies to any mob, regardless of politics.

  13. If anything it’s a shift in the republican party back towards how our constitution says it should work.

    Serious question: How so?

  14. Alabama, when you need to use the word progressive to describe someone’s politics, that puts them on the left.

    I wasn’t familiar with the indivisible group so I checked them out.

    They seem pretty left to me.

    They seem to support BLM based on events listed, but also try be very vague about what they really are.

    One they they are clear about is they don’t use the word moderate anywhere I could find.

    This is how they describe their political goals

    “promote a progressive agenda, elect progressive leaders and realize progressive government”

    So we are on the same page, my definition of left here is

    1 You believe in equality of outcome instead of equality of opportunity

    In other words, you believe that any difference in outcome must be a problem with the system not being fair and needs to be rectified as opposed to everyone gets the same rules and what you do with it is up to you.

    2 You believe in positive rights over negative rights.

    Positive rights are things you get from the government or other people.

    A right to health care, education things like that.

    They are positive because someone else has to do something for you.

    Negative rights are what’s in the declaration of independence.

    Requires nothing from others.

  15. “If anything it’s a shift in the republican party back towards how our constitution says it should work.”

    Our constitution is pretty clear if you read it and don’t try and put your own opinions into it.

    The federal government is supposed to be small and limited according to the constitution.

    That is what the tea party wants.

    Less federal power, more state power.

  16. hahaha! even her own kind can’t stand ms.buckwheat……. loser on many levels… she is in the sea hags cocktail..like a fine stirred ice cube…

    LOL…. and will only do whats good for herself its all about the ME me me me… time for her to be gone!

    hopefully more will fall and be eaten by their own…

  17. Small limited government?

    Why are Republicans not up in arms with Trump sending federal law enforcement into urban cities?

    That’s a nice fairytale they tell themselves.

  18. I said the tea party faction, wanted more limited government, not mainstream Republicans.

    The federal government does have the right to use law enforcement anywhere in the country to enforce federal law. If someone vanadlizes a federal building, the feds can chase him, they don’t have to let him go because he isn’t on federal property anymore.

    There have been very obvious violations of federal law in Portland, hence the federal presence. If people were not being terrorists and attempting to attack federal court buildings, burn down buildings and knock over statues, the feds wouldn’t be there.

    Are you suggesting that the federal government should ignore acts of domestic terrorism against a federal facility??

  19. Oh on makes a moronic statement at 6:12 PM. The mayors of Portland and Seattle have been incredibly incompetent at best. Their in-actions on the riots and anarchy and insurrection in their cities suggests that they are in sympathy with these lawbreakers. What else can an observer conclude besides that.

    There was a moron Democrat Mayor of Baltimore a few years back that publicly stated she wanted to give the vandals there “space” to do their destruction.

    Bottom line is that currently and for decades in the past such as the Great Society of Democrat Lyndon Baines Johnson, Democrats have been all wrong. Their so-called solutions have made things worse. And, it continues on today what with the stupid and reckless Democrat Mayors and Governors as well as top leadership such as the Dufus Dementia Moron Biden and Pelosi, Schumer, AOC and other top Democrats. Democrats will destroy our nation if they have total power. Trust no Democrat ever. Never vote for a Democrat.

  20. https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/cpd-releases-new-video-of-friday-protest-says-mob-action-injured-49-officers/2307965/

    I dare anyone here on the left defending the protests to watch this video an explain why federal involvement isn’t needed.

    Watch just the first five minutes.

    The people behind the violence are obviously highly organized and have political motives.

    They are also attempting to operate under cover on innocent citizens, just as terrorists who would hide in a church or mosque.

    Maybe the protesters are not so innocent.

    In that video, how many people saw all the troublemakers with umbrellas hiding behind the banners and did nothing?

    The very banners leading the march were used as cover and sharpened for use as a weapon.

    Doesn’t this imply that those organizing the march are behind the violence?

    Given that similar events are occurring in multiple cities, why shouldn’t the federal government consider this as a terrorist threat, given the definition or terrorism I gave above?

    I’d really love to see someone explain this away.

    It’s about time Trump did something about this, it’s his duty as president.

  21. I’m saying that people who interpret the constitution in a way that puts emphasis on the tenth amendment and states rights should be outraged when local authorities don’t want the federal government sending in additional law enforcement and the federal government says we’re going in anyway.

    Do you want local control or do you want the federal government coming in?

    Pick a side and be consistent.

    Otherwise you’re just full of it.

  22. Global pandemic?

    States can go at it alone

    Graffiti on statutes?

    SEND IN THE TRIOPS NOW!

    We need a strong federal response!

    Lol.

    ive me a break with states rights.

  23. Covid cases have been rising for the last 3 weeks.

    Now deaths are spiking which is what you’d expect.

    Second day in a row with deaths over 1,000 in a day.

    Trump would rather you talk about graffiti on statutes than 1,000 deaths a day.

    That’s why he’s sending in federal troops into urban areas.

  24. I want the law followed and it’s on Trump’s side in both cases.

    Article 1 Sect 8-15 US Constitution

    15: To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

    Article 1 is referring to Congress yes.

    Trump is acting under the anti terrorism laws passed by Congress after 9-11.

    I can’t find anywhere health care or face masks are mentioned.

    Therefore that is the states rights under the tenth ammendment.

    The federal government clearly has constitutional authority to suppress insurrection and rebellion, so Trump is following the constitution.

  25. And I do think that armed organized thugs terrorizing our cities to achieve political goals is a much bigger threat than a virus.

    Even if 1000 people a day are dying.

    If the protesters that care about the cause really cared, they would call a timeout.

    That way the police can get rid of thugs making them look bad.

  26. insurrection and rebellion????

    They are protesting.

    It’s not a f’en rebellion.

    That’s absurd.

    Commerce clause gives the authority for heath care and masking mandates.

  27. Right Article 1 is Cingrsss so that has nothing to do with Trump’s executive power.

    Second point is interesting because Congress has abdicated its powers to the Executive beach over the years. I’m not up to speed on “9/11 laws” (which ones??) that you claim give him this authority and how that applies to what he’s doing.

    But the fundamental point is… this is what you want as a Republican who believes is reduced power for the executive branch and more power/control for the states??

    That’s why you guys are full of it.

    Ends justify means for you guys. Always. You aren’t principled.

  28. Did you watch the video?

    That isn’t protesting.

    That is an organized attack on police by a mob.

    This is happening in multiple cities.

    I would call it rebellion or insurrection.

    I pointed out that clause because it does give the federal government power to deal with it.

    You are correct when you say they gave that power to President.

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/40/1315

    Under this law DHS can

    (A)enforce Federal laws and regulations for the protection of persons and property;

    C)make arrests without a warrant for any offense against the United States committed in the presence of the officer or agent or for any felony cognizable under the laws of the United States if the officer or agent has reasonable grounds to believe that the person to be arrested has committed or is committing a felony;C)make arrests without a warrant for any offense against the United States committed in the presence of the officer or agent or for any felony cognizable under the laws of the United States if the officer or agent has reasonable grounds to believe that the person to be arrested has committed or is committing a felony;

    (E)conduct investigations, on and off the property in question, of offenses that may have been committed against property owned or occupied by the Federal Government or persons on the property; and

    (F)carry out such other activities for the promotion of homeland security as the Secretary may prescribe

    So, Trump is acting within the authority given to the federal government, and delegated to him by Congress.

    I do believe that we SHOULD have a more limited government.

    Reality is we don’t.

    The democrats would take advantage of every bit of power that they get there hands on.

    Therefore I have no problem with Trump doing this.

    If they mayors and governors did the job they were elected for, we would not have this problem.

    This time watch the video I linked.

    These are organized terrorists, not protesters.

  29. BTW this is all in plain language, no interpretation needed.

    Face masks under the commerce clause is much more of a stretch.

    The commerce clause is greatly abused and misinterpreted to cover everything and that wasn’t the founders intent despite courts making up law to the contrary.

  30. https://www.foxnews.com/us/portland-riots-federal-officers-blinded-lasers-fireworks-doxed

    Is this protesting?

    They are blinding officers with lazers, doxing thier families, attempting to cut off water supplies to federal buildings, tear down fencing, throw bottles and explosives at officers.

    They even appear to have advanced technology

    “The U.S. Marshals Service also reported communications jamming – the first reported instance since the riots have started — which may have caused significant problems with their radio communications.”

    These are not your hippie protests from the 60’s.

    This is an armed group of thugs attempting to achieve political goals through violence.

    In other words they are terrorists.

    I’m sure most protesters not really part of that but it doesn’t matter.

    Everyone else’s right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness outweighs the rights of the protests.

    They have a right to peaceful protest, that isn’t what this is.

  31. “The democrats would take advantage of every bit of power that they get there hands on. Therefore I have no problem with Trump doing this.”

    There it is.

    Thank you for being honest.

    This isn’t about small government principles .itt is about lR vs D. Thanks for your honesty.

  32. John, I found something else you may find interesting.

    An amendment by Ilhan Omar would have accelerated our withdrawal from Afghanistan and struck down language inserted into the NDAA by Liz Cheney which placed conditions on leaving Afghanistan that are nearly impossible to meet.

    Underwood voted against the amendmen

    Of the 13 Democrats in Illinois, 7 voted for Omar’s amendment (Quigley, Schakowski, Krishnamoorthi, Davis, Kelly, Garcia, and Rush) and 6 voted against (Casten, Underwood, Schneider, Foster, Lipinski, and Bustos).

    All 5 Republicans voted against Omar’s amendment.

    103 Democrats joined 181 Republicans to oppose Omar’s amendment which was defeated 284-129.

    The yes votes came from 126 Democrats, 2 Republicans, and 1 Independent.

    17 did not vote: 15 Republicans and 2 Democrats.

    https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2020144

    There are useful filters on that website that allow you to search by party, by vote, by state, so it is easy to find out how people voted.

  33. PinocchiOH said: “This isn’t about small government principles .itt is about lR vs D. Thanks for your honesty.”

    PinocchiOH deciding how people are allowed to make their decisions to vote.

    It could just be that the Democrats are supporters of all things evil and perverted that people can’t support them any more.

    Nearly any option is a better option but the RINOs aren’t any better.

  34. Ugh. I intended to avoid this dumb thread that won’t seem to die. Peace out.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *