McHenry County Blog

A press release about Joe Walsh about the two Democrats running to challenge him this fall:

Congressman Walsh: “Was that a Debate?”

My potential opponents debated each other for the first time last night.

The two Democrats who seek to challenge Joe Walsh in the 8th Congressional District were given air time on WTTW Wednesday night. Walsh was excluded because he has "no opponent."

Those voters who base their decision on literature, music and cinema are happy to now know Tammy and Raja’s favorite music group, the last movie they saw and the last book they read. Sadly, for the rest of us, many issues are still unclear.

DOES TAMMY SUPPORT THE PRESIDENT’S BUDGET?

It’s a simple yes or no question. Maybe if Tammy put Chris Matthews’ latest book down or stopped listening to Prince for five minutes, she could let us know her position.

The more I watch their primary unfold, the more I realize that the media and these candidates are not interested in a campaign focused on the issues.

He knows how to play the media like a concert violinist.

He makes potential opponent State Rep.Jack Franks, a potential candidate for Congress, look like an amateur.

After last month’s Chicago Sun-Times child support attack on a dispute filed months before, right after he was elected, any ordinary politician would have rolled up into a fetal ball and disappeared.

Joe Walsh didn’t.

When President Barack Obama tip-toed into Western Illinois last month, Walsh invited him to meet real people at a joint Town Hall Meeting in his district.  (A friend who was in Henry County the day before the President was coming asked farmers if they were planning to go.  “No.  Got better things to do,” was the answer.)

Walsh agreed to a feature interview on Chicago Tonight Wednesday before an appearance before the Nunda Township Republican Precinct Committeemen.  Obviously, he knew personal questions would be on the table.

Joe Walsh fielded policy and personal questions calmly on WTTW August 31, 2011.

And they were in the long interview on WTTW.

Watch the full episode. See more Chicago Tonight.

Walsh replied calmly throughout the interview.

He pointed out that the Chicago Tribune ran no articles on his campaign last fall, when he was talking about his personal problems “day after day.”

The questions were thorough.  His critics will quibble with Walsh’s answers, but they can’t say that he was not calm–not exactly the image the media is trying to pin on Tea Party folks.

Last night he grabbed  what may have been the lead story on ABC’s Channel 7.

The Town Hall crowd shown on ABC Channel 7 on Thursday night.

In late afternoon, Walsh sent out a press release saying that he was not going to attend the long-promoted speech on jobs that President Barack Obama is giving next week.

Certainly no reason to go to hear the President’s content. It will be everywhere, spread by a mainstream media that desperately wants Obama re-elected.

The question was asked by WTTW’s Eddie Arruza about whether he would run in the 14th Congressional District against Randy Hultgren.

Walsh demurred, said he had not decided, but that he was running for re-election.

So, what’s Walsh’s strategy?

My guess is that he is going for the red meat Republicans who cannot stand having President Obama in office–the kind of people who would wear an “OMG” tee shirt with the initials standing for “Obama Must Go.”

Will that be enough to get past local Republican Establishment support of Hultgren, should Walsh decide to run in the district where he lives?

Hard to tell in a two-way primary.

It worked in a mufti-candidate field in 2010.

April 12th, State Reps. Mike Tryon and Jack Franks, both from McHenry County, joined State Senators Randy Hultgren, who is running for Congress against Democrat incumbent Bill Foster in the 14th District south of the McHenry-Kane County line, and Chicago State Senator Ricky Hendon in discussing the state budget.

The following email just arrived from State Rep. Mike Tryon. He includes a link to an April 20, 2010, WTTW Chicago Tonight show on which he, State Rep. Jack Franks and State Senators Randy Hultgren and Ricky Hendron discuss the budge crisis facing Illinois. I think the Republicans called it a “spending” crisis.

Dear friends,

Many residents of Illinois may be asking themselves how is it Illinois is over $13 billion dollars in the red when our state is not constitutionally allowed to run a deficit.

The simple answer to this question is the inability of the entrenched Chicago political interests that currently run the State of Illinois to fundamentally change the way we appropriate money.

In homes across Illinois, family budgets are being managed everyday.   Most of us who have had to balance our own household budget know full well the unpleasant realities and tough decisions that need to be made when doing so.

Mike Tryon discussed budget problems on WTTW April 12, 2010.

The fact of the matter is that our economy is contracting, while government continues to expand.  Our leaders need to recognize that government can’t be all things to all people.We need to roll back spending in the form of reducing our Medicaid eligibility which is one of the most liberal in the country.

We need to enact creative solutions by consolidating Illinois services, agencies and programs to maximize resources and reduce costs.

We need to start our budgetary process with revenue, not with existing spending.

Entrenched public labor interests in Illinois this year alone will be receiving nearly $336 million in wage increases, all the while fighting tooth and nail against the most modest pension reforms.

The Governor refuses to reopen contracts to bring down labor costs for fear of angering special interests.  Legislative leaders have refused to consider significant reform measures while protecting their political fiefdoms from which they have made their careers.

This type of short-sided approach to governing is not capable of digging us out of this mess.

Decisions can be made; its just legislative leaders are refusing to make them.

So as we head down to Springfield next week to see what Governor Quinn, Speaker Madigan and President Cullerton have in store for us in regards to the upcoming state budget, please know that I will be fighting to bring some accountability into the discussion.

Take a moment to watch myself and several other area legislators discuss the state budget on a recent [April 12, 2010] episode of Chicago Tonight by clicking on the link below.
http://video.wttw.com/video/1467200511/

As always, do not hesitate to contact me with any questions or concerns regarding state issues.  It is an honor to serve you in Springfield.

Sincerely,

Michael Tryon
State Representative – 64th District

Pretty much nothing in public policy formulation disturbs me more than reporters who do not know anything about percentages.

Maybe I shouldn’t be so critical, but when an opinion leader like WTTW’s “Chicago Week in Review” host Joel Weisman asks four reporters whether they would be willing to pay a one percent income tax increase when he should be asking either

I wonder if he deliberately trying to mislead his listeners or just mathematically impaired.

I suspect it is deliberate because of my experience while I was working in the bowels of the Department of Central Management Services.

Driving my little red Honda down Jefferson to work, I was listening to WTAX or WMAY and heard a story about Governor Jim Thompson’s proposing a “1% income tax hike.”

“What???!!!” I thought.

“I’m not going to let them get away with that.”

So, arriving about ten minutes early, I went to my friend Rep. Bernie Pedersen’s office and wrote a press release explaining that increasing the state income tax rate from (2½% to 3½%, I think), was a 40% increase in the state income tax.

My little red Honda, by the way, was the only car in the Stratton Building parking lot with a

window sticker on it.

I came back to Bernie’s office for my 15-minute break, picked up the press release and walked it over to the Press Room.

Soon stories started appearing pointing out that the 40% income tax hike being requested by my 1982 running mate, who miraculously changed his mind about the need for an income tax hike just weeks after he was re-elected and I lost my election for State Comptroller to Rolland Burris.

Later the line item paying for my salary disappeared from the budget.

But, back to Weisman and his reporter guests.

All were asked whether they would mind paying a 1% income tax increase.

And, maybe one of them didn’t answer because he was moving to New York, but at least three allowed as how they would be willing to pay one percent more.

That says something of the liberal bias of those on the panel, but it is old news that Weisman can’t manage to find any reporters who are conservative.

Weisman had, of course, pointed out the state was so, so much in debt without pointing out that Governor Rod Blagojevich and his Democratic pals in the General Assembly had increased spending $1 billion a year pretty much every year since his took office.

Unlike former Governor George Ryan, who was trying to tighten the screws on state government after he found out that there expenditures were exceeding tax revenue and caught hell for doing so from Blagojevich during the campaign, the Democrats decided to spend, spend, spend.

And, don’t forget that Blagojevich contended that the state was “$5 billion” in debt when he took office.

I figured that the state could work its way out of that debt, which I doubted was really $5 billion, in two years, if state government were squeezed and no new programs were started.

However, while mouthing the “$5 billion in debt” mantra, Blagojevich pushed for a $1 billion a year increase in spending.

Year after year.

Go figure.

Must be like President Barack Obama.

Never took a course in economics. (Or if either did, it didn’t take.)

And, now, after six years of total Democratic Party control, Illinois is supposed $9 billion in debt.

Great management by the Democrats.

In any event, for Joel Weisman’s edification and that of his guests, a one percentage point increase in the state income tax rate means a 33% increase in our state income tax bill.

So, what was Weisman doing?

The same thing Jim Thompson’s press office was doing way back in the early to mid-1980′s.

He was framing the issue in terms favorable to a huge tax increase.

Whether deliberately or not, Weisman’s false description of the size of a one percentage point tax hike will make it easier for the Springfield politicians to enact.

Pretty much nothing in public policy formulation disturbs me more than reporters who do not know anything about percentages.

Maybe I shouldn’t be so critical, but when an opinion leader like WTTW’s “Chicago Week in Review” host Joel Weisman asks four reporters whether they would be willing to pay a one percent income tax increase when he should be asking either

I wonder if he deliberately trying to mislead his listeners or just mathematically impaired.

I suspect it is deliberate because of my experience while I was working in the bowels of the Department of Central Management Services.

Driving my little red Honda down Jefferson to work, I was listening to WTAX or WMAY and heard a story about Governor Jim Thompson’s proposing a “1% income tax hike.”

“What???!!!” I thought.

“I’m not going to let them get away with that.”

So, arriving about ten minutes early, I went to my friend Rep. Bernie Pedersen’s office and wrote a press release explaining that increasing the state income tax rate from (2½% to 3½%, I think), was a 40% increase in the state income tax.

My little red Honda, by the way, was the only car in the Stratton Building parking lot with a

window sticker on it.

I came back to Bernie’s office for my 15-minute break, picked up the press release and walked it over to the Press Room.

Soon stories started appearing pointing out that the 40% income tax hike being requested by my 1982 running mate, who miraculously changed his mind about the need for an income tax hike just weeks after he was re-elected and I lost my election for State Comptroller to Rolland Burris.

Later the line item paying for my salary disappeared from the budget.

But, back to Weisman and his reporter guests.

All were asked whether they would mind paying a 1% income tax increase.

And, maybe one of them didn’t answer because he was moving to New York, but at least three allowed as how they would be willing to pay one percent more.

That says something of the liberal bias of those on the panel, but it is old news that Weisman can’t manage to find any reporters who are conservative.

Weisman had, of course, pointed out the state was so, so much in debt without pointing out that Governor Rod Blagojevich and his Democratic pals in the General Assembly had increased spending $1 billion a year pretty much every year since his took office.

Unlike former Governor George Ryan, who was trying to tighten the screws on state government after he found out that there expenditures were exceeding tax revenue and caught hell for doing so from Blagojevich during the campaign, the Democrats decided to spend, spend, spend.

And, don’t forget that Blagojevich contended that the state was “$5 billion” in debt when he took office.

I figured that the state could work its way out of that debt, which I doubted was really $5 billion, in two years, if state government were squeezed and no new programs were started.

However, while mouthing the “$5 billion in debt” mantra, Blagojevich pushed for a $1 billion a year increase in spending.

Year after year.

Go figure.

Must be like President Barack Obama.

Never took a course in economics. (Or if either did, it didn’t take.)

And, now, after six years of total Democratic Party control, Illinois is supposed $9 billion in debt.

Great management by the Democrats.

In any event, for Joel Weisman’s edification and that of his guests, a one percentage point increase in the state income tax rate means a 33% increase in our state income tax bill.

So, what was Weisman doing?

The same thing Jim Thompson’s press office was doing way back in the early to mid-1980′s.

He was framing the issue in terms favorable to a huge tax increase.

Whether deliberately or not, Weisman’s false description of the size of a one percentage point tax hike will make it easier for the Springfield politicians to enact.

Tuesday, hey, that’s today, is the day to watch 8th district Congresswoman Melissa Bean and her Republican challenger Steve Greenberg.

Sometime between 7 and 8 o’clock in the evening.

Bean has refused to debate Greenberg before an audience, but is supposed to show up tonight.

Tuesday, hey, that’s today, is the day to watch 8th district Congresswoman Melissa Bean and her Republican challenger Steve Greenberg.

Sometime between 7 and 8 o’clock in the evening.

Bean has refused to debate Greenberg before an audience, but is supposed to show up tonight.

You know your congressman or state legislator has made the big time when he ends up on Chicago television.

Last night 16th district Congressman Don Manzullo was the point man for opponents to the financial bailout on WTTW’s Chicago Tonight.

I was astounded that there were actually two opponents versus one who voted “Yes.”

Supporting the opposition to the bill was Democratic U.S. Representative Dan Lipinski. In support was Democrat Danny Davis.

Manzullo complained about the “dictatorial powers” being given to the Treasury Secretary, more than Alexandra Hamilton would have ever dreamed of.

And, without judicial review.

As Manzullo explained the bill, the types of checks and balances that keeps the United State government working just are not included.

As for bipartisanship, Manzullo said House Republicans were left out.

Manzullo suggested using the “same method as was used in the savings and loan bailout.”

He complained about the “take it or leave it” approach, as well as the complete lack of committee action. Manzullo serves on the Financial Services Committee chaired by Democrat Barney Frank, which supposedly has jurisdiction over the legislation.

“There was no oversight,” he complained.

Lipinski, a southwest side congressman said that the problem is “those on Wall Street don’t understand the rest of America.” He pointed out that the average family would be saddled with a $10,000 burden had the legislation passed.

“The people who are saying congress doesn’t understand Main Street are the ones who caused the problem,” Manzullo added.

He suggested immediately changing the “mark to market” rule for banks. As I understand it, that requires banks to mark down the value of their mortgages when the market value of the asset mortgaged decreases.

This suggestion is being hotly opposed by auditing firms.

“Before we spend $700 billion, we should exhaust every other possibility,” Manzullo asserted.

“Most of the constituents are opposed to (the bailout),” he revealed.

Manzullo’s Democratic Party opponent Robert Abboud has not commented on the failed vote.

You know your congressman or state legislator has made the big time when he ends up on Chicago television.

Last night 16th district Congressman Don Manzullo was the point man for opponents to the financial bailout on WTTW’s Chicago Tonight.

I was astounded that there were actually two opponents versus one who voted “Yes.”

Supporting the opposition to the bill was Democratic U.S. Representative Dan Lipinski. In support was Democrat Danny Davis.

Manzullo complained about the “dictatorial powers” being given to the Treasury Secretary, more than Alexandra Hamilton would have ever dreamed of.

And, without judicial review.

As Manzullo explained the bill, the types of checks and balances that keeps the United State government working just are not included.

As for bipartisanship, Manzullo said House Republicans were left out.

Manzullo suggested using the “same method as was used in the savings and loan bailout.”

He complained about the “take it or leave it” approach, as well as the complete lack of committee action. Manzullo serves on the Financial Services Committee chaired by Democrat Barney Frank, which supposedly has jurisdiction over the legislation.

“There was no oversight,” he complained.

Lipinski, a southwest side congressman said that the problem is “those on Wall Street don’t understand the rest of America.” He pointed out that the average family would be saddled with a $10,000 burden had the legislation passed.

“The people who are saying congress doesn’t understand Main Street are the ones who caused the problem,” Manzullo added.

He suggested immediately changing the “mark to market” rule for banks. As I understand it, that requires banks to mark down the value of their mortgages when the market value of the asset mortgaged decreases.

This suggestion is being hotly opposed by auditing firms.

“Before we spend $700 billion, we should exhaust every other possibility,” Manzullo asserted.

“Most of the constituents are opposed to (the bailout),” he revealed.

Manzullo’s Democratic Party opponent Robert Abboud has not commented on the failed vote.

In a fit of “equal time,” even though it’s not required by Federal law, Channel 11′s “Chicago Tonight” will feature an interview with Republican United States Senate candidate Steve Sauerberg tonight at 7.

Incumbent United States Senator Dick Durbin was interviewed last night.

It will be rebroadcast at 1 and 4:30 AM, just in case you miss the 7 PM broadcast and want to record it or in case you have a hacking cough and can’t get to sleep, which happened to me Saturday night.

See story seeking volunteers below.

= = = = =
The photo is of Steve Sauerberg attending the Pig Roast thrown by the Pro-Life Victory PAC at Woodstock’s Resurrection Center this summer. He is seen talking to the Illinois Family Institute’s Jim Finnegan.