[Updated at 6:05 p.m. ET] An Illinois congressman has stuck to his guns – including during a testy interview with CNN’s Ashleigh Banfield this week – in a flap over his assertions that his double-amputee election opponent talks too much about her military service and war injuries.
Rep. Joe Walsh, R-Illinois, has said that the story has been blown out of proportion, arguing that it has been manufactured by liberal opponents who recorded his comments at a campaign event Sunday and then posted them on the Internet, with liberal website ThinkProgress.org starting the coverage.
But he’s defended his stance, arguing that Democrat Tammy Duckworth – a Black Hawk helicopter pilot who lost both legs when her crew was shot down in Iraq in 2004 – rarely makes campaign appearances in her bid to defeat him in Illinois’ 8th Congressional District. When she does, he said, she talks mostly about her background fighting overseas.
We’d like to hear what you think about the issue. First, here’s how it played out this week.
In a Sunday campaign event in a Chicago suburb, Walsh was recalling the 2008 presidential campaign of Republican Sen. John McCain, saying McCain was modest about his background as a prisoner of war during the Vietnam War. Walsh said McCain was reluctant to make that story a focus of his campaign, despite pressure from advisers to do otherwise.
“That's what's so noble about our heroes. Now I'm running against a woman who, my God, that's all she talks about," Walsh said. "Our true heroes, it's the last thing in the world they talk about. That's why we're so indebted and in awe of what they've done."
The comments spread online, and several groups, including VoteVets.org and Emily’s List, condemned Walsh’s remarks.
Walsh, elected in 2010 with support from the tea party, told CNN’s “The Situation Room with Wolf Blizter” on Wednesday that he believes Duckworth is a hero, but she gives voters a narrow window into her positions on political issues.
“She is a hero, and that demands our respect, but it doesn’t demand our vote. All she does, guys, is talk about her service,” Walsh said.
On Thursday, Walsh got into a heated back-and-forth with Banfield during an interview on CNN. After Banfield attempted to contradict Walsh’s allegation that Duckworth doesn’t talk about issues – she read a list of moments when Duckworth commented on things other than military service – Walsh responded:
“She spends a lot of time talking about her war service. I’ve asked her to debate me monthly. She won’t. I’ve asked her to get directly in front of voters with me. She won’t. She will not get in front of voters and take questions directly from voters. Because she’s a war hero, Ashleigh, that demands our respect. But that doesn’t demand our vote.”
While Walsh and Duckworth might not have debated frequently, they did debate on May 11. According to a Chicago Sun-Times account, Duckworth criticized the GOP’s federal budget proposal, accused Walsh of wanting to end Medicare and backed President Obama’s support of gay marriage, but she declined to answer a question about whether she would have supported the bank bailout of a few years ago.
Duckworth’s stances on issues, according to her campaign website
Duckworth hasn't hidden her war service or injuries. She highlights them on her campaign website. After last week's U.S. Supreme Court ruling on the health care reform act, she referenced her injuries when discussing the act, according to the Chicago Tribune.
Walsh’s criticism of Duckworth isn’t new. Politico, on March 28, reported that he said this during a 30-minute interview: “I have so much respect for what she did in the fact that she sacrificed her body for this country. Ehhh. Now let’s move on.”
“What else has she done?” Walsh said, according to the March 28 Politico article. “Female, wounded veteran … ehhh. She is nothing more than a handpicked Washington bureaucrat. David Axelrod, Rahm Emanuel just picked her up and dropped her into this district.”
He later backtracked on the “dropped her into this district” comment in an interview with Chicago Magazine.
Hitting back on Friday, Duckworth told CNN's "The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer" that she discusses the issues "a majority of the time" and argued that Walsh was trying to "distract" voters away from his record in Congress.
"It's very irresponsible for Mr. Walsh, as a sitting congressman, to try to muzzle war veterans and keep them from talking about their service," Duckworth said.
Duckworth said during a Tuesday interview with MSNBC that Walsh had disrespected veterans and called him an "extremist loudmouth for the tea party." On Wednesday, she told CNN affiliate WLS that Walsh’s comments were “not even worth mentioning.”
This election year marks Duckworth's second run for Congress. The Iraq War veteran made an unsuccessful House bid in 2006, before being tapped by President Barack Obama in 2009 to become an assistant secretary at the Department of Veterans Affairs. She is a lieutenant colonel in the Illinois Army National Guard.
The two candidates are fighting for a seat representing the new 8th Congressional District outside Chicago and created by the state's recent redistricting process.
– CNN's Ashley Killough contributed to this report.
What do you think of Walsh's stance? Leave your thoughts in the comments section below.
© 2012 Cable News Network. Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
| Advertising practices | Advertise with us | About us | Work for us | Help
I'd rather have a glass of wine. Thank you.
The GOP has decided to peddle hate and lies as their campaign strategy, and this guy Joe Walsh, R-Illinois is proof. It's almost as if satan is being exposed in slow motion. Voter supression, policy deception, and out right lies by it's candidate Romney is proof. Walsh is a person that lied to the voters to get elected, but they will surely send him home this cycle. The GOP will take this country into another civil war. A Morman is not Christian, but is an anti-christ.
Only the imposter Jews and Mormons don't believe in Jesus' messge from our lord.
For the most part politicians can say whatever they wish during a campaign. It's up to the voters to decide beyond that. Some will stress their record, others their ideas, and still others their background. It's pretty much up to them.
Of course, the opponent can similarly do whatever they wish. They can question the ideas, challenge the record, or simply "go negative" and try to denigrate the candidate in some other way. While I haven't seen her typical appearance, he's still probably out of line...even if she talked about nothing else. He, on the other hand, has a record that is less than stellar, and I suspect he's feeling the heat. Things like child support aren't what any candidate wants to discuss, yet they may well form the basis for voters to decide. If you can't, or don't, pay your debts, especially the court-ordered kind, that probably says something about you. Similarly, if you're standing on the stage with two prosthetic limbs because you served in the military, THAT probably says something too. Let the voters decide which of these candidates is the idiot!
Craig,
Your summary at the end was right on the mark. You succinctly put into words what most of us are thinking. Thanks! Could Rep. Walsh please provide his service record...oh, that's right, he can't. His comments may just be political banter, but how many times do we keep allowing people to "cross the line" in what is just poor taste. If that's all she talks about, people will figure it out and they won;t vote for her. It is just plain bad manners to EVER downplay the contributions of a veteran and particularly callous and, quite frankly, un-American, to take this line of argument when the veteran has lost both legs. Unfortunately, no one within his own party has the guts to stand up and tell him to knock it off – "you're in time-out, Joe. Mom says you need to play nice or you have to sit in the corner." It also seems to me it is the something said by someone with no original thoughts – attack the obvious. If all she talks about is her service, then all you're talking about , Joe, is her talking about talking about her service! Give it a rest.
Wow. The story is about a raving lunatic and everyone is posting about the military records of past Presidents? Military service may not be a requirement to be President, but it is at least some evidence of mental discipline, and heroism just adds to the equation. Those qualities can be gained in other ways, but that clown Walsh has nothing. It is amazing he got elected to anything.
What is interesting about this is that some candidates tend to emphasize their military experience while others don't – in Ohio, we have a guy named Mandel who features his Iraqi experiences in his commercials, albeit briefly. McCain downplayed his experiences in Vietnam, and downplayed the service of his son, a Marine in Iraq. On the other hand, Palin's kid was featured some when he was deployed for a year in Iraq with the ALaskan Guard.
Mr. Walsh does not appear to have served in the military. So is he trying to downplay that when Duckworth brings that up?
Joe Walsh was a drug using hippie and became a loser husband and father. Couldn't pay his child support, lost his house to bankrupsy, borrowed over two thousand dollars from one of his campaign workers to take his girlfriend on a foreign vacation and further borrowed money from his campaign funds.
Walsh is a loser who never held a decent job and got himself elected because he has a big mouth and like all big mouths he has no class. Calling our President a liar from such a lowlife person as he, tells you everything you need to know about this jerk. Tammy Duckworth ourclasses him in everything. She is a patriot. He is a deadbeat father who can't hold a job, can't pay his bills, and borrows from his own campaign workers. What a piece of garbage he is.
This guy is one of those arrogant conceited loud mouths that have no respect for anything but the almighty dollar and the filthy rich.
Of course he has not served.. He is one of those college educated, "I am better than that " type..
The people that do not talk about their service are the men and women who are traumatized and will be traumatized for the rest of their lives.
It seems he likes them that way... then he can ignore their service..
This guy is the new breed of American.. The one that thinks the dirty work of going to war, is for the poor and uneducated.
His kind "rule"..
Vote this guy out.. Let him get a real job.
For Republicans, they wnat their presidential candidates with military backgrounds because this is where the money is.
Ashleigh Banfield wouldn't let him speak... that makes the interview nothing more than a personal rant...
All the guy was trying to say is that there should be MORE meat to a candidate than just military service – I certainly don't think that my service makes me fit for every job on the planet... it is was it is – and I am proud of it and those that serve(d)....
But the reporting ranting like a lunatic doesn;t help – it was supposed to be a news/editorial show and not a episode of Glenn Beck...
Reporters should report – when interviewing, they should ask questions and let the guest answer completely –
Apart from that, I have no opinion on the guy in general...he is a Republican which leads me to beleive that there are a lot of issues she could have targeted that would have made him look foolish – this was just childish rhetoric...
People would actually vote for this loudmouth? He won't even let the interviewer ask a question without talking/yelling all over the top of her. This seems to me to be the epitome of Tea=Party politics. I'm sure this guy is a hit at Fox.
As a military veteran myself, I respect those who gave more than I did. However, you need to be relevant to the discussion at hand. Talking about what you'd do as a Congressman (or woman)? Talk the issues, not your injuries. Is Congress debating armed conflict? By all means get up there and use yourself as a soap box. Show the wealthy white men the reality of war. Talking about taxes? Mum's the word.
Imagine the uproar that would be pouring forth from every right wing media outlet if a Democratic candidate has said these things about a disabled Republican veteran running for office. This guy is a classic example of someone who feels the need to constantly belittle his opponents and try to assert some kind of dominance through subtle and not-so-subtle signs of disrespect. Notice how he even addresses the reporter as "kiddo" at one point, as if he was talking to a child.
Walsh is just another chicken-hawk. No military service of his own, so in order to compensate he has to belittle someone who served. Why would anyone vote for this loser? It is about time for Republicans to vote country first instead of Republican first. That is the reason jerks like Walsh get elected.
Tea Party? I should have known.
The say they "support the troops", until they get home that is, and especially if they are disabled.
You know, "we need to make the government smaller" so cut out the old people, the infirm, and the poor and let them support themselves....etc., etc.
It is amazing how they follow a flip-flop leader right into the jaws of obscurity...