HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Alan Grayson » Journal
Page: 1 2 3 Next »

Alan Grayson

Profile Information

Member since: Sat May 22, 2010, 01:02 PM
Number of posts: 485

Journal Archives

$18,000 For A Single Ad, Shown Once

It’s difficult to describe how crazy the Presidential race has made TV ad prices in Orlando. But let me try.

In Orlando, it now costs $18,000 to run a 30-second ad, once, on the CBS show “Two and a Half Men.”

Now I recognize that “Two and a Half Men” is a magnificent tour de force, a beautifully-wroughtchef d’oeuvre putting a magnifying glass to contemporary society, a pitch-perfect analysis by our greatest living prose stylists, an ambitious and poignant masterwork that establishes itself as one of the most profound artistic accomplishments in American history, a gritty and gripping and darkly funny achievement that will inspire countless millions for generations to come.

And that’s even without Charlie Sheen.

But $18,000 for one ad? Come on! That’s more than what I paid for my car.

Yet whether we like it or not, that’s what it costs to put our message -- for all of 30 seconds -- in front of fewer than 200,000 pairs of eyeballs in Orlando. Roughly 40,000 of whom live in our district. And fewer than 5,000 of whom are undecided voters in our district.

Here are some other pungent, acrid examples:

“Mike and Molly” - $18,000. An unheard show, at an unheard-of cost.

“Hawaii Five-0” - $14,000. And that’s minus Jack Lord.

“How I Met Your Mother” - $14,000. At that price, Dad can keep it to himself.

But what are we supposed to do – just let Karl Rove and the Koch Brothers shout us all down?

So there you have it. In order to convey to our voters what we would do for them, and what the other side will do to them, we have to pay staggering sums, in order to dart in and out of the crevasses of what passes for entertainment these days. What a strange, strange world.

But you understand what is at stake. We have to win. So we need your help.

Tomorrow, we need campaign finance reform. But today, we have to win. So we need your help.


Alan Grayson

Republican: “Alan Grayson’s Negatives Are Higher Than Hitler’s”

Our campaign office got some calls a couple of weeks ago, from supporters who said that on the radio, a Republican leader had compared Alan Grayson to Hitler – unfavorably.

As you can well imagine, not every call to a campaign office turns out to be reliable information. Even from supporters, we take these calls with a grain of salt. Why would anyone, much less a Republican leader, equate Grayson with Adolf Hitler? Grayson is Jewish, and Grayson has relatives who died in the Holocaust.

Well, we looked into it. It took us a while to track down the audio file. But it’s true. Lew Oliver, the Chairman of the Orange County Republican Party, said on the radio that “Alan Grayson’s ‘negatives’ are higher than Hitler’s.” Oliver said it on WDBO, Orlando’s highest-rated news radio station. We have the clip.

Now here is the question for you: how low can they go?

(True or false is irrelevant to people like Lew Oliver, but the fact is that what he’s suggesting is not true. Grayson’s rating in our most recent poll was 53% favorable, 39% unfavorable. Grayson’s opponent, by contrast, had a net favorability rating of zero. Admittedly, the campaign somehow neglected to poll Hitler’s favorability.)

There is a pattern to this. Alan Grayson’s opponent Todd Long has said in one interview after another that Alan Grayson is “the most anti-Christian Congressman in history” – whatever that means (other than the obvious anti-Semitism).

Yesterday, Alan linked a clip of a TV interview in which Long said that Alan “is just about as evil as they get.” In a debate at the Orlando Sentinel, with Grayson sitting right next to him, Long described Grayson as “pure evil.”

And now, rather than repudiating Long’s politics of vilification, the local head of the Republican Party has chimed right in. His equation is this: Grayson > Hitler.

We have to punish them for this outrageous misconduct. We have to prove that their hate speech doesn’t pay off. We have to beat them, and we have to win big.

Help us prove to them that hate is the parent of defeat, not victory. Please contribute to our “Fight Back Against the Lies” Fund.

Do it today. Do it right now.

Fight Back Against the Lies

One of the most disturbing aspects of this election cycle is the pervasiveness of outright lies. If you saw Mitt Romney in any of the Presidential debates, you know exactly what I’m talking about. The year 2012 is in danger of becoming what George Orwell described as a "time of universal deceit."

It’s not just in the Presidential race. The Right Wing has discovered the utility of fabrication and denial, from the top of the ticket to the bottom. And that’s true in my race for Congress, as well.

Two years ago, my opponent Todd Long published a book that enumerated all of his crackpot schemes in a single volume. Among other things, he said (on page 50) that he would “raise the eligibility age for Social Security and Medicare to seventy.” He reiterated it on page 138. At the same time, in a meeting with the Orlando Sentinel Editorial Board, he said that he would raise the age for Social Security and Medicare to “70 or 72.”

We have the video.

Todd Long is literally the only person I know in Central Florida who wants to raise the age for Social Security and Medicare to 70 or 72. I’m happy to have a debate, on the merits, about whether America should do that.

Todd Long doesn’t want to have that debate. It’s so much easier for him to turn that Etch-A-Sketch upside down, and shake it. And then put the cherry on top of the sundae, by saying that we’re lying, not him. A few days ago, Todd Long went on WFTV, the highest rated local news station in Orlando, and said this:

“It’s just lie after lie after lie . . . [Alan Grayson]’s run almost a million dollars of ads saying I want the retirement age to be increased and the Medicare age to increased, all lies, all not true. . . . This man is just about as evil as they get.”

The WFTV reporter, who has heard the video of Long saying that he would raise the retirement age, was understandably skeptical: “Is there any truth to his assertion that you want to raise the retirement age to 70 or 72?”

Long replied: “No. It’s not true.”

Despicable. Utterly reprehensible and irresponsible.

Vince Lombardi said that “the best defense is a good offense.” (Mao Tse-Tung also said that, by the way.) Todd Long has a similar view. He believes that the best defense is to be as offensive as possible.

Well, we’re fight back against the lies. We have put together a devastating ad against Todd Long, using his own words to expose him. We want the public to see exactly what he and his right-wing allies have in mind for them – before it’s too late.

But the Presidential race has made TV time in Orlando so expensive that we’ve been pushed off WFTV, and several other stations.

We need your help.

Please contribute to our “Fight Back Against the Lies” Fund. We will use your contribution to help keep the true face of Todd Long on the air. We will defeat his lies with our truth.

The truth will set us free. And keep us free. Please help.


Alan Grayson

“During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.”

- George Orwell

An Eye For An Eye, Unless You’re Rich

As we lurch uncontrollably toward Election Day, choosing our next set of lawmakers, I’ve been looking for a way to cast some light on what is at stake. I think that I’ve found it in the oldest legal code, the Code of Hammurabi, from 1772 B.C.

In general, the Code of Hammurabi established the law as a force much like William Blake’s “tyger” in “Tyger, Tyger, Burning Bright”: it has a “fearful symmetry.” How many times have you heard the phrase, “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth”? That is shorthand for these sections of the Code of Hammurabi:

196. If a man has knocked out the eye of a patrician, his eye shall be knocked out. . . .

200. If a patrician has knocked out the tooth of a man that is his equal, his tooth shall be knocked out.

I think that I can hear you say, “Whoa! I never heard that bit about ‘patrician’ or ‘equal’ before. What’s that all about?”

Well, I’ll tell you.

The Code of Hammurabi explicitly set separate laws for patricians, a/k/a the 1%, and plebians, a/k/a the 99%. Patricians enjoyed the full protection of “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.” Plebians did not. Here is what they got:

198. If (a man) has knocked out the eye of a plebian . . . he shall pay one mina of silver.

199. If he has knocked out the eye of a patrician’s servant . . . he shall pay half (of the servant’s) value (to the patrician). . . .

201. If (a patrician) has knocked out the tooth of a plebian, he shall pay one-third of a mina of silver.

(Today, a mina of silver would be worth about $600.)

Here is another example:

202-204. If a man has smitten the privates (ouch!!) of a man higher in rank than he, he shall be scourged with sixty blows of an ox-hide scourge, in the assembly. If a (patrician) has smitten the privates of a patrician of his own rank, he shall pay one mina of silver. If a plebian has smitten the privates of a plebian, he shall pay ten shekels of silver.

(A shekel of silver today would be worth about $10.)

And another one:

209-213. If a man has struck a free woman with child, and has caused her to miscarry, he shall pay ten shekels for her miscarriage . . . . If it be the daughter of a plebian that has miscarried through his blows, he shall pay five shekels of silver. . . . If he has struck a man’s maid and caused her to miscarry, he shall pay two shekels of silver.

So here is the point: in the wrong hands, the law itself becomes a means – a very powerful means – of discrimination. And in many respects, it already is. Look at the tax code. Look at banking law. Look at abortion laws. Look at the laws on marriage equality. And look at the system itself: most people have the same access to the so-called “justice system” as they do to the Ritz-Carlton.

And whose hands are “the wrong hands”? How about the hands of a gentleman who has never had to dirty his hands at any time during his entire life? A gentleman “to the manor born”? The spiritual heir to Thurston Howell, III?

We already have reached a point where inequality is so extreme that the median wealth of whites is seven times higher than that of African-Americans, and African-Americans are seven times more likely to be incarcerated.

When we choose our legislators in a few days, let’s remember this: the laws that they pass can be a force for equality, or a force against it. That’s not only a big difference, it’s the biggest difference of all.


Alan Grayson

We Need Alan Grayson in Congress

Congressman Dennis Kucinich, famed champion of justice, equality and peace, recorded a short video yesterday for you to hear. This is what he said:

We need Alan Grayson in Congress. I'm excited that he's going back to Congress, for the 113th Congress.

We need Alan Grayson in Congress to challenge these phony wars, to put an end to the usurpation of our civil liberties, to take a stand for social and economic justice.

Alan Grayson has the guts, the intestinal fortitude to be able to stand in there, and push back, and fight back whenever we need someone to rally the cause.

So please support his efforts, contribute and help in any way that you can so we can make sure that Alan Grayson is in the next Congress.

Thank you very much.


Rep. Dennis Kucinich

Click here to see the video. And if you want to help return the “Congressman With Guts” to Congress, then please show your support -- click that CONTRIBUTE button below.

Alan Grayson is Famous for Courage and Candor

This week, House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi campaigned for Alan Grayson in Orlando. While Leader Pelosi was in Orlando, she recorded a short video for you to hear. This is what she said:

Hello, I'm Nancy Pelosi, House Democratic Leader. And I'm here to sing the praises of Alan Grayson, who will soon be, once again, Congressman Alan Grayson. But that can only happen with your help.

And why is that important? Because when Alan Grayson comes to Congress in January (and with your help, he will), he will be there to fight for America's working families, to fight for re-igniting the American Dream, and for building ladders of opportunity for people who want to work hard, play by the rules, and take responsibility.

He's about fairness, he's about opportunity. He's also about our democracy. When Alan Grayson comes there, he will be in the lead in the fight for clean campaigns, for his [Save] Democracy platform, so that we can reduce the role of money in campaigns, and amplify the voice of every person in America.

When he comes there, he will demonstrate the courage and the candor that he is famous for. In his district, which I am visiting now, he is very, very respected. We feel confident about his election, but we take nothing for granted. I told [Alan’s supporters] that I knew the high esteem in which they held him, Alan Grayson, and at the high regard in which he is held in the Congress of the United States, and more important than that, across the country. Every place I travel in the country, people ask me, "How is Alan Grayson going to do? Is he going to be re-elected?" He will and can be re-elected, but it takes support. The Republicans are tough. They are struggling to hold the majority. We’re in our “Drive for 25” to take back the House. Alan's election is important, of course, because we need 25 votes, but it is important beyond that. It's not about quantity; it's about the quality of his leadership, the courage of his conviction, and the strength of his ideas. And the support that he commands in his district person-to-person, but also across the country.

So if you can, please help Alan Grayson get re-elected. Please make a contribution, not only for Alan, but for our democracy, which he champions. Thank you.

Onward to Victory,

Leader Nancy Pelosi

For Alan Grayson’s “quality of leadership, the courage of his convictions, and the strength of his ideas,” please show your support -- click that CONTRIBUTE button below.

(P.S. Congratulations again to Douglas L., of Belleville, Illinois, and Cheyenne P., of Palm Bay, Florida, our supporters who joined Leader Pelosi and Alan Grayson for lunch.)

Romney: A Campaign of Lies

Last night, Alan Grayson was on Eliot Spitzer’s national TV show Viewpoint, and this is what he said:

ELIOT SPITZER: Let’s bring in former Florida Congressman Alan Grayson, who is currently running to represent Florida’s newly-formed 9th Congressional District. Congressman, thank you as always for joining us.

ALAN GRAYSON: Thank you.

SPITZER: So how did last night’s {Presidential} debate affect Florida voters? It is still listed, Florida that is, in a toss-up category, although it seems to be leaning toward Mitt Romney right now. Why is that? And do you think the President made any ground up last night?

GRAYSON: Oh, I think he certainly did. Look, he seemed like the President. He seemed like the President of the United States, in full grasp of the facts. Mitt Romney seemed like somebody with 15 minutes of material trying to spread it out over 45 minutes. And {Romney} seems to have this wonderful gift to string together words that mean absolutely nothing. I wrote down a couple of them as I was watching, with my family. The first answer was, “We need a very comprehensive and robust strategy,” and “we need to coordinate with our friends,” to “address the rising tide of tumult.” What does that mean? How can someone claim to be the President of the United States, or a plausible candidate for the President of the United States, and just give out vacuous nonsense like that?

SPITZER: Let me ask you this though. There is no question that over the last several weeks, Florida has been moving towards Mitt Romney. What do you ascribe that to? The unemployment rate there is at 8.7%. Foreclosures still in crisis. Can the President remedy that?

GRAYSON: Well, I think it’s been, more than anything, the impact of the lies concerning the President’s plan regarding health care. I think that the fact that the other side has been pounding [him] with ad after ad after ad -- this nonsense that the President is going to cut Medicare benefits. When the opposite is true, he’s actually expanding them, he’s closing the “donut hole.” That’s had an effect on Florida seniors’ votes. And I think that people have to see through that. The Romney campaign is running a campaign of lies. Outright lies. And I think that the President is starting to point that out. I think that other people in the Party are starting to point that out. I’ve been pointing that out now for quite a while. And I think people are going to have to see through that. In fact, the Ryan and the Romney Plan is to cut Medicare, to cut Social Security, and I think that once seniors understand the facts, they’re going to vote for Obama.

SPITZER: Certainly he hopes that will be the case. But the President doesn’t have much time now to change the direction of this. And, you know, for four years, foreclosures have continued to be a problem. So… I’m troubled by the fact that he hasn’t addressed that more specifically.

GRAYSON: Well, I think you’re right. I think the President understands that. That’s why you saw a difference between the first debate, and the second and third debates. He realizes that in order to beat those lies, he has to confront them. He has to call them out. https://secure.actblue.com/contribute/page/alangraysonforcongress

And I’m pleased to see that he’s finally doing that. I’m also pleased to see that the Democratic Party is doing that. I mean, the Republicans have come along and actually proposed to turn Medicare into “Vouchercare.” [For them] to turn around and say that the President is cutting benefits, when in fact the President’s plan, which is passed into law, doesn’t cut a single Medicare benefit whatsoever, is just outrageous. It’s outrageous that they would try to abuse people like that with lies.

SPITZER: What did you make of Mitt Romney last night trying to run to the middle, pretending that his foreign policy was identical to the President? Does that seem to be waving the white flag on an issue that he had been talking about the whole time? The issue of Israel, of course, in Florida is hugely important. Did the President close that gap last night?

GRAYSON: Well, honestly, no. I don’t think the President closed that gap, because as a Jewish Member of Congress from Central Florida, I’ve been hearing now for the past four years that the Right Wingers have been trying to make out this case that the President is a Muslim, that he hates Israel, that he won’t visit Israel, and so on and so forth. I ask them frankly, “Tell me one thing that the President has done to harm Israel, just one thing.” And they can never come up with a single thing. But there has been a whispering campaign regarding the Jewish vote now for four years. It’s hard for the President to turn that around.

SPITZER: Alan, I have been a devout and steadfast supporter of the President on all these foreign policy issues, in particular on Israel, where I remember that campaign began, a misinterpretation of his critical speeches. He’s been a devout supporter of Israel. But let me ask you this. As a matter of politics, you and I have both been in politics, you’re still in it. Why didn’t he visit Israel and just do what would visually have been better?

GRAYSON: Well, in fact, as he pointed out in the debate last night, he has visited Israel. And he visited Israel in a way that was profoundly important to him, and shaped his thinking in a way that is far more {significant} than Romney going to Israel in order to raise money for {Romney’s} campaign. So I applaud him for that.

SPITZER: I agree with you that the President went there, and as you pointed out, he went to Yad Vashem, which is the great memorial to the Holocaust, and I’m sure that was moving for him. But over the last four years, why did he not set foot in the State {of Israel} and say to the American Jewish community, “I understand how significant this is. As your President, I am here right now.”? I wish he would have done it. I think it would have eased, increased his capacity to win the state of Florida, and that would have been the end of the presidential race.

GRAYSON: Well, listen, it’s one more reason for four more years [for President Obama]. He’ll have four more years to do it, shortly.

Alan Grayson – he tells it like it is. If that’s what you want to see, then show your support, and click to CONTRIBUTE.

Put A Little Love in Our Hearts

Good news and bad news. The good news is that President Obama won last night’s debate. The bad news is that the entire debate, questions and answers, seemed premised on the false assumption that virtually everyone else on this planet wants to kill us.

Here is a list of the topics last night: (1) Libya embassy attack. (2) War in Syria. (3) Why we shouldn’t cut military spending. (4) Israel or the U.S. attacking Iran. (5) The war in Afghanistan. (6) “Divorcing” Pakistan. (7) What is the greatest future threat to our security?

In other words, seven variations on the same theme: xenophobia. Fear of foreigners.

Let’s go over the basic facts. There are two large oceans that separate us from 191 of the 193 other countries in the world. Our northern border has been peaceful since 1812. Our southern border has been peaceful, more or less, since 1848. In the 229 years since the Treaty of Paris, establishing our independence, foreign military forces have attacked American territory only twice – in both cases, on the outermost periphery.

So how is it that a “foreign policy” debate can be devoted entirely to the single, narrow subject of who is going to kill whom? It appears that the military-industrial complex has not only occupied huge chunks of the federal budget, but also huge chunks of our political discourse, and even our thinking.

Why is it that every candidate for public office keeps pressing that big, red PANIC button? Isn’t there anyone out there who will try to put a little love in our hearts?

Here are some questions that should have been asked last night, but weren’t:

(1) What should we do about the 10+ million undocumented people in this country, more than half of whom came here from Mexico?
(2) Speaking of Mexico, the drug war in Mexico was the most deadly armed conflict in the world last year, killing more people than the war in Afghanistan and the civil war in Syria combined. What should we do about it?
(3) We have run the largest trade deficit in the world every year for roughly the past 20 years. This year, it’s half a trillion dollars, again. Other developed countries like Japan and Germany run consistent trade surpluses. What should we do about this?
(4) The United States is the only industrialized country without universal healthcare, paid vacations and paid sick leave. Why is this? What should we do about it?
(5) Climate change obviously is a worldwide issue. Should the United States participate in efforts to mitigate it? If so, how?
(6) There is tremendous suffering now in both Greece and Spain, with unemployment of 25%+. Should we do anything to help people in those countries?
(7) In poor countries, three million people die each year of respiratory infections, 2.5 million die each year of diarrhea, and two million die of AIDS. Virtually all of these deaths are avoidable. Should we avoid them?

As Charles P. Pierce of Esquire put it, before the debate last night:

Trade is foreign policy. The environment is foreign policy. Energy policy is foreign policy. Human rights are foreign policy. Drought is foreign policy. Starvation is foreign policy. War is generally only foreign policy when one of those other things I mentioned get[s] completely out of control. However, as I suspect we will see argued enthusiastically from both sides tonight, war, and not its historic causes, has come to define foreign policy. Increasingly, it has come to define us as a nation as well. This is a problem that, I predict, will not be addressed at all this evening . . . .

He was right. It wasn’t addressed at all.

Look – the world is a beautiful place. I know; I’ve seen it. This planet is full of people just like us. It’s not full of monsters and demons and ogres and beasts. And there are solutions to problems other than “shoot it,” “bomb it,” “burn it,” and “kill it.”

Let me make this as simple as possible: The Earth – love it or leave it.


Alan Grayson

Think of your fellow man,
Lend him a helping hand,
Put a little love in your heart . . . .

Another day goes by,
And still the children cry.
Put a little love in your heart.

If you want the world to know,
We won't let hatred grow,
Put a little love in your heart.

And the world will be a better place.
And the world will be a better place.
For you and me --
You just wait and see.

Put a little love in your heart.

Jackie DeShannon, Put A Little Love in Your Heart (1968).

"Congressman Joe the Plumber"? OMG.

Do you remember “Joe the Plumber”? If not, you’re better off. But let me remind you – because “Joe the Plumber” might be elected to Congress in two weeks.

“Joe the Plumber” is not named Joe, and he’s not a plumber.

His name is Samuel Wurzelbacher. In 2008, he claimed that he was a plumber, working for A.W. Newell Corp. in Ohio. But in Ohio, plumbers are licensed, and Joe didn’t have a license. So he’s not a plumber. As Gov. Rick Perry might say, “Oops.”

“Joe the Plumber” made about $40,000 not doing his not-plumbing. In his Walter Mitty imagination, though, he somehow was going to buy Newell Corp. How could he do that? Who knows?

Not-yet-President Obama came to “Joe the Plumber’s” town in 2008. At an Obama campaign event, “Joe” took that magical mental leap from personal failure to personal success, and told/lied/BS’ed Obama that “Joe” was “getting ready to buy a company that makes $250,000 to $280,000 a year – your new tax plan is going to tax me more, isn’t it?”

“Joe the Plumber” was “getting ready” to buy that company in much the same way as Kim Kardashian is “getting ready” to end the Middle East conflict. It could happen. But I doubt it.

Anyway, Candidate Obama gave “Joe the Plumber” a substantive analysis of how “Joe’s” non-purchase of “Joe’s” non-plumbing business would affect “Joe’s” non-income and “Joe’s” non-taxes. Obama then added that Obama’s tax plan was necessary in order to reduce taxes on the middle class, which would add customers to “Joe’s” non-business: “My attitude is that if the economy’s good for folks from the bottom up, it’s going to be good for everybody. If you’ve got a plumbing business, you’re going to be better off . . . if you’ve got a whole bunch of customers who can afford to hire you. Right now, everybody’s so pinched that business is bad for everybody. I think that if you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.”

You may recall the shock and horror which the right-wing noise machine manufactured over that statement. The same shock and horror that the right-wing noise machine manufactured over the President’s more recent statement that “if you’ve been successful, you didn’t get there on your own.” History repeats itself – first as tragedy, and second as farce. (To quote someone else who, by coincidence, also wrote about spreading the wealth.)

Back the first time, in 2008, “Joe the Plumber” jumped, with both feet, into the ensuing distortion-fest. He said that the President’s answer would put us “one step closer to socialism.” He said that the answer showed that our first African-American President could “tap dance . . .almost as good as Sammy Davis, Jr.” He said that he could never support Obama, because of “questions” about “Obama’s loyalty to our country.

For Fox News and Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck, a star was born.

“Joe the Plumber” gave up his non-plumbing career, and became a “motivational speaker.” His talk consists of witty observations like asking why Senator Chris Dodd hasn’t been “strung up” yet.

Now he is running for Congress in Ohio, against Rep. Marcy Kaptur. Here are some of “Joe the Plumber’s” more recent bon mots:

(1) “Joe” says that both the Holocaust and the Armenian Genocide were caused by gun control.

(2) “Joe” says that the way to stem illegal immigration is “going to Mexico, and start shooting.

(3) “Joe” says that he would not let anyone who is “[actually homosexual]” near his children.

Samuel Wurzelbacher, a/k/a “Joe the Plumber,” should not be in Congress. And we have a good chance to get defeat him, on Nov. 6. Please click here, and support “Joe’s” opponent Marcy Kaptur. Help avoid the stain of “Joe the Plumber” in Congress.


Alan Grayson

Joe Walsh Also Shouldn’t Be In Congress

Joe Walsh. The great, great guitarist for the Eagles. As much as I have enjoyed listening to his riffs over the years, I don’t think that Joe Walsh, the guitarist, should be in Congress.

Also Joe Walsh, the Congressman. He shouldn’t be in Congress, neither.

Like David Rivera, about whom I wrote yesterday, Joe Walsh is another Member of Congress whom the cat drug in two years ago. But at least Rivera recognizes that silence is a virtue. Joe Walsh is without virtues.

Joe Walsh said that Barack Obama was elected President only “because he pushed that magical button: a black man who was articulate, liberal – the whole white guilt {thing}, all of that.

Joe Walsh didn’t pay his child support.

Joe Walsh, like my opponent Todd Long, drove on a suspended license. (Although in Walsh’s case, unlike Long’s, the media actually reported it.)

Last year, a Walsh constituent suggested to Walsh that the banks had been responsible for the Crash of 2008. Walsh swore at her.

The Democrats nominated Tammy Duckworth to face Walsh. Duckworth, a helicopter pilot, lost both legs and the use of one arm in Iraq. Joe Walsh callously whined, “My God, that’s all she talks about. Our true heroes, the men and women who served us, it’s the last thing in the world they talk about.”

And on Thursday night, in a debate, Joe Walsh said that “you can’t find one instance” of abortion being necessary to save the life of the mother. (Six hundred American women die from pregnancy each year.)

So our choice is between Tammy Duckworth, war hero, and Joe Walsh, irresponsible loudmouth. Hmmmmmm.

Joe Walsh should not be in Congress. And we have a good chance to get rid of him, on Nov. 6. Please click here, and support Walsh’s opponent Tammy Duckworth. Help remove the stain of Joe Walsh from Congress.


Alan Grayson
Go to Page: 1 2 3 Next »