« MDE FROM THE ARCHIVES: FRANKEN SAID HIS “LIFE” IS IN NEW YORK, NEVER SAW HIMSELF MOVING BACK TO MINNESOTA | Home | NRCC RELEASES “TWINKLE TOES” YOUTUBE VIDEO ON WALZ »
ROCHESTER POST-BULLETIN: “REPUBLICAN AD CAMPAIGN TARGETS WALZ”
By Michael B. Brodkorb | May 24, 2007
"Contending that the first-term congressman is vulnerable, the Republican National Congressional Committee is taking out a week-long radio ad targeting Democratic U.S. Rep. Tim Walz.
Ken Spain, a spokesman for the Republican committee, declined to say how big the ad buy is, but said it would air on six stations in the 1st District starting today and run for seven days.
The spots are the opening salvo in a race that has already drawn four declared or possible Republican challengers. Walz is up for re-election in the fall of 2008.
'The district has traditionally performed well for Republicans in the past and Tim Walz is voting far to the left of his district,' Spain said.
The Republican National Congressional Committee is the Republican Party's chief fundraising committee and is dedicated to electing Republican candidates to the U.S. House of Representatives.
One of the central accusations the committee makes against Walz is that the congressman votes with House speaker Nancy Pelosi 97 percent of the time and against the interests of his own district.
The spot also accuses Walz of voting for the biggest tax increase in history by supporting a budget that would allow President Bush's tax cuts to expire. The ad also takes Walz to task for voting for pork barrel projects contained in a war supplemental funding bill sponsored by the Democratic majority in the House." Source: Rochester Post-Bulletin, May 24, 2007
Click here for complete story.
Tags: Uncategorized
Topics: Uncategorized | 48 Comments »
48 Responses to “ROCHESTER POST-BULLETIN: “REPUBLICAN AD CAMPAIGN TARGETS WALZ””
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
May 24th, 2007 at 1:47 PM
Good. Walz is a big-time liberal hiding behind the front of his military experience.
May 24th, 2007 at 3:36 PM
Tim is hardly a Liberal in the true sense of the word. But the fact that he is pragmatic and has no problem challenging the President on issues makes him a liberal in a Republican’s eye.
So what that he came out blasting President Bush, who opposed an additional $6 a month in Military pay deeming it “unncessary”. Tim has been doing a lot on behalf of Veterans adn those in uniform serving now.
The GOP can try to intimidate Tim all they want with their painting him this and that. That was what Gil Gutknecht and the NRCC tried to do in 2006 and it did not work. Voters in the 1st CD are not that stupid to fall for such B.S. now that they are experiencing for the first time in as many years what it means to be represented, being asked for their input on issues before a vote, etc.
Let the GOP try as they might unseat Tim Walz. For Tim is going to be walking the halls of Congress for many years.
May 24th, 2007 at 3:43 PM
A spokesman for the DCCC responded:
Ryan Rudominer, a spokesman for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said Republicans are desperate to regain the seats they lost in 2006, but “the public just isn’t buying.”
“(Walz) is doing all the things he ran on. He’s fighting for a new direction in Iraq. He’s fighting to increase pay for our troops. And he’s fighting to put more cops in southern Minnesota,” Rudominer said. “He’s about changing the way Washington does business.”
And for this, the GOP will try to get him out??
May 24th, 2007 at 4:01 PM
Well, like I said, he’s hiding his liberalism behind the war, like so many others. Plus, Washington hasn’t really done any business this year. Any action on those supposed Democrat priorities?
Nope.
May 24th, 2007 at 5:49 PM
I have news for you, the military gets pay raises every year. In fact, congress votes on the pay raise every year. So Walz saying he’s getting the military a pay raise is a whole bunch of BS.
And as a veteran, I can tell you right now, Walz hasn’t done a darn thing for me or my fellow veterans either.
May 24th, 2007 at 8:59 PM
I have a couple of questions…
1. The only declared GOP candidates I’m aware of are Dick Day and Randy Demmer. Who are the other two?
2. Has Gil Gutknecht expressed an interest in running again?
3. Can someone tell me how Gil Gutknecht managed to lose in ’06? His loss can’t be pinned solely on the war in Iraq. Did he become detached, lazy and sloppy in constituent services?
Anyone wanna take a stab at these questions?
May 24th, 2007 at 9:30 PM
MplsSteve…I read somewhere Gutknecht sold his place in DC. The thing I read said that was as solid a sign as any that he didn’t plan on going back. ’06 was a bad year for Republicans and that district isn’t as reliably Republican as it used to be; Bush only got 51% there in ’04.
May 24th, 2007 at 9:34 PM
I have called Tim’s office about 10 times since he took office. Whenever I ask how he intends to vote on a specific bill, the guy on the phone never knows. Isn’t that strange…they NEVER KNOW how Tim is going to vote on a bill that is being voted on that day. One would think those types of subjects would come up in is office…one would think he would tell his staff how he was going to vote so they could answer those questions. No…they never know. They do offer, however, to get the information and get back to me. They ask for my name, address, phone number and e-mail address….all the things they need to find out how I am registered, or whether I donated to his campaign…and then they never get back to me. I wonder why???? I always got answers from Gil’s staff…right away…with no equivocation. NO…the voters in the 1st District are not being represented….unless they believe having their ears tickled is true representation!
May 24th, 2007 at 9:45 PM
Gee Donna, I have no problem getting a hold of Tim via his staff. he has mobil offices throughout the 1st CD. AS well as main offices in Mankato and Rochester. His Roch office is a mile from my house.
The oposite was true when Gil was in office. I had written many letters and not one reply. Apparently none of you read http://www.bluestemprairie.com/ that details Tim’s votes, comings and goings, in addition to posting his weekend schedule as to where he will be.
I know there will be some dissatisfied people in the 1st CD. But the days of GOP domination of specific areas are over.
May 25th, 2007 at 4:13 AM
Gee Kathy, maybe you get an answer because timid Tim knows you are a hard core liberal like he is.
I see you also ignored the fact that your assertion that Timid Tim is working to get military pay raises was shot right out of the water.
I think after the crap the democrats have pulled at the state level and nationally isn’t going to sit well with the majority of people. Most people don’t like being taxed into poverty.
May 25th, 2007 at 5:00 AM
Some good news on behalf of Active Duty serving in Iraq and Afghanistan….About Traumatic Brain Injuries………….This man is working hard for Americans, period!!
(Washington, D.C.) – Yesterday evening, the United States House of Representatives approved the provisions of H.R. 2179, the Traumatic Brain Injury Centers Act, sponsored by Congressman Tim Walz. The Walz bill was incorporated into a larger legislative package (H.R. 2199) designed to address traumatic brain injuries (TBI), which passed the House last night by a vote of 421-0.
Walz’s legislation will create five Traumatic Brain Injury Centers around the country that will conduct research, develop improved models for patient care and provide education and training for VA staff about TBI.
Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) is the signature injury of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and we must do everything we can to help veterans cope with these life-changing injuries,” said Walz. “The comprehensive TBI package approved by the House today combines my bill with legislation my colleagues have introduced to address TBI. This legislation is a big step forward to help the men and women who have served overseas and returned home with these wounds.”
“Rep. Walz’s bill is essential to ensuring that the VA is conducting intensive research on TBIs,” said Rep. Michaud, who is the lead sponsor on H.R. 2199. “By concentrating TBI research in five centers, we can ensure that VA doctors are able to share and coordinate information easily and that our veterans are benefiting from the most recent treatments developed by the research conducted in these centers. I was pleased to include Rep. Walz’s legislation as part of the Traumatic Brain Injury Health Enhancement and
Long-term Support Act.”
————————————————-
Is the action of a “hard core Liberal” or someone who happens to give a hoot about Americans serving this country in Afghanistan and Iraq who suffer injuries such as TBI? This will be taxpayer money wells pent to treat our men and women in uniform who suffer these injuries on our behalf.
May 25th, 2007 at 8:49 AM
Clowns like this all run as “pragmatic”, “work-across-the-aisle” candidates. When elected they are the biggest “follow the leader” people that exist.
In Coon Rapids/Brooklyn Park, Melissa Hortman ran on this bogus “work across the aisle” line but became the most partisan, tax-raising legislator there is. Shameless in her desire to jack up taxes, Hortman is a mutt in wolves clothing.
Walz is one of those. Run as one thing to get elected, operate as a lacky for the leader.
May 25th, 2007 at 8:51 AM
Holy crap Kathy, are you screwing the guy for real, or just in your dreams?
Put your tongue back in your mouth.
May 25th, 2007 at 8:53 AM
Well, I got to hand it to him. He just voted for the war funding with no time table and no pork.
How soon before the libs turn on him?
May 25th, 2007 at 9:08 AM
Kathy
Do you work for Congressman Walz?
May 25th, 2007 at 12:17 PM
Someone should ask Walz why someone who believes the Iraq War is a mistake and we should start getting out should vote for him next time. If I lived in his district I would not vote for him in ’08. And Amy should be ashamed of herself as well but we’ve got 5 1/2 years before we can address her. Clearly people voted last November to change our policy in Iraq, but instead too many Democrats have caught Potomac fever and are now parroting the Presidents talking points. Perhaps the most shameful was Sen Reid saying that the “debate has only begun”; our involvement in Iraq has now lasted longer that our involvement in WWII and the debate is now beginning? Disgusting.
May 25th, 2007 at 12:37 PM
I hate to say it Otter, but I agree with you. Any Democrat that is against this war and who campaigned on ending our engagement has just failed to do his/her duty, and live up to their promise.
Congress has one Constitutional power: To fund or withhold funds for the war.
If they choose not to fund the war, then they should live with those consequences. Now that they have funded the war, they should shut the fuck up and let the military to it’s work.
Apparently congressional Democrats are too chicken-shit to take a firm stand one way or another.
May 25th, 2007 at 12:39 PM
We finally agree.
May 25th, 2007 at 12:44 PM
So instead of surrendering to Al-Qaeda, the democrats surrendered to Bush.
If you elect people to cut-and-run, what else would you expect.
May 25th, 2007 at 1:01 PM
Amen Master of None.
May 25th, 2007 at 1:22 PM
I just talked to someone in Sen Klobuchar’s office and was told she would not vote for the supplemental in Sept, no caveats. MDE should stay on top of this.
May 25th, 2007 at 2:30 PM
Chestnut Says:
May 25th, 2007 at 8:51 am
Holy crap Kathy, are you screwing the guy for real, or just in your dreams?
Put your tongue back in your mouth.
————————————————-
Only someone whose mind is in the gutter and has no respect for National Office would say such a thing. God gave you two heads Chestnut, and you can’t think with wither one of them.
May 25th, 2007 at 3:01 PM
Tim Walz doesn’t represent a liberal district, and he made the right choice for his constituents and for himself. With GOP eyeing his every word and action, he has responsibilities. Those responsibilities have repercussions that pundits and bloggers couldn’t imagine. A vote against this bill would be like pouring more gasoline onto a spreading wildfire.
President Bush can rally behind the American flag, give speeches with Troops as a backdrop of his loyalty to them, holding them hostage while acting like a spoiled child, and refusing any bill that is not to his liking. Tim Walz is an honest man and should be commended for this vote. With this difficult vote, he stood up for all of the rest of the American men and women in Iraq and Afghanistan ensuring that they have the support and the funding they need. It is Bush who this nation should hold responsible for this mess that is the Irag War.
The Iraq War debate is far from over. For Bush intends to keep this war going for the rest of his term wether we like it or not.
May 25th, 2007 at 3:04 PM
“he made the right choice for his constituents and for himself. With GOP eyeing his every word and action, he has responsibilities.”
Shorter Version: He’s worried about getting re-elected
May 25th, 2007 at 3:06 PM
Kathy,
Chestnut may be a bit crude but you come across like a disciple rather than somebody thinking for themselves. We should be wary and critical of our office holders not reverent.
May 25th, 2007 at 3:35 PM
Had Tim voted to cut off funding, what would have been said about him…”Walz doesn’t support the troops”? Rest assured the GOP would come up with some spin about this.
I di think for myself, kerosene hat. Tim is an honorable man who works hard to do the right thing. If I wasn’t sure about his abilities, I and many others would not have supported him.
When was the last time you made a decision that did not feel right, but yet was the right decision that had to be made? I bet you have made many of them as I have done.
May 25th, 2007 at 3:47 PM
You are simply admitting that Waltz cares more about the headline than doing what he thinks is the truly right thing. Who cares what the Republicans say? I sure as hell don’t. If he feels he knows the war is wrong he should do what he has to to stop it. That would be the honorable thing.
May 25th, 2007 at 3:54 PM
Kathy,
Tim is nothing but a fucking coward. He joins the ranks of Democrats bitching about the war, disparaging our President and undermining our soldiers, while giving them the money to do the work he doesn’t support.
If he had any character or integrity, he would vote against the funding and deal with the consequences… political and otherwise.
If he doesn’t support the mission, then Tim should grow a backbone and vote against funding it. If he’s going to vote to fund it, then he should shut the fuck up.
Until then, Tim Walz is a a chicken shit liar. Nothing more.
BTW — did you get pompoms with that cheerleader outfit?
May 25th, 2007 at 4:34 PM
BTW — my comment demonstrates no lack of respect for a “National Office”… but it may demonstrate lack of respect for the mindless drone stalking the office holder.
May 25th, 2007 at 5:59 PM
Kathy …
Everyone but the most rabid Republican knows that Bush does not really support the troops. He sent them into battle without a plan to stabilize Iraq. When Gen Shinseki said we needed more troops to od the job, the administration went after him. When ammo dumps were not secured, White House surrogate Giuliani blamed the troops for not securing them. When Bush announced under the Mission Accomplished banner “major combat operations are over” and then was called out on it, he blamed the sailors, saying they had put it up (as though the White House was clueless to the fact it was there). He made fun of the reason he sent our men and women to Iraq at a press club dinner when he showed pictures of himself in the White House looking under a couch, behind a chair and commented “No Weapons of Mass Distruction here”. “Bring ‘Em On” with out troops at war. Permitting the Army to lie to Pat Tillman’s family even still. Using Jessica Lynch as a PR prop. Not equiping the troops adequately. Vetoing a pay raise for them. Walter Reed. Asking them to make the ultimate sacrifice for their country while asking all other Americans to do absolutely nothing. And on and on.
Rep Walz needs to say everyday and every place between now and Sept that the troops will be taken care of, but that Pres Bush will no lomger be able to play chicken with our men and women in uniform. Remind people that the Pres said he would leave the troops over there without funding if he didn’t get his way. Disgusting. No more enabling him.
May 25th, 2007 at 7:25 PM
Otter’s funny. Mis-informed and stupid… but funny.
May 25th, 2007 at 7:29 PM
What do I say to someone like you, chestnut, who lowers himself in the manner that you have? I say to you, sir, you have no backbone nor integrity. Chris and I may disagree a lot about things political, but at least I can respect him. You, sir, I cannot.
If I have gotten a bit personal with you, tough, deal with it!
May 25th, 2007 at 7:40 PM
Otter. That is a whole lot of crazy in one paragraph. But, because you forgot to mention Haliburton, or anything abougt “Blood for Oil” I’m only going to give you a C+ on the moonbat scale. Keep trying, you’ll get better with each rant.
May 25th, 2007 at 8:31 PM
Oh puh-leeeeeez kathy. I don’t want your respect. It’s not worth much if all you can do is champion some absolute worm who doesn’t have the spine to do what he thinks is right.
May 25th, 2007 at 8:39 PM
Question: Does Tim support the war. Answer: No. Hell, he even pulled early retirement and let his own unit go on to fight without him. Some leader.
Question: When asked to vote on providing the funds to execute the war, how does Tim vote? Answer: Yes.
So let’s figure this out:
1) Tim says he supports the troops, but refused to go fight with this men.
2) Tim says he doesn’t support the mission, but agrees to fund it.
3) Tim says we need to bring the soldiers home, but continues to provide the money required to keep them abroad.
Fact: Tim doesn’t know what the hell to do. He doesn’t recognize the threat our soldiers are fighting. Doesn’t understand the threat our nation faces. And he’s more interested in retaining his congressional seat than to vote consistently with his beliefs, and then explain himself.
He’s a hypocritical coward, kathy. He’s not worthy of even your respect.
May 25th, 2007 at 8:43 PM
Worse, the dumb bastard campaigned on serving as an “independent voice” in Washington. And then became Nancy Pilosi’s — the most radical, irresponsible liberal in the House — purse poodle.
Walz is a jerk. I don’t care how many Hy-Vee grocery store delis he visits.
May 25th, 2007 at 8:51 PM
… and for the record: historically, kathy’s one of the more fair-minded and moderate liberals who comment here. But her blind allegiance to that half-wit is inexplicable.
It all comes down to this: Why won’t congressional Democrats vote consistently with their goddam mouths? The answer, convincingly, is that they are more interested in scoring short-term political points than living with the long-term consequences of the defeat they favor.
They form a cold sweat when asked: What happens if we surrender, and Islamic Facistists, emboldened by victory, kill more Americans in more American cities? What if they’re held accountable for that.
But isn’t liberalism that bastion for fools who fear accountability and consequence for their actions? …
May 26th, 2007 at 4:47 AM
I find the issue of the Iraq Funding Vote a tad ironic being that Michelle Bachmann, Jim Ramstad, and John Kline also voted YES along with Tim Walz. Yet, they are not being villified on this blog. Did they do the right thing because they are Republicans?
May 26th, 2007 at 5:17 AM
Kathy, no they aren’t being villified because THEY aren’t the ones being HYPOCRITS!
And you still haven’t addressed the false pay raise thing.
May 26th, 2007 at 8:06 AM
Yes, but Kathy, Michelle, Jim and John all support the mission. They should vote yes.
There’s nothing ironic in that at all. Walz on the other hand lacks the backbone to vote his conscience.
May 26th, 2007 at 9:11 AM
Ramstad was one of the weepy Republicans who met with Bush to ask him pretty please to do Iraq better, but he acts like a rubber stamp when it comes to voting. I remember at the State Fair a couple of years ago how verbally belligerent he was with people who dared to ask if Sadaam was as great a threat as Cheney was saying. Ramstad is singing a different tune today. Pathetic.
You’re right about Bachmann and Kilne, they have both always been wrong on this issue without equivicating.
This is the pay raise issue. But I suppose the Army Times is part of a liberal cabal:
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/05/military_payhike_whitehouse_070516/
May 26th, 2007 at 9:21 AM
“Ramstad was one of the weepy Republicans who met with Bush to ask him pretty please to do Iraq better, but he acts like a rubber stamp when it comes to voting.”
So, Jim Ramstad met with the president to voice concern with progress in Iraq. Jim supports the mission. Then voted to provide the funds for the mission he supports.
You’re a confused little rat, aren’t you otter.
Personally, I fully believe Jim, Michelle and John are on the right side of this issue. And I’m pleased they vote consistently with their view.
Tim Walz has revealed himself to be an utter embarrassment… Pilosi’s purse poodle. Regardless of whether or not I think hes wrong on this issue (hint: I do), he lacks the courage to act on his own convictions.
May 26th, 2007 at 9:49 AM
At the State Fair this year I’ll bet Ramstad doesn’t treat people who disagree with the mission in Iraq as disdainfully as he did a couple of years ago. And I’ll bet if there are votes to override the President’s veto in Sept he’ll vote to override. Waffler.
To Kline and Bachmann’s credit, they say and vote what they believe. Ramstad votes as a rubber stamp and then a private conversation he was a part of gets leaked to try to make him look independent.
May 26th, 2007 at 2:35 PM
Another Blog opinion on the difficult vote that is worth reading…
http://idonthateamerica.com/2007/05/before-we-call-for-tim-walzs-head-lets-take-a-step-back/
Not everyone is calling for Tim’s head. I may not have agreed with him on this vote, but I certainly understand where he was coming from.
May 26th, 2007 at 4:40 PM
Hey kathy, you’re free to identify with anyone you want. Even people who lack the integrity to act according to their convictions.
May 26th, 2007 at 4:58 PM
One vote and you say Tim lacks integrity when he has been working towards all that he has campaigned on. Funny you should say that, chestnut. I pity you.
May 26th, 2007 at 5:13 PM
It’s not just one vote. It’s a 6 month record of being Nancy Pilosi’s purse poodle. He ran as an independent voice. He became a lap dog advancing the radical left-wing agenda.
You bet that coward lacks integrity.
Keep your pity to yourself. You need it more than I do.
June 7th, 2007 at 4:09 PM
I was shopping and saw something on sale but didn’t have the money to get it.
And I knew it wouldn’t be on sale later, but I didn’t have the cash to get it.
Since I wouldn’t receive my salary for at least another week so I decided to get a [url=http://www.ukcashadvanceloan.com]cash advance[/url] loan to help me afford it.
Glad I did too. I knew I could afford to repay the loan on payday so I went for it.