Breaking News Bar
posted: 4/3/2010 12:01 AM

Daily Herald goes too easy on Walsh

Success - Article sent! close

It seems to me that the Daily Herald editorial board is not only giving Melissa Bean a raw deal, but also beginning to sound like a cheerleader for her Republican challenger - the aptly named Joe Walsh.

You state that Joe Walsh made between $30,000 and $40,000 last year. He also stated his wife doesn't contribute to the family income.

Order Reprint Print Article
Interested in reusing this article?
Custom reprints are a powerful and strategic way to share your article with customers, employees and prospects.
The YGS Group provides digital and printed reprint services for Daily Herald. Complete the form to the right and a reprint consultant will contact you to discuss how you can reuse this article.
Need more information about reprints? Visit our Reprints Section for more details.

Contact information ( * required )

Success - request sent close

Then it is stated that this so-called fiscal conservative spends $3,300 a month on rent for a house.

Now, the obvious follow-up question, to me, would have been: "Mr. Walsh, you claim to have made $40,000 last year and yet you spent $39,600 on rent. How?! How do you pay child support for your three children? Are you a deadbeat dad? The only clue we're given in the article is "some money borrowed from relatives to live on."

Perhaps if we all had such relatives, we would all be fiscal conservatives.

On Melissa Bean, also a fiscal conservative, in the Saturday Soapbox, the Daily Herald editor claims "Are we really supposed to believe that Reps. Bean and B. Foster 'don't know how they're going to vote.'"

Well, why not?

Did the protesters lining the street in front of her Schaumburg office just participate in an exercise of futility, or did they believe that someone was paying attention?

Also, on this page you claim that Joe Walsh "didn't duck a question." As I demonstrated above, it is easy not to "duck" softballs.

Earlier, you claimed Melissa Bean had become huffy (sexist) when asked why no Republicans signed on to the House bill. Not only is that factually incorrect - a Republican from Louisiana previously cast a yes vote - but you are expecting a Democrat to answer for Republicans anti-Christian, anti-life, anti-human position that seeks to deny the most coverage for the most people.


Stephen P. Beisiegel


Share this page