About Walz's border trip

posted by Edward Felker, P-B Washington Bureau

We reported over the weekend that the three-day trip by Rep. Tim Walz, D-Mankato, to the Texas border region was official travel, but you might still wonder why he was joined by three other freshman Democrats and no Republicans. That makes it look partisan, leading one to think the trip should be paid by the politicians' campaigns and not the taxpayer.

According to Walz's staff, his trip was paid out of his office budget and was coordinated with the Department of Homeland Security. They said he planned to go anyway and three of his colleagues asked to join him, though his office also said he organized the trip as president of the Democratic freshman class. It was not a codel, short for congressional delegation trip, that is generally organized by a House committee and paid by committee funds. Those trips often include members of both parties, though not always.

There's no rule against using office funds for a fact-finding trip, and the group's itinerary was centered around the activities of the federal government, namely the Border Patrol and the Homeland Security department. Still, the trip points up the power of incumbency. When one of his three Republican challengers, state Sen. Dick Day of Owatonna, went to the Arizona border region in November to visit with the Minuteman Project, he says he had to dip into his campaign funds and put up some personal money.

But had the Walz campaign paid his way, would it have looked like a direct response to Day's trip? Does it  look that way anyway?

Comments

[OdaSilva]

Walz had to cover his left flank on immigration. Of course the congressman went to El Paso as a direct response to Dick Day's trip. You guys and Walz's office can play the funding source game till the cows come home.

Mayhap the money Walz used for this particular trip came out of the $102,000 the congressman got from MoveOn.org. You know, the same guys who took out a full page ad to call General Patreus "General Betray Us." How could Walz take money from people who besmirch the reputation, character and honesty of the commander of our armed forces in Iraq?

This was a campaign trip. Period. Intellectual honesty would dictate calling it so. Alas, such intellectual honesty is in short supply on the left.

[Ist Districter]

How about phrasing it this way? When you are the president of the Dem freshman class, what are your leadership responsibilities? Perhaps it is knowing the most about the campaign issue that will be thrown against each every member of the freshman class, including yourself? It's no secret that the Republicans, and Republican talking heads, across the US say immigration will be their number one issue this fall. So why not be informed as you can be?

[taxpayer]

So, O, why aren't you ragging on Day as much as on Walz? He went there obviously on a campaign trip too. And what about those Republicans who destroyed the reputation of our ex-Chairman of the Joints Chiefs? Oh, wait, that's because in your weird, distorted, myopic world only Democrats can do wrong and Republicans can do only right. OK, time for you to post some one line crap response that doesn't actually respond.

[L D Nelson]

Since illegal immigration is a topic that will surely come up in congress in one bill or another, Congressman Walz should visit the border area to find out as much as he can about the subject. Nothing wrong with that, in my opinion. I imagine there are a fair number of Republican congressmen visiting the border this year, too; some of them might actually be interested in the issues, as opposed to building up a little fear and loathing among the population

I wonder if Mr da Shilva was upset over the way the Bush administration shunted aside Gen. Eric Shinseki for his honest prediction of troop levels need in Iraq (several hundreds of thousands)? MoveOn.org may have produced a bad ad; Bush and Rumsfled created an endless, costly war and a humanitarian crisis of huge proportions.

[bill]

Visits to problem areas are nice, but what about action.
We didn't get any when Gil was in office and now I'm starting to wonder about Walz.
Surveys show that over 70% of U.S. citizens want the borders secured, Illegals sent home, and employers of Illegals fined/jailed.
Seems like very little action from government on any level.
Just a thought.

[OdaSilva]

The truth of the matter is that the anti-American MoveOn.org lined Walz's pockets. The honorable thing to do would have been to return the $102,000 from a group that smeared General Patreus, but Walz chose to keep the money rather than risk offending the leftist contributor.

Walz has proven an expert at pandering to unions. Take his recent "fact finding" visit to the border. Border guards are not the only constituency affected by the illegal immigration epidemic. Farmers and other property owners as well as law enforcement and homeowners suffer hardship under the constant flow of illegals across the border.

Again, Walz has been a Johnny Come Lately on this issue. He went to the border because Dick Day did. Walz is not a leader.

Walz would rather demagogue the issue and defend the selfish interests of a labor union than get serious about securing the border. The 1st CD deserves better.

[Bluecat]

Right, Walz should do the one-two-shakedown dance over immigration like Gutknecht did. Oda, thanks for bringing Gutknecht into this. Day is nothing but another Gutknecht on immigration. The one-two shakedown dance goes like this. Step one: the Republican says my main issue is immigration, we are going to crack down! Step two: the Republican goes to the main benificiaries of illegal immigration, (the meatpacking industry here), and says, don't worry, give me enough money and I'll propose something so draconian that it won't get through congress. Plus, the Republican thinks, I'll still have this issue in two more years to demagogue all over again on! Election season after election season, Gutknecht's biggest employee group donors were meatpacking executives. I bet Day has a secret deal to hit them up for big money after the election if he is the congressman.

[OdaSilva]

I'll say one thing for Walz: he has made no "secret deals" with anti-American and anti-military groups to take campaign cash at a later date. He has already pocketed the money from a leftist group that has soiled the reputation of one of America's most honorable men in uniform.

[Leaning]

I am leaning "left" after reading all of OdaSilva's narrow "blinders on" political frame of reference rants. Divisiveness is not a virtue, it is destructive.

[OdaSilva]

The truth is divisive. It separates the intellectually honest from those who pretend to "lean left."

[I got your divisive]

See my thumb?

[Jay Furst]

Just my opinion, but calling Moveon.org "anti-American" is the type of rhetoric that leads some people to consider you extremist, OdaSilva...

[L D Nelson]

Speaking of intellectual honesty, I wonder if Mr da Silva read the report that found the Bush administration lied hundreds of times in the build up to the Iraq folly. In Mr da Silva's upside-down world, lying to get the nation into a war is okay (or at least not worth commenting on), but protesting the lies and the resultant war is "anti-American." On torture, extraordinary rendition, CIA black sites, kidnappings, detention without charges or trial, practices which we used to condemn, Mr da Silva is strangely silent.

As far as immigration and the border goes, Mr Walz debated Gil Gutkneckt on those issues in the last election. Gutkneckt tried to make illegal immigration the central issue of his campaign, but his fear mongering did not work. Most people, I reckon, intuitively know that the issues are more complex than the immigration foes would have us believe.

[OdaSilva]

Mr. Furst,

Thank you for your opinion. It is valued and appreciated. I would argue, however, that what leads some people to consider me an "extremist" is not my assessment of MoveOn.org but my criticism of liberalism and its proponents.

[Locust]

No, Othelmo - it's things like having a picture of Hillary Clinton on your blog that's been photoshopped to look like Adolf Hitler. It's believing that those who don't share your religious beliefs will burn in eternal hellfire, and ridiculing their faith. It's the misogyny of posting unattractive pictures of Clinton and Pelosi.

Those are just some of the reasons you're considered to be an extremist.

[Jay Furst]

Have to say, I think there's plenty of intolerance on both sides in this thread -- such as by Taxpayer and Nelson.

[Locust]

I have to say, Jay, that I've never seen either Taxpayer or Nelson use phrases like "Hitlery," or post pictures of a person made to look like Hitler.

I recall that the "anti-American" MoveOn got savaged a few years ago for having an open video competition. They didn't have safeguard checks on uploaded material (dumb, not "anti-American") and some bozo posted a film showing Bush morph into Hitler.

That was wrong. MoveOn apologized and removed the video.

Mr. da Silva still engages in behavior like that. He's never apologized for it. I think his degree of "extremism" eclipses that of almost everyone else who posts here.

[L D Nelson]

Where was I exhibiting intolerance?

[OdaSilva]

At any rate, regarding Tim Walz's recent trip to the border, the Congressman has not led on the issue of illegal immigration and border security. Senator Dick Day's visit to the border pushed Walz to address the issues from the socialist side of the spectrum.

The congressman would not have gone to El Paso if Dick Day hadn't been there. Walz felt threatened and political expediency motivated him to demagogue the issue.

Instead of siding with security interests, Walz chose to side with union interests in the form of a "solution" based on hiring more government employees. Pandering to union interests will not keep our southern border safe.

[Jay Furst]

To Nelson regarding intolerance -- call it what you will, but referring to da Silva as "da Shilva," his "upside-down world" and intellectual dishonesty seems more aggressive than is called for -- sticking to the points being made, rather than broadly characterizing people/groups as "anti-American" or people on this blog as dishonest or whatever, will get more people involved. I know of several people who don't get involved in this blog or many others, because of the attacks and disrespect.

[Locust]

Jay, I agree that Nelson's moniker is not very nice. I hadn't seen that before.

I'm still waiting for da Silva to renounce (and remove) his pictures of Hillary Clinton made out to like like Hitler, and to stop calling her "Hitlery."

[Jay Furst]

Hi, Locust -- in my little world, I can only be concerned about what da Silva and other users write on our blogs. If he or anyone else puts juvenilia like "Hitlery" on their personal blogs, that's his business. I really don't intend to get into the business of deciding what's juvenile or extremist...it just seems like we should be able to aspire to loftier commentary, rather than constant ridicule and personal attacks.

[True?]

".....pictures of Hillary Clinton made out to like like Hitler,....."

Proof please. Thank you.

[Locust]

http://paleoconstrikes.blogspot.com/2008/01/hillarys-twisted-dream.html
http://paleoconstrikes.blogspot.com/2008/01/oprah-traitor.html

[True?]

Thanks.