VIDEO FEATURE: Heck Debates Malcolm on Porn & Santorum 

a service of Attaboy Productions, Inc.

Friday, 11 May 2012


Here we go again.  Two years ago, Indiana’s 2nd District Congressman “Silent Joe” Donnelly (we’ve called and requested an interview with Congressman Donnelly for 564 straight programs now...that’s 564 messages without even the courtesy of a response to decline) was the first candidate in the national elections to go negative against his opponent, Jackie Walorski. 

Two days ago, he kept up that reputation by spending primary night attacking Richard Mourdock.  No “I look forward to a spirited debate with Treasurer Mourdock” or “Congratulations to Mr. Mourdock who will be a worthy opponent in the fall.”  Instead, here was Silent Joe’s not-so-classy statement:

I stand ready to challenge Richard Mourdock in the general election because of what’s at stake for Hoosier families. Mourdock once said he ‘didn’t take a pledge that [he] would support every job in Indiana.’ I wholeheartedly disagree. I am running to be a U.S. Senator for working families, which means I will fight for every single Hoosier job.

There are many months of campaigning ahead, but I am prepared to work non-stop traveling the state talking about my plan to help Indiana businesses create Hoosier jobs. While Richard Mourdock trumpets his TEA Party ideas and claims bipartisanship is a dirty word, I will be meeting with the hardworking men and women of this state talking about how we can get Hoosiers back to work.

Leave aside the asininity of saying you want to “get Hoosiers back to work” when you have helped Barack Obama push through an agenda that has crushed American jobs, not the least of which is the onerous regulations of ObamaCare – a job destroying monster in and of itself.  Just focus on the Mourdock attack.  First, just as he did with Walorski on Social Security, Donnelly distorts the context of Mourdock’s statement about jobs.  Actually, he doesn’t even bother to cite the context.

Secondly, Donnelly is going to hammer this idea of bipartisanship and “working together.”  We see how much he’s interested in talking with people who have opposing views every day we leave a message for him requesting an interview, only to be rebuffed by a Congressman too good to speak to his constituents in our listening audience.  But beyond that, you simply can’t claim to be interested in working together when you have been a loyal foot soldier for Nancy Pelosi.  Which might be why Donnelly is already trying to mislead on that reality too.

Check out this whopper Donnelly just told:

Joe Donnelly says he’s not worried about Nancy Pelosi’s politics being tied to his campaign.

“Well, I did not vote for her for Speaker and so, you know, my focus is on the Senate race, what we’re doing here and on job creation,” Donnelly (D-2nd) says.


Uh...pardon me?  Here we go again with Donnelly’s half-truth problem.  Donnelly didn’t support Pelosi after the 2010 to remain as the Democrat Party leader.  He used as cover for that betrayal of his party master the fact that the Democrats had just lost big in the 2010 midterms.  In other words, he didn’t reject Pelosi because of her policies – no, he voted for those.  But keep in mind, Democrats were in the minority, so she was really up for Minority Leader.

The two times Pelosi had a serious shot at being Speaker, guess who voted for her twice?  Joe Donnelly.  Don’t believe me, here are the roll call votes for 2007 and 2009.  So when Donnelly says he “did not vote for her for Speaker,” he isn’t telling the truth.  In fact, he isn’t even telling a half-truth.

This tendency to tell half-truths and pretend it’s ethical is the same thing that allows a self-proclaimed Catholic to claim to be pro-life while voting for the largest expansion of abortion since Roe v Wade and stand silent while his Democrat President threatens the Catholic Church that they better violate their rights of conscience or face penalties.  That’s the real Joe Donnelly, and he’s already at work building on the sad legacy he’s already carved out for himself.

Posted by: Peter Heck AT 06:09 pm   |  Permalink   |  0 Comments  |  Email

Post comment
Email Address

(max 750 characters)
Verify image below
* Required Fields
Note: All comments are subject to approval. Your comment will not appear until it has been approved.

click between 3-5 pm ET