Tuesday’s editorial in the Chicago Sun-Times made it clear that the paper has no use for the message being forcefully delivered by Congressman Joe Walsh.
The headline was
“Joe Walsh has a loud voice, but nothing to say“
Walsh, as you may remember, used the word “liar” to describe President Barack Obama’s statement that failure to raise the debt ceiling would result in Social Security checks being sent out.
Since monthly Federal revenues are far in excess of the required interest payments on the national debt, Social Security, it would be the President’s choice whether payments to the old and disabled should be suspended or other less politically explosive expenditures.
Needless to say, the liberal talking heads on TV were livid that Walsh had forced that fact into the national spotlight.
Now a suit filed by Walsh’s ex-wife for over $100,000 in child support and alimony has allowed the Sun-Times to hammer Walsh on its front page.
The basic charge is hypocrisy.
The small print on the front page reads,
“Freshman Rep. Joe Walsh, who sharply lectures President Barack Obama on fiscal responsibility, owes more than $100,000 to his ex-wife and three children, according to documents his ex-wife filed in their divorce case in December.”
The headline blares,
“TEA PARTY REP. SUED FOR $100,000 IN CHILD SUPPORT“
Why should the paper have any use for the message of an economic terrorist like Joe Walsh and his attempts to destroy the US economy? Walsh is a dirtbag congressman and a deadbeat dad.
The picture looks like he’s about to catch (or miss) a fly ball. I think he’ll miss.
Is your job to be against extending the debt cieling and not paying child support? Not setting a good example Joe. Shame on you Joe.
Read his wikipedia page (perhaps somewhat accurate) and you get a view of someone who does not handle finances very well.
However in this case just because someone charged him of a crime doesn’t mean he committed it.
They ended up settling. http://www.funglawoffice.com