CT AG Richard Blumenthal Down, But Not Out

May 18, 2010 -

Several news stories on the man that once railed against "Beer Pong" for the Wii and the classification of alcohol use in videogames by the ESRB, are causing the would-be Connecticut senate nominee a major headache today.

First the good news: DSCC Chairman Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) said today that Democrats "will continue to support" senatorial candidate Richard Blumenthal in his bid to become the next senator from Connecticut. Menendez's support came hours after a bombshell story in the New York Times that Blumenthal had been "untruthful" about his Vietnam service record. Here's what the DSCC chairman had to say:

"I think he's corrected the record in the past and I think his actions as it relates to standing up for veterans over a long period of time speaks volumes about where his heart and his actions are. I'm sure those veterans who will be standing up for him today will make the case for him, that he will continue to stay in the Senate race and that we will continue to support him."

But Blumenthal's primary opponent for the Senate seat (that will be vacated later this year by Chris Dodd), Merrick Alpert, had some harsh words for the Attorney General, calling him a "liar" and a "coward."

"As a citizen and as candidate, it's shocking to see someone who has tried to craft this image of themselves as a fighter, as someone who is willing to always step up and tell the truth, to see him lie about serving in Vietnam,'' Alpert said during a brief phone conversation tonight.

"He was a coward to go and get five deferments and he's clearly a liar for standing up for his own political benefit years later...It's disgraceful behavior from someone who is clearly not qualified to serve in the U.S. Senate."

At a news conference in West Hartford this afternoon, flanked by veterans, the Connecticut Attorney General tried to explain what he said and what he meant. He said that he didn't know about all the deferments (which is a pretty amazing statement by itself) and that he meant to say that he served "during Vietnam" instead of "in Vietnam." He called it a matter of "a few misplaced words" that were "totally unintentional."

Blumenthal served six months in the Marines training at Parris Island, S.C., and six years in the Marine Reserve, none of it overseas. He joined a unit in Washington that conducted exercises and focused on local projects, such as organizing a Toys for Tots drive, the Times reported. Before that, Blumenthal got five deferments to avoid going to war between 1965 and 1970. Some were for education, others were because he worked in a job that was "important to the nation's well being."

As for clarifying the record, the Attorney General seemed to put that responsibility on reporters and not on himself. He said that there were hundreds of stories that he didn't know about and that the mistake wasn't his, but reporters. But as one Associated Press report points out, "Blumenthal is known to pore over press clips and call reporters to clarify or correct points."

Apparently the key point – stories and news reports about serving "in Vietnam" as opposed to serving "during the Vietnam era" - never crossed his desk or just escaped his attention. No word on when (or if) he will address his imaginary time on the Harvard swim team.

Source: AP via breitbart, Politico, Capitol Watch


Comments

Re: CT AG Richard Blumenthal Down, But Not Out

Ok, why couldn't the few new infos be added to the previous post in an "update" field? I mean they're both posted the same day and say nearly exactly the same thing.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Poll: Is it censorship when a private retailer decides not to sell a particular video game?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
PHX Corphttp://www.gamespot.com/articles/need-for-speed-will-require-an-online-connection/1100-6427672/ Need For Speed Will Require An Online Connection05/29/2015 - 7:54am
Wonderkarpjust be happy and encourage it.05/29/2015 - 7:37am
DocMelonheadSorry about that, but I'm surprise at what IP participate in this discussion.05/29/2015 - 7:25am
E. Zachary KnightIron, I did not Google Search because I figured the ESRB would publish such infor on their site, which is where I looked. http://www.esrb.org/ratings/ratings_process.jsp05/29/2015 - 7:22am
WonderkarpDocMelonHead, don't look a gift horse in the mouth05/29/2015 - 7:21am
E. Zachary KnightDoc, Uncalled for. Please keep things civil.05/29/2015 - 7:21am
MattsworknameThey were discussing the appeals process for Esrb ratings Doc.05/29/2015 - 7:21am
DocMelonheadDid IP post something that isn't related to White Supremecy?05/29/2015 - 7:13am
IronPatriotBut hey, you're welcome.05/29/2015 - 5:23am
Andrew EisenEZK did say he didn't find any info on the appeals process. And if all he did was look at the ratings process part of the ESRB's website, he wouldn't have. That's where I would have looked too. But hey, thanks for being thorough and finding the info.05/29/2015 - 5:01am
Andrew EisenDude, again. I am NOT saying there is no appeals process. THERE OBVIOUSLY IS. All I am saying is that the appeals process is not described in the ratings process part of the ESRB's website.05/29/2015 - 4:59am
IronPatriotI googled appeal esrb.org and it is the first and third hits. Second is esrb talking about appeals for web publishers. Gamefaqs is fourth.05/29/2015 - 4:01am
IronPatriotZachary said he did not find any information about a formal appeals process. I did a simple search and found two places on the esrb site with the info. Just sayin.05/29/2015 - 3:57am
IronPatriotOn Google I get "1 Written Testimony of Patricia E. Vance President ... - ESRB" http://www.esrb.org/about/news/downloads/pvtestimony_6_14_06.pdf05/29/2015 - 3:55am
Andrew EisenNow, that post on GameFAQs was made four years ago. It appears the ESRB has since moved the appeals process stuff behind the publisher login on its website.05/29/2015 - 3:32am
Andrew EisenOh, third link on the Google search. Okay. That leads to a GameFAQs message board which quotes a section of the ESRB website that includes a description of the appeals process. But when you follow the link, that quote doesn't exist.05/29/2015 - 3:30am
Andrew EisenThird link down from what? Look, I'm not arguing the existance of an appeals process. There obviously is one. I was merely noting that it's odd that it isn't described on the website's ratings process section but it is on the mobile site.05/29/2015 - 3:25am
IronPatriotOK, so use the third link down, which describes the appeals process and is not on the mobile site"Publishers also have the ability to appeal an ESRB rating assignment to an Appeals Board, which is made up of publishers, retailers and other professionals."05/29/2015 - 2:47am
Andrew EisenRight, which links to the ESRB's mobile site. On the website (again, unless I'm overlooking it) the appeals process is locked behind the publisher login.05/29/2015 - 2:37am
IronPatriotHuh? Google "appeals esrb". It is the first link. Click it. No login requested.05/29/2015 - 2:31am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician