Blumenthal Defiant On ‘A Few Misplaced Words’
by Christine Stuart, Melissa Bailey, and Paul Bass | May 18, 2010 3:23pm
(14) Comments | Commenting has expired
(Updated) He didn’t apologize. But as he scrambled to resuscitate his battered U.S. Senate campaign Tuesday, Democrat Richard Blumenthal said he “regrets” “misspeaking.”
Then he swung back.
“I will not,” he declared, “allow anyone to take a few misplaced words and impugn my record of service to our country.”
Blumenthal made the remarks at a 2 p.m. press event at a West Hartford VFW Hall, as he scrambled to contain the damage from a New York Times expose charging that he has falsely claimed to have served in the military in Vietnam, rather than at home in the marine reserves.
Dozens of veterans, most of them rounded up through American Legion and Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) networks, stood by Blumenthal’s side inside Hannon-Hatch VFW Post 9929—even if not all plan to vote for him in November. (Pictured above with Blumenthal: Peter Galgano of the Marine Corps League and Connecticut Vietnam Veterans Memorial Inc. Chairwoman Jean Risley.)
They said they were rallying behind a fellow vet being beat up back at home.
Despite the show of support in West Hartford, the Times expose has created a crisis for Blumenthal’s campaign for Connecticut’s open U.S. Senate seat.
One of the state’s leading Democrats, New Haven Mayor (and 2006 gubernatorial candidate) John DeStefano, earlier Tuesday urged Blumenthal to use the occasion to make a full, quick, complete apology instead of fighting back against the story. “Say you’re sorry. Mean it. And move on,” DeStefano advised.
One of the two leading Republican candidates for the seat, former U.S. Rep. Rob Simmons (pictured), held his own press conference earlier Tuesday afternoon, on the steps of the state Capitol, and made a similar suggestion. Simmons told reporters Blumenthal should apologize for a 2008 statement captured on video—that he “served” in Vietnam, an untrue statement. “Too many have sacrificed too much to have their valor stolen in this way,” he said. Simmons did serve in Vietnam, for 19 months, and won two Bronze Stars. So he stands to gain the most from the Blumenthal controversy.
Later, surrounded by veterans in West Hartford, Blumenthal spoke briefly to the crowd.
Blumenthal himself began by reminding people that he did serve in the United States Marine Corps Reserves during the Vietnam War 40 years ago. He was stationed here in the U.S. He didn’t pull strings to get in, he said. “I looked them up in the phone book.” He said he’s “proud” of his service. And he spoke of attending dozens of military and veterans events a year in Connecticut as attorney general.
Then came the key moment—how he was going to address the Times expose and the subsequent attacks from his political rivals.
He didn’t apologize.
“On a few occasions I have misspoken of my service. I regret that and I take full responsibility,” Blumenthal said.
“But I will not allow anyone to take a few misplaced words and impugn my record of service to our country.
“I served in the United States Marine Corps Reserves. And I’m proud of it.”
End of statement.
After his brief speech, Blumenthal got a second, and third, chance to apologize when he spoke with reporters. Connecticut Post reporter Ken Dixon asked the candidate if he feels he owes people an apology.
“I regret those words,” Blumenthal responded.
Dixon pressed, asking Blumenthal if he was in fact apologizing.
At that point assembled vets shouted back, “No! No! No! They’re badgering you.” And Blumenthal repeated his “regret” answer.
“Babykiller” Redux?
The vets at the VFW hall said they were coming to the aid of a fellow vet.
One of them, Rusty Meek, is a diehard Republican. He said he plans to vote for Rob Simmons.
A former commander of the statewide VFW, Meek (pictured with John Schmidt, commander of the VFW post in West Hartford where the event took place) said he came to Tuesday’s event “66 percent sure” that Blumenthal was being “railroaded.” He left the event “90 percent sure” that was true.
Elliott Storm is a Blumenthal supporter. The campaign called him and asked him to show up; he called up his friends in the “Vet Pack” to join him, friends who, like him, travel around the country talking about ex-soldiers who contend with post traumatic stress syndrome.
Storm, who lives in Milford, wrote a book on the subject, called These Scars Are Sacred.
“If a man wore a uniform during those turbulent times, they were rejected and called ‘babykiller,’” Storm said at Tuesday’s event “People are still attacking veterans who served in Vietnam.” The Times story about Blumenthal’s service is a yet another example of that, he claimed.
Democrats Have His Back
Loyal Democratic politicians present Tuesday like former state Comptroller Bill Curry claimed the New York Times story may have a short term impact, but won’t damage the campaign.
“Dick’s overall reputation for integrity is about as good as it gets,” Curry said. “If there was a resume in American politics that didn’t need burnishing it would be Dick’s.“
Curry showed up late for the event and was critical of the New York Times story.
“The, ‘Did you serve in Vietnam” story—I thought we’d had a truce,” said Curry. “Wasn’t there a meeting during the Bush discussions, in fact, and didn’t we all decide we’re not doing this story anymore?”
State Sens. Jonathan Harris of West Hartford and Ed Meyer of Guilford agreed that the story is a temporary bump in the road.
“We’re human beings,” Meyer said. “I think he over-identified with the veterans and got caught up in the moment.”
“I trust him 100 percent,” Harris said.
Blumenthal’s longshot challenger for the Democratic Senate nomination, Merrick Alpert, wasn’t as forgiving.
“He’s not sorry he did it. He’s sorry he got caught doing it,” Alpert said at the back of the VFW Hall.
When Blumenthal debated Alpert back in March he was clear about not having served overseas. But that wasn’t good enough for Alpert, who also served.
“Telling people that you tell the truth 90 percent of the time is not particularly helpful,” Alpert said.
GOP Jockeying
Meanwhile, Simmons and the frontrunning Republican candidate for the Senate seat, Linda McMahon, managed to turn this development—like all others on the campaign trail—into fodder for their own intramural spat.
Monday night, after the story broke, the McMahon campaign began to take credit for supplying the New York Times with the materials for the hit on Blumenthal. The McMahon campaign even distributed to reporters a post by blogger Kevin Rennie congratulating the campaign on getting the story into the Times.
By Tuesday, McMahon scrubbed references to that story line from its website. And both state Democrats and Republican Simmons attacked her—the Democrats, for alleged gutter politics, Simmons, well, for being embarrassed and switching course, apparently.
Tags: campaign 2010, Richard Blumenthal, Rob Simmons
(14) Comments
posted by: CT Jim | May 18, 2010 3:32pm
This story is less than 24 hours old and already has seemed to turn on the republicans that perpetrated it for political gain. Both McMahan and Simmons will fall further behind Sargent Blumenthal and all I can say is aint that GRAND!!!
posted by: Martha H | May 18, 2010 4:55pm
Personally, I am much more concerned about Mr. Blumenthal’s stated enthusiasm for sending American soldiers to die in the morass that is Afghanistan than in the “gotcha” game. But apparently, the press feels otherwise…
posted by: thomas hooker | May 18, 2010 5:30pm
It’s curious that the media are jumping all over Blumenthal regarding a few words about his military record. Where were the media for the past twenty years when Republican Chris Shays was blatantly misrepresenting his own record on the military? Every time anyone asked Congressman Shays about his not having served in the military, he invariably responded, “I didn’t go into the military; I served in the Peace Corps.” He insinuated that he served in the Peace Corps instead of the military. But the truth is that the Selective Service Administration never considered Peace Corps service grounds for either a deferment or a draft exemption. I wrote to the SSA and received written confirmation of that fact. And having served in the Peace Corps myself, I recall being told that it was not considered the basis for a deferment by PC officials. Yet no one in the media ever called Chris Shays on that falsehood. Indeed, as late as two months ago, Shays used that same dodge to explain to Fairfield County Weekly why he wasn’t drafted when his very low lottery number came up at the height of the Vietnam War in 1969. And displaying incredible chutzpah, Shays has just been quoted in the New York Times criticizing Blumenthal’s pronouncement on his military record.
The Connecticut press corps never pressed Shays on the hypocrisy of supporting the Iraq War and the Gulf War when he had obtained conscientious objector status in 1972, which meant that he considered all wars to be immoral. Where were the media then?
And why are the media jumping on Blumenthal who did, indeed, serve six years in the Marine Corps Reserve, while giving free passes to Shays and Joe Lieberman, both of whom avoided draft entirely? Lieberman received repeated draft deferments, including a “family exemption” after law school when his wife got pregnant.
Where is the balance in the media’s coverage? Why did not a single reporter ever challenge Shays?
I think now would be a good time to do so, when Mr. Shays is piling on in the press himself.
posted by: Anton | May 18, 2010 5:34pm
America’s Vietnam War essentially began in 1964, under a Democratic president with even bigger congressional majorities than today’s. A decade later, the party had turned against the war, and its congressional majorities betrayed America’s onetime allies by cutting off aid to South Vietnam and consigning Southeast Asia to communist oppression. It’s no wonder Democrats have a guilty conscience about Vietnam. It’s nonetheless weird when they aren’t truthful about the facts of their own biographies.
posted by: DrHunterSThompson | May 18, 2010 7:50pm
why his mistatements are political, i can’t understand. he made a mistake. he owned up to it.
done.
posted by: sf09 | May 19, 2010 4:35pm
Regards making a mistake. He lied and perpetuated the lies by not correcting the articles written about him. He’s a lawyer, supposedly a sharp and good one, misspoke, no. A Vietnam Era veteran is very conscious of the difference of being in the time period and being in the country proper of Vietnam.
Also Elliott Storm defending Blumenthal. The Elliott Storm on the Wall of Shame at POW networks.http://pownetwork.org/phonies/phonies293.htm
Seriously, a liar defending a liar.
They served, they should have been proud of that instead of fabricating embellishments to further their own needs.
Selfless service, not self serving.
posted by: ChubbChubb | May 20, 2010 5:46am
“when I returned from Vietnam”.
What a disgusting person. As a retired Marine and someone who lost two uncles in Vietnam, this guy should go take a long walk down a short pier
posted by: CT Jim | May 20, 2010 6:49am
Man is this like the Marine corp web site or what?
Seems like each and everyone of the regulars here who post from the right are Viet-Nam vets who they and most of their relatives had fought in that war.
We are so proud that every republican seems to have been a marine!
One question how come the In the US Congress the Democrats have twice as many veterans than the republicans do?
Just asking the obvious.
As for me no sorry never served but my father was a medic in the Korean War or conflict which ever is politically correct. Is that good enough for all you Marines or should I just leave your country now with the other illegals?
posted by: sf09 | May 20, 2010 2:44pm
CT Jim what’s your point? A discussion of military service. The legitimacy, or right, of those with military service to comment on a subject of military service. What is your point.
By the way I only read one poster in this claiming to be a Marine or have relatives who’ve served in any conflict. Other than you.
I don’t care if he’s Democrat or Republican. I don’t ask party affiliation when I meet a Veteran, it doesn’t matter. Neither does it matter how many Congressman served or where. It does or should matter they use stolen honor regardless their party affiliation.
“I wore the uniform in Vietnam and many came back to all kinds of disrespect. Whatever we think of war, we owe the men and women of the armed forces our unconditional support.” - Stamford Veterans Days parade - Richard Blumenthal Nov. 9, 2008.
posted by: CT Jim | May 20, 2010 7:39pm
sf, My pont is that all of a sudden EVERY person that has come out slamming the AG on his words or mis statements or what have you is a Marine Viet Nam era vet.
My point is these people who are familiar faces on this and other sites are now ALL Viet Nam vets???
My problem is that it is highly unlikely there are lets say 6 people that post from the right and today they are ALL Viet-Nam war vets and tommorrow they are all small businessmen.
Just looking for a little honesty in the discussion here.
I when asked and otherwise fully state where I come from and what I do. Apparently the otherside doesn’t have to do this. Which I understand, but it still don’t make it any less sleazy
posted by: GoatBoyPHD | May 21, 2010 10:39am
I’m not a Viet Vet Jim. Happy? What’s more I was in the first crop of High School Seniors that didn’t have to register.
I can only say this: the people I know usually say “I was in the Reserves” or “I was in the Guard”.
I’ve found the people who say otherwise are always duplicitous. In business and in real life.
I don’t now why some members of the Guard or Reserves find it so hard to say those words.
OK. I do know why and that is the point, isn’t it?
posted by: victim's revenge | May 21, 2010 10:39am
Another reason that the democrats may have wanted this story out there could possibly be that there is a bigger problem that could really damage his chances of getting elected to the senate. So when everyone is looking at this, the real problem goes unnoticed. Anytime the democrats break a negative story about a democrat there is a reason for it. Remember the Clinton war room, that’s when the DNC and the media worked together to manipulate the public’s perception of his administration and his image.
posted by: CT Jim | May 21, 2010 1:46pm
Goat Boy, I was in that same group but I beleive we still had to register but there was no draft.
I think that 18 year olds are still suppose to register but could be wrong.
And I agree that most say it just the way you do, gaurd or reserves. Politicians tend to try and dress it up but that seems to be the norm.
posted by: Henry Berry | May 18, 2010 3:22pm
Blumenthal will be lucky if this is the worst charges against him coming his way in this campaign. I thought he handled the issue pretty well in the news conference, considering the tightly-controlled presentation and narrow, anticipated questions of the forum. His only vulnerability, it seemed to me, was his claim that he got into the Marine Reserve by using the phone book. If people start turning up how getting into the privileged reserve unit actually happened, Blumenthal will be vulnerable to a whole other area of negative press not so easily controlled involving insider connections and other offensive claims. Remember how much trouble Bush had with his serving in the Texas reserve unit. Yet even this much greater trouble did not knock him off his road to the White House.
Blumenthal is most vulnerable to charges of negligence regarding his primary responsibilities as attorney general which would give him an image along the lines of the Catholic hierarchy with respect to the sex scandal and the fraudulent, damaging practices of the banksters/Wall Streeters. The public despises this sort of highhandedness and damage to the social fabric.