Press Conference: Latta says “stay away from my wife”
Tonight on the ten p.m. news on Fox Toledo covered a press conference by Representative Bob Latta. In addition to Fox’s coverage, here is the in full statement released by the Latta campaign:
Statement by Representative Bob Latta on October 11, 2007 Regarding the Dirty Campaign Tactics of Senator Steve Buehrer
I want to thank you all for being here today. When I entered this campaign for Congress, I truly believed that we would have thoughtful discussions on the pressing issues that are facing our nation today. Instead, we have been sidetracked by ridiculous issues such as innuendos about chicken pox vaccinations. I have had to put up with false statements about my voting record made by Mr. Buehrer and his Washington group which have now resulted in a 3-0 probable cause vote from the Ohio Elections Commission to investigate Mr. Buehrer and his outside group.
Now, beyond my disbelief as to how low a campaign can sink, Mr. Buehrer is now attacking my wife, Marcia.
I want you to know a little about her. She was raised on a farm in Williams County. She is the fourth of six children. Marcia’s parents could be nominated for sainthood for all of their civic and community work and their efforts to eliminate world hunger. There are few people who can hold a candle to them. Marcia graduated from Stryker High School and worked her way through Bowling Green State University. She volunteered in Costa Rica for six months with International 4-H in 1984.
Marcia has set high standards and goals for herself, and she has achieved them. She has worked her way up the ladder and is now the Director of Development at BGSU. She is leading the campaign to raise $120 million for the university and is about to achieve that goal. To further improve herself, she is now working at night to gain her doctorate.
Even though her job is important to her, her number one priority in life is being the mother of our girls, Elizabeth and Maria. The girls are now 15 and 14 and involved in everything from tennis, volleyball, quiz bowl, dance team, band and 4-H. When I am in Columbus, she is the sole driver, confidante and healer. Marcia is a wonderful mother.
Besides motherhood and her job, she is always a wife. Marcia has been through thick and thin with me over the past twenty-one years. We have shared a lot of laughs and a few tears. Most wives would never have put up with what Marcia has over these years. She has endured eight campaigns and now a congressional race. Through the years Marcia has been bitten by dogs doing door to door, late night envelope stuffing and sealing, and eating at lots and lots of fish fries, chicken barbecues, and pancake days. She does it all with a smile. To do all this takes a special person. Am I proud of her, you bet I am. Do I love her with all my heart. You bet I do. It takes a very special woman to love a guy like me.
Today, the Buehrer campaign, through his manager Jim Banks, has submitted a records request at BGSU. What is to gain by attacking my wife? All of these records are public. There has never been anything to hide. So what’s the point?
I guess in my opponent’s case, when you get tired of attacking the candidate you attack his family. To attack my wife is beyond belief. Please point me to another election in northwest Ohio when this has ever happened. Mr. Buehrer, I am only going to tell you this once, stay away from my wife. And let me also add my kids are also off limits. I had better add Maci our Boston Terrier to the list, too.
The office of the United States House of Representatives is one that should be respected and not trivialized. No wonder the public has been losing faith in our elected leaders and so many good people are staying out of public service.
From someone who runs a campaign like this one, I don’t expect an apology.
[...] From Lisa Renee at GCJ, this from the Bob Latta campaign: Today, the Buehrer campaign, through his manager Jim Banks, has submitted a records request at BGSU. What is to gain by attacking my wife? All of these records are public. There has never been anything to hide. So what’s the point? [...]
October 12th, 2007 at 12:34 am“So what’s the point?”
To get elected to office anyway possible.
October 12th, 2007 at 6:38 amOh and he/they will cut taxes, forget that tired statement
October 12th, 2007 at 6:38 amI don’t understand why this stuff about his wife was included in the statement. It was a records request, not an attack. Seems premature to complain about an attack before there is one. As he said, the records are open to the public. Requesting them is just research at this point. Big deal? Nope.
October 12th, 2007 at 9:52 amBut why make a records request about his wife? I can’t imagine Buehrer was just sitting around thinking “gosh, I wonder what kind of grades Latta’s wife got at BGSU?” No, I’m sure there is something more sinister behind this. Seriously, leave the family out of it.
Oh but I do love that he added the dog to the “off limits” list. haha.
October 12th, 2007 at 10:05 amI don’t think a campaign staff would be doing their job if they didn’t do a records search. Maybe they’ve heard something about the wife and wanted to check it out … maybe there is something there voters would care about. Or maybe they’re just going on a fishing expedition. So what? If there’s nothing there, there’s nothing for him to get his panties in a twist about. It really is a big nothing unless there’s a big something.
I do not see spouses as off limits in a campaign. Guys often run as a family man (all that values hoopla). And married couples often file joint taxes, so financial issues that concern the spouse also concern the candidate. That makes the spouse’s employment a fair field of exploration for the opposition. Now, if the opposition starts saying his wife is sleeping with the dog, I could see why there might be squeals of protest about that — and I could see why he also put the dog on the list.
I just think he was awfully defensive over what is at this moment not an issue. I’d kinda like to know why.
October 12th, 2007 at 10:19 amFrom what I understand the records request is related to Tom Noe, the Latta campaign has made an issue of Buehrer receiving money from Noe, so I think the Buehrer campaign is looking for connections/information on any connection between Mrs. Latta and donations Tom Noe made to BGSU.
The discussion as to is family “off limits” or not has been one that’s been discussed here as well as elsewhere in the Ohio blogosphere with several other candidates/elected officials as well as a few bloggers having had personal family information used against them.
October 12th, 2007 at 10:28 amI don’t know…I guess there’s a reason why I’m not a politician. Because I’d probably do the same fly-off-the-handle “keep away from my family and the dog” sort of thing that Latta did.
Aside from things like joint tax filings, family should be off limits. That’s just my take on it.
Again, I guess that’s why I’m not a politician.
October 12th, 2007 at 10:41 amUnderstandable, TLC, I’d feel the same way, though it wouldn’t bother me if someone dissed the cats we have, especially one that is particularly evil.
October 12th, 2007 at 10:59 amI wouldn’t vote for anyone who used these kinds of tactics. Makes the election research easier when they do this kind of this stuff
October 12th, 2007 at 11:06 amWhy can’t these polititians focus on their jobs (or what they plan on doing if they get the job) instead of digging dirt?
October 12th, 2007 at 12:41 pmYou know what I’d like to see Robin? With the exception of two school board candidates (and now Mr. Ford has come out with a carbon copy of the Urban Coalitions agenda as his campaign platform, IMO) I don’t EVER hear a politician putting out a platform.
I’d love to hear someone talk about what they thought and wanted to do with an office. Even the last presidential election – I just heard the candidates talking trash about their opponents. And they all did that.
October 12th, 2007 at 2:45 pmBeing the spouse of a public official or a candidate automatically means you’re subject to scrutiny. Latta’s reaction is really odd to me. At the moment, he’s the one making an issue of his wife. He’s telling us how wonderful she is, and maybe she is. But instead of closing the door to the opposition’s interest in her, he’s probably only deepening it.
Bernie was a BGSU employee at some point and there was that lawsuit she filed. Maybe that plays into the records request, too, to see if the ladies had a connection there. But at this point, it’s nothing, so the fuss is silly.
October 12th, 2007 at 2:58 pm“Why can’t these polititians focus on their jobs (or what they plan on doing if they get the job) instead of digging dirt?”
Because doing the job is not as exciting and headline grabbing as body slamming an opponent even if the allegations are not true.
October 12th, 2007 at 6:38 pmI’m doing legal work for the Latta campaign, which includes research on Steve Buehrer. I don’t even know Steve’s wife’s name, let alone have any interest in researching anything about her.
October 12th, 2007 at 8:13 pmHaven’t Latta and Buehrer been friendly colleagues in the GOP led Ohio legislature? Their attacks on one another is just another example of ambition overwhelming integrity as both of these gentlemen attempt to crawl up the political ladder.
Having run for office and having been the object of an opponent’s unbridled ambition, I would like to see the electorate reject this type of inflammatory politics of hatred and despair.
Unfortunately, until the voters soundly reject this type of political discourse, we’ll likely see it get worse and more dirty in this election and others to come.
I don’t reside in this district, but I’d like to see more positive messages which outline how these candidates would legislate on issues of importance to Ohioans. Don’t tell me what’s wrong with the other guy, I can figure that out for myself.
What a shame! But maybe it’s shame on us if we keep letting them get away with it time and time again.
October 12th, 2007 at 11:11 pmMark, did you see that recent court ruling that it’s okay to lie about your opponent because that’s free speech. That one leaves me scratching my head.
October 13th, 2007 at 12:43 am“…did you see that recent court ruling that it’s okay to lie about your opponent because that’s free speech. That one leaves me scratching my head.”
Well it is protected to say what we want and there is no fact checker on what we say, per se, the other person is. And the other person chooses to file the claim and go to court or not. Libel, slander and all that are already in place.
October 13th, 2007 at 7:42 amEven if public people had an easier time suing for slander or libel, candidates can’t be running off to court in the midst of a campaign to clear up deliberate lies. They can ignore them or deny them. If they ignore them, the lie is out there uncontested. If they deny them, that gives the opponent control of the candidate’s message. I do not see why telling deliberate lies is considered free speech. A lie is not an opinion. Do we really see swift-boating with impunity as worthy of a Constitutional protection? Is that what the authors intended?
October 13th, 2007 at 8:52 am“I do not see why telling deliberate lies is considered free speech. A lie is not an opinion.”
There first has to be a statement. The statement has to be contested. There has to be an arbitor to settle the matter.
Reflect for a moment, and as an example only, Clinton said that he did not have sex with that woman, right.
Lie or not?
His comment is an example of free speech.
I can also call someone a dumb ass and they do not deserve to breath the same air as me.
Lie or free speech?
October 13th, 2007 at 8:57 am“Do we really see swift-boating with impunity as worthy of a Constitutional protection? Is that what the authors intended?”
Well my time ship is out of fuel at the moment but the framers did set up tribunals to settle disputes and what is the alternative?
Government approved speech?
To tell or tell a lie is a personal choice/decision and there are repercussions set forth by the framers.
October 13th, 2007 at 8:59 amThis candidate went through the appropriate “tribunal” and then got shot down by the courts who undid the “repercussions” — making it okay to knowingly lie about the opposition:
http://www.spokesmanreview.com/breaking/story.asp?ID=11817
October 13th, 2007 at 10:13 amThanks for the link! Great story.
What I find amusing is this: “As a result of the court’s ruling Thursday, she said, political campaigns are in danger of morphing into “contests of the best stratagems of lies and deceit, to the end that honest discourse and honest candidates are lost in the maelstrom.”
And this is news to the justice?
October 13th, 2007 at 10:26 am