Talk:Tammy Duckworth/Archive 2

Couillaud,

It looked like you had cut out the original view I had placed on her abortion stance. I was wrong. Thanks for improving the edit. I misinterpreted what you were doing. Bubbler2222.

My intent had been to rewrite it over in a form consistent with the rest of the article, as yours just had it as an isolated quote from the Post. I cut and pasted the original entry just below "Health Care" and meant to give it its own header, and then forgot to add the header. Looking at it, it DID seem that I had removed it. Thanks for understanding. -- Couillaud 22:03, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Bubbler2222, you list McCain-Feingold in one of your recent edits, but I cannot find a reference where McCain-Feingold specifically prohibited the NRCC from mentioning Roskam's name in its ads. I believe that the law applies to 527 groups like the Swift Boaters or MoveOn in that it limits direct endorsements of a candidate by such a group, but not the party itself. Can you cite the specifics of the law, please? -- Couillaud 21:43, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting that the "Robocalling" section of this article was completely excised under the heading "moved to 2006 election article", but that information never appears in that article, along with the endorsement by Michael J. Fox. Neither was placed in the other article.

The same editor (Tdl1060) also changed the header "Negative tactics by political opponents" to a more euphemistic "Opponents' campaign agiainst Duckworth" (sic). The point of the header is the fact that the particular campaign tactics used are specifically defined as being negative.

---Couillaud 18:37, 18 August 2007 (UTC) I plan to reinstate the removed text in the first case and revert to the original header in the second.[reply]

You must not have read the article

in question before commenting, because the information was added to the election article before it was removed from Duckworth's.--Tdl1060 18:57, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

I have re-read the article about the 2006 Illinois 6th race, and I do note that both are there, just less conspicuous than before, and that the robocall portion has lost approximately 100 words from the original, failing to mention the frequency of the calls, the total number of calls, and the fact that the Duckworth campaign specifically labeled them dirty tricks; the effect of the omission is to the effect of making the incident seem much more innocuous. If you want to move part of this article to another, please do not change the meaning. This is central to the fact of the calls themselves, especially if there is a repeat in 2008. -- Couillaud 06:46, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just curious, I noticed that in the picture at the top-right of the page, Tammy has been photographed in her Army green service uniform, testifying before a congressional body, and on her right shoulder she is wearing the 3.25" x 1.75" colored US Flag patch. This has confused me for awhile, as you wouldn't normally wear that patch on the Army green service uniform (per AR 670-1 dtd 3-Feb-05, para 15-10). Does anyone know why she is pictured wearing the colored flag patch on her formal green service uniform? Is there a special directive to wear it when testifying in Congress? Just curious... --AzureCitizen (talk) 00:58, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An

=/\= | 01:02, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

Army Regulation 670-1 specifies which patches may be worn. The US flag is not authorized for wear in that position on that uniform. That location is reserved for a "combat patch" (SSI–FWTS)(that's where I wear mine), which she is authorized to wear -- strange that she does not feel bound by or is not aware of the AR and is not wearing her combat patch -- unless she is wearing it under the flag. CsikosLo (talk) 16:06, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

She is wearing a 1st Infantry Division combat patch below the US Flag patch - just scroll down further in the article and you'll see a similar picture where you can see more of her right shoulder and sleeve. In any event, this photo has been a mystery to me ever since I first saw it back in November 2007. Could it be that both she and her husband received conflicting guidance at the time? Was the photograph taken around the time that soldiers were first directed to wear the colored US Flag patch on combat uniforms, and they mistakenly put them on their service uniforms when they found out they would be wearing them to testify before Congress on short notice? Or is there really some National Guard uniform modification as Thor questioned above? etc. All in all, it's a minor issue with regard to a photo on Wikipedia for the majority of users, while military personnel will immediately find it strange the moment they see it. I will add that I doubt Tammy Duckworth feels that uniform regulations don't apply to her - I think that if this is a mistake, it's an honest one. --AzureCitizen (talk) 19:33, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In the last revision I edited, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :)

• "Heats Up" :
  • {{cite news | author=Biemer, John | publisher=''The Chicago Tribune'' | title=Race for Hyde's seat in Congress heats up | date=[[September 7]], [[2006]] | url=http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/nearwest/chi-0609070273sep07,1,1503876.story?coll=chi-newslocalnearwest-hed}} (Registration required)
  • {{cite news | author=Biemer, John | publisher=[[The Chicago Tribune]] | title=Race for Hyde's seat in Congress heats up | date=September 7, 2006 | url=http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/nearwest/chi-0609070273sep07,1,1503876.story?coll=chi-newslocalnearwest-hed}} (Registration required)

Any discussion of the considerable POV problems with this entry? 68.83.72.162 (talk) 02:22, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Bias" may be in the eye of the beholder in political articles. This article has seen considerable discussion (please see its archives to catch up on that part), has been argued back and forth, and has been the subject of at least one edit war.

As for your current perception of "considerable POV problems with the entry", you'll have to be more specific as to where you see such problems.

I moved your comment and my reply to the bottom of this talk page. It is more difficult for other editors to spot new headings and respond to them when they are inserted arbitrarily into the middle of the discussionm in between two other discussions. -- Couillaud (talk)

Let not, start doing a rewrite of recent history, just because, Ms. Duckworth's primary patron, Rod Blagojevich, gets in a little trouble trying to sell US senate seats. Lets try to be fair, as one would say, revisionist history is a very troubling thing.76.224.26.23 (talk) 17:17, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not "patron"

Blago is not "Ms. Duckworth's primary patron." Where do you get this stuff? Your remark, esp with the word "patron," given the nature of the Blago scandal-- since it revolves around money, BRIBES-- is extremely prejudicial against Duckworth, instead of descriptive. Unlike other possible candidates mentioned for Obama's Senate seat, i.e. Jesse Jackson, Jr., Danny Davis, Emil Jones, et. al., Duckworth's name has not surfaced at all since the scandal broke (or if so, not to my knowledge), nor has she been implicated in any way.99.3.80.85 (talk) 08:31, 17 December 2008 (UTC) 99.190.164.17 (talk) 12:14, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Who appointed Tammy??? GOD??? She was appointed to the Illinois Veteran affairs office and one could ask, considering the depth and breath of the Blago Scandal, what favors (MONEY???) was traded to get Tammy appointed... considering Blog's M.O. and his past history.76.217.100.48 (talk) 20:45, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That is ridiculous. To assume that every Blagojevich appointment was due to a bribe is quite a bit of a stretch, even though is is possible that some of the more powerful positions may have been. The state Vet affairs office is not a high paying position, nor is it one that is very powerful. I think the Gov. saw someone who was a fairly well know vet who could help his image and appointed her in good faith. There is no evidence that Duckworth is connected to any of this stuff. --rogerd (talk) 21:46, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Needless to say, Tammy is not rich. And, as someone not in elective office, she has no extensive standing fundraising appartus from which to draw. So talk of her bribing Blago is pretty ridiculous. As I had read re Tammy and the Senate seat before the scandal broke, if Blago were to appoint her, it would be because he throws politics to the wind, and just appoints the person he would think would be the best for Illinois, the Senate, the country, the Democratic Party, etc. Tammy would have brought him no African American support, no Illinois Legislative love, no elimination of a gubernatorial rival for reelection, etc., etc. It woulda been a mostly selfless pick. But as we now know, selflessness is not something Blago is very good at :( 99.3.80.85 (talk) 08:46, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think she resigned as director of the Illinois VA in February: http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2009/02/quinn-names-chicagoan-to-veterans-affairs-post.html Jackb1973 (talk) 03:37, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Negative" is an opinion. A neutral heading here should be "Political Opposition."68.81.151.62 (talk) 02:34, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just curious if there is any documented evidence that she is in fact 'fluent' in these languages. I've looked online and cannot seem to find evidence. Is there evidence to support this? The claim that she speaks Indonesian is most questionable in my opinion. President Obama spent six years in Indonesia and he is not fluent in any Indonesian dialect. More evidence please.180.180.160.58 (talk) 13:09, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This made me curious so I did a quick google search. In the results search list, the 2nd entry was a VA Bio that says she speaks Thai and Indonesian, and the 3rd entry was an article saying she speaks Thai, Indonesian, and Chinese. The latter also says her youth was spent "all over Southeast Asia including Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia, Singapore and Indonesia". AzureCitizen (talk) 13:48, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I can find no corroboration of her role with this group. I have written the campaign to make sure, but I think that claim is spurious and is based on two things; Another person named Duckworth who has worked with the foundation and Ms. Duckworth certainly promoted the group during her time with the VA and was present at the building dedication for their treatment center in that official role.

Can anybody cite this quickly? Otherwise I will apply cite tags to it.

Thanks!

BenBurch (talk) 19:35, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Image Might be useful... -- AnonMoos (talk) 01:50, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]