Rep. Joe Walsh: Media Protects President Obama Because He is Black

Rep. Joe Walsh, who is widely considered to be the biggest media hound among freshman in the U.S. House of Representatives, has done it again.

The Illinois Republican had made a number of outrageous statements since he was elected, many of which have been directed at President Barack Obama; in particular, his race. For instance, in a May interview with Slate, Walsh insisted that the only reason Obama was elected because he is an articulate black man that appealed to the nation's collective sense of white guilt.

While speaking with the Media Research Center's Brent Bozell on Wednesday, Obama's race once again came into play. During the interview, Bozell asked Walsh why he thought the mainstream media keeps defending Obama when he is playing class warfare and race warfare games. In response, Walsh essentially said the media is invested in the success of the nation's first black president, and therefore go to extreme lengths to defend his policies.

He was liberal, he was different, he was new, he was black. Oh my God, it was the potpourri of everything. They are so vested in our first black president not being a failure that it's going to be amazing to watch the lengths they go to protect him, Walsh said.

Walsh, who has appeared on television more than any other House freshman, certainly can be personable. Whether he is trustworthy is another question.

According to a report by the Citizens For Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), Walsh is one of the 13 most corrupt politicians in Washington. The report, which compiled its rankings based on news reports, Federal Election Commission reports and financial disclosure forms, said the Tea Party-affiliated Congressman's ethical issues stem from his failure to pay child support and accurately disclose income and liabilities on his personal financial disclosure forms, and his campaign committee's inaccurate reporting of interest payment on his loans to his campaigns.

Walsh reportedly owes more than $100,000 in back child support to his ex-wife, Laura Walsh. Although he claims the charges are wildly inaccurate, last week, a judge ordered that he provide proof that he made those child support payments or risk being held in contempt.