September 10, 2008

Gary Hart: "If a majority of voters... think that it is cute to have a moose-hunting hockey mom run the country, then that's what we'll get."



Was that enough sneering for you? If not, there's a longer clip, here.

Somebody needs to tell these guys that Sarah Palin is the Governor of Alaska. And Reagan was the Governor of California.

132 comments:

chickenlittle said...

Monkey Business

AlphaLiberal said...

Sarah Palin saddled poor little Wasilla, Alaska with millions of dollars in debt. She wasn't up to the job of being Mayor, she's not up to being Governor and lord help us if she becomes VP.

That's not anti-woman (it's insulting to say women candidates should be treated with kid gloves).
That's anti-Palin. She's a rolling disaster.

Tom Spaulding said...

I need brahmins to run my country.

Please, Kerry/Hart 2012.

That'll be cute. I'll wear my designer jeans.

Ben said...

I would rather have a moose-hunting hockey mom who was NOT the governor of Alaska run this country than Gary Hart.

AlphaLiberal said...

Palin incompetence:

"Palin, who portrays herself as a fiscal conservative, racked up nearly $20 million in long-term debt as mayor of the tiny town of Wasilla — that amounts to $3,000 per resident. She argues that the debt was needed to fund improvements. "

Just what we need at the federal level! More egomania to bankrupt us!

Harwood said...

This video link spoke to me. It said Don't click me!

So I didn't.

AlphaLiberal said...

ben, Gary Hart is not running for President.

chefmojo said...

Why is Robert Wright interviewing Hugh Hefner?

Mortimer Brezny said...

Somebody needs to tell these guys that Sarah Palin is the Governor of Alaska. And Reagan was the Governor of California.

Claifornia is a major industrial state with a substantial population. It might as well be its own country.

Alaska is a minor state with a tiny population that subsists off pork barrel earmarks and oil profits.

You're comparing running a complicated country to running a simple city. There is no true comparison.

Her credentials are ridiculously lame. McCain might as well have picked Harriet Miers.

joewxman said...

More elitist statements and from someone on the left who isn't even relevant any more!

Just keep it up boys and girls on the left...that sound you hear is another 10k votes swinging to McCain.

AlphaLiberal said...

Palin continues to lie that she said "Thanks but no thanks" to the Bridge to Nowhere. She kept the money and changed from supporting the bridge to opposing it once Congress killed it. Rank opportunism.

Is it a new pinnacle of feminism to have a "feminist" leader being such a shameless liar?

Keep building her up, Ann.

chickenlittle said...

Keep looking for that bridge Alpha.

Revenant said...

Is it a new pinnacle of feminism to have a "feminist" leader being such a shameless liar?

No, feminism has pretty much been that way for the last thirty years. :)

Ben said...

Funny, the people who supported the Bridge to Nowhere all blamed Palin for killing it. So she once supported it and changed her mind -- politicians (including Obama) take credit for stuff based on less all the time.

George said...

"Alaska is a minor state."

It has 570,380 square miles.

It is larger than Texas, California, and Montana put together.

At $33.9 billion its gross state product is the fifth largest in the nation.

Sez Wiki.

Some minor state.

And for those who don't know, Gary Hart made an utter fool of himself in the 1988 presidential season when he got caught with cheating on his wife and humiliated her ala John Edwards. Talk about laughable. Pitiable is more like it.

avwh said...

Keep trashing her with the smears and misleading half facts, Alpha Liberal. I'm sure you're driving even more undecideds to McCain-Palin with your hysterical posts.

You leftists have cried "wolf" so many times already, if you ever DID have some real "dirt" on Governor Palin, by now, 3/4 of the country will have tuned it out and never pay attention, since the first 100 or so smears were false and haven't done the trick.

john said...

The comfort of our moral outrage: that dark part of our psyche that we can retreat to when they won't listen to us, will they Gary? Those uneducated goons.

avwh said...

Keep trashing her with the smears and misleading half facts, Alpha Liberal. I'm sure you're driving even more undecideds to McCain-Palin with your hysterical posts.

You leftists have cried "wolf" so many times already, if you ever DID have some real "dirt" on Governor Palin, by now, 3/4 of the country will have tuned it out and never pay attention, since the first 100 or so smears were false and haven't done the trick.

AlphaLiberal said...

Again, more wholly unsubstantiated allegations:

"Keep trashing her with the smears and misleading half facts, Alpha Liberal. I'm sure you're driving even more undecideds to McCain-Palin with your hysterical posts. "

Are you saying she didn't saddle Wasilla with $20M for a sports complex?

George: "It has 570,380 square miles. "

News flash to George: miles don't vote.

Beth said...

She was for the bridge before she was against it.

Paul Zrimsek said...

You might get more mileage out of reminding them that Bill Clinton was governor of Arkansas.

john said...

Alpha - you haven't mentioned the chief reason that Palin is totally unqualified:

South Carolina Democratic chairwoman Carol Fowler sharply attacked Sarah Palin today, saying John McCain had chosen a running mate "whose primary qualification seems to be that she hasn’t had an abortion.”

That sure beats running Wasilla into bankruptcy, doesn't it?

Your welcome.

Pogo said...

Gary Hart offers the I coulda been a contendah viewpoint, the crucial insight sorely needed to decide close elections. His conclusion? Palin is evil.
Whodathunkit?


"Gary Hart’s political career began with the crucial insight that the rules of the game with regard to getting delegates to the Democratic convention had fundamentally changed, thanks to the debacle of the 1968 Chicago convention. His political career ended because he failed to realize that the rules of the game with regard to the private lives of politicians had also fundamentally changed, thanks to the debacle of Watergate."[source]

Sy said...

Beth,

As oppose to Obama and Biden? They BOTH VOTED FOR THE BRIDGE TWICE.

At least McCain didn't vote for it and Palin had the sense enough to canceled in the end.

Alphaliberal,

She did canceled the bridge. Its not a lie no matter how many times you repeated it.

If the voters think a coke snorking community organizer is fit to be president, then I guess that's what they deserved.

Revenant said...

As oppose to Obama and Biden? They BOTH VOTED FOR THE BRIDGE TWICE.

You just don't understand the formula, Sy. See, Obama is about Change, and Obama consistently supported building the bridge. So people who want Change don't change their mind about building the bridge.

Palin initially supported building the bridge, but then changed her mind and opposed it. This is inconsistent with Obama's position, and thus directly hostile to Change.

I hope that clarified things for you.

Michael said...

Palin is also a flat out liar:

Sarah Palin: “I told Congress, ‘Thanks but no thanks’ for that Bridge to Nowhere up in Alaska,” she said in a speech today. “If our state wanted a bridge, we were gonna built it ourselves.”

Today’s Wall Street Journal, that bastion of liberal, pro-terrorist, anti-American ideology, reaches the only conclusion possible on the facts available:

“Despite significant evidence to the contrary, the McCain campaign continues to assert that Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin told the federal government ‘thanks but no thanks’ to the now-famous bridge to an island in her home state….,” the Journal states.

The Journal also makes clear that Palin only abandoned the project AFTER Congress had killed federal funding for it, and that “she did not return the federal money.

She just allocated it elsewhere.” As late as last September, Palin was complaining that criticism of the project had been unfair, claiming that “much of the public’s attitude toward Alaska bridges is based on inaccurate portrayals of the projects here.”

In other words, it was never “thanks, but no thanks.” It was “thank you very much, and now give me some more.”

Michael said...

sy, Palin did not cancel it.

Simon said...

Beth said...
"She was for the bridge before she was against it."

I always thought Kerry was hard done by with that quote. I understood exactly what he meant, although I understand why the Bush campaign used it and I understand why it worked. Still. At any rate, I don't think that the bridge story will get that much traction against Palin; the bottom line is that while the version she tells on the stump simplifies a more complex saga, it's basically accurate. This is the speech all over again. The media's assault on her created the ratings for her speech, because everyone wanted to know what she would say. Similarly, because she hasn't given many interviews since the speach, her interview with Gibson will be watched by everyone. He'll ask her about "troopergate" and the alleged mistakes in her version of the "bridge to nowhere," and in front of a massive TV audience, she'll kill those claims dead in a pithy quote or two that will rerun endlessly on youtube. Airwave superiority tactics.

peter hoh said...

I'm convinced that the "she was for the bridge . . ." is not going to make a dent in Palin's support.

Michael said...

This is the bill to which the "bridge to nowhere" was attached...and by the way, McCain skipped the vote:

Coburn Amendment #1311 – An amendment requiring that existing border security and immigration laws be enforced and approved by Congress before the amnesty in this bill can be granted.

The federal government has an obligation to secure the U.S. borders and enforce U.S. laws. The American people expect that their laws will be upheld. Yet, the U.S. borders are not secure and illegal immigrants are not being deported.

The American people have history since the 1986 amnesty of being over-promised and under-sold. The federal government has failed and has rightfully lost the trust of the public. How can the public trust that this time anything will be different?

The Coburn amendment is the first step to help restore some of the trust Congress has lost. It says that before the Kennedy-Bush bill can go forward, the president must demonstrate to Congress that current laws are being enforced.

This amendment is common sense. If the Agencies can demonstrate that U.S. borders are secure and immigration laws are enforced, then it will help restore public trust.

ALSO:

Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), also said that she had been an early supporter of the earmark before turning against it.

Michael said...

simon says: "...the bottom line is that while the version she tells on the stump simplifies a more complex saga, it's basically accurate."

It is not "basically accurate" at all. It's a flat out lie.

WSJ: "The Journal also makes clear that Palin only abandoned the project AFTER Congress had killed federal funding for it, and that “she did not return the federal money."

*Did you get the part about returning the money?

vbspurs said...

NO! I can't take any more animal references today.

Moose, apes, snakes, lambs, sheep, pigs, now monkeys!!!

As the great Susan Powter once said, Stop the insanity!

Freeman Hunt said...

She was for the bridge?! Well, shiver me timbers I guess I'll just go whole hog Marxist now and vote for Obama.

Michael_H said...

You can put lipstick on Alph and he's still a loon.

Michael_H said...

If you are confused about the whole bridge thing, just say she was pro-choice regarding the bridge. It was aborted before it could be delivered.

There, there. Feel better now?

mcallen3 said...

Palin continues to lie that she said "Thanks but no thanks" to the Bridge to Nowhere. She kept the money and changed from supporting the bridge to opposing it once Congress killed it. Rank opportunism.

I see this posted all the time. I keep wondering why we see it over and over when the facts are undisputed. I think I now understand. the people who say this either don't know, or are willfully blind to the difference between an "earmark" and an ordinary highway grant. Everyone knows that the highway grant to Alaska was the same with or without the earmark for the BTN. The congressional vote not to "earmark" did not mean Alaska could not use the funds for the BTN, only that Congress was not making the expenditure a requirement. Congress never did (and could not) kill the project. Since the Governor had the power to cancel projects, and did, it can't be a "lie" for her to say she canceled it. Nor could she, as governor be for, or against, a Federal "earmark." Those are entirely a creature of Congress' own machinations. I'm mystified as to why people think this is a winning argument.

Bill said...

Congress didn't kill its funding of Alaskan infrastructure; it killed the earmark — the requirement that the money be spent on that bridge. Governor Palin spent the money on infrastructure, but killed that project.

Sy said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
AlphaLiberal said...

avwh sez:
"I'm sure you're driving even more undecideds to McCain-Palin with your hysterical posts. "

By that logic, Obama is a shoo0in come November.

Or are you saying Palin shouldn't be criticized because she is a woman? Kind of like Repubs saying McCain shouldn't be criticized because he was a POW 40 years ago.

Beth said...

As oppose to Obama and Biden? They BOTH VOTED FOR THE BRIDGE TWICE.

So your big defense is that she's no better than either of those guys? You're starting to sound like me.

AlphaLiberal said...

From Rueters:

"National fury over the bridge caused Congress to remove the earmark designation, but Alaska was still granted an equivalent amount of transportation money to be used at its own discretion."

See, also "shell game."

And...

'"The state, however, never gave back any of the money that was originally earmarked for the Gravina Island bridge, said Weinstein and Elerding.

In fact, the Palin administration has spent "tens of millions of dollars" in federal funds to start building a road on Gravina Island that is supposed to link up to the yet-to-be-built bridge, Weinstein said.

"She said 'thanks but no thanks,' but they kept the money," said Elerding about her applause line."'

She kept the money and had work done o the bridge:

"A press release issued by the governor on September 21, 2007 said she decided to cancel state work on the project because of rising cost estimates.

"It's clear that Congress has little interest in spending any more money on a bridge between Ketchikan and Gravina Island," Palin said in the news release. "Much of the public's attitude toward Alaska bridges is based on inaccurate portrayals of the projects here.""

Bruce Hayden said...

mcallen3 answered this “she did not return the federal money." The problem was the earmark, and not the highway money, raised from gasoline taxes and supposed to be spent, as she presumably did, for highway projects. This is money taken from the states and then returned supposedly for highway projects.

Here is an article on the problem of diverting highway trust money to earmarks: Earmarking Pain Beginning to Hit Home.

AlphaLiberal said...

Beth, I doubt Biden and Obama "voted for the bridge." I think they voted for a massive appropriations bill which had the bridge buried inside of it.

But if you can point us to the bill or amendment they voted for that was explicitly BTN, please do.

The Drill SGT said...

Alaska is a minor state with a tiny population that subsists off pork barrel earmarks and oil profits.

about the same size as Delaware (both with 3 electoral votes).

So she is the Chief Executive of a State and Biden is 1 of 2 Senators from the same size state.

Which has more responsibilities?

Bruce Hayden said...

Me: "If the majority of voters don't think it is cute to have a Senator openly screwing around on his wife as president, they can turn him out to be a washed up bitter old man". (and, yes, I did vote to turn him out the next time he ran).

Bruce Hayden said...

Beth, I doubt Biden and Obama "voted for the bridge." I think they voted for a massive appropriations bill which had the bridge buried inside of it.

Great excuse. There was just too much pork to vote against, so they voted for it.

AlphaLiberal said...

If Sarah Palin is against earmarks, why did Alaska get so many earmarks when she was Governor?

$506 per person in earmarks in Alaska. And in Wasilla, AK, over $1300/person when she was Mayor.

Sara Palin is lying when she claims to have championed earmark reform as Mayor and Governor. And in a lot of other instances, as well.

The Drill SGT said...

AlphaLiberal said...
Beth, I doubt Biden and Obama "voted for the bridge." I think they voted for a massive appropriations bill which had the bridge buried inside of it.

But if you can point us to the bill or amendment they voted for that was explicitly BTN, please do.


I thought you promised to delete your bookmark and leave... stop teasin us, but since you asked:

Though Gov. Palin originally supported the earmark spending on the Ketchikan bridge (“to nowhere), she eventually killed the project, chosing to spend Federal money on other infrasturcture programs.

However, Sen. Biden and Sen. Obama voted for funding the Bridge, even when given a second chance by Sen. Tom Coburn, who proposed shifting earmark funds to Katrina relief.


http://www.cdobs.com/archive/our-columns/obama-and-biden-voted-for-bridge-to-nowhere,1628/

Cedarford said...

Funny, I don't remember Gary Hart saying how "cute" it was that Democrats selected as their VP a bridge playing Queens housewife who "abandoned" her three kids not even in their teens to become a prosecutor in 1974.

Didn't remember Hart commenting it would be "cute" to have a female President that coached as a mom or did any outdoor sports, either...

===============
Then you have Steven Cohen rising to give this gem on the Senate floor.

If you want change, you want the Democratic Party,” said Cohen. “Barack Obama was a community organizer like Jesus, who our minister just prayed about. Pontius Pilate was a governor.”

Not sure what his bottom line is.

1. Is he comparing Obama to Christ?

2. Or, as a Jew is he saying community organizers are heretics that Jews condemn and drag to governors for execution, and good as governors are and as reluctant to go along...there is just so much a governor can do?

3. And if Obama is Christlike, (pending the new Sanhedrin's judgment, of course)...what does that imply to Cohen about other community organizers like Charlie Manson, Pol Pot? And Mrs Birdsong down the street who is passing around a petition to allow boys on the girl's HS field hockey team?

Lawgiver said...

Well said mcallen. If you don't mind I will just cut and paste, with props to you, the next time an alphabetic posts the same old tired bridge rant.

Revenant said...

If Sarah Palin is against earmarks, why did Alaska get so many earmarks when she was Governor?

Um, earmarks are determined by Congress, little brain. The Governor of a state has no power over what earmarks a state does or doesn't get. Alaska's Senators (and lone Rep) are notorious porkmeisters; small-government Republicans have been haranguing them for years.

AlphaLiberal said...

Revenant:

"Um, earmarks are determined by Congress, little brain."

So why is she claiming to be an earmark reformer?

Opportunistic much?

Cedarford said...

Err, US House floor, sorry.

Steve Cohen is a Tennessee Democrat and staunch liberal elected to the 9th District in 2006 when Harold Ford gave it up to run for the Senate..

AlphaLiberal said...

Drill Sgt:

"I thought you promised to delete your bookmark and leave."

I see you flunked basic reading comprehension. I never said I'd leave.

rhhardin said...

I couldn't figure out what twaddle Hart was talking about at the beginning, about a transformation, and gave up.

Who has the time.

Palladian said...

AlphaLiberal, I thought you were deleting your Althouse bookmark and crawling up Andrew Sullivan's well-worn butt-hole? Or was that just another one of your LIES? Hang on a minute, I'm going to Google for some links then cut and paste 458 snippets of articles here on how you LIE.

Palladian said...

"I see you flunked basic reading comprehension. I never said I'd leave."

Ah, so you deleted your bookmark so now you'll have to type in Althouse's URL 4218 times a day so you can come and troll and spam the comments here? Gee, that's SUPER-GENIUS level thinking there!

Palladian said...

"I couldn't figure out what twaddle Hart was talking about at the beginning, about a transformation, and gave up.

Who has the time."

Gary Hart, obviously. Lots and lots and lots and lots of time.

AlphaLiberal said...

palladian, I see the puberty is tough on you.

The Drill SGT said...

AlphaLiberal said...

So why is she claiming to be an earmark reformer?
Opportunistic much?

two types of earmarks.

1. She took money from the US Congress, canceled the bridge and spent it on other transportation priorities.

2. Alaskan Governors are allowed "line item veto" she cut hundreds of millions of earmarks from the State budget.

what has your guy done?

1. voted to fund the bridge to knowwhere rather than spending the money helping poor Katrina victims?

2. asked for a billion dolloars in earmarks over his short senate career?

3. gotten earmarks for his wife's employer after they tripled her salary?

let's do dueling ads on the topic :)

Palladian said...

I'M DELETING MY ALTHOUSE BOOKMARK AND INSTEAD BOOKMARKING ANDREW SULLIVAN! Of course, I'll still come here just as much and post just as much flotsam that no one will read BUT STILL!! It's SYMBOLIC! ALTHOUSE, YOU'VE BEEN DE-BOOKMARKED! TAKE THAT!

Um, yeah I still have to come here to do my trolling and spamming since Sullivan (natch) doesn't have a comments section on his blog. BUT THE SYMBOLISM!!1

Trooper York said...

Gary Hart was for Donna Rice before he was against her.

Well he was against her twat anyway.

bleeper said...

Did anyone mention to Gary "My chick was less obese than Clinton's" that Palin is the VP candidate?

Just wondering...

Palladian said...

"Gary Hart: "If a majority of voters... think that it is cute to have a moose-hunting hockey mom run the country, then that's what we'll get."

Palladian: "If a majority of voters... think that it is cute to have a community organizer and undistinguished one-term US Senator run the country, then that's what we'll get."

Revenant said...

So why is she claiming to be an earmark reformer?

She said she told Congress she didn't want the earmark. That is an accurate statement.

Opportunistic much?

Incessantly. The game is called "politics", not "let's be best friends".

Zachary Paul Sire said...

Um, earmarks are determined by Congress, little brain. The Governor of a state has no power over what earmarks a state does or doesn't get.

Well then, here's your Sarah heaping praise on her congressional delegation and promising to not get in the way of their progress securing federal funds:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ieuA7nAOBXQ

Sorry.

While her lying doesn't make her any worse than other pols, let's not act like she's some maverick reformer. She's a pork queen just like everyone else. And she's out on the trail lying to Americans everyday...real nice.

And John McCain picking her undermines his entire message, so the whole thing is a sham. Good luck!

Trooper York said...

He also probably rubbed against her ass too!

And he got ear marks too.

On his fingers. (She had very greasy hair).

Palladian said...

Maybe we can get Gary Hart to come and throw Rice at Bristol and Levi's wedding...

Palladian said...

"She's a pork queen just like everyone else."

No, I've heard you're a chicken queen.

Palladian said...

Maybe Monica Lewinsky and Donna Rice will start a lesbian affair and then the press can refer to them as Donica.

AJ Lynch said...

Who is the great scorekeeper in America who determines whether an idiot like Hart get respectable again?

I wonder about that when I think how some folks never get respectable again including OJ, Al Campanis, Howard Cosell, Frank Gifford.

Others get respectable again real quick as if they never did anything wrong. Example are Gary Hart, Al the NBA announcer, Jessie Jackson, Martha Stewart, Charlie Rangel.

What will be the verdict on John Edwards? Anyone wanna guess?

AlphaLiberal said...

ZPS:

"While her lying doesn't make her any worse than other pols..."

Actually, I think she's pretty bad. She's been busted on this particular lie (among others) repeatedly but she continues to repeat it.

Other politicians wouldn't have the gall to repeat lies after being exposed for lying. She thinks she can claim that being called on being a liar is sexism.

She's using her gender to lie shamelessly. That's pretty unique.

Other than that, I agree with your post.

AlphaLiberal said...

"She said she told Congress she didn't want the earmark. That is an accurate statement."

I don't think so. Please provide the quote.

Zachary Paul Sire said...

Alpha, Obama was out there mis-characterizing McCain's "100 years of war" remark, over and over again. I'd call that repeatedly saying something he knew not to be true. But, I think Palin's misleading statements are worse because she's misrepresenting herself.

I saw her, again, today lying "Thanks but no thanks!" and it's really disgusting. Saying "thanks but no thanks" implies that you rejected the money...but as well know, she kept it.

It'll be interesting to see if Gibson calls her out on it tomorrow, and then how, if at all, her script writers revise her stump speech.

Paul Zrimsek said...

Ann needs to start flooding Obama's campaign site with fisheye photos of Madison scenes. Turnabout is fair play.

AlphaLiberal said...

Hey, Ann. John McCain has voted against "equal pay for equal work" legislation again and again.

Isn't this a feminist issue? Why not address something substantial like this instead of superficial imagery and imagined insults?

Just a thought.

See this story for a Wisconsin link to the story.

Lawgiver said...

Alpha, Obama was out there mis-characterizing McCain's "100 years of war" remark, over and over again. I'd call that repeatedly saying something he knew not to be true. But, I think Palin's misleading statements are worse because she's misrepresenting herself.

Exactly why do you think making misleading statements about yourself is worse than making misleading statements about someone else?

PatCA said...

Oh, MEOW, Mr. Hart!

Trooper York said...

Didn't Gary Hart lie about his name when he ran for President?

Wasn't his real name Hartpence or Lew Alcindor or something like that there?

I get all these obscure figures from the seventies mixed up.

AlphaLiberal said...

In other news, US government under Republicans literally in bed with the oil industry.

You can't make this stuff up!

Lawgiver said...

Re Alpha's crush on Sullivan;

On 6 September Sullivan quoted David Frum, "George W. Bush had very slight executive experience before becoming president. His views were not well known. He won the nomination exactly in the same way that Palin has won the hearts of so many conservatives."

Bush was Governor of Texas for 6 years, promoted faith-based initiatives, signed into law a concealed-carry bill, and passed the largest tax cut in Texas history.

Pallin is governor of Alaska but "only" has 19 months of executive experience at the state level. Neither Bush nor Palin have hidden their views on any of the hot button issues.

Exactly what type of executive experience are these guys looking for? Sullivan laments, "John McCain has demonstrated with this insane decision that he is unfit to be president of the United States. This was an act of near-criminal negligence." Near-criminal negligence? Good grief, I used to think Sullivan was somewhat intelligent.

garage mahal said...

"She said she told Congress she didn't want the earmark. That is an accurate statement."

Unless she could travel back in time 1 year she couldn't have told Congress anything. That's like Obama going around saying "I told Congress thanks but no thanks to the Iraq war vote".

The Drill SGT said...

AlphaLiberal said...
But if you can point us to the bill or amendment they voted for that was explicitly BTN, please do.


Obama and Biden specificly voted in favor of spending money on the BTN rather than spending on Katrina victims when they defeated the Voburn amendment.

I gave you an MSM article as the basis. I have not heard you concede the point.

what don't you understand? Your guys voted for PORK and against the POOR to enable their own PORK spending.

Peter V. Bella said...

Mortimer Brezny said...
Her credentials are ridiculously lame. McCain might as well have picked Harriet Miers.

What were Hillary Clinton’s credentials again? What credentials does Obama bring to the table?

Zachary Paul Sire said...

Exactly why do you think... blah blah blah...

Because I do.

Synova said...

"That's like Obama going around saying "I told Congress thanks but no thanks to the Iraq war vote"."

Hehehe.

Revenant said...

let's not act like she's some maverick reformer. She's a pork queen just like everyone else.

That's obviously nonsense. Note, for example, her track record vetoing earmarks passed by the (Republican) Alaska legislature.

AGrad said...

Spending the money on more worthwhile projects as opposed to the "Bridge to Nowhere" is better than building the bridge. I suspect left and right can agree on that.

If there is any substance to those on the left shouting LIAR LIAR beyond partisan necessity it must rest on the idea that they believe the honorable thing would have been for Gov. Palin to give the money back to congress.

I just don't agree with that. Unless Sarah Palin could cut all the tax payers a refund check ceding the money back to the Congress doesn't seem like the better move. They were the folks who voted twice to spend it on such a craptacular project in the first place.

Earmark reform is about stopping corruption and wasting taxpayer's money. Giving the money back to congress would not further either of these goals.

Also, alpha - you yelling Palin is a liar doesn't make Wright, Hart or any of the other douchebags saying this kind ofthing less ridiculusly elitist and sexist.

Palladian said...

I'm feeling very AlphaLiberal tonight:

Hey! Today's activation of the Large Hadron Collider proved conclusively that Sarah Palin is composed entirely of subatomic LIES.

Revenant said...

That's like Obama going around saying "I told Congress thanks but no thanks to the Iraq war vote".

Fancy that.

Revenant said...

Sarah Palin is composed entirely of subatomic LIES.

That's the greatest line I've heard in quite a while. :)

Synova said...

The "letters to the editor" response to the column in the paper last week about "Sarah Palin makes me think I could be Vice President" came out today so I was grousing most of the day about the very thing Gary Hart is spouting off.

The column started out how Palin's candidacy made the little people feel like they could succeed... only you had to read half-way through before hearing the "little people" sneer between the lines.

A lot of the responses were about experience and how Obama made *them* feel like they could be president because they'd organized a community rummage sale... but for me that missed the point.

The point was what the columnist listed sarcastically as "unnecessary"... a degree from Harvard or Yale... in law or economics...

It's not CUTE to have a moose-hunting hockey mom run the country. It's profound to have someone exemplify the Virtue of this country where *anyone* can grow up to be president.

This is nearly as basic as justice and liberty for all when it comes to our national psyche.

It's not an advanced degree from an Ivy League school in the proper field of law or economics and being ruled by our betters... none of that says squat about tenacity or wisdom or humility in the face of service and hard choices.

Obama has been playing on his humble origins for a reason. But it seems that what impresses his supporters is the lofty social sphere he inhabits.

Trooper York said...

I will have you know that Vanessa Del Rio was the "Pork Queen" and all others are just pretenders to her crown.

AGrad said...

Another thing with this clip is that Hart argues and Wright seems to agree that it is somehow nefarious Republicans who show that Government is so lame anyone can run it. This seems like they are putting the cart before the horse. They spend their time calling Reagan, Bush, Palin etc. morons and idiots and soccer moms and B-movie actors. If anyone is trying to convincing the American public that idiots can run the government it is liberals. It isn't some conspiracy of the right, Mr. Hart! You are the one doing this. YOU! You are the folks running down people's conception of politicians. Right in this short clip you spend time telling the public that President Reagan was only a B-Actor and then you don't like it when people say - "Well, if Reagan is an idiot I'd like a whole government of morons, please." How can Hart in the same breath complain that people don't respect the offices of government when you so obviously won't if a Republican holds that position.

Jeff Gee said...

Trooper York said...
Didn't Gary Hart lie about his name when he ran for President?

Wasn't his real name Hartpence or Lew Alcindor or something like that there?


He HAD to change his name. Say "Senator Hartpence" with a Boston accent and you'll understand why.

Revenant said...

That's an interesting point, AGrad. Most people think Reagan was a great President; attacking him as inexperienced and less than intelligent just convinces people that inexperienced and not-too-bright politicians can be great Presidents.

Jim said...

I don't want to have a moose hunting hockey mom run the country, but I can't seem to find the coke snorting community organizer of my dreams.

By the way, Harts God given name is Manute Bol.

Lawgiver said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
VariableSpin said...

**closed eyes, pinching bridge of nose, shaking head**

Let's ask Mr. Monkey Business about women in politics!

Sure! Why not?!

I'm sure he's all for women in politics. And by politics I mean his pants.

Peter V. Bella said...

AlphaLiberal said...
Or are you saying Palin shouldn't be criticized because she is a woman? Kind of like Repubs saying McCain shouldn't be criticized because he was a POW 40 years ago.


Those community organizers were real heros.

Simon said...

Michael, if you won't believe me, believe the NYT's admission against interest: "Palin ordered state transportation officials to abandon the 'bridge to nowhere' project that became a nationwide symbol of federal pork-barrel spending. ... 'Ketchikan desires a better way to reach the airport,' Ms. Palin, ... said in a news release, 'but the $398 million bridge is not the answer.' She directed the State Transportation Department to find the most 'fiscally responsible' alternative for access to the airport."

AlphaLiberal said...
"Beth, I doubt Biden and Obama 'voted for the bridge.' I think they voted for a massive appropriations bill which had the bridge buried inside of it."

You think that makes a difference? Unbelievable! You people really are unbelievable! Every member of Congress carries responsibility for every bill they vote for. No ifs, no buts, no maybe - they are responsible for every chapter, section, sentence, dot and commar in every bill they vote for. Period. And if they cannot handle that responsibility - as one of them admitted in Michael Moore's "Farenheit" documentary - that member should resign.

Pogo said...

Like former Sen. Hart, I too think it's really cute when women do the politics thing.

But remember, it's like comparing men's basketball to women's b-ball, no? Right, Gary?

Salamandyr said...

My problem with Bloggingheads is, like this one, too many of them seem to have a liberal arguing with a leftist.

The first podcast to offer discussion of Sarah Palin consisted of two people (IIRC, Joshua Cohen and Glenn Loury) arguing over exactly what kind of horrible person she was. That kind of discussion is not, to my mind, particularly elucidating.

blake said...

I'd call that repeatedly saying something he knew not to be true. But, I think Palin's misleading statements are worse because she's misrepresenting herself.

ZPS--so...

If I call myself a "Girl Scout", that's worse than calling you a "Nazi pedophile"?

blake said...

Gary Hart--

...is proof that men don't necessarily get better looking as they get older.

Not bein' snarky, here, but wasn't he exceptionally good looking 20 years ago when he ran?

Henry said...

Another thing that the left prefers to forget about Reagan: between being an actor and running the state of California, he was a labor negotiator.

Not bad experience for foreign policy, as it turned out.

Lawgiver said...

If I call myself a "Girl Scout", that's worse than calling you a "Nazi pedophile"?

Blake,

Yes, because he says so, lol.

Simon said...

Let me say in defense of Bloggingheads - I understand the criticism that they generally have the left arguing with the lefter (or at least the center arguing with the left), but not always. Dan Drezner, Eli Lake, Jonah Goldberg and Gene Volokh have been on, and that's just the ones that spring immediately to mind. I guess my point is that we shouldn't assume that the absence of righties is a choice by BHTV rather than either an absence of availability, compatability or interest from righty bloggers. (By compatability, I have Malkin in mind, but I gues that in light of their embrace of the Hamsher child that's a moot point.

Bob Wright strikes me as a fair-minded guy, and I think he's interested in seeing BHTV feature interesting and provocative diavlogs that will get people watching and talking. I'd like to see more conservatives on there too, but maybe the problem is that conservatives who would be a good fit haven't shown interest.

rcocean said...

Simon,

You're defense of Bob Wright is somewhat excessive. Bob is only interested in "reasonable" conservatives as BHTV guests. That is to say those acceptable to the liberal-left NYT/WaPo Audience. It's unthinkable he could have a real discussion with say, Ingraham, Malkin, Coulter, Sailor, Levin, Buchanan, Taki, Fleming, etc. That is to say a nationalist or a traditional/ social conservative.

Good lord,the BHTV audience wants moderate Micky Kaus banned because he occasionally talks about illegal immigration. Wright himself, practically broke down in tears of rage,when Micky refused to disown Coulter. You seriously misread how Open minded Bob is to voices on the right.

EnigmatiCore said...

Why would they change their rhetoric?

Have feminists, from Gloria Steinem on down, given them any reason to doubt they will be with them to the end?

Heck, it is 50/50 (or maybe even 70/30) that Althouse will be a good girl and do what she is supposed to do.

Mark said...

Just a point: "All negative on Palin all the time" has gone from actively harmful to Obama to simply more noise.

Alpha, your side needed to find something real and hit it hard early. It didn't, it pushed things that get laughed about now, and even if your team could find something useful to your cause, it will be fruit from a tainted tree, electorate-wise.

If this election continues to be about Obama v. Palin, the person who wins is McCain. Suggest you re-think.

Mark said...

"Also, alpha - you yelling Palin is a liar doesn't make Wright, Hart or any of the other douchebags saying this kind ofthing less ridiculusly elitist and sexist."

Don't blame alpha, he's just working from the latest script.

Glen said...

"As opposed to Obama and Biden? They BOTH VOTED FOR THE BRIDGE TWICE."

You see? Obama DOES have a record of reaching across the aisle.

EnigmatiCore said...

And I want to make this clear.

If the roles were reversed, there would not be this many sexist comments made by the other side.

I say this with confidence because the roles were reversed, and Rep. Ferraro was treated with significantly more proper respect than has been Palin.

Pogo said...

The funny thing is, Hart is spending the entire video lamenting the fact that he will never get anywhere near Palin. And that just kills him.

He projects his desperation about his rapidly closing window of attraction onto hatred for She Who Arouses Him.

Gary, that's hilarious. Still ruled by your little frankfurter.

reader_iam said...

Oh, let's just vote already. (Then everyone can regroup in their own locker rooms and get ready for the next season.)

Gooooooooo teaeaeaeaeaeaem!

reader_iam said...

[-s]

Ahem.

Pogo said...

Rats, reader.

I thought for a moment I had gone all existential-Camille Paglia-deconstructivist for a moment.

Just flakkery, though. I'll try harder.

Trumpit said...

If McCain loses to Obama, will his pick of Palin become know historically as McCain's folly after Seward's folly? And if he wins the presidency, and dies in office, will the joke (Sarah Palin) be on us (U.S.)?

Trumpit said...

President Potatoe Head, Dan Qualye! Haha.

chickenlittle said...

Trumpit said: President Potatoe Head, Dan Qualye! Haha.

Actually, Obama is the one with Mr. Potato Head Ears.

Simon said...

Trumpit - McCain's going to win. And if the worst should happen, and he dies in or resigns from office, we get Sarah ahead of schedule. That doesn't frighten me, although it's sad to see people already supposing tragedy will strike.

Synova said...

We have to elect our betters to office because then we can pretend that they aren't just people like us. that they're somehow adequate to the task of making the right decision instead of making a decision among many choices, none of which are indisputably good, all of which may actually be bad.

And a person... a *human*... is going to have that responsibility.

Someone please... save us from ourselves. It's bad enough that the masses get to vote... but if we can't even be trusted to vote for someone so far above us in understanding and ability? Well? What is there to do?

blake said...

So vote your conscience, guts and heart
Although it's just a mystery
And partake in the sacramental:
Tuesday we make history.
Draw the curtain, pull the lever
Pick a winner in the booth
But a winner's not a saviour
And that's the awful truth.

--Loudon Wainwright, "Leap of Faith"

Alex said...

Victoria - I don't understand why everytime truth is pointed out on the bridge issue you ignore it.

MarkW said...

Reading the comments thread, I wonder how many people there are whose opinion hasn't been firmly fixed in place? Not many, it seems.

Palin? She's a poltician--less objectionable than most, it seems, but still a politician. Which means, at least, opportunistic spinning.

But for all the frenetic digging going on in Wasilla, I doubt anyone will find the equivalent of a Wright, Rezko, or Ayers (or even Pfleger or Klonsky) in her background. No failed $150M education programs that funneled large sums to unreconstructed 60s radicals. No failed slum rehabilitation projects that deteriorated again almost as quickly as they were finished (but enriched political allies in the process).

Fen said...

VariableSpin:

**closed eyes, pinching bridge of nose, shaking head**

Let's ask Mr. Monkey Business about women in politics! Sure! Why not?! I'm sure he's all for women in politics. And by politics I mean his pants.

Ha. No kidding. Get Gary Hart out there on the talkshow circuit where he can tell women what Democrats really think of them.

Henry said...

Seward's Folly turned out okay.

The Deacon said...

Reagan sucked, too.

X said...

Heh.

Gary Hartpence.

New Ideas.

Monkey Business.

Loser.

Verso said...

Hey, Ann, I have news for you.

"Moose hunting hockey mom" is how Palin has branded herself. Do you get that? Do you understand?

It's the McCain/Palin camps own branding.

Do you understand? Comprende?

I know thrashing around like a victim is wingnut sport, but the sobbing victim routine isn't very becoming.

Act like an adult.

dccupp said...

You must have the "correct" credentials to be a politician. No, he's not being elitist at all.

Not anyone can run government. Only the liberals, so they can tell us the "correct" way to live our lives.

Thanks, but no thanks. Take your hot air and go global warm another planet please.

I love that Hart thinks that she is a "media phenomenon".