The Trib Chimes In On Missy's Car

It's been said I have a hate-hate relationship with the Tribune-Review.

Not so. The reporters I have met from Richard Mellon Scaife's newspaper have all been decent and rational.

It's with the editorial board that I have my issues.

But hate? Naw. Scaife's braintrust, because it's fully infected with teh crazie, is a more than reliable source of blog posts, the braintrust is the gift that keeps on giving.

But again, I have to give credit where credit is due. Today they got it right when they wrote about Missy Hart's car.

The text in full:

If you're longing for yet another example of how screwed up our federal government is, look no further than to the case of Melissa Hart's junker.

Ms. Hart, the former congresswoman who represented Pennsylvania's 4th Congressional District, was defeated for re-election nearly four years ago. But her car, a Volkswagen Jetta, has remained in office, so to speak.

As was first reported many months ago, the car was left in the Longworth House Office Building parking garage. Incredibly, such nonsense is allowed. Former members are allowed to park or store their cars in House parking garages free of charge and indefinitely.

With one major exception: You can't be a lobbyist. And since March 2009, Melissa Hart has been just that. Confronted, Hart says she'll remove the junker and donate it to charity.

But Hart feels no compunction to reimburse taxpayers for warehousing her car since she violated the terms of her perpetual perk. At $290 per month — the value the House Administration Committee puts on the space for tax purposes — Hart owes taxpayers about $4,600. She should pay up.

That said, the House should end the practice of free parking and storage for ex-members. It's a ridiculous perk that never should have been offered in the first place and one ripe for abuse, as the Hart incident shows.

The Trib is right. She should pay up. $4,600 can't be that much for a DC lobbyist. That's probably pocket change on K Street.

The fact that she feels no compunction to reimburse the taxpayers even such a piddling amount only reminds us how lucky we are that she's no longer a member of the House.

More On Missy Hart's Car

Remember this? Or this?

Well, it's been confirmed. The car's Missy Hart's. From ABC News:


And their report:

ABC News spoke with former Congresswoman Melissa Hart , a Pennsylvania Republican, and confirmed that a Volkswagen Jetta with a George W. Bush bumper sticker, coverd in dirt and cobwebs and parked in the Congressional Longworth House Office building parking garage, does in fact belong to her. Hart was voted out in 2006, but her car remains parked in the choice spot more than four years later.

The details of the story are, by now, well known. Members of Congress can park in the garage even when voted out of office except if they're lobbyists. Missy Hart's car is there, she lost her seat to Jason Altmire in November, 2006 but, according to ABC, she's been a registered lobbyist since March of 2009. According to the report, she was "unaware" of the rules.

More on Missy's car:

Hart admitted the car was a piece of junk that she used for short trips around Washington. When ABC News asked Hart if she felt any need to reimburse taxpayers for the spot, valued at around $200 a month, that has been illegally occupied by her Jetta since March of 2009 when she became a registered lobbyist, she said no. Hart protested she had planned to allow other people to use the car (and presumably the sweet parking place) but it never happened.

Of course taxpayers aren't entitled to a reibursement!

Melissa Hart's a Republican who was ignorant of the lobbying rules! She didn't do anything wrong because she didn't know she was doing anything wrong! AY-und if she donates the car to charity (and enjoys a bit of a tax break because of it) so much the better. Tax breaks are good.

Who cares if she broke the rules? She's a Republican. They're entitled.

Nothing happening here, citizens. Go about your business.

Missy Hart In The Tribune-Review

Remember this?

The OPJ posted a link (with a photo) to an online article detailing how it looks as if Melissa Hart abandoned her car in DC. In the House parking lot. For going on three years.

Well, Richard Mellon Scaife's Tribune-Review has picked up the story:

Having apparently left her car unattended for more than three years, you'd think Melissa Hart would have received a parking ticket by now.

Hasn't happened yet. But that doesn't mean the Republican and former U.S. representative from Bradford Woods will be able to leave her Volkswagen Jetta parked indefinitely in the Longworth House Office Building garage in Washington, D.C.

You would think Hart would have gotten the vehicle out of the garage after returning to Pittsburgh in the wake of her defeat by Democrat Jason Altmire of McCandless in 2006, when she sought re-election. But former House members are allowed to park there as long as they are not registered lobbyists, the Daily Caller Web site reported.

Therein lies the problem. As head of the Pittsburgh-based law firm Keevican Weiss Bauerle & Hirsch's government relations practice, Hart is now registered in the Senate's lobbyist database.

When something like this is reported about a conservative politician (now lobbyist) in a conservative newspaper, you know something's up.

It's time, Missy. It's time to move the car or prove that it ain't yers.

Melissa Hart's parking for life

The Longworth House Office building parking garage is for current members of Congress. Former members can park there if they are not lobbyists.

So who does the above car -- which has sat abandoned for the last three years -- belong to?

According to The Daily Caller:

Bumper stickers on the car point to Hart, as does the fact that the license plate is from Pennsylvania. There’s a Washington and Jefferson College sticker (of which Hart is a 1984 graduate) on the back window. And there’s a George W. Bush for President sticker on the bumper.

[snip]

A sign in the dashboard reads “109th Congress” (which lasted from 2005 to 2007 and was the last Congress Hart served in). The Pennsylvania license tag expired last year.

When a Daily Caller reporter called the Hart's office she hung up.

Oh yeah, Hart is a registered lobbyist.
.

Sunday Not So Funnies, Altmire Edition

Former Health Care Industry Lobbyist and Congressman Jason Altmire continues to bite the hand that feeds him.

UPDATE: From the Comments section (Hope it was worth it, Jason because I'm guessing there's a lot of folks like GeneW):

At 10:43 AM, GeneW said...
I worked hard for almost six months making phone calls and knocking on doors for him three years ago in part because he told me and my wife to our faces that he was going to fight to reform healthcare. We no longer live in his district but if I did, I'd certainly vote against him and if he has a primary challenger, I'll definitely send him/her support.

.

Who's going to run against Jason Altmire? (In the primary I mean)

Someone, please!

Not only did he vote yes on the Stupak Amendment, he voted no on the Health Care Reform bill.

Why exactly did anyone bother to vote out Hart?
.

More News

CNN projects Altmire over Hart AND Murtha over Russell.

Altmire Update

Quick note -

Talking Points Memo has something on the latest out of the "Cook Report":

Here's yet more evidence that the Dems are poised for huge gains in Congress: The Cook Report has released a new set of updated rankings on 25 House races -- and all 25 are shifts in the Dems' direction.

All of this, of course, is bad news for the Republicans - including one special friend of ours:

PA-04 Jason Altmire (D) - Lean Democratic to Likely Democratic

If Cook is right, then Jason Altmire is "likely" to beat Melissa Hart this November.

Possible Trouble for Melissa Hart

From a press release that arrived today:

A formal complaint has been lodged with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) by Shawn T Flaherty, a local attorney and former PA State Representative.

The complaint alleges that Melissa Hart, Republican nominee for Congress in Pennsylvania's Fourth Congressional District, violated the laws governing federal elections by accepting an illegal campaign contribution.

To make a long-ish story short-ish(er), the complaint alleges that when Ms Hart was on the "Glen Meakem show on News Talk 104.7 she broke the law. Glen Meakem buys time on the show to broadcast his views. The press release continues by saying that he's entirely within his rights to do so.

The complaint, however, goes on to say that Meakem "promoted Hart repeatedly while Melissa Hart was appearing on the show" and "then went on to ask the listeners to go to Melissa Hart's campaign website and to make contributions." At that point, the complaint alleges, the radio show became a combination of a fund-raiser and a promotional advertisement. The allegation is that it's a direct contribution from a corporation for her campaign for federal office.

KDKA quoted Melissa Hart pointing out (if my memory serves) that Flaherty has given money to Congressman Altmire's campaign.

It's true that he's donated money to the Altmire campaign ($1,000 in fact, in early June), but how does that change the complaint? Let the FEC decide whether the case has any merit.

The Altmire campaign has issued this statement:

This complaint was filed by a private citizen and not my campaign. These are serious allegations and I hope the Federal Election Commission fully investigates this matter.

Let's hope they do.

I dropped the Hart campaign an e-mail for a comment. I'll post whatever I get.

UPDATE: The Hart campaign issued a press release today about this. They call the complaint "baseless" and point out that "anyone can file a complaint with the FEC" adding that the process usually takes a few weeks and won't be decided until after the election. Melissa Hart:

This is clearly an attempt by the Altmire campaign to distract voters from the real issues. Altmire and his supporters know that if public finds out where he really stands on issues, he will lose because I am the only candidate in the race who has a record of representing the best interests of Western Pennsylvanians.

For the record, the Altmire campaign has already said it didn't come from his campaign.

House News

Via Talking Points Memo:

A new round of SurveyUSA polls, commissioned by Roll Call, suggests that Democrats are poised to sweep those House races this year that are competitive rematches from 2006.

Some of these races are Democratic gains from 2006, in which candidates defeated Republican incumbents or picked up open seats. Some of them were Republican retentions that year, where the incumbents fended off challengers who are trying again this year. In all seven of these case, the Democrats are winning

Specifically:

PA-04: Freshman Rep. Jason Altmire (D) defeated GOP Rep. Melissa Hart in an upset in 2006, and Hart is trying for a comeback. The new poll: Altmire 54%, Hart 42%.

That's 12 points. Gee. That's alot. Especially since he won in 2006 by only 4 percentage points.

By the way, Melissa Hart had an interesting plan for dealing with Congressman Altmire's two NO votes on the Wall Street bailout. Altmire said, before the first vote, that his constituent calls were 30-1 against the bailout. (He voted no when the bailout was first voted down in the House.) Between the two votes, there was this from the New York Times:

Mr. Altmire said many of his constituents were outraged that tax dollars would be put at risk to stabilize financial firms run by wealthy executives. He said he had not yet decided whether to switch his vote to yes when the House votes again on Friday, though he does support a provision added by the Senate to increase to $250,000 the limit for bank deposits that are federally insured.

His Republican opponent, Melissa Hart, whom Mr. Altmire beat by 4 percentage points two years ago, said she would criticize his stance on the bailout either way — if he remains opposed he is pandering to voters in a tough election year; if he switches his vote, he is flipping to help pass a bad plan. [emphasis added]

He voted against the bailout the second time as well. So if Missy accuses him of pandering, we'll know why.

Update on the Altmire/Hart Race

Remember this?

In an interview with me, Melissa Hart said that while the Chinese were NOT, in fact, drilling for oil off the coast of Cuba, "they may already be now."

Well I have a response from the Altmire campaign:

Every independent expert now recognizes that the China drilling off the coast of Cuba myth is just that, a myth. Most of those who were using that Republican talking point, including Vice President Dick Cheney and House Republican Leader John Boehner, have apologized or at least admitted their error. That's the problem with simply recycling the National Republican Congressional Committee’s talking points without checking your facts.

Good to know.

Melissa Hart on KDKA

Looks like they'll be discussing this bill. It's called the "Broadcaster Freedom Act of 2007. Here's the text:

`Notwithstanding section 303 or any other provision of this Act or any other Act authorizing the Commission to prescribe rules, regulations, policies, doctrines, standards, or other requirements, the Commission shall not have the authority to prescribe any rule, regulation, policy, doctrine, standard, or other requirement that has the purpose or effect of reinstating or repromulgating (in whole or in part) the requirement that broadcasters present opposing viewpoints on controversial issues of public importance, commonly referred to as the `Fairness Doctrine', as repealed in General Fairness Doctrine Obligations of Broadcast Licensees, 50 Fed. Reg. 35418 (1985).'.

9:11: The conversation begins (all these are paraphrased - I'm doing this live).

Steigerwald: If Obama wins, do we get the Fairness Doctrine again?
Hart: I think we do.

Hart: Altmire is trying to have it both ways. He supports the bill but won't sign a discharge petition forcing the bill to the floor.

9:14: Steigerwald Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer both say we need the fairness doctrine.

This whole argument seems to be based on this:

Conservative critics have been very concerned that Congress had supported a one-year moratorium on the return of the Fairness Doctrine, but has not supported the Broadcaster Freedom Act (BFA), which would permanently prevent these regulations from returning.

Representative Mike Pence (R-Ind.) introduced the BFA last June, where it is still awaiting a vote. As of June 25, 200 Members have signed a discharge petition which would force the House to make an up or down vote on the legislation, but an additional 18 signatures are needed.

“And so far, not one single House Democrat has signed our petition for an up-or-down vote on broadcast freedom...and now we know why,” announced Pence in response to Pelosi’s comments. “I say to Speaker Pelosi with respect: Defending freedom is the paramount interest of every Member of the American Congress.”

9:20: Now they're talking about off-shore drilling.

9:23: The drilling is stopped because the Democrats are dependent on radical environmental groups, like Moveon.org.

9:25: Steigerwald: What about Conservatives' criticism of Bush on spending?
Hart: Bush should have vetoed more than he did.

Steigerwald: Was that about Bush "getting along" and going a little too far?
Hart: I think he should have been stronger.

9:27: Steigerwald: McCain has gained 5 points in the recent Quinnipiac poll. From 12 points down to 7 points down in Pennsylvania, so that should be good news to Republicans in the state.

9:29 Steigerwald: Biggest differences between Altmire and Hart?
Hart: I say what I believe in and act on it. He does a lot of flip-flopping. He says he's pro-live but he's voted pro-abortion.

Submitted for your approval.

My Commentary:

I'm always amazed at the "fairness doctrine" argument. It seems that everyone and his uncle on the right is screaming about how liberals are looking to bring the fairness doctrine back. Their panic is palpable. It'll be the end of the republic if those lib'ruls get their way and reinstitute the fairness doctrine, they rant. Then they complain about how the mainstream media is silent about the issue - thus proving the conspiracy to reinstate it.

Hart's and Steigerwald's argument seems to be that Pelosi and Altmire want to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine because they're not fighting tooth and nail to bring the "Broadcaster Freedom Act of 2007" to the floor. Altmire in particular because while he cosponsers the bill, he won't sign the discharge petition to force a vote.

So that proves he's in favor of reinstatement.

Can someone explain the logic to me?

The thing is, if nothing happens, then the Fairness Doctrine is still inert, right? So explain to me how keeping something inert actually supports reinstating it?

Especially when Senator Obama is NOT in support of reinstatement?

Conservative logic - an oxymoron if ever there was one.

But, of course to the wingnuts, since Bill Clinton cheated on his wife and then lied about it, that invalidates "Democrat Logic."

If You're Near A Radio Tonight

Melissa Hart will be on John Steigerwald's KDKA Radio show in a few minutes.

I'll try to live blog.

Altmire/Hart Fundraising Numbers

The numbers have been released.

According to the Politicker:

After a disappointing first quarter where Hart raised $141k, she more than doubled her take in the 2nd quarter and has reported $300k raised over the last three months and finishes the quarter with $625k cash on hand.

Here's the FEC page with the details.

And here's the press release from the Altmire Campaign:

Jason Altmire has raised more than $2.1 million for his re-election to Congress Altmire raised 464,444 between April 3 and June 30 of this year and has $1.57 million in the bank.

And the FEC page with his details.

Altmire Update

Things just got a little worse for my new friend Melissa Hart.

Apart from claiming that he Chinese might now be drilling off the coast of Cuba (even though they weren't a few weeks ago) looks like her opponent Congressman Jason Altmire is getting some campaign cash.

From RealClearPolitics:

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is taking advantage of its huge financial advantage already, making major media buys in 31 Congressional districts around the country, according to an internal document obtained by Politics Nation. The DCCC has reserved $34.5 million worth of television time, including $22.5 million in districts currently held by Republicans.

Guess who's getting a chunk of that money?

But after picking up thirty seats in 2006 and another three in special elections this year, Democrats realize they have to play defense as well. The party will defend Reps. Jason Altmire, a Pennsylvanian who faces a rematch with his 2006 opponent Melissa Hart, Texan Nick Lampson, who will face former Congressional aide Pete Olson, and Harry Mitchell, a freshman from Arizona who will face the winner of a competitive primary.

To the tune of about $554,000.

Why should this bother Hart?

According to Opensecrets.org, at last check (April 2, 2008) she's only got about $400,000 on hand.

Obviously the numbers will change over time, but in one swoop the DCCC has promised Altmire a little more than what his opponent already has.

And take a look at the opensecrets site. As of April he had $1.3 million of his own.

2pj on tpm

David's interview here with Missy Hart has garnered some real attention at Talking Points Memo. It's the lead story on that site right now:


Here's a link to their story.

And, here's their video version of it:




CONGRATS to David!
.

My Interview with Melissa Hart

He can't be serious, you're saying. There's no way HE could be be chatting with HER, you're yelling between knashings of your teeth. Something must be dreadfully wrong with The Universe in order for that to happen, you're screaming while pulling out what remains of your hair.

Nope. It's all true, The proof is right there. On the right. Get it? It's a pun.

Earlier this election year, I interviewed two prospective candidates for Tim Murphy's House Seat; Wayne Dudding and Steve O'Donnell. I thought it only fair to extend the same invitation to one who's looking to reacquire Jason Altmire's House seat. And the rest, as they say, is history. Well, recent history.

Sitting in a bright corner of Mitchell's Fish Market downtown, me with a ginger ale, Hart with an alcohol-free Seabreeze and Alicia, Hart's Campaign Manager, with a diet Pepsi, we had a very nice chat about her campaign. I started the ball rolling by asking her why she wanted to run again.

After devouring at the orange slice that came with the Seabreeze, she answered that she had a lot of reasons to run. She said she's looking to finish some projects she was working on when she left Congress - some highway projects in order to bring economic development to the area, for instance.

Every now and then throughout our chat, her well manicured fingers tapped at the table for emphasis.

Her main point, and one I'm guessing she's relying on for her campaign, is that she feels she's a "better fit" for the voters in PA-4. While Democrats constitute 57% of the district, she says, the voters there don't fall into an Republican vs Democrat choice. The voters, she said, want lower taxes, less regulation and so forth. Assuming a leftward shift in the Democratic Party (and, unfortunately, she did use the incorrect "Democrat Party" a few times), she said that given the current political climate John F Kennedy would be a Republican these days. PA-4 voters, though, are closer to JFK than they are to Nancy Pelosi, she said.

Obviously she's thinking she'll win in November, when asked about the three recent special elections (the ones where Democrats beat the Republicans in highly "red" districts) she side-stepped a bit. As they were special elections, they shouldn't be used as a model for all the elections to come.

When asked about the overwhelming advantage money Congressman Altmire has at the present time (at last count, he has $1.3 million on hand to her $393,000, with little possible help from the NRCC) she said, "We'll have what we need."

Given her high conservative ratings from the National Journal, she scored an 83 on economic policy (higher than Orrin Hatch) and an 89 on foreign policy (higher even than Rick Santorum), I wondered how she close of a match she could be.

I wondered, as well, how she would explain how she, if she indeed was a "better fit" for the district, was voted out of office in 2006. She explained that that year was an anomaly. The voters were sending a message. They were mad about the war, they had reason to be angry and they took it out on the Republicans.

Now however, the situation in Iraq is getting better, she said and Bush is not an issue in this campaign and so on. My guess is that the voters will decide whether either of those are indeed the case.

I had to ask about her appearance on Pintek's show from a few weeks ago. She was on and said that the Chinese were drilling off the coast of Cuba. This urban myth has since been debunked and even the office of the Vice President has said it wasn't true.

She agreed. The Chinese weren't drilling. They were relying on this old NYTimes article and this recent column by George Will. They said they'd heard it from so many places they figured it was probably true. It seemed true and in fact the Cubans did make a deal with the Chinese.

She did add, however, that they may be drilling now.

Transcript to follow.

A Missy Hart Update

Remember this? It was from February of this year and it pointed out that while Melissa Hart had declared her intention to run for Representative Jason Altmire's seat a few months earlier, her website hadn't been updated. In fact it hadn't been updated since before the 2006 election.

First off, her website's been updated. Oh, frabjous day!

In any event, Dennis Roddy (who, while usually shorter than me, is still wicked-smaht) has a compare and contrast column on the Altmire-Hart race.

Some highlights:

Two years out of Congress and looking for a way back in, former Rep. Melissa Hart, R-Bradford Woods, says she now wishes she'd cast a few budget votes differently, but believes a head-to-head comparison with the man who ousted her now works in her favor.

"I think we'll now have an opportunity with a record and a record to actually see two very different people," Ms. Hart said. "This is a choice election, not a change election."

Ms. Hart's comments came yesterday during a sometimes-contentious meeting with the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette editorial board.

Must've been a fun meeting. That middle sentence came as a surprise. Seeing that Hart's party's presidential candidate has said otherwise. From Time.com:

Tuesday night, John McCain, who turns 72 in August, began making the case that the answer to all those questions is yes. With Barack Obama running on the slogan "Change We Can Believe In," the four-term Senator from Arizona might have chosen to avoid the reform motif entirely, to run instead on "experience" or "leadership." But he and his campaign have decided they have no choice but to embrace the idea that voters want change above all. They also believe that Obama is the chimera of change, while McCain can actually deliver it. "This is, indeed, a change election," McCain said in New Orleans, the second time in two months that he's chosen that Katrina-ravaged city to make a point of distinguishing himself from George W. Bush. "But the choice is between the right change and the wrong change; between going forward and going backward." [emphasis added]

Perhaps Missy didn't get the memo that day.

In any case, it's still an uphill battle for Missy.

Point one - According to the Cook Report from June of 2008 detailing competitive House races, the Representative Altmire's district (PA-04) is still in the "leans Democratic" (meaning it's a competitive district, but the Democrats have the advantage).

Point two - According to the OpenSecrets.Org, as of April 2 of this year, Altmire has raised $1.6 million of which he's spent $359,000 leaving him with about $1.3 million cash on hand. Hart, on the other hand, has raised only $529,000 and spent $143,000 leaving her with $393,000 cash on hand.

He's got a tad over $1.3 million, she's got a skosh below $400,000. It's pretty close to a 4-to-1 ratio in funds.

Can Missy expect any help from the NRCC? Sad to say, but probably not. According (again) to Opensecrets.org, the NRCC has only about $6.7 million on hand while the DCCC (it's counterpart from the Democratic Party) has a whopping $45.3 million on hand.

That's about a 7-to-1 advantage to the Democrats.

Melissa Hart Rewrites Her Own Political History

Our favorite former Housemember, Melissa Hart, stopped by The Conversation this week to have a chat with the tie-dyed, long-haired, commie-pinko, hippie freak, Bill Toland.

And Missy tries to rewrite her own political history in the first coupla minutes. The interesting stuff happens early on when Toland asks about the current national political climate. Here's a transcript of that part of The Conversation:

BT: It's been bad so far for republicans. Lost special elections in Mississippi, Illinois and now Louisiana. Is it a bad year for you guys? Are you hoping that'll turn around, I'm assuming, by November?

MH: Well first of all I think the Republican brand has been damaged. I don't know all the specifics of the local issues that were involved in those races. You know our race is a local race. There's six counties here that need to elect a congressman and hopefully that'll be me. My goal is to go back and reemphasize with folks the positions I take on issues. Where I stand. The priorities I have for the region. And how hard I work. A lot of folks are behind me in that campaign.

BT Why do you think that message didn't resonate two years ago?

MH: In 2006 I think it was a national election. You saw just across the board the president being unpopular, the war really putting people on edge – and appropriately. Questions that they had about current leadership. Scandals with some congressman taking bribes. Congressmen sending sexual e-mails to children. I mean, come on -

BT: That does hurt, yea.

MH: - that's not a good thing. People should be held responsible for that. I served on the ethics committee and we did hold them responsible for that. [emphasis added.]

So Melissa Hart now thinks that it was "appropriate" that the war put people on edge in 2006.

But take a look at what she was saying before the 2006 election.

It's June of 2006 and Henry Hyde has introduced House Resolution 861 that declares in part:

that it is not in the national security interest of the United States to set an arbitrary date for the withdrawal or redeployment of United States Armed Forces from Iraq;

That meant, back then, that the House would not favor any date being set to bring the troops back home. In fact the resolution:

declares that the United States is committed to the completion of the mission to create a sovereign, free, secure, and united Iraq

There it is. No timeline for withdrawal and the troops will stay there until Iraq is safe and secure (How's that going, Missy? Just asking.) This Resolution is exactly the sort of stuff that put the electorate on edge back in 2006. And guess who voted in favor of that resolution? That's right. Melissa Hart, along with most of the Republicans in the House. Take a look.

Any wonder why they were voted out of power?

But there's more. Keep in mind that now she says it's appropriate for the voters back then to have been on edge about the war. But in her supporting statements for H.Res 861 (found here at the invaluable C-Span archives) she has a very different outlook on those opposing dubya's war.

Here's what she said:

As I traveled with seven colleagues earlier this year to visit our troops in the Middle East and Central Asia, I learned a great deal about the American spirit, the spirit of our volunteer servicemen and women and what drives them to risk it all. It is the defense of freedom. It is the understanding that vigilance and sacrifice are requirements for our Nation's security.

Back home in the comfort of their living rooms though, many Americans lack that focus. They forgot about Iraq's violation of U.N. Security Council resolutions and the mounting incidence of attacks on our Nation leading up to 9/11. They began to loudly dissent and doubt and distract from our mission in Iraq.

One of the generals who I spoke with while I was in Kuwait took the opportunity in a quiet conversation to ask a very pointed question. He said, is America fighting this war, or is it just our military who is fighting this war?

We today, together with all Americans, must answer that general's thoughtful question. We must answer it for him, for ourselves, for the rest of the world, but especially for our enemies, so they know America is truly committed to liberty and the victory of civility and opportunity for all who love freedom and support democracy.

These enemies have long been committed to robbing the world of liberty. The United States and others have been targets of these terrorists many times leading up to 9/11 because of our commitment to the ideal of freedom. These enemies include regimes which harbor terrorists, but most especially those loosely connected terrorist organizations operating outside a national framework who share an ideology of oppression, tyranny, control, hatred resentment. They value no life, no man, no woman, no child.

We Americans cannot continue to be free if we spend all our time questioning our mission. Many Americans want to debate the validity of prewar intelligence or weapons of mass destruction. Whether one nation or another supported al Qaeda, how many troops do we need? Americans have to look beyond the tactical challenges.

We must do as Tony Blair did. The people who are fighting us, he said, know what is at stake. The question is, do we?

Notice the insulting jabs at the people "back home in the comfort of their living rooms" "distracting" from "our mission in Iraq." She's charges that the people questioning the war didn't know what's at stake. She charges that the people questioning the war weren't committed to liberty. She charges that we cannot continue to be free if we spend all our time questioning the mission, and that the debate on prewar intelligence and WMD were just "tactical challenges" we have to "look beyond."

And now those dissents are ok.

She needs to explain her flip-flop.

Missy Hart Goes Negative Early!

Many thanks to Bob Mayo for letting us know. Here's what he wrote:

Republicans are spotlighting Melissa Hart's anti-Barack Obama web-only ad for the national media, but Hart is not calling media attention to it locally.

Then there's this quote from the Washington Post:

Republican party committees and candidates have launched a series of ads this week linking Democratic candidates for lower offices to controversies surrounding Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama, signaling that a racially tinged campaign may lie ahead, should the senator from Illinois secure the Democratic nomination.

And then:

In western Pennsylvania, a GOP challenger unveiled an ad on the campaign web site accusing freshman Rep. Jason Altmire (D-Pa.) of defending Obama after he told donors in San Francisco that white working class voters "cling to" gun rights and religion because they are "bitter".

"Barack Obama said our bitterness makes us cling to our religion, and our guns. This was simply an insult. But maybe the biggest insult of all is how Jason Altmire continues to defend Barack Obama," says Melissa Hart, the former representative who was ousted by Altmire in 2006 and faces a rematch this fall.

Here's the ad in all it's tinged racial-ness:

And the transcript:

HART: I'm Melissa Hart and I approve this message.

ANNC: Barack Obama described small town, hardworking, God fearing, Second Amendment-respecting families of western Pennsylvania as bitter. Barack Obama said our bitterness makes us cling to our religion, and our guns. This was simply an insult. But maybe the biggest insult of all is how Jason Altmire continues to defend Barack Obama. Jason Altmire. Just how much of the liberal Kool-Aid did he drink?

For someone voted out of office for (among other things) voting too closely with dubya, I don't think Missy Hart should be accusing anyone else of "drinking the cool-aid."