Hare Today, Gone Tomorrow

Just a quick link to this article, regarding Phil Hare’s claim to be a veteran.  I don’t care too much about the semantics of the use of the word, but the claim does seem a bit disingenuous. 

What troubles me more is Hare’s reaction to the incident:

“After I pointed out that according to the law he is not a veteran, he became very upset and demanded to know my name. I refused to tell him my name, saying that this was about his claim of being a veteran and not about me.

Mr. Hare then told one of his aides who was with him, to follow me to my car and get my license plate number so he could find out who I was. I have since been told that Mr. Hare’s daughter works for the DMV.

I then asked Mr. Hare if he was going to stop telling people that he was a veteran. Mr. Hare again demanded to know my name, and again told his aide to get my name or to follow me to get me license number so he could find out who I was, so he could tell the former reservists what I said.

I asked Mr. Hare if he as a public official was going to use his official office to run name checks on private citizens, in order to intimidate them into not asking questions he did not want to answer.

As Mr. Hare was turning to walk away from me he paused, and turning back to my direction, he glared at me intently, and while leaning forward pointed his finger at me, and in a threatening and intimidating manner said, “I’ll find out who you are!”

Unbelievable.

Well, it turns out that Hare’s office has admitted that it screwed up.  As noted previously, the allegedly racist paper handed to Hare by Quincy resident Allie Lymenstull was not racist at all; Hare’s office just said (falsely) that it was.  While it was over-the-top, it was NOT racist. 

But given that Hare was backpedaling for his political life, that didn’t matter.  The press release issued by his office explicitly stated, and placed in quotation marks the supposed quote from the paper that “The White House is No Longer White.”

Hare’s office left this slander out there for at least a whole week.  Then, after it had served its purpose (namely, making his opponent’s supposed racism the issue, rather than Hare’s stupid statement) his office silently changed the press release to conform to the truth.  (Initially, the office obviously simply cut and pasted the true quote over the falsehood, it even left in place the initial period, thus, the sentence ended with an exclamation mark and a period – they have since changed this.)

When called on it, Hare’s office then sought shelter in the comforting arms of its cheering section — the press.  The Springfield Journal-Register willingly obliged with a puff piece, which paints Hare’s detractors in the worst possible light, while refusing to ask the most basic questions of Hare and his alleged mistake:

After the video started circulating — portions have been shown on various Fox News programs, and a short version has logged more than 325,000 views on YouTube — Hare’s communications director, TIM SCHLITTNER, issued a statement saying that what Hare said was taken out of context. What Hare meant, Schlittner said, was that he is not worried about the new health-care law being ruled unconstitutional.

Hare repeatedly said at the meeting that he supports the Constitution, Schlittner said.

“Congressman Hare served six years in the Army Reserves. He needs no lectures on fighting for the Constitution,” Schlittner added.

Schlittner also accused Hare’s Republican opponent in the 17th Congressional District, BOBBY SCHILLING of Colona, of politicizing the Quincy event by sending supporters to be disruptive.

Schilling denies that and says Hare’s trying to change the subject. He also accused Hare of an “out-and-out lie” that implied agitators against Hare were racist.

Schilling has a good point. Schlittner’s statement said that at the meeting, “Congressman Hare was called a Nazi. He was called a liar. He was handed a piece of paper that said ‘The White House is no longer White.’”

Actually, the flier, handed out by 88-year-old ALLIE LYMENSTULL of Quincy, who calls himself “100 percent radical American,” carried a picture of the White House above the words: “America’s White House? Not any more!”

The flier also shows drawings of flags with a swastika and a hammer-and-sickle and pictures of ADOLF HITLER, JOSEF STALIN, FIDEL CASTRO, BENITO MUSSOLINI, NANCY PELOSI, HARRY REID and President BARACK OBAMA. The American flag is turned upside down, Lymenstull told me, to indicate “distress.”

Lymenstull said he considers members of Congress who voted for the health-care bill to be “communist, socialist, Marxist, fascist traitors.” (Lymenstull gets his own health insurance through his elevator construction union, a line of work he was in for 38 years, and Medicare — which, of course, is a government insurance program.)

Nonetheless, he said, the president’s race had nothing to do with the wording on the flier.

“We did get the wording on the flier wrong,” Schlittner said of the “White House” line.

That’s all folks — we got the wording wrong.  Nothing to see here.  Go home to your families. 

Any reporter worth his salt would ask the obvious follow up:  how did that happen?  But not the Journal Register!  They simply parrot the theme pedaled by Hare’s office.

A few other obvious questions, questions any fifth grader would ask, if trying to get the real story:  You placed the erroneous racist comment in quotes – why?  Who did it?  How did it happen?  Where did the erroneous quote actually come from?  Was it manufactured in your office?  We know it was not on the actual piece of paper, so where did you get it?  Why did you not correct it right away?  Why did you not issue a retraction, and an apology?  How is it that the remark just so happened to fit the Democrat talking points (also now disproved) that the “tea partiers” were racist?

Inquiring minds want to know.  The Springfield Journal-Register apparently doesn’t.  And some people wonder why newspapers and news are dying.

A few days ago, Phil Hare’s office released a statement, explicitly stating that at the now-famous meeting in Quincy (“I’m not worried about the Constitution” and all that), Hare “was handed a piece of paper that said ‘The White House is No Longer White.’”

I questioned whether this was true at the time, stating:

And where’s the piece of paper?  Why didn’t he hold it up on the video (WGEM was there), and call out the racist who handed it to him?  (Let’s see, if it took him a whole day to read those seven words, I wonder how long it took him to read the 2,700 page Health care Bill three times…?)

Illinois for Growth has now conclusively shown that the piece of paper did NOT say “The White House is No Longer White.”  It was a lie.  The Congressional Representative for the 17th Congressional District in Illinois lied.  And not a simple misstatement, either – this was a deliberate and premeditated falsehood, and smear.  Phil Hare wanted people to believe that the people at the meeting — his constituents! — were racists.  The press release issued by his office explicitly stated, and placed in quotation marks the supposed quote from the paper that “The White House is No Longer White.”

But the actual document never said that.  More importantly, it never implied anything remotely racist.   Instead, it used some admittedly over-the-top imagery of historical political figures and stated “America’s White House?  Not Anymore!”  This is a far cry from what Phil Hare said was on the document, and is not racist is any way, shape or form.

Hare’s sliming of his own constituent as racist is reprehensible, but certainly not beneath the  Democrats in Congress.

Hare has already silently backtracked, though.  If you click on the link for his prior press release, it has been silently changed, and now the quote reads:

“Yesterday, Congressman Hare held what was supposed to be a meeting with seniors in Quincy to discuss important provisions in the health care bill. But Bobby Schilling, Congressman Hare’s opponent in the fall, politicized the event by sending his supporters to disrupt it. Congressman Hare was called a Nazi. He was called a liar. He was handed a piece of paper that said “America’s White House? Not Anymore!.” So much for a civil debate.

Notice how the updated release now shows the actual quote, confirming that Illinois for Growth’s document is correct?  So, in sum, Representative Phil Hare called one of his constituents falsely, a racist, and has now confirmed the fact by changing his press release, without informing the public, or apologizing.  This was no innocent mistake, it was a smear, through and through.

Confirmation that Hare changed the press release to remove the defamatory remark is found in this article from the Quad Cities Online, which quotes the slanderous statement from Hare’s (prior) press release:

But Rep. Hare’s office alleges that Bobby Schilling–the congressman’s Republican opponent–sent his supporters to derail the event.

“(Rep. Hare) said several times during the meeting yesterday that he supports the Constitution, but that conveniently didn’t make the tape,” the release from the congressman’s office states.

In the statement, the congressman’s office also contends there were other things not shown on the tape.

“Congressman Hare was called a Nazi,” the release states. “He was called a liar. He was handed a piece of paper that said ‘The White House is No Longer White.’ So much for a civil debate.”

WGEM also confirms the smear here; The Quincy Herald-Whig here.

Hare thinks he can silently back out of this, but I beg to differ.  This is news, folks.  Mr. Hare has been caught in a white lie.  And it ain’t pretty.  As Mr. Hare said, “so much for a civil debate.”   This guy is a disgrace. 

ps- anyone know how to get a “screen grab” or a cached view of the prior statement?

This is a good summary of what I would write had I more time to respond to Phil Hare’s backtracking on his “I don’t worry about the Constitution” on the Health Care Bill:

Note well: He doesn’t mean ‘I don’t worry about it because I’ve studied the Commerce Clause and I’m confident we’ll win in court.’ When pressed, he flatly says he doesn’t know which part of the Constitution justifies the law, which is his way of saying he doesn’t care and hasn’t thought about it. In fact, the best he can do by way of legal authority is to cite life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness — which of course comes from the Declaration of Independence. His response, when corrected? ‘Doesn’t matter to me. Either one.’

This is yet another example of the political gaffe that consists of telling the truth when one really ought not to do so. When the YouTube of Phil Hare saying these things went viral, Phil Hare cut a YouTube video of his own explaining what he really meant. No, he explained, I really meant to say that health care reform, in my opinion, will pass Constitutional muster otherwise I would never have voted for it.

That remains to be seen, as the matter is being litigated in the courts. But Phil Hare’s original statement, before he revised and extended his remarks, illustrates the attitude of too many politicians toward the dictates of the Constitution, which is filled with admonishments about what the government can’t do. To politicians like Phil Hare, what is Constitutional is not so much what is written and the meaning of what is written, but what politicians like Phil Hare think they can get away with.

Amen.

Gosh, didn’t see this one coming.  Apparently, after yesterday opening his mouth and proving he is as stupid as he looks, Phil Hare wants to claim he was taken out of context.  Not only that, but those evil non-seniors who support his opponent called him names:

Yesterday, Congressman Hare held what was supposed to be a meeting with seniors in Quincy to discuss important provisions in the health care bill.  But Bobby Schilling, Congressman Hare’s opponent in the fall, politicized the event by sending his supporters to disrupt it.  Congressman Hare was called a Nazi.  He was called a liar.  He was handed a piece of paper that said “The White House is No Longer White.”  So much for a civil debate.

Bobby Schilling “politicized the event”?  You know, if the Democrats didn’t have the government take over everything, then everything would not be political, would it?  For crying out loud — these clowns involve the government (and hence politics) in every facet of our lives, and when they hear a squeak of dissent, immediately charge the dissenter with injecting “politics.”  Disgusting.  And it’s a meeting with a politician — how can the event be “politicized”?

I want to see the evidence of Hare being called a “Nazi.”  As I noted yesterday, on the tape Hare was the one who mentioned the word “Nazi” and “Communist,” not the questioner. 

And where’s the piece of paper?  Why didn’t he hold it up on the video (WGEM was there), and call out the racist who handed it to him?  (Let’s see, if it took him a whole day to read those seven words, I wonder how long it took him to read the 2,700 page Health care Bill three times…?)

Here’s the Fox News story.

I’ll have more to say later regarding Hare’s pheeble attempt to “contextualize” his Hare-brained comment, after further review.  For now, suffice it to say:  NO ONE BELIEVES YOU, MR. HARE.  We are not as stupid as you think we are.  Actually, maybe I should cut that sentence short and just note that “We are not as stupid as you.”

Wow.  Today is the day they’ll look back and say ‘that’s when the wheels came off.’  Phil Hare went down in flames — where were his staffers?   The man was getting bloodied, good grief, get him out of there!  But the looks on their faces are almost as stupid as the look on Phil’s.

Yesterday, Mr. Hare had all rainbows and bunny rabbits at the Rock Island County Senior Center.  But today, Quincy was having none of it. (Click on it, you gotta see this.)

When pressed, the truth comes out.  When questioned where in the Constitution he is granted authority to mandate health care, Hare responded: 

“I don’t worry about the Constitution on this to be honest.” 

Hare then tries to recover and quotes the “life, liberty and pursuit of happiness” phrase and when corrected that those words come from the Declaration of Independence, says “It doesn’t matter to me.”

Then, when clearly asked again where the Constitution grants authority for mandated Health Care, Hare admits “I don’t know, I don’t know.” 

And now, for a brief Constitutional interlude:

“The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution[.]“  — U.S. Const., Art. VI.

When the questioner says Hare is a liar for refusing to answer how long it took him to read the 2,700 page bill three times, Hare is the one that says “nazi, communist.”  But I thought the crazy tea partiers were the ones who said things like that…  Hate speech?

Hare asks his questioner whether he is the “expert,” and the guy responds “Are you?”  Hare says “No, I’m not.  I’m the dreamer.”  He’s dreaming all right. 

And I LOVE it at the end when the guy says “You better start looking for a job…”

Amen to that, brother, amen to that.  Thank you for your service today, sir, you are a patriot.  THIS is what America is all about.  It’s guys like that who will save this country from guys like Mr. Hare.

Mr. Hare is sweating now…  (Well, he was before too, but now it’s not just because he’s phat, it’s because he’s phat and he’s gonna get run over by the health care crazy train…)

UPDATE:  Just saw this account:

Hare was asked numerous times if the bill was Constitutional and he would never answer the question.

“We could all take the easy way out,” he said, in referring to not wanting to support mandatory health care. “The goal is to insure 30 million Americans. The bill does an awful lot, some like it, some don’t like it.  Some want to repeal this bill, I will tell them that ain’t gonna happen. Let me rephrase. Go to kids, go to seniors and tell them they can’t have health care. I don’t want this repealed. We’ve worked for 106 year for this and 120 people a day die because they don’t have health insurance.”

After that comment a majority of people in the room shouted “Bullsh*t.”

You go, Quincy.  Mr. Hare’s Waterloo.

This guy is about as smart as a sack of potatoes.  Asked about all the threats” supposedly coming from opponents of the health care bill, Phil Hare stated:

… that he thought Boehner should step aside for not being more vocal in denouncing the threats.

“He has a responsibility to step up and put and end to this,” Hare said. “I think this is despicable.”

Question – why does John Boehner have a responsibility to stop threats?  Is there any evidence that he supports or encouraged the threats?  Is there even any evidence the “threats” are real?  (Most of these are usually faked or made up by Democrats and the media - see here and here, for example.)  And even if Boehner were somehow encouraging the threats, what does Hare think, he can wave his magic wand and they will cease?  What a moron.  I agree with Nancy Pelosi, who said “Elections are a way for people to show their approval or disapproval.”

Amen to that.

Funny that Hare should urge Boehner to step down for failure to stop threats, when Hare himself was quoted — today — as stating he did not feel threatened:

“There have been some people who have been irate and crossed the line in phone calls and been rude to staff,” [Hare spokeman] Schlittner said. “Most have been respectful.”

Hare, who said Capitol Police recommend congressmen contact police in their district regarding town hall meetings, said he doesn’t feel threatened but there is heightened concern because of what he sees happening to his colleagues.

“It is very troublesome to me. I don’t mind an old-fashioned debate, but there is a line that shouldn’t be crossed,” he said. “We hope we can talk about the bill in a civil way and the fever can work its way down. We are people, too.”

“Crossing the line” is “being rude to staff”??  My gosh, the poor dears.  John Boehner must stop people being rude to congressional staff!  Pass a law!Hare was also quoted in the Politico today:

One Democratic lawmaker, Rep. Phil Hare of Illinois, said he knows several Democrats who have told their spouses to move out of the home districts while the lawmakers are in Washington.

“If this doesn’t get under control in short time, heaven forbid, someone will get hurt,” Hare said.

*****

 Hare is holding eight town hall meetings in his district over the recess and requested that the Capitol Police coordinate with his local police department to provide security. His wife has pleaded with him to cancel the events.

 “My wife is home alone, and I’m worried for her,” he said. “I am about to have my first grandchild. I don’t want to have to be worried.

I think this guy really is getting worried, but it’s not because of threats to his physical safety, but threats to his political safety.  Hare is going down in November, and I think he may be starting to sense it.  As Hare said, we have a responsibilityto step up and put an end to this.

But government-run health care sounds more like a Declaration of Dependence to me.

Shortly before his vote in favor of the bill, Hare states (as he has numerous times) that “health care in this country, my friends and fellow citizens, is a right, it is not a privilege.”

He then went on to say that he would “stand proud for this bill,” and “no amount of shouting, and no amount of tearing this down, and calling the bill whatever you want to call it; I call it giving people exactly what this country promises them: life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

Wow.

Please explain, Mr. Hare, in what way health care is a right.  And where is this declared?  You know, we have a Constitution, and it protects our actual rights from GOVERNMENT intrusion.  And I can’t think of any of the rights contained therein which our fellow citizens have to pay for.

This is how liberals operate – they declare something a right, and then the rest of us have to pay for it.  I don’t mind the debate, but it is not settled – our actual rights are written down and protected by the Constitution; if you want to add something, there is a mechanism for that.  But until it is added through amendment, health care is not a right.  My friend.

As for the pathetic reference to the Declaration, it goes without saying that those who threw off the British government because of its interference with their lives did not do so for the promise of government-run health care.

Did people really vote for this clown? Really?  So he could keep a promise to his dad?

Last summer in a hearing in Washington, Mr. Hare made a remark, supposedly to illustrate how “conservative” his district was.  In the course of droning on and on about health care, he said “and by the way, I had counties that carried not for George McGovern, but for George Wallace[.]” (comment made at approximate 4:00 minute mark)

This is blatantly false, not to mention slanderous.  I dug around, and all I could find was this county-by-county map of the 1968 election results in Illinois.  As you can see, Nixon trounced Humphrey, and Governor Wallace took only 8% of the vote, and more importantly, did not carry a single county in Illinois, much less in the 17th District. (Nixon in blue, Humphrey in red, Wallace in green – not seen!)

Mr. Hare should apologize, as his mention of the then widely viewed as racist Wallace was a slander on the good people of his own district.

In addition, Hare stated that “at every one of the six town hall meetings that I’ve had, the vast majority of the people there supported single-payer health care.  And I didn’t even ask them, they brought it to my attention.”

I’m calling BS.  And in any event, I don’t think Hare had many “open” town-hall meetings after things blew up. 

What do you think the people would say today?  Even though he hasn’t asked us, we have brought it to his attention.  Do you think Mr. Hare cares?  I don’t.

while most of the rest of the country is extending just a finger.  The article is a discussion of Hare’s support for the latest “jobs” bill (wasn’t the stimulus about “jobs, jobs, jobs”?  what happened there?).  In actuality, the bill represents (another) huge payoff to public sector unions with money confiscated from the private sector.  How’s that working out so far, Phil?

Anyway, for some fun, here are a few of his quotes:

Asked about whether “opaque” local governments would spend the money properly, Hare responded “I  think our mayors know what’s best for our cities.”  Gee, if local government knows best, why does the federal government keep butting in, Mr. Hare?

Asked “Is $100 billion enough?”, Hare responded: “I think it’s enough for now.”  Have you ever heard any Democrat say “this is enough”?  No, and you never will.  By the way, if our mayors know so much, Phil, why don’t you ask them?

And check this out:

PI: What’s your take on the Senate’s strategy to break up jobs and economic stimulus bills to get them passed?

HARE: We’re in the critical zone for cities and towns across the country. I disagree with a piecemeal approach. This is not how Roosevelt did it during the Depression. He didn’t mess around and say, “We can’t afford it.” The Senate is taking the wrong approach. It will take too long and won’t make a difference.

We need to stop nibbling around the edges. Fifteen million people are unemployed. Many for six or more months. The only way you solve the problem is that people pay taxes — state, city, municipal, and federal.

Let me get this straight – to this point, Mr. Hare, you think the government has been “nibbling around the edges”?  $787 billion in failed stimulus was nibbling around the edges?  $410 omnibus spending was nibbling around the edges?  Quadrupling the deficit in one year, with trillions of dollars in deficits as far as the eye can see is nibbling around the edges?  Wow, that says a lot about Hare’s political philosophy – can you say statist?

And, to most observers (go read The Forgotten Man), Roosevelt and the government prolonged the Great Depression with their endless “fixes.”  Kinda like Obama and Hare.

Finally, according to Phabulous Phil, it appears he thinks the solution to unemployment “is that people pay taxes — state, city, municipal, and federal.”  Question – if they are unemployed, where will they get money to pay such taxes?  And if you are referring to other (presumably employed) citizens to pay such taxes, I guess that means a tax increase?  And the government will then take that money and “put people to work.”  The government is the least efficient mechanism EVER, how is it going to solve unemployment by taking even more money from the private sector?

As Ronald Reagan said in his First Inaugural, “In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem.” 

(Because many of the articles I found left off the second part of the quote – what’s up with that? – the link above has audio, so you can actually hear the words come out of President Reagan’s mouth; quote at the 6:00 minute mark)