Sat 20 Aug 2005
onegoodmove has video of Paul Hackett on Bill Maher’s show Real Time. (Requires Quicktime) Crooks & Liars has the same video in WMF format and an interesting discussion in the comments.
Some initial reactions from the blogs:
- Jungle Kat territory: I would like to declare a new love: Paul Hackett. I just saw him on “Real Time and with Bill Maher,” and it was love at first Bush-mocking joke. In the five minutes (if that) Mr. Hackett was on the show, he stood up for his beliefs! He actually stood by what he said about President Bush!! I kept pinching myself, thinking, “Is this guy a Democrat???”
- silentkid: There was a first, Paul Hackett actually put Bill Maher on edge during their interview. That was the first time I’ve seen Bill made speechless. But what do you expect from a former Marine who has a national audience to strike back at someone who slandered his name on national radio for weeks leading up to the special election in Ohio.
More reactions:
- DED Space: Did anyone else find him shallow and phony? This was the first time I’d seen him, and I couldn’t wait for the interview to be over.
- Hammer Of The Blogs: Last night’s return of Real Time With Bill Maher was certainly welcome. I found myself very impressed with Paul Hackett. Hackett was a last-minute substitution for Cindy Sheehan, as Sheehan had to hustle back home to care for her ailing mother. As it turns out, Hackett will prove to have been the better choice anyway. Eventually Sheehan has to go back home for good and try to get on with her life, and the people who are currently so outraged about her will forget her name by Christmas.
Hackett, on the other hand, has a real political future ahead of him — he’s funny, smart, engaged, and unafraid to speak his mind. I found myself wishing he’d run for something out here. I’d love to replace a treacherous, servile enabler like Dianne Feinstein with a pit bull like Hackett. If the Democratic Party is going to survive and thrive and return to its lost glories, it needs more Paul Hacketts, pure and simple. This is the future of the party, folks.
ALSO: Eric Minamyer and BizzyBlog were not impressed.
4 Responses to “Video of Hackett on Real Time With Bill Maher (UPDATEDx3)”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
August 20th, 2005 at 9:43 pm
Newsflash to the Left: Bush-hate may win nominations but it does not win elections.
Hackett is essentially saying that if the Pentagon is not willing to send the resources needed to train and equip an Iraqi military capable of defeating the insurgent terrorists and defending a new democratic nation, we should bring our forces home. And he’s right. But listen to the interview again. Maher, although he ends up trivializing the question and acting the fool, asks, “Are there enough Iraqis to take over? It seems the key is, we keep sa…hearing they’re going to take over and I think - well, the guys who really wanted to be soldiers were in the old army, who we disbanded and they can’t be in the new army, I mean, the insurgents - they’re true believers, but the guys who are in the new Iraqi army, you know, they were like burka salesmen last week, that guy was a hummus farmer, and now… I don’t know if that guy can stand up to that kind of…”
And Hackett replies, “Well it, yeah, they can… I mean they can with the appropriate training. The question is, is the Pentagon going to get behind the effort to get those folks trained? “
The real problem then, according to Hackett, is politics in the Pentagon, policy in the Defense Department. The bottom line is that this war in Iraq, like the war in Afghanistan, is winnable if the U.S. government - the People - “get with the program.” In other words: IT’S THE POLITICS, STUPID.
Earlier, Maher asks, “Are there Iraqi patriots? Do they have their John Adamses, and their George Washingtons over there who are going to do that?” And Hackett answers, “You know, my first hand experience was that I saw examples of Iraqis willing to stand up and fight. I think the challenge is we haven’t sent enough folks over there to begin with in order to train them and, uh, we’re just, we’re doing it haphazardly and there’s just not enough support to the American forces over there to do that job and do it right and then get the hell out of there in a year and a half’s time so….
So what is it that gives the Left and the Democrats and Bill Maher this need to see the glass as being not only not half full, but as being essentially empty? I think I know the answer. It’s Bush-hate. And ultimately, Bush-hate - good as it feels - is a losing hand. Democrats need to offer something more - something positive. I would suggest looking to John Kennedy, Woodrow Wilson, and Harry Truman for inspiration: pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, oppose any foe, support any friend who is fighting for a world safe for democracy and free from tyranny. The Iraqi people are friends worth supporting, defending, and training. Defeatism, cutting and running, and abandoning friends to religious fanatic insurgent terrorists are not principles worthy of the Democratic party or of the American people.
You can call President Bush a chicken hawk, a son of a bitch, and a greater threat to our security than Osama Bin Ladin until you’re blue in the face. Say it, mean it, and stand by it all you like. But in the end, the American people want things to be for. In my opinion, Bush-hate is not only a loser, it’s a childish indulgence.
Republican or Democrat, support of liberal democracies is the future.
August 21st, 2005 at 5:55 am
Straight talk: You’re a fool if you buy into the neocon fantasy of spreading democracy through cluster bombs. Hackett has always been 100% right: lead by example. Nothing has change in the over 200 year history of this nation. The French Revolution didn’t happen because George Washington.
Also… it’s a comedy show. Goof all you want. One of Hackett’s strengths is that he makes it fun to be a Democrat again. We can be a dreary lot being on the losing end of this political nightmare. It’s hard to be upbeat when you watch the country you love being destroyed by selfish incompetent fools.
Many of the flapping jaws you now see on Fox TV got their start ripping Clinton a new one day in and day out. Oh noooo… he talked bad about the President… he was so mean… Wahhhhh!!! Republicans set the political tone in the countery. You can’t get all bent out of shape when it gets dealt back at you. Grow up and be a man.
As for Bush hate, I wonder about that not being a political winner as you say. His numbers are in a tail spin. Maybe some honest talk about the President will inspire the millions of cynical people out there who avoid the polls.
I honestly don’t think that Hackett slamming Bush is a political move on his part, good or bad. He’s discovering his love for the cameras and is playing to them. Your fans come out to here you play Satisfaction, you play Satisfaction.
I think that what Hackett is for is pretty straight forward. Decide on a mission and do it right. If training the troops is the mission don’t do it half assed. Do it and get it done right. The Pentagon is incapable of doing that under Bush and Rumsfeld. They all think they know how to invade a country better then the experts. Dummies.
August 21st, 2005 at 9:10 am
Suit yourself. If you think that appealing with Bush-hate to the millions of cynical people out there who avoid polls will once again make the Democratic Party competitive, go get ‘em, sport.
But here’s a heads-up for you: Not every Republican campaign will be run as ineptly as was Jean Schmidt’s. And not every Republican candidate will be as loathsome as she.
Personally, I’d rather see the Party form a grown-up, progressive, coherent, positive message to take into the 2006 elections.
August 21st, 2005 at 11:02 am
Actually I agree with you. In my perfect world Democrats would never mention Bush by name again. He’s a lame duck. You’ll never be running against him again. Run against their failed policies. Run against the candidates you are running against.
That’s why I’m an idealist. It looks like in reality every Ohio Democrat will be running against Bob Taft. Every Democrat Congressman will be running against George Bush. To me Bush is liked by a lot of people even though they hate what he is doing. I want their votes. Why push them away? It’s a tactical decision on a candidates part. The key thing to me is do it or don’t do it but don’t do it half assed. Commit. Just like we needed to commit in Iraq.
I will say that I find all of the crocodile tears over so called Bush bashing hypocritical. I know where you are coming from, but when I hear right wing pundits say it it’s pure BS.
As for Hackett, he really sucks at being a robot politician. He has a bad habit of saying what’s on his mind when you ask him a question. He doesn’t like President Bush. You ask him what he thinks of President Bush and he says it. Bad habit. Some call it refreshing honesty.
He also has the bad habit of being personable. He likes to get a reaction out of people. For some reason many crowds of people like it when you call the president a Chicken Hawk. Go figure.
The funny thing is that when I watch conservative voters here in Ohio talk about stuff like that a lot of times they find it refreshing too. Politicians are such wind up dolls that no one trusts them. That’s the main reason that Schmidt did so bad compared to Bush. Between taxes and hedging on abortion she came off as a typical politician.
One thing I know about Paul Hackett is that Paul Hackett is going to be Paul Hackett. Maybe if John Kerry had run as John Kerry instead of Senator Elder Statesman he’d be President John Kerry right now.