Video: Mary Katharine Ham talks Congress on MSNBC
posted at 1:21 pm on January 18, 2007 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
printer-friendly
Democratic embarrassment on earmarks, Democratic cowardice on the war: all things considered, it could be worse.
They misspelled her name again.
Update: Barnett says the “11/7 Republicans,” as he calls them, are just as gutless — and that they’re about to rip the party apart.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Oh, come on. How many people ever spell her name correctly?
frankj on January 18, 2007 at 1:26 PM
We love MKH.
Enrique on January 18, 2007 at 1:26 PM
I’ve made hers my normal way of spelling it. That way I never get it wrong.
James on January 18, 2007 at 1:29 PM
Did she say “Hagel along with other ‘Democrats’” did she just reassgin him to the Dems? Its where he belongs at this point but I’m curious if MKH is making it official.. LOL
Viper1 on January 18, 2007 at 1:36 PM
They never spell my name correctly either.
KelliD on January 18, 2007 at 1:37 PM
Actually, I think she spells it incorrectly.
RedWinged Blackbird on January 18, 2007 at 1:44 PM
Mary should have saved the “happy chick” signoff for Easter… far more appropriate!
IntheNet on January 18, 2007 at 1:47 PM
The word for today is “gum shun” definition = “Balls”
dread pirate roberts on January 18, 2007 at 1:48 PM
Man, the producer and I had a 2-minute conversation about the spelling of my name. Sheesh.
marykatharine on January 18, 2007 at 2:09 PM
Would it help if we got all pissy and pulled an Obama/Osama hate campaign on them?
James on January 18, 2007 at 2:17 PM
I believe the net term is “Bawlz”
One Angry Christian on January 18, 2007 at 2:19 PM
“What’s in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other word would smell as sweet.”
georgej on January 18, 2007 at 2:26 PM
This has Krazy Keith written all over it.
Rick on January 18, 2007 at 2:27 PM
Love MLK, but as we all know, she is the one mispelling her name.
Kevin M on January 18, 2007 at 2:37 PM
Happy chick!
Kevin M on January 18, 2007 at 2:40 PM
What a gal. A role-model for all!!
Griz on January 18, 2007 at 2:53 PM
She seems nervous and her speech is uncertain. I hope she gets some more on-air experience and improves.
Anil Petra on January 18, 2007 at 2:55 PM
The good lady explained in the past that “Katharine” is a family name and not related to “Katherine”.
Entelechy on January 18, 2007 at 3:13 PM
There is no ‘wrong’ way to spell a name. My real-life first name is spelled the second-most popular way, and one of my brother’s is as well. I think that makes us special. (And it makes me think a Chevy Monte Carlo is misspelled, which should be enough for you to know our first names, and probably which is which.)
Let’s look at Google hits for /kath’ rin/ variants:
Katherine 42,700,000
Catherine 95,800,000
Katharina 14,500,000
Katrina 47,000,000 ( with -hurricane exclusion)
Kathryn 27,200,000
Katharine 11,600,000
Kathrin 8,040,000
Catharina 4,950,000
Catharine 3,710,000
Katrine 3,210,000
Cathrine 2,530,000
Kathrine 2,020,000
Cathryn 1,510,000
Catrina 995,000
Cathrin 980,000
Catrine 607,000
Kathrina 227,000
Cathrina 126,000
Not only does Ms. Ham spell it that way (1,110,000 hits by full name), but so does Ms. McPhee (1,350,000, of which 28,200 mention both, for a total of 2,332,000.) So two people are roughly a quarter of the hits for that spelling!
The Monster on January 18, 2007 at 3:22 PM
“The good lady explained in the past that “Katharine” is a family name and not related to “Katherine”.”
I know, but it’s kind of funny (to me only, no doubt) to claim someone spells their own name wrong.
Kevin M on January 18, 2007 at 4:05 PM
If we dated, it would be Ham and Cheezy…
Mazztek on January 18, 2007 at 4:12 PM
She seems a little drunk to me :)
CharlestonCritic on January 18, 2007 at 4:12 PM
We love Maree Katherinn Hamm!
JetBoy on January 18, 2007 at 4:33 PM
I love Ham on wry.
right2bright on January 18, 2007 at 4:47 PM
Mary is terrific.
Dread Pirate and One Angry Christian are correct. Balls is the issue (or more precisely, the lack there of).
The Republicans are “Testosteronally Challenged”. Which is slightly better (emphasis on slightly) than the DemoncRATS (treasonous, surrender-monkeys).
Mary, Michelle, Ann Coulter and many other conservative women have more BALLS than the likes of Hagel, McCain, Arlene Specter, and a whole host of other RINOS.
I am a 52 year old, ROCK-RIBBED Conservative. Since I was old enough to vote, sometimes holding my nose, I’ve voted Republican. I have had it with the Republican Party. They lost both houses because:
1. Iraq and the so-called war on terror (both are but police-actions). Both are being waged via Political Correctness.
2. The borders are wide open.
3. The Republicans spent money like DemonCRATS always have.
When I heard that the two Immigration border guards started their prison terms yesterday, as well as the aforementioned, as far as I am concerned, the Republican Party has “JUMPED THE SHARK”.
As of now, I am changing my voting status to Independent. I am now an Independent Conservative.
We need leadership, badly. Neither the Donks or RINOS offer any.
God Bless MKH, Michelle and America.
mountainmanbob on January 18, 2007 at 5:00 PM
That smile induces a lot of stupidity, no?
Kid from Brooklyn on January 18, 2007 at 5:28 PM
Yes, the Ham was not the slickest presenter but that is okay. That she and others like her are now getting to come to the table is far more significant than how well they do - for now.
Also less important than presentation or the need to be labeled blogger, conservative or liberal, is the desire for the emergence of a strong constitutional reaffirmation party. This is a need which has never been greater. The constitution is an elegant document that outlined a great country governed by strong individuals in ways that lawyers need not explain or manage. This is not the case now. It is no accident when gutless politicians hide behind questionable legal technicalities to enable more power for themselves while accountability declines.
Reaffirming the spirit of the constitution, not the letter thereof, would secure a new party a position of power over these weasels in very short order should it but survive the birthing pains required to force a way past entrenched views held by those who stand the most to loose from the demise of business as usual.
No question seeing people like the Ham is a hopeful indication that at least the potential is there for business as usual to become business as it used to be.
“Please, may I have some more Ham?”
fng on January 18, 2007 at 5:51 PM
Here, here fng.
Haven’t we had enough slick?
Both parties are dominated by weasels, more interested with feathering their own nests and not tending to the peoples best interests.
mountainmanbob on January 18, 2007 at 6:00 PM
Nice job MKH! I like happy chicks!
vcferlita on January 18, 2007 at 6:10 PM
1. My first name is “Marc,” and if I had dollar for every time people screwed it up, I’d be a very wealthy man! It’s not that someone is intentionally trying to screw it up. I wish they’d get it right, but there are FAR more important things to worry about.
2. It could be worse…ask Niger Innis about people misspelling HIS name!
asc85 on January 18, 2007 at 6:21 PM
However you spell it, the lady is fine!
Tzetzes on January 18, 2007 at 6:29 PM
It is kind of funny. That being said, Barbra Streisand spells her name wrong.
MattSkosh on January 18, 2007 at 6:35 PM
Ham is a necessary staple.
infidel on January 18, 2007 at 7:41 PM
Best sign off in the history of TV. You can use that Ham.
Griz on January 18, 2007 at 7:54 PM
Katharine is the right spelling. Just check out the quintessential Katharine.
rivlax on January 18, 2007 at 8:01 PM
Mary K you sidestepped immigration as a reason Republicans lost. I could see it on your face, you wanted to say it but… =(
Theworldisnotenough on January 18, 2007 at 8:53 PM
1. No stand on immigration
2. No control of spending
3. No gumption (malkins) to strongly support the President’s war stance
4. Caving on “values” issues that got many of them in power between 1994 and 2004
5. Leaning too far to the left on too many topics, believing it to be the “populist” position
There’s a one-minute list of why the RINOs cost the Republican party the majority. Return to the foundations of the party and return to power, period.
Freelancer on January 18, 2007 at 9:20 PM
Chuck Hagel is not from Nebraska…really?!
serenity on January 18, 2007 at 9:50 PM
Hagel is worried we’ll win. He’s a waste of my Republican donation money.
Mojave Mark on January 18, 2007 at 10:48 PM
If I could just convince her to change her name to AndrewsStepMom, that would solve problem.
AndrewsDad on January 19, 2007 at 12:22 AM
I’d certainly hope I can keep my brain functioning properly but my heart definately skips a beat due to that smile.
Breathtaking!
As for Hagel, I’m a conservative from Nebraska and I can say he’ll have a helluva time getting my vote in ‘08 when he’s up for reelection. He’s soft on the war in Iraq IMO and I believe he’s weak on immigration last I heard as well which are two very important issues to me. Nebraska is Big Red in more ways than one and Hagel is going to lose his job unless he remembers in a big hurry what State he lives in. Sen. Hagel seems to think his votes are coming from San Francisco and not Omaha when it comes to the Iraq War.
Yakko77 on January 19, 2007 at 1:41 AM