wow - your as crazy as Mark - congratulations.

sean hannity is pretty much a tool. In particular he doesn't really qualify as a journalist under the classic definition. Thats probably my biggest problem with him - is that he claims to be giving you the news - when in fact it has been proven that
he
a) selectively cuts interviews to prove his points in ways that are so egregious that they completely change the intent of the speaker
b) outright makes up stories
c) is generally not very bright

here are some great remarks of your favorite guy:
http://mediamatters.org/issues_topics/search_results?qstring=sean+hannity

You know people like kblack really show what ignoramuses they are when they right stuff like this.
And then reference Media Matters? What a joke, a 501c3 site that is a DNC talking point distribution center. Give me a break.

You know, when you are in a hole, the best thing to do is stop digging.

Kblack, you claim he outright makes up stories:

Name one.

Actually Porter - this is an acknowledged fact by Seany boy himself. For example he claimed that Hillary blamed Bush for the mugging of a 101 year old woman. She never did any such thing and he later admitted it..

What more can i say?

Sean Hannity reminded us Thursday night of a great man by the name of Ronald Reagan who had the nerve and audacity to call the Soviet Union an evil empire.

Posted by princella at March 24, 2007 03:16 PM

Well, princella, I guess poor old Reagan is turning in his grave to know that the evil empire is now, under Bush, his own beloved America.

Maybe, since you seem to be abandoning President Bush as your iconic conservative, you should change the name of your blog (never understood why you called it "Blogs" for Bush)...change the name to "Blog for Reagan".
Reagan certainly won't go down in history as the worst president in 43 administrations.

Being a civil person I guess i'll give the kettle black and slimy canuck a pass on their analysis and slamming of Hannity. I don't always agree with him, but it sounds like these libs in comparison would put up Bill Maher, or lets say Michael Moore as the safeguards of liberty and the truth. Why don't you two just shut up and like Porter said above...why don't you choose something other than dnc talking point to assign as your source for your rabid rantings. It won't take long before dumbo and the hildebeast lose after their knock down drag out...and the silky pony figures out the love of his life deserves some of his time. We'll search for the great man to lead our country...and we don't need kibitzers from Canada...the pinnacle of a country gone bad with wimpy liberalism.

Princella- I don't want to be picky here, but Sean Hannity has agreed with Bush about 99% of the time. Most conservatives have concluded that Bush is not a true conservative- as he has brought us enormous deficits, enlarged the bureaucracy so that it is now an unwieldy mess, and has been unable to control illegal immigration. He also authored a huge entitlement program for Seniors, which eventually will help to bankrupt the Treasury. I agree with C.O.- Bush has brought in the very kind of government that Reagan warned us about!

Reagan was the Great Communicator. We didn't have to worry about whether or not he could win or not. Dole was not the great communicator. If Republicans run someone who agrees with us but doesn't have a high electability chance and the Democrats run someone who has a high electability then we lose. Are you willing to hand the reigns of the Presidency over to Obama or Hillary?

If we don't have a candidate that satisfies both, then we need an electable one, while at the same time insuring he/she is pressured by right wing groups at all times, including picking our vice-president as well as judges.

of topic.

but what no posts about how there is evidence now that Gonzolas actually *WAS* involved explicitly in the firing of the lawyers..
I will even quote fox news for you
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,260880,00.html

gosh - i wonder why people want them to be under oath

Reagan was not totally responsible for the implosion of the USSR. He made a contribution, as did other presidents before him.
For all of you die hard "conservatives", check out the latest Pew Poll. Allegence to Republican ideology has plummeted during the Bush administration. And for you Sean fans, go the the Bunny Ranches website and check out the photo of your pillar of morality smiling with the prostitutes. I guess even Ann Coulter turned him down.

It's obvious that Republicans in general and the presidential candidate especially will have to run against George Bush in '08 if they want to have any chance of actually winning control.

It's also obvious that fealty to dear leader is still an extraordinarily important thing to the 30 percenters.

It's also probable that our blessed media, who spent '00 demanding that Al Gore run away from Bill Clinton due to his hideous 65% approval ratings, will be unlikely to do that to the Republican candidate in '08.

(oops, that was actually a direct quote from the dreaded Atrios).

Hannity is AMAZING!

Everyone should watch this clip from last night's Hannity & Colmes episode and post their response.

Cheers!

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2-leads-the-wrong-witness/007/03/24/sean-hannity

Sorry, that first one doesn't work.

Witness the genius Mr. Sean Hannity......

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/03/24/sean-hannity-leads-the-wrong-witness/

Bush makes Reagan look like Lincon by comparison.

Can't wait to see the right wing of the Republican party litmus test their front runners to death during the primary season.

It's gonna be magic.

Good for you Eric. Maybe they will read the Bill O. post too!
Don't you find it interesting that the 30%ers always say that it is "politics" that is obstructing their direction? Sort of like a drunk who says a friend is "obstructing" them for demanding the car keys.
I came to the conclusion a long time ago that it is an excersize in futility to point their noses to the obvious. As a group, they are two demensional and are only capable of understanding simplistic explainations in very broad generalities. They respond to being afraid of what they do not understand and like primates or reptiles, they then villify it. They do not question ,they do not query and they certainly do not have any interest in admitting that the specifics of what they think they support has not been examined for any evidence of factuality.
The proof is in the pudding, so to speak. Not the recipie. I know that I am guilty of baiting them but I do get a vicarious thrill from the anomynity
that the internet provides. I get a secret pleasure from knowing that close to 70% of the country wants us out of Iraq, that they were not tied to 9/11, that Bush is understood to be the most catastrophic, manipulative,divisive and incompetent president ever. He has as much in common with being a conservative as a fish does to a bicycle.
What I find puzzling is the level of hysteria that his dwindling supporters display and yet are unable to articulate it in a meaningful way. Calling those that have a grip on reality "kooks" is hardly a descriptive term or a policy discussion. .They disparage scholars and intellectuals. I guess they support book burning and censorship as well. Look, for example at how they bash "the media". The anchor of the Bush administrations entire modus operandi is this hypothesis of a unified exectutive which they have perverted into this unsubstaniated concept of a unitary executive.
The good news is that they are in the process of getting their comeupence and I could not be more relieved. This bastardized child of conservativism is shrinking like a spyder on a hot skillet.
Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan would be proud.

Fred Thompson in '08!

and we don't need kibitzers from Canada...the pinnacle of a country gone bad with wimpy liberalism.

Posted by: dickdee at March 24, 2007 05:25 PM

Even with our current 'conservative' government, I would have to agree, dickdee, we are still a 'liberal' country. We may be wimpy but, honestly, do you really think we have 'gone bad'?

princella- What no mention of Bush 43? Where is your loyalty to "Dear Leader"? Actually we may have Reagan partially to blame for W's folly in Iraq, as Reagan is his role model not his own father. Bush mistook Reagan's steady and stalwart leadership for stubbornness, and unwillingness to admit and correct mistakes. He didn't get that Reagan projected steadiness, but in actuality was successful because he had the ability to be flexible when the situation called for it. You can see this in his dealings with a Democratic Congress (he and Tip O' Neill were able to bury their differences away from the Capitol bldg and work together quite productively when they were there) and in his dealings with the Evil Empire. Reagan realized that that extremist rhetoric was for the die-hard Commie-haters back home, not for Gorbachev, while W actually believes in it.

Canadian Observer said, "Even with our current 'conservative' government, I would have to agree, dickdee, we are still a 'liberal' country. We may be wimpy but, honestly, do you really think we have 'gone bad'?"

Since you've asked, CO, yes much of Canada has gone bad with it's secular progressive politics. Here's an update of the Islamic threat that Canada's secular progressive media/politicians have allowed to grow in Canada:

Canadian Moderates Threatened with 'Slaughter'

CBCnews: A moderate Muslim group that called for a separation of religion and state in a recent documentary has received a pointed death threat. The Muslim Canadian Congress received the message Tuesday morning. It was left on the Toronto telephone of secretary general Munir Pervaiz.

"I swear on 99 names of Allah, if you don't cease from your campaign of smearing Islam … I will slaughter you," the unidentified caller said.

The message mentioned congress founder Tarek Fatah and current president Farzana Hassan-Shahid by name. Both have openly criticized the politicization of Islam and alleged influence of Iran and Saudi Arabia in Canadian mosques.

*Update* on the Muslim Canadian Congress from LGF, "Note that Tarek Fatah has been featured previously at LGF; and unfortunately, he’s a “moderate” only in comparison to the ones who would slaughter him. It’s good that he denounced the radical infiltration of mosques, but last June he demonstrated why it’s difficult to feel very enthusiastic about him as an example of moderate Islam.

Tarek Fatah, communications director of the MCC said, “It is ironic that Muslim extremists are portraying themselves as anti-imperialist, when in fact Al-Qaeda and the Taliban are nothing more but a creation of the CIA.”

Hopefully, Canada's new Conservative PM and government can save Canada from it's growing Islamic insurrection.

I say it again and again...

I thank God for Keith Olbermann.

"Still, I want to call on the conservative constituency to keep their eye on the ball, and while we need to concern ourselves with the future elections, we must still remember the tasks and issues at hand."-Princella

Like terrorism. This is another example of the conservatives keeping their eye on the ball and protecting Americans from "legal terrorism".-

U.S. Congress Tries to Protect Flying Public from CAIR:
"Hill bill protects flying public"

The Washington Times: House Republicans are pushing legislation to protect airline passengers from lawsuits for reporting suspicious behavior that might be linked to a terrorist attack.

Rep. Steve Pearce, New Mexico Republican, introduced the Protecting Americans Fighting Terrorism Act of 2007 on Thursday, a week after a lawsuit was filed by a group of Muslim imams who were taken off a US Airways flight in November.

It is "unconscionable" that those who report suspicious activity could be "terrorized in our own court system in our own country," Mr. Pearce said on the House floor yesterday afternoon.

*Shakes head*

I always find it funny when folks "Know" about someone when they've never listened or witnessed anything about the person in question. Like those who attack Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity because it's "proven" that they're bad.

I for one won't bad mouth Bill Maher for instance because I've never heard the guy. Old Mike Moore I'll go after because I have seen his segments that I disagree with, the same goes for Al Gore.

For instance, to say Sean agrees with 99% of Bush's policies shows a level of ignorance on the subject that is beyond the pale. Rush and Sean both disagree with this administration on a number of subjects (most notably immigration) and voice it regularly on their shows. Also, when they make a mistake they are both quite ready to take the blame for that mistake, when was the last time you saw Al Gore or Mike Moore do that?

Good post, Gozer. Nice to "see" you, again.
:)

Who's Mike Moore?

Sean Hannity was just commenting on what he read about Hillary's comments.

The New York Daily News reported...

"The vicious mugging caught the attention of Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.), who made it a part of her presidential campaign yesterday, blaming President Bush's cuts to community policing programs for recent spikes in crime and rising fear."

"'We had a horrible mugging the other day in New York City. A 101-year-old woman in her walker was attacked,' Clinton told the National League of Cities conference in Washington. 'That was on the front page of our papers. Imagine how that makes every widow living alone, every older person, everybody [feel].'"

The Wall Street Journal's OpinionJournal.com also referenced the New York Daily News article in one of theirs, and I would guess others reported the same story.

It's really a trivial, insignificant, non-issue compared to all of the vile, vicious, and hateful things the Democrats have said about President Bush, Vice President Cheney, Republicans and Conservatives during the past six years of their incessant hate and propaganda campaign!

I mean it's nothing compared to when Hillary stood up on the Senate floor screaming (for all the world's media to report) that "Bush knew" about the attack on the World Trade Center before it happened.

AAR

AAR, it's like the lemmings who claim, with indignation, that Fox claimed Obama attended a madrassa, when in FACT Fox merely reported that Hillary made that claim--and later pointed out that it was not true.

It's been fun, reading these posts. When I saw the lead sentence I knew the trolls would be lurching out from under their bridges, because ever since Hannity started to come into his own as a commentator he has been targeted by the LLL as someone who needs to be stopped. And the only way the radical Left can stop anyone is through personal attacks.

Sean is a pretty even-tempered mild mannered guy, who just happens to be willing to say it like it is, and he has been branded as evil, vicious, hate-mongering----the whole usual litany of Lefty whining.

And you are right---as a human being, Sean will make mistakes, but he corrects them and takes responsibility for them. I love watching him next to Alan Colmes, who is so whiny and so smug and so willing to say the stupidest things just to be contrary. And Sean never loses his cool, never descends to personal attacks, and just keeps reporting facts. I think Colmes is a boon to the Right, as he makes the Left look so unappealing.

Thanks Freedom. I just went into Lurker mode for a while. *Chuckles*

Oh and carsick, "Mike Moore" is short for Michael Moore of Fahrenheit 9/11, Bowling for Columbine, Roger & Me, TV Nation, and The Awful Truth.

I've seen and read too much of his distortions to want to call him Michael, besides, Mike is easier and quicker to spell. :)

If Fred Thompson doesn't jump in, Duncan Hunter seems like a good conservative running. He is being overshadowed by better known RINO's, but his message remains solid conservative.

Maybe a Thompson Hunter ticket would win in 2008?

Canadian...I grew up near the Canadian border, and would have some stories ...but they are only anecdotal. But one from a cousin is that Canadians are the worst tippers in the world....and that goes right along with the study that shows conservatives far outgive liberals to worthy causes. So, go figure...while Algore wants to take away our way of life, he'll just sit in his expansive home eating his way out of this life. Any bets which comes first...Al's demise or the destruction of the planet?? Fear for Al's health, the man's becoming not only a rock star but the new Tennessee Orca...following in the footsteps of that Massachusetts one. I met him in the Memphis airport one time and know for sure he chews juicy fruit...and I suppose after all those years it has gone to the hips in some manner....and all that sugar must have mushed his brain cells. One minute he's yelling and claiming our president betrayed us...and the next minute he's sobbing like a widdle baby. That must be why he won a movie award...he's the best actor of the bunch.

Hannity, best way to describe him; simply a little sphincter that has learned to talk. Just another chickenhawk waiting for his next taxpayer paid meal at the Whitehouse.

Gets millions of dollars to repeat over and over again embolden our enemies, embolden our enemies, embolden our enemies, embolden our enemies, embolden our enemies. He would be a good Bushie.

LOL ... yeah, that's right, listen to a man that hasn't been right about one single thing about Iraq ... I'm sure anything he has to say carries a lot of weight ... idiots

Gozer, actually I do listen to Rush and Sean- they may disagree on several issues immigration being a key one, they are basically administration shills. Proof? When Bush knew he was in trouble (in jeopardy of losing GOP dominance in Congress) he called his AM Radio buddies to the WH, so they could galvanize the base. Their shows mimic Rove's talking points and frequent guests are members of the administration.

Watching and listening to pundits is something I do from time to time... probably because I am something of an intellectual masochist, maybe because it is seeing what the "enemy" (partisans) are saying. Savage is definitely the worst, in fact, Salon had an article a while back about how he bombed a public appearance and turned off his own fans, but Hannity, I can say from actually listening to his radio show, is an idiot. He tortures logic more than Michael Moore, and when even the logical torture fails him, he resorts to calling his and the Administration's detractors as "unAmerican" or "unpatriotic" or some variation thereof. This is, of course, symptomatic of all pundits, both right and left... but to call someone who resorts to ad hominem instead of actually arguing the facts "amazing" reveals simple-mindedness and hints at retardation...

Almiranta:
AAR, it's like the lemmings who claim, with indignation, that Fox claimed Obama attended a madrassa, when in FACT Fox merely reported that Hillary made that claim--and later pointed out that it was not true.

LOL!!!(link)
"WE reported it." Do you not understand how this works? Not only did they report it, they spent a 4 minute segment on it saying how HUGE it was that Obama was raised a muslim until 10. Do you think REPORTING a false story is OK if they cite the originator of the story? Was the retraction not necessary then? If I report the claim that you are an idiot based upon the statements of those who know you would you call me a journalist? Or would you rather call me a sensationalist?

I love watching him next to Alan Colmes, who is so whiny and so smug and so willing to say the stupidest things just to be contrary.Posted by: Almiranta [TypeKey Profile Page] at March 25, 2007 01:37 AM

I'll bet you do love watching this little scripted Faux show that makes the neocons champions of truth, justice, apple pie and the American way. Shows like this are meant to distract you from the fact neocons are trampling your Constitution. Your comments suggest their plan is working. One day you are going to wake up and think you are in Mother Russia with no rights and no voice to speak out against the government.

Back when the whole Terri Schiavo mess was happening Hannity was saying that Terry Schiavo was able to all but dance and sing right on up to when the life support plug was pulled. It was a case of GOP-appointed judges reinforcing existing state next-of-kin laws. Who did Hannity blame for Terri's death? The "liberal culture of death". I STILL don't know what that is. Matt Margolis and Kahn themselves knew better than to touch that issue with a ten-foot pole, but not Hannity.

Almiranta- I should have known from your posts that you've been "Hannitized" that's brainwashed by a pundit who is so overbearing that he never lets anyone on that show finish a sentence unless they are in agreement with him! Sean handpicked the weak-looking Colmes so that he could come off as the steadfast, stalwart culture warrior, going to the mat daily to protect white virginity, conservative values and the infiltration of the boy scouts by gays. Whatta great American!