About us Login Get email updates
Quick Clip
Print

Hannity distorts Sotomayor's comments to claim she "seems to disagree" with Dr. King

June 12, 2009 2:32 pm ET

From the June 11th edition of Fox News Channel's Hannity's America:

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED
Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by budrykzp9226 (June 12, 2009 2:36 pm ET)
      1  
      So you like her after all, Sean?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by mybrotherskeeper (June 12, 2009 9:18 pm ET)
        1  
        Of course, Sean is wrong about Dr. King's views on affirmative action.

        What I find most noteworthy is Mr. Hannity's cowardly use of the word "seems." This way, he is not claiming that she and Dr. King actually disagree.

        Of course, making such a claim would require actual knowledge, in addition to some guts. Sadly, neither are required of a FOX News broadcaster.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by harley (June 12, 2009 2:45 pm ET)
      1  
      If she did indeed disagree with King, Vannity be calling her a "Great American".

      Report Abuse
    • Author by manofmystique (June 12, 2009 2:47 pm ET)
      1  
      Klannity only does things he believe will hurt Obama.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by wolf kotenberg (June 12, 2009 6:23 pm ET)
        1  
        and anyone he deems a " liberal ". I just can't let go of the fact he couldn't even make it thru seeminary school and is considered intellectual enough to provide commentary on a person who graduated suma-cum-laude from Princeton, a place Hannity might have enough college credits to take out the garbage. Perhaps this nation's news media put forth the best, not the loudest.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by robyn20094113 (June 13, 2009 6:33 am ET)
             
          couldn't make it through seminary school....I think in seminary they mention lying is a sin. That's probably when he dropped out.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by newzhound (June 12, 2009 2:49 pm ET)
      1  
      However, if you can run fast or jump high, or your folks gave a ton of money to that institution of higher learning, or one or both of your parents happened to go to school there, there's nothing wrong with being preference for either a scholarship or simple admission.

      Not to mention the state where you went to high school.

      But if the ultimate selection should include race (did you know Puerto Ricans had different color skin? Perhaps a caller to Sheer "Hot Air" Insannity will ask if that is because of sun) then the right wing nutz are all over it...
      Report Abuse
      • Author by magnolialover (June 12, 2009 3:07 pm ET)
        1  
        Indeed.

        Don't you think it entirely possible that Bush got into Yale, and then Harvard more because of who he was, and who his parents knew, rather than his accomplishments? It's entirely possible, and I'm sure it happened.

        And I'm sure it still happens today. I know a lot of legacies who got into their colleges and or fraternities because of who they were, not because of what they schieved to get there. And this happens probably mostly with white men with rich backgrounds and connections.

        But, republicans are probably OK with that.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by historygeek001 (June 12, 2009 3:10 pm ET)
          2  
          Affirmative Action is all good when it's to help the wealthy get in over any other qualified applicants. After all, it's their fault -- they should have been more careful when choosing their parents.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by pags2 (June 12, 2009 3:33 pm ET)
          1  
          I have no doubt Bush got into Yale and Harvard because of who he was and not because of his great intellect (oxymoron?).
          Report Abuse
          • Author by John Paradox (June 12, 2009 7:19 pm ET)
            1  
            "Oxymoron" should be restricted to comments about Rush Limbaugh...
            Report Abuse
        • Author by fireking (June 15, 2009 12:10 pm ET)
             
          Bush got in because his father promised an endowment for the school LIBERRY.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by wolf kotenberg (June 12, 2009 4:11 pm ET)
      2  
      we need to get him waterboarded for the truth and have Olbermann write a check to military families charity. And i thought the only wiener was Mr Savage.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by neon desert (June 12, 2009 6:52 pm ET)
        1  
        GRODIN: Would you consent to be waterboarded? We can waterboard you?

        HANNITY: Sure.

        GRODIN: Are you busy on Sunday?

        HANNITY: I'll do it for charity. I'll let you do it. I'll do it for the troops' families.


        Seems Mr. Hannity disagrees with "Little Shyawn", who bravely - possibly in a fit of unauthorized bravado - volunteered them for the waterboard mission.

        How's that coming, Mr. Hannity? No accord between you and Little Shyawn yet? Sundays are still coming up about every 7 days or so, so there should be one available to accomodate you pretty soon. Let us know, 'kay?
        Report Abuse
      • Author by robyn20094113 (June 13, 2009 6:39 am ET)
           
        My first disappointment in Olbermann that he has let Hannity off the hook on water-boarding. I've noticed Sean is careful not to book anyone that might mention it. Spends most of his time talking to Rush, Glenn & that other fella Coulter.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by MickD (June 12, 2009 4:22 pm ET)
      2  
      If Dr. King were still alive he would have been smeared by Hannity long ago.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by budrykzp9226 (June 12, 2009 4:29 pm ET)
        1  
        And had his life threatened by one of Sean's buddies.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by wolf kotenberg (June 12, 2009 4:29 pm ET)
        1  
        with Hannity's credentials, Dr King does not have to be alive to be smeared.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by magnolialover (June 12, 2009 5:00 pm ET)
        2  
        True, very true. Not to mention...

        Nixon would have been a communist sympathizing appeaser, because he went to the country and talked to them.

        Teddy Roosevelt would have been a tree hugger because he wanted to preserve our national wild lands.

        And so on, and so forth.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by neon desert (June 12, 2009 6:57 pm ET)
          2  
          Eisenhower would have been a Nazi Stalinist for trying to create an "American Autobahn" using tax dollars for the benefit of the people, that traitor.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by neon desert (June 12, 2009 7:15 pm ET)
            5  
            Hannity on Lincoln:

            "So now, Mr. Lincoln has decided that he knows better than the cotton farmers how to compensate the labor. Apparently, to Mr. Lincoln, the unrepentant Illinois trial lawyer and 2-time senate loser hypocrite (his wife's family owns slaves) whose first wife died of mysterious causes feels that free housing, food, and clothing isn't enough compensation for farm labor. But remember, this is the same man whose family LOST their farm while he was growing up. Seems like Mr. Lincolns affirmative action is to make sure ALL American farmers get the same opportunity to squat on public land after being evicted from their own..."
            Report Abuse
    • Author by jayhammers (June 12, 2009 6:51 pm ET)
         
      "My test scores were not comparable to that of my colleagues at Princeton or Yale...."

      I find it amusing that a future Supreme Court Justice very likely had test scores that were not comparable to my own. Did they have the SAT and ACT back then?

      It's obvious Sotomayor was a beneficiary of discriminatory practices favoring ethnic minorities at the time. I do not admire her glee in the admission. But I hope that she is keen enough to realize that such discriminatory practices are not beneficial to society as a whole.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by jstarr99 (June 14, 2009 12:40 am ET)
         
      The premise of Hannity's point is spot on, although using Dr. King's famous statement was a bit self-serving and calling AA reverse racism is disingenuous. King did want us to assess people by the content of their character. Who's to say her character was not up to Yale stands? What if they did look at her test scores and took into account that she, very successfully, overcame difficult circumstances. Is that a validation of her character? Who knows. Point is she is qualified to be appointed the Supreme Court, affirmative action or not.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by caveman (June 14, 2009 11:22 am ET)
         
      This is less a distortion of Sotomayor than of King. He SUPPORTED affirmation action, as is well known to everyone outside the right-wing gaslighting machine.
      Report Abuse