About us Login Get email updates
Quick Clip
Print

Hannity claims of Supreme Court Ricci ruling, "in essence, when you look at it, really, it's almost nine-zero"

June 29, 2009 10:12 pm ET

From the June 29 edition of Fox News Channel's Hannity:

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

Previously:

Conservative media claim Supreme Court decided Ricci "9-0" against Sotomayor

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by budrykzp9226 (June 29, 2009 10:16 pm ET)
      10  
      "Facts WILL adapt to my wishes! They WILL!"
      Report Abuse
      • Author by carlileb5935 (June 30, 2009 4:46 am ET)
        2  
        When Ginsburg uses the word "if," what does that mean to these people, right after she says she disagrees with their arguments?

        I mean, these guys are just incorrigible.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by knowlies (June 29, 2009 10:33 pm ET)
      5  
      You are correct Sean.
      Except for that small detail of a five-four ruling.
      Other than that, I guess it is almost like nine-zero.



      Report Abuse
    • Author by TheDayV (June 29, 2009 10:54 pm ET)
      4  
      Loaded question in a loaded interview.

      There's a load of something in there.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by MickD (June 29, 2009 10:57 pm ET)
      4  
      How does this make their point to their sheeple audience?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (June 29, 2009 11:06 pm ET)
      8  
      Come on, be fair. It was nine-zero. Nine judges made decisions. Zero didn't.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by captfoster2 (June 30, 2009 12:11 am ET)
      6 1
      Sadly... many of Fox-Noise's viewership will actually believe this garbage from the dumbest bastard on TV and radio as if it were actually true.

      Somehow, I get the feeling that this whole thing was a set-up ...

      Personally, I think that this decision was purely motivated by politics!

      The five right-wing nut-jobs on the Supreme Court knew that by doing this it would feed the fire of right-wing rhetoric and hate against Sotomayor by claiming that she is not trustworthy to be on the bench...

      If anyone has no credibility to be on the bench... its the five crack-pots that affirmed this case... Alito, Scalia, Thomas, Roberts, and... Kennedy!
      Report Abuse
      • Author by dianetx (June 30, 2009 1:05 am ET)
          4
        I've often wondered why if one followed all the rules; did their best in order to get a promotion; but was denied the promotion solely on the fact that their skin color out preformed another skin color taking the test, that, that would sit well with anyone. If African Americans had been the only ones to pass the test, would they also been denied the promotions? I think not. The law is that opportunity can not be denied based on race, or gender. That does not apply only to people of the African American race. Sotomayer did not take into consideration, that the Law should be applied equally.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by eweston8542983 (June 30, 2009 10:41 am ET)
          3  
          Fairly nicely put, but wrong. There's plenty of info arround here on why. Read a bit of it.
          Law should be applied equally, if only. Then there would be no courts of appeal. Cause we'd have it all figured out, and no idiot legislation enacted. I don't see this happenning soon.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (June 30, 2009 10:47 am ET)
             
          "dianetx," eh? OK, the $cientologists have been heard from, and they're wrong, as usual. Next time, before you post, make sure your Thetans are back in the volcano, or Xenu will be very mad at you.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by mrahen (June 30, 2009 12:50 pm ET)
             
          If a test is not skewed for or against a particular group then your hypothesis would hold some merit. However, the test for the firefighters in New Haven showed some evidence that it may have been skewed. If the test had been skewed in favor of the African American firefighters then would the White firefighters sat by and accepted the results. I think not. So how could you think that the African American firefighters would not sue if the White firefighters were given the promotions? The City of New Haven was in an untenable position regardless of their decision. True that the law is that opportunity can not be denied based on race, or gender. However, the law explicitly states that any denial can not occur from disparate causes, either intentional or unintentional, or from overt causes. This case dealt with the potential of unintended disparate cause, a potentially skewed test, and with an overt cause, the denial of promotions for White firefighters. The ambiguity in this law was the question before the Supreme Court, not Sotomayor’s consideration of the equal application of the law. Note that a total of 3 of the other 6 Judges on the 2nd Circuit Court ruled the same as Sotomayer..
          Report Abuse
    • Author by mjh (June 30, 2009 12:47 am ET)
      5  
      Hm, first Limpballs said it . . .

      Now Seannie Poo's saying it.

      This talking point should make its way around to Beck and O'Reilly by tomorrow . . .
      Report Abuse
    • Author by cArn (June 30, 2009 1:10 am ET)
      6  
      This is golden. The fact that Hannity had to use so many qualifiers--"in essence", "when you look at it", "really", "it's almost"--shows that even a pinhead like him found this hard to spin.

      I said almost...
      Report Abuse
      • Author by robyn20094113 (June 30, 2009 6:12 am ET)
        4  
        That's exactly how he starts every sentence. Maybe he thinks no one will notice he is stealing someone else's material if he stammers around it first. What a shameless idiot.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by Col. Harlan Sanders (June 30, 2009 1:36 pm ET)
        3  
        Carn, I notice that too, the qualifiers Hannity uses to contort reality to fit his objective. Well, he tries to bend reality, at least, he's still fulla crap most of the time, but trying to disguise it.

        "Virtually", "One could make the case", "In a way..", these are all in his bag too, but I have a personal favorite; Sean is one of those pinheads who uses "literally" constantly, when he doesn't mean "literally" at all. I'm not sure if he's just the idiot he appears to be, or very clever, using "literally" to feed BS to his Hannitized knotheads with the plausible deniability of being among that growing group of Americans who misuse the word "literally" on a regular basis.

        Listen to Hannity's show on radio or tv, and count how many times he uses the word, and how many times it means what he thinks it means.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by Buckwheat (June 30, 2009 2:07 am ET)
      3  
      Yes, 5-4 is almost like 9-0, 5+4=9, I can see their confusion. Karl Rove must be teaching them math lessons.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by robyn20094113 (June 30, 2009 10:28 pm ET)
        1  
        And O'Rielly is their history teacher. No wonder they are brilliant.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by rwmacdonald2091 (June 30, 2009 3:54 am ET)
      4  
      El Rushbo speaks in the afternoon and the right wing crackpots all fall in line by nightfall.

      Congratulations Sean, you are now a member of the ditto head club, may I add in good standing.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by robyn20094113 (June 30, 2009 10:37 pm ET)
        1  
        Have you noticed how much time they spend interviewing each other these days? Seems like they do not have the guts to actually book a guest that might disagree with them. Or god forbid call them on there ridiculous reasoning. All these idiots have their own shows most on the same net work, so why are they guesting on each others show? It's not bad enough that each of them rants the same false hoods on their own show. They have to get together to spew the same crap. Maybe they need moral support from each other, to even continue with their nonsense.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by manofmystique (July 01, 2009 8:28 am ET)
          1  
          You noticed that too.
          It's becoming the "good old boy network"
          They are trying to shut out or drown reasoning voices and common sense.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by NiceguyEddie (June 30, 2009 7:49 am ET)
      3  
      And when you look at that way, the Rays swept the Phillies in the World Series last year.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (June 30, 2009 8:44 am ET)
        2  
        And Detroit won the Stanley Cup.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by NiceguyEddie (June 30, 2009 8:52 am ET)
          3  
          Oooh... you're on dangerous ground now!

          I'm just kidding. Though I am from Detroit (automotive engineer dontcha konw!) I'm not a hockey fan. And if I was, I'd have been for the Bruins, who (according to Hannitiy's logic, and your and my amusing application of it) apparently were the team that lost in the Stanley Cup finals which Detroit just won.

          (Isn't re-writing history fun? I can see now why the conservative like to do it so much!)
          Report Abuse
          • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (June 30, 2009 9:00 am ET)
            1  
            Well, the Penguins beat Detroit four games to three. But, in essence, when you look at it, really, Detroit almost swept the series four-zero"
            Report Abuse
            • Author by NiceguyEddie (June 30, 2009 9:24 am ET)
                 
              LALALALALALALA - I AM NOT LISTENING!!!

              I mean...

              I think you mean they beat the BRUINS 4-3. (wink-wink, nudge-nudge)
              Report Abuse
    • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (June 30, 2009 8:42 am ET)
      1  
      "in essence, when you look at it, really, it's almost nine-zero"
      No, Sean, in essence, when you look at it, really, it's still precisely 5-4.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by jjamele2880 (June 30, 2009 9:14 am ET)
        3  
        Hannity's IQ is 180.

        Well, actually, it's 29. But in essence, it's practically 180.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (June 30, 2009 10:39 am ET)
          3  
          Without the trailing zero.

          (And, no, I don't mean Alan Colmes.)
          Report Abuse
    • Author by rtdavis11200 (June 30, 2009 8:52 am ET)
      2  
      Who hired this idiot? 5-4 does not mean 9-0. Hannity is the biggest clown on cable today.

      Anyone who takes what he spews stupid mouth should have their head examined and are not to bright.

      That means most conservatives.

      Thurgood Marshall must roll over in his grave with every decision that good old uncle tom Clarence Thomas makes from his old seat on the bench.

      How Clarence Thomas lives with himself is beyond me.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by wzwriter (June 30, 2009 12:14 pm ET)
        1  
        Who hired this idiot?
        Roger Ailes....
        Report Abuse
      • Author by John Paradox (June 30, 2009 12:55 pm ET)
        2  
        Please, Glenn Beck is the biggest clown, especially when he goes into his 'don't hate Britney' mode.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by robyn20094113 (June 30, 2009 10:52 pm ET)
           
        By the same logic, in essence, when you really look at it, I think he did not even come up with this on his own he stole it from his blustering, slob of a friend RUSH LIMBAUGH.

        I think he has fallen of the wagon and needs to get to a shrink immediately. I stole that from my fiance Keith Olbermann.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by o rly (June 30, 2009 9:05 am ET)
      1  
      Yes, I can see how 5-4 is pretty much 9-0. All numbers are the same for the most part. The important thing Sean is to bend the laws of reality to your desires.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by nerzog (June 30, 2009 9:17 am ET)
      1  
      By the same logic, in essence, when you look at it, really, Obama got 100% of the vote, and has one HELL of a mandate.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by kfraz43 (June 30, 2009 10:09 am ET)
      1  
      Well, let's give Sean a big hand for finally learning Fox Math: 5/1 + 4/1 = 9/1, which reduces down to 9 with a remainder of zero... so, yeah... when you look at it, really...
      Report Abuse
    • Author by zardoz237630 (June 30, 2009 11:18 am ET)
      4  
      What kind of Americans are you? We won 2 world wars singlehanded, we liberated the entire Middle East, we are the Hope of Freedom throughout the world...God gave us the right to recreate science & math into whatever image suits us. It's called 'American Exceptionalism'. Once again, I say ignore this clown. It's the only way to marginalize him. If you want to damage him, email his advertisers.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by pags2 (June 30, 2009 11:25 am ET)
      1  
      You have to put Hannity's comments in the context that he is like the Energizer bunny who keeps banging the drum without purpose or forethought.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by shaggles (June 30, 2009 12:12 pm ET)
      2  
      Since it was a 5-4 split you could say it's almost like they upheld the lower courts decision.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by tman418 (July 01, 2009 2:21 am ET)
      1  
      You know, if you look at it (Sean Hannity), really, it's (Sean Hannity) a black person".
      Report Abuse
    • Author by manofmystique (July 01, 2009 8:21 am ET)
         
      Sean never let facts stand in the way of his talking points. What we are witnessing here is Television at its worse. Sean and Fox News in general, are allowed to lie, distort and be un-American in front of millions of people and it is not a social issue of caution or concern.
      This is a clear example why Network TV doesn't want black people to own a national TV station, because a Black Station could point out Sean's lies and challenge him on the facts. As it stands now Sean lies on a daily basis and no one in authority holds him accountable for his actions.
      Black people would also point out Sean's association with a racist hate-monger name Hal Turner and demonstrate that Sean holds those same views as Hal Turner.
      It seem they don't care about this kind of dangerous talk on the airwaves as long as it is a white man directing his hate for a black President. No major black station could get away with being so irresponsible; knowing such talk could lead someone to do harm to another people based on race.
      I believe Sean’s talk is leading people to do harm against President Obama and black people in general. Under the same circumstances this has happened in the past.
      Report Abuse