Hannity repeated Bennett's Freakonomics falsehood
SUMMARY: Sean Hannity repeated radio host Bill Bennett's false claim that Bennett was simply quoting from the book Freakonomics when he made controversial comments regarding blacks, crime, and abortion.
Fox News host Sean Hannity repeated radio host and former Secretary of Education Bill Bennett's false claim regarding a controversial remark Bennett made on September 28, 2005 -- "[I]t's true that if you wanted to reduce crime ... you could abort every black baby in this country, and your crime rate would go down" -- saying the remark was not "his [Bennett's] theory" and that Bennett was "quot[ing] from a book." As Media Matters for America noted, Bennett purported to explain the comment by falsely claiming that he was simply reiterating a theory made in the book Freakonomics (William Morrow, May 2005) by authors Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner. But, neither Levitt nor the book discuss "the racial implications of abortion and crime," as Bennett falsely stated on his September 29, 2005, radio broadcast. Hannity repeated Bennett's falsehood on the January 18 edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes, during a discussion about Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's (D-NY) January 16 remarks that the U.S. House of Representatives is being run "like a plantation."
Freakonomics advances the theory that legalized abortions have reduced overall crime rates by reducing the number of children growing up in poor, single-parent, or teenage-parent households -- and therefore those who would have been more likely to commit crimes. But, the author's theory does not address the issue of race. In fact, in a 1999 Slate.com online discussion that followed the release of a preliminary version of a 2001 paper by Levitt and John J. Donohue III, on which the argument in Freakonomics is based, Levitt specifically noted that "[n]one of our analysis [of abortion and crime] is race-based because the crime data by race is generally not deemed reliable." In a September 30, 2005, response to Bennett's remarks, Levitt reiterated: "Race is not an important part of the abortion-crime argument that John Donohue and I have made in academic papers and that Dubner and I discuss in Freakonomics."
From the January 18 edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes:
HANNITY: Let's talk specifically about a double standard that exists in this country. [Sen.] Trent Lott [R-MS] makes comments at a 100th birthday party, throw-away comments to be funny for a man that was a hundred years old. We saw the fallout. Bill Bennett quotes from a book -- it's not even his theory; he has exculpatory statements surrounding it -- nobody pays attention to that, and they want big trouble for Bill Bennett.
Freakonomics ... Bennett ... Hannity
Game ... Set ... Match
leave Freakonomics out of this the authors did not make such a claim. The book stated that a black person and a white person living in the same neighborhood, as long as other variables (income, debt, etc.) were the same they had the same likelihood of committing a crime -- not that African Americans were more likely to. The book came to the conclusion that it was social factors that were more likely to determine the probability of committing a crime.
In relation to the words that followed Mr. Bennett's opening remark on the original progam, that opening remark was given far too much play. The words that followed included "morally repugent, reprehensible, outrageous" to put the highlighted remark into context, but most people, including myself originally, jumped on that remark to brand Bennett racist. Shamity, of course, exaggerates, mis-speaks, misleads, because it gets him ratings, which in turn leads to more revenue. One could read the above statements contributed to "Freakonomics" and make a similar statement even though its not directly written in the book. Poor, single parent, teenage parent families are unfortunately more predominant in the AA community, therefore reducing the number of children in those situations (whether it be through abortion or economic opportunities) would reduce the crime rate. Would personally prefer to see the second option put more into play in our country.
There is no non-racist context to Bennett's remarks. The fact that he is now trying to divert attention away from himself onto a book he says he was "quoting" (although the book says nothing of the sort) shows that Bennett knows his remarks were shameful and that he is now attempting to distance himself from his own racism.
You're spinning and reaching. Whether Freakonomics authors specifically noted that "[n]one of our analysis [of abortion and crime] is race-based because the crime data by race is generally not deemed reliable." - it is reasonable to give Bennett the benefit of the doubt here since "Freakonomics advances the theory that legalized abortions have reduced overall crime rates by reducing the number of children growing up in poor, single-parent, or teenage-parent households -- and therefore those who would have been more likely to commit crimes."
One cannot avoid the fact that there is a disproportionately higher crime rate among blacks per percent of population than among whites and that the vast majority of those blacks that commit crimes are from " ... poor, single-parent, or teenage-parent households." This is not a racist position; it is merely a logical conclusion based on statistical fact.
I think it is far more reasonable to believe Bennett on this than to condemn him as a liar based on your unreasonably tenuous attempt to "catch" him on a technicality.
You can debate the validity of theories relating to abortion all day long, but the point is that Freakonomics DOESN'T make a correlation between race and crime that may have been prevented by abortion. That only leaves a handful of ways to look at Bennett's comment, which was that aborting ALL black babies -- not just poor ones -- would reduce crime rates.
He may believe that what he said is what he read in Freakonomics, which reveals some frightening things about the way he thinks.
He may believe what he said and is ducking behind Freakonomics to get out of the line of fire.
He may be promoting the agenda of a power base that recognizes that keeping public debate focused on the things that divide us is the fastest and most effective way to keep us from focusing on the things that threaten us all.
There's really not much mystery about what motivates Hannity, though. He's a self-impotant little schmuck. If it's idiotic, you can pretty much count on him saying it.
"My Winning Strategy for Roulette: Never Bet On Black!!!"
I heard the entire comment. Some guy was asking if there were no abortions then there would be plenty of people to pay into social security. So it was a stab at abortion and the social security system. Bill's AA response was probally a little inappropriate, but he shouldn't be shot for it. If he had said that those aborted would be more likely to be in jail, or unemployed, and would be a tax, and therefore a social security, burden then it would have been more appropriate. It would have addressed the statistics between abortion and taxes as opposed to race and taxes. It also would be more in line with the Freakonomics claims, though still not a quote. I used to actually watch FOX to entertain opposition arguments, but Hannity, Couter and O'Really lie so much its pointless.
You could abort every Cuban-American (mostly Miami), Mexican-American (ditto with major props to Cali, Tejas & Chi-Town), not to mention every other ethnicity's babies (including whites...whatever they are) if you want to reduce crime!!! Quite simplistic..."NO BABIES NO CRIME"
Constantly he lies for his book. Republicans will let Rice run as their candidate? No, there is no chance of that.
Have any of you ever heard of the Cound of Conservative Citizens (CCC)? This council was founded in 1985 by Gordon Lee Baum and is headquarted in St. Louis, MO. An interesting fact is that Sen. Lott has spoken at and attended at CCC meetings. Well, a little know fact that the CCC is reported to be white separatist council. It idealology is that of inflaming the fears and resentments of Southern whites in regards to black-on-white crime, non-white immigration and attacks on the Confederate flag as well as other issues related to "traditional" Souther culture. Other connections to this council: Senator Jesse Helms, former Governors Guy Hunt of Alabama and Kirk Fordice of Mississipi. David Duke, Mark Cotterill and Chris Temple.
For more information:
[link to www.militia-watchdog.org]
[link to www.sourcewatch.org]
I am looking for more information on Bill Bennett as well. It's not a double standard if they hang with known sepratists...aka white supremacists...aka racists...aka...you get the point.