Hannity falsely claimed Dem plan includes "nothing about ... increasing security in this country"
On the January 2 edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes, co-host Sean Hannity falsely claimed that House Democrats' plan for the first 100 hours of the 110th Congress includes "nothing about ... enhancing or increasing our security in this country." However, as Media Matters for America has noted, House Democrats have announced their intention to introduce legislation to implement recommendations by the 9-11 Commission as part of their initial slate of legislation.
The plan outlined on the House Democratic leader's website, titled "100 Hours," includes a claim that Democrats intend to "make our nation safer and we will begin by implementing the recommendations of the independent, bipartisan 9/11 Commission." As Media Matters has noted, there are several recommendations of the 9-11 Commission that have not been enacted that members of the commission say could be implemented by the Democratic Congress.
From the January 2 edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes:
DICK MORRIS (Fox News political analyst): And the other thing is, remember, these guys aren't legislating. They're writing their party platform. They know these bills aren't going anywhere. They know these are one-house bills. They're passing them so that they can make a party statement.
HANNITY: Get on the record. All right, look at how uninspiring, though. Minimum wage, look, I'm not saying any of these issues are unimportant --
MORRIS: Minimum wage will pass. It needs to.
HANNITY: Minimum wage, stem cells, student loans, and, laughably, ethics by Democrats. Is that -- we've got a war on terror. We're in the middle of a war in Iraq. We still don't have a comprehensive position by the Democratic Party. Nothing about controlling our borders, enhancing or increasing our security in this country. It's kind of uninspiring. This is the best they've got? This is their --
MORRIS: It's not a bad opening package. Minimum wage has broad, broad support.
HANNITY: Dick, this is 1938. You said it to me.
MORRIS: And it's key to -- oh, yes, of course.
HANNITY: So it's 1938, and the best they can come up with is stem cells?
MORRIS: You know what they really need to do? Pass the [Sen. Joseph] Lieberman [CT] bill. There's a bill in the United States Senate, introduced by 28 senators, including some real right-wingers, like Jeff Sessions [R] of Alabama and some liberals. And it requires that, within 10 years, every car in America be flex-fuel, be able to run on diesel or on gasoline, and requires that they all be plug-ins.
Knows Hannity is a moron. It is now clear he is a liar as well. I am shocked, shocked I say that there is gambling, I mean dissembling on Fox propaganda network.
Is Hannity a liar, or just a complete moron? I'm thinking he's probably more of the latter really. He's just regurgitating the daily talking points, and hyping the most recent things that the republicans tell him to say. I fear that he indeed does not do his own research, probably doesn't read too much about what is going on, or actually look into things, he just accepts carte blanche, and that's being a moron, or at least being ignorant of what is going on around you. Hannity, stop listening to Rush and believing everything he says. Take Colmes, even though he's not as "loud" sometimes as I wish he would be, he comes across as the more intellectual, and well thought out person of the duo.
Is Hannity a liar, or just a complete moron? I'm thinking he's probably more of the latter really.
If Hannity is such a moron and liar, then why do you bother refuting everything he says? Why not just completely ignore him? What's the point of responding to somebody who is a liar and a moron?
Propaganda is so much more effective when the other side isnt heard. We refute him because he is WRONG. We need to have the actual facts out there or some uninformed person might accidentally take him seriously. Are you really saying that a moron or liar with a mike CANT possibly misinform?
he's a moron.
I mean.
If we allow him to spew forth his lies, and his misinformation, then people start believing (and I believe in many cases already in watching and listening to his shows) what he is saying. If the people who disagree with him ignore him and don't call him to the carpet for the lies that he does make and promote, then he gains a foothold, and the debate in this country takes a sharp turn to the right (which it has, look at the media coverage of just about anything), and we only hear one side of the story, or in Hannity's case, one side which is mostly lies. Does Hannity drop a nugget of truth here and there? Sure, but for the most part, he gets an hour a day to promote his "news" show, and not be accurate about hardly anything. That's why we don't ignore him.
So the new Congressional majority is subject to what criticism from what "media" hack?
That they'll not "enhance or increase our security in this country"?
Whoa, talk about not only judging that new Congressional majority before they're even seated!...
...but judging them on something that is not even in their jurisdiction!
"Our security in this country" (as that Fox hack says), as far as the Federal Government is concerned, concerns the...
Federal Bureau of Investigation
U.S. Customs Service (to keep those murderous saudi al-qeada, the president's "good friends" and business partners, out of this country)
Central Intelligence Agency
And all the law enforcement that the balance of the administration of the Federal Government, and of the State and City Governments, can provide the American People.
Just what does the new Congressional majority have to do with that?
Doesn't the idiot hack hannity know the difference beteween the functions and responsibilities of the ADMINISTRATION of our Federal Government, and the duties of our Legislators?
What a worthless RNC hack that hannity is, to invoke "our security in this country"...
...when all he really means to do is undermine the American People's confidence in their new Congressional majority...
...who must stand-by (or otherwise only oversee) the functions and responsibilities of the Federal Government.
Functions and responsibilities which are of course "our security in this country".
"What a worthless RNC hack that hannity is, to invoke "our security in this country"...
...when all he really means to do is undermine the American People's confidence in their new Congressional majority... "
He is a favorite of the king's court, being personall invited to share council among other ass-hacks in carrying out Bush political directives (see pre-election). So people think Bush will be a cooperative prez from now on? Whatta joke. Bush still has his dogs on a leash like this one, but is anyone really taking Insanity's worthless punditry seriously?
All the rightwing hacks were on their hind legs with their tongues hanging out as Bush hand-fed them from a bag of Purina Hack Chow.
(By the way, I'm joking)
Get ready for a two-year slog through a muddy quagmire of Fox lies about Democrats. Before it's over, we'll hear them blame the Democrats for Iraq, 9/11, the deficit, the national debt, you name a Bush failing and Fox will pin that tail on the Donkeys.
O'Reilly, Hannity and the rest of Fox's Red Herring line up are gearing up; it's lying season 24/7 on Fox!
Their battle cry should be a rip off of the thing.
"It's SMEARING TIME!"
I hope MMFA have enough space on their server. They're going to be busier than ever with the pathetic bunch of whiners at Fox News alone.
I actually actually have tune in to his show from time to time to actually hear first hand what he actually say in the context of his sho (just out of a morbid curiosity). I can only take about 4 minutes before I just have to turn the channel. I honestly believe that he doesn't have a clue and is just an overpaid parrot. I usually try to give people the benefit of the doubt, but i have no sympathy for this moron.
. . . if only those ugly Dems would go ahead and schedule the Coronation of George the Simpleton: no more troublesome elections, George In Charge would use the Allen Bill to call up the (remnants) of the Reserves and National Guard, and truly SECURE the nation against domestic dissent!
wakes up and moves away from extreme conservative views why does the media continue pile on the extreme conservative message? Why do we need so many in the mode of Hannity, Scarborough, O'Reilly, Beck, Limbaugh, the whole Salem crew? Why is there only one Olbermann?
"Why is there only one Olbermann?"
Because people can only take so much insanity in one day. Most people don't like listening to commentators who compare politicians to Nazis. That's just far left insanity. One Keith Olbermann is enough. No one watches the guy the way it is. I don't know why you would want to have another ratings disaster.
"Most people don't like listening to commentators who compare politicians to Nazis."
Yeah, Hannity, O'Reilly, Beck, Coulter, Malkin, Savage, et al. never ever compare politicians to Nazis. That's just "far left insanity."
[link to mediamatters.org] [link to mediamatters.org] [link to mediamatters.org] [link to mediamatters.org] [link to mediamatters.org] [link to mediamatters.org] [link to mediamatters.org] [link to mediamatters.org] [link to mediamatters.org] [link to mediamatters.org] [link to mediamatters.org] [link to mediamatters.org] [link to mediamatters.org]
I'll give you that O'Reilly, Beck, and Coulter definetely did that. But Hannity and Dobson didn't. Hannity was merely making the point that if you extend special rights to one group of people then you will have to extend special rights to another group of people. He never compared any politician to a Nazi. The same goes for Dobson. He never compared any politician to a Nazi. It's his opinion, (and many others) that the mass destruction of human embryos is mass murder. He didn't compare any politician to Hitler. He simply said that there are similarities in the two situations.
Hannity's comments about Ellison's use of the Koran being like a Nazi using Mein Kampf is a direct comparison. And it has nothing to do with "special rights." Ellison isn't being given any special rights when he chooses to incorporate the Koran in his swearing in ceremony. It's a given right. And in case it escaped you, Mein Kampf is not a religious text.
And as for Dobson comparing stem cell research with Nazi experiments, even Focus on the Family apologized for that, yet you still want to defend it?
I'm not defending it. I disagree with what he said. My point simply was that he didn't compare any politicians with Nazis. He simply said that the Halocaust is comparable with the mass destruction of human embryos. I don't believe that the destruction of human embryos is comparable to the Halocaust, but Dobson didn't insinuate that Democratic politicians are sympathetic to Nazi thinking. That was my point.
It may have been a Republican that Dobson called out by name, but the point still stands. Here is what Dobson said:
"In World War II, the Nazis experimented on human beings in horrible ways in the concentration camps, and I imagine, if you wanted to take the time to read about it, there would have been some discoveries there that benefited mankind. You know, if you take a utilitarian approach, that if something results in good, then it is good. But that's obviously not true. We condemn what the Nazis did because there are some things that we always could do but we haven't done, because science always has to be guided by ethics and by morality. And you remove ethics and morality, and you get what happened in Nazi Germany. That's why to Senator [Senate Majority Leader Bill] Frist [R-TN] and the others who are saying, 'Look what may be accomplished.' Yeah, but there's another issue, there's a higher order of ethics here."
about far-left insanity. No one is interested in far-right insanity anymore yet you can't escape it. And if you call fair wages, health care, prudent foreign policy, oversight, government for the PEOPLE not wealthy corporations and special interests left-wing insanity -- BRING IT ON.
"No one is interested in far-right insanity anymore yet you can't escape it."
Then why is it that people who you think are far right like Limbaugh and Hannity are so popular? Why do they have such a big audience when liberal talk radio has failed so miserably?
have their dedicated audiences. That doesn't mean the majority of the people in this country agree with them. Why does a shrinking pool of thought get so much air time?
"Why does a shrinking pool of thought get so much air time?"
If it's really a "shrinking pool of thought" then why do they still dominate liberals in the rating. Why is it that conservatives like Limbaugh and Hannity have been so successful while liberals like Al Franken and Rhandi Rhodes have failed so miserably? Conservatism isn't shrinking at all. As many people are tuning in to listen to Rush and Hannity as they always have. Liberal talk radio is still a miserable failure.
about radio audiences. I rarely listen to the radio. Most people I know don't listen to the radio.
How is conservatism not shrinking? There are staunch conservatives who would never vote Democratic, but the swing voters and those not idealogically rigid aren't buying the conservative message anymore. The people have spoken and now the Dems have a 31 seat majority in the House. The last time the Repubs have had more than a 30 seat majority was in 1947. Democrats have also taken the majority of governorships for the first time in 12 years and 2008 also looks good to pick up more senate seats.
HANNITY [referring to Democratic proposals]: "Minimum wage, stem cells, student loans, and. laughably, ethics by Democrats . . ."
Wow Sean, if you think Democrats having ethics is "laughable", you must have been cracked up over Scooter Libby, Duke Cunningham, Tom Delay, and Mark Foley . . .
says "Nothing about controlling our borders, enhancing or increasing our security in this country." what does he mean? If these things are a problem after 12 years of repub controlled house and senate and 6 years of repub controlled EVERYTHING maybe the repubs have done a shi**y job and it's time to let the Democrats take over
If the Democrats continue supporting Israeli war crimes against arabs and support the escalation of the Iraq conflict and support bombing Iran without provocation, of course the nation will become less secure....but then these are policies pursued by BOTH parties and neither side is actually doing anything to end this ridiculous racist crusade against Islam.
So don't expect actual security any time soon. You may see an increase in insecurity and "security forces", aka a police state, but don't expect security. Real security don't sell war to the masses.
in your assessment. If the democratic party continues on the path it has been on for decades, there will be NO change.
We should certainly support Israel as a democracy, yet at the same time, we should demand that they restore human rights to the Palestinians.
The first 100 hours agenda is certainly worthwhile, but it doesn't address the root causes of our security problems. We have the means to secure our borders and cool the tempers in the Mid-East. That would cost us only a tiny fraction of what we are currently spending to inflame those tempers and drive the unemployed to our shores.
Hannity may be correct on this one, but I doubt that he knows why.