Hannity claimed Obama was "bashing America" when he criticized Bush's Afghanistan policy
SUMMARY: On Hannity's America, Sean Hannity asserted that Sen. Barack Obama was "bashing America" and "accus[ing] U.S. soldiers of killing innocent Afghani civilians" during a campaign appearance. In fact, accounts of civilian casualties resulting from U.S. air strikes in Afghanistan have been widely reported, and Obama expressed support for increasing the number of troops in Afghanistan so the U.S. military is not so reliant on air strikes in the region. Hannity has repeatedly mischaracterized Obama's comments on Afghanistan.
On the August 19 edition of Fox News' Hannity's America, host Sean Hannity asserted that Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) was "bashing America" and "accus[ing] U.S. soldiers of killing innocent Afghani civilians" during an August 13 campaign appearance in Nashua, New Hampshire. In fact, as the video, which Hannity aired, makes clear, Obama criticized the shortage of troops in Afghanistan, saying: "We've got to get the job done there [in Afghanistan] and that requires us to have enough troops so that we're not just air-raiding villages and killing civilians, which is causing enormous pressure over there."
As Media Matters for America noted in response to Hannity's earlier mischaracterizations of Obama's comments, U.S. air strikes in Afghanistan -- and accounts of resulting civilian casualties -- have been widely reported in the media and have reportedly provoked criticism from Afghan President Hamid Karzai and a British commander stationed there. Additionally, as the Associated Press reported in a "Fact Check" responding to conservative attacks on Obama, "Western forces have been killing civilians at a faster rate than the insurgents." Further, in a July 7 article on NATO and U.S. air strikes reported to have killed more than 100 Afghan civilians, Reuters cited the assessment of military analysts that "a shortage of ground troops means commanders often turn to air power."
Following his assertions that Obama was "bashing America" and "accus[ing] soldiers of killing innocent Afghanis" during his August 13 remarks, Hannity asked: "Does that sound familiar?" and proceeded to air two audio clips featuring 2004 Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry, the first taken from Kerry's 1971 testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the second taken from his interview on the December 4, 2005, broadcast of CBS' Face the Nation.
The first clip Hannity aired was of Kerry asserting, "They personally raped, cut off the ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human gentiles and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in the fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan," but Hannity did not note that Kerry, who testified in his capacity as spokesman for the Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW), stated at the time that he was relating the stories of other Vietnam veterans who came home and testified to their personal experiences in what was known as the Winter Soldier Investigation, which VVAW had commissioned a few months earlier in Detroit, Michigan. Kerry was not, as Hannity suggested, making his own judgments about the soldiers' conduct. Additionally, as Media Matters documented, in an August 3, 2004, appearance on Fox News' Hannity & Colmes, co-hosted by Hannity, retired Gen. Tommy Franks stated in response to Kerry's testimony, "I'm not sure that -- that activities like that didn't take place. In fact, quite the contrary. I'm sure that they did."
In the second clip, Hannity aired video of Kerry saying on the December 4, 2005, broadcast of Face the Nation, "There is no reason ... that young American soldiers need to be going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night terrorizing kids and children," but did not note that Kerry's comment regarding the sometimes abusive treatment of Iraqi civilians during American-led raids was supported by an International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) report, a United States Institute of Peace (USIP) report, and news accounts detailing such raids, as Media Matters also documented.
From the August 19 edition of Fox News' Hannity's America:
HANNITY: Hi, everybody. Welcome to a new edition of Hannity's America. I'm Sean Hannity. We get right to our top story tonight. The far-left wing of the Democratic base has hijacked their own party and kicked centrism into the curb. Democratic presidential candidates are catering to this liberal extremism in an effort to appeal to primary voters. You will not believe some of the outrageous things that they have been saying. Let's take a look.
[begin video clip]
[...]
HANNITY: But some of the biggest Democratic victories last fall were by candidates who hardly fit the netroots mold. Jon Tester of Montana is hardly a left-winger, and the same can be said of Jim Webb in Virginia. Some people are even surprised that freshman Congressman Keith Schuler of North Carolina is a Democrat. For every netroot champion, like Ned Lamont -- well, maybe he's not the best example. For every far-left-winger who won, there's also a moderate. Just ask the tax-cutting Senator Claire McCaskill from Missouri or the pro-life Bob Casey Jr. from Pennsylvania.
In spite of all of that, the presidential candidates have decided they must pander to the pajama-wearing crowd. The most obvious example of this is with the war in Iraq. Like a parade of white flags, they get up in front of liberal audiences and tell the world that the war is lost.
SEN. HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON (D-NY) [video clip]: It has to start with bringing our troops out of the civil war that is raging in Iraq.
OBAMA [video clip]: We have to begin a phased withdrawal, have our combat troops out by March 31st of next year.
FORMER SEN. JOHN EDWARDS (D-NC) [video clip]: We need to be bringing home our men and women from Iraq. That's what America needs to be doing.
HANNITY: But retreating is one thing; bashing America is another. Earlier this week, Barack Obama took the rhetoric to new heights when he accused U.S. soldiers of killing innocent Afghani civilians.
OBAMA [video clip]: We've got to get the job done there. And that requires us to have enough troops that we're not just air-raiding villages and killing civilians, which is causing enormous problems there.
HANNITY: Does that sound familiar?
KERRY [audio clip]: They had personally raped, cut off the ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in the fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan.
HANNITY: In case you thought that sort of left-wing rhetoric had gone the way of Senator Kerry's presidential campaign, think again.
KERRY [video clip]: There is no reason, Bob, that young American soldiers need to be going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night terrorizing kids and children.
This must be Hannity's assignment for this campaign season...lie about Barack Obama. He's doing a bang-up job of it, too.
You expect him to say anything else? This isn't shocking, this is totally routine now. If Bush said the sky was bright pink, the entire McMedia crew would be screaming at all who still called it blue. We've known this for quite a while now.
I was just mentioning Hannity elsewhere. So type the devil's name and he appears now? The only thing vaguely positive about him would be his consistency. Otherwise a real waste of protoplasm.
unfortunately, what kerry said about vietnam was not left wing rhetoric. a lot of those things happened. the real hero at my lai was an officer who ordered his helicopter to land and told william calley that if he did not stop shooting civilians, including babies, that he would have his men turn their weapons on calley and his men.
OBAMA "... that requires us to have enough troops that we're not just air-raiding villages and killing civilians..."
So, Obama's saying we shouldn't be doing these things.Just as Kerry said our troops shouldn't be going into homes at night terrorizing civilians.
My only questiion is, does Hannity believe that we should be doing these things, or is he such a special child that he actually thinks horrible things don't happen in war unless you talk about them?
I'm no supporter of hannity, but the anti-military attitude and the overwhelming attitude that America should sit back, not take any action if there is even the slightest risk of civilian casualty, and basically handcuff itself from going after terrorists that are hiding is disgusting.
Barack says that we need a plan "that requires us to have enough troops that we're not just air-raiding villages and killing civilians." Well, if you did something like that, you would have a door to door ground war like Bush has in Iraq...which obviously isn't working too well, and is resulting in unnecessary American death. I haven't heard about to many American deaths during air raids, have you? Additionally, if you kill a few known terrorists with a cruise missile, but happen to have a few civilian casualties...too bad, its war...we have to kill the bad guys. We aren't targeting little innocent johnny's house for no reason other than to make a fireworks show, or is that what you people think our military does for giggles?
And Kerry said our troops shouldn't be going into homes at night terrorizing civilians? I think mr. kerry is playing on a wonderful media distortion of our military here. Look at how the media falsified nearly everything about the so called "Haditha Massacre." Once investigated, most of the marines are having the charges against them dropped because it never happened the way the military-hating media portrayed it.
Please stop taking the testimony of the terrorists as truth about the conduct of our troops and our military over there...they know how to create propaganda like no other.
"I'm no supporter of hannity, but the anti-military attitude and the overwhelming attitude that America should sit back, not take any action if there is even the slightest risk of civilian casualty, and basically handcuff itself from going after terrorists that are hiding is disgusting."--john
Just who do you think is arguing that? Who is saying we shouldn't take any action if there is even the slightest risk of civilian casualty?
I don't know whose argument you are referring to, but it seems that is not what is being argued.
Obama appears to be arguing for a new strategy to accomplish the same goal of rooting out terrorists without killing so many civilians. It would seem to make practical sense as this is a war of hearts and minds at this point.
Let's not be unfair and mischaracterize his argument here.
I think he's arguing with El Rushbo's lispy liberal character.I used to debate pro wrestler The Iron Sheik.He was an America-hating swarthy fellow, and I was stoned.
The completely anti American anti Human attitude that we shouldnt care one whit how many innocents are killed by psychopathic warmongers is what is unacceptable.
"...how many innocents are killed by psychopathic warmongers..."
You're not doing too good of a job showing that you are pro-american by calling our troops psychopathic warmongers (they are the ones doing the killing, ultimately). And if you meant to be referring to the politicians, I would think that you should be thanking them for continuing the anti-terror war campaign in afghanistan...isn't that where even the "progressives" believe the terrorists to be mainly hiding?
Face it, the anti-war/anti-military attitude in here is obvious, and also sad because that is the attitude the terrorists need from more Americans so they can do their work with no resistance.
Nice try spinning that comment obviosly what I was talking about using the same overheated rhetoric as you employ was the warmonger lets get as many Americans killed as we possibly can crowd, like YOU and the bloviators carrying water for this policy. George Bush is giving the terrorists all they could possibly ask for. I am sure Osama has a pin up poster of George Bush in his bedroom and thanks Allah for him every night. Iraq had NOTHING to do with a war on Islamic extremist terrorism. If THEY had been the point of this war then invading the most secular Islamic Nation in the region was sheer insanity. Al Quedas stated purpose is to bring all secular Islamic countries under Islamic controlled governments. He couldnt have even DREAMED of bringing this about in Iraq so George W Gump did it for him, maybe it was a birthday present. Glad we FINALLY got around to taking Afghanistan seriously what we do there is important. IF we had finished the job there and helped rebuild that country in the first place instead of taking a Halliburton time out to fight a more profit friendly war in Iraq you would have a point, we didnt, you dont.
You criticize me for spinning my statement about you, thats fine...but then you falsly make the assumption that "...YOU and the bloviators carrying water for this policy." The hypocrisy abounds. I do not support the current policy, or the the policy that has been in place since the Saddam regime was toppled. Trying to train a foreign army/police force and stand up a goverment that continues to fail despite unlimited aid from the US is stupid and a waste of time/money. I'm not sure what the best route for us is at this point, but I think getting out of there, investing all this money in the domestic needs of America, and allowing the members of the "religion of peace" to annihilate eachother on their own time/money/agenda sounds pretty good to me.
Its not hypocrisy for ME to treat YOU the way you are treating us. That is making baseless assertions based on overheated rhetoric and insulting mischaracterizations. In fact it makes THAT VERY POINT. See how easy it is to do? I can do it all day, no reason to know anything or use logic, facts or insight just spew out insulting characterizations of YOU guys just like YOU did about us. Dont like it done to YOU? I suggest you stop doing it to US.
"Its not hypocrisy for ME to treat YOU the way you are treating us." --Yes is it is, when you condemn my behavior and then you participate in the same kind. If you dont like/approve of it, dont participate in it -- very simple.
"That is making baseless assertions based on overheated rhetoric and insulting mischaracterizations." -- Oh, my friend...the following comment form you meets all three of the categories above: "...YOU and the bloviators carrying water for this policy." It is a baseless assertion because you do not know that I and other conservatives support Bush's policy (which I and many smart conservatives do not). It is overheated rhetoric and an insulting mischaracterization because, again, myself and many others do not support this policy and it insults me to be thought of as a Bush-bot fool who follows him into the darkness without questioning his actions and intentions.
We both could care less if we offend eachother, so can we please move past criticizing and condeming eachother for minor opinionated statements about how much we despise eachother's political leanings and discuss the topic at hand? I'd rather hear your take on what you think we should do in Iraq or Afghanistan (like I stated), because I really dont think i've ever read any ideas that are on topic from you, only criticism of other's behavior on this board.
John boy Stop taking your talking points from the pigman and the RNC It is the asshole you voted for twice that put us in this position. Why do you continute to support thiese crminals after they have pissed all over the constituion and bill of rights?
The RNC got us into this? I guess if you ignore all the democrats in congress who voted to authorize us to go to war that would be the case. "Pissed" all over the constitution and bill of rights? If you want to make that claim at least provide a few examples, and cite the parts that have been violated. Exactly what part of the bill of rights have you been denied since the evil president bush took office?
You couldnt even come up with one example in over a day? I was foolish to expect anything more than nothing from a hate filled hot air bag.
Lets see Bush says he will wiretap anyone he wants without a warrant, thats the fourth amendment. Padilla was held for three years with no charges, and we were told he would NEVER be brought to trial if Bush didnt WANT to bring him to trial so much for our sixth amendment right to a speedy trial (three years in solitary without access to a lawyer hardly qualifies as speedy) I guess thats only about20% of our Bill of Rights. Any marginally informed person knows about these things.
"Lets see Bush says he will wiretap anyone he wants without a warrant, thats the fourth amendment." --Bush isnt the sole reason wiretapping exists. It isn't a violation of anything when the Congress signs into law the Patriot Act. Congress makes the laws in this country, they have the power to alter/amend the constitution as necessary. We the people elect representatives who we believe will represent our values and do what is best for the country. If you dont agree with the law and process of government to alter it, thats fine, but it doesnt mean something illegal is happening.
The fact that you defend Padilla at this point in time is scary. The man is a convicted felon and enemy of America. Additionally, had he been given a trial that you deem as "speedy" (lets say within a couple months of his arrest) he would have been convicted of his crimes sooner, but would have went directly to sitting in a cell for just as long. I'm happy that our government took the time gather complete evidence against this America hating terrorist. Him being behind bars for the past 3 years has KEPT AMERICANS SAFE from any terrorist activity he may have sparked.
What really amazes me about "conservative" so called news is how they refuse to deal in reality. With the suicide rate for soldiers at the highest rate in 26 years www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/08/16/ap4026007.html to pretend that this war has not effected our troops is insane. To "conservatives" bashing is telling the truth. This war is hell on our troops. The frequent deployments has caused great harm to their family life as well as there own mental well being. To pretend otherwise is just that pretending. Soldiers are humans capable of doing the same thing everyone else is cable of (good and bad). The problem with conservative radio and so-called news is their loyalty is to their master, Junior, Dick and the Republican party not in reporting the truth.
I wonder, has Karl Rove started ghost writing the script for Hannity's America? Or, has he been doing it all along? Seems like a logial progression for the "BRAIN".
A brain in "hannity's homeland"? Now what on earth would they do with something like that?
Make tacos? No, sesos traditionally aren't made from pigs.
TACOS?!?
You expect great homelandicans to eat Mexican food?!?
Just scramble up some eggs with them brains, and stuff your crispy corn shells south of the border, Haysoos... (double entendre intended)
"took the rhetoric to new heights" . . .
thankfully, we have the calm, sober, reflective analysis of Hannity to counter this.
I'm of course kidding.
Civilian deaths in war? No, that never happens! Instead of considering--as Obama does--such unfortunate consequences of war and the strategic fallout they have for our military on the ground, let's just act like they never happen. (Notice Obama does of course not say the deaths are intentional.) Can anyone say "support the troops"? Maybe we can stretch this pointless Iraq policy debacle out for another 10 years, then Hannity can hold more "freedom concerts" in which he books lame, culturally backwater country-music acts and--with the fawning help of Olly North--hurls gay epithets at Colmes. Yes, that's much better than facing the reality of civilian casualties.
kidding again.
Before I comment on this subject, I am going to wait for the rebuttal on "Colmes' America". There is a "Colmes' America"; is there not?
I mean Fox News is "fair and balanced" and wouldn't just give an hour to their insanely-far-right commentator without giving equal time to Alan Colmes. Would they?
We're all waiting for Alan to grow a spine and take on his 'co-host', which is an absurd term to use here, I know. 'Colmes' America'--what a radical concept: no bombast, thoughtful discussion, opposing views challenging one another respectfully, no deliberate misinterpretation of public figures' comments...nah, it'll never work, unless we can raise the IQ of FOX viewers! But it is worth wishing for.
I'm going to confess that, once again, I could not watch this creep doing his routine, but I did read the transcript. I like Onionhead's comment--there is a 'Colmes' America' isn't there? Well, when seany's ratings finally slip, and as we can see the far right is getting desperate here with their extremism, then you can bet FOX will tilt left and start selling only that viewpoint. I welcome some balance; not more of one and less of the other. FOX, however, has yet to live up to its 'fair and balanced' claim.
Sean Hannity is the Democratic Party's best friend.
The stuff about Tester and McCaskill and Webb is just hilarious - he actually thinks they weren't supported by the netroots. Is there anyone more politically unaware than Hannity? Apparently not, because the rest of this report is a ringing endorsement for the Dems.
First, he shows how many Dems won in the last election, demonstrating the how the left is now the majority position of Americans.
Then he plays "patriotic" music behind the Dem candidates saying we need to get our troops out - something the vast majority of Americans agree with. He follows with a clip of Obama explaining we need to get the job done in Afghanistan - again, a mainstream position.
He then shows Kerry - who, given Bush's high negatives, reminds everyone of how bad things have gotten since 2004. And Kerry's denouncing the Vietnam War IN UNIFORM, reminding us that Kerry is a combat vet (unlike Bush), and he led the opposition to the last huge mistake America made.
Then Hannity shows Kerry making the equivalence between Iraq and Vietnam - playing into the concerns the majority of Americans have about Iraq right now!
Honestly, does Hannity think he's made his case? He couldn't have written a better commercial for the Dems.
No surprise. Surely no one expects any reasonable response from Hannity. Poor thing has problems with his analysis skills. If any statement is made, he always deciphers it through his far, far to the right bias. It is a given that he will make such stupid evaluations. Obviously, Media Matters is not only committed to good analysis but also to making fair assessments of what is said by either liberals as well as the far right conservatives. Thank you for finally leveling the playing field with your evaluations of their biased statements. mari
Hannity is impugning the patriotism of those who criticize the policies of the Bush Administration. Obama is defending America's good name against a rogue President, but that's not what's important to Hannity. He serves at the pleasure of the President, and will defend Bush until his dying breath, no matter what it takes.
When is the Media Matters or anyone, going to start looking into Hannity's Wounded Veterans Concert Rip-offs? Out of a $14,503,615 in fund balances at the end of 2006, ONLY $397,900, were actually given out to the wounded ,or school scholarships ! As reported in Freedom Alliance/ Wounded Veterans, 2006 Tax Form 990 (501c) to the IRS. John 174541842, What country of origin, did 53 of the 124 suicide bombers come from? Here's a hint, it isn't Iraq!
John: 174541842?
Isn't that the sign the guy in the rainbow wig holds up at football games?
So if you are critical of the Afghan policy you are Anti American? Was it Anti American when Hannity was critical of Clintons Bosnian policy?
Sean Hannity's America looks a lot like Nikita Khrushchev's Russia.
I'm not surprised.
Sean's America would look more like Winston Smith's Oceania
C'mon, Easy
You're being unfair to Nikita.
Now... if you had said STALIN'S Russia...
While I obviously do not have any first hand experiences of activities in Iraq, Afghanistan or Vietnam it is widely reported that sometimes our soldiers will inevitably kill or injure innocent civilians. Sometimes this is not an accident. Would Sean Hannity not have this reported? Would the right wing call us traitors for acknowledging that this does go on & it needs to be fixed? Yes, I suppose they would. Were this a war started by a Democratic president, would they want it reported then? I tend to think yes, they would.
Isn't it funny that every time Kerry's testimony is quoted or played by a conservative, the first few words of the sentence that Kerry starts is cut out?
"They told the stories at times they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, tape wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the country side of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war, and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this country."
http://www.nationalreview.com/document/kerry200404231047.asp
It is very important for Hannity to hide the fact that Kerry was reporting on the accounts highly decorated veterans.
Well Hannity is just trying to be a louder, lack of knowledge buffoon like O'REILLY! What Kerry said and I think all should in-fact understand. These nighttime house-to-house raids were in-fact happening and are happening now in Iraq and Afghanistan as well.
I as a 10-year-old girl walked into my home and it had been broke into and everything was thrown around or missing. I felt terrorized! I though had a phone to call the police and talk to someone in my language, to get instructions of what to do. Luckily, my mom pulled up right after I hung up. I cannot imagine living that day and night. You can spin words all you want, but to those civilians that is what they feel. I never took what Kerry said anymore than what the whole context of that conversation meant. He was saying the Iraq and Afghani Police that had been trained or helping the U.S. soldiers, should have done the night raids. The Iraqi & Afghani troop knew their language, and they needed to step-up. So Hannity, get your facts straight. Kerry was not saying our troops were terrorist, but the consequences for the families would feel the threat. Just stop Hannity we know who you are and ARE NOT.
I don't know what is worst. Having your voice to Land on Deaf Ears or Having Your Actions Unseen Through Open Eyes!Barbara Dietrich, R.N.