Hannity supports his claim that Obama is "an ideologue" with falsehood
SUMMARY: While interviewing Rudy Giuliani, Sean Hannity repeated the false claim that "[s]ixty-one" Guantánamo detainees who have been released are "back on the battlefield" to support his assertion that President Barack Obama is "an ideologue." Hannity and Giuliani also repeated the claims that fiscal stimulus packages were ineffective during the Great Depression and during Japan's "lost decade," but both those claims have been challenged by economists.
During the January 23 edition of Fox News' Hannity, while interviewing former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, host Sean Hannity repeated the false claim that "[s]ixty-one people we know now were released [from Guantánamo] and now they're back on the battlefield" to support his assertion that President Barack Obama is "an ideologue." Hannity and Giuliani also repeated the claims that fiscal stimulus packages were ineffective during the Great Depression and during Japan's "lost decade," but both those claims have been challenged by economists.
Contrary to Hannity's claim that "[s]ixty-one" detainees who have been released are "back on the battlefield," according to the Pentagon, that figure includes 43 former prisoners who are suspected of, but have not been confirmed as, having "return[ed] to the fight," as Media Matters for America has documented. Indeed, during a January 13 press conference, Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell stated: "The new numbers are, we believe, 18 confirmed and 43 suspected of returning to the fight. So 61 in all former Guantanamo detainees are confirmed or suspected of returning to the fight." Moreover, even the Pentagon's claim that it has confirmed that 18 former Guantánamo detainees have returned to the battlefield has been challenged by experts.
In addition, after Giuliani stated, "[I]f you think you're going to get your way out of this recession by all kinds of social programs, welfare programs, you're just going to make it much worse," Hannity claimed: "[T]he Japanese economy was suffering, in the '90s, they had eight separate stimulus packages that created, in their history, massive debt. It was unprecedented. And it didn't work." However, as Media Matters documented, according to prominent economists, economic conditions were improving in Japan before the Japanese government temporarily abandoned stimulus spending in an attempt to reduce the deficit. Nobel laureate and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman, for one, points to Japan's fiscal stimulus packages as having "probably prevented a weak economy from plunging into an actual depression."
Moreover, Hannity allowed Giuliani to suggest that stimulus spending during the Great Depression did not work. Giuliani claimed that "the actions of the New Deal, which may have had other reasons for them, did not work from the point of view of solving the Depression. In fact, by 1936, '37, '38, the Depression was arguably just as bad as it was in 1929." But as Media Matters has documented, the suggestion that the New Deal failed has been flatly rejected by some prominent economists, including Krugman, who has said that President Franklin D. Roosevelt did not go far enough to end the crisis and that his attempts to balance the budget hindered recovery.
From the January 23 edition of Fox News' Hannity:
HANNITY: Let's start with, you know, closing down Gitmo. Is this -- I guess the simplest question is: Does this make America safer?
GIULIANI: In my personal opinion, no. I was -- I was -- as a candidate, as you remember, I was against closing Guantánamo -- several times took that position in Republican debates. I think that you shouldn't close it down until you have a real plan of what you're going to do with these people, and until then, you got to keep it there.
What are you going to do? Send them to the United States, or -- nobody wants them. You try to -- you try to send them to other countries; other countries don't want them. People that we have released from Guantánamo have gotten involved in terrorist activities again and killed other people, innocent people, Americans.
GIULIANI: Yeah. I mean --
HANNITY: Sixty-one people we know now were released and now they're back on the battlefield.
GIULIANI: And we know some of them have engaged in murdering Americans and other people.
GIULIANI: So you have to have a very concrete plan as to what you're going to do with them before you just announce you're going to close them. Here's my hope. My hope is that President Obama announced that campaign promise, got to get it over with, and now is just going to stay there for a long time --
GIULIANI: -- until they get the practical -- the practical plans over with.
HANNITY: But if he spent the better part of the first two days, I mean --
GIULIANI: Well, maybe they --
HANNITY: -- significantly pushing this -- but it was interesting, as I was watching the press conference with his new press secretary, where are you going to put them?
GIULIANI: Well, they don't seem to know.
GIULIANI: Right. So what that might mean is this was a symbolic act rather than a real one. Let's hope that's the case. He satisfies his left-wing supporters by saying I'm closing Guantánamo, and then, you know, two years from now, it's still there.
HANNITY: All right. The big -- the other big issue that is facing this country right now is the economy. He's talking about trillion-dollar deficits as far as we can see. He's saying it's a tax cut, but people who don't pay taxes are going to get a check. Look, you dealt with welfare in New York. Is that welfare?
GIULIANI: Yes. If somebody is not paying taxes, is going to get a check from the government, then that is welfare. You haven't earned it, that's a welfare payment. I think he's going to have to abandon that in light of the economic situation.
HANNITY: Are you thinking that he's really -- he's going to abandon all these things?
GIULIANI: I think so.
GIULIANI: I think, as practicality emerges, you're going to see -- I'm hoping you're going to see a very pragmatic approach. I'm not sure if President Obama is an ideologue or a pragmatist. I am hoping and praying he's a pragmatist. We can get through it if he is.
HANNITY: You know, look, I'm going to tell you, my take on it is just the opposite. I think he's an ideologue. And I'll tell you why.
GIULIANI: Right.
HANNITY: Because, look, he's talking about anywhere from 850 billion to over a trillion dollars in a stimulus package -- trillion-dollar deficits as far as we can see. They're going to move on health care, which is --
GIULIANI: Right.
HANNITY: -- will alter this economy dramatically. Gitmo, I think, is we are redefining the war on terrorism. And we can go straight on down the line. Instituting welfare -- the era of big government is beginning again.
GIULIANI: Right. I hope that he and his people have read The Forgotten Man, Amity Shlaes' book, came out last year. It's -- I think it's back on the best-seller list. Basically, it points out why the recession of 1929, which was a bad one, became the Great Depression of 11 or 12 years. And it became the Great Depression because of unwise government actions, first by Hoover, and then by Roosevelt.
GIULIANI: And if -- if you think you're going to get your way out of this recession by all kinds of social programs, welfare programs, you're just going to make it much worse.
HANNITY: Well, in the 10 years that the Japan -- the Japanese economy was suffering, in the '90s, they had eight separate stimulus packages that created, in their history, massive debt. It was unprecedented.
GIULIANI: Right.
HANNITY: And it didn't work. And you're right, historically --
GIULIANI: And the actions of the New Deal, which may have had other reasons for them, did not work from the point of view of solving the Depression. In fact, by 1936, '37, '38, the Depression was arguably just as bad as it was in 1929.
HANNITY: Yeah, it's true.
GIULIANI: So now you look at that history and you look at the other countries that have tried this, what it says to you is, yes, you have to have a relief program, but it's got to be one that's targeted right to the -- right to the problem.
GIULIANI: The problem is the toxic debt that's sitting on the books of the banks. [former Treasury Secretary Henry] Paulson's first approach, which was then abandoned, probably makes the most sense, which is set up an auction for these toxic assets, the government will come in, make an offer, a low-ball offer, and then private enterprises can come in and try to buy up some of this debt.
So you can take 2 or 300 billion in government funds and you can leverage it with maybe a billion -- a trillion dollars in private funds.















"So you have to have a very concrete plan as to what you're going to do with them before you just announce you're going to close them."
I'd hate to disagree with a living saint like Ghouliani but the time for a concrete plan is BEFORE you start rounding up the usual suspects. Those who planned this fiasco should have had a plan in place on what to do with those we're going to capture, other than torturing them.
What's funny about G. and the others is that they deny the New Deal being a factor in the 30s, and give credit to WWII instead.
But they refuse to see that WWII was the biggest public works, prime-the-pump spending program in history! A complete deficit-buster!
You know why they're this way? Because they are addled.
I have trouble listening to predictions of doom and gloom from the same people who have been so consistently wrong about practically everything for the past eight years.
Iam bothered that we are here talking about whether or not the New Deal was successful - when policy approach was changed 4 or 5 years after the start of gov't stimulus - and whether or not Japan did it right (ooh ther was an uptick in the economy in year 7 if only they stayed the course). I don't know about the rest of you but these stories of whether or not past policies were successful in showing improvement 5 years later scare me to death. I am suppossed to be retired by then - not working until age 70.
I think we need to be studying and understanging what needs to be done for quicker signs of positive impacts from a stimulus. Japan's recovery took a long time even though the world araound them was doing OK. What chance have we with trying to get back going when the whole world is crumbling?
Maybe there isn't a quick fix...or as quickly as we'd like.
Considering that Hannity's talking with presidential nominees who couldn't survive the primary...
Sorry, just thinking out loud
I'm just glad we didn't have to witness a Presidential pardon of Bernie Kerek by President Giuliani...and Kerek's appointment to head GITMO. Now I'm sure Bernie would have figured out what to do with those terrorists. ;>)
Aside from the media continuing to repeat the BS about the people who have "returned to the fight", I'm also noticing that they're discussing this as if closing Gitmo means just letting the prisoners out and dropping them off on my street. Well, not my street, but YOUR street, quivering Fox viewer.
I notice that one of the sad legacies of the Bush years is that it is considered somehow "unpatriotic" to show skepticism toward Pentagon press releases. How soon we forget...
Yes.
Why? Our Government has never exactly told the truth and the same people are running the show at the Pentagon that were running it last week.
Oh, our government has never told us the truth. Ok, never mind then.
Well I guess they told the truth about WMD. I love how you just want us to belive anything the Pentagon says. Are you telling me that we should not ask questions of our Government? Is this not the mess we got in when we had Bush?
It sounds sad , but some may now believe they no longer need to question the Government because Bush is gone. That would be a mistake.
Well said Saddam.
Indeed. We do need to ask questions of our government, unless of course we're all villified again as being "un-Patriotic" if we should dare question things that are being told to us.
In March of 2003 when I was spit on at an Anti War Protest in Boston, I vowed no one will ever call me anti patriotic again for questioning our Government.
I'm not telling you that you should not ask questions of your Government. But if you really think that it's never told the truth, it seems like a rather insane exercise.
Governor again you are taking what I said out of context . I was refering to context of this post and the War on Terror. Why you said YES do a question on if we are supposed to believe the Pentagon now after 8 years of Gitmo and lies is mindboggling to me.
I did not know that you were only talking about the GWB years. Considering that your you were hating the Bush Haters last week, I am taken aback that you're now confining government's lies to his leadership.
There is a difference between being critical and hating people. I don't hate anyone, even you Governor.
Sueeld hearts Olbermann.
Sueeld was banned. I think she was banned because of inflamatory hate speech?
Holy crap. Seriously, FYI, people are not as stupid as you are.
Why am I stupid? And I am not sure what a banned poster has to do with the topic at hand? Why are you deflecting from the issue?
You, Sueeld, deflect each time you refer to someone by some other name.
You are funny Governor. You appeared after Governor and Former Governor . Also well after Sueeld was gone, yet you know about Sueeld? Amazing.
Anyway I will stick to the topics at hand on the posts while you smear people.
In only January 26th and you're already hypocrite of the year.
Good luck Governor.
Flag away, Sueeld!
I don't think that he IS confining lies to Bush's administration only. As in, the Obama administration has only been in office, not even a week yet. Let's take a breath, take a step back, and let them lie first before we start busting them on it.
I'm willing to bet that myself, as well as Casey would call out the lies as we see them. We're not complete partisan hacks such as Bush supporters are/were. Meaning, most hardcore Bush supporters that I know still think he did a GREAT job, and never lied. Nope, not once, about serious issues facing the country.
I'm willing to bet that myself, as well as Casey would call out the lies as we see them
Exactly, and my only fear as some of the Bush people are still at the Pentagon to lie and manipuate. Not to the extent of Rummys days but it is a fear. Sad that the mistrust will be here for awhile.
One should always question their government. It's our patriotic duty.
I prefer the Jeopardy format. Government needs answers.
Exactly.
It's our patriotic duty to ask questions of a chronic liar? Really?
Who is the chronic liar?
"Our Government has never exactly told the truth."
Exactly when it came to the war on terror. I made that clarification before . I am not sure what your point is? You obviously did not stand with the majority in 2003 when we knew this war and WMD was BS if that is your attitude about dissent.
My point is that it is more fruitful to demand action from government, then to ask it questions.
"Dissent is the highest form of patriotism"
Thomas Jefferson.
We were talking about asking questions.
questioning your government is dissent. there is no difference.
Questioning a chronic liar is futile.
So our dissent toward the Bush administration was useless ? Is that what you are saying?
Yes, if your placards and chants contained a questions mark, then it was useless. Please use this script when it comes up again: "No War!"
You are obtuse, magnolia is right.
You're the bafoon who took to the streets chanting "No War?" in 2003, not me.
how dare you call someone a buffoon who took the time to protest peacefully against something they so strongly believe in? you are contemptible.
Thanks James, I never felt like I was a buffon. I guess President Obama is a buffon in the eyes of Victor since he was against the war in 2003.
You use logic like a penguin uses a pencil sharpener.
And your attacks on people against this war is something I find stunning.
I'm not at all stunned that you're pretending that I'm attacking people for being against war - when in truth I'm just having at you for being a fake and a troll.
You really are sad .
Just a little sick of you calling me "Governor".
But, as mentioned before, Casey was talking about the WOT in specific, and dissent is sometimes defined as:
Disagreement with the ideas, doctrines, decrees, etc. of a political party, government or religion; An act of disagreeing with, or deviating from ...
You first demand action by asking questions of your elected officials, and learn then what they are thinking or proposing, and then offer differing opinions. Questions are required to bring about action.
Victor, are you being obtuse on purpose or because you don't follow this line of reasoning too well?
magnolia, I think old Vic is playing games. For some reason he is against anything I post, just his nature.
You can drop out of this conversation now. Thanks.
I prefer to tell my government what to do, not ask it what it is doing.
give us an example of how you personally told your government what to do, and how this was much more effective than merely questioning and dissent. can't wait to hear it.
I told the Mayor of Boston and the Governor of Massachusetts not to give the Red Sox public funding for a new ballpark.
i'm not sure demanding is anymore productive than questioning the validity of, or disagreeing with, such public funding. whatever is your preference.
You told them and they listened? Or there was a collective wave of dissent on that issue?
Were you not "questioning" what they wanted to do?
Seems like it to me.
I advocated my view, which I guess could be looked at as "questioning". I didn't think I could question something without asking a question, but I do get your point.
See, by advocating your viewpoint, you were questioning their viewpoint, as in you, you didn't agree with them. You don't have to ask a question, to "question" someone else, or your government.
What is the difference?
Yeah, where is Rumsfeld these days? Hibernating till the next Republican adminsitration?
He claimed (and I heard him too) that he knew that WMD were, to the north, west, south, east of Tikrit. Should he be not held accountable (and jailed if he was lying) for his words?
I'm sure the Pentagon was telling lies for the past 8 years is because their Commander-in-Chief told them to lie.
President Obama will put an end to the lies!
So, if 61 were released, and are "back on the battlefield" as these clowns like to keep saying; is that Obama's fault? Nope. Because, this would have happened BEFORE he took office, and hence the assertion would be against the Bush Administration.
Yes, but don't expect people who watch Faux News to notice that little nuance. Because they're talking about it now, it must have some taint on Obama as a result. Timing is everything.
Sorry for the correction Mag. I know you meant to say that since it happened before President Obama took office it was all Clinton's fault.
We all make mistakes, except for GW Bush that is.
You did not hear? This is the Obama Recession, Rush tells us it is so it is true.
Whatever Rush says is true. I went out for lunch today and was listening to Rush on the radio( I always need a good laugh). Anyway he was announcing his economic recovery package. He thinks he walks on water.
I can't wait to hear the Rotund One's prescription for economic recovery. This is the guy who told 30,000 laid off steelworkers that all they had to do was go out and start their own businesses.
Rush's answer is more tax cuts for the wealthy, and more deregulation, Nerzog.
In other words, more of what got is into this economic cesspool in the first place.
Oh yeah, forgot about that.
How do we explain the failures of GHW Bush? Since he came after Reagan? Carter?
During the 92 campaign Bush Sr. was trying to run against Jimmy Carter. He kept comparing Clinton to Carter.
Exactly. And nobody in the current Obama administration is talking about releasing these people. He's talking about closing the prison at Gitmo. That's it.
I love it when people talk about if we bring these characters into the US, somehow they're all going to get loose and run amok in the streets committing terrorist acts up and down and through the US. Throw them in a Supermax, isolation for 23.5 hours per day, and constant supervision. Where are they going to go? Nowhere.
I also believe that they should get a fair trial, per our judicial system. Sure, they're not US citizens (most of them I think), but we have them, let's try them in our system, and show the WORLD that our judicial system is fair, and the best.
People like Hannity will blame Obama for this, just like they blamed Clinton for 9/11
Don't get the crazies all riled up. They'll be here any moment now with their tirades about Clinton failed to get Bin Laden and all.
And remember Maglover, you're not really a first string crazy if you don't mention the Silver Platter. You know, the one that Bin Laden was offered on.
Yes indeed. Even though, he wasn't offered up on any such silver platter. I suggest this book quite often to folks who might want to read about what was really happening right up until 11-Sep-01 with Bin Laden, and al Qaeda in general. Pick up and read Ghost Wars by Steve Coll. It is insightful, and full of information, and the history of al Qaeda from inception, until right before 9/11.
There was no silver platter. Pakistan was protecting Bin Laden and the Taliban. A lot.
I'm almost positive that the platter was only silver plated, not solid silver.
After all, Clinton was the president and if he had accepted Bin Laden on shoddy silver plate he'd have created an international etiquette faux pas.
I can't say that I blame him.
Considering that all of the major economic downturns -1929, 1987, and 2008 happened under Republican presidents and their allies in Congress why do they still have credibility on these issues?
You forgot the 82 Recession, worst after the Great Depression until now.
What a couple of day dream believers. Hannity and Rudy represent a tiny minority of hard right corporatists. Even Frank Luntz can't find a way to spin his numbers.
"Last month, I conducted a national survey of 800 registered voters on their attitudes toward infrastructure investment...The survey's findings were unlike any other issue I have polled in more than a decade...A near unanimous 94% of Americans are concerned about our nation's infrastructure. And this concern cuts across all regions of the country and across urban, suburban and rural communities. Fully 84% of the public wants more money spent by the federal government -- and 83% wants more spent by state governments -- to improve America's infrastructure. And here's the kicker: 81% of Americans are personally prepared to pay 1% more in taxes for the cause.
This isn't "soft" support for infrastructure either. It stretches from Maine to Montana, from California to Connecticut. Democrats (87%) and Republicans (74%) are prepared to, in Barack Obama's words, put skin in the game, which tells you just how wide and deep the support is...
The context of the poll is clear: Americans have a serious case of bailout fatigue. They've seen government pony up to Wall Street and Motor City. Yet the stock market continues to fall, jobs continue to disappear and the spending just plain continues. Top executives received their Christmas bonuses, and the rest of America was left asking, "Where's my bailout check?""
The conservative worldview is dead, Hannity needs to lead, follow or get out of the way.
Hannity needs to lead, follow or get out of the way
Let's see, Roundhouse, I don't believe Hannity has the brains to lead a conga line
He doesn't seem to be able to follow anything except the most childlike reality-free-market dogma.
Looks like "get out of the way" is the only reasonable option.
"I don't believe Hannity has the brains to lead a conga line..." Col. thanks for the compliment...sort of!? (smiles)
Let me sum up today's Sean Hannity's Show so that no one has to listen...
Let not your heart be troubled.
Conservative underground.
Conservatism in exile.
Newt Gingrich will be on our show.
Father Flager.
The unrepentant terrorist William Ayers.
Michelle Obama said "for the first time in my adult life I am really proud of my country."
Let not your heart be troubled.
Obama said Iran and Venezuela are tiny countries.
Ruth's Chris.
Lobstergram.
Freedom Concert tickets.
Regan conservatism.
Conservative principles.
Socialism.
60% of all taxes are paid by the top 1% of all wage earners.
Let not your heart be troubled.
Newsmaker line.
We'll be right back. Don't go away. This is your conservatism in exile. The conservative underground.
Speaking of venezuela, anyone catch that issue going on in biscane bay, alaska? They are having an unusually severe winter this year, are almost out of heating oil (it has to be flown in) and Palin is too busy promoting her book to help her state residents. A liberal group that normally helps south american towns is actually flying in oil from venezuela to help alaskan natives. OT, but I thought y'all would find that interesting!
>>We'll be right back. Don't go away. This is your conservatism in exile. The conservative underground.
"Hey man, we should, like, totally freak out the liberal establishment, man. That would be, like, far out"
Far in, right off!
And now open up your heads and wallets for Radio Free NeoCon! For the best in witty bantor and neoarcheological talking point coverage. We'll be right back after we scrape our pronouncers head off the ceiling.
Keep shopping!
I'd add:
Reagan ended the Cold War.
Obama recession.
Tax and spend Democrats.
Randy
and...
Trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye can see !!!!
Sean Hannity and G Gordon Liddy to the rescue!
http://accstudios.com/f/comicpreview_page_covera.htm
Here we go again. These boobs ASSume that if they repeat their lies frequently enough that they'll become accepted facts. Of course they will. In the ranks of the easily convinced knuckleheads that watch bilge water backwash like "Hannity".
Randy
HATE IS NOT A FAMILY VALUE......TRUTH IS THE ENEMY OF A FASCIST STATE. HANNITY IS AN ENEMY OF THE DEMOCRATIC STATE.DEMOCRACY IS HIS DEMOCRATIC RIGHT HANNITY WILL EXPOSE HIMSELF AS AN ENEMY OF THE STATE
"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, THE TRUTH IS THE GREATEST ENEMY OF THE STATE." -- Joseph Goebbels, German Minister of Propaganda, 1933-1945
This quote cannot be repaeted enough times, goodguy1.
Thanks.
I notice that to Hannity, guys like Ronald Reagan and Limbaugh and himself are "Dedicated" and "Principled" and "Steadfast" and "Committed." Liberals, on the other hand, are always "Ideologues."
It seems to me that an "Ideologue" is a person who refuses to sacrifice his principles and who happens to be a liberal, according to these idiots.