Hannity makes a habit of distorting quotes to smear progressives
SUMMARY: Sean Hannity has repeatedly smeared progressives and Democrats by cropping their comments in ways that misrepresented them. Most recently, he cropped President Obama's answer to a question about the Cold War to falsely suggest he wasn't acknowledging the achievements of past presidents in freeing Eastern Europe.
Over the past few years, Fox News host Sean Hannity has repeatedly smeared progressives and Democrats by cropping their comments in a way that misrepresented them. Most recently, during the July 8 edition of his Fox News show, Hannity spliced President Obama's answer to a Fox News reporter's question about the Cold War to suggest that Obama did not acknowledge the actions of past U.S. presidents in freeing Eastern Europe. As Media Matters for America documented, Hannity edited out the part of Obama's answer in which he said, "I'm very proud of the traditions of Democratic and Republican presidents to lift the Iron Curtain."
Media Matters has documented numerous instances in which Hannity has cropped quotes or clips to misrepresent what actually was said. Some of the most egregious examples include:
- During the June 4 edition of his Fox News show, Hannity deceptively edited a clip of Obama's June 4 speech in Cairo to claim that Obama "decided to give 9-11 sympathizers a voice on the world stage," when Obama was in fact specifically condemning the attacks. Hannity played Obama's comment that "I am aware that there's still some who would question or even justify the events of 9-11." Hannity left out what Obama said next: that Al Qaeda "chose to ruthlessly murder" 9-11 victims, who "had done nothing to harm anybody," and that "these are not opinions to be debated; these are facts to be dealt with."
- On April 3, Hannity played a clip of Obama saying in an April 3 speech in Strasbourg, France: "In America, there's a failure to appreciate Europe's leading role in the world. Instead of celebrating your dynamic union and seeking to partner with you to meet common challenges, there have been times where America's shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive." Hannity then said: "And the liberal tradition of blame America first, well, that's still alive." He later asked: "Why is there this anti-Americanism in Europe?" In fact, immediately after the part of the speech Hannity played, Obama criticized anti-Americanism in Europe and Europeans who "choose to blame America for much of what's bad."
- During the March 6 edition of his Fox show, Hannity purported to "go to the videotape" and "show the audience at home" Obama's "campaign promise" of "no earmarks." He then aired several clips that purportedly showed this "campaign promise." In fact, in three of the clips, Obama was referring to reforming the earmark process, and in a fourth, he was asserting that an opponent was being hypocritical for taking earmarks and then advocating against them. Hannity's fifth clip, which showed Obama saying, "We are going to ban all earmarks -- the process by which individual members insert pet projects without review," was actually taken from a post-campaign media availability, during which Obama made clear that he wanted to "ban all earmarks" from the "recovery and reinvestment plan," not from "the overall budget process."
- During the August 15, 2008, broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio program, Hannity falsely asserted that Obama had "openly complained about 'white folks' greed.' " As evidence, he played a clip of Obama saying, "White folks' greed runs a world in need." But the clip is from the Obama-narrated audiobook edition of his memoir, Dreams From My Father, in a passage in which Obama quotes parts of a sermon by Rev. Jeremiah Wright.
- During the July 10, 2008, edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes, Hannity distorted former President Bill Clinton's remarks to claim that Clinton was "obviously taking a shot at Senator [John] McCain." Hannity aired the following parts of Clinton's remarks: "[E]very living soul on the planet has some often highly justified anger"; "[I]f you know anybody who was ever a POW for any length of time, you will see that you go along for months or maybe even years, and then something will happen, it'll trigger all those bad dreams, and they'll come back, and it may not last 30 seconds"; and, "It's not like all that stuff just went away." But Clinton was discussing what former South African President -- and political prisoner -- Nelson Mandela means to him. Indeed, the sentence from which Hannity took his final quote actually read in full: "It's not like all that stuff just went away, but he [Mandela] disciplined himself and his mind and his heart and his spirit to always work to constantly overcome it every day."
- During the October 28, 2008, broadcast of his radio show, Hannity aired Obama's statement from a 2001 radio interview that "[t]here's a lot of change going on outside of the [Supreme Court] that, you know, the judges have to essentially take judicial notice of. I mean, you've got World War II. You've got the doctrines of Nazism that we are fighting against that start looking uncomfortably similar to what's going on back here at home." Hannity aired the clip twice, then stated: "He's comparing -- looking similar to what Nazism is back here at home? Has anybody picked up on this in the media?" But Hannity left out Obama's next sentence, which made clear he was not speaking about modern-day America: "You've got African Americans who are returning from the war with certain expectations in terms of, 'Why is it that I'm now in uniform and yet am denied more freedom here than I was in France or Italy?' "
- During the June 17, 2007, edition of Fox News' Hannity's America, Hannity aired a clip from a December 15, 2003, speech by then-Sen. Hillary Clinton, in which she said, "I was one who supported giving President Bush the authority, if necessary, to use force against Saddam Hussein. ... We have no option but to stay involved and committed." He then asserted, "A year into the war, when most Democrats completely turned their back on the president's decision to invade Iraq, Hillary maintained her support." But almost immediately after the first sentence that Hannity quoted from the speech, Clinton said: "I have had many disputes and disagreements with the administration over how that authority has been used, but I stand by the vote to provide the authority because I think it was a necessary step in order to maximize the outcome that did occur in the Security Council with the unanimous vote to send in inspectors."
- On July 15, 2007, Hannity asserted that "Hillary's time as partner in the [Rose] law firm was closely associated with her husband's political seat in the state of Arkansas," then stated: "George Wells, a reporter who covered the courts for Arkansas papers, said the following in a 1994 interview with the Baltimore Sun, quote: 'A few people would say that the Rose Law Firm was married to Governor Clinton -- and there were businesses that thought it was to their advantage with the state to go to Rose.' End quote." But the next sentence in the Sun article quoted Wells saying: "But no one in the firm that I know of ever solicited business based on the governor's wife being a partner there."
Media Matters has previously identified many instances in which other Fox News figures have also misleadingly cropped the statements of progressives or Democrats.















How quickly you forget that not too long ago a sizable percentage of Fox viewers believed Saddam was behind 9-11 and that the WMD's were found. Now THAT'S scary.
When Hannity spends three hours a day criticizing Obama and Pelosi, does that mean he's scared of them?
Do you own a dictionary? Criticism is not generally a bi-product of "fear." Nice attempt at shutting down the conversation though. Did it work on the playground?
Please provide proof that liberals are afraid of the uneducated idiots (that never served this country) on Faux and am hate radio. Thanks.
Please provide proof that liberals are afraid of the uneducated idiots (that never served this country) on Faux and am hate radio. Thanks.
You think the mainstream media is left because you don't know what the real left side of it is. If all you listen to is right wing propaganda, you'll continue to have misperceptions.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/24/eveningnews/main4476173.shtml
On the left, its almost all there on the web. Do you think they left out a part where Sarah was brilliant?
Gee, must be rough.
And as for the rest of the media, aren't they the same media that allowed government talking points to be spewed by retired generals in a pentagon coordinated propaganda effort? Wait, you didn't know that, did ya? Then again, that's why you watch fox news in the first place, so you don't have to be faced with these kinds of facts. You can cram these ideas down your own throat all you like, but quit trying to force everyone else to listen fox-style propaganda.
The nice thing is you can always turn the channel and/or turn it off.
I recommend you get Sirius/XM. They still have the remnants of Air America on one station. Don't tell anyone, but I enjoy listening to them even though I seldom, if ever, agree.
I think it's funny that cons say that the mainstream media is liberal (a myth) but when challenged on their blatant propaganda channels, they just advise people to change the channel. Why doesn't the same apply to the so-called "liberal" media that they bitch about constantly?
Which I'm guessing is why your so afraid they're gonna bring the fairness doctrine back. You, like Ann Coulter, know conservatives have the media.
Sure I can change the channel, but unfortunately I can't change it when the majority of my countrymen believe something crazy like the idea that Saddam was behind 9/11.
Sorry Charlie, but I can no longer tolerate people mouthing the long discredited meme of "the liberal media". If you don't like it, change the channel, or go to another website.
Conservatives are the biggest hypocrites. When their own media outlets run one side the conservatives answer that's OK because that's what the market wants. What about what the market is for network news or big city newspapers? Suddenly, those media are expected by right wingers to shun the bottom line and provide equal time to right wing liars. Isn't it possible those outlets are just going for ratings, same as your guys?
Once again, the media doesn't have a liberal bias, the facts do.
Furthermore, I hate to keep confusin' ya with the facts, joe, but Air America is still in existence. Like most gopologists, you just don't know up from down or what the hell you're talking about.
The oxy-moron is ignorant trash by ignorant trash for ignorant trash.
It's no wonder you're such a fan.
Leftist mainstream media propaganda is pure Limborg hogwash. You have to be as simpleminded as Joe to take it seriously but it was what he was TOLD to think and TOLD to say, so mindlessly he does. What a sad and pathetic little person Joe is
The point is not bias. Everyone is biased. The point is dishonesty. Surely both liberals and conservatives can agree that lying is wrong? Or is that just a liberal belief?
Do a search on them, they are mentioned, frequently, on this site, which evaporates your point.
Not only is it nice to have a resource where you can look up all the lies and misinformation in one place, but it's not just FOR us. Yes , we know it's lies. Not everybody does. They're not all idiots, by the way, they could be naive or ignorant of the facts.
Some do, because they've had it with talking with conservatives, who called us America hating traitors for the last 8 years. Some people evaluate conservative posters on a case-by-case basis, and decide which ones are worth talking to, and which ones are trolls and/or brainwashed, talking-points-spewing drones. And by starting a post with
you place yourself closer to the latter camp than the former.
That's because Hannity goes about it in such a crude fashion. It's like doctoring a photograph...someone with any brains would use Photoshop, whereas Hannity would cut and paste. Once again you have to ask how stupid are the folks who regularly watch Hannity and actually believe him.
I'm still completely baffled as to what Hannity means by this. There are those who feel that 9-11 was an inside job and those who feel that 9-11 was a jihad against the West and that America was properly humiliated by it. It's not at all clear what a "sympathizer" feels.
I have a lot of sympathy for the families/friends of the victims of 9-11. I suppose that makes me a "9-11 sympathizer."
[/sarcasm] (just in case)
And I also have sympathy for rape victims. Yep, I'm one of those rape sympathizers.
18) when quoting your opponent, edit his words to conform to "correctness"
(dittobusters.com for full list and other comments [shameless self-promotion])
J/P=?
Also, if you consider editing a quote to be 'lying', along with the other Rules that are similar, the final one is simply an expansion of the previous.
So what if the information is dishonest, made-up, or even worst cropped-out? Long as these guys at FoxNews Channel "ONLY" go after President Obama, Democrats, and Minorities it's a win win with big big ratings as these guys laugh happily to their local banks. Hmmm, what does this sounds like? Oh, FoxNews Channel has become a 'tabloid' cable news network. Now this makes $ense. LOL
After years of being led around by the brain, deep thought and introspection cannot even be considered.
But thanx for the clip.
It will be on its' way to my Connies shortly..as for the poster above...NO HOPE!!! Just wants to complain that he/she cannot be wrong about thier heroes. They would have to sell all of the O'Reilly, Morris, Hannity etc, books at a flea market. This poster probably believes they are collector items...
Is it, joe? You mean like the following statement:
"I don't think Media Matters is un-American. I think it's sad and a little funny that the liberals are so scared of what Rush, Hannity, Beck and Fox news have to say that "someone" is providing the funds to have a whole website dedicated to making a counterpoint to whatever they say. Liberals never said a think about the leftist mainstream media spouting their liberal propaganda. And now that there is an alternative....uh oh!"
Both Democrats and Republicans say how they believe in "equal" rights for everyone. But, the Republicans continue on with their saying: ...as long as it does "NOT" affect my religion, guns, security, liberty, money and way of life. Selfish, selfish, selfish wouldn't you say. LOL
You are mistaken...I have been included on email list full of distortions made by Conservatives. When I get the correct information, I send it back to the entire list that received the nonsense and three different times got emails back thanking me for getting the REST OF THE STORY OUT.
I agree with you. The whole preoccupation with Fox makes me think that MMFA wouldn't have anything to write about if Fox suddenly disappeared.
I do not watch his TV show but I sometimes listen to Hannity for my five minute ride home at night, six if catch the light, (but most of the time it is commercials,) and I listen knowing he is an ideologue but his guests and callers sometimes are interesting.
I doubt that the vast majority of his audience is uber-ideological. He just keeps it entertaining.
Just punch "home" and refute your own rubbish.
Ya know, given the fact that you gops are caseless and clueless and have to lie your sorry butts off in order to have something to say, you'd think you'd be a helluva lot better at it by now given all the practice ya get.
And for those who don't like my "guilt by association," I am just using Hannity's logic that Bill Ayers and Rev. Wright somehow shaped Obama's career.
And the only reason he's on TV is because he happens to be a handsome, all-American fellow. He is just as bad as Rush.
Especially since we can't see the bias ourselves, you should show it to us.
The coverage on McCain was negative because he was a negative old man.
Have you ever heard of the Ayers stories? That was 100% of McCain's campaign in the final weeks. Hell, he at one point ran a 100% negative campaign in the final weeks (no exaggeration, that's real).
Waiting......
Waiting......
Waiting......
Just teasing.
Media Matters provided evidence of Hannity doing it on this occasion and on other occasions, with transcripts and video.
PUT.DOWN.THE.MIRROR.
Your projection on this issue is blinding you to reality.
The very clear suggestion there is that Hannity shouldn't be criticized by liberals because there's supposedly liberal bias somewhere else. Any complaint about Hannity is just "call(ing) names" out of a need for an "emotional" argument. That sentiment is what you seem to be agreeing with, since that's the post you responded to. Obviously if there's a genuine complaint, as there is here, then there's no basis for claiming such a thing about liberals. It's a valid complaint to make, therefore there's a "logical argument" behind it. I'm curious as to how you're not seeing this.
Your agreement is what you "specifically posted", by the way. I didn't infer it. My question was how you can agree with such a ludicrous argument.
You might as well be citing baseball scores and then acting all indignant that I'm not addressing what you're saying.
Four people replied to him already, for one thing. For another, there's nothing that prevents him from addressing my posts here. Finally, I hadn't read this thread at all until after you had agreed with him, so why should I post the same thing twice?
I'm not sure what difference it makes whether you are convinced of anything or not. I would have to believe that you were arguing in good faith for that to have any bearing on anything.
And relevance? Seriously? I'd love to see your argument that what you said isn't relevant to my questioning of what you said.
"And the funny thing is many liberals around here use Hannity and O'Reilly as some backup proof of a conservative tilted media. It's ridiculous. They are commentators and their one-sided opinions mean nothing, they are not unbiased newscasters, they are partisan hacks with TV shows on a rightwing network. The media, the mainstream journalists and news reporters are decidedly liberal and have always had a leftist slant, for generations. Look at who they vote for and what party they belong too. Look at how they cover illegal immigration, taxes, global warming - always sympathetic to the liberal point of view. We are not talking about hack commentators on TV, Olbermann and Maddow included. We are talking about what is supposed to unbiased news reporting. Liberal"
That's what I said earlier. So now you think it means something to repost everything you said after you agreed with him. Incredible.
Meanwhile, you're not explaining why you're not supposed to be accountable for expressing agreement with his sentiments. That agreement is your opinion. That can't be too complex for you, if you know how to turn on your computer.
I think he or she must be a Fox employee toying with you. No one is that stupid.
It's true that O'Reilly, Hannity, Rush, and their ilk are merely silly entertainers, but it's frightening to, for example, listen to their talking points on the radio on the way to the golf course and hear them being parroted righteously only moments later at the clubhouse.
Prove it.
Thanks
We'll wait....as usual....
This website is loaded with examples and analysis showing the mainstream, so-called liberal, media is anything but when it comes to the issues you mentioned.
But if you want something else, how about a study from Eric Pooley on climate reporting in the wake of the debate on the Lieberman-Warner bill:
Guess which side. More:
Doesn't sound liberal to me.
The full report is here (pdf). It's not opinion. It's expert analysis. I know you wingnuts don't care too much for that.
Again, not liberal. Still waiting your evidence of liberal media bias.
I'm still waiting on evidence of liberal media bias on these issues.
While you are at it, why not look at those for whom these "liberal" reporters work. Monied elites looking to protect their interests. I wonder who the reporter may skew a story in favour of? The political party they are aligned with, or theose folks in the excutive suites that sign the pay cheques?
And of course you right-wingers can retreat to your own crappy "news" sources wherever you are, be it fox, talk radio or your imbecilic mags and newspapers. Liberals just don't have that kind of noise machine. But you'll never be satisfied; everyone must live in the twisted right-wing universe.
And here's some more. If name-calling and fear-spreading are from "the typical liberal play book," the real story here is that liberals have stolen and co-opted Hannity's and Rush's magnum opus!
You are projecting, justjoe.
Just making the point a little more obvious.
The so called liberal media is a myth that the right wing has been promulgating for decades. Try reading (if only the introduction) "What Liberal Media" by Eric Alterman.
FoxNews Channel lost out to CNN and MSNBC over these past two weeks. Now, they (Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity and Bill O.) have become desperate and their nasty tactics are out of the bag as they try to re-gain the #1 spot in the cable world. When people become desperate they make lots of mistakes and FoxNews Channel is becoming more like a 'tabloid' news channel just for high ratings. LOL
Again, as has been demonstrated here time and time again, hannity just makes stuff up. If you've got specific, factual gripes against KO, feel free to fail to cough them up like you clueless cons are apt to do.
There's no comparison between the two.
As shrub's eight-year reign of error proved over and over again, the media doesn't have a liberal bias, the facts do.
Continuing and expanding those tax cuts after we had an economic slowdown due to 9/11? Bush
Continuing tax cuts after we were in a deficit position and beginning to wage a war? Bush
Trying to keep our nation's economy out of a depression? Obama
The Stimulus bill was a necessary bill. If Bush hadn't waged a voluntary war, and hadn't handed out tax cuts to the richest of the rich, his Stimulus bill wouldn't be very painful at all.
It's not his "fault" that he had to react to the economic circumstances we find ourselves in.
It IS Bush's fault that he chose to give tax cuts instead of paying down the national debt (being shortsighted in helping out rich taxpayers in the present and screwing taxpayers of the future), waging a war or dealing with a recession. It is Bush's fault. How can you have missed this factual info.
Only a reich-winger could possibly believe this makes sense.
CONSERVATIVES LIE TO POINT OUT THE FLAWS IN LIBERALISM.
Here's a fact pointed out to Charlie Gibson (which really suprises me). He asked President Obama in a pre-election interview about capital gains tax. He wanted to know if in light of the fact that 3 of the last 4 president (Reagan, Clinton and 43) lowed the tax with a subsequent INCREASE in revenue from that tax, if he would be willing to also cut that tax. He wouldn't really answer, and now he's talking of raising taxes on the rich. Is it really about cutting deficits or is it about class warfare, because the little guy is alway for raising taxes on the rich and since there are way more little guys who vote than rich who vote....well, you get the idea. It's doesn't matter that per the IRS web site (there's a fact you can look up), that the top 5% pay 68% of the taxes.
Same way with issues of race, gays and immigration, because my views aren't the same as yours I'm a racist and intolerant. So I'm only tolerant if I believe what you believe. Just because I believe marriage should be between and man and a woman, I'm intolerant. I have a few friends who are gay, they don't mind my point of view. I don't think they should be discriminated because they are gay. I don't think that someone should recieve special consideration because of their race. I am not naive enough to think that racism does not exist, but just because someone says something you don't like doesn't make them a racist. If we are going to end racism, then end it. Stop racial preference. My brother-in-law and my 5 nieces and nephew who are black think uncle Joey is an alright guy. One neice is in college and the other will be soon. They got good grades and an excellent SAT score so they got into good schools with scholarships. Not because they were black but because they tried. I'm not a racist just because I thinks that immigration in this county needs to be done legally and responsibly. If you are in this county you need to be paying taxes like I am. My partner on the ambulance in Houston who is from Mexico agrees with me. I'm not a racist and I'm not intolerant, I just stand up for what I believe in . Class warfare, I seem remember some guy named Hitler and Marx who did the same thing.
If you're against gay marriage, you ARE intolerant. You don't want them to have literally hundreds of legal rights that are included in marriage just because they are gay. This is not a religious issue, it will have no effect at all on anybody else's marriage, and it is not in any way leading to any of the false equivalencies people on the right typically spout. It is a civil rights issue. The same arguments are being used today against gay marriage that used to be used to justify "racial purity" laws forbidding inter-racial marriage. They were wrong then and they're wrong now.
Until there is no institutionalized racism, we need affirmative action. Anecdotes about family members who are black have nothing to do with this. I don't know anybody who is claiming that non-whites should get promotions without working for them; that's a claim made by people who either don't understand affirmative action or just don't like the idea that non-whites can get promotions.
You're absolutely right when you say that wanting responsible immigration doesn't make you racist, but don't simply say it's because of taxes; many illegal immigrants get false SSN's and do pay taxes. I don't support illegal immigration, but I think that the primary blame does not lie with the immigrants, it lies with those who hire them. If they weren't hiring, the immigrants would stop coming; they're here for jobs.
Class warfare has been going on here for decades, but from the top down. Throwing out Hitler and Marx is, again, a false equivalency. Taxing the rich is not class warfare; putting the primary burden on the non-wealthy, who cannot afford it the way the wealthy can, IS. According to Congress, 2/3 of American corporations paid no federal income taxes from 1998 to 2005. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080812/ap_on_bi_ge/corporations_income_tax Corporations are getting rights individuals don't have and they're not paying their taxes. If you're truly against class warfare you should be upset by this.
Liberal definition of tolerance - believe exactly what I tell you to believe. Have no opinion of your own because if it doesn't match ours we'll call you a racist, a bigot and intolerant. Well, I guess I'll just have to be intolerant.
The way to end racism and racial preferences is to....eliminate them. Once again, I'm not naive enough to think that racism does not exist, but giving someone preference based on race is wrong, either way it goes. How was it going to be fair to those New Haven firefighters, who took months out of their lives to study for promotion, to be denied advancement JUST because no blacks and few lationos passed the exam. I see blacks and latinos in Houston pass them and get promoted all the time. In fact a black woman just came out #1 on the captains exam. Let's admit people to college based on grades, not race. Let's hire and promote people based on merit, not race. And just because I believe that, does not make me a racist.
Finally, illegal immigration is a HUGE burden on our tax system. Historygeek, I don't know where you live, but in Houston and Harris county it costs tax payers millions to provide healthcare and to educate illegal immigrants. Sure they pay sales tax when they buy things, but very few pay income taxes. Look at any ER in Houston and you'll see a lobby full of illegal immigrants. That's a cost the the local hospitals and hospital disctrict just have to absorb. How much more money could be redirected to other worthwhile projects in out school districts if we didn't have to spend the money to spend illegal immigrants english or have bilingual education. And then there is the criminal element. 3 of the last 4 Houston police officers killed in the line of duty were by illegal immigrants. It does not make me a racist to think that immigration needs to be done in a responsible manner and the only way to do that is to start from scatch. I do agree that the first place to start is with the companies who employ them.
My point is just because I'm a conservative and believe in less goernemtn involvement in my life does not make me intolerant or racist or a bigot. I just makes me...wel....right.
You won't be right in your lifetime with the way you're going. Illegal immigrants pay more in taxes than they get back in benefits. That's been proven. Yes, in some ways, in individual communities, it costs them more than those communities get back, but how much MORE would it cost the people who live in those communities if employers had to pay American citizens living wages to do work that they currently pay minimal wages to illegal immigrants now? Don't you realize how much better off our economy is because we have those low wage earner jobs here in the US instead of those same jobs being filled with Americans who would make even more money and therefore have the price of goods go up significantly?
"Conservatives should have to lie to point out the flaws in liberalism."
I am guessing you forgot the word "not," but its a hilarious slip.
But the black eyes on our nation, are usually the fault of the very same people who wind up and punch America in the face to begin with, with things like wars of CHOICE!
I once had to cover O'Reilly's fundraising appearance before an adoring audience in Rochester NY. He began fairly quietly, then built up to an angry diatribe about liberals and others who might not pray at his alter, while avoiding even the pretense of logical argumentation. When he ended, he strutted off the dais like a thug looking for a fistfight--accompanied by his bodyguard, of course. The thunderous applause from the well-fed men and big-haired women in the audience made me nauseous.
Challenge any of these "commentators"--most admit they aren't journalists--on any point, no matter how valid, and their thin skins pull back to reveal fear and rage. These folks have radio or TV audiences only because Ronald Reagan did away with the Fairness Doctrine. Had he not done so, they'd be shown for what they are whenever they opened their mouiths.
Are these the kinds of people who should have the ear of the public? Are they the kinds of folks who should guide our country with their mouths?
As is the Hannity tradition of making it seem as if a "Liberal tradition of Blaming America first" actually exists,rather than say,the healthy introspective and truly patriotic belief in a just and benevolent America Liberals actually deeply yearn for in the face of an avalanche of radical right wing bigotry and misinformation.