Thanks to Bob Geiger for catching this, I never watch Faux News. Sean Hannity got his knickers in a knot over Sen Kerry wanting to know what Sam Fox thought he was doing donating to a 527 that Sam considers evil. I'm pretty sure we all have an idea what he thought he was doing, but he's clueless. I don't know, even Belgium could use an ambassador who knew what he meant to do. But Hannity is not happy so he had John (swiftboat) O'Neill on,
SH: "John, first of all, your reaction to the overreaction and this real bitterness of Senator Kerry?"
(really?)
J O'N : "Sean, he just won't let it go. You know, he spent 37 years obsessed with three-and-a-half months in Vietnam. Everybody else went about their business, had jobs, you know, did other things...."
(we know how that Kerry guy laid up feeling sorry for himself and just disappeared...)
SH: "Well, I want to ask you this, because you talk about the politics of personal destruction. Clearly, you're the victim of this here."
(yep, he was sought out by martians while hiding in a basement)
SH: "John Kerry smeared the good character, the good name of Vietnam vets like yourself, and he lied about them, and he made accusations that they were murderers, and that they were terrorizing people, and cutting off head and arms and limbs, et cetera."
(it is a matter of record actually and sadly, but then Sean listens to the echo in his head)
SH: "...he now is using his position, or misusing his position, to take revenge. Is that what you saw in this?"
(I'll be darned if I saw revenge, too bad that was never on the campaign trail)
J O'N: " Exactly" (there's more about how many people donated, but this is the answer given in all detail)
SH: "...really, really important, if we're going to get to the bottom of whether or not Kerry is allowed to use or misuse his position here."
(huh?)
Alan Colmes: (disagrees)
SH: "I don't know if George Bush would have won re-election but for you guys telling the truth. And as far as I'm concerned, you're all heroes. John O'Neill, you're a great American."
(gack)
I couldn't really put it all up, I have more respect for my readers than that. There's something so Mad Hatter Orwellian about Hannity that leave me so reality deprived after I've heard or read him that I'm unsure if the Earth is still in its orbit. I really don't mind that people don't agree with things I think, but when I'm not sure we're in the same universe something is amiss.
I suppose that what I don't understand is how the "other side" is served by this kind of nonsense. It makes as much sense as a little kid sticking his fingers in his ears and yelling, "noooo!" I've seen the same kind of nastiness occasionally by lefties, but it seems to be a right wing trait. Could it be that all news into the White House is run through this same filter? If they're getting their news and opinion from the Hannitys then maybe it's understandable that they're so screwed up.
4 comments:
Your coined "Faux News" tells it all. Great coinage and I will borrow from it many times. LOL
You're welcome to it, I certainly stole it from others.
The contemporary definiton of "balanced reporting" is to present truth and utter fabrications as equal, opposing arguments: Iraq, global warming, "death tax," etc., etc., you know the list. On Fox, the balance tips toward the fabrications.
Instead of providing a forum for debating fact-based details to hone and refine our policy decisions, the news establishment claims balance means giving the podium over to liars, lunatics, and head-in-the-sand (or elsewhere) ostriches.
Add a massive revocation of broadcast licenses to the list of the Democratic nominee's to-do list for '08.
Yes I agree in general terms, but in this particular case I don't. Hannity and Colmes is commentary, it's crap, but it's commentary. I do commentary and I don't pretend that a few articles critical of Democrats make this site "balanced." I do try to get the stuff I rant about correct, there's a difference between Sean Hannity and myself.
The Fox "News" is a different story, but as much as I dislike their stuff, I vote with my tuner and watch elsewhere. Sometimes I watch "Link" and "FSTV" which are viewer supported and way left, I don't figure they're balanced, but possibly more accurate.
As with the 2nd Amendment, I prefer to err on the side of let it be on all civil liberties. Do I think media ownership constriction ought to be addressed, yes.
Post a Comment