Right after the 2012 election Sean Hannity on FNC announced he had “evolved” on the issue and now supported comprehensive immigration reform. Haven’t watched or listened to him since.
Obozo “evolved”, so he says, on supporting sodomites. Sean “evolves” on supporting asylum for illegal aliens. He’s not in very good company.
What does the GOPe know that makes them so willing, even eager, to spit on the conservative base?
That’s the way ALL three, Rush Limbo, Hannity and FAUX news have been handling the Article II. Section 1. Clause V., totally muzzled cowardly by other pressures!!!
Well, the GOP flunkie recently said he was not pushed to change his mind, contrary to the report that said he and Cavuto and someone else were pushed to... I didn’t believe him, and it really is beside the point- he is pushing the lie about border security first. There won’t be any, the Democrats won’t agree to it, so it is just a lie peddled by “conservatives.”
I already knew how "moderate" he was continuously catering to Rudy, Christie, McCain, even found time to have Al Sharpton, so I needed nothing more to tell me he wasn't anyone I needed to pay any attention to.
I, too, favor immigration reform; but only if it is done properly.
The Simpson-Mazzoli disaster of 1986 should be quite instructive: If immigration reform does not contain border enforcement as a key component--in fact, if that does not precede legalization--we will end up with little more than amnesty, unaccompanied by anything that might prevent a future invasion of the southwest (mostly, by low-skilled workers).
Charles Krauthammer, I believe, has this about right: We should measure outputs, rather than mere inputs, when determining if border enforcement is working. More border agents, more miles of fence, and other guarantees are all well and good; but the only serious metric is how well these new measures are working: Has the flow of illegals slowed to a mere trickle, or does it remain a river?
Until that is answered--and answered correctly--there should be no legalization...
Same here for the very same reason. He kneejerked me to change the channel.
Hannity is a GOPe bootlicker and has been for ages.
getting "evolved" on an issue: GOP-e / RINO weasel words for receiving Soros bucks. What was YOUR price, Sean?
Oh good. I had a weird feeling I was the only one who heard him capitulate on his radio show. Click! Done. No more Hamnesty or FOX. I was sick to my stomach just watching Meagan Kelly smiling announcing the election results so it wasn’t a huge stretch to turn em off permanently, other than the fact I had watched them since 2002 or so. Guess the FOX paycheck outweighed loyalty to the cause, huh Sean? Ailes says we’re pro amnesty and you just meekly go along. Sickening.
For Hannity, this latest might be the "devolve" state of his illegal immigration position. I first heard him when he was on WGST in Atlanta only. Pre-9/11/2001, he'd occasionally get a call from someone who thought the increasing number of illegal aliens around Atlanta and Georgia was a problem. Hannity would jump down their throats and start babbling about his Irish ancestors, "no Irish need apply", and about how he'd come to the US illegally if he lived in Mexico,etc.
He would not allow anyone to even state why they thought illegal aliens were a problem. Then 9/11 happened and he "evolved" and decided that illegal aliens and porous borders were a national security issue.
And, as you state, since the 2012 election he's changed again, but actually he's "devolved" back toward his pre-9/11 position and was even for a path to citizenship. But now he seems to be backing off from that to some extent.