Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Sean Hannity is an a$$
Vanity | Me - nesnah

Posted on 01/31/2012 1:46:56 PM PST by nesnah

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121 next last
To: nesnah

Sean Hannity reminds me of the top producer at a Merrill-Lynch branch office. Before passing the securities exam he sold jewelry at Diamds-R-Us, before that a house painter, before that some kind of laborer and other than that, I think he managed to get out of high school.

And Sean’s qualifications as a political pundit and whatever the heck he is are... what? You can say similar about many of the other talk show hosts.

It takes hard work to capitalize on luck. A lot of luck and being in the right place doesn’t hurt either.


41 posted on 01/31/2012 2:29:17 PM PST by Sequoyah101 (Half the people are below average.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Terry Mross

did not know that pal, thank you.

I have turned Hannity since last year, the man is a fraud, his message to helping vets is a fraud.

It is all about him and he is no hard working blue collar either


42 posted on 01/31/2012 2:29:40 PM PST by manc (FOX, DRUDGE, HAS BEEN DISGUSTING IN THEIR BIASED ATTACKS V NEWT. I HATE OUR BIASED LIBERAL MEDIA.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: nesnah

A million years ago Hannity was good, now its as though he listens to Limbaugh and gives a kindergarten interpretation of Rush.


43 posted on 01/31/2012 2:31:16 PM PST by svcw (For the new year: you better toughen You up, if you are going to continue to be stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sequoyah101

He seems to take his cues of Rush or he did when I used to watch and listen to him.


44 posted on 01/31/2012 2:32:44 PM PST by manc (FOX, DRUDGE, HAS BEEN DISGUSTING IN THEIR BIASED ATTACKS V NEWT. I HATE OUR BIASED LIBERAL MEDIA.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: cynwoody
“Leo Donofrio, having failed on the facts, turned to the law and cooked up his cockamamie definition of NBC, designed to exclude Obama.”

Nonsense. History shows, Supreme Court shows, what NBC is. Donofrio didn't concoct anything. It was already commonly known fact.

How the current court would decide is unknown. Just because they might agree with you won't make them right. They found abortion in the constitution and it isn't there, so they could go against common knowledge, historical fact and judicial precedence and find whatever the want to and it will be law.

45 posted on 01/31/2012 2:32:44 PM PST by faucetman ( Just the facts, ma'am, Just the facts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: chrisnj
I am not constitutionally eligible to be the pres or VP because I am not an article 2 natural born citizen

The concept of "natural born citizen" did not require the parents to have been citizens. It stipulated that the parents (actually just the father) not owe allegiance to any foreign nation. Resident aliens on the path to citizenship, having renounced such allegiances, would have fit the definition.

I don't know if Rubio's father was a resident alien when Marco was born, but he was an exile from Castro and certainly owed him no allegiance. So, though it's clear that Obama doesn't qualify, I don't think it's settled at all that Rubio doesn't. Just my opinion.

Oh, and yes. Hannity's a talentless hack.

46 posted on 01/31/2012 2:33:13 PM PST by BfloGuy (The final outcome of the credit expansion is general impoverishment.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: svcw

just said the same LOL, you beat me to it.

Hannity has his elitist cross dressing homosexuals pals at his cocktail parties and that is all he cares about whilst taking conservative money pretending to be a conservative.


47 posted on 01/31/2012 2:35:47 PM PST by manc (FOX, DRUDGE, HAS BEEN DISGUSTING IN THEIR BIASED ATTACKS V NEWT. I HATE OUR BIASED LIBERAL MEDIA.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: svcw

Dumb Republicans for $200 Alex. :)


48 posted on 01/31/2012 2:38:16 PM PST by MotorCityBuck ( Keep the change, you filthy animal!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: cynwoody

Thank you !


49 posted on 01/31/2012 2:44:06 PM PST by Eric in the Ozarks (Eh ?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: nesnah

Anyone who mocks the birthers is not a Constitutionalist. If they don’t mind having an illegitimate president sitting in the white house they are not Constitutionalists. They are RINOs or democrats.


50 posted on 01/31/2012 2:47:55 PM PST by taxesareforever (Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich no jail time. Yeah!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jonrick46

Hannity getting confused???? No way!!! /s


51 posted on 01/31/2012 2:48:20 PM PST by autumnraine (America how long will you be so deaf and dumb to the tumbril wheels carrying you to the guillotine?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: cynwoody
It was not until December, 2008, after the election, that Leo Donofrio, having failed on the facts, turned to the law and cooked up his cockamamie definition of NBC, designed to exclude Obama.

Here is that Obot lie again. Chester Arthur's NBC citizenship was challenged in 1884, and Charles Evans Huges NBC citizenship was challenged in 1916. That precedes Obama by a hundred years in the first case, and by 90 years in the second. While we're at it, George Romney's NBC citizenship was challenged in 1964.

Sorry, it's too late for that. If the Supreme Court ever takes up the issue, they'll define NBC as entitled to citizenship by birth.

And should they do so, they will be making just another mistake in a long history of mistakes. Why anybody takes them seriously anymore I don't know. I think the supreme court should be derided as the clown circus act it has become, thanks to Roosevelt. Good God! The other day they voted on a GPS tracking case. They were unanimous in their conclusions, but their reasoning was all over the place. Hardly the activity of a reasoned body, but perfectly consistent with a clutch of voting clowns.

I for one am sick of putting up with bullsh*t from the Supreme court. WE THE PEOPLE need to decide what the law is, and force those silly bastards to obey the people's will, and we can start by impeaching those two silly Obama appointees. Let it not be forgotten, they derive their power from US, not the other way around.

It will also seem perfectly reasonable to the people, because it's the common understanding, whereas adopting Donofrio's definition would seem contrived to screw Zero by judicial fiat.

And who would care if Zero got screwed over? Ever hear of a thing called Karma? I wouldn't give a flying leap if Obama was wrongfully convicted and punished for anything. Why on earth would you care if Obama got screwed over?

That the master of screwing people over with legal technicalities himself got screwed over because of a legal technicality is what I would call a Just comeuppance!

52 posted on 01/31/2012 2:49:43 PM PST by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: nesnah

He was referring to people who questioned Rubio’s citizenship


53 posted on 01/31/2012 2:49:43 PM PST by bamagirl1944 (That's short for Alabama, not Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nesnah

Wait, people still listen to Yawn Vanity?


54 posted on 01/31/2012 2:54:10 PM PST by Antoninus (Mitt Romney -- attempting to execute a hostile take-over of the Republican Party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thestob
hope your flame resistant suit is in good order!!!

Don't worry about *it*. It's been inviting this kind of slap down since I and others first became aware of it's existence.

It just keeps repeating the same old lies and Democrat talking points. It is what they refer to as a crapweasel.

55 posted on 01/31/2012 2:54:51 PM PST by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: nesnah
Sean, it isn't about birth certificates; it's about eligibility.

I understand he's huge into Twitter now, so if anyone here uses it, maybe they can gently remind him what the real issue is.

56 posted on 01/31/2012 2:56:30 PM PST by mupcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: faucetman

Exactly. The Supreme Court gets the law wrong all the time. Kelo v New London is another example.


57 posted on 01/31/2012 2:58:08 PM PST by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

Comment #58 Removed by Moderator

To: All

I haven’t listened to Hannity in years. What turned me off?

Do you remember the “Jersey girls”? They were a group of attractive women from New Jersey who had lost their husbands on 9-11. They were paid off handsomely by a variety of agencies, but that did not stop them from bashing President Bush for 9-11 and its aftermath. The tv networks couldn’t get enough of them. They were on just about every tv network talk show over and over again because they had the right message - Bash Bush!

The 9-11 Commission was eventually formed and came to New York for some of their hearings. Guess who the 9-11 Commission called to testify? That’s right, the “Jersey girls”. More Bush Bashing!

In response to the initial publicity the “Jersey girls” received, approximately 100 families of the victims of 9-11 joined together and wrote a letter to President Bush offering their support. Not surprisingly, they were, for all practical purposes ignored by the major media. The little bit of media attention they got was confined to NYC and just preceded the hearings for the 9-11 Commission.

So now the 9-11 Commission calls upon, only the “Jersey girls” to testify and ignores the 100 families. So, I ask you, who does Sean Hannity have on his radio show as the 9-11 hearings ended? That’s right - the “Jersey girls”!
The 100 families remained in obscurity.

Sean Hannity is a loser!


59 posted on 01/31/2012 3:15:48 PM PST by JohnG45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: mupcat
Sean, it isn't about birth certificates; it's about eligibility.

I understand he's huge into Twitter now, so if anyone here uses it, maybe they can gently remind him what the real issue is.

Be careful, you may confuse him.

60 posted on 01/31/2012 3:17:53 PM PST by JohnG45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson