Posted on 03/10/2006 5:34:07 AM PST by soccermom
Dear Mr. Hannity,
Your cavalier attitude toward the possible removal of our troops from the UAE air base (as discussed on Thursday's show) has finally caused me to lose whatever remaining affection I had for you. It is very easy for you, sitting in your comfortable studio, to respond, “Let em”. You're not the one who has to conduct missions in the Middle East. You're not the one that needs the logistical support. Why don't you tell it to General Tommy Franks? Better yet, why don't you tell it to the men and women that are currently working with the UAE?
Yesterday's stunt by congress to revoke the contract with DPW has done absolutely nothing to make our country any safer. It was purely a political stunt. Unless congress closes down every air and sea port to imports (and foreign visitors) of any kind, there will always be a risk. Changing whomever holds the contract is nothing more than a change in window dressing and you know it. Meanwhile, as you and others are stirring up people into a frenzy over them thar A-rabs, another pale-skinned, British-accented Richard Reid will waltz right in under your nose.
Whether or not the selfish pandering of our politicians hampers our war effort remains to be seen. But, if our troops are forced to take on additional risks due to a lack of cooperation by the UAE, I will lay their blood directly at the feet of you, like-minded shock-jocks, and the spineless Republicans in congress. (I expected such tactics from the Demagoguecrats. I did not expect Republicans to put their own miserable political careers ahead of national interest.)
Furthermore, I am getting more than a little tired of your wrapping yourself in the mantle of Ronald Reagan. Your repeated attempts to paint yourself as a “Reagan Conservative” is nothing more than an intellectually lazy way for you to appeal to your audience. It is very easy to simply claim “I'm with him – the cool guy”, rather have to define yourself and stand on your own.
We (conservatives) all love Ronald Reagan. Who are you to invoke him as to where he would stand on your issue? My father was a fighter pilot from the time he fought in Vietnam to the time he retired in 1992. He will tell anyone who will listen about the brilliance of Ronald Reagan. He tells us he is a “World War Three” veteran and that Reagan won the Cold War without firing a shot. For Father's Day a few years ago, I even got him a license plate frame that reads: “World War III Veteran......Reagan Won the Cold War.” Incidentally, my father was the DO for the fighter wing that bombed Libya. I was only a teen then but, if I'm not mistaken, France was even uncooperative then, refusing to let us use their airspace. So while you're telling it to Tommy Franks and our troops in the Middle East, why don't you go ahead and tell my father how insignificant it is to have strategic allies as well?
Finally, I get a little tired of people like you holding subsequent presidents to the “Reagan Ideal” -- an illusion that Ronald Reagan himself couldn't possibly live up to. Yes, Reagan was one of our greatest presidents. Yes, he was a conservative leader. But, NO, he didn't always adhere to his conservative principles and I'm getting a little tired of you revisionists pretending he did. President Reagan, like any great leader, was a pragmatist. And he, like any great leader, occasionally had to set aside his conservative ideals for more practical purposes. Raising taxes on social security isn't a conservative ideal. I don't think Reagan wanted to do it, but he did so in order to get other concessions from congress. Growing the deficit is not a conservative ideal. I don't think Reagan wanted to do it, but he did so for the greater goal of building up our military (and he thought he was getting other concessions from congress.) I don't think a conservative like Reagan would want to ally himself with a country like Iraq, but he did so because it was the pragmatic thing to do at the time. And let's not forget Reagan appointed Sandra Day O'Connor. So please, stop holding Bush (or anyone else for that matter) to a purely conservative standard that never was.
So WWRD? I don't know what Reagan would have done in the DPW controversy. NEITHER DO YOU. I do know that Reagan wasn't concerned with what the “popular” thought was. He did what he thought was best for our nation, regardless of what the critics said. Unlike you, he was not short-sighted. He knew that the long-term benefit of defeating communism was more important than avoiding the contemporaneous scorn of his critics. And unlike the spineless Republicans in congress, he didn't ignore the best interests of the country in an attempt to save his own political rear end. And that is why his legacy stands today.
I am stunned at the sudden love and trust of everything Muslim by many people here on FR.
From DU or from the Demo-lib lefty wing, YES, I could understand.
But from FR, I am still scratching my head.
soccermom's rant does not focus on the DPW deal it focuses on Hannity. Hannity is a little light in the loafers when it comes to understanding and discussing national security matters. All he does is incessantly repeat talking points without providing any analysis. And if you disagree with him, you are for terrorist infiltration of our ports? Yea, right.
I really like Glen Beck too, but ticked off at WSB in Atlanta for taking him off and adding some twit named Denny Schafer. His whine is worse than Sean.
The New York/Washington DC culture is very much dominated by liberals and their media whores. Thus for the conservative talk radio hosts and journalists (Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham and others…) who in this area suck up to liberals from time to time in order to be “marginally” accepted in this culture and attend the liberals’ cocktails party from time to time and have some fun. It sounds strange but it is very much true. I think that is one important reason why Rush Limbaugh the ultimate and best talk show host in the country does not live in New York/DC area but lives in Florida. He knows that there is a great temptation to play nice to liberals from time to time if he lives among them, and he just does not want to do that and I that is why I admire him more than any other talk show host or political analyst in the country.
The UAE already services our naval ships in the region. The UAE has assisted with tracking the financial network of AQ.
The UAE has offered a HUGE amount of financial assistance to the US in the wake of Katrina.
Is the UAE perfect? Of course not. But they are much more in our camp than in the camp of our enemies and particularly so since 9/11.
This fiasco sends an awful message to other regimes in the ME that might have wanted to side with the US.
You mean as liberals and their media whores as well as some knee jerks and extreme fringe on our side have predicted the same outcome in 2000, 2002, and 2004.
I don't have to wear a tiara, do I?
You forgot one part. That is what the show is during the phone calls. The phone calls are sandwiched in between sickening, gratuitous encomiums of George W. Bush. Quite boring and without intellecutal honesty. I gave up on him some time ago. I'd rather have the radio turned off than tuned in to Hannity.
LOL! Never heard of the Intermediate Nuclear Forces treaty?
Boy, Reagan got hammered for not protecting the "security of the United States" on that issue.
Despite the many years he'd shown his good judgement of how to deal with communists.
Very similar to what happened to Bush on the Dubai terminals deal.
Here's my favorite historical comparison on this issue though:
"I have no objection to President Nixon going to China. I just object to his coming back.”
People will be fickle and foolish won't they? But leaders shouldn't.
I can't even listen to him anymore. Self-promotion and repetition aren't the mark of a great conservative talk show host. Medved is much better during the same slot here in D/FW.
We are seeking and trying to promote alliances in a war. We are not picking a members of a church softball team. Backing Arab states that assist us in the GWOT is not an embrace of all things Muslim. To suggest that it is an embrace of a DU or left wing agenda is absolutely absurd. Gens. Franks, Pace and Abizaid all backed this ports deal. Are they DU, Demo-lib freaks?
Yours is the kind of simple analysis that Hannity serves up three hours a day.
Ok, enough levity, back to the serious arguments!
OK IJ, are you going to coerce a US firm to operate these TERMINALS? What if you don't get an American firm? As a rock-ribbed conservative, are you going to nationalize terminal operations?
This is absolutely hilarious. Watching Republicans falling apart over a deal that shouldn't have even raised an eyebrow. I'm just suprised Bush actually did something conservative. Of course it doesn't make up for the over $1 trillion in waste he helped to add to the budget in initiatives and it will probably be the last conservative thing he ever does, but what the heck. Unfortunately the 5+ years of over-the-top turrism and boogey man behind every tree rhetoric put the masses in the camp opposite to Bush. And the one time he does something conservative they turn against him.
Just for clarity's sake, I would walk to the ends of the earth barefoot to support and help finance President George W. Bush and the GOP.
Until this port deal, I have supported W's every move, and could almost even sympathize with his stance (dilemma) on immigration and spending.
I stand 1000 percent behind W's version of the Patriot Act, and I am in support of the NSA's right to intercept terrorist communications in and outside the USA.
I support school vouchers, am strenously opposed to abortion, I believe we should drill for oil in ANWR and elsewhere, and I even support W's vision of global financial investments.
This ports deal, however, would have put us in a real bind, especially if there was some type of leadership change in the UAE, or if the DWP had hired a nasty new CEO or board of directors.
As for the GOP, it is (was) not media bias that had W's support level plunging. It was the fleeing of millions of mainstream Republicans over this deal, most of whom support and welcome foreign investment but don't want Arab governments to be in bed with the US Coast Guard, etc.
Today, I am on my knees thanking the US House for in effect saving many Republicans from certain defeat this November.
It will be tough enough to fight the mainstream media libs, let alone many rank and file conservatives who would have been so disgusted with this deal that they would have stayed home in 06 and 08.
Good good job. Can I put this on my blog?
I agree totally. I can usually stomach Hannity for a little while on my drive home, but he was scolding anyone who disagreed with him the other day, very condencending, and it just turned my stomach. He just doesn't strike me as the smartest bulb in the pack.
He cannot argue, and pulls out the "I'm a true conservative who holds my ideas right no matter what" "I love Reagan" when he is stuck.
Once again, good job on this.
Signed - another soccer mom, lol!
You forgot to mention that he tells everyone that they are a great American, as long as they agree with him. He is always up against a hard break. And when he spoke with Joshua Sparling he tried to compare the pain he suffered with what Josh is suffering every single day. Hannity is a moron.
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.