Poor Sean Hannity

King ^ | April 22, 2003 | Charley Reese

[beaversmom]

That's my view of soccer moms too--it's got its pros and cons. It may mean the conservative movement is getting too weak if they all start flocking over. I see the conservative way of thinking as being more level headed and logical thus more masculine, but, hey, if they start thinking out of the box because of Hannity that would be good.

[omronnie]

After all, who are the great culture-destroyers of the 20th century? Mao, Lenin, Pol Pot...

---

My gosh!! Don't forget the Talliban !!!!
Omronnie

[MightyMouseToSaveThe Day]

I agree with you, Puppage. You hit the nail on the head. Of course the liberals need to complain about SOMETHING since applauding a victory is not within their maturity level.

I have a liberal sister who had obviously read the Talking Points memo because she started on me about how Bush had just stood by and allowed these antiquities to be looted blah blah blah. And how priceless and precious these antiquities were and at least under Saddam they were preserved. And that the US should have parked tanks in front of the museum

So, I replied with the following points:
1. Saddam was responsible for murdering millions of innocent people, and those people were also "priceless and precious".
2. I sent her every article i could find that showed the museums hadn't been open to the public in about a decade, that there was some evidence that Saddam had taken the best for himself long ago, that the looting of artifacts was largely the work of professional thieves with the cooperation of inside operators, and that the museums also displayed mostly reproductions, and that the staff really didn't know how much had actually been stolen during the war and unable to quantify because of the aforegoing factors.
3) Her idea that the US should have parked tanks in front of the museum presupposes that everyone KNEW which building would be hit by professional thieves (and if that's the case, then there would be no more burglary in the world because we could just park a guard in front of the building that was targeted for theft, duh), and that Baghdad has thousands of buildings and was she suggesting that tanks be parked in front of each of those thousands of buildings?

She dropped the subject after that. And in typical liberal fashion, said she "wouldn't discuss it anymore and for me not to bring it up again". haha. victory is mine! :-)

And I have to confess something to you all. This is new behavior for me. For years I've kept quiet when she's spouted off because she rants and raves and starts with the name-calling (yes, I love her, but not her political views--she really is a typical liberal)and I never knew how to respond to her. I'd just get so mad and not be able to hold my own in a kind of rational debate (not that she's rational in her non-debate, for that matter).

But thanks to FR, and I mean this most sincerely, I now feel confident enough to express my viewpoints in a (fairly) cohesive and articulate manner. so, a great big thank you to all FReepers for the wonderful discussions that have expanded my debating abilities! :-)

[ladyinred]

Sorry, gotta go with Sean here.

[Puppage]

Good for you! I have a very liberal brother n law who is the same way...in words & actions as your sister. It's funny how amazingly similar the people on the left are.

[bootless]

As a long-time listener, yes, you will hear a lot of themes on the show over and over. One thing, though, is that there are always new listeners tuning in who did not happen to hear about Byrd or whoever back when you and I did. This is the same sort of radio technique used in a baseball game broadcast - the score is repeated often because new listeners are constantly tuning in, and the important stuff is said over and over.

Also, you will hardly ever hear a host (Larry Elder is great about this) discuss an earlier call with someone without catching the audience up. He does it so smoothly that you hardly notice it - you just appreciate it.

So, these repetitions, while being an irritant to someone who is tuned in for the long haul, is necessary to bring the newer listener up to date, and to keep them listening.

However, there are times when that is done too frequently on many shows in the same way, and I think some variety in presenting the information would be a good thing.

[Puppage]

And here's something else to think about....what if we HAD put troops there to prevent the looting thieves? How would they do that??? Put shooting them, that's how.

And, wouldn't the left just LOVE THAT? Then all of a sudden they're no longer looters or theives....they become INNOCENT CIVILIANS

Don't think for A SECOND, that it wouldn't play out JUST like that.

Lastly, HOW COME THE HUMAN SHIELDS DIDN'T PREVENT THE LOOTING,Hmm?

[FirstTomato]

This guy actually had me agreeing with him, until he started spouting off about fascism. Fascism is actually socialism(and a form of Marxism) and there is nothing more fascist than leftists.

And as far as the left being "pro-life" because they are "anti-war" tell that to the millions of dead unborn babies that the left has murdered. Tell that to the millions of murdered Jews and Gypsies, who wouldn't have been slaughtered if not for the pacifists who strangled the West in the 1930's. Tell that to the dead Iraqis, tortured in unspeakable ways for not adhering to socialist Ba'th Party policy in Saddam's regime. I'm sure all those dead souls are not amused.

[meyer]

Those who stole from the museums are the guilty party, not the US who freed human beings from prisons, tyranny, and torture.

Exactly. These people want to blame the US soldiers for the looting and theft, some of which probably took place long before we got there, rather than blame the thieves themselves. This is akin to blaming the cop on the beat for the bank robbery because he was patrolling 2 blocks away.

We had much more important buildings to secure during the early stages of this event including infrastructure, hospitals, and the many arsenals in and around the city. And as much as I think there was some important historical "stuff" there, none of it was worth the life of even one American soldier. Where were the human shields?

[meyer]

For example he's probably posseses the most stellar managerial skills I've ever seen in my life, yet the leader of the free world can't manage to pronounce "nuclear".

It ain't dumb; its an accent!

[meyer]

One single American soldier firing in the air could have prevented the looters.

BS - following that logic, there would have been no looting anywhere in Baghdad. We could have just fired a few shots in the air and all would be calm.

[wtc911]

Agreed, Hanity is a c+ mind sitting in a chair that should be filled by at leasta b+ intellect....we stopped watching his furrowed brow, shallow sound bite act a long time ago.

[FirstTomato]

Sorry I disagree. The museums and the library should have been protected, early on. It was simply a mistake.

We spent an extraordinary effort to spare these buildings, plus ALL the mosques, from destruction from bombs. We could have made sure some troops were parked outside the entrances to these buildings early on. In fact, the troops that pulled that Saddam statue down should have been parked in front of the museum instead of futzing around with a statue that wasn't worth anything.

[FirstTomato]

I stopped listening to Hannity on the radio when he started having more leftist guests than conservatives.

[Double Tap]

But he really showed his emptiness recently when he said that criticism of the United States failing to guard the Iraqi National Museum was — you guessed it — just left-wing soreheads who are mad that President Bush's war has been so successful.

Looks like Hannity was right.

[meyer]

This whole issue is akin to the LA riots after the Rodney King verdict. If the Iraqis are so dumb as to not care about their heritage and to destroy their museums and homes etc, they get what they deserve.

It wasn't the Iraqi people at large; it was a relatively small group of Iraqi people. I suspect that this is where a goodly chunk of the republican guard (the ones that "blended in") decided to make their mark. There are still many that would like to discredit the US in any way that they can. While we were busy securing hospitals and water treatment plants, they were out looking for things to steal. They were likely also drawing media attention to the theft as is often their way. Leftists and their friends love propaganda.

I would not have expended 1 American life for something the Iraqis should have been proud enogh of to protect themselves.

Agreed to a certain extent. Certainly, none of the contents were worth the life of an American soldier.

[meyer]

I've been in the military for some time now and I was never aware that cultural advisors were in the chain of command.

That's "Cultural advisor, SIR"!

[meyer]

Surely we coulf have spared a few guys to protect the heritage of mankind?

At the expense of which strategic objective?

[meyer]

If Clinton had been President, we would've secured the museum and lost 18 men doing it, or we would've secured the museum and left Jessica Lynch behind. Our military is no longer the world's rent-a-cop.

If Clinton were President, we'd have invaded Israel, looted their museum ourselves, and the leftist presstitutes would not have said a word.

[meyer]

Re: post #140. Excellent post and rises above the rhetoric.