Replies

As for Hannity, he isn't one tenth as informed as Grant and often suggests a caller is lying because he, Hannity, isn't aware of the facts. Seems Sean thinks if he doen't know about something then it couldn't possibly have happened.

I gave him a couple of years and he still hasn't been able to utter the name Vince Foster. When Fox first went on the air, they had Rita Cosby do some pieces on the possible murder. Then nothing. Then O'Reilly confronted Ken Starr with the fact that several of Starr's investigators didn't think it was a suicide. Then nothing. I haven't watched H&C or O'Reilly for a few months now because I've given up on them.

The other day I listened for a few minutes and there was Hannity complaining about the 'obscene' profits the executives earned at Enron. He decided that they should be allowed to keep X amount of millions and the rest should go to the workers. At that point I turned off the radio.

The question about Enron is the accounting practices they used to state their fiscal health. If laws were broken, then they need to go to jail. If they were within the law, then we have a duty to see if changes can be made. My guess is that right now there are more than a few huge corporations waiting for the ax to fall on them. If the Enron execs misstated their financial condition in memos to their employees, that probably is a crime as well.

I simply refuse to react to the hysteria promoted by the lamestream talking heads who couldn't tell you what kind of business Enron was if their lives depeneded upon it.