Keith Olbermann tells McCain to grow up

Ms KittyMs Kitty Registered Users Posts: 556
My favorites
Qhemets AHOC,OHHB
Yemen Henna
HHC
AOHR Deep Conditioner
Coconut,Jojoba and JBC oils
Rosemary Oil/w horsetail,coltsfoot and Nettle leaves.
My own homemade mixtures
BlackStrap Molasses

http://public.fotki.com/mj11051
«1

Comments

  • a.l.i.c.e.a.l.i.c.e. Registered Users Posts: 673
    I saw this last night and, while it made me uncomfortable to watch (I have a STRONG aversion to conflict), I thought it was very true and brilliant.

    A lot of what McCain has been saying lately has been galling to me, and I used to have a great deal of respect for him (I even voted for him in the 2000 primary).

    As an evangelical Christian, I was personally NOT won over during the religious debate (whether he knew the questions ahead of time or not), especially when he was asked how his faith affected him in his dialy life and he rehashed a story about being a soldier. To me, that said that it doesn't affect his daily life today.
    botticelli-ish bob.

    Current Routine:
    -Suave Aloe & Waterlily cowash/leave-in
    -Giovanni Direct Leave-In
    -FOTE aloe vera gel
  • misspammisspam Registered Users Posts: 5,318
    Keith Olbermann strikes me as an angry, self-important windbag. Just my opinion. :glasses9:
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • AmandacurlsAmandacurls Registered Users Posts: 6,252 Curl Neophyte
    misspam wrote: »
    Keith Olbermann strikes me as an angry, self-important windbag. Just my opinion. :glasses9:

    Mine too. I've listened to him before and I found it useless.
  • Myradella3Myradella3 Registered Users Posts: 2,481
    I agree with others that Olberman is so full of himself that he can't come close to being effective. When I first watched, I thought it was a comedy show. When I realized it was serious, I watched a couple of more times just in case the first time had a been fluke. I don't know the last time I saw his show.
  • RedCatWavesRedCatWaves Registered Users Posts: 31,259 Curl Connoisseur
    misspam wrote: »
    Keith Olbermann strikes me as an angry, self-important windbag. Just my opinion. :glasses9:



    Keith Olbermann is a pompous windbag. But so are Bill O'Reilly and Joe Scarborough, and all the other pompous windbags over on Fox News (fair and balanced my ass). Makes no difference which way they lean. They're all pretty much alike.
  • nynaeve77nynaeve77 Registered Users Posts: 7,135 Curl Novice
    misspam wrote: »
    Keith Olbermann strikes me as an angry, self-important windbag. Just my opinion. :glasses9:

    Aren't most of those guys, though? They love to hear themselves talk, that's for sure, left or right. It's why Stephen Colbert can satirize them so well...he's got lots of material for comedy gold!
    "Maybe Lucy's right. Of all the Charlie Browns in the world, you're the Charlie Browniest."--Linus, A Charlie Brown Christmas


    My fotki: http://public.fotki.com/nynaeve77/
    Password: orphanannie
  • misspammisspam Registered Users Posts: 5,318
    misspam wrote: »
    Keith Olbermann strikes me as an angry, self-important windbag. Just my opinion. :glasses9:



    Keith Olbermann is a pompous windbag. But so are Bill O'Reilly and Joe Scarborough, and all the other pompous windbags over on Fox News (fair and balanced my ass). Makes no difference which way they lean. They're all pretty much alike.

    You do have a point. But I gotta say, Sean Hannity is a cutie and seems like a real sweet guy, husband and father. (Yeah, I have a bit of a crush on him.) :tongue5:
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • misspammisspam Registered Users Posts: 5,318
    nynaeve77 - Ooooohh, I love watching Stephen Colbert! :laughing7::laughing7:
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • RedCatWavesRedCatWaves Registered Users Posts: 31,259 Curl Connoisseur
    misspam wrote: »
    misspam wrote: »
    Keith Olbermann strikes me as an angry, self-important windbag. Just my opinion. :glasses9:



    Keith Olbermann is a pompous windbag. But so are Bill O'Reilly and Joe Scarborough, and all the other pompous windbags over on Fox News (fair and balanced my ass). Makes no difference which way they lean. They're all pretty much alike.

    You do have a point. But I gotta say, Sean Hannity is a cutie and seems like a real sweet guy, husband and father. (Yeah, I have a bit of a crush on him.) :tongue5:


    I think Sean Hannity is a first-class dick. He has spent more air hours trashing Obama than all of the other pompous talking-heads put together. When Edwards got caught with his pants down, Hannity harped on the subject for several shows, probably because he somehow thought it would reflect badly on Obama...until one of his guests pointed out that McCain is an adulterer also. Then Hannity got all crazed and started spouting BS about how we can't hold that against McCain because he was a POW and the Viet Cong messed with is mind! As if that somehow instills confidence in McCain...we're supposed to vote for a crazy adulterer now I guess. It was pitiful really. Hannity hates Obama so badly that it clouds his judgment.
  • Ms KittyMs Kitty Registered Users Posts: 556
    misspam wrote: »



    Keith Olbermann is a pompous windbag. But so are Bill O'Reilly and Joe Scarborough, and all the other pompous windbags over on Fox News (fair and balanced my ass). Makes no difference which way they lean. They're all pretty much alike.

    You do have a point. But I gotta say, Sean Hannity is a cutie and seems like a real sweet guy, husband and father. (Yeah, I have a bit of a crush on him.) :tongue5:


    I think Sean Hannity is a first-class dick. He has spent more air hours trashing Obama than all of the other pompous talking-heads put together. When Edwards got caught with his pants down, Hannity harped on the subject for several shows, probably because he somehow thought it would reflect badly on Obama...until one of his guests pointed out that McCain is an adulterer also. Then Hannity got all crazed and started spouting BS about how we can't hold that against McCain because he was a POW and the Viet Cong messed with is mind! As if that somehow instills confidence in McCain...we're supposed to vote for a crazy adulterer now I guess. It was pitiful really. Hannity hates Obama so badly that it clouds his judgment.


    Thank You
    My favorites
    Qhemets AHOC,OHHB
    Yemen Henna
    HHC
    AOHR Deep Conditioner
    Coconut,Jojoba and JBC oils
    Rosemary Oil/w horsetail,coltsfoot and Nettle leaves.
    My own homemade mixtures
    BlackStrap Molasses

    http://public.fotki.com/mj11051
  • Myradella3Myradella3 Registered Users Posts: 2,481
    Not only is McCain an adulter, his wife Cindy is too. But in a recent story on NPR, we learned that her dad was too! He was injured in WWII and though married, he took up with Cindy's mother while recuperating. Seems to me the spouses of Cindy and John's offspring need to be a tad cautious.
  • wild~hairwild~hair Registered Users Posts: 9,890 Curl Neophyte
    misspam wrote: »
    Keith Olbermann strikes me as an angry, self-important windbag. Just my opinion. :glasses9:

    Mine too. I've listened to him before and I found it useless.

    ITA.

    I only watched the first 1/5th of that video before I got bored with him and clicked away.
  • susancnwsusancnw Registered Users Posts: 1,374 Curl Novice
    misspam wrote: »
    misspam wrote: »
    Keith Olbermann strikes me as an angry, self-important windbag. Just my opinion. :glasses9:

    Keith Olbermann is a pompous windbag. But so are Bill O'Reilly and Joe Scarborough, and all the other pompous windbags over on Fox News (fair and balanced my ass). Makes no difference which way they lean. They're all pretty much alike.

    You do have a point. But I gotta say, Sean Hannity is a cutie and seems like a real sweet guy, husband and father. (Yeah, I have a bit of a crush on him.) :tongue5:

    Yeah, I like him too. I'm surprised he's not strangled Skeletor, er um. Alan Colmes though :D
    My son wears combat boots (and a parachute). So does my son-in-law.
    The older I get, the less patience I have with cleverness. Thomas Sowell.
    Resolve to perform what you ought. Perform without fail what you resolve. Benjamin Franklin.
    Don't go around saying the world owes you a living. The world owes you nothing. It was here first. Mark Twain.

    s-event.png

  • automaticflowersautomaticflowers Registered Users Posts: 3,465
    I really hate all the editorializing done on news stations now. It's all useless, IMO.
  • a.l.i.c.e.a.l.i.c.e. Registered Users Posts: 673
    I actually like the editorializing within the confines of editorial format/opinion shows like Olbermann's (and the same goes for O'Reilly--I can't stand him, but his show is an editorial show, so I take that into consideration and try not to get that bent out of shape about some of the more outrageous things he says). It is when editorializing spills over into straight news (on both sides) that I start to get uncomfortable. I feel like MSNBC does a better job of keeping these things separated than other channels. I used to be a big fan of FoxNews because I truly thought they were fair and balanced for the most part, but it seemed to just lean more and more throughout the last 6 or 7 years.
    botticelli-ish bob.

    Current Routine:
    -Suave Aloe & Waterlily cowash/leave-in
    -Giovanni Direct Leave-In
    -FOTE aloe vera gel
  • curlygirl81curlygirl81 Registered Users Posts: 127 Curl Neophyte
    The mainstream media is unwatchable. They talk over each other, interrupt each other, talk down to their audience and spin facts to support their point of view. It's all about them, what they think and how they contrive to make you think.

    For example, on CNN after the 2004 election, an announcer said that "Bush got 'only' 51% of the popular vote". Her point was that he really hardly got elected at all. Now, I'm not a Bush supporter, but 51% of the popular vote is the most a presidential candidate has EVER received in our entire 230-year history. It was actually a remarkable LANDSLIDE of an election.

    My point here is that only if one is armed with actual facts, not opinion, will the truth become plain.
  • MichelleBFTMichelleBFT Registered Users Posts: 4,812
    The mainstream media is unwatchable. They talk over each other, interrupt each other, talk down to their audience and spin facts to support their point of view. It's all about them, what they think and how they contrive to make you think.

    For example, on CNN after the 2004 election, an announcer said that "Bush got 'only' 51% of the popular vote". Her point was that he really hardly got elected at all. Now, I'm not a Bush supporter, but 51% of the popular vote is the most a presidential candidate has EVER received in our entire 230-year history. It was actually a remarkable LANDSLIDE of an election.

    My point here is that only if one is armed with actual facts, not opinion, will the truth become plain.

    Um, that's not true. Just a couple of minutes of research revealed that 14 of the presidents we've elected since the year 1900 have gotten more than 51% of the popular vote.

    And while I disagree that getting 51% of the popular vote equates to not having been elected, to imply that that's some sort of record feat is... well, wrong.
    "And politically correct is the worst term, not just because it’s dismissive, but because it narrows down the whole social justice spectrum to this idea that it’s about being polite instead of about dismantling the oppressive social structure of power.
    Fun Fact: When you actively avoid being “PC,” you’re not being forward-thinking or unique. You’re buying into systems of oppression that have existed since before you were even born, and you’re keeping those systems in place."
    Stolen.
  • curlygirl81curlygirl81 Registered Users Posts: 127 Curl Neophyte
    The mainstream media is unwatchable. They talk over each other, interrupt each other, talk down to their audience and spin facts to support their point of view. It's all about them, what they think and how they contrive to make you think.

    For example, on CNN after the 2004 election, an announcer said that "Bush got 'only' 51% of the popular vote". Her point was that he really hardly got elected at all. Now, I'm not a Bush supporter, but 51% of the popular vote is the most a presidential candidate has EVER received in our entire 230-year history. It was actually a remarkable LANDSLIDE of an election.

    My point here is that only if one is armed with actual facts, not opinion, will the truth become plain.

    Um, that's not true. Just a couple of minutes of research revealed that 14 of the presidents we've elected since the year 1900 have gotten more than 51% of the popular vote.

    And while I disagree that getting 51% of the popular vote equates to not having been elected, to imply that that's some sort of record feat is... well, wrong.

    Please post the URLs where you found this info. I'm very interested and am perfectly willing to be corrected. Thanks.
  • MichelleBFTMichelleBFT Registered Users Posts: 4,812
    The mainstream media is unwatchable. They talk over each other, interrupt each other, talk down to their audience and spin facts to support their point of view. It's all about them, what they think and how they contrive to make you think.

    For example, on CNN after the 2004 election, an announcer said that "Bush got 'only' 51% of the popular vote". Her point was that he really hardly got elected at all. Now, I'm not a Bush supporter, but 51% of the popular vote is the most a presidential candidate has EVER received in our entire 230-year history. It was actually a remarkable LANDSLIDE of an election.

    My point here is that only if one is armed with actual facts, not opinion, will the truth become plain.

    Um, that's not true. Just a couple of minutes of research revealed that 14 of the presidents we've elected since the year 1900 have gotten more than 51% of the popular vote.

    And while I disagree that getting 51% of the popular vote equates to not having been elected, to imply that that's some sort of record feat is... well, wrong.

    Please post the URLs where you found this info. I'm very interested and am perfectly willing to be corrected. Thanks.

    One might argue that you should be posting a URL for your initial assertion that the 2004 election was any kind of landslide. But hey, I'm willing to play.

    2004: Bush 50.73%, Kerry 48.27% (http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/fe2004/tables.pdf

    1988: Bush 53.37%, Dukakis 45.65% (http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/national.php?year=1988)

    1984: Reagan 58.77%, Mondale 40.46% (http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/national.php?year=1984)

    1972: Nixon 60.67%, McGovern 37.52% (http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/national.php?year=1972)

    1964: Johnson 61.05%, Goldwater 38.47% (http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/national.php?year=1964)

    I'd go on, but I actually just found this handy list of tables that breaks it down: http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/comparegraphs.php?year=1956&fips=0&f=1&off=0&elect=0

    So you can take a gander for yourself. Happy researching!
    "And politically correct is the worst term, not just because it’s dismissive, but because it narrows down the whole social justice spectrum to this idea that it’s about being polite instead of about dismantling the oppressive social structure of power.
    Fun Fact: When you actively avoid being “PC,” you’re not being forward-thinking or unique. You’re buying into systems of oppression that have existed since before you were even born, and you’re keeping those systems in place."
    Stolen.
  • curlygirl81curlygirl81 Registered Users Posts: 127 Curl Neophyte
    One might argue that you should be posting a URL for your initial assertion that the 2004 election was any kind of landslide. But hey, I'm willing to play.

    Thanks for the info - I stand corrected.

    But I maintain my original point. Being armed with the truth is the only way to make an informed decision. My example wasn't very good, since I didn't verify my data with more in-depth research, but the comment by CNN was still made and in such a way as to imply that Bush "hardly won".

    No, he did not win by a landslide by any means, but using the data you sent me, I now understand that there were a number of elections in our history that were just as close as the Bush/Kerry race and even closer. CNN still gets a thumbs down for their "implication", and thereby stirring everyone up.
  • MichelleBFTMichelleBFT Registered Users Posts: 4,812
    I never disagreed with your point.
    "And politically correct is the worst term, not just because it’s dismissive, but because it narrows down the whole social justice spectrum to this idea that it’s about being polite instead of about dismantling the oppressive social structure of power.
    Fun Fact: When you actively avoid being “PC,” you’re not being forward-thinking or unique. You’re buying into systems of oppression that have existed since before you were even born, and you’re keeping those systems in place."
    Stolen.
  • Mojo RileyMojo Riley Registered Users Posts: 27
    misspam wrote: »



    Keith Olbermann is a pompous windbag. But so are Bill O'Reilly and Joe Scarborough, and all the other pompous windbags over on Fox News (fair and balanced my ass). Makes no difference which way they lean. They're all pretty much alike.

    You do have a point. But I gotta say, Sean Hannity is a cutie and seems like a real sweet guy, husband and father. (Yeah, I have a bit of a crush on him.) :tongue5:


    I think Sean Hannity is a first-class dick. He has spent more air hours trashing Obama than all of the other pompous talking-heads put together. When Edwards got caught with his pants down, Hannity harped on the subject for several shows, probably because he somehow thought it would reflect badly on Obama...until one of his guests pointed out that McCain is an adulterer also. Then Hannity got all crazed and started spouting BS about how we can't hold that against McCain because he was a POW and the Viet Cong messed with is mind! As if that somehow instills confidence in McCain...we're supposed to vote for a crazy adulterer now I guess. It was pitiful really. Hannity hates Obama so badly that it clouds his judgment.


    Cosign with this, Hannity is a loose cannon and a complete nujob- he spews lies over and over again like a Tourette's victim. And he doesn't have the grace to admit when he's been caught, because he has no shame. I'l take Oberman any day of the week. At least most of it is backed up by facts, unlike his buddies on the right.
  • notegalnotegal Registered Users Posts: 560
    I know this is off topic... BUT...Really? Last time I checked Hannity tells the TRUTH. Something most liberal talk show hosts don't do. They just circle around and back peddle around every issue. I'm sorry, can't agree with you there. Truth hurts for most people. We need TRUTH not LIES.
    "The world is a fine place and worth fighting for."
    Ernest Hemingway


    CG since June 15th, 2008:dog::love5::elephant:
    3b very thick hair with very kinky (possibly 3c) curls underneath
    Went Deva Care line beginning
    September 23, 2009
    Update: 10/12/2009 I can't stop playing with my curls!! So soft, shiny and manageable!!!! IN LOVE WITH DEVA Products!!!!!! YIPPPIE!!!!:wav:




  • notegalnotegal Registered Users Posts: 560
    I saw this last night and, while it made me uncomfortable to watch (I have a STRONG aversion to conflict), I thought it was very true and brilliant.

    A lot of what McCain has been saying lately has been galling to me, and I used to have a great deal of respect for him (I even voted for him in the 2000 primary).

    As an evangelical Christian, I was personally NOT won over during the religious debate (whether he knew the questions ahead of time or not), especially when he was asked how his faith affected him in his daily life and he rehashed a story about being a soldier. To me, that said that it doesn't affect his daily life today.

    That wasn't really a debate. Obama refuses to do debates. The fact that McCain has had the experience as a soldier is better than Obama. So the little things that we go through in our daily lives don't affect our future years? I find that hard to believe. I believe we learn from every experience that comes our way.

    Can someone please tell me what Obama has done that's so fantastic anyway? The guy keeps talking about change. What change? You mean RADICAL change with Socialistic and Marxist tendencies? You mean act like Robin Hood? Steal from the Rich to give to the poor....ooo I mean redistribution of wealth? That kind of change? I sure as heck don't want that kind of change. The change for FEDERAL health care...wait, you mean end up like Canada where it can take DAYS to see a doctor and it's HORRIBLE service? How about no funding for our military to help defend our country? OR How about the fact that Obama wants to raise taxes? Hmmm...I think I'll take McCains proposal to lower taxes not raise them. I don't want his (Obama) change. His change will put this country into the stone age. Now I'm not exactly for McCain either, but I sure want someone who is experienced and tells me the straight out truth and no fluff in between. :occasion9: I just can't vote for a guy (Obama) who flip flops on every issue and somehow wants us to forget all of the things he has said and done in the past. From his ties to people to his words. His true character is showing. Everything little thing Obama does adds up to a very bad influence for this country. His true character will start coming out now.
    "The world is a fine place and worth fighting for."
    Ernest Hemingway


    CG since June 15th, 2008:dog::love5::elephant:
    3b very thick hair with very kinky (possibly 3c) curls underneath
    Went Deva Care line beginning
    September 23, 2009
    Update: 10/12/2009 I can't stop playing with my curls!! So soft, shiny and manageable!!!! IN LOVE WITH DEVA Products!!!!!! YIPPPIE!!!!:wav:




  • wild~hairwild~hair Registered Users Posts: 9,890 Curl Neophyte
    I know you're bored 'cause it's the DNC this week, but don't worry, just a few more days until the RNC.

    Maybe take up knitting in the meantime?
  • notegalnotegal Registered Users Posts: 560
    :toothy7:Ha! Thanks. I'm not actually that bored. :laughing7:
    "The world is a fine place and worth fighting for."
    Ernest Hemingway


    CG since June 15th, 2008:dog::love5::elephant:
    3b very thick hair with very kinky (possibly 3c) curls underneath
    Went Deva Care line beginning
    September 23, 2009
    Update: 10/12/2009 I can't stop playing with my curls!! So soft, shiny and manageable!!!! IN LOVE WITH DEVA Products!!!!!! YIPPPIE!!!!:wav:




  • CurlyGina2CurlyGina2 Registered Users Posts: 1,048
    I tend to think it is the conservatives who move us back into the stone age. Hmm.
  • notegalnotegal Registered Users Posts: 560
    So looking for other means of power or I mean ENERGY is running us back into the stone age? Last time I checked it was Pelosi who didn't want us to drill anywhere. Ms. Speaker of the house didn't want to do anything about advancing our energy and btw...she's a very liberal democrat.
    "The world is a fine place and worth fighting for."
    Ernest Hemingway


    CG since June 15th, 2008:dog::love5::elephant:
    3b very thick hair with very kinky (possibly 3c) curls underneath
    Went Deva Care line beginning
    September 23, 2009
    Update: 10/12/2009 I can't stop playing with my curls!! So soft, shiny and manageable!!!! IN LOVE WITH DEVA Products!!!!!! YIPPPIE!!!!:wav:




  • StephSStephS Registered Users Posts: 352
    How about the fact that Obama wants to raise taxes? Hmmm...I think I'll take McCains proposal to lower taxes not raise them.

    Obama wants to end the Bush tax cuts, which means your taxes could go up if you make over $250K/yr.

    Does that affect you? All of these "tax cuts" affect ONLY the wealthy. If you make less than $250K a year, you best believe you will be picking up their slack in some form or another. I know I have been for the past 8 years.

    What about McCain's idea to tax our already costly healthcare plans? You like that idea?

    I would much rather have someone willing to CHANGE the current status quo of coddling the uber-rich (and big corporations) at the expense of the middle class. (THAT'S the change you keep asking about from Obama supporters.) I do not think it is "stealing from the rich" to have them pay a fair share. Hell, it's chump change to them, anyway.

    Your reasons for one candidate over the other are very vague in the sense of "he will raise taxes, or he will lower taxes" without the specifics of who these taxes actually affect. All the people on TV/radio griping about taxes are millionaires/billionaires that do not want to pay any. And they apparently do a fantastic job of convincing people to vote with them, even though it's completely against the interests of the common (middle class) people. Some even get paid FOUR MILLION DOLLARS A MONTH to convince you to vote against your own interests.

    In addition, a change in the way we run healthcare doesn't mean our country turns completely socialist. That's some very extreme thinking, and only sees black or white in the issues. The issues of our country are NEVER black and white. They are always many shades of gray, and should be looked at as such.

    But hey, if you are a gazillionaire, I can see how you would vote for lower taxes....but if you are not wealthy, that vote ends up hurting you and me and all the rest of the "backbone of America" that is rapidly becoming more and more compressed (and depressed). Once the middle class is snuffed out, the terrorists truly WILL win, since the rich can live anywhere they please, and the rest of us will be too poor and sick to fight. Just had to tie in the terrorists, there. :wink:

    McCain is VERY disingenuous in my eyes since he began parroting exactly what the Evangelical voters want to hear, even though he has never walked that walk OR talked that talk in his past. Even worse, is that many Evangelicals now praise McCain simply because he SAID the things they want to hear. It is blatantly clear that he does not believe, or even care about those things at all - he just needs that voting block. I certainly would not classify that as "straight talk."

    John McCain is NOT the John McCain of several years ago. He has sidled up to the very people currently running our country into the ground.
  • Mojo RileyMojo Riley Registered Users Posts: 27
    notegal wrote: »
    I know this is off topic... BUT...Really? Last time I checked Hannity tells the TRUTH. Something most liberal talk show hosts don't do. They just circle around and back peddle around every issue. I'm sorry, can't agree with you there. Truth hurts for most people. We need TRUTH not LIES.

    HANNITY: "You're not listening, Susan. You've got to learn something. He had weapons of mass destruction. He promised to disclose them. And he didn't do it. You would have let him go free; we decided to hold him accountable." (4/13/04)
    FACT: Hannity's assertion comes more than six months after Bush Administration weapons inspector David Kay testified his inspection team had "not uncovered evidence that Iraq undertook significant post-1998 steps to actually build nuclear weapons or produce fissile material" and had not discovered any chemical or biological weapons. (Bush Administration Weapons Inspector David Kay, 10/2/03)
    HANNITY: "Colin Powell just had a great piece that he had in the paper today. He was there [in Iraq]. He said things couldn't have been better." (9/19/03)
    FACT: "Iraq has come very far, but serious problems remain, starting with security. American commanders and troops told me of the many threats they face--from leftover loyalists who want to return Iraq to the dark days of Saddam, from criminals who were set loose on Iraqi society when Saddam emptied the jails and, increasingly, from outside terrorists who have come to Iraq to open a new front in their campaign against the civilized world." (Colin Powell, 9/19/03)
    HANNITY: "And in northern Iraq today, this very day, al Qaeda is operating camps there, and they are attacking the Kurds in the north, and this has been well-documented and well chronicled. Now, if you're going to go after al Qaeda in every aspect, and obviously they have the support of Saddam, or we're not." (12/9/02)
    FACT: David Kay was on the ground for months investigating the activities of Hussein's regime. He concluded "But we simply did not find any evidence of extensive links with Al Qaeda, or for that matter any real links at all." He called a speech where Cheney made the claim there was a link "evidence free." (Boston Globe, 6/16/04)
    HANNITY: "[After 9-11], liberal Democrats at first showed little interest in the investigation of the roots of this massive intelligence failure...[Bush and his team] made it clear that determining the causes of America's security failures and finding and remedying its weak points would be central to their mission." (Let Freedom Ring, by Sean Hannity)
    TRUTH: Bush Opposed the creation of a special commission to probe the causes of 9/11 for over a year. On 5/23/02 CBS News Reported "President Bush took a few minutes during his trip to Europe Thursday to voice his opposition to establishing a special commission to probe how the government dealt with terror warnings before Sept. 11." Bush didn't relent to pressure to create a commission, mostly from those Hannity would consider "liberal" until September 2002. (CBS News, 5/23/02)
    HANNITY: "First of all, this president -- you know and I know and everybody knows -- inherited a recession...it was by every definition a recession" (11/6/02)
    HANNITY: "Now here's where we are. The inherited Clinton/Gore recession. That's a fact." (5/6/03)
    HANNITY: "The president inherited a recession." (7/10/03)
    HANNITY: "He got us out of the Clinton-Gore recession." (10/23/03)
    HANNITY: "They did inherit the recession. They did inherit the recession. We got out of the recession." (12/12/03)
    HANNITY: "And this is the whole point behind this ad, because the president did inherit a recession." (1/6/04)
    HANNITY: "Historically in every recovery, because the president rightly did inherit a recession. But historically, the lagging indicator always deals with employment." (1/15/04)
    HANNITY: "Congressman Deutsch, maybe you forgot but I'll be glad to remind you, the president did inherit that recession." (1/20/04)
    HANNITY: "He did inherit a recession, and we're out of the recession." (2/2/04)
    HANNITY: "The president inherited a recession." (2/23/04)
    HANNITY: "The president inherited a recession." (3/3/04)
    HANNITY: "Well, you know, we're going to show ads, as a matter of fact, in the next segment, Congressman. Thanks for promoting our next segment. What I like about them is everything I've been saying the president ought to do: is focusing in on his positions, on keeping the nation secure in very difficult times, what he's been able to do to the economy after inheriting a very difficult recession, and of course, the economic impact of 9/11." (3/3/04)
    HANNITY: "All right. So this is where I view the economic scenario as we head into this election. The president inherited a recession." (3/16/04)
    HANNITY: "First of all, we've got to put it into perspective, is that the president inherited a recession." (3/26/04)
    HANNITY: "Clearly, we're out of the recession that President Bush inherited." (4/2/04)
    HANNITY: "Stop me where I'm wrong. The president inherited a recession, the economic impact of 9/11 was tremendous on the economy, correct?" (4/6/04)
    HANNITY: "[President George W. Bush] did inherit a recession." (5/3/04)
    HANNITY: "[W]e got [the weak U.S. economy] out of the Clinton-Gore recession." (5/18/04)
    HANNITY: "We got out of the Clinton-Gore recession." (5/27/04)
    HANNITY: "We got out of the Clinton-Gore recession." (6/4/04)
    FACT: "The recession officially began in March of 2001 -- two months after Bush was sworn in -- according to the universally acknowledged arbiter of such things, the National Bureau of Economic Research. And the president, at other times, has said so himself." (Washington Post, 7/1/03)
    HANNITY: "The Hispanic community got to know him in Texas. They went almost overwhelming for him. He more than quadrupled the Hispanic vote that he got in that state." (9/16/03)
    FACT: Exit polls varied in 1998 governors race, but under best scenario he increased his Hispanic vote from 24 to 49 percent – a doubling not a quadrupling. He lost Texas Hispanics to Gore in 2000, 54-43 percent. (Source: NCLR, NHCSL)
    HANNITY: "Look, we've had these reports, very disturbing reports -- and I have actually spoken to people that have confirmed a lot of the reports -- about the trashing of the White House. Pornographic materials left in the printers. They cut the phone lines. Lewd and crude messages on phone machines. Stripping of anything that was not bolted down on Air Force One. $200,000 in furniture taken out." (1/26/01)
    TRUTH: According to statements from the General Services Administration that were reported on May 17, little if anything out of the ordinary occurred during the transition, and "the condition of the real property was consistent with what we would expect to encounter when tenants vacate office space after an extended occupancy." (FAIR)

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file