Last night a group of New Jersey voters appeared on Hannity. The discussion touched on their general feelings about the state of things in the nation and New Jersey, as well as their views on issues like taxation. Later in the focus group session, these voters discussed their opinions of Christie and Corzine while also reacting to some TV ads from both camps.
Overall, the discussion was interesting and enlightening. In listening to these fellow New Jerseyans – regardless of their views (and some did have some radical views, particularly on wealth redistribution) - my sense was that all of them wanted to hear more specific plans from each candidate. They are tired of the bull that goes on and are craving some real leadership. They don’t seem to think they are seeing that from Corzine or Christie in this campaign – and I sure as heck can’t disagree with them.
Talk about your hypocrisy! Here we are just days into the White House’s infantile war against Fox News. Rahm ‘Dead Fish’ Emanuel claims Fox isn’t a news organization because it has a “perspective.”
Their press secretary idiotically points to news opinion guys, Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck, to *prove* their point. Then, in the next breath the White House invites two of MSNBC’s biggest Obama/Democrat lackeys to Pennsylvania Avenue for a secret, off-the-record meeting? (1:45)
Yes, Maddow and Olbermann – nah, no *perspective* there! MSNBC an arm of the DNC? Nah, couldn’t be!
Well, all I can say is I’m relieved. I now have a full and complete understanding of what it means to be a ‘news organization.’ Apparently, all it takes is agreeing with the President and doing his bidding.
Last week I posted on the G20 protests going on in Pittsburgh, including around my alma mater, Pitt. Well, on Friday Sean Vannity had a segment with a couple of the protesters, 2 Pitt students. Suffice it to say, I can’t help being embarrassed by this to some degree. Watch here as these two students demonstrate their incredible naivete. God only knows where they come up with their ideas, but I fear they are only being reinforced in the halls of *higher learning* at Pitt.
First off, it is amazing to me that neither student can bring themselves to at least condemn the violence. The one girl justified the violence and vandalism as an effort to make ‘their voices heard.’ So, according to this leftist radical, such activity is OK if it means getting your message out. Bill Ayers must be proud.
Michael Moore must also be proud considering that these protesters have come to the twisted conclusion that capitalism is evil. Yes, somehow CEO’s making 6 figures is bad for society and needs to be reined in via taxation and forced wealth redistribution. Capitalism is evil because poor people still exist in society. And, ironically, capitalism is evil because, according to these ’progressives,’ progress resulted in the demise of the city’s steel industry. (As an aside, it should be noted that Pittsburgh has rebounded over time both due to a vibrant healthcare industry – Pittsburgh is known for its hospitals – not to mention the efforts/expansion of the University of Pittsburgh itself, which is the city’s top employer.)
Underlying the protester’s attacks on capitalism is the idea that there is a utopia. That if only there were wealth redistribution to address the ‘inequities’ of capitalism, opportunity and prosperity would abound for all. Of course, such socialistic visions only lead to tyranny and the spread of misery and poverty among the populace.
This segment just underscores the real problem we are facing. Too many people simply do not understand – and have not been taught – the virtues of capitalism and the superiority of its morality. Abraham Lincoln said it best:
“You cannot help the poor, by destroying the rich. You cannot strengthen the weak, by weakening the strong. You cannot bring about prosperity, by discouraging thrift. You cannot lift the wage earner up, by pulling the wage payer down. You cannot further the brotherhood of man, by inciting class hatred. You cannot build character and courage, by taking away men’s initiative and independence. You cannot help men permanently, by doing for them what they could and should, do for themselves.”
While these protesters are likely lost to this message and the virtues of capitalism and a free market system, it is up to conservatives to deliver it to our fellow citizens and persuade them otherwise.
On ‘Hannity’ last night, Sean compared the meek response of Obama vis-a-vis Iran to Reagan’s strong and principled stand against communist oppression in Poland. Check out this telling video here. Now if only Mr. Hannity would take my calls!
By the way, here’s what I wrote back in January regarding the Obama approach to Iran:
Herein lays the problem with Obama’s approach toward Iran. One can not engage in diplomacy – which entails negotiation, finding common ground and compromise – when the ‘partner’ at the table is an opponent of the convictions and values your nation stands for. To do so would be pacifism. And as history has taught us pacifying enemies of freedom only leads to more violence, war and tyranny, not less. One can only hope that history isn’t about to repeat itself.
Proven right? Pretty much, I think. Although the one thing that has become more clear to me now is that Obama has also completely ceded our moral authority as the leading promoter of freedom and democracy in the world. With his constant apologizing for America and willingness to cut deals with dictators he’s boxed himself in. He put himself in a position of not being able to support the Iranian protesters for fear that it would damage future negotiations with the evil mullocracy. In essence, his approach legitimized an evil regime.
Tried to call in to Sean Hannity’s show today to ask him why he had Christie on and not Lonegan. Here’s how it went:
Call Screener: Hello, Sean Hannity Show
Me: Yes, I just heard Sean say that he doesn’t like being lied to. Then why did he lie to the conservative voters of New Jersey?
Call Screener: (chuckle) You must be a Lonegan supporter. Click.
So, Sean Hannity’s call screener is clearly under orders to not accept any calls about the primary in New Jersey; one in which he clearly stuck his nose into it and sided with the moderate Chris Christie by having him on his program multiple times (radio and TV) while not even inviting the conservative Steve Lonegan.
According to Lonegan campaign volunteers, there is a planned protest tomorrow against none other than Sean Hannity. Lonegan supporters are upset – and rightfully so – that Hannity had Chris Christie on his TV show last week and has not extended an invitation to Mayor Lonegan. As I posted last week, Hannity has claimed neutrality with regards to state primaries in the past — yet in this case he has hypocritically given Mr. Christie free air time on national TV while shutting out his closest rival.
So, in what I am sure will be an unprecedented event tomorrow – CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICANS will be in New York City, at Fox headquarters, protesting Sean Hannity. If you want to join this protest here is the information:
Tuesday, May 26, located at 1211 Avenue of the Americas (a/k/a 6th Ave.), between 47th & 48th Streets, beginning at 7:00 p.m.
Note: I am still awaiting for the Lonegan campaign to post the video of my interview with Steve. Hopefully, they will do so shortly.
Cross-posted at Conservatives with Attitude! and Red County.
So, last night I walk on the door, turn on the tube and hit the old favorites button…right to Fox News, of course!…and who do I see? None other than Chris Christie and Mayor Giuliani on with Sean Hannity. (You can go to Christie’s web site to see the interview if you wish: Hannity)
Now, the substance of the interview isn’t what mattered to me about the interview. My initial reaction was, why is Christie on with Giuliani? Yes, Giuliani is supporting Christie and has endorsed him. I get all that. But politically, it seemed to me to be a bad move for Christie. For me, it seemed like he needed Rudy there to hold his hand during the interview. I just thought the appearance of it all was not a positive for him.
Secondly, I was sort of surprised to see Hannity have Christie on. Obviously, the NJ Governor’s race is important and there is a story here to be told, but Hannity has made a point on his radio show of staying out of state primaries. However, giving Christie national air time is tantamount to giving him support.
So if Sean Hannity is to be fair – and if he truly wants to stay out of state primaries – he really ought to invite Mayor Lonegan on to give him ‘equal time.’
Cross-posted at Conservatives with Attitude! and Red County.
The Internet is an amazing thing. With all of the hullabaloo over Rush Limbaugh’s comments I started wondering if I could find evidence of Democrats wanting Bush to fail. Lo and behold Fox News did a poll in 2006 and asked that very question. An article on the poll appeared in the NY Post by Craig Charney, a former Clinton pollster (I found the text of the article at sistertoldjah.com). Check this out.
A recent Fox News poll gets at the disturbing truth: A majority of Democrats say they want to see the president fail. Such deep hatred is bad news for the country at a time when America needs to bridge the partisan divide. It’s also bad news for the Democrats, who risk repeating the Republicans’ mistakes of a decade ago, driving away the centrists they need to regain power or going too far if they do manage to win.
Fox’s question was revealing: “Regardless of how you voted in the presidential election, would you say you want President Bush to succeed or not?” Democrats said “not,” 51 percent to 40 percent – where the public at large wanted success by almost two to one. [See page 4 of this document for the poll in question.--ST]
In other words, the rage extends way beyond the lip-pierced Deaniacs, aging hippies and other fringes of the Democratic Party. Lots of otherwise sensible people – suburban moms, hospital orderlies, schoolteachers, big-hatted church ladies – detest George W. Bush.
When these Democrats say they want Bush to fail, might this mean that they simply reject what they see as his far-right religious and corporate agenda? If so, it’s hard to see why independents – hardly right-wing zealots – hope he succeeds by 63 percent to 34 percent. Sadly, much of the Democratic Party wants to see this president crash and burn.
In fact, the fury against to Bush has reached unprecedented levels, even compared to the animosity among Republicans to his predecessor. Not long ago, a Washington Post-ABC News poll found that “strong disapproval” of Bush was 10 points higher than that recorded for Bill Clinton at any point during his presidency, including his impeachment. (That wasn’t during a war, either.)
Remember, for better or for worse, George W. Bush will be our president for more than two years. Hoping that he’ll fail is really hoping that America will fail. These people detest Bush so much that they don’t mind America getting a setback across the globe if it will weaken Bush.
Of course, there’s a key difference between then and now. Wishing Bush would fail meant wishing the country lost in Iraq. Wishing Obama fails means rooting against socialistic policies that threaten everything the country was founded on and our future prosperity.
Do you think the MSM, considering their whining about Limbaugh’s comments, would think to look something like this up now and then report on it? Nope, that would actually mean really reporting on something and adding some context. That would mean they couldn’t marginalize and demonize him.
Quite a day! I had no idea this would ever happen. I actually e-mailed the story to Rush last week, but it wasn’t until Gateway Pundit and Little Green Footballs picked up on it that it got out there.
Again, I didn’t do anything special here. A little light bulb went off and said let me check around and see what I can find. Any reporter for any media outfit could have done the same. The fact that they didn’t says alot about the mainstream media and their agenda.
Off the bat, this begs a number of questions: How do we determine what is fair? How many voices get to speak? How much time do they get? How will the government force people to listen to these “opposing views?” But most of all, does anyone actually believe that in today’s modern society, with the vast number of resources across the web and with 24/7 cable news stations, that citizens do not have access to “contrasting views” on matters of importance to the country? The whole idea is utterly ridiculous and the Left’s motivation is clear: silence the opposition.
Talk radio is the main arena where conservative voices are heard. And liberal attempts to succeed in the format (see Air America) have failed miserably. So, since they can’t compete, they’ve decided to go for the nuclear option: a stealth effort to shut down the Limbaugh’s and Hannity’s under the guise of ‘fairness.’
If the Fairness Doctrine is reimposed, stations will begin dropping talk rather than face being fined by the FCC for failing to adhere to arbitrary regulations being dictated out of Washington. It’s as simple as that. AM radio will return to playing elevator music.
This is un-American. It’s anti-freedom, anti-free speech and anti-free markets. If we want our government to control content on our airwaves, then we are no longer much different than the likes of Venezuela or Cuba.
And it also has to make you wonder, if the Democrats will go to these lengths to silence the opposition, then what else are they willing to do to take away your freedoms and quash dissent so that they can keep power?
According to Lonegan campaign volunteers, there is a planned protest tomorrow against none other than Sean Hannity. Lonegan supporters are upset – and rightfully so – that Hannity had Chris Christie on his TV show last week and has not extended an invitation to Mayor Lonegan. 
