A showdown of ideas between two opposing giants. But will Hannity fight fair? by Jake Morphonios
(libertarian)
Thursday, August 12, 2010
It has been more than two years since I last listened to the Sean Hannity radio show. The reason I stopped listening to Hannity wasn't merely because of my disagreement with most of his views; I am secure in my ability to listen to the opinions of other people while maintaining my own. It was not Hannity's high-pitched voice that made me stop listening; while his nasal-toned whine certainly grated my nerves, that wasn't sufficient cause for me to boycott his show. Nor was it his self-promoting megalomania that I found off-putting; Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck are also narcissists, but I haven't stopped listening to them completely. No, there was but one reason that I stopped listening to his show and it really was quite simple. Sean Hannity is an idiot.
A political talk show host, especially one that regularly applauds his own wisdom to the extent that Hannity does, must back up his rhetoric on occasion with substance. The phrase "put up or shut up" comes to mind. I can respect someone with whom I have complete disagreement if that person is able to make a reasoned case for his position. For example, while I frequently disagree with Sam Donaldson on politics, I developed respect for him after watching him debate his liberal positions before a hostile crowd at a CPAC conference in Washington DC. He explained the rationale for his positions, gave supporting examples to back up his arguments, and then allowed his opponent the chance to challenge his ideas without interruption. Can the same be said of Sean Hannity? Absolutely not.
Hannity's positions are so devoid of substance - so utterly lacking in reason - that any attempt to glean rationality from his remarks is nearly impossible. But aside from this glaring ineptitude, what Hannity truly is missing from his repertoire as a political analyst is the ability to meet opposing ideas with intelligent rebuttal. His pattern is predictable. First he states his own position and then challenges his guest to respond. But the guest is not allowed to give a direct response to Hannity's position. He must frame his response inside of one of Hannity's baited questions. Because there can be no reasonable response to the unfair question posed by the host, the guest must either ignore the question or argue against the fairness of the question asked. Either of these responses immediately results in Hannity repeatedly shouting down the guest, insulting his intelligence, questioning his integrity, challenging his patriotism and/or cutting off his microphone. Sean Hannity is the quintessential coward. He will not debate fairly because his over-inflated ego cannot countenance being whipped by the rational arguments of a more reasoned opponent. In other words, Hannity is a chicken.
Because I don't find the abject bullying of people to constitute entertainment, I had stopped listening to Hannity's radio show. Earlier this week, though, as I was driving home I came across his program and decided to listen in. Nothing has changed. A caller had just made an excellent point about the importance of considering the reasons that may motivate Islamic extremists to perpetrate acts of terror against the United States. He pointed out that considering the motivating factors behind terrorism does not at all excuse the crime, but may help us to identify ways to reduce the likelihood of future attacks. Hannity, the consummate neo-conservative shark, smelled blood in the water. He began a jingoistic tirade against the caller that repeatedly referenced September the 11th. Then he lumped him in with the dastardly "blame America first crowd" that apparently hates everything about Hannity's America. Hannity wouldn't let the guest defend himself, and, after a few more disparaging words, hung up on the caller. Naturally, Hannity then pat himself on the back for defeating yet another "enemy" of America and cut to commercial break - at which point I resumed my boycott of the Sean Hannity show.
The caller had made an important point. It's one that political disciples of Congressman Ron Paul have been hearing from him for years. A US foreign policy that advocates American imperialism is both legally unconstitutional and morally reprehensible. Paul has, in fact, tried to make this very point to Sean Hannity himself. More than once during the 2008 Presidential campaign, Paul appeared on Fox News as a guest of Sean Hannity. At the time, Paul was taking heat from every direction, including from within the Republican Party, for his positions on the Iraq war and the international role of the United States. After one Republican debate, Hannity decried Paul as being an "isolationist" who was out of touch with the will of the American military while ignoring the fact that Paul received more campaign donations from the military than any other candidate.
In fact, the US military continues to strongly support the positions of Congressman Paul. Those men and women on the front lines of the never-ending, undeclared wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have done their duty. America is safe. It's time for them to come home and they know it. The conflict in Afghanistan has become unwinnable because there is no clear objective anymore (if there ever was one to begin with). Too many civilians are being needlessly killed and these deaths, unintended as they may be, are fueling an increase in resistance to the US presence. Last week the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) released its findings the conflict in Afghanistan resulted in over 4,000 civilian deaths (more than the number of civilian deaths that occurred on 9-11) over a 15 month period. The report stated, "In Afghanistan, when units kill civilians, this increases the number of willing combatants, leading to an increase in insurgent attacks." For some readers, this statement should be an obvious truth. When one group kills innocent civilians among another group, that second group is likely to seek revenge. This is the point the caller was trying to make to Sean Hannity. Yet, it is this kind of common sense that eludes Hannity and his neo-con ilk.
Referencing the NBER's report, this week Congressman Paul wrote:
"The Central Intelligence Agency has long acknowledged and analyzed the concept of blowback in our foreign policy. It still amazes me that so many think that attacks against our soldiers occupying hostile foreign lands are motivated by hatred toward our system of government at home or by the religion of the attackers. In fact, most of the anger towards us is rooted in reactions towards seeing their mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers and other loved ones being killed by a foreign army. No matter our intentions, the violence of our militarism in foreign lands causes those residents to seek revenge if innocents are killed. One does not have to be Muslim to react this way, just human."
"Our battle in Afghanistan resembles the battle against the many-headed Hydra monster in Greek mythology. According to Former General Stanley McChrystal's so-called insurgent math, for every insurgent killed, 10 more insurgents are created by the collateral damage to civilians. Every coalition attack leads to 6 retaliatory attacks against our troops within the following six weeks, according to the NBER report. These retaliatory attacks must then be acted on by our troops, leading to still more attacks, and so it goes. Violence begets more violence. Eventually more and more Afghanis will view American troops with hostility and seek revenge for the death of a loved one. Meanwhile, we are bleeding ourselves dry, militarily and economically."
And so we come full circle. The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq rage on with no end in sight. Neo-conservatives and globalists in the Obama administration are frothing at the mouth, slavering for an opportunity to attack Iran. Meanwhile, our friends and family members serving in the military are being used as pawns in a geo-political chess game. They are being kept separated from their loved ones back home and from the comforts of our American society. I want to see them come home now.
So to borrow a tool from a certain radio host's bag of tricks, I must pose a question to you Mr. Hannity. Do you support the troops enough to bring them home? Or, do you just hate America?
The views expressed
in this article are those of Jake Morphonios only and
do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates.
Jake Morphonios is solely responsible for the contents
of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated
with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Posted By: thirty3na3rd
Date: August 12, 2010 06:06:46 AM
Jake,
What an incredibly well-articulated description of this man's pomposity and shallowness. Reading it, I was astouded at how it was as if you were quite literally reading my mind, although I don't know that I could have possibly written such a thoroughly on-target piece to convey my utter disgust with Sean Hannity. The more self-aggrandizing, arrogant assholes we have in the public dialogue, the more certainly our nation's problems will never be solved, because all of our otherwise productive energies and ideas will be squandered as we play childish games of Left versus Right to sell radio and television ad time or books. Thanks again, Jake. I'm now going to go back and enjoy re-reading your column.
Posted By: Brucus
Date: August 13, 2010 03:44:13 PM
With all due respect, my friend, you have made the point for so many conservatives when it comes to an assessment of how the left functions socially. The left can't dispute the right on facts....so they smear. I am not a big Hannity fan either because he is somewhat overbearing. I totally disagree with you on Limbaugh and Beck. They are quite wise. You may not like them...but don't put 'em down without something to back your claim up. Don't act like the idiot and start cars on fire and burns buiildings down....come up with something intelligent and maybe the right will listen to you.
Posted By: Non-Prophet
Date: December 3, 2010 08:52:39 AM
Brucus that last part you said about coming up with something intelligent. Try it yourself. I am not a liberal but the article was very well written and your reply was not. That's what I see. Not even a nice try.
Posted By: Don Goins
Date: December 12, 2010 10:38:19 PM
Hannity is a classic interupter and misdirector. And for some reason his guests (the ones that disagree with him) let him get away with it. It's like watching an '80s horror flick. I find myself screaming at the radio or TV "Don't go into that room! It's a trap!"
