The Dixie Chicks, of course, were criticizing the US president, not the US. Which is exactly what the Hannity is doing.

These rightwing clowns can't even come up with valid analogies.
____________________________________________

When vitriol is all you got, vitriol is all you can use... Since the conservatives apparently really do have no ideas, they're stuck with animosity, obsession, and (of course) creative editing. It's a shame, because this nation could benefit from a principled debate on where the proper level of government intervention and regulation lies. But we won't get it until the thinking people in the Republican party either gain control or splinter off and form a credible loyal opposition.

That's nothing. The booth near the Vietnam mamorial is still selling anti Jane Fonda bumper stickers. The right wingers don't forget their grudges.

and that's why i call him sean insHannity.

Its not Hannity that's the problem really because nobody is surprised that he would make such a dishonest critique. Its the Rte Reverend Mike Huckabee who is really the problem. He cosigns the lies like the worst of the right wing of the Republican party. Huckabee has taken a decided turn for the worse since he joined FoxNews and I honestly think he has now thrown any chance at running for office again away. His overheated rhethoric about gay rights as well as his aversion to telling the truth is going to combine to keep him away from elected office and after seeing him the last few months on his show I couldn't be happier about that fact.

This latest outburst from Hannity inspired me to the following consideration of what terms best describe him (if anyone wants to suggest others, I'll be happy to plug them in)(and yes, I believe vitriol has its place):

In the light of his latest quote-mining, what phrase better describes Hannity: lying fool, or foolish liar? Other words also come to mind: a hack; a bottom-feeder; an ape-brained bully; a walking, talking bag of pus; 200 pounds of shit stuffed by some miracle into a 10-pound bag; a slope-headed thug so stupid it’s a wonder he remembers to breathe; a waste of good oxygen; not an asshole (a necessary part of the human body) but a hemorrhoid; a pustule; a fistule; a boil; a seeping pimple; a virus; a bacterium (and not the good kind); a garden slug roughly in the shape of a human being; inexplicably wealthy white trash; an idiot who’s wandered too far from his village; a whore; a rightwing grievance pimp; a blackshirt; a brownshirt; a creeping stain; a knave; a villain; a blackguard; a moral void; an intellectual void; a steaming pool of dog spew; a stench; an offense; a plague; a worthless burden on the earth; a dolt; a dimwit; a halfwit; a lack-wit; a conservative commentator.

Aaron, all the above?

Did anyone else catch Olbermann on Bill Maher a few weeks ago? Olbermann mentioned that what he finds truly disturbing and bizarre about Hannity is that when he met Hannity in person without a camera around that Hannity said to him (paraphrasing) "can you believe that people think we are rivals and hate each other? hahahah."

These people are selling crap that they don't even believe for A LOT of money. It's widely known that Limbaugh makes $38 million a year, what about Hannity? I'm guessing a close second. All they have left is recycled rage at this point. But that is what they're paid for.

Hannity: "Didn't we see all of this in the campaign?"

I certainly did. That's why I voted for him. It's refreshing to have a president who doesn't view his country's government as unquestionable or infallible. And ultimately a whole lot safer for all of us.

Hannity feels past alleged Obama indiscretions and acts merit criticism. The Left may object to his rants as petty but he feels strongly about Obama's history. I'll posit an admittedly apples and oranges comparison. The left was very critical of Dubya's inclusion of Elliot Abrams and John Negroponte in his administration. It was pointed out they were involved in Central American crimes committed by regimes the U.S. funded and trained. These were sometimes decades old events. Yet the Left felt they were indicative of the character and competence of these individuals. How would the Left have greeted rebuttals that the events were so far in the rear view mirror it was petty bringing them up? The page needed turned, a clean start was called for. A sympathetic hearing doubtless wasn't waiting.

The last French king who said "I am the state" lost his head in a revolution. Sean Hannity lets his inner fascism show when he equates criticism of Republican presidents like George W. with criticism of the nation they were hired to serve. But this is SOP for Hannity who almost every day shows he was absent the day they taught American civics.

@ Aaron Baker Wit apologies to PG Woedhouse how about:
"A blot on western civilization."

Not much difference between Hannity and the McCain shill of a RepuG young lady, this morning, at "MoUrning Joe". "and to do that on French soil", she whined. France must be put down at all costs, eh? Geez, we finally had an intelligent, articulate and charismatic President go off to Europe not wearing hob nailed cowboy boots and the wingers go nutzo.

Growing up in an mid-sized, largely Irish-Catholic city, we had a term for a certain type of know-it-all blow-hard like Mr.Hannity-"thick mick". We didn't realize, as I look back, that it was an ethnic slur because we were talking about our own. Then, in the early 70's, Jethro Tull released Thick As A Brick and it immediately struck me as a more appropriate descriptor and I have used it ever since. Now what is it about a thick brick? Well, for one thing, nothing gets in. It is impervious to light, doesn't allow for the passage of air and stacked with other thick bricks, makes a marvelous wall. What brings a brick wall down? The slow passage of time and cracks appearing in the mortar is one way it comes down or a sudden cataclysmic event, such as an earthquake can also do the trick. Nothing lasts forever, even thick brick walls.

The views spewing from the mouth of Hannity are too foul to be used on my anal orifice. The guy and his "ideas" are worth less than used toilet paper! -Kevo

"A blot on Western Civilization"; I like it!

I'm disappointed in Sean. All those words and no mention of Obama's birth certificate, Clinton's blowjob or Ward Churchill. If you're going to be over the top Sean, you have to go all the way.

steve duncan-

When Rev. Wright & The Dixie chicks get gov't jobs that allow them to torture & murder civilians I promise to raise holy hell.

Apples to oranges? More like apples to orangutan.

Fair enough, Prudence. Let me attempt a more pertinent comparison. The Left wails when conservatives put forth Newt Gingrich as a serious player in a future Republican administration. Especially vociferous criticism is voiced when presidential aspirations are rumored. While professional qualifications are often questioned you'll more often than not find objections centered on his personal life, his dalliances and divorces and alleged mistreatment of ex-spouses. These are also events sometimes decades old. They're little different from rubbing shoulders (however briefly) with violent protesters or frenzied preachers. Neither trail of personal associations and actions on their own likely preclude either Obama or Gingrich from holding the reins of power. The left can excoriate Gingrich and everyone nods that yes, he was and may still be a cad. Obama and his past? Off limits. Partisan hyperventilating.

Hannity on the air in 2016, now that's depressing.

steve duncan or should I say steve dunce. I really have a hard time understanding how anyone can compare apples to oranges other than they're both fruits which is what you are.

er, no, Gandealf, hemlock is not a fruit.

Gandealf, Steve Duncan deserves a thoughtful answer to his question, not some stupid insult.

Steve, the difference as I see it is that the criticisms of Gingrich, Abrams, Negroponte, etc. are about things THEY THEMSELVES DID - clear legal and/or moral failings. Hannity's rants about Obama are not about anything he did; rather, they're all about guilt by association - what people Obama knows said or did, which is very different. And the link to the person who actually DID something foul (Ayers) is incredibly weak - they served on the board of an educational entity (funded by a conservative Republican who was in the Reagan administration) along with a bunch of other people, of all political stripes, none of whom had any problem with working with Ayers. As for Wright, all he did was say a couple of provocative things, many of which were deliberately taken out of context.

So on the one hand you have people who committed illegal acts, and on the other you have Hannity smearing Obama just because he knows certain people and has interacted with them. That really is a different standard. Further, Hannity's rants are typically McCarthyite in that he constantly implies that somehow there is more dirt that needs to be uncovered - that Obama's history hasn't been fully investigated. "Why hasn't the media fully investigated this?!" he thunders, year after year.

But they HAVE. There's nothing there. Hannity's attacks are sleazy and calculated. (And boring. I swear, I listen to him once a month and it's impossible to tell any time has gone by. Sometimes I think he just plays the same tape over and over again.)

Menthol, I agree completely. I only paint the picture as one might surmise a denizen of the Right perceives it. It doesn't advance dialogue or contribute to civility to complain about Hannity or Beck when their ilk is incapable of seeing the folly of their diatribes. Yes, Obama's critics strain credulity in their broadcasts. So what? He's elected. As was pointed out these old news harangues are pathetic. Again, so what? Let them stand on their own (lack 0f) merit. I'll tune in to some of these shows out of morbid curiosity and marvel at what sort of audience sustains their ratings. A strange cesspool of people indeed. Yet rendered irrelevant by the most recent election. I'm not sure ignoring them is the best course of action but turning the channel works for me.

I'll second Menthol. The NYT ran an article on Obama's connections to Bill Ayers not long before the election, and it was obvious there was no there there. An important discovery by the reporters who authored the article: Obama did NOT launch his senate campaign in Ayers's apartment (so much for one of Hannity's talking points).

Wright's a more complicated matter, becase Obama did have more than superficial contact with him. In the interest of full disclosure I have to say: I agree with the gist of some of Wright's sermons, while thinking his conspiracy-mongering about AIDS in the black community was and is despicable. What did Obama do in response to the Wright flap? Exactly the correct thing, I thought: a speech saying you don't cast off someone you care about just because you don't like all his opinions. When Wright then tried to capitalize on his new-found notoriety with a critique of Obama for selling out, Obama again did the correct thing: cutting the opportunistic prick off and banishing him to outer darkness. End of story for me.

McCain, quite creditably, refused to make an issue of Wright (just what issue was there after Obama had dealt with the matter as he had?), though perhaps also out of fear that some of his (McCain's) associations would get more scrutiny.

No troll deserves a thoughtful response to a "fair and balanced" critique. Duncan wrote that the left said any critisim of past associations were off limits - This is untrue - What the left said, was that enough had been written and said about said associations, and the majority of the public put those arguments aside and voted for Obama. As you wrote, Menthol, the actions of Abrams and Negopronte were deliberate and were not, simply, past indiscretions. Duncan comes on this site to spread more of his poison, however, couched in his plea for being fair and balanced. We, all, know which RepuG cable outlet misuses that term.

And, now a moment of silence for those lost in Abruzzo.

"Cutting the prick off"; not a felicitous mix of metaphors, I admit. I also should have said that Wright criticized Obama "as a sellout," not "for selling out."

berttheclock, I've found an item useful for those in your frame of mind:

http://www.designtoscano.com/product/furniture/benches+and+sofas/classic+benches+and+sofas/swan+fainting+couch+(right+version)+-+gr305r.do

Sean Hannity's profoundly stupid comments are a required part of his role as attack dog in the right-wing firmament. I am not sure whether he realizes he makes a public fool of himself each time he opens his mouth, he must,but he is well paid for it so perhaps it means he still has an audience. The best thing progressives can do is ignore him.

When one aspires to be president,and serves his wife divorce papers in the hospital while she is recovering from ovarian cancer surgery because she was not pretty enough for trophy arm status, one should be subject to scrutiny of character Mr. Duncan. But that aside, now Newt has thought of zapping North Korea with a super laser weapon - personal attacks need not be made any longer. Newt Gringrich is not a serious or substantive political leader. He is a circus clown! -Kevo

Hannity and O'Reilly are proof that the English were right about the southern Irish in at least two cases (i.e., sub-human morons).

Sean Hannity is still obsessing over Bill Ayers and Jeremiah Wright? Jeebus. Can't he come up with some slightly fresher canard to hurl into the insane-o-sphere five nights a week? Like maybe Obama is a golem or something? He's not going to keep this up for eight years, is he?"

And you wonder why Glen Beck's ratings are higher than Hannity's on Fox? Beck may very well emotionally ustable I grant you and taken with a grain of salt but he's saying things Fox viewers want to hear while Hannity sounds like a broken record as you point out in this post.

If you want to see something as scary as it is pathetic, you ought to go to Hannity's website and click on over to the singles advertisement pages, where the SeanScum try to hook up. That these people exist is what is both scary in the way they are and pathetic in what they want.

Hannity, Beck, O'Reilly, and the whole wad of them are a bunch of paid propagandists. I take everything they say with a tiny grain of salt.

Hey TCinLA - I'm Irish! Don't be condemning me because of Hannity and O'Reilly's other genes! -Kevo

Just a little comment:
I'am a Frenchman, protestant including, enough said about what I think about the Moron's Club Faux News!
BUT...I am not agree about the comment on the Southern Irish..they are cool (with the exception of...you know who...!)
That's all, merci.
Paul