What we’re up against…
Published by Mike Stark March 22nd, 2006 in Sean Hannity, UncategorizedHannity put cretins like this on the air… I don’t listen to Savage because even I can’t tolerate the sewage that comes out of his mouth… but it looks like his ideas are spreading as the die-hards get more and more desperate…
“I hope their children are raped…”
How does a person say something like that? And Hannity kept him on the air - ostensibly to lecture him, but hell - how did he even get through the screener?
Speaking of which… I haven’t been able to get through o’Reilly’s screener since the Olbermann action. They’ve finally come round to the idea of caller ID, I guess…
And I’m not sure, but it might be spreading… I was denied at the Tony Snow Show and at Hannity yesterday… All Fox hosts…
I’ll keep you informed.
But this does raise an issue, doesn’t it? O’Reilly can dump callers that say Olbermann’s name, but Hannity can’t dump callers that talk about their child rape fantasies? Only on Fox.
17 Responses to “What we’re up against…”
- 1 Pingback on Mar 22nd, 2006 at 12:39 pm
- 2 Pingback on May 15th, 2007 at 10:55 pm
Leave a Reply
Search
Login
Donations Accepted
Subscribe
Posts- Comments
- Podcast
Me thinks Hannity doth protest to little.
He doesn’t care of the children of liberals
are raped or killed.
They’re ramping up the violent and eliminationist rhetoric, they hope to push some batshit crazy winger over the edge. Then they’ll claim ‘we didn’t think anyone would actually DO anything!’, but of course they were praying for a murder rampage all along.
Anyone paying attention to the violence perpetrated against judges and their families in the last few years because of all the ‘activist judges’ rhetoric?
Did that caller say he was a liberal? That is either a fake call to make liberals seem crazy and Sean seem magnanamous, or someone who is actually a very sick individual.
“I haven’t been able to get through o’Reilly’s screener since the Olbermann action. They’ve finally come round to the idea of caller ID, I guess…”
There are a number of services like this:
www.spoofcard.com
that might help. Good luck.
You can use a pre-paid long distance phone card to call. The number that shows up on caller ID, when using a phone card, can be anywhere in the US of A.
That was absolutely crazy to hear. This guys gotta a fetish. More so I think this goes to the root of what some conservatives really would like to do. They would like to have confrimation from the upper ups that its okay to start being criminals towards certain groups
As the Sane Woman said - Not getting through? Are the following solutions?:
1) use a $5 calling card - it comletely masks where you’re calling from
2) get the phone company to hide your caller id. They’ll put a caller id block on for free. Although they also give people the option to decline such calls. You’ll see if they’re equiped to do so…
Wow, Here in Florida, the good ol’ gunshine state, I encounter these types all the time. I can’t fathom the mental processes of these individuals .
Chuck 2: Incredible list of right-wing talking points my friend. Did you find them on a website or just have them so embedded in your brain by now that you can repeat them verbatim?
“We are not there because Iraq was a threat.”
Clinton, a democratic president said Saddam was a threat.
- Chuck are you Sean Hannity? Oh, well if Bush and Clinton said it then certainly when it turns out to be categorically false how dare we critisize this President for taking us to war there. Who gives two flying lumps of shit if Clinton, Dean, Kerry, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and every other idiot under the sun said it. The point is it was false and this President and only this president used that reason to take us to war with Iraq not Clinton.
“We want a military outpost (in the Middle East).”
We had military bases all over the Mid East before the Iraq war.
- If you are really trying to argue that the current Bush administration is not happy that they have a foot hold in the Middle East between Iran and Syria then you my friend are off your rocker. Just because we have military bases in certain areas of the Middle East in no way whatsoever disputes the fact that the neo-cons wanted this strong hold. In fact you didn’t even really make an argument. Question: If I have a million dollars and somebody offers me another million would I say, “Nah, I already got enough millions thanks though.”
“Every single politician in order to get where they are has made so many deals with the devil, so many compromises of principle”
No evidence, sources, or proof to back up this wild, and unsupported assertion.
- Name one high ranking official in this administration who hasn’t and I promise you I will find evidence to the contrary.
“When Scooter Libby has done it (in reference to the perjury charge)”
Scooter Libby has been convicted of zero crimes.
- Oh, so he must be innocent then. And you and I both know he will be so stop playing ridiculous games. That is not an argument and he along with a dozen or more conservative officials will be indicted while this President is still in power.
You of course can disagree with Mike’s technique and ability to confront individuals on the phone, but to do it with weak talking points and statements that barely amount to arguments is well… IRONIC to say the least. Thanks for stopping by!
The PNAC envisions more military bases throughout the Middle East that we could use to leapfrog to Iraq, Iran, Syria and on. Helen Thomas asked about this during the press conference yesterday, and then again on Wolf Blizter.
As for Bill Clinton, John Kerry, and all the rest of the politicians who said Iraq was a threat I offer one truism: politicians lie
Its likely that to Clinton boxing in Iraq like that was a way to maintain the United States’ position in the world.
“- Oh, so he must be innocent then. And you and I both know he will be so stop playing ridiculous games. That is not an argument and he along with a dozen or more conservative officials will be indicted while this President is still in power.”
First,
1. Has Scooter Libby been convicted of the crime of perjury?
2. Is not our legal system based on the presumption of innocence until guilt has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt in a trial by a jury of one’s peers?
Second,
I do not know where you get the number that “a dozen conservative officials will be indicted” since you cite no sources for this assertion. However, here is some democrats who have not only been indicted but convicted/or plead guilty recently of crimes.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/LegalCenter/wireStory?id=1673417&CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312
http://www.washtimes.com/metro/20060316-103348-8675r.htm
chuck2 says:
Mike, you are boring.
He must not be too boring. I notice you’re here an awful lot.
chuck2 I will give you that he has not been convicted and our system is based on being proven guilty. I will you see you in 2008 and we will tally the number of Republicans convicted of crimes and I guarantee you, in fact I will send fifty bucks to your paypal account if Libby is not on that list. Never said a dozen have been indicted, but by 2008 the number will be close if not over that. Hopefully Cheney and Bush will be on that list for the crimes they have commited. Oh, and nice job responding to one of my points and notably the easiest to prove me wrong on. You on the other hand made 4 points that were easily disputed and yet you refuse to respond to them. Just like all the others when in doubt or wrong just dump or ignore the issue. Mike knows all about this!
Rounder
read prager and medved (27 comments) where i expanded on my 4 pts alot more.
Try calling from a phone booth. Or borrow a friend’s phone.