1
   

Deliver us from Democrats

 
 
Fedral
 
Reply Thu 8 Apr, 2004 01:11 pm
Deliver us from Democrats[/u]
April 8, 2004

Sean Hannity's latest book, "Deliver Us From Evil," is even better than his last. It hit No. 1 on the New York Times best-seller list the week it came out and stayed there for at least five weeks. This explains the huge cover story on Hannity in the latest New York Times magazine, as well as that big NPR profile on him - wait, neither of those happened. Indeed, not a single major mainstream newspaper has reviewed it.

That's unless you include the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, which briefly mentioned Hannity's book in order to say that it compared unfavorably with another book and to call Hannity an "angry conservative" (redundant in liberal-speak).

The reviewer, Harry Levins, Post-Dispatch "Senior Writer," complained that Hannity's book "reads like a long, long transcript of his television and radio shows." Inasmuch as Hannity's TV show is the second-most-watched show on cable news and his radio show is the No. 2 radio show in America, only a liberal would consider that an insult. Levins is hoping for a book that would read more like a transcript of Al Franken's listener-free show on Airhead America.

Hannity's book is chock-full of something that frequently makes liberals uncomfortable - history. He begins by reciting historic evils such as the Holocaust and the 9-11 terrorist attacks and contrasts those with everyday stories of evil culled from the newspapers: A suicidal woman is poised to jump from a bridge in Seattle and, after a few hours, someone from the crowd below yells out, "Jump, b----, jump!" The woman jumps.

Hannity says we face moral choices between good and evil every day. If we make excuses for evil - Hitler was a "madman," a pedophile priest was "weak" or, as philandering actor Ethan Hawke recently advised us, Bill Clinton "suffered from" infidelity - soon we cease being able to distinguish good from evil at all. (I would add to the excuses for evil, "It's just about sex.") With each choice we make, large and small, we take a step closer to the devil or a step closer to God.

The leaders of the modern Democratic Party, Hannity says, have made excuses for evil for so long that they cannot recognize evil anymore. The closest thing to it in their vocabulary would be "someone who wears fur." And of course, they recognize evil in the person of "George W. Bush," whom they see as the very essence of evil. In fact, Bush may be the only force of evil in the world liberals haven't wanted to appease.

"Deliver Us From Evil" runs through an enormous amount of history that's fun to hear again. Hannity quotes Neville Chamberlain on his return from Munich, a few years before German warplanes began ravaging Britain, promising the British "peace in our time" and advising them, "Go home and get a nice quiet sleep." (This was just after Chamberlain's "national malaise" speech, if memory serves.)

Chamberlain's proud boast that he had removed "those suspicions and those animosities that have so long poisoned the air" sounds eerily like today's Democrats so eager for the rest of the world to love us. Sen. John Kerry has condemned Bush's "belligerent and myopic unilateralism," and called for a "progressive internationalism." To reprise an old joke from the Cold War, if Democrats aren't on al-Qaida's payroll, they're being gypped.

And speaking of old jokes from the Cold War, Hannity turns to Jimmy Carter next. Carter could see evil in the world; he just mistook it for a rapidly moving bunny rabbit. Reacting to the Soviet Union's invasion of Afghanistan, Carter exclaimed on ABC News: "This action of the Soviets made a more dramatic change in my own opinion of what the Soviets' ultimate goals are than anything they've done in the previous time I've been in office."

Hannity then runs through a few other incidents that might have caught the president's attention - Stalin's and Mao's mass murders, genocide in Cambodia, the Berlin Wall, Soviet tanks crushing uprisings in Hungary and Czechoslovakia, the personal testimony of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn - before concluding: "The evil of communism was no secret." Well, yes, but Carter was distracted by that rabbit.

In his defense, there has not been a documented rabbit attack on a U.S. citizen since Carter left office.

And of course there was Carter's masterful handling of the crisis in Iran, leading America to betray our ally, Mohammed Reza Shah Pahlavi. Even as Carter was back-stabbing this loyal U.S. ally, the Shah was assuring those around him, "The United States has always been our friend, and it won't let me down now." Sadly, there was no one to warn him: "Run for your life! A Democrat is in the White House!"

In addition to covering Carter's accomplishments in Iran, which taught Islamicist animals that Westerners can be made to grovel before terrorism, Hannity reviews what Democrats in Congress have done about brewing trouble in the Middle East over the last 20 years: i.e., nothing.

After Saddam Hussein's forces invaded Kuwait in 1990, torturing men and raping women, Rep. Nancy Pelosi took to the floor of the House to say, "I hope the point will be made that we take very seriously the environmental consequences of our actions." Rep. Dick Gephardt said: "History shows that even brutal dictators have been toppled and defeated by sanctions." And so it was again after 9-11. Sixteen months after the attack, John Kerry gave a speech saying, "Mr. President, do not rush to war."

According to the latest polls there's at least a fair chance that an amoral appeaser and foreign suck-up like John Kerry could be our next president. Now everyone go home and get a nice quiet sleep.

Link
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 6,151 • Replies: 124
No top replies

 
cavfancier
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Apr, 2004 01:20 pm
Heh heh, whatever. Kerry was probably right, and only time will tell. <contemplates to self> I wonder what Fedral would think if I said I support a strong militaty, but not overly-excessive use of it? I might assume he would guess I am Canadian, which is true, however, our military is Pac Man and the USA's is Playstation 5.
0 Replies
 
Scrat
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Apr, 2004 01:26 pm
Fedral - Thanks for sharing this. I'll have to add Hannity's new book to my reading list.
0 Replies
 
Fedral
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Apr, 2004 01:36 pm
cavfancier wrote:
Heh heh, whatever. Kerry was probably right, and only time will tell. <contemplates to self> I wonder what Fedral would think if I said I support a strong militaty, but not overly-excessive use of it?


Not true cav,

I support a strong military that is kept in a box until it is needed and then it is unleashed to accomplish it's mission as swiftly as possible before it is placed back in its box.

The one important thing that must be remembered before committing troops anywhere is the quote by an American General to certain members of Congress:
"The American Military is a superb hammer ...
but not all problems are nails."


The decision to use it is made at the Executive and Legislative Branches of our government, so the will of the people is taken into account.

cavfancier wrote:
I might assume he would guess I am Canadian, which is true, however, our military is Pac Man and the USA's is Playstation 5.


I have a lot of respect for certain members of the Canadian military. Though the equipment may be out dated and the numbers may be small they are professional. (You don't need a large military when you shelter behind the mightiest military machine on the planet.)

The Canadian special operations troops are first rate and take a back seat to no one. The best trained special forces/commandos are those of the 'Old Commonwealth'.
Australia's SAS and SBS
Canada own elite units.
Great Britains special ops.

All rank among the top rated units on the planet.
0 Replies
 
Tarantulas
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Apr, 2004 01:48 pm
That's an excellent point. Just like school without grades and games without scorekeeping, liberals advocate evil without blame. And inside each of us is a victim just waiting to be identified the moment we do something wrong.

I'm going to have to buy that book too.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Apr, 2004 03:20 pm
I recall, (not that I, as in personally, but from what my daddy told me) It was a dEmocrat in the White House to win WWII. hmmmm.

The point with Hannity is that he makes up about half his history and never tells his airhead followeres , which half..

Whatever happened to ANN (Butch) COULTER
0 Replies
 
Scrat
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Apr, 2004 03:29 pm
farmerman wrote:
The point with Hannity is that he makes up about half his history and never tells his airhead followeres , which half..

Lucky us, you've come along to educate us on the subject of history. This should be fun and educational, so let's get started...

Please cite for us a specific example of history which Sean Hannity "made up". (Since he does this "half" the time, you should have lots of examples for us.) Then we can either sit in awe of your knowledge and thank you for the service you've done us, or show you that you're wrong.

Thanks in advance for your substantive contributions to our understanding of Hannity and of history! Cool
0 Replies
 
Dartagnan
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Apr, 2004 03:31 pm
When you guys finish Hannity's book, you should read the one by O'Reilly, too. And there's one by Limbaugh, I think, and a few by Coulter.

Just in case you didn't know these folks were writing books. Though given the drumbeat of cut-'n'-paste propaganda I see around here these days, I would imagine you're well supplied with righty BS...
0 Replies
 
Scrat
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Apr, 2004 03:36 pm
Just curious, but are books written by liberals, "lefty BS"?
0 Replies
 
cavfancier
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Apr, 2004 03:51 pm
"I support a strong military that is kept in a box until it is needed and then it is unleashed to accomplish it's mission as swiftly as possible before it is placed back in its box."

As for a strong military as Fedral described, I agree. As for the US military completing their missions swiftly? I'm not so sure. 'Swiftly as possible' is a loaded statement, and yes, some fights take longer than others, but with the current state of things, more honest admission of guilt for the current war is necessary.

Yes, I support a strong military, and I don't think Canada is putting enough money into it, (heck, we have no money) but I also have problems with abusing the forces collected.

Scrat, nice to see you. Am I a liberal or a conservative, and why?
0 Replies
 
Scrat
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Apr, 2004 04:09 pm
cavfancier wrote:
Scrat, nice to see you. Am I a liberal or a conservative, and why?

Cav - Nice to be seen, and nice to see you too. Interesting question, and it probably deserves its own discussion, but I'll give it a go.

I would answer that--with you as with me--it probably depends on the issue. I might label you a liberal in the heat of a discussion wherein I perceive you to be entrenched in the liberal position, but I recognize that doing so doesn't make for useful dialog.

Of course, my use of the term here was an attempt to show the flaw inherent in D'art's little attack on "righty" books. With books as with individuals there's far more useful meat on the bone if we gnaw on the actual bone rather than trying to sink our teeth into a broad caricature of the bone. (Have I lost you yet? I've lost me. Must be late. Gotta run. Hope this answer is satisfactory.) Cool
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Apr, 2004 04:23 pm
scrat. You believe the BS on the top of the page? If you do, additional remedial training will be useless on you.
I only stopped by to give my honest opinion about your Mr Hannity. I dont get my history from Hannity and dont get my science from Limbaugh. Yet that doesnt mean that I cant hear such "information" oft repeated from the pre-programmed fans of both.
You rant on girl. Ill just sit here and smile quietly.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Apr, 2004 04:37 pm
Everybody accuses anything supporting Bush of being drivel, BS, and lies. But with few exceptions, nobody says why they are.
0 Replies
 
Dartagnan
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Apr, 2004 04:43 pm
Perhaps reading someone other than Sean Hannity would help. Try Paul Krugman; he writes a column in the NY Times.

Chances are, you won't get the info you seek, Foxfyre, on Fox. Just a hunch...
0 Replies
 
mesquite
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Apr, 2004 04:55 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
Everybody accuses anything supporting Bush of being drivel, BS, and lies. But with few exceptions, nobody says why they are.

Hannity is drivel because.
Quote:
Hannity says we face moral choices between good and evil every day. If we make excuses for evil - Hitler was a "madman," a pedophile priest was "weak" or, as philandering actor Ethan Hawke recently advised us, Bill Clinton "suffered from" infidelity - soon we cease being able to distinguish good from evil at all. (I would add to the excuses for evil, "It's just about sex.") With each choice we make, large and small, we take a step closer to the devil or a step closer to God.

If you can not see the point, nothing I can say will change your mind.
0 Replies
 
kickycan
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Apr, 2004 04:57 pm
Quote:
The leaders of the modern Democratic Party, Hannity says, have made excuses for evil for so long that they cannot recognize evil anymore. The closest thing to it in their vocabulary would be "someone who wears fur." And of course, they recognize evil in the person of "George W. Bush," whom they see as the very essence of evil. In fact, Bush may be the only force of evil in the world liberals haven't wanted to appease.


What a bunch of bullshit. This book, along with other finger-pointing pieces of crap like it (on both sides) do nothing to further the pursuit of truth. In fact, they are probably the main reason the truth seems to be so hard to find sometimes.

This is what passes for fair and balanced in our media these days. The conservative jackass tells his totally biased, one-sided, spun-to-the-max version, then the liberal jackass comes out and spews his equally biased bunch of crap. Some people say the truth is somewhere in between, but I think it is somewhere outside either side.

Don't read one-sided junk like this, unless you like being manipulated.
0 Replies
 
kickycan
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Apr, 2004 04:57 pm
Or unless you love to hate, like me. Smile
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Apr, 2004 05:01 pm
For the life of me I don't see anything wrong with that Hannity quote up there Smile
0 Replies
 
Tarantulas
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Apr, 2004 05:24 pm
I don't see a problem with either quote. But I guess it's not going to be explained, so we'll never know.
0 Replies
 
Craven de Kere
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Apr, 2004 05:30 pm
..... for thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory, forever. Amen.

That does it folk, they're gone.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Deliver us from Democrats
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.43 seconds on 12/26/2024 at 10:36:00