Author Topic: YIKES, this was supposed to be McCain's debate. Check out these debate polls.  (Read 4650 times)

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31865
WASHINGTON - A pair of one-night polls gave Barack Obama a clear edge over John McCain in their first presidential debate.
 
Fifty-one percent said Obama, the Democrat, did a better job in Friday night's faceoff while 38 percent preferred the Republican McCain, according to a CNN-Opinion Research Corp. survey of adults.

Obama was widely considered more intelligent, likable and in touch with peoples' problems, and by modest margins was seen as the stronger leader and more sincere. Most said it was McCain who spent more time attacking his opponent.

About six in 10 said each did a better job than expected. Seven in 10 said each seemed capable of being president.

In a CBS News poll of people not committed to a candidate, 39 percent said Obama won the debate, 24 percent said McCain and 37 percent called it a tie. Twice as many said Obama understands their needs than said so about McCain.

Seventy-eight percent said McCain is prepared to be president, about the same proportion of uncommitted voters as said so before the debate. Sixty percent said Obama is ready — a lower score than McCain, but a solid 16-percentage-point improvement from before the debate.

In another Obama advantage in the CBS poll, far more said their image of him had improved as a result of the debate than said it had worsened. More also said their view of McCain had gotten better rather than worse, but by a modest margin.

The CNN poll involved telephone interviews with 524 adults who watched the debate and had a margin of error of plus or minus 4.5 percentage points. The CBS survey involved online interviews with 483 uncommitted voters who saw the debate and had an error margin of plus or minus 4 points. It was conducted by Knowledge Networks, which initially selected the respondents by telephone.

Both polls were conducted Friday night.

Polls conducted on one night can be less reliable than surveys conducted over several nights because they only include the views of people available that particular evening.



http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080927/ap_on_el_pr/presidential_debate_polls

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31865
expect a full onslaught of dirty politics to start now.

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Mccain's strong ground is foreign policy, and he lost?

not looking good for him. 

hopefully palin will do an awesome job and restore some credibility to his campaign.

shootfighter1

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5674
  • Competitor- NABBA Nationals Overall Champ
I think Obama impressed people with his overall knowledge.  On the specifics, they both did well IMO.  I don't think McCain lost on specifics.  Obama is just easier to like when speaking, he's smoother... I think that influenced some people.  McCain kept smiling and had that little irritating laugh when criticized.  Obama did it too but didn't look as bad.

I would have liked to hear Obama admit that he will not be able to push through many of his spending increases in this tough economic time and talk more powerfully about spending cuts.  McCain's best point of the night was his emphasis on spending cuts, which resonates highly with me.

Good to hear Obama is now saying yes to nuclear but I question if that is a political yes and will not be a priority.  Thats likely our best short-mid term option for energy (along with persuing an all the above approach and see what works).

In summary, I think Obama came across better to the public but they have the same divides on issues.

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31865
looks like Obama made the biggest score with independents.  That's huge.  I expect a pretty big upswing in dirty politics from the McCain camp now.  especially if the polls get any worse for him.  They need it to be close to rig.

shootfighter1

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5674
  • Competitor- NABBA Nationals Overall Champ
But I think some of the independents liked he demeanor.  If you watched the little graph at the bottom, nearly every time Obama started speaking, independents registered higher.  I kept watching to see if it was in responce to specific points Obama made, which some bumps were, but other bumps from independents came when he wasn't saying anything of consequence.  Therefore, I think he won points on style of speech, which is being a good communicator, so its an important quality to have.

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31865
But I think some of the independents liked he demeanor.  If you watched the little graph at the bottom, nearly every time Obama started speaking, independents registered higher.  I kept watching to see if it was in responce to specific points Obama made, which some bumps were, but other bumps from independents came when he wasn't saying anything of consequence.  Therefore, I think he won points on style of speech, which is being a good communicator, so its an important quality to have.
sorry, I watch it on cspan precisely to avoid their little control tools and pre-written pundit analysis of how the debate went.  The idea of watching a debate while some gameshow style audience monitor potentially sways viewer opinion just sounded wrong to me.  The polls broke some of it down to specifics which showed Obama did better than McCain.  Is style a factor? it usually is, but did it win him the debate?  I think that's giving his style way to much credit.

Fifty-eight percent said Obama would better handle the economy vs. 37% for McCain. And 52% said Obama would better handle Iraq vs. 47% for McCain.

The other poll had Obama ahead on everything but Iraq.

Mark Kerr

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1356
Re: YIKES, this was supposed to be McCain's debate. Check out these debate poll
« Reply #7 on: September 27, 2008, 05:37:19 PM »
hopefully palin will do an awesome job and restore some credibility to his campaign.

I think she will do well. ;)

Maybe, she will lick her finger in the VP debate.


MCWAY

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19338
  • Getbig!
WASHINGTON - A pair of one-night polls gave Barack Obama a clear edge over John McCain in their first presidential debate.
 
Fifty-one percent said Obama, the Democrat, did a better job in Friday night's faceoff while 38 percent preferred the Republican McCain, according to a CNN-Opinion Research Corp. survey of adults.

Obama was widely considered more intelligent, likable and in touch with peoples' problems, and by modest margins was seen as the stronger leader and more sincere. Most said it was McCain who spent more time attacking his opponent.

About six in 10 said each did a better job than expected. Seven in 10 said each seemed capable of being president.

In a CBS News poll of people not committed to a candidate, 39 percent said Obama won the debate, 24 percent said McCain and 37 percent called it a tie. Twice as many said Obama understands their needs than said so about McCain.

Seventy-eight percent said McCain is prepared to be president, about the same proportion of uncommitted voters as said so before the debate. Sixty percent said Obama is ready — a lower score than McCain, but a solid 16-percentage-point improvement from before the debate.

In another Obama advantage in the CBS poll, far more said their image of him had improved as a result of the debate than said it had worsened. More also said their view of McCain had gotten better rather than worse, but by a modest margin.

The CNN poll involved telephone interviews with 524 adults who watched the debate and had a margin of error of plus or minus 4.5 percentage points. The CBS survey involved online interviews with 483 uncommitted voters who saw the debate and had an error margin of plus or minus 4 points. It was conducted by Knowledge Networks, which initially selected the respondents by telephone.

Both polls were conducted Friday night.

Polls conducted on one night can be less reliable than surveys conducted over several nights because they only include the views of people available that particular evening.



http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080927/ap_on_el_pr/presidential_debate_polls

That's a bit of a small sample. The one done on H&C on Fox were done with cell phone, about 58,000 callers texted in their votes. It gave McCain the win, with a rather lopsided margin. I think it was 84-14.

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31865
That's a bit of a small sample. The one done on H&C on Fox were done with cell phone, about 58,000 callers texted in their votes. It gave McCain the win, with a rather lopsided margin. I think it was 84-14.
Hannity's poll ::)  gimme a break...  Why don't I go see what the text poll by Michael Moore was ::)  I can't even believe you brought that...  Major credibility thinking 84-14 hannity poll is more accurate than a controlled polling of 500.

MCWAY

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19338
  • Getbig!
Re: YIKES, this was supposed to be McCain's debate. Check out these debate polls.
« Reply #10 on: September 27, 2008, 06:15:11 PM »
Hannity's poll ::)  gimme a break...  Why don't I go see what the text poll by Michael Moore was ::)  I can't even believe you brought that...  Major credibility thinking 84-14 hannity poll is more accurate than a controlled polling of 500.

500 vs. 58000? Yep, the smaller poll is a much better indicator.  ::)

Besides, the last time I checked, it was the Hannity and Colmes show.

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31865
Re: YIKES, this was supposed to be McCain's debate. Check out these debate polls.
« Reply #11 on: September 27, 2008, 06:31:10 PM »
500 vs. 58000? Yep, the smaller poll is a much better indicator.  ::)

Besides, the last time I checked, it was the Hannity and Colmes show.
you're serious!!!! LOL.... BWHAHAHAHAHhahahhahaha.. .





I suppose you think Liberals actually listen to Hannity so they can hear Colmes LOLOL...

MCWAY

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19338
  • Getbig!
Re: YIKES, this was supposed to be McCain's debate. Check out these debate polls.
« Reply #12 on: September 27, 2008, 06:50:38 PM »
you're serious!!!! LOL.... BWHAHAHAHAHhahahhahaha.. .



I suppose you think Liberals actually listen to Hannity so they can hear Colmes LOLOL...

The show features BOTH guys. What's the matter with that, unless (as I've suspected at times) liberals don't like a fair fight?

I saw both polls on CNN and on Fox (H&C, in particular).

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31865
Re: YIKES, this was supposed to be McCain's debate. Check out these debate polls.
« Reply #13 on: September 27, 2008, 07:07:44 PM »
The show features BOTH guys. What's the matter with that, unless (as I've suspected at times) liberals don't like a fair fight?

I saw both polls on CNN and on Fox (H&C, in particular).
dude, you can't possibly think it's a balanced audience on FOX's hannity and colmes...  This is some of the most naive bullshit i've heard lol...  Fair would be something like Hannity vs. Thom Hartmann.  But hannity would never have the balls to go up against someone like Thom on a daily basis.  Colmes is a joke and Fox knows and planned it to be just that.  Sorry to tell you we know it too.

MCWAY

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19338
  • Getbig!
Re: YIKES, this was supposed to be McCain's debate. Check out these debate polls.
« Reply #14 on: September 27, 2008, 07:10:28 PM »
dude, you can't possibly think it's a balanced audience on FOX's hannity and colmes...  This is some of the most naive bullshit i've heard lol...  Fair would be something like Hannity vs. Thom Hartmann.  But hannity would never have the balls to go up against someone like Thom on a daily basis.  Colmes is a joke and Fox knows and planned it to be just that.  Sorry to tell you we know it too.

Please enlighten us as to why Colmes is a so-called "joke". And, what's stopping Hartmann from going to FOX?

24KT

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 24454
  • Gold Savings Account Rep +1 (310) 409-2244
Re: YIKES, this was supposed to be McCain's debate. Check out these debate polls.
« Reply #15 on: September 27, 2008, 07:16:33 PM »
Mccain's strong ground is foreign policy, and he lost?

not looking good for him. 

hopefully palin will do an awesome job and restore some credibility to his campaign.



Please STOP!!! My sides are aching!
w

24KT

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 24454
  • Gold Savings Account Rep +1 (310) 409-2244
Re: YIKES, this was supposed to be McCain's debate. Check out these debate polls.
« Reply #16 on: September 27, 2008, 07:21:38 PM »
And, what's stopping Hartmann from going to FOX?

Journalistic integrity!
w

The Coach

  • Guest
Re: YIKES, this was supposed to be McCain's debate. Check out these debate polls.
« Reply #17 on: September 27, 2008, 07:33:22 PM »
WASHINGTON - A pair of one-night polls gave Barack Obama a clear edge over John McCain in their first presidential debate.
 
Fifty-one percent said Obama, the Democrat, did a better job in Friday night's faceoff while 38 percent preferred the Republican McCain, according to a CNN-Opinion Research Corp. survey of adults.
Obama was widely considered more intelligent, likable and in touch with peoples' problems, and by modest margins was seen as the stronger leader and more sincere. Most said it was McCain who spent more time attacking his opponent.

About six in 10 said each did a better job than expected. Seven in 10 said each seemed capable of being president.

In a CBS News poll of people not committed to a candidate, 39 percent said Obama won the debate, 24 percent said McCain and 37 percent called it a tie. Twice as many said Obama understands their needs than said so about McCain.

Seventy-eight percent said McCain is prepared to be president, about the same proportion of uncommitted voters as said so before the debate. Sixty percent said Obama is ready — a lower score than McCain, but a solid 16-percentage-point improvement from before the debate.

In another Obama advantage in the CBS poll, far more said their image of him had improved as a result of the debate than said it had worsened. More also said their view of McCain had gotten better rather than worse, but by a modest margin.

The CNN poll involved telephone interviews with 524 adults who watched the debate and had a margin of error of plus or minus 4.5 percentage points. The CBS survey involved online interviews with 483 uncommitted voters who saw the debate and had an error margin of plus or minus 4 points. It was conducted by Knowledge Networks, which initially selected the respondents by telephone.

Both polls were conducted Friday night.

Polls conducted on one night can be less reliable than surveys conducted over several nights because they only include the views of people available that particular evening.



http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080927/ap_on_el_pr/presidential_debate_polls

Just thought I'd highlight that part.

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31865
Re: YIKES, this was supposed to be McCain's debate. Check out these debate polls.
« Reply #18 on: September 27, 2008, 07:37:01 PM »
Please enlighten us as to why Colmes is a so-called "joke". And, what's stopping Hartmann from going to FOX?
Hannity is the one who chose who was going to be on the show with him.  Ask him why he didn't choose someone like Hartmann instead.


Colmes, unlike other "hard-hitting liberals" such as Al Franken and Michael Moore, seems have more respect from conservatives than from his fellow liberals. This could be because of his excessive pandering to the right, which may have alienated his left-wing comrades, but has given him the respect of many leading conservatives. Among them are Newt Gingrich ("You are my favorite liberal to argue with"), Senator Orrin Hatch ("You're great for a liberal"), and the Christian conservative leader of Focus on the Family (which is quite popular in my southern-to-the-core hometown of Knoxville, Tennessee), Dr. James Dobson ("He's my favorite liberal").
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Hannity_%26_Colmes

"The title…Hannity & Colmes, is something of a misnomer, because the other host--the timid, bespectacled liberal Alan Colmes--acts essentially as a sacrificial lamb and may as well not be there," reads a review in Britain's Sunday Business Post (8/24/03).

Franken calls Colmes "a moderate milquetoast" and "a liberal on-air punching bag"

This nailes the Colmes joke down:
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1158

MCWAY

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19338
  • Getbig!
Re: YIKES, this was supposed to be McCain's debate. Check out these debate polls.
« Reply #19 on: September 27, 2008, 07:47:10 PM »
Hannity is the one who chose who was going to be on the show with him.  Ask him why he didn't choose someone like Hartmann instead.


Colmes, unlike other "hard-hitting liberals" such as Al Franken and Michael Moore, seems have more respect from conservatives than from his fellow liberals. This could be because of his excessive pandering to the right, which may have alienated his left-wing comrades, but has given him the respect of many leading conservatives. Among them are Newt Gingrich ("You are my favorite liberal to argue with"), Senator Orrin Hatch ("You're great for a liberal"), and the Christian conservative leader of Focus on the Family (which is quite popular in my southern-to-the-core hometown of Knoxville, Tennessee), Dr. James Dobson ("He's my favorite liberal").
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Hannity_%26_Colmes

So, that's your condition for being a "joke", having your opponents respect you, even if they don't agree with your views.

Maybe the lack of name-calling, childish insults, or America-bashing has earned Colmes the respect of these conservative figures.

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31865
Re: YIKES, this was supposed to be McCain's debate. Check out these debate polls.
« Reply #20 on: September 27, 2008, 07:50:28 PM »
"The title…Hannity & Colmes, is something of a misnomer, because the other host--the timid, bespectacled liberal Alan Colmes--acts essentially as a sacrificial lamb and may as well not be there," reads a review in Britain's Sunday Business Post (8/24/03).

Franken calls Colmes "a moderate milquetoast" and "a liberal on-air punching bag"

This nailes the Colmes joke down:
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1158



An Aggressive Conservative vs. a "Liberal to be Determined"
The false balance of Hannity & Colmes

By Steve Rendall


Hannity & Colmes, Fox News Channel's primetime debate show, figures prominently in the cable network's campaign to market its right leaning programming as "fair & balanced," the network's ever-present slogan. Fox News executives argue that the show, pitting conservative Sean Hannity against liberal Alan Colmes with guests from both right and left, presents a spirited and evenhanded nightly debate.

Fox News president Roger Ailes is clearly riled by those who suggest the show has a slant to it (New York Times, 6/24/01): "I get attacked for putting Sean Hannity on because he's a conservative--even when Alan Colmes, the liberal, is there to balance him!" Ailes is so insistent that Hannity & Colmes plays it "down the middle" that he says producers use a stopwatch to ensure equal time between the two hosts (Washington Post, 2/5/01).

But a systematic review of Hannity & Colmes does reveal a show listing to the right in virtually every respect, from mismatched hosts--the show pairs the aggressive conservative Sean Hannity with the mildly liberal, often conciliatory Alan Colmes--to a format where conservatives out-number, out-talk and out-interrupt their liberal opponents.

The dissimilar circumstances under which the two hosts came to Fox News are revealing. Recruited from Atlanta's talk radio scene by Roger Ailes, Hannity was hired so far in advance of a decision about a co-host that Fox staffers referred to the show as "Hannity & Liberal To Be Determined," or "LTBD." Finally, after auditioning prospective left hosts, Colmes won the job--after Hannity expressed his preference for the mild-mannered New York radio host (Newsday, 10/20/98).

The result is a debate show that doesn't add up to a fair fight, say many critics, because Colmes' wishy-washy views and low-key delivery just can't stand up to the relentlessly ideological and combative Sean Hannity. It's a widely held view outside Fox studios.

"The title…Hannity & Colmes, is something of a misnomer, because the other host--the timid, bespectacled liberal Alan Colmes--acts essentially as a sacrificial lamb and may as well not be there," reads a review in Britain's Sunday Business Post (8/24/03). Other critics are no less harsh. When the show recently began featuring a weekly commentary by outspoken conservative comic Dennis Miller, further weighting the discussion to the right, Los Angeles Times television critic Howard Rosenberg (6/23/03) described the Hannity/Miller/Colmes line-up as "two rants, one runt."

The notion that Colmes plays second fiddle to Hannity is shared by television critics across the country. At least four papers (Salt Lake City Tribune, 6/21/03; Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 6/3/03; Atlanta Journal and Constitution, 10/12/96; New York Times, 10/10/96) have run articles referring to Colmes as Hannity's "sidekick."

Fellow liberals don't disagree. In his best selling Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right, liberal comic Al Franken calls Colmes "a moderate milquetoast" and "a liberal on-air punching bag" and puts Colmes' name in tiny typeface in every reference to the show.

And though Fox News markets Colmes as "a hard-hitting liberal known for his electric commentary" (FoxNews.com), it doesn't even get much help from Colmes himself. "I think I'm quite moderate," Colmes blandly told USA Today (2/1/95), not long before being hired as the show's left-wing counterweight to Hannity.

Even Fox News owner Rupert Murdoch seems to have trouble making the case that Colmes is a clear-cut liberal. When asked at a congressional hearing last spring (5/8/03) to identify the liberals featured on the Fox News Channel, he offered "Alan Colmes for one." He added the name of On the Record host Greta Van Susteren--a liberal mainly because she used to work at the centrist CNN--before seeming to apologize: "You know, it's in the eye of the beholder, I guess."

"I voted for Giuliani"

Conceding points to conservatives and Republicans seems to be a Colmes specialty.

Following the September 11, 2001 terror attacks, Colmes (9/28/01) assured former Republican congressmember Susan Molinari that he'd voted for New York City's Republican mayor: "Hold on. Susan--Susan, look, I voted for Rudy Giuliani. I'm a liberal Democrat. I voted for this Republican, Rudy Giuliani." Reminding Fox viewers that he voted for Giuliani is a sort of Colmes on-air mantra; according to the show's transcripts, he's done it at least eight times since 1998.

Colmes sometimes joins his conservative co-host and guests in criticizing the left. When conservative author Tammy Bruce appeared on the show touting her book, The Death of Right and Wrong: Exposing the Left's Assault on Our Culture and Values (4/21/03), Hannity predictably agreed with the author about the blame for declining values: "But, literally, the left is responsible for this." Then Bruce clarified her point: "Well, as I show in the book…it's the left having gone so far to the left." Rather than putting up some kind of resistance to this left-bashing--as one might expect a left-of-center host to do--Colmes instead concurred: "I think in some respects you're right. And you and I have talked about this before."

While Hannity, a devout movement conservative, can be relied upon to dwell on the slightest conservative grievance, Colmes seems to see his role as one of policing liberal excess. When left-leaning New York City councilmember Charles Barron dubbed George W. Bush a "selected" president on the show (3/28/03), Colmes scolded the wayward leftist: "Look, my problem with my fellow liberals is they keep arguing the election of 2000. Let's move forward. If you want to win in the future, stop talking about the past."

Once appearing as a guest on Fox's O'Reilly Factor (4/11/03), Colmes received a figurative pat on the head from the show's host, Bill O'Reilly, for not criticizing the White House during the Iraq war. O'Reilly praised Colmes for his silence: "I put forth that once the shelling starts--and you did this--you kept quiet, OK." Colmes dutifully responded: "Well, look, I've kept quiet. My choice has been--I have not criticized the administration or this war effort while there are men and women in harm's way, and I will not, and that is my --that's a choice I make."

"I defended Trent Lott"

When Sen. Trent Lott (R.-Miss.) appeared on the Hannity & Colmes show (4/30/03) chiding Democrats for conducting a filibuster to stall confirmation of Bush judicial nominees, he got no argument from Colmes: "I agree with you. I don't think the Democrats should be doing that. I think they're viewed as obstructionist when they do that."

Colmes seems to have a special affinity for the conservative senator. When Lott stepped down as Senate majority leader in December 2002, after praising Senator Strom Thurmond's racist 1948 presidential campaign at Thurmond's 100th birthday party, guest Oliver North appeared on the show to defend Lott (12/23/02). When North blamed "Alan and all of his colleagues" for Lott's downfall, Colmes corrected him: "By the way, Ollie, I defended Lott and said he should not have had to step down." When North responded, "Because you wanted him there so you could continue to kick him around," Colmes cited his own pattern of defending Lott: "Absolutely not. Absolutely untrue. You haven't been watching our show."

Similarly, when conservative radio host Laura Ingraham (1/22/03) charged that Lott had been "tarred and feathered…destroyed on the public forum," Colmes protested: "I defended him. I defended Trent Lott."

During one of Newt Gingrich's many appearances on Hannity & Colmes (7/24/03), Colmes thanked the former Republican House speaker profusely for writing a blurb for his upcoming book. It was nothing, Gingrich insisted: "You are my favorite liberal to argue with." And Gingrich isn't alone on the right. If Colmes remains largely a non-person in progressive circles, his tendency to concede points to the right and criticize the left make him the favorite liberal of many conservatives.

In addition to Gingrich, Colmes has won the praise of Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch ("you're great for a liberal"--4/16/01), Republican House Whip Tom DeLay ("you are my favorite liberal"--10/18/99), Christian right leader James Dobson ("he's my favorite liberal"--4/28/03) and, of course, Sen. Trent Lott ("you may be a liberal but you're one of the better ones I've seen on TV"--4/30/03).

"Lower forms of behavior"

If Colmes' fans are almost all on the opposite side of the spectrum, the same cannot be said about Sean Hannity. A popular figure in conservative movement circles, Hannity reportedly gets as much as $10,000 per speech, his first book spent time near the top of national bestseller lists, and his radio show is one of the most listened-to in conservative talk radio, trailing only Rush Limbaugh's show in the ratings.

Before Fox News, Hannity's career included hosting a handful of confrontational talk radio shows in various states. He got his start in the late 1980s as a volunteer broadcaster at the University of California at Santa Barbara's KCSB radio station, where his tenure was revealing.

After airing for less than a year, Hannity's weekly show was canceled in 1989, when KCSB management charged him with "discriminating against gays and lesbians" after airing two shows featuring the book The AIDS Coverup: The Real and Alarming Facts about AIDS (The Independent, 6/22/89). Written by homophobic Christian-right activist Gene Antonio, the book crankily argued that AIDS could be spread by casual contact, including coughs, sneezes and mosquito bites. Antonio charged that the government, medical establishment and media covered up these truths in the service of "the homosexual movement."

When Antonio appeared by phone on one of the shows, Hannity and his guest repeatedly slurred gay men. At one point, according to the UCSB campus newspaper The Daily Nexus (5/25/89), Hannity declared: "Anyone listening to this show that believes homosexuality is a normal lifestyle has been brainwashed. It's very dangerous if we start accepting lower and lower forms of behavior as the normal." According to the campus paper, Antonio responded by calling gay men "a subculture of people engaged in deviant, twisted acts."

When a fellow KCSB broadcaster called the show to challenge the host and his guest, Hannity pointed out that the caller, a lesbian, had a child through artificial insemination, and Antonio dubbed the child a "turkey-baster baby." When the caller took issue with that "disgusting" remark, Hannity followed up with "I feel sorry for your child" (The Independent, 6/22/89; KCSB, 4/4/89).

Saved by the ACLU

Hannity challenged his dismissal with help from the Santa Barbara Chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU Foundation of Southern California. The civil liberties groups wrote letters on Hannity's behalf, arguing that the state school was breaching his free speech. When KCSB relented, offering him his show back, Hannity held out for more airtime, walking away from the station when he didn't get it.

Hannity's own accounts of his time at KCSB have been selective and incomplete. A few years ago he summed up the experience to Newsday (7/12/99): "You work for free at a college station, where they spit on you and then they fire you." In his best-selling book, Let Freedom Ring: Winning the War of Liberty Over Liberalism, Hannity wrote:

My first gig was with my own talk radio show at the University of Santa Barbara. But it didn't last long. I was too conservative, the higher-ups said, and they didn't like the comments one guest made on the show…The left-wing management had zero-tolerance for conservative points of view. And I was promptly fired. Once my voice was silenced, my destiny was set--do or die, I'd make my career in radio.

In this bit of personal mythmaking Hannity attributes his troubles at KCSB to his conservatism and to the behavior of a guest on his show. Both claims distort what actually happened, exonerating Hannity of any responsibility and casting him as a victim. Maybe that's the point. After all, accurately recounting the KCSB story, including his own hateful language and the inconvenient fact that he was offered his job back, might spoil the pristine image of the free-speech martyr Hannity wants us to believe.

Hannity's relentless application of ideology allows for few exceptions, none of the soft spots or quirks of the sort acquired over time when one's rigid beliefs are tempered by experience. So while one might expect Hannity to maintain at least a quiet gratitude toward the ACLU, it's surprising to see how ungenerous he is toward the group that supported him in Santa Barbara. For instance, in a discussion about free speech last year, Hannity charged Colmes with being "a card-carrying member of the ACLU." When Colmes said he that was proud to be a member, "because they defend all free speech," Hannity interrupted him: "No they don't, actually. But go ahead" (Hannity & Colmes, 7/17/02).

"Three Times a Liar"

Hannity's first big-city success in talk radio came on Atlanta's WGST-AM, where by all accounts he was no less confrontational than in California. African-American clergy groups, according to the Atlanta Journal and Constitution (9/15/95), charged WGST with spreading hatred on the airwaves, specifically citing Hannity's show. The paper reported (3/27/96) on Hannity's campaign to get "Oscar attendees to wear blue ribbons, in support of the L.A. police officers who beat Rodney King." Also according to the Journal (4/30/96), a blurb promoting Hannity on the WGST website touted him as "making a proud name for himself by insulting lesbians."

When Hannity reported to New York City in 1996 to begin work on what would become Hannity & Colmes, it wasn't long before he'd also landed an afternoon show on the biggest talk radio station in the country, New York City's WABC-AM.

On his WABC show, as with his earlier radio shows, "the left" and its various constituencies were blamed for the nation's problems; and crime, affirmative action, welfare and "illegitimacy," all talk radio staples, were discussed ceaselessly. But Hannity really distinguished himself with his crusading efforts to defend the police against charges of brutality. When Haitian immigrant Abner Louima accused New York City police officers of sodomizing and badly injuring him with a wooden rod in 1997, Hannity used his WABC show for a vicious counter-offensive targeting the victim.

The father of chief defendant Justin Volpe, an NYPD police officer, regularly appeared on show during the 1999 trial. And Hannity and various guests repeated rumors that Louima's injuries resulted from a "gay sex act" and not from police brutality. Playing on the homosexual rumor and inconsistencies in Louima's story, Hannity and his producer sang a parody of Lionel Richie's song "Three Times a Lady," changing the words to "you're once, twice, three times a liar." Hannity stopped referring to the victim as "Lying Louima" only after Volpe confessed to sodomizing Louima with the help of another officer (OnePeoplesProject.com).

Meanwhile, at Hannity & Colmes, the Louima story got somewhat less, and less sordid, play; Hannity only repeated the homosexual rumor once on the national cable show (5/13/99). But there, on national television, Hannity was gaining a reputation as a leading conservative advocate who could be depended on to echo and amplify the latest lines in conservative and Republican thinking.

The Elián switcheroo

While Fox has made Hannity an increasingly important mouthpiece for the right, Colmes remains little more than Hannity's foil on Fox. One story that seemed to bring this out was that of Elián Gonzalez, the five-year-old Cuban refugee who was rescued in November 1999 from the shark-infested waters off the coast of Florida that claimed his mother's life. The debate that developed on Hannity & Colmes over whether the child ought to be returned to his father in Cuba took some strange turns.

"Unless information comes out that he was a bad father or something, he has a right to his son. And we've got to honor that." That was Hannity's take on Elián Gonzalez in the first segment of the show dealing with the story (11/29/99). In the segment, Hannity agreed with one conservative guest who wanted the child returned to Cuba based on immigration law, and disagreed with another conservative guest, Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart (R.-Fla.), who represents Florida's Cuban-American community. Colmes downplayed the father's rights, siding with Diaz-Balart, who insisted that the child should stay in Florida: "What about the interests of the mother, who as was pointed out, gave her life so her child might find freedom in America?" It was a peculiar position for a liberal to take.

As the Elián saga dragged on, becoming all-important in Florida's anti-Castro community, it stretched into the political primaries of 2000, where most Republicans were hardening their anti-Castro rhetoric and calling for Elián to remain in the U.S..

By March 27, Hannity's pro-father position had begun to soften; on-air, he admitted to being "torn" between the father's right to raise his son and the son's right to "freedom." By late April, he'd completed the reversal; consonant with the Republican consensus, Hannity was demanding that Elián not be sent "back to slavery." This definitive turn-around happened during an April 26, 2000 segment again featuring Diaz-Balart.

While Hannity's position was shifting and he was acknowledging the shift on air, Colmes was changing his view too, but with virtually no explanation. On the same April 26, 2000 segment, putting aside earlier concerns about the child's "freedom," Colmes now polarized with Diaz-Balart, arguing for the father's rights: "But there's no mother, Mr. Congressman, there's only a father left."

Because Colmes did not discuss his switch, the reversal seemed to have no motivation other than to keep Colmes positioned as a sparring partner for Hannity. Unlike his partner, who speaks to and is respected by a conservative movement, Colmes appears to have no goal other than to maintain the illusion of debate on a univocal network.

"A liberal that is a cut above"

And that, in the end, is the job of Hannity & Colmes, a lopsided discussion of political issues between a forceful, connected conservative firebrand and an affable, accommodating subordinate. If the Harlem Globetrotters have the Washington Generals as their nightly fall guys, Sean Hannity has Alan Colmes. The notion that the two hosts are co-equals, fighting it out on a level playing field, cannot be supported by evidence, any more than the rest of Fox's daily offerings can be described as "fair and balanced."

One final example illustrates the role that Colmes plays in the world of right-wing journalism: When Rush Limbaugh came under fire and resigned from ESPN after saying that a highly regarded African-American football star was overrated by the media because he was black, Colmes ran to Limbaugh's defense (10/2/03). Colmes praised the conservative radio talker: "We in talk radio owe Rush a debt of gratitude, no matter what side we're on, because he made it possible for us to do what we do, liberal or conservative, because he paved the way for so many of us." Colmes said Limbaugh, a close friend of both Hannity and Fox News president Roger Ailes, was getting a bad rap, and defended him against charges that the remark was racist: "He wasn't making a racial comment. He was commenting on the media."

Colmes' homage to Limbaugh drew this response from Hannity: "I think what Alan Colmes did in the last segment of this program tonight and what he said about Rush Limbaugh shows why Alan is a liberal that is a cut above and a class act and why I'm proud to have him as a partner."

Hannity might have been speaking for Fox News in expressing his gratitude for Colmes' brilliant performance as the ultimate "Liberal to Be Determined."

MCWAY

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19338
  • Getbig!
Re: YIKES, this was supposed to be McCain's debate. Check out these debate polls.
« Reply #21 on: September 27, 2008, 08:03:09 PM »
Again, because Colmes isn't loud, rude, hurling insults, calling people names, or bashing his own country, he's a "joke", as a liberal.


He doesn't talk about how stupid American voters are, whenever his party loses an election.

With regards to Rush Limbaugh, exactly what's the grievance again? Limbaugh's popularity on talk radio has paved the way for others to do what they do. And, Colmes was right; Limbaugh's comments weren't aimed at McNabb. They were squarely directed at the sports media.

But, I understand. What a weak, limp-wristed liberal Colmes is, to actually suggest to his liberal brethren that they stop bleating and whining about  being "robbed" in 2000 and that Bush was "selected". That's NOT going to help them win in the future.

(Incidentally, he won initially on election night in 2000 and NEVER LOST the lead in Florida, during the 5-week recount. At that point, the court deemed enough was enough and declared that Bush won Florida, and with it, the presidency).

Colmes isn't quite as animated or loud as Hannity, but that hardly makes him weak.

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31865
Re: YIKES, this was supposed to be McCain's debate. Check out these debate polls.
« Reply #22 on: September 27, 2008, 08:29:59 PM »
Again, because Colmes isn't loud, rude, hurling insults, calling people names, or bashing his own country, he's a "joke", as a liberal.


He doesn't talk about how stupid American voters are, whenever his party loses an election.

With regards to Rush Limbaugh, exactly what's the grievance again? Limbaugh's popularity on talk radio has paved the way for others to do what they do. And, Colmes was right; Limbaugh's comments weren't aimed at McNabb. They were squarely directed at the sports media.

But, I understand. What a weak, limp-wristed liberal Colmes is, to actually suggest to his liberal brethren that they stop bleating and whining about  being "robbed" in 2000 and that Bush was "selected". That's NOT going to help them win in the future.

(Incidentally, he won initially on election night in 2000 and NEVER LOST the lead in Florida, during the 5-week recount. At that point, the court deemed enough was enough and declared that Bush won Florida, and with it, the presidency).

Colmes isn't quite as animated or loud as Hannity, but that hardly makes him weak.

Are you for real?  What are you talking about?  He's a hand picked joke.  wasn't this about your laughable thinking that Hannity's text poll had merit because Colmes is there?  yes... I just told you I think he's a joke.  He lays down for Hannity all the time.  again if Hannity had any balls he would have picked someone like Thom and Thom doesn't do the shit you're spewing about liberals wherever the fuck that came from...  Liberals and progressives don't tune into Hannity's show just because he hired a "liberal" punching bag.  Infact they tune in even less BECAUSE of the Colmes farse.  All I did was to show you many others also have issues with Colmes, not just me.  Now stop trying to change the subject 20 different ways.  The fact that you think HANNITY'S poll carries any real weight is beyond a fucking joke, it's just sad.  If you believe this crap you're part of the sad joke.