Fox News’ “Hannity” is still in the hands of guest hosts until Monday. The show hasn’t covered anything terribly Earth-shattering in Sean’s absence, but there was a Hannity-related commentary in the Detroit Examiner that’s well worth revisiting.
During the Hannity radio show segment which aired at approximately 2:50PM (third hour) on KABC 790 radio Los Angeles, I clicked on the channel and heard Hannity caustically referring to “A Ron Paul presidency” saying something to the effect of “this is what you would get”, comparing Paul’s foreign policy ideals to the democrats. He went on to say that he likes some of Ron Paul’s ideas but that a lot of Paul’s supporters are crazy. I bring up this latest smear to point out that the establishment neocon pundits such as Hannity, Beck and O’Reilly do not really like constitutional or liberty-minded statesmen, but rather constantly strive to undermine them and their supporters.
Hill treats the very act of criticizing the Cult of Paul as if it’s inherently scandalous, but he never quite gets around to defending Paul or his fans on their own merits. Maybe that’s because even a cursory glance at the merits shows that Hannity is right, and that Paul’s fan base isn’t exactly a model of sanity—as evidenced by the above video, which charmingly depicts Hannity performing a Nazi salute and wearing a swastika, and in which “George in Chicago” idiotically calls him “a spokesman for the merchants of death” who “love[s] death, destruction and murder.” I guess that doesn’t count as “demonization” in Martin Hill’s world.
Besides, to be a Paul supporter, you’d have to be—well, nuts. The guy has disgracefully given credence to the 9/11 Truther movement, was involved in some mighty interesting newsletters back in the day, spouts insane, factually-challenged moral equivalency whenever terrorism rears its ugly head, and is generally delusional when it comes to foreign affairs—so much so that to him, even a liberal pansy like Barack Obama is a war-monger.
Ron Paul’s laughable foreign policy record is the very definition of baggage, but Hill dishonestly implies that it’s “constitutional or liberty-minded” politicians that mainstream conservative pundits can’t stand. Funny, I don’t recall Hannity or his colleagues declaring war on Tom Coburn…
As NewsReal highlights the divide between conservatives and libertarians when it comes to personal morality, it’s important to recognize that the foreign policy divide is just as intense. Within the libertarian movement, there are distinct strains of isolationism, appeasement, and even anti-Americanism, with every word in favor of military action indicative of deep-rooted bloodlust or dreams of world domination.
Finding common ground between disparate factions is all well and good, but we cannot indulge denial of the fact that America’s enemies are real, and will mean us harm regardless of what we do—and there can be no compromise with a faction that insists on willful denial of this reality.