Saturday, September 24, 2011

Ron Paul versus Sean Hannity

Fascinating. This interview immediately followed Thursday's debate.

16 comments:

  1. Man, that was a great explanation -- clear, logical, absolutely to the point -- by Ron Paul of why not to go into Iran preemptively.

    And, good to see Hannity treat the Doctor respectfully, and give him time to explain his thoughts.

    Hey, Sean; gives some etiquette lessons to that thug, O'Reilly.

    ReplyDelete
  2. It's painfully obvious that Paul dislikes Hannity just by the kind of passive/annoyed tone he takes with him. Hannity pretty much asks "why don't you like me? Why don't you wanna destroy Iran?" It's a shame Paul has to put up with this crap but he needs to try and reach the neocons if he really wants to win.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Ron Paul is right of course, but he missed the opportunity to point out that U.S. foreign policy creates the environment conducive for guys like Ahmadinejad to come to power. It's a fair bet that if U.S. trade relations with the Iranian people were beneficial to the man on the street in Tehran, saber rattling at the U.S. by their politicians would be a non-starter.

    ReplyDelete
  4. James- yeah, RP really dislikes Hannity- I've never seen him give the cold shoulder to anyon that way. Compare this to his interaction with Jon Stewart, whom he obviously likes.

    Omni, that's a great point. Overall a good interview for RP!

    ReplyDelete
  5. It seemed like Ron Paul views Hannity the same way he views Obama - different sides of the same coin. One side has Warfare, the other side is Welfare, and the coin is made of Fool's Gold covered with Chinese lead paint. Hannity supports the Warfare side of the coin, and Mr. Paul doesn't support it, obviously.

    Perhaps some of Hannity's viewers will stop and think for a minute after that exchange.

    ReplyDelete
  6. @James, that expression on Paul's face at the end says it all. LOL. I really hate it when Neocons pretend that they and libertarians think alike on most things. I have never found that to be even remotely true. While libertarian's and neocons do agree on certain things that government should not do, our reasons for our positions are night and day. For instance, libertarians look at welfare as a system that traps people in poverty and takes away any incentive to improve their lives, while the neocon hates welfare because in their minds welfare recipients are lazy shiftless people that desire to feed off the government.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I think part of the cold shoulder was due to Hannity bringing up the Rand/Obama plane trip.

    #1 I'm not sure Ron agrees with his sons stance.

    #2 Ron is there as a candidate for the GOP nomination. Not idle banter about what his son is doing on a plane with Obama.

    I think it was a very coy play by Hannity and Ron picked up on it.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Nuff said, again, by Dr. Paul. When will these MSM bozos get the message. The Fox's hydra of stupid commentators is getting sickening. Are these dummies dense or what. Let the good times roll Dr.Paul, no match yet from the elite generated crowd.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Hannity sure wasn't against warfare, the Fed, out of control spending, etc when bush was in charge! Same thing with levin, rush, etc.

    Hannity is desperate for getting Paul's approval at this point for ratings reasons, and because maybe even Hannity is smart enough to see which way the political winds are blowing. Newt was smart enough to post on twitter that Paul will go down in history as being the first serious person in modern times to make the Fed an issue. Paul is rising in the polls and growing in influence with the youth and the american people, while neo-con nonsense is losing popularity.

    I thought Paul did great in the debate and during this Hannity nonsense. The only thing I wish he would have done is point out that our foreign intervention is exactly what caused Hitler to rise to power, not the other way around.

    ReplyDelete
  10. To all above:
    Man, I caught that vibe from RP big time. I was going to comment on it, but you all beat me to it!
    He's always courteous, though.
    VERY intersting interview, however. Hannity would NEVER have sucked up like that in '07.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Didn't seen that Ron was all that pleased that Rand was jetting around with Obama...

    ReplyDelete
  12. Unlike most people that have commented, I did not get the impression that Paul gave Hannity the cold shoulder. Paul seemed more like "Yeah yeah can you be more original?" Hannity's talking points about Iran are so scripted and robotic. I think Paul was reacting to that.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Hannity was kissing ass big time.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Paul has reason to be wary of Hannity. Hannity has repeatedly attacked, belittled, mocked, and sabotaged Paul for several years. That said, Paul has to step above that to present his message without alienating the viewers who have not recognized Hannity's disgusting behavior.

    ReplyDelete
  15. This is is very educational. The classic arguments against Paul's non-interventionism. Hannity is a putz though for being so aggressive with Paul right from the start...

    @Ombibulous: Our policies do polarize the Iranian people to support their government against the US. But remember that the Iranian people on the whole like the US and don't forget that one of the founding fathers of the first Iranian constitution in 1909 was an American, Howard C. Baskerville (http://www.persianmirror.com/Article_det.cfm?id=1950&getArticleCategory=58&getArticleSubCategory=32).

    ReplyDelete
  16. I'm glad that Sean Hannity admits 95% agreement with Dr. Ron Paul.

    I've got one question: if, like Ron Paul and many libertarians, you recognize that government agencies are enormously wasteful, inefficient, self-serving, and counterproductive, why don't the same economic theories apply equally to the military? Why are you not equally suspicious of the endless reasons for more war?

    ReplyDelete