Rocky would have embarrassed Hannity to the point of crying out for mama on the air.

Ethan,

And what’s your point? Are you afraid of having the Repugs’ ass kicked by Rocky?

Warnick is correct, when Rocky stands and reads a speech, he is one of the dullest speakers imaginable. He comes across as shrill and frenetic. But he can debate with the best of them…face it, he’s got a first-class mind. Give Hannity credit…he realized he would be overmatched.

I haven’t decided who to support, I am still watching a few candidates very closely.

By the way, if you want to see this Rocky V. Hannity thing get good, tune in tonight at 8:10.

Also, it’s not that I DISlike the guy…

yep. Should be mucho funo

IT’S ON!! Rocky says hell yeah!!

I know that Mr. Hannity said that he would come out here, and I look forward to him keeping his word. But honestly, I don’t expect much more than the usual from Hannity where he polarizes issues that are only slightly (if at all) related to the subject at hand, and dogdes any issue that he would most certainly fail at presenting a strong case for.

Hannity will try to come out on top, but if he is to do that he will have to pull the usual bait and switch tactic that he is famous for.

I was on KSL Nightside tonight and I gave Rocky a pat on the back. I hope he bring more attention to this issue.

Rocky will wail on this guy. Hannity is a bully with a ‘kill button’. Rocky will do much better in this forum. The ‘voting’ concerns me though, there will probably be more Hannity than Rocky fans show up, especially if Shaun pushes it on his show.

Oh yeah, this: http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/03/06/the-daily-show-slams-bush-over-walter-reed-scandal/

and this: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070309/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/national_security_letters

Aren’t helping Hannity, being the apologist he is. Rocky doesn’t have to be that good, the facts speak for themselves. Hannity will be balled up in the corner, and rocky will be dropping bomb after bomb. And if Hannity stays true to form, his defence will be “he just hates Bush and wants us to lose the war”. Pathetic. Happy hunting Rock!

Hannity controls more than a radio show. Hannity controls the propaganda that comes from the administration. Hannity openly and deceitfully convinces us that submitting to loss of Habeas Corpus, wiretapping, state sponsored torture, tracking of bank records, medical records, transportation patterns, library use, internet usage, and opening our mail is patriotic and necessary to insure our security while opposing these losses of liberty is unAmerican. Without Hannity keeping public opinion divided, there would not be this administration in it’s current form. Hannity is the mouthpiece of the Mao, Stalin and Hitler.

I agree with that. Hannity reaches alot of voting Americans stuck in gridlock in our cities in the afternoon. Rush has the morning shift covered. O’Reilly used to have the evening shift here in Utah, then Lars Larson. I dig Nightside, for the most part. I’m not much of an FM guy anymore…except my favorite KRCL blocks.

Hannity is the republican version of Howard Stern, ‘nough said.

Hannity is afraid of Rocky and he sure isn`t going to let him speak to his brainwashed audience.
So hannity offered to come here for a debate he now wants control over the broadcast. Why did he cancel the show where he did have the CONTROL the neocons crave. Hannity is a wimp.

I relate Hannity to Howard Stern, but maybe that is too narrow.
Hannity seems to me like a mix between Rush Limbaugh and Howard Stern, as if they mixed up their DNA and Hannity is their by-product.

The reason I say that is becuase Hannity is a shock jock, and his republican/conservative attitude mixes with the Im right F-U attitude of Stern, as if Hannity got his politics from Rush Limbaugh, and his attitude from Howard Stern.

Anyway. It’s just a goof…
But I do hope to see Hannity debate out of his arena where there are guidelines for a debate with someone more intellectual than his typical audience where Hannity can’t weed out the good comments by hanging up on a person.

If he comes out here I would be suprised. But one can hope!

I figured Hannity wasn’t as charitable as he claimed. He mentioned he would come out here on his own expense. But letting Fox have exclusive rights tells a different story.

So not only to the concerned people of America miss out on a good debate, but charity loses out too. Sean offered to donate all of the proceeds to the winners favorite charity, but “all of the proceeds” wouldn’t include Fox’s advertising sales profits…. IF such an event even happened.

Regardless, I expected Sean to back out, or try to put this in his arena. Typical.

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz – my only solice is that some day you will all face God – and I hope that standing behind Him are all the children you have allowed to die by abortion, and all the boys and girls you have allowed to be abused and killed through your steam engine the ACLU – sueing to allow pornography to be handed out on the streets of Vegas? Come on … really … these are the values and ideals your little hero Rocky Anderson fights for? Impressive.

Im no liberal, Im no conservative… Moderate?? I don’t think so.

I have probably enough conservative views to be more than moderate, but not enough to be a neocon republican.

It really doesn’t matter, the whole partisan game is just a distraction anyway.

If everybody’s doing it (aborting), must be O.K. Too bad george w.h. and barb didn’t have that figured out.

Cliff,

Thanks for your questions. I’m sorry if I take awhile to respond, but it’s difficult to find the time to get online.

1. Of course there would be child molesters without pornography, but anyone who claims pornography doesn’t have a significant impact on that number is crazy. I’m not just talking about magazines and online websites either. I’m also talking about T.V., movies, billboards, etc. I am an elementary school teacher, and each day I wrack my brain trying to figure out why the ACLU fights so hard to “protect kids from the evils of religion” and then turns around and supports child pornography (which they do). Does that make sense to anyone?

If there were no pornography can anyone doubt that children would be spared? Can anyone doubt that marriages and relationships would be saved? That there would be less broken homes and more functional families raising functional children?

Of course it wouldn’t be a fix-all, but should we allow it to continue just because it won’t remove every predator from the streets? Why would it be wrong to castrate anyone convicted of a sex crime? Why would it be wrong cut off the hand of a thief? Why would it be wrong so have prisons that are actually uncomfortable and unwelcoming? We have become sooooooooooooo politically correct in this country that it seems there are no consequences for anything anymore. There is no fear of what will happen. Everyone whines about this guys rights being abused, or the unlawful intrusions into this guys privacy. Obviously there need to be limits, but I’m not afraid of someone listening to my calls or monitoring my bank accounts. What do I have to hide? NOTHING! It drives me nuts.

2. My comparison between abortions and Iraqi deaths was in response to your earlier comment about those who would greet me after death. Of course there’s no legitimate comparison between the two, but you wanted to bring out numbers. BTW, I love how you describe it as “reproductive family planning decisions” vs. “murdering innocent Iraqis”. I always have, and always will maintain that “family planning decisions” should be made BEFORE you get pregnant. If you decide to have sex without a condom, THAT was your decision. If you decide to take a chance, THAT was your decision. The decision should not be whether or not to take the only REAL innocent life on this earth, that of a developing child.

I hope I didn’t sound too bitter in these responses. These are probably two of the issues I am most passionate about. I was molested as a child by someone addicted to pornography. It seems so incredible that people are so willing to support such an obviously dangerous evil from our society in the name of free speech (and not to mention a few billion dollars on the side). My passion against abortion comes from the six beautiful children I have, and the serious innability so many people have to accept responsibility for the decisions they make.

Cliff, thanks again for your response. I promise I’ll respond tomorrow when I have some time.

Nephi, did you take all night coming up with this response? Do you really think that rape is the issue when it comes to abortion? What percentage of those 46 million abortions are due to rape? Why would I be worried about anyone listening to discussions with my lawyer? Why would I be worried about the government listening to conversations with my bishop? If I had a reason to go to my bishop shouldn’t I be ready to accept the consequences of whatever actions put me in that position? Do I speed? Sometimes. If I speed do I deserve a ticket? Of course I do. I just hope I don’t get caught. If the cops are smart enough to put robo-cop out there I won’t speed anymore, and if I do, I deserve a ticket. Why are you so against personal responsibility?

Good to see that folks are busy on the blogo this pm.

Bored,

First of all, thanks for ditching the shrill tone that accompanied your first comment or two on 1U. If the roles were reversed and the same tone appeared on a right wing blog, immediate banning would be the result. To Cliff’s credit, like most left wing blog-masters, banning is reserved for the most eggregious of circumstances, which do not include anti-liberal commentary. Welcome!!

Now, back to my question which you conveniently avoided: What happens if one of your female loved ones were to become pregnant through rape? Are you going to carve out an exception for that?

Bored,

I happen to be somewhat of an expert on the subject of abortion.

You keep talking about the 46 million abortions. You further argue that because such a small proportion of those are the result of rape and that therefore rape should not be a consideration when discussing goverment’s role legislation of abortion and the evisceration of a woman’s right to choose.

So I assume you agree that in the case of rape, abortion should be allowed.

What would be the standard for determining if the pregnancy is the result of rape?

And if you would, could you provide the source of the 46 million number?

Thank you.

I do not think all abortions are damaging / traumatic. A demise of that loveable little critter, likely another little soldier-fodder, a familys broken bank, the returning son of god, or…?, suggests that said critter will just have to come from some other womb. That’s all.

RU486

And we appreciate your presence here.

As a newbie, perhaps you are open to using a less cynical screen name. It may cause the discourse to elevate somewhat.

“Boredwithliberals” suggests your mind is made up and closed.

I would hate to think our children are being taught by professionals who put cultural stereotypes above intellectectual curiosity.

Peace, L

May 4th is the date: Hannity has no screener or “kill button”. He will be playing in “NFL” with no helmet or pads when he debates Rocky. Hannity can only play on your emotion, not on your intellect. Hannity will receive the “beating” he has deserved for years now. GO GET UM, ROCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Blessed, I’m honestly not sure what point you are trying to get across, but in response to your question about my objective … I wanted my students to see that there were two sides to the war – they were expected to look at the ideas, emotions, and rationale behind both points of view, and then make an education decision about which side they supported and why. Obviously I wanted them to all come to the conclusion that what the colonies did was brave, bold, and necessary, but it’s not my place to TELL them this, they need to make that decision for themselves.

Funny; we “tell” people the exacting formulas to define geometry, algebra, and calculus, but we won’t give our children the true formula of what made us free,….

….. we have to tell the story of the side that absolutely would have left us subject to the tyranny of the crown, the tory side, usually slavers, or the simple loyally minded common folk. Who wants to teach that sorry story? Though as a ridiculed object lesson it would be OK by me.

I have no problem with propaganda in this regard. BG would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue! …

The first, compelled by deception, got us into Iraq. The second properly applied to the current crop of criminals, will get us out.

So Brian, since you are “the teach” what was it George Washington, Father of our Country, stated in his Farewell Address concerning “foreign entanglements” especially those not in our interest?

Please cover this is detail with your students.

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/washing.htm

Further, the Revolution was a minority event in which the Founding Fathers, the minority, asked for aid from France, and received it unconditionally, because their King Louis the 16th at the time, was a mental defective. We got pretty lucky, better than virtue anyday. By and large though, the fight was our own, and tories certainly had no mettle like the Sunni insurgency.

Force of will tends to make its own history. The Sunnis, also a minority.

and Howe….

Neither am I, never say never, Just believe this entanglement is in no way in our interests, and has been brought to the fore with the help of unworthy alliances.

“No permanent friends, no permanent enemies, only permanent self interest”. This is the directive of realpolitik, as it is practised the World round. Play it to win, because the other choice is lose. The morality play is for politics, and domestic consumption. It doesn’t weigh on the minds of our enemies at all. They have their own reasons for fighting. We are in their lands with guns in our hands, the die is cast.

Good thing what you think of Georges’ plan was all about, was not realized, and that Jackson and the like had the sand to disagree with your supposed take on things. We had doings with the English that led to our War with them in 1812, all economic, and quite entangling. Business with the crown is always duplicitous like that.

The comparison is absolutely there. Agree or disagree, the outcome will be similar.