First-class ticket and private jet not good enough for

October 9, 2004 3:57 AM

First-class ticket and private jet not good enough for "regular guy" Sean HannityLess than a week before he was scheduled to speak to students at Washington University in St. Louis, ABC Radio Networks host and FOX News Channel host Sean Hannity -- who regularly casts himself as an "average American" while attacking Senator John Kerry's "elitist lifestyle" -- reportedly canceled the appearance because flight arrangements were not made to his liking.
posted by Postroad (33 comments total)

sean hannity is a fucking fuck, fuck him and the fucking horse he fucking rode in on my least favorite person
posted by mr.marx at 4:59 AM on October 9, 2004

sorry for that. he just gets to me, like almost noone else.
posted by mr.marx at 5:23 AM on October 9, 2004

Give me a break. Anyone who thinks Hannity isn't elitist must also be an undecided voter. He's King of the Obfuscation Machine.
posted by fleener at 7:04 AM on October 9, 2004

Hannity is a douchebag. Next!
posted by psmealey at 7:07 AM on October 9, 2004

This isn't really suprising, tons of these right-wing pundits blab about how Kerry and "the liberals" are out of touch with "mainstream America." I think Laura Ingraham loves to use the term "flyover country" because, you know, she's really going to be taking a week vacation in Wyoming sometime soon.

Think about it. Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, all these guys- they run radio shows and tape television. They could live and broadcast anywhere in the world if they wanted to. Does Limbaugh actually talk about living in Middle America? Bullshit. He brags about his fine Cuban cigars, has a Condo in New York where his radio empire is located, and owns a McMansion down in Miami to have his designer drugs delivered to. O'Reilly was on the Daily Show the other night practically bragging that he was a multimillionaire.

These people are the elitists, and there's no greater example of their hypocrisy than their constant avoiding how so-called "liberal elitism" made them the successes they are today. I laugh at Sean Hannity claiming to be more in touch with the common man as much as I laugh at Ann Coulter talking about how horrible "the feminists" are- honey, you're a 40-year old woman who chose a successful career and a law degree over getting married, staying home, and raising kids... on behalf of Gloria Steinem, you're fucking welcome.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 7:15 AM on October 9, 2004

From what we read, he's really a Diva ..what do they say in some streets again...a queen ?
posted by elpapacito at 7:23 AM on October 9, 2004

There's a peculiar sleight-of-hand around the whole issue of class-membership in this election. Bush is from a line of old-money bluebloods -- keeping the cash and the connections in the family. Kerry's dad, by contrast, was the son of poor Hungarian immigrants, and what blueblood connections he has are decidedly black-sheep. (His grand-daddy Forbes apparently made a killing in the Chinese opium market.) (Trivial aside: Kerry is GWB's 19th cousin, twice removed....)

So Bush becomes the icon of the "common man", and Kerry the icon of the patrician elitist. It's not really a mystery how this happens -- Bush has aggressively and probably intentionally underachieved for more or less his entire life ('gagging on that silver spoon', to paraphrase C.F. Kane). And Kerry's family and later Kerry himself made early decisions that he would do what was necessary to climb to an appropriate level of society, through going to the right schools and giving the right level of performance. (Ralph Nader makes a great contrast to both of these models, BTW...)

British Mefites, please offer opinions: I recall reading many moons ago of socioeconomic studies that compared self-identification in America and Britain. Roughly, the finding in comparison was that British tended to identify upward more or less consistently -- if they were close to a bracket boundary, they'd identify themselves as belonging to the higher bracket. But Americans would identify themselves as belonging to the lower bracket. As an example, someone earning $150K/yr might describe themselves as "middle class" (and I can't tell you how many people I've heard do that).

[Aside: Anybody else irritated by the President's insistence on referring to the British as "the Brits" on national TV?]

Compare also O'Reilly's insistence on a lowly background, and the instant credibility that seems to stick to anyone in America who talks about having "started low." It's a peculiar thing; in America, we identify with the next bracket up, but identify as a lower bracket. Is it a cultural issue, with trust, or something?
posted by lodurr at 7:31 AM on October 9, 2004

Horatio Alger?
posted by mr.marx at 7:37 AM on October 9, 2004

lodurr : The Economist recently averred an opinion which (for once) I think agree with.

Basically, 'middle class' in Britain means moderately well off or better, up to being prosperous; 'middle class' in America means moderately well off or a bit worse without being poor. In Britain, the 'middle swathe' think of themselves as being middle class or working class, with a small number of rich/upper class people at one extreme and a small number of poor people at the other.

(I should probably qualify this by saying that the concept of class in Britain is not just an economic thing but is partly cultural and to some extent self-defined; home ownership, education and family background are also factors, so a not very wealthy librarian with a degree may consider himself to be 'middle class' whereas a somewhat more financially comfortable plumber without a degree might think of himself as being 'working class').
posted by plep at 9:14 AM on October 9, 2004

I'd love nothing better than to totally kick this windbag piece of shits' ass. I can't stand this lying motherfucker. And I'm a very calm, non-violent person. Well non-violent at least.
posted by damnitkage at 9:33 AM on October 9, 2004

I think he's just a chicken shit who wouldn't want to speak in front of a college audience and balked out an excuse as to why. Wuss!
posted by Peter H at 9:39 AM on October 9, 2004

actually, plep, I think your qualifying parenthesis pretty much nails it. (I say this from a Swedish perspective, but we tend to have adopt all kinds of foreign standards, so I think this is true for much of Europe).
it's very much a social status thing, not necessarily just an economical thing. if you have a college education: bam! middle class. if you get promoted to boss/manager: bam! middle class. if you make a living doing something that might be perceived as influential (in my case journalism): bam! middle class.

on preview: damnitkage, you and me together could cause some serious damage.

on 2nd preview: peter h: the best part of al franken's book is when he challenges hannity to a FITE.
posted by mr.marx at 9:42 AM on October 9, 2004

But Americans would identify themselves as belonging to the lower bracket. As an example, someone earning $150K/yr might describe themselves as "middle class" (and I can't tell you how many people I've heard do that).

I've never heard of this. Wasn't there a study recently that said that the top 15% of american income earners believed themselves to be in the top 5%?
posted by Stynxno at 9:47 AM on October 9, 2004

For further reading:

The Document Sean Hannity Doesn't Want You To Read

(Stupid page title, but interest quotes from Hannity.)
posted by jca at 10:11 AM on October 9, 2004

(make that "interesting".)
posted by jca at 10:12 AM on October 9, 2004

Perhaps we should go cause a scene on the douche bag's Hannity's message board?
posted by monju_bosatsu at 10:52 AM on October 9, 2004

jca: interesting bunch of quotes indeed. Notice the repetition frequency rate of the various memes (hate america, inherited recession) which suggests me he's "wired" and very satisfied of that..as being "wired" requires little person tought and analysis
posted by elpapacito at 10:55 AM on October 9, 2004

Wasn't there a study recently that said that the top 15% of american income earners believed themselves to be in the top 5%?

While that would be logically inconsistent with high-income people self-describing as middle class, I would not find it surprising if many people were found to exhibit both views. We are talking about Americans, after all. We're not the most self-examined or mathematically literate population in the first world.
posted by lodurr at 11:08 AM on October 9, 2004

[Aside: Anybody else irritated by the President's insistence on referring to the British as "the Brits" on national TV?]

It bothers me. Not that it's derogatory, necessarily, but it seems out-of-place familiar. Maybe he called Blair's countrymen 'Brits' in front of him, and figures it's cool to repeat it, over and over...Everytime he does so, I hear him following up with 'Frogs, Polacks, Krauts...they all love me', though. Then I give him props for not being so offensive.

And who the hell are you to question the President's language? He knows how these people think, remember?
posted by Busithoth at 12:24 PM on October 9, 2004

Hannity's that odious kid from childhood who kisses the asses of all the teachers, but when he's alone tortures small animals (Frogs, squirrels, Stray dogs etc...) . A sociopath. Yes that's the word I'm searching for.
posted by Skygazer at 12:45 PM on October 9, 2004

From what we read, he's really a Diva ..what do they say in some streets again...a queen ?
I've only heard that about Shep Smith, not Hannity, but i wouldn't be surprised in the least--O'Reilly too.
posted by amberglow at 2:02 PM on October 9, 2004

I've only heard that about Shep Smith, not Hannity, but i wouldn't be surprised in the least--O'Reilly too.

News flash. They're all divas. Bush has nothing to do with the common man, neither does kerry, nor hannity, nor dan rather, nor michael moore.

Somethings are black and white, this is one of them. Take off your liberal goggles for once.

sean hannity is a fucking fuck, fuck him and the fucking horse he fucking rode in on my least favorite person

Hannity is a douchebag.

I'd love nothing better than to totally kick this windbag piece of shits' ass. I can't stand this lying motherfucker.

I think he's just a chicken shit

Perhaps we should go cause a scene on the douche bag's Hannity's message board?

Ahh, the intelligent, mature, left. Watch out or you'll become just as hateful as the far right. Best of the web indeed.
posted by justgary at 4:28 PM on October 9, 2004

The thing with the Hannity situation is that he allegedly likes to fly commercial (bottom of page). So Hannity is one of those flip-floppers that he decries.

I have to admit I like Sean Hannity. He asks a lot of good questions and is less sycomphatic of the Republican party line than a Rush Limbaugh, but not off the wall loony like Michael Weiner. He's funny and witty and has a public persona of being a nice guy. After all, he basically catapulted Alan Colmes from the doldrums of evening radio into stardom as the Fox News house liberal. I really don't get this hatred for him. He's not a racist or a felon. He's not pompous, but is grateful for all the breaks he's gotten. But, he's a conservative, so he must be evil.
posted by calwatch at 4:31 PM on October 9, 2004

Umm... calwatch, when you talk about "evil" you might want to look at the title of Hannity's latest book, and perhaps get a glimpse of his sense of equivalency.

If you wrote a book titled "child rapists, mass murderers, and liberals: things I don't like" it might give cause for liberals to be, shall we say, somewhat concerned with you.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 5:11 PM on October 9, 2004

I am a talk radio junky, and not because I'm a kool-aid drinker, I am an avid listener of NPR, BBC, O'Reilly, Alan Colmes, even Limbaugh occasionally. I enjoy listening to all of their viewpoints and feel enriched and informed as a citizen being so exposed.

But Hannity is just terrible. It's 3 hours a day of him taking calls where him and the caller exchange 2 minutes of talking about what "Great Americans" each other are, in between horrible patriotic modern country bumper music. It's unbelievably tedious and insipid. O'Reilly is a million times more listenable and interesting.
posted by glenwood at 5:12 PM on October 9, 2004

I agree with glenwood. Hannity is terrible. Compared to him, Limbaugh actually sounds more like a principled conservative than a Republican shrill like Hannity. Plus, Limbaugh's show is so much more entertaining.
posted by gyc at 6:07 PM on October 9, 2004

Most talk radio callers are terrible, and most radio hosts can't turn these lemons into lemonade. (There are a few exceptions, like Phil Hendrie and Mr. KABC, that handle the callers like they deserve.)

Limbaugh's shtick got old years ago. Limbaugh's parody songs were great in the Clinton era but became old hat once Bush got elected, and his skills declined as his hearing went down the tubes. His bumper music and "special updates" also got dated. I also won't forgive Rush for character assassinating John McCain in the 2000 primary season.

I find O'Reilly's blatant arrogance entertaining, and he often surprises me with his viewpoints. The main problem with O'Reilly is that he doesn't shut up and let the guests talk. He does keep the callers on for the right amount of time (about 10-20 seconds), because no one wants to listen to a caller talk about the same issue yet again.

For conservative talkers, Hannity is articulate. His beliefs are genuinely held, unlike a certain Weiner who went hard right when his ratings started dropping. His guest list is amazing, and he usually lets them talk. Even liberals like Howard Dean, Dennis Kucinich, and Janeane Garofalo appear on his show for some reason. Occasionally he pulls a joke like on April Fools' Day when he announced an endorsement for John Kerry. And, everyone likes Marty at the end of the show, and the side stuff like Flipper and the Friday quizzes weren't the same old shtick. The main knocks are he can't reign in his callers and make them get to the point, and that his radio show often seems like a plugfest for the main event on TV (in contrast to O'Reilly where he keeps the plugging relatively restrained).
posted by calwatch at 7:25 PM on October 9, 2004

It's been my experience that those who boast about being of the upper crust generally aren't... and evidently the same is true of those who never tire of talking about their "humble origins".

Look at Dubya, for instance: a "common Texan" who was born and educated in the northeast, and a "rancher" who'd never set foot on a ranch until 1999...
posted by clevershark at 7:42 PM on October 9, 2004

Hannity is blustering, boorish, and poorly informed. He appears to have the sense of humor of a particularly crabby cockroach.

I would personally love to launch him and Michael Moore into space together for a steel-cage match to the death.
posted by Sidhedevil at 8:18 PM on October 9, 2004

Weiner a/k/a "Savage" doesn't seem to be "hard right" anymore--I don't listen to his show, but the teasers I hear on the radio for it basically have him lambasting Bush for not preserving the racial purity and precious bodily fluids of our nation or something like that.

It's a long road from hippie herbalist to head of the Monster Screaming Loony Party, US division...
posted by Sidhedevil at 8:23 PM on October 9, 2004

As Romanesko put it in his link, Hannity apparently has found a jet he likes--to Utah Valley State College.
posted by croutonsupafreak at 8:33 PM on October 9, 2004

Justgary, I don't think Hannity is a douchebag for his political beliefs. He's just a douchebag. There's a difference.
posted by psmealey at 8:00 AM on October 10, 2004

psmealey, I'm with you. I couldn't agree with, say, Bill Kristol any less than I agree with Hannity. But I respect Kristol a kajillion times more than I respect Hannity.

Similarly, Michael Moore probably votes for the same people I do more often than not (well, maybe not in primaries, because I seem to be more likely to take a Republican ballot for various reasons). However, I would much rather be cast away on a desert island with Kristol because he, at least, seems like a sane human being.
posted by Sidhedevil at 8:23 AM on October 10, 2004