
Sean Hannity chased out of a Manchester, NH restaurant by angry Ron Paul supporters because of Fox News exclusion of Ron Paul.
LOL, the people have spoken. Sean, you....
Hetep and Respect DONALD TURNBULL, now that was funny, LoL. The people are catching on, you can't fool them for ever. I am clipping it to my column.
I am not a Republican but Ron Paul has money and votes and should be in the debate.
Though I dislike the fact that FoxNews has shown its bias and though I disagree with much of what Sean Hannity has to say anymore, behavior such as this might place the Paul campaign in a bad light.
On the other hand, I really can't blame them, people are sick and tired of news outlets pulling this kind of garbage.
I'm waiting to see how this gets spun from the Hannity camp; fortunately, it is on Youtube so he can't claim he was physically "assualted" or some other victim-type verbiage.
There was no violence. Just protest. This is a Revolution no matter what people these days think. We are tired of corporate media trying to fix the outcome of the elections and pouring fear down our throats.
This is a Revolution no matter what people these days think.
And you wonder why no one takes you seriously. This was a mob: the very thing the Founders who wrote the blessed Constitution you claim to worship feared.
Acid, you are way off track.
Am I?
Yes, you are.
Hannity is an entertainer/commentator not a journalist. Neither is Combes
Looks like it was $.25 drafts night in Manchester.
They were probably free.
Thanks for the seed Donald, After seeing that I would rather vote for Hillary or Obama. This just proves to me how stupid people are. If more people supported Paul he would have been on FOX, but instead they decide to play victim and chase Hannity. Thanks again for helping me realize how far gone some of Pauls supporters are.
Play victim? He got over 10% in Iowa when Guiliani only got 3%. Do your homework before you make yourself look like a fool without basis.
Did he wow, won't get him anywhere anyway. BTW did I ever say anything about Guiliani. I would still rather have Guiliani any day, but thanks for the info. He still isn't on top of my list.
It doesn't matter how you feel personally. Paul has money and support - and he should be in the debate without the media controlling it.
OK but does it make sense to chase Hannity no matter how"funny" people might think it is. To me it is @!$%#ing ridicules and proves what some of the people who support Paul resort too. Just my 2 cents. I agree he deserves to be in the debate but I am not in control of Fox and neither is Hannity so don't chase me now please:)
Disagreeing with a Ronulan is about as fruitful as engaging a member of the Christian Taliban on the topic of evolution. More and more they are reminding me of the slavering followers of Lyndon Larouche.
On the other hand, he should be in the debate if Rudy is. If they are excluding him after his showing in Iowa, then keeping Paul out at least has some justification.
Hannity lies, and is a true shill. I wish they had caught him. : )
Hannity is a major player and speaker for Fox News. This was a genuine protest and he was an accurate target. Do people not get angry with the press secretary when the government screws up?
Hannity is a major player and speaker for Fox News. This was a genuine protest and he was an accurate target. Do people not get angry with the press secretary when the government screws up
Whatever helps you Ron Paul people sleep through the night man. I really don't care. I know it doesn't excite me about Ron Paul and I doubt it will make Hannity or Fox do anything for him in the future. Oh well it is not like I thought Paul had a chance anyway. But I do agree he did deserve a few minutes in the debate so now we can stop arguing right.
It wasn't intended to excite you. It was intended to get Fox to allow Paul in the debates. If you don't understand that, we have nothing to discuss.
I understand that but how is acting like children going to do Paul any good. I mean it wouldn't make me want to let him on my network. I guess we don't have much to talk about but I did agree he deserved at least a few minutes on the debate.
So protesting is acting like children? It's better to just accept oppresstion?
Ah, c'mon. Sean Hannity can hand it out, the smarmy little bastard. Not so good at taking it, is he? Fox is the Network for people who want their thinking done for them. Bout time that little prick got a snoot full of his own guff. Time for Fox to do a full PMCS on the vehicle.
No, but screaming epithets and chasing someone you don't agree with around, and then laughing about it afterwards is childish.
And I think Hannity is a twit.
No, but screaming epithets and chasing someone you don't agree with around, and then laughing about it afterwards is childish.
When Fox News does it, they take the tape back, upload it into the satellite, and add swoosh leaders before they show it.
True, but isn't "Mom, he did it first!" also a pretty childish defense?
Ecch, while we're indulging in platitudes, there's that old chestnut "what goes around comes around". While that lunkhead Sean Hannity walks the earth, outside the safety of his studio, he should know it's not Hannity's America. It's still ours.
Sometimes platitudes are all we've got: I've not noticed a particularly high level of thinking from most of Paul's supporters. Complexity seems to elude them, although I will freely admit that they are far from alone in that respect.
Paul supporters feel they're on a mission to save the country. Hannity's lucky they didn't string him up! Somehow, I think he'll get over it.
I wonder whether Ron Paul thinks he's in a vacuum, too.
The more we learn about him, the worse he appears.
Interesting, care to elaborate on what you have learned about him?
These juvenile stunts by Ron Paul supporters only do more harm than good. - Shame on them!
whatever, he's not going to win anyways and this was worth the laugh.
"We've given the word 'mob' a bad name"
Let's just hope they made up for it and went singing at the hospital next.
Dang, that was fun to watch.
When I first read the headline, I was like nah, you don't literally mean he got chased; but lol, he did.
And look at the end Shawn let a woman step in between him and the crowd to come to his defense as he walked on away without saying a word to them. I always knew he was a punk ass chicken hawk; but daaaamn!
And I always knew Ron Paul fans were kind of flakey; but now they're kind of scary!
He'll be on Leno or Letterman tonight; I forget which one.
"can i get an interview Shawn" - lol
Now the press can feel what is is like to be hounded when they go out in public.
Sean was walking. It really wasn't a chase. Just an outspoken evening stroll in NH.
Don't Tax me Bro! That was a funny sign..
Folks, please forgive me. I have not seen the video (I'm at "work" and have no sound card and they frown on streaming here...) but I'd like to ask the reasons given for Paul not be included in the Republican debates. It seems I saw Alan Keyes at a debate and I had no idea he was even running for president. I thought I had heard the reason Paul is not included in the debates is because he is not polling 10% nationally; that seems, in the words of you kids nowaday, "pretty whack". If somebody out here knows more about this issue, please toss this old man the lantern of your knowledge. On a related note, is Fox the only organizer and/or media outlet for the Republican party?
Someone just told me, Sean Hannity is talking about it right now on Fox. With the title, Sean Hannity attacked by Ron Paul supporters... So, now we call this attacking? So, paparazzi can be said to attack stars now? He was walking, not running. The supporters were just doing what they do to all the other candidates. Like when they show up at a Giuliani speech. Just voicing their protest. If, they did throw snowballs, then Sean is being a puss. I mean come on, snowballs?
The video has been removed from You Tube.
boots, It's not the only video in the world. Be a little resourceful
Sorry for my stupidity, I found it after a minute of searching YouTube. My mistake.
On one hand I think that Paul should be in the debates - he is a recognizable candidate and it's a good thing for people to see just how crazy he is.
On the other hand, I have believed since near the beginning that the not-a-chance-in-hell candidates were distracting people from getting better acquainted with candidates who may actually win the nomination. I'd rather hear two minutes of a position from Mitt Romney than 30 seconds each from Paul, Keyes, Tancredo etc.
This goes for Dems too. We should have been focusing more on Obama, Clinton and Edwards and less on Kucinich, Gravel, Dodd.
Excluding Paul may upset some of his brainwashed fanatics but it does the potential voters a service by not wasting their time on phantom candidates.
Even if Paul doesn't win, he can keep the other stooges in check. As the one candidate that speak the truth, and the only one who is economically conservative - he represents an ideal that the other candidates wouldn't have a chance in hell of standing up against, if he spoke like Obama.
I don't need Fox News to do my thinking for me. I know that's hard for neoconservatives such as yourself to understand.
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |