Sean Hannity: “It’s a 100 percent certainty. Crack addicts will kill to get more crack.”

Sunday, June 20th, 2010

And as long as we’re throwing out fake statistics: It’s 90 percent certain that when argued into a corner, drug warriors will just start making shit up.

The video below is another segment from John Stossel’s show on the drug war, which aired Thursday night.

Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

56 Responses to “Sean Hannity: “It’s a 100 percent certainty. Crack addicts will kill to get more crack.””

  1. #1 |  J sub D | 

    I could not debate Sean Hannity for five minutes before punching him in the snot locker.

  2. #2 |  Stephen | 

    I am just amazed that this is on FOX.

  3. #3 |  Buc | 

    I wonder if he legitimately doesn’t recognize the fact that being for prohibition is being in favor of massive government, something Mr. Hannity claims to be against.

    The only other alternative is that he does recognize it and just views it as necessary considering that the ratio of crack killers to crack users is 1:1.

    My bet’s on the latter.

  4. #4 |  Kennedy | 

    Although I agree with Stossel, I found his charts to be a bit comical and unnecessary.

  5. #5 |  kant | 

    I’m curious what the regular viewer of his show think when he makes ridiculous claims like that.

  6. #6 |  Guido | 

    “I’m curious what the regular viewer of his show think…”
    People who think don’t watch his show.

  7. #7 |  Eyewitness | 

    Kant:
    “I’m curious what the regular viewer of his show think when he makes ridiculous claims like that.”

    You mean reports the facts. They believe him.

  8. #8 |  The_Chef | 

    Is this entire episode up on youtube yet? I’d really like to watch the entire thing.

  9. #9 |  bob42 | 

    Speaking of making shit up, here’s Texas State Senator Dan Patrick, making shit up while answering a FoxNews question about why Mexican citizens were protesting the presence of the military in their cities and the violent escalation of the drug war.

    Well we believe it’s the drug cartels who paid the the people to protest.

    There’s just plain dumb.
    There’s dumber than a fence post dumb.
    Ant then, there’s drug warrior dumb.

  10. #10 |  MacGregory | 

    If I didn’t know better, I’d swear this was a comedy bit with Stossel playing the “straight man.”

  11. #11 |  SJE | 

    Hannity’s is just spouting the “bogeyman” argument: fact-free, fear mongering of the other. In decades past it was alcohol (one sip will make you an alcoholic), gambling, being Roman Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, black, Irish, or whatever is flavor of the century. I wonder if the improving religious and racial tolerance of the USA gives rise to more drug hysteria: I mean you GOTTA have someone to blame.

  12. #12 |  BSK | 

    You listen to Sean Hannity, you are out of your mind!

    See! I can do it, too!

  13. #13 |  BSK | 

    Ignoring the fact that his stats and theories are complete bunk.

    Let’s assume his argument IS true. Let’s assume doing crack will turn you into a raving lunatic bent on murder, rape, and pillaging. Don’t we already have laws that outlaw murder, rape, and pillaging? Let’s deal with people ONCE they break the law instead of punishing them for the possibility or even likelihood that they will.

    Because if we’re looking at what people are most likely to commit crime, I’m going to start with people who are awake and conscious. 100% of crimes are committed by people who are not dead, in comas, asleep, or otherwise unconscious. So let’s keep those raving lunatics off the street.

  14. #14 |  bobzbob | 

    It’s amazing to me that someone would choose to waste 5 minutes of airtime on two of the least honest and least informed talking heads in america.

  15. #15 |  Chris Berez | 

    Listening to people like Sean Hannity talk about drugs always makes me think of the “Know your dope fiend” bit from Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas:

    KNOW YOUR DOPE FIEND. YOUR LIFE MAY DEPEND ON IT! You will not be able to see his eyes because of Tea-Shades, But his knuckles will be white from inner tension and his pants will be crusted with semen from constantly jacking off when he can’t find a rape victim. He will stagger and babble when questioned. He will not respect your badge. The Dope Fiend fears nothing. He will attack, for no reason, with every weapon at his command-including yours. BEWARE. Any officer apprehending a suspected marijuana addict should use all necessary force immediately. One stitch in time (on him) will usually save nine on you. Good luck.

  16. #16 |  EH | 

    Someone should tell Hannity that once upon a time the Irish were in the same place he puts Mexicans now.

  17. #17 |  EH | 

    And I’m not going to quibble every Hannity point, since I don’t have all day, but he’s also wrong about heroin putting people out of their minds. It’s the opposite of what he says: they only go out of their mind when it’s hard to get. Maintenance is the problem with opiates, they aren’t cognitive impairers.

  18. #18 |  David in Balt | 

    @Eyewitness

    Did you really just say that Hannity reports ‘the facts?’ Sarcasm does not come over very well in text, and I can only hope that is what that was.

  19. #19 |  Jeff | 

    It read sarcastic to me. Then again, a whole lot of Republicans believe Stephen Colbert’s fake persona is for real. Who can tell with sarcasm.

  20. #20 |  claude | 

    Another way to look at this is that Sean Hannity is most likely the product of completely clean living.

  21. #21 |  Ed Dunkle | 

    Hannity is an entertainer. He will say anything to attract viewers. He has no authentic credibility on any issue except how to make money in television. He is amoral at best and will happily make the U.S. a worse place if he is well compensated.

  22. #22 |  Arthur | 

    #21–Agreed

    Hannity brings nothing new to the discussion; he is spouting nonsense and knows it. The man’s face says, ‘I am lying my ass off here, but most Americans WANT to believe me so, I win.’

    Hannity is a drug warrior because that position gives him more power and influence with his Christian/Right base.

  23. #23 |  ZappaCrappa | 

    And this is what you get when talking heads pontificate on subjects they know NOTHING about. I have a feeling that would apply to any subject Sean speaks of with the exception of him speaking on what it is like to BE a walking talking rectum…the only subject he is probably familiar enough to pontificate on.

    It is a 100 percent certainty: Sean Hannity is a walking talking rectum along with 99% of the folks at Fox, CNN, and MSNBC…and Rush Limbaugh of course…but that goes without saying…even though I said it.

  24. #24 |  Big Chief | 

    It was interesting to see this clip right after I finished watching “The Days of Wine and Roses” with Jack Lemmon. If you don’t know the movie, Jack plays an alcoholic. In one scene he wakes up after a bender and is dying for a drink. He gets to the liquor store just after it closed and when the proprietor refuses to sell him a bottle, he breaks in and steals one. Despite Sean’s protestations, there are people who drink alcohol who are willing to commit crimes to “get their fix.” So I find interesting to hear “Heineken Hannity” downplay the dangers of alcohol while he exaggerates about other drugs. It’s just another case of my drug is OK, your drug is the problem.

    Did you catch his “Clintonesque” comment about how he drinks his half a Heineken but doesn’t get a buzz. Sure Sean. I’m sure you drink beer just because you like the taste.

  25. #25 |  Marty | 

    lots of people living in an anecdotal world…

  26. #26 |  mad libertarian guy | 

    Hannity is such a douche. Unfortunately those who watch him already beluve anything he’ll say about drugs no matter how patently full of shit.

  27. #27 |  bobzbob | 

    “Hannity is an entertainer. He will say anything to attract viewers. He has no authentic credibility on any issue except how to make money in television. He is amoral at best and will happily make the U.S. a worse place if he is well compensated.”

    Unfortunatly Stossel is just the same. Only you don’t see it because he claims to be a “libertarian” and the lies he tells agree with your worldview.

    http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1682

  28. #28 |  BSK | 

    You knew he was lying when he said he likes the taste of Heineken. Bleh!

  29. #29 |  Dave Krueger | 

    #26 bobzbob

    “Hannity is an entertainer. He will say anything to attract viewers. He has no authentic credibility on any issue except how to make money in television. He is amoral at best and will happily make the U.S. a worse place if he is well compensated.”

    Unfortunatly Stossel is just the same. Only you don’t see it because he claims to be a “libertarian” and the lies he tells agree with your worldview.

    I don’t think so. The difference between Hannity and Stossel is that Hannity (and O’Reilly, and Limbaugh, and Nancy Grace, etc) largely choose what they say specifically to attract audience. They simply reflect and inflame the sentiments of the mindless spoon-fed mob they serve. They are entertainers and their primary interest is return on investment. Stossel says what he believes, knowing he will alienate almost everyone. No one who chooses entertainment as a career decides to go the route of libertarianism to enhance their chance of success. They go the route of libertarianism because they can’t force themselves to preach idiocy any longer.

  30. #30 |  Helmut O' Hooligan | 

    It really pisses me off when Hannity and other high profile conservatives try to cozy up to libertarians or talk about their own libertarian inclinations. They are authoritarians through and through. They have no principles. It pisses me off and I am not even a libertarian.

  31. #31 |  David in Balt | 

    @ 27

    Putting aside for a second that I do not think you could find a reporter who you could honestly say has never played ‘loose and quick’ with facts on one occasion or another, your source is fairly poor. From their website:

    [quote]
    As a progressive group, FAIR believes that structural reform is ultimately needed to break up the dominant media conglomerates, establish independent public broadcasting and promote strong non-profit sources of information.
    [/quote]

    Flaunting your bias while claiming to be spotlighting others is never a good sign of a reliable source. Furthermore, many points they raise in the article itself are factually incorrect and politically motivated. A two second google search would reveal this to you.

  32. #32 |  BSK | 

    David-

    I’m not sure if your point about FAIR is, well, fair. What is FAIR’s bias? I suppose you are speaking to their opposition of “dominant media conglomerates” in favor of “independent public broadcast[ers]“? If that is considered bias in the same way that Stossel playing fast and loose with the facts is, then we are all biased and have no right to speak about anything. Bias is not problematic if it is a transparent ideology that is openly communicated (as FAIR does). As you said, you found it in 2 seconds. As such, everyone knows the perspective from which FAIR is coming at things from. Stossel, meanwhile, is implying or explicitly stating that what he is giving you is unbridled fact when, in reality, it is deliberately twisted to suit his agenda.

    So, yes, none of us are absolutely neutral automatons. We all have biases. That is not a bad thing. What is bad is when someone claims to be offering objective analysis and instead is offering subjective opinion and/or misrepresenting objective analysis.

  33. #33 |  David in Balt | 

    @ BSK

    Stossel is fairly open about being a libertarian, about as explicitly as FAIR is about being ‘progressive.’ It is this ‘progressivism’ that makes FAIR not exactly an independent or reliable source when commenting on libertarianism, as the two philosophies are basically diametrically opposed. Furthermore FAIR is not exactly known for unbiased ‘reporting.’ Finally, I see that you did not address how FAIR’s article was factually incorrect on several points.

    As far as my comment about Stossel not being the only person ‘playing fast and loose with the facts,’ I was pointing out that that problem applies to people on all sides of the ideological spectrum in the media; not necessarily as a comparison of Stossel to FAIR.

  34. #34 |  ClassAction | 

    #33

    David, it’s awfully hard to address your allegations of factual inaccuracy when you don’t actually list any. You just vaguely mention that they exist. If you want someone to respond to them, you should actually outline what the factual inaccuracies are, and cite how or why they are wrong.

  35. #35 |  BSK | 

    David-

    You did offer evidence that FAIR’s article was factually incorrect, which is why I didn’t address it. And I’m not saying they necessarily WERE factually correct. If they are guilty of the same “fast and loose” games as Stossel, I will support exposing them as well.

    My point is that FAIR should not be criticized for having a publicized agenda. Nor should Stossel. They are intended to their ideologies and perspectives and if they want to promote these, so be it. But engaging in underhanded, dishonest tactics is wrong. Is Stossel alone in doing this? No. Does that mean we shouldn’t criticize him? No.

    And you did make a direct comparison to FAIR when you claimed they were flaunting their own bias while drawing attention of others. They were not calling Stossel out for being libertarian. They were calling him out for lying/misrepresenting the facts.

  36. #36 |  Duncan20903 | 

    Thanks again Mr. Linkletter.

    “The transcripts show Linkletter telling Nixon, “There’s a great difference between alcohol and marijuana.”

    Nixon replies: “What is it?” The president wants to know!

    “When people smoke marijuana,” Linkletter explains, “they smoke it to get high. In every case, when most people drink, they drink to be sociable.”

    “That’s right, that’s right,” Nixon says. “A person does not drink to get drunk. . . . A person drinks to have fun.””

    http://www.thenation.com/blog/art-linkletter-and-richard-nixon-alcohol-vs-pot

  37. #37 |  Stephen | 

    “It’s a 100 percent certainty. cops will kill kill you if you touch their girlfriends butt.”

  38. #38 |  Serena | 

    According to batshit crazy Debbie Schlussel, it’s 100% fact that Hannity is an adulterer, despite the source, the people who give off the “my shit don’t stink” usually have the stinkiest.

  39. #39 |  DaveG | 

    Hannity really seems to hate crack. He seems more like the powdered coke, alcohol shot buying, date rapist type to me. Much more christian

  40. #40 |  Boyd Durkin | 

    Man, it seems as if Hannity is not being completely honest.

  41. #41 |  Dan Z | 

    Everyone knows that 97% of statistics are false and the other 3% are made up.

  42. #42 |  hamburglar007 | 

    I just hope that Hannity is arrested one day for sex with a male prostitute in a public restroom with crack on him.

  43. #43 |  winston smith | 

    i want to ask Hanninty one question. Why didn’t the murder rate tripled or quadrupled when the crack epidemic was going on?

  44. #44 |  Yizmo Gizmo | 

    Is that a crayon Sean always holds in his right hand?

  45. #45 |  Kristen | 

    Hannity is about 10 years behind…everyone knows meth, not crack, is all-the-rage now.

  46. #46 |  joev | 

    /facepalm

  47. #47 |  JS | 

    Everybody I grew up with got on crack. I mean, every single friend I had. They are all in prison or dead now. Everybody has this crazy idea about people on crack being violent lunatics but thats not how people get when they do crack. Crackheads are very passive and listless and the only time they’ll even move is to score a quick $10 for a bolo. They’ll steal anything that isn’t nailed down and they’ll mow your lawn, paint your house or anything for $10. I’ve been around crackheads my whole life and I’ve never seen anybody on crack get violent. I’ve seen big tough guys get on crack and then get their ass kicked by pissed off people that they’ve stole from and my own brother actually dragged a crackhead right out of a crackhouse and beat the crap out of him for stealing his car and selling it to the rockman. Crackheads don’t put up much of a fight, I don’t care how bad they might have been before they got on crack. We had a guy here who had a football scholarship to Miami and he wound up a crackhead. He gets beat up a lot by pissed off people who he steals from. Also crackheads are so desperate they’ll give oral sex to another guy for $10 to get a bolo. I guess what I’m trying to say is that people like Hannity have no freaking clue what a crackhead looks like when they think of crackheads as violent. Thieves yes but crack doesn’t make people kill other people unless they could then sell the person they killed for $10.

  48. #48 |  Aresen | 

    You people are being far too harsh on Mr. Hannity.

    I think we should applaud him.

    I mean, how many of us would employ an intellectually challenged fact-checker?

  49. #49 |  Charlie O | 

    Sean Hannity is a tool. He thinks “Reefer Madness” was a documentary.

  50. #50 |  John H. | 

    If people will kill to get crack… isn’t the solution to make it easier, so that they don’t HAVE TO?

  51. #51 |  Maria | 

    Funny. After thinking about it a bit. I have my own anecdotes to prove that I and the people around me are much more likely to die because of drinking then because of a “crackhead”, or any other drughead, even methheads.

    Drunk driving is at the top of my list of fun good times idiots tend to engage in. Or my jackass friend who decided that drunken hunting was the way to be. Or there was the guy who went drunk boating and nearly drowned after falling off. Then there was the friend who nearly lost an eye due to the misplaced notion that getting in the middle of a drunken bar brawl was the best idea ever… I could go on in the war of anecdotes.

    Sean has his head firmly up his own ass, or is that a puppet hand I see also up there?

  52. #52 |  Juice | 

    The sad thing is, to most Fox News viewers, Hannity “won” that debate by merely pointing out the obvious: that anyone who does any drug (besides Heineken) will go out of their mind and kill for another fix. Sorry, Stossel. Game, set, match.

  53. #53 |  jb | 

    There is a reason Savage calls Hannity “The Wallbanger.

  54. #54 |  Police shoot dog while raiding the wrong house - E.D. Kain - American Times - True/Slant | 

    [...] course, when you have blathering nonsense like this being pushed by the Sean Hannity’s of the world, you see how far those of us who want to end the [...]

  55. #55 |  Voltear | 

    Oh come on! Why does Stoessel concede this ridiculous point and the one where Hannity says they “out of their minds”? Pretty bad. A terrible performance. And this should be very easy to debunk. Hannity actually ‘cleaned his clock’ – so far as I’m concerned. We don’t need another “cannabis only” spokesman, if you please; we’ve got more than enough of them already!

  56. #56 |  Tsu Dho Nimh | 

    Yes, they will KILL!

    And if you believe our Governor, all illegal immigrants in Arizona are drug smugglers.

Leave a Reply