Sunday, July 24, 2005

Sean Hannity at New Ruskin College

Lecture Notes: 07-21-05

Hannity Responds:

Sean Hannity 07-21-05 went on the air and announced that he was “married” to his show and his audience.

I think he has been cheating on us.

For example, when introducing Dr. Hammesfahr as a “Noble Prize Nominee.” Didn’t Sean Hannity first consider that his audience would be able to see how dishonest he was? He did not care about our opinion of him or his credibility. We do not count in his estimation of the power situation.

Or when discussing the Bush open borders policy he said to an irate caller, “they are introducing technology to police the border. . . .” a line right out of the White House briefing instructions to stooges. Even Rush Limbaugh will criticize the Bush open border policy. But not Sean.

Or in discussing the Kelo decision he repeatedly claimed that the Supreme Court was taking, or seizing property, etc., instead of telling the truth that the court had permitted, or deferred to the elected officials, allowed that they should first decide what is a public purpose. Does he want only judges to decide what is a public purpose? Of course he was not himself proposing anything he has no ideas of his own.

Sean Hannity has recommended Michael Weiner’s books (“a great read”) and had him on his TV show. Weiner for his part now refers to Hannity as “that Irishman” or “Pawn Hannity” or “Mr.” --- well you get the idea.

Hannity is a suck up. He sucks up and kicks down.

He knows that Weiner and Mrs. Jack Swanson have used their influence to ruin my life. He knows about the burglary, about the stalking me from place to place, job to job . . . he knows and does not care.

He goes out of his way to show that he does not care, or even to let it be known that he enjoys the spectacle of his radio colleagues destroying another.

He delights in cruelty.

Sham Hannity.

And consider Al Franken recently going out of his way to show his enjoyment in another’s suffering, even suicide.

This is our society.

“Not bad for a homeless guy.”
---- Sean Hannity, 07-20-05, at the end of an “interview” with Senator McCain ( McCain see 4-28-05, Lecture Notes: 5-18-05, Lecture Notes: 07-18-05 Protest)

You see Sean, when you do things like this your business partners just don’t understand.

They are thinking: “We give him payola every week to mention Ruth's Chris Steakhouse, on the air, (how much do they give you Sean? all reported to the IRS is it Sean?), and now we have an IPO about to come out, an IPO for Christ sake! . . . and dis radio c___ s___ing dick is going ta screws it all up so he can f___ wit’ some guy in California? What a Long Island sack of s___.”

See Sean, your business partners have been working this scam for some time now. And you were just a part of it. To help with the buzz. Mention those delicious steaks, talk it up, get . . . what $10,000 a mention? Oh, $1,000? . . . cheap radio advertising . . . and this would help with the IPO, and God knows they need help with the IPO.

This pig needs a lot a lipstick: “debt load, which came in at $116 million as of March 27.”

They have not only cooked Sean Hannity some free steaks, they have cooked the books. They had to: “Revenue, which fell in 2001 and 2002, rose 14.6 percent last year and operating income climbed 50.6 percent from the year earlier.”

Sound impressive? How do you like that “.6%”? Not just “14%” but see that little something extra? Sean helped with that did you Sean?

Impressive? It is not until the end of the article that you will read: “Ruth's Chris didn't open any new restaurants last year and closed two locations, including one in Manhattan, as it overhauled its management, including hiring a new chief executive in March 2004.” (New chief executive? Gee I wonder why? Some problem with the books? Or . . .?)

Does ya sees? If you do not open any restaurants you do not have any of those “expenses.” Helps with the “balance sheet.” (Never mind that the business plan is to open 80 new restaurants with all those expenses.)

But the business “reporters” are all over the “trend in eating out” and how Sean’s favorite restaurant is free from any risk of a turn down in the economy. How so? Because it is so expensive! See? That is where the rich go to eat so, yas knows, the rich’s gota eat. Rich men like Sean, does ya sees?

But the reported did tell us who the players are, Sean Hannity’s business partners and why the IPO is so important to them: “Madison Dearborn could receive an additional payment from selling 1.7 million shares covered by the underwriters' over allotment option. . . . Other holders of junior and senior preferred stock are set to be paid a total of $20.6 million by Ruth's Chris.”

I wondered why Sean Hannity didn’t talk about how the IRS was auditing him. They even came to his studio to search for records. “I just never talk about it” is all he would say, on the air.

When I was targeted by the IRS (see The IRS and the Illegals from the North), I felt it was my duty to tell how, during the Clinton administration, the IRS revealed my name to the very people that they had asked me to help investigate, Crawford and Company, and told them that I had cooperated in the investigation. But not Sean Hannity: “I just never talk about it”. (Sees ya? Yas just gota dummy up. See? When das police are – ya know – questionings ya, you just gota dummy up. Right Sean?)

And for those of you who think the economy is an evenly rotating system of objective fixed relations here is an interesting example. Here at New Ruskin we have argued that, for example, the IRS tax tables do not accurately explain who actually pays the tax.

We have argued that the rich, (those who are making goods and services which are in high demand), pass on their taxes to their consumers in higher prices, (the price mechanism of tax transfer). This is why the poor have such a high “propensity to spend” they end up paying their own taxes, and all the other taxes, and all other expenses in the price of the goods they purchase. We have explained that both Democrats and Republicans misrepresent the situation, each for their own political calculation.

But let us now consider the true value of the payola paid by Ruth's Chris to Sean Hannity every time Sean mentions the steakhouse chain. How much is the under the table payment, (the tax free payment), worth to Sean given Sean’s tax bracket? For extra credit, Class, How much income must Ruth's Chris hide in order to pay Sean?

But now with the IPO, Sean, the stakes are much higher. How much is Sean getting out of the IPO? How much extra commission must the underwriters charge to pay Sean? (All reported is it, Sean?)

This is why yas “business partners” doesn’t understands yas Sean. Why would you mess with some guy in California right now, right when the IPO is coming out?

Now it is not just the IRS, and the FCC, but Sean wants to add the SEC!

See Sean? It is things like this that give good old boys from Long Island a bad reputation.

And “not bad for a homeless guy” didn’t even fit in the conversation with Senator McCain. You are supposed to at least try and work it into the conversation. See? That is what makes them covert.

Otherwise you just look like a dick.

ps Secrets and secrets. So many secrets. And this is the whole society. Top to bottom. Why didn’t socialism work. The economist say because it did not allow for “economic calculation” but really because people are so dishonest. My tormenters have stalked me for these fifteen years, brought me to the end, and Sean Hannity interviewing Senator McCain wanted to take a little poke. (In the middle of an IPO!) But this is just one small example. A world of hate, cruelty, . . .

Do but seriously consider how much more insupportable and painful an immortal life would be to man than what I have already given him. If you had not death, you would eternally curse me for having deprived you of it; I have mixed a little bitterness with it, to the end, that seeing of what convenience it is, you might not too greedily and indiscreetly seek and embrace it: and that you might be so established in this moderation, as neither to nauseate life, nor have any antipathy for dying, which I have decreed you shall once do, I have tempered the one and the other betwixt pleasure and pain. ----

LIBERAL ISLAM WEB SITES Collected by Charles Kurzman University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Islamic Statements Against Terrorism Collected by Charles Kurzman University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

International Tribunal For The Prosecution Of Terrorists Letter From Liberal Arabs & Muslims To The United Nations Security Council & The U.N. Secretary General


Post a Comment

<< Home