Rating: 
Summary: Spin Example
Review: Anyone hear this one on his show yesterday:"Kerry voted to not fund the troops!" Those damn military "HATING" liberals! This is a classic example of how right wing extremists attempt to create a personal dichotomy between military people and the left. The way that Hannity spins this is to make it sound like Kerry voted to not expand the military because he personally has something against "the troops". Isn't the more obvious reason that maybe Kerry believed that the money would just be better spent elsewhere? I seriously doubt that Mr. Kerry dislikes "the troops". On the flip side, Hannity is the warm, cuddly, "troop-loving" teddy bear. I believe that we had several guys killed over in Iraq last week and I don't recall hearing Mr. Hannity pay any homage to them. Let's be careful, people. This kind of speech that Hannity engages in is purely manipulative. To all you military people, remember this - To quote Christian Nevell Bovee: "False friends are like our shadow, keeping close to us while we walk in the sunshine, but leaving us the instant we cross into the shade. "
Rating:
Summary: Good Job dubya - U.S. Sinking in the Eyes of the World!
Review: Observe what has happened to the United States of America since George W. Bush stole the president's office. International opinion of the United States has worsened since America invaded Iraq a year ago, with suspicions about President Bush's war on terror rising even among key European allies, a nine-nation poll has found. Even in Britain, the Bush administration's closest partner, favorable views have fallen sharply, according to the survey. It also found that Europeans increasingly back a foreign policy more independent of the United States. Anger toward the United States remains pervasive in the Muslim world. Large majorities in four Muslim states that are key U.S. allies - Jordan, Pakistan, Morocco and Turkey - say they believe America's real motive in conducting a war on terrorism is to control oil and dominate the world. In two of those nations - Jordan and Morocco - lopsided majorities say they think that suicide bombings against Americans and Westerners in Iraq are justified, the survey showed. "A year after the war in Iraq," the survey concluded, "discontent with America and its policies has intensified rather than diminished." The survey was conducted in late February and early March by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, before the bombings in Madrid that have been linked to Muslim militants and that led to the toppling of Spain's U.S.-allied prime minister.
Rating:
Summary: Smelly
Review: Im neither conservative or liberal, but I have to say Mr. Hannity just totally discredited himself in the eyes of many Americans. This outlook is the dying attitude, and I'll be glad to see it go. When one features "defeating the war against liberalism" on the title, it just creates a "you vs. me" dispute- let's grow up here. Please, Lord, deliver US from evil and get this damn book off the shelves.
Rating:
Summary: Rats,Rats,Rats
Review: Finished 3 Chapters and that was enough. The book no doubt copies and relates so very much of what his and other conservative talk show hosts boast of, that being continously beating up on hardworking liberal america( which made this country great)with fiction instead of pure facts. Ladies and Gents, Listen carefully. These right wing conservative radio talkshow blowharts are multiplying like Rats. And, we all know that Rats are a menace to society............
Rating:
Summary: Don't Waste Your Money
Review: I keep hearing the whining Sean stating that the bad reviewers have obviously not read his book. Well, I would hope that if your political views are toward the liberal side, you wouldn't want to contribute a dime toward someone who lumps your political views along with terrorism and despotism. Sean wrote this book to make money. He's not getting any of mine. I have, however, had the unfortunate experience of reading this book. Sean's simplistic black-or-white thinking shows no real analysis. His proof always seems to be this is true because this is how I think it happened. It's nothing more than a scare tactic to keep people voting for Bush. So yes. If you find the book in the trash or left behind on a bus, read it if you can stomach it. But don't give this guy money.
Rating: 
Summary: The Theology of Bush
Review: When I first saw the clip art for this book, I mistakenly thought it was the preliminary cover for Peter Jackson's new movie, _King Kong Takes New York_. However, after finishing the book I know it is more scary than anything Peter Jackson could conjure up for the film, and also more fanciful. While the book doesn't have much in the way of special-effects it does manage to create lots of phantom monsters: liberals, pacifists, anti-war protestors, and anyone who questions President Bush's campaign to eradicate "evil." The "war on terror" is not a debate about strategies, tactics, diplomacy, resources etc, but a black and white issue of good (people who dogmatically support President Bush) and evil (people who have reservations about Bush's war in Iraq.) Support pursuing Osama bin Laden and Al-Qaida until they are caught and eliminated instead of invading and occupying Iraq, you are acquiescing to evil says Hannity. Don't think we should devote resources to building a democracy in Iraq, you are acquiescing to evil says Hannity. Question the legitimacy and wisdom of invading Iraq, again you are acquiescing to evil says Hannity. Skeptical of the claims made by the Bush Administration, you just don't get what this war is about. To understand Hannity's position you must realize that anything Bush does regarding the war on terror is sacrosanct, unquestionable, and always done with the noblest of intentions. Bush is the unimpeachable saint blessed with divine light. Mr Hannity's arguments are like heavy, almost iron-like rods -- cold, ugly, and unresponsive. This book is more theological than political -- it ignores the subtleties of arguments and just wields the mighty battle ax against good versus evil. In this theological accounting you are forbidden from asking questions like: where are the weapons of mass destruction? Was Iraq involved with the September 11th terrorist attack? Is nation-building in Iraq a integral aspect of American security? All these questions are more than legitimate but just to ask them according to Mr Hannity is to expose yourself as an enemy of the President, and thus a fall from grace. Since the debate is defined so tighly as good versus evil there is no point in questioning, re-analyzing, or re-thinking our occupation of Iraq. After all, when the stakes are good and evil you don't waste time in debate. However, this almost metaphysical approach to the issue -- where one tries to gracefully soar above the shoals -- is unsatisying for everyone except the true believer. Unless you already see the world just as Hannity does, where Iraq and many other countries are in the crosshairs, where questions of WMD border on blasemphy, and where Bush is really bequeathed with Godly vision, you are likely to find this book little more than a scattering of incoherent polemics. If we carefully follow the rationale behind invading Iraq it doesn't follow a linear argument, but ebbs and flows, moves hither and thither tossed atop the waves of changing circumstances. At first we needed to overthrow the Hussein regime because he was not in compliance with UNSC Resolution 1441 regarding his weapons program. Now that no weapons have turned up and it seems likely Iraq has not been experimenting with WMD since 1998, the rationale moves to mass graves and links with al-Qaida. When links with al-Qaida vaporize into the ether, then the arguments becomes creating a democracy for the Iraqi people. When that prospect begins to fade, the only argument you'll hear is: if we hadn't invaded Saddam would still be in power. This is true, but it's also a tautology. If your only argument is tautological, you are effectively out of arguments, your quiver is empty. None of this matters to the true believer, but it does matter to all of us who want real solutions to terrorism -- like securing the border -- and not a mindless stew of metaphysical mumbo-jumbo.
Rating: 
Summary: For "Sara Duncan" and Others Who Exploit Spain's Bombings
Review: First things first, all the liberal swine that have been mercilessly and agitatedly submitting non-related, propaganda-infested review after review--even scarier, sometimes PLAGIARIZING news stories that they copy from websites--are completely damaged, irreparably defective, and irrationally unstable. They've proven Michael Savage right, who says, "LIBERALISM IS A MENTAL ILLNESS." Judging from all the rabidly hyperventilating psychopaths masquerading as liberals, who flood this book-review forum with current news stories that they've twisted to their liberal-skewed propaganda, and even scarier, illegally respond to book-reading reviewers like this would be a message board, liberals are so emotionally raped that they distressingly feel pressured to unfairly take over and flood the reviews for a book which opposes their ideology with anti-Bush/socialistic propaganda from the op/eds of "alternative", radical websites that they probably limit their crippled brains to! Fearfully, while just one liberal-lunatic behind all these reviews would be ghoulish enough, there's probably a whole Al-Qaeda-like "cell" of liberal agitators who degrade the integrity of all conservative books' review fields. "Sara Duncan" is a prime example of liberal terrorism to impose the liberal's fanatical viewpoint over the majority that's read the book, perpetrated on these review fields. You fabricating wwhore who's echoing the same falsehoods that the liberal media and the a$$hole anti-war "protestors" outside the PP headquarters are spreading, not all Spaniards were retarded to the point of extreme peril in how they voted. The election was severely closer, with the Socialist PIGS OF TERRORIST-APPEASEMENT stealing the election (like Gore tried in Florida in 2000) by ONLY 5%, 43% to 38%, than terrorist-empowering communist/liberals like you and the media invent. Neanderthal, Spain and its insanely hazardous Socialists--much like the Demoncrats in America--have death-sentenced their country to an even harder jeopardy of future terrorist attacks because they're weakening Bush's unassailable policy of active terrorist pursuit. The majority would've still voted for the PP if government-overthrowing, a$$hole anti-war psychos like yourself didn't predatorily capitalize on the bombings to brainwash everyone that they were "retaliation" for Spain's involvement in Iraq by holding their psychotically radical "rallies" the day before election, which was illegal anyway! You total, contemptible dunce, undoubtedly poisoned by the liberal media's brutally one-sided, misleading "coverage" of the Spain bombings, the videotape claiming responsibility for the bombings even admitted that terrorists WANTED TO PUNISH SPAIN FOR IRAQ AND ALSO AFGHANISTAN, meaning that Spain was forever targeted on terrorists' hit-lists since their compliance with America for the post-9/11 War on Terror. France and Germany aren't exempt from terrorists either, you vile primitive, although I bet your liberal media-brainwashed "mind" has been programmed to think that, right retarded cretin? Finally, you filthy idiot who represents the WORST, impure mentality of liberal treachery, half of Spaniards who voted for the terrorist-submitters, the Socialists, have subserviently robbed the GREATEST VICTORY EVER for Al-Qaeda by surrendering to all the terrorists' extortions from influencing their elections to retreating from the frontline terror war and for voting for a party that was demeaned for not even being able to deal with its own ETA-terrorists effectively. If foully distasteful tawdry wwhores like you (read: ALL LIBERALS) actually believe in your twisted, unenlightened, hallucinatory forgery of the facts relating to the implications from the Spanish bombings, then your whole ideology is irremediably INSANE and MENACING.
Rating:
Summary: hypocritical depravity
Review: I feel that Mr. Hannity, in his attempt at simplistic rationalization of his cultural conservatism, reaches new depths of a hypocracy of which he must certainly be aware. It climbs to levels of depravity paralleled only by his comrade Rush Limbaugh, in his call to throw all those "white" drug addicts in prison and throw away the key.
Rating:
Summary: What's in a title?
Review: Liberalism is defined as favoring or permitting freedom of action, especially with respect to matters of personal beliefs and expressions. It is being "free from prejudice and bigotry, tolerant". Now why would Sean Hannity write a book on how to "DESTROY" a culture free from prejudice and bigotry? Does that mean he believes prejudice and bigotry need to come to the forefront of modern thought?
Rating: 
Summary: What?
Review: Charlie Bon-bon loved this book more than mikey did. Me I liked the book flap, sean buy my book, the book of love. Tommy bought it and look at him.
| 
