Sorta related to Spending way too much time on this I finally broke down and took a coupla my bedtime happy pills the nice man at the VA gives me and disappeared for about 14 hours. Guess I musta needed…

…

…

He is very good at springing obscure past comments or votes on guest consveratives that are embarrasing on their face. He also trots out arguments that sound like Democratic talking points. I am sure he is fed all of this by Democatic operatives just prior to the programs.

Colmes always sounds agrieved when asking what he considers to be “gotcha” questions and then purses up his lips like he is sucking on a lemon when they respond. Routintely, the conservative guests like Graham last night treat Colmes as a clueless twit worthy of nothing but contempt. Colmes deserves nothing better.

Death to Islam!
Duty, Honor, Country
(in THAT order)
Rowane

Don’t be so hard on Alan, when he’s not being hated by the left for not being liberal enough and for being an FNC shill, he gets to be Hannity’s piñata. I’d bet he gets more hate mail from the left than Hannity does.

Of course Colmes would not take up for a pro-Israeli photographer, because that would be Hannity’s job. A major flaw of the format is that occasionally one of the hosts gets stuck defending a dumb position to maintain the antagonistic nature of the show. Hannity probably wasn’t too thrilled to be defending Mel Gibson recently.

I must say I agree with RW’s analysis (part of which I quoted here). I also must ask people to be a little nicer to Alan. The show’s not a complete Right-leaning show where people who talk agree with each other all the time. It seems to succeed at being somewhat balanced, no matter how rediculous we find a point of view coming from the other side.

And as much as Alan might drive someone crazy (I must admit, sometimes I get baffled at a viewpoint he sticks up to) support him anyway and just view what he says as something he disagrees with. He’s a human being like anyone, Jewish or not. Nobody is in lockstep with their “group” or “community”. Am I the only one who believes that the fact he is a Jew is irrelevant in the position he defends here (whether he truely believes what he’s saying or not)?
Just because Alan is a Jew doesn’t mean he’s self-hating if he doesn’t defend Israel here or there. It reminds me of two things: First, the main subject at hand in this HA page (no, not Kirsten Powers or Michelle Malkin’s looks) about labeling someone whom you disagree with, which in turn reminds me of the time people like Michael Steele, Lynn Swan, Larry Elder, Condolezza Rice, Colin Powel get attack by people because of bigotry. From Michael Steele’s Oreo Cookie incident to Larry Elder and Charles Barron squaring off (when the latter accused Larry Elder of being a creation of the “White Man”) to Ted Rall’s bigotry expressed in comic strips on Condi Rice, and so on and so on (summing up the latter’s examples, basically those of a particular “race” [I'm not one to identify people by that, by the way] attacking others in the same “race” because they’re not in lock step.
Which reminds me of the Democratic Party and their denounciation of Joe Lieberman and how Democrats (not everyone however) are opposed to him because he’s not opposed to the conflict in Iraq (to which is a part of the War on Terror)…

To sum up all the examples and things, I’m trying to say the following again: Just go easy on Alan. I don’t think he hates being Jewish or anything like that for taking any viewpoint that doesn’t lean towards pro-Israel stances.

I don’t really get why he’s defending Hajj. Simply speaking, the man was trying to pass off doctored photos, altering the narrative. This is simply unethical, inexcusable, and infuriating. Reuters needs to realize that by allowing those photos through, they are complicit in this intentional deception by Hajj. And yes, I fully believe that Hajj intended to deceive people through this. I do not buy the “removing dust” and “made mistakes due to poor lighting” excuse. Dude, YOUR MONITOR/LCD SCREEN PRODUCES IT’S OWN LIGHT! In a poor lighting situation, you turn up the brightness. Apparently, his ‘brightness’ was off.

A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention….

He has developed a annoying habit of ending each segment by saying, well … I’m sorry that’s all the time we have, and then throws in one final “gotcha zinger” obviously prepared well in advance – after the guest’s microphone is turned off. It reminds me of my childhood when the neighborhood brat would yell out insults to kids riding on the school bus, after the driver shut the door and began driving away.

I am a lifelong conservative whose son just returned from Iraq (11B-infantry)….How do you think he feels when he sees many jewish folks thinking the way they do?

It has always remained a mystery to us…..

The wingnuts are furiously circle-jerking their way around a second lap of Reuters, having revealed that not one, but two photographs by Beirut-based freelance photographer Adnan Hajj had been altered. The picture that kicked this off is a staggering s…

The skit is called Hannity and Colmes: Slow Burn and it details the hapless Colmes as he finds himself manipulated by the wiley Hannity into defending first a 2004 Presidential election conspiracy nut, then an Aryan Nation White supremist, cartoonist Ted Rall, and finally, a NAMBLA pervert. In the end, Colmes ends up cracking and going nuts, resulting in his being drug off stage kicking and screaming by the crew of the show.

John does alot of these skits, but on the right sidebar, he has a list of his best stuff. They are all pretty damn funny.

Of course Colmes would not take up for a pro-Israeli photographer, because that would be Hannity’s job. A major flaw of the format is that occasionally one of the hosts gets stuck defending a dumb position to maintain the antagonistic nature of the show. Hannity probably wasn’t too thrilled to be defending Mel Gibson recently.

The left does function as an apologist for some pretty shady stuff, and in their twisted moonbat minds, it all makes sense. In this case, Colmes is just phoning in a defense to keep those checks rolling in. Now, reconciling Colmes’ faith and his position on Israel – I’m still trying to figure out that whole Gays for Palestine thing.

Cut the poor guy some slack, he has a face for radio, but works in television. In all honesty, the show could stand to have a co-host that comes off as having a set of beliefs other than the opposite of whatever Hannity happens to believe.

Then again, we don’t call them moonbats and idiotarians for NOTHING…

I just don’t get it. Jews are, more or less, average people like the rest of us, some smart folks, some idiots, and a lot in between. Why do so many support a party that would throw them to the wolves for two bits and a pat on the head from Saint Cindy?

RH

*SCROLL FOR UPDATES – REUTERS still spinning I was turned on to yet another Hajj scandal by reader Michelle, and have dug a little deeper to add to it. Obviously Hajj is officially discredited so the piling on isn’t necessary,……

Alan seems to essentially say “stories over” because Reuters fired the guy and is “tightening” their editing policies… But he’s ignoring the real issue… How did it happen in the first place?

Our policy is to send news to our customers only after scrutiny by a group of production editors who ensure quality standards are maintained across all our news services. When we get something wrong, our policy is to be honest about errors and to correct them promptly and clearly.

How did this group of editors miss this childlike photoshopping when they were “scrutinizing” it? Hajj’s head ain’t the only one that should roll at Reuters. Of course they’re claiming that his images mostly skipped the editing step… but why? Why would Reuters allow him to skip that step if they are such scrutinizers?

Reuters thought they would be off the hook by just dropping Hajj, and largely they’ve gotten away with it (because the MSM is all on their side), and Alan Colmes seems to not get the real issue here.

By the way, why does Reuters need to tighten policies? They only say that because it sounds good, but their policies are fine if they just abided by them in the first place.

I’m sorry to rant, but Alan just really irritated me with his “problem solved” attitude about the whole thing.

By the way, did you happen to catch McCain on Leno. He got real serious and blasted the “moral equivelency” crap we’ve been seeing in the MSM (though he didn’t attack the MSM directly).. He made it clear that Israel may kill some civilians by mistake, but Hizbollah whole goal is to kill as many people as possible civilian or military they don’t care… they are terrorist. I’m no huge McCain fan or anything, but I liked the stand he took on that and the way he said it… I wish other leaders would do the same.