Video: Bozell to Colmes on definition of civil war: “hush”

posted at 1:55 pm on November 28, 2006 by Ian

Media Research Center’s Brent Bozell told Alan Colmes to “hush” last night during a discussion about NBC’s decision to call the situation in Iraq a “civil war”. Colmes repeatedly talked over Bozell while he was trying to explain what a civil war really is.


At one point Bozell told Alan Colmes to “hush,” leading Sean Hannity to propose: “Brent, you get the award for the Phrase of the Year: ‘Alan, hush.'” Bozell earlier recalled how back in August of 2005 Lauer repeatedly pressed soldiers in Iraq to admit they had low morale, prompting one to fire back: “If I got my news from the newspapers also I’d be pretty depressed as well.” (Links to that incident, with video, below the break)

Breaking on Hot Air



Trackback URL


Alan, hush.

When you take words literally without placing it in context, everything loses its meaning. For instance, “stop screwing around” does not have anything to do with sex.

Ouabam on November 28, 2006 at 2:05 PM

Reminds me of the scene in LA Confidential when Dudley Smith said “hush hush” to Sid Hudgens. Maybe we can get a screen shot of that.

Colmes at least gets to live.

JammieWearingFool on November 28, 2006 at 2:12 PM

Since Skeletor resembles some odd wax figure, maybe next time Bozell can ask him to dummy up.

JammieWearingFool on November 28, 2006 at 2:13 PM

The end of that clip made me LOL at work. Well played….

World B. Free on November 28, 2006 at 2:19 PM

…a civil war *COULD* happen…the sad thing is that the Left so *WANTS* it to happen, without any thought to the consequences to the Iraqis…the *LAST* people they think about in this whole, unfortunate matter. So long as they win the argument, they’ll be happy…over the broken, bleeding bodies of these poor people.

Bozell’s right: if both factions are still *ENGAGED* in the government, regardless if there’re factions fighting eachother in the streets, it isn’t a civil war. The states making up the Confederacy, as he again correctly pointed out, seceeded from — quit — the federal union. The civil war, in that case, was a matter of the states remaining in that union trying to force the union back into existence with these self-amputated members present.

Nobody in Iraq is at the point of seceeding. What you have are varying factions jockeying to be in charge of the whole magilla. That’s a different matter.

Puritan1648 on November 28, 2006 at 2:20 PM

Alan Colmes is a loser. This is apparenntly the left’s latest fad, to claim Iraq is having a “civil war”. I assume that label is meant to dishearten America’s efforts to bring security, democracy, and secularism to Iraq.

Free Kurdistan on November 28, 2006 at 2:21 PM

Enik, go to your pyramid an play with your crystals!

Drtuddle on November 28, 2006 at 2:22 PM

Just once, I’d like to see Sean reach over, after Alan has said something stupid, and yank Alan’s piece off his head.

The Donks are still in election mode, trying to spin the war into a “civil war” to make Bush look bad. They still don’t seem to realize that, post-election, they are supposed to come up with the “new direction” to save us all….and we are still waiting for what that is.

Mallard T. Drake on November 28, 2006 at 2:34 PM

You gotta love the double dose of Bozell’s laugh at the end of the clip. Thanks, AP.

Chris L. on November 28, 2006 at 2:49 PM

He was too nice. He should have just leaned over causally and socked Colmes in the nose.

ahem on November 28, 2006 at 3:06 PM

What was the smarmy thing Alan said at the end? I couldn’t quite make it out? Something about hush puppies and shoe sizes?

CrimsonFisted on November 28, 2006 at 3:26 PM

I’ll repeat what I just posted in the New York Times thread:

The “Civil war in Iraq” mantra has been claimed by our traitorous media for at least a year now.

Bill Roggio, milblogger and iraq correspondent listed last February the following indicators that would confirm that a civil war is in progress:

• The Shiite United Iraqi Alliance no longer seeks to form a unity government and marginalize the Shiite political blocks.

• Sunni political parties withdraw from the political process.

• Kurds make hard push for independence/full autonomy.

• Grand Ayatollah Sistani ceases calls for calm, no longer takes a lead role in brokering peace.

• Muqtada al-Sadr becomes a leading voice in Shiite politics.

• Major political figures – Shiite and Sunni – openly call for retaliation.

• The Sunni Iraqi Islamic Party and Muslim Scholars Association openly call for the formation of Sunni militias.

• Interior Ministry ceases any investigations into torture and death squads, including the case against recently uncovered problems with the Highway Patrol.

• Defense Minister Dulaimi (a Sunni) is asked to step down from his post.

• Iraqi Security Forces begins severing ties with the Coalition, including:

o Disembeddeding the Military Transition Teams.

o Requests U.S. forces to vacate Forward Operating Bases / Battle Positions in Western and Northern Iraq.

o Alienates Coalition at training academies.

• Iraqi Security Forces make no effort to quell violence or provide security in Sunni neighborhoods.

• Iraqi Security Forces actively participate in attacks on Sunnis, with the direction of senior leaders in the ministries of Defense or Interior.

• Shiite militias are fully mobilized, with the assistance of the government, and deployed to strike at Sunni targets. Or, the Shiite militias are fully incorporated into the Iraqi Security Forces without certification from Coalition trainers.

• Sunni military officers are dismissed en masse from the Iraqi Army.

• Kurdish officers and soldiers leave their posts and return to Kurdistan, and reform into Peshmerga units.

• Attacks against other religious shrines escalate, and none of the parties make any pretense about caring.

• Coalition military forces pull back from forward positions to main regional bases.

I don’t think that the conditions that Roggio cites have come to pass. Both Sunnis and Shiites continue to remain engaged in a natinional government.

What are seeing is not civil war, but an attempt to incite one.

georgej on November 28, 2006 at 4:03 PM

an internal war between factions within a country

Alan Colmes ridiculously over-simplistic definition of a civil war would include gang wars in most inner cities. So, is there a civil war in the barrios of LA? in the ghettos of Detroit, DC, and New York?

urbancenturion on November 28, 2006 at 4:34 PM

What great timing. Yelling “shut the f**** up” would be better suited for Alan, but “Hush” was more effective. Brilliant.

right2bright on November 28, 2006 at 6:26 PM

So it’s come to this: delusional Bozell “hushes” wormish Colmes = big victory for the conservatives. Whoopee.

honora on November 29, 2006 at 11:10 AM

I would not believe anything Alan Colmes says or would say in any public venue. How can anybody believe him is beyond me. If Colmes said the sun rises in the east and sets in the west; I WOULD NOT BELIEVE HIM.

oldelpasoan on November 29, 2006 at 11:31 AM