Sean Hannity Vs. Congressman Keith Ellison

Why Rep. Ellison agreed to come on Hannity's show at all is a mystery to me.  I'm sure he could have imagined how it would go, and potentially what would be the result.

Round 1:

Sean Hannity opened the segment talking about something that didn't sit very well with the Congressman.  He was apparently misrepresenting the President, as well.  I know what you're saying, "Hannity wouldn't do such a thing!," but believe it.

Right before he cuts to Congressman Ellison he plays a video of the president giving speeches on the problems the sequester cuts would have on people.  Hannity calls it "The Obama Sequester" and then claims he is more interested in fear-mongering than finding a solution to the problem he, President Obama, created.  He then says that the President is very good at staying on message.

Here is a video of the exchange:

HANNITY: I guess that's what we can describe as staying on message, something the Democratic Party I would argue is very good at.

ELLISON: You're pretty good at it too.

HANNITY: Thank you.

ELLISON: Quite frankly you are the worst excuse for a journalist I've ever seen.

HANNITY: I can't hear you.

ELLISON: You heard me.

HANNITY: No, say it again. I didn't hear you.

ELLISON: What you just displayed was not journalism, It was yellow journalism. It wasn't anything close to trying to tell the American people what's really going on, and I mean, it's just shocking.

Sean Hannity is trying really hard to pin all the problems that the cuts will cause on the President.  This is simply unfair and I have a hunch that he knows that.  The President is the one that has come up with a plan to fix the issue and the Republicans will not even consider it.  His plan has been regarded as fair by many and it certainly is not as arbitrary as the sequester cuts were set up to be.  

Rep. Ellison should have known this would not be the end of this.

Round 2:

On his Thursday show, Hannity implied the Congressman was an anti-semite and a racist.  He unearthed some old attacks on Ellison from when he ran for Congress in 2006.

During the 1990's, while Ellison was in law school, he worked with a group that helped organize the Million-Man March. This group included Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam.  Ellison wrote in his school newspaper defending Farrakhan from charges of anti-semitism.

Ellison had apologized saying he did not “adequately scrutinize the positions and statements” of the Nation of Islam and Farrakhan six years ago. He wrote this in a letter to the Jewish Community Relations Council of Minnesota and the Dakotas.

“I wrongly dismissed concerns that they were anti-Semitic,” he wrote, adding, “They were and are anti-Semitic and I should have come to that conclusion earlier than I did.” “I have long since distanced myself from and rejected the Nation of Islam due to its propagation of bigoted and anti-Semitic ideas and statements, as well as other issues.”

When these statements surfaced people that went to law school with Ellison dismissed the idea of him being an anti-semite.  They said they never got that impression from him. Also, in the 2006 campaign, Ellison was endorsed by American Jewish World, the newspaper for Minnesota’s Jewish community.  This doesn't exactly scream anti-semite.  I don't think Jewish groups are in the habit of endorsing anti-semitic people for Congress.  

I believe Hannity has a problem with Rep. Ellison because he is Muslim, and even if he doesn't personally, he is playing it up for his audience that probably do have a problem with Muslims in general.  It's despicable and really proves all of the Congressman's critiques he made at the beginning of their interview.  The sad thing is people watch this guy and think they're getting real information.

Once Congressman Ellison was elected, he chose to be sworn in on the Qur'an because he is Muslim.  Hannity compared this to a racist being sworn in on Hitler's Mein Kampf, as he put it, the Nazi Bible.

And then, this:

Apparently going back five years on something he said, that he never retracted, is too far.  Pulling up an issue that happened in the 1990's and was resolved seven years ago is fair game.

Stay classy, Sean.