She commented on the trail of evidence linking the alleged Ft. Hood shooter, Maj. Nidal Hasan, to militant Islam. “There were such clear, obvious, massive warning signs that were missed,” she said. “This terrorist, even having business cards” that identified him as an “SoA” or soldier of Allah. Palin blamed a culture of political correctness and other decisions that “prevented — I’m going to say it — profiling” of someone with Hasan’s extremist ideology. “I say, profile away,” Palin said. Such political correctness, she continued, “could be our downfall.” If the upcoming investigations into the attack reveal bad decision-making on the part of senior officials, Palin continued, those officials ought to be fired.

In an interview with Fox News’ Sean Hannity, which is set to air in full tonight, Palin predicted the backlash that would come from her embrace of profiling. “Because I use the word profile, I’m going to get clobbered tomorrow morning,” said Palin. “The liberals, their heads are just going to be spinning, they’re going to say, ’she is radical, she is extreme.’” Watch it:

“I say profiling in the context of doing whatever we can to save innocent American lives, I’m all for it then,” concluded Palin.

Media Decoder’s Bill Carter notes that “Hannity did not address specifically how the mistake came to be made.”

“These ads inform New Yorkers that a million or more of their neighbors are good without God,” said Michael De Dora Jr., the executive director for the New York branch of the Center for Inquiry. “That is, a million of us have found or created natural morality, and lead good, productive, and meaningful lives without appeal to religious dogma or God.”

Sensing an opportunity to exploit the ads for political benefit, Hannity told his audience that a Christian group could never get away with airing ads like that:

Can you imagine the outrage if a Christian group put pro-God ads in the New York City subways? What outrage.

Watch it:

But as Subway Sights — a blog about the NYC subway system — explains, “The problem with this thinking is that Christians have been putting up pro-Christianity ads in the subway for years and nobody cares.” The blogger continues, “There are ads for all kinds of competing churches, each offering their own flavor of Christianity and their own path to salvation,” and offers this photograph as evidence:

Subway Sights concludes, “Of course, Sean Hannity doesn’t factor this into his argument because he doesn’t ride the subway and has no idea what he’s talking about.”

Indeed, Hannity doesn’t seem to ride the subway. He has said, “I travel on private planes, I have an SUV that I’m proud of.” But his lack of knowledge never stops him from opining on things he knows little about.

“I mean, is this an enemies list? Seems like it to me,” Hannity said on his program last Wednesday. “They want to come after the Fox News Channel,” the right-wing pundit complained. Almost every night in recent weeks, Hannity has badgered his guests, demanding that they take up his talking point. Last night, Liz Cheney took the bait:

HANNITY: It seems to me, it’s almost like an enemies list. Is that a fair description?

CHENEY: Well, uhh, yeah.

On Fox News Sunday this past weekend, Karl Rove propagated the talking point. “Let’s not kid ourselves — this is the White House engaging in its own version of a media enemies list,” Rove said.

Yesterday, Hannity won his biggest convert yet. Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN) took to the Senate floor and read Sean Hannity’s talking points into the congressional record:

ALEXANDER: I want to make what I hope will be a friendly suggestion to President Obama and his White House, and it is this: don’t create an enemies list. […]

So in conclusion Mr. President, here’s my point. These are unusually difficult times with plenty of forces encouraging us to disagree. Let’s not start calling people out and compiling an enemies list.

Watch a compilation:

The irony is rich, of course. In attempting to debunk Anita Dunn’s argument about Fox News, Sean Hannity has instead validated it — proving just how effective Fox News can serve as the “communications arm of the Republican Party.”

HANNITY: [Yasser Arafat] got the Nobel peace prize. Excuse me, a terrorist got the Nobel peace prize. Some people deservedly so. You know who else deserved it? Ronald Reagan. And frankly, I would’ve given it to George Bush.

Watch it:

As many commentators have noted, the Nobel Prize appears to have been motivated in part by anti-Bush sentiment, which makes Hannity’s suggestion particularly absurd. After all, George W. Bush engaged in the torture of detainees, waged an unprovoked and illegal war, and brought about the largest protests in history against U.S. policies — hardly behavior that is fitting for a Nobel Peace Prize.

(HT: TP reader Mark)

KING: Would you want the Limbaugh, that crowd — would you want them to be your voice as the Republican Party stands in this country?

BACHMANN: Well remember it’s who the American people are referring to Larry. And the American people are looking to voices like Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, Glenn Beck –

KING: I just told you — it’s 2 percent of America. It’s 2 percent!

BACHMANN: If you look for a critical mass, that’s the movement, that’s the direction that the critical mass is going. And the American people are very smart people.

Watch it:

Bachmann’s answer got a chuckle out of Larry King. “That’s funny,” he said.

IMUS: So you’re on the cover of Time magazine, your book’s number one I’ve noticed this week.

BECK: Yeah. It’s gone well.

IMUS: Sean Hannity, Rush, they both hate you.

Beck: No. No, they don’t.

IMUS: They all hate you.

BECK: No they don’t, no they don’t. Why must you stir up the hate?

IMUS: You’re telling me Rush is happy you’re on the cover of Time?

BECK: Yeah, I actually got a note from Rush.

IMUS: What did Rush say?

BECK: “I hate you.” (LAUGHTER) No, you know what? Rush has been really very gracious. The whole time, he has. He really has.

Watch it:

While Imus was mostly joking, there have been disagreements on the right over how much prominence Beck should have. Last month, Limbaugh said that he found attempts to “rally people” — like Beck and his 9/12 Project do — “cheap and disingenuous“:

“I don’t rally people and haven’t since the first year of my radio show,” he wrote to POLITICO. “At that time, all local talk hosts were attempting to prove their worth by getting people to cut up gasoline credit cards, call Washington, etc. I thought it was cheap and disingenuous. The few times I did, early on, suggest people call Washington, the reaction to it from the media was that the response was not genuine (I shut down the House switchboard) because people only did what they did because ‘Limbaugh told them to.’”

Beck’s recent suggestion that “John McCain would have been worse for the country than Barack Obama” created a surge of anger to from conservatives, including Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and radio host Mark Levin. Former Bush administration officials Peter Wehner and David Frum have also lamented the influence Beck is having on the conservative movement.

The conservative movement may have to deal with a lot longer if some of his fans have their way. At a book signing in Worcester, MA this weekend, 500 people lined up in the rain to see the Fox News personality. When he arrived and greeted the crowd, one man yelled out, “Glenn Beck for president!”

[Chicago is] a bustling metropolis with the warmth of a small town; where the world already comes together every day to live and work and reach for a dream — a dream that no matter who we are, where we come from; no matter what we look like or what hand life has dealt us; with hard work, and discipline, and dedication, we can make it if we try.

That’s not just the American Dream. That is the Olympic spirit. It’s the essence of the Olympic spirit. That’s why we see so much of ourselves in these Games. That’s why we want them in Chicago. That’s why we want them in America.

Always looking for a way to bring down Obama, conservatives not only criticized the President’s 15-hour trip, but also spent this week denegrating Chicago, downplaying the Olympics, and rooting against America. The criticisms have included mocking “fat people” in Chicago, gushing that Rio is just plain “awesome,” and saying that Chicago is too violent and doesn’t deserve the event. Watch a compilation:

So how will all these conservatives who have been rooting against the United States react now that their rhetoric has become reality? On Twitter, former Bush spokesman Scott Stanzel cautioned Republicans against gloating: “Note to GOP officials/consultants – resist the temptation to pile on about Chicago losing the Olympic bid just because Obama made the pitch.” His message didn’t reach RedState’s Erick Erickson, who immediately wrote:

Hahahahaha. I thought the world would love us more now that Bush was gone. I thought if we whored ourselves out to our enemies, great things would happen. Apparently not.

Bringing the Olympics wasn’t about cronyism. Besides U.S. pride, it was about an event that could have generated $22.5 billion in economic activity and the equivalent of 315,000 new full-time jobs in America.

Transcript:

SEAN HANNITY, 9/29: Tonight — Gang violence in Chicago leaves a teenager dead, and the shocking events are caught on tape. Should the President be pushing to bring the Olympics to this city?

…

MICHELLE MALKIN, 9/30: Well, this is all about the president’s Chicago cronies. That’s what this Olympic push is all about. And it starts with Richard M. Daley, the mayor of Chicago. He’s been there since 1989. He would like to see this $5 billion party cap off his long grand tenure. And it’s a great way to white wash all of the city’s ills in the windy city and in Illinois for that matter.

…

PAT CADDELL, 9/29: “Now in Chicago what we’re going to have is gangster politics that will make Al Capone so happy. This is the biggest ever outrage ever done the President of the United States.”

…

BRIT HUME, 9/29: Even if he does though, there are always going to be people who will always suspect he was on a political errand for Mayor Daley of Chicago, who has staked a lot of prestige on landing the Olympics, and a lot of people, I think, will not ever get over that idea.

BRETT BAIER: We’ll cover it.

…

DENNIS MILLER, 9/30: But I would caution the IOC to get ready. If they don’t award this Olympics to Chicago, and thus to President Obama, get ready to be deemed racist. That is the move.

BILL O’REILLY: And Oprah’s there too. They’re going to take a hit.

…

S.E. CUPP, 10/1: But on the other hand? Have you have you been to Rio? I have. It’s awesome. If I’m Rio, I’m not really worried. I mean, I don’t know — there’s conflicting stuff going on here. I’ll be surprised.

SEAN HANNITY: And they have a national holiday on the day of the announcement. So they’re fighting back.

CUPP: Well, Rio’s awesome. No offense to Chicago. I love the Cubs game.

GUILFOYLE: Everybody loves Rio.

CUPP: But Rio is awesome.

…

LOU DOBBS, 10/1: They are there talking — Michelle Obama talking smack with the First Lady of Brazil about the Olympics. Is this an appropriate — well, initiative on the part of the Obamas?

…

GLENN BECK, 9/30: ou know, I wouldn’t think that with everything that’s going on that Chicago and the Olympics would be a priority, but it is for this president, and his gal pal, because remember, they’re playing for all the gold.

…

BILL BENNETT, 10/1: BENNETT: Well, I’m actually for Rio. Somebody made the argument this afternoon — I guess it was Jack Cafferty — who said — and I don’t always agree with Jack, you may know, but he said, Rio, it’s beautiful women at the beach. In Chicago, it’s fat people eating. So, which would you rather see on TV?

ROLAND MARTIN: Have you seen Rio’s crime rate?

BENNETT: But let me say, one good thing — one good thing about Barack Obama going to Copenhagen and arguing for the United States and Chicago is, he is going to have to say some really very positive things about the United States while abroad, which is not something he has been doing.

WOLF BLITZER: All right, guys, on that note –

BENNETT: It will be a good thing. I would love to hear that.

MARTIN: Bill, that’s the first time you didn’t say buy American. I’m can’t believe you’re not supporting America.

BLITZER: Let the record show there are many, many beautiful women in Chicago as well.

Last night on Fox News, Sean Hannity devoted his top segment to hitting Obama over the Olympics. He brought up a tragic incident in Chicago where an innocent 16-year-old boy died after getting caught in gang violence crossfire. Hannity said the murder had turned “political” in light of Obama’s Copenhagen trip — even though the two are completely unrelated and no one else has tied them together:

HANNITY: This is absolutely chilling. Well, now the story has turned political. This Thursday President Obama will travel to Denmark to support Chicago’s bid to host the 2016 Summer Olympics. But in light of this tragedy and all of the pressing issues facing the country, is the president making the right move?

One of Hannity’s guests was former Bush White House press secretary Dana Perino, who agreed that the killing had become “part of a political issue.” She admitted that “this type of school violence, unfortunately, happens all over America,” but quickly added, “But as I read today that this is not the first child that’s been murdered this school year in Chicago.”

Hannity also tried to compare Obama’s Copenhagen trip to sending more troops to Afghanistan, saying that since the President was able to make the first decision so quickly, he should similarly make a snap decision about the war. Watch it:

CNN’s Lou Dobbs made a similar argument yesterday, saying, “The president is heading off to Denmark later this week to try to sell Olympic officials on Chicago, but many say the president’s focus on Chicago should have more to do with stopping the worsening violence in that city.”

Yesterday, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs made a jab at Steele and the other Olympics critics, asking, “Who’s he rooting for? Is he hoping to hop a plane to Brazil and catch the Olympics in Rio? Maybe it’s Madrid.” Former Massachusetts governor and head 2002 Olympic Organizing Committee Mitt Romney also endorsed Obama’s decision to go to Copenhagen, saying “I think the people in the IOC want to understand the level of the commitment of the host country. … And nothing says that like having the presence of the leader of that country and, particularly, the case of Barack Obama.”

(HT: News Hounds)

Transcript:

SEAN HANNITY, HOST (voice over): Tonight. Gang violence in Chicago leaves a teenager dead and the shocking events are caught on tape. Should the president be pushing to bring the Olympics to this city?

JAMES TRAFICANT, FORMER OHIO CONGRESSMAN: If they lie again, I’m going to go over there and kick them in the crotch.

HANNITY: James Traficant makes his dramatic return.

TRAFICANT: Don’t call me names. Don’t call me names.

HANNITY: “The New York Times” admits that it missed the boat on the ACORN scandal. All of that, plus Dana Perino, Victoria Gotti, here with a brand- new book.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: People are upset.

HANNITY: HANNITY starts right now.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

HANNITY: And the city of Chicago is still reeling from the murder of a 16- year-old honor student during an after-school fight between two rival gangs. Derrion Albert died of massive head injuries after he was struck with a large board and repeated kicked in the head.

His mother told the FOX affiliate in Chicago that her son got caught in the middle of the brawl because he was trying to help a friend. Now tragically the massive fight and vicious murder of Derrion Albert was all caught on tape. Now we want to warn you that what you’re about to see is extremely graphic and can be very difficult to watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Damn!

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Oh, my god.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What the (EXPLETIVE DELETED).

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Oh, my god. Get closer.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Damn.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HANNITY: This is absolutely chilling. Well, now the story has turned political. This Thursday President Obama will travel to Denmark to support Chicago’s bid to host the 2016 Summer Olympics. But in light of this tragedy and all of the pressing issues facing the country, is the president making the right move?

And joining me now is the host of “Give & Take,” which airs on WNBC’s New York Nonstop, Julie Menin is with us, and FOX News contributor, former White House press secretary, Dana Perino.

That video is some of the most difficult video to watch.

DANA PERINO, FORMER WH PRESS SECRETARY: I can’t watch it. And I think a bout the mom who, not only did she lose her son, but now it’s there on video for everybody to watch and it becomes like part of a political issue. And I — my sympathies go to her and everybody.

(CROSSTALK)

HANNITY: This kid, from all indications, a great kid, honor student. I mean, what are we to make — what has happened that we see — these instances come up periodically. We’ve seen brawls at football games. You can go back to Rodney King and some of the riots that have taken place.

What has happened to these kids that they can take a board and beat this kid to death, kick him in the head, and act like that? What happened?

JULIE MENIN, HOST OF “GIVE & TAKE”: Well, that’s exactly right. I mean this is a terrible scourge on society, gang violence. But I want to get back to what Dana said. It’s not a political issue. I don’t think there’s any political about it. This is a terrible tragedy and it has nothing to do with politics.

HANNITY: Well, it’s become political in this sense — the president is going to convince the Olympic Committee to bring the Olympics to Chicago.

PERINO: Well, the sad thing is that this type of school violence, unfortunately, happens all over America. And not always resulting in murder. But as I read today that this is not the first child that’s been murdered this school year in Chicago. [...]

HANNITY: Dana?

PERINO: So they had — there’s a matter of perception, right? And there will be a perception problem. He probably felt like he had to do this.

The one thing that’s interesting is in the United States we’ve always let the private sector push for our Olympic bids and also for our athletes. And, you know, other countries haven’t done that. And it looks like America is going to.

MENIN: That’s not true. You know, in New York Mayor Bloomberg took a very active role in trying to get.

(CROSSTALK)

PERINO: Right, but not the president.

MENIN: Not president? We have Vladimir Putin of Russia, went to Guatemala.

PERINO: Right but.

MENIN: Tony Blair.

(CROSSTALK)

PERINO: And President Bush is very supportive of Chicago getting the Olympics and did events with Mayor Daley but did not go and make the type of display. Look, it’s a 15-hour trip. It’s probably not that big a deal.

MENIN: I think it’s.

PERINO: If they get the Olympics, it will be fine.

MENIN: It’ll be wonderful. [...]

HANNITY: But this is the point. He can make a decision to go to, you know, advocate on behalf of the Olympics, but he can’t make a decision about whether or not he’s going to support — give the general the troops that he’s asking for.

Last night on Fox News, host Sean Hannity and former Bush adviser Karl Rove predictably mocked Obama. It’s “his mandatory jab at America,” Hannity said. “I love the blame America first,” Rove piled on. The anti-Obama duo then moved into global warming denier territory:

HANNITY: You know, we just came off one of the coolest years on record. [...]

ROVE: In 2006, only one major industrial economy in the world actually grew and at the same time reduced the absolute level of greenhouse gas emissions put out. Guess what that country was, Sean? The United States of America. He should be heralding our leadership in reducing greenhouse gases by applying technology and market economy to the problem of greenhouse gas emissions.

Watch it:

Actually, 2008 was the coolest since 2000, not “on record,” as Hannity claimed. In fact, according to a NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies analysis released in January, last year was likely the ninth warmest on record. The warmest ten years have all occurred since 1997. Moreover, the study said that we should expect the warmest year on record within the next few years:

NASA climate scientists released a new analysis today showing 2008 was the coolest year on record since 2000 but warned a new high temperature record could be broken in the next couple of years. [...]

“It still seems likely that a new global temperature record will be set within the next 1-2 years,” the authors said.

Rove’s global warming denier claim is slightly more sophisticated than Hannity’s but also highly misleading. While overall emissions dropped from 2005-2006 in the U.S., 2007 saw an increase from 2005 emissions. The 2006 decline was mostly due to a mild winter rather than as a result of any Bush administration policies as Rove suggested. Moreover, the U.S. wasn’t alone in seeing a drop in greenhouse gas emissions that year; the European Union’s emissions also dropped slightly during that same period.

At one point, Hannity stopped to address why he and other conservatives call them czars: “mostly because the White House itself does.” To prove his point, he played a montage of four clips by Obama and White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs using the term “czars.” Watch it:

This was an incredibly weak montage. A look at the full context of these clips:

– On July 13, Obama did use the term “Drug Czar” when referring to Gil Kerlikowske, director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy.

– Hannity’s March 11 clip of Gibbs saying, “I think I’ve been asked in this room any number of times if the czars in our White House to deal with energy and health care had too much power” was in response to a reporter’s question. In fact, the first person to use the term “czar” in that briefing was Fox News reporter Major Garrett.

– At the Radio and Television Correspondents’ Association dinner in June, Obama was joking when he said, “ABC is planning a series called ‘Dancing with the Czars.’” It was part of his comedy routine at the dinner.

– Hannity’s fourth clip was taken from the same March 11 press briefing as his second clip. In fact, it was in response to the exact same question, and came just a sentence later.

So basically, all Hannity could come up with is one legitimate use by the Obama administration of the term “czars.” All the others were in response to a reporter’s question or when the President was joking at the media’s overuse of the term.

It’s the media, not the White House, that is driving the term. A search of the White House website finds that the only time Obama actually uses the term “czar” is in reference to Kerlikowske. This position, of course, isn’t new; George W. Bush, George H.W. Bush, and Ronald Reagan all had drug czars. The rest of the results for “czar” on the White House website are from reporters’ questions or responses to those questions.

Additionally, many of the positions being referred to as “czars” are actually long-standing positions — not ones instituted by Obama. Others have already been confirmed by the Senate.

Fox News personality Sean Hannity was one of the rally’s keynote speakers, and he took the opportunity to gloat about Van Jones’ resignation. He vowed to the audience that he would get rid of “every other one” of Obama’s so-called czars:

HANNITY: Do you want another czar?

CROWD: No!

HANNITY: I don’t think so. By the way, we got rid of one, and my job starting tomorrow night is to get rid of every other one. I promise you that!

Watch it:

Hannity’s pledge is part of a larger right-wing campaign. Glenn Beck has announced that Cass Sunstein, Mark Lloyd, and Carol Browner are his next targets and asked his followers to dig up all the dirt they can on them.

Republican lawmakers are trying to argue that Obama should be barred from appointing more advisers until the administration addresses their constitutional concerns. Yesterday on Fox News, Rep. Jack Kingston (R-GA) said that all of Obama’s advisers should have to go through the same vetting and approval process through the Senate as Supreme Court nominees and Cabinet secretaries. Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN) has said that the “president should suspend any further appointments of so-called ‘czars’ until Congress has an opportunity to examine the background and responsibilities of these individuals.”

The conservative strategy is to bring the executive branch to a screeching halt. Republicans in the Senate have tried to hold up key Obama nominees in what amounts to ideological witch hunts and self-interested horse-trading. Additionally, several of the so-called czars have actually already been confirmed by the Senate.

Hannity presumably misspoke about ending “this move towards America.” Or perhaps, he was speaking in code to Gov. Perry’s core constituency who wants to secede from the Union.

On Sean Hannity’s radio show yesterday, Bachmann continued to attack the Census, repeatedly insisting that people should go to her website to “see the Census form for themselves.” Listing off a few questions from the American Community Survey (a long-form survey sent out to one in 40 households each year) that she considers invasive, Bachmann claimed that it doesn’t ask “are you an American citizen”:

BACHMANN: Twenty-eight pages. Sean, you know the one question they don’t ask? They don’t ask, “are you an American citizen?” They don’t ask if you’re here on a visa or when it expires. We have no real idea how many illegal aliens are in our country. But wouldn’t you think, here they are asking every personal question about our lives, they could at least ask if we’re an American citizen? They don’t bother to ask for that. That’s why I think people need to read this census for themselves. If you go to my website, michelebachmann, you can read it.

Listen here:

In fact, the American Community Survey does ask about U.S. citizenship and it has since 1890:

Additionally, though Bachmann repeatedly directed Hannity’s listeners to her website, michelebachmnann.com, in order to view the Census questions, the questions aren’t actually available on her website. A press release on her congressional website, however, does encourage citizens to read the Census and ACS questions. Apparently Bachmann has yet to take her own advice.

Transcript:

HANNITY: And Congresswoman, credit to you. I mean, you’re out there and you’ve become a target by the Democrats because of your outspokenness and your willingness to take on the administration. A lot of press was made over the fact that you said, “well, I’m only going to give pertinent constitutional information as it relates to the census.” What’s the status on that?

BACHMANN: Well, the Democrats are trying to make a lot out of this because at my website, Michelebachmann.com, I’ve invited people from all over the United States to come and sign the ACORN petition to get ACORN out of conducting the census. And then I’ve also stated that as for my family and myself, we are not comfortable telling the administration every intricate detail of our life. If a person goes to my website at michelebachmann.com, they can see the census form for themselves. There’s a short form and a long form. On the long form, and recognize that the federal government says unless you answer every question, you’ll be subject to a fine. So the federal government will fine you if you don’t answer the questions.

HANNITY: Give us some of the example of the intrusive questions. We’ve gone over this some time ago and some of the questions that you don’t like.

BACHMANN: Well, they ask you your phone number. They want to know how many times you’ve given live birth. How many times you’ve been married. How many bathrooms are in your home. They want to know what time you leave your house in the morning to go to work. The hour and the minute. What time you come back from work. The hour and the minute. Your age, your race, your sex. And not only just for you, but for every person that lives in your house. Twenty-eight pages. Sean, you know the one question they don’t ask? They don’t ask, “are you an American citizen?” They don’t ask if you’re here on a visa or when it expires. We have no real idea how many illegal aliens are in our country. But wouldn’t you think, here they are asking every personal question about our lives, they could at least ask if we’re an American citizen? They don’t bother to ask for that. That’s why I think people need to read this census for themselves. If you go to my website, michelebachmann, you can read it.

In the next segment, however, Democratic strategist Bob Beckel called out Hannity for seemingly “defending John Ensign” despite being “a big family values guy.” “Here’s a guy that cheats on his wife, not just with somebody, but somebody on his staff who’s married. Now what do you think?” asked Beckel. Hannity reluctantly admitted that he thinks such behavior warrants a resignation:

BECKEL: Excuse me. Excuse me for a second, Mr. University Prager. I want — I want him to answer this question.

HANNITY: My answer is, if you’re going to be a family-values candidate and a family-values politician, and you don’t live up to that, I think you should resign.

BECKEL: Well…

HANNITY: I don’t know where he stands.

When Beckel said he wanted to “let the record show that that you called for John Ensign to resign,” Hannity tried to hedge his words again, saying “I don’t know where he stands on the issues.” Watch it:

Hannity claims to not know where Ensign stands on “family values” issues, but as ThinkProgress has pointed out, Ensign has previously positioned himself as a protector of “the institution of marriage.”

In 2007, Ensign called on then-Sen. Larry Craig (R-ID) to resign after he in an airport men’s restroom on disorderly conduct charges, but he declined to call for Sen. David Vitter’s (R-LA) resignation after he acknowledged an affair involving prostitution. In July 2007, Hannity said that Vitter should resign as well.

Transcript:

BOB BECKEL, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: Can I just speak to what you did in this segment here for a second?

HANNITY: You can do whatever you want.

BECKEL: You go to this thing with John Ensign, right, about Harry Reid. He’s more popular than — now, this is a guy — you’re a big family values guy. Here’s a guy that cheats on his wife, not just with somebody, but somebody on his staff who’s married. Now what do you think? Are you defending John Ensign?

HANNITY: That sounds like a liberal Democrat to me.

BECKEL: That was good.

DENNIS PRAGER, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: Wait, wait, wait. What does have it to do with…

BECKEL: Excuse me. Excuse me for a second, Mr. University Prager. I want — I want him to answer this question.

HANNITY: My answer is, if you’re going to be a family-values candidate and a family-values politician, and you don’t live up to that, I think you should resign.

BECKEL: Well…

HANNITY: I don’t know where he stands.

BECKEL: Oh, he’s big.

HANNITY: But with that said, it is interesting that Harry, you know, Prince Pelosi, Prince Harry and Princess Pelosi. His ratings are lower than the guy that had an affair.

BECKEL: All I’m saying is let the record show that that you called for John Ensign to resign.

HANNITY: I don’t know where he stands on the issues.

HANNITY: Karl, it seems rather unprecedented. You were there in the White House for the better part of eight years. Did this ever happened while George W. Bush was president?

ROVE: You know, look, it’s normal for the networks to want to come in and do an interview inside the White House or to get a glimpse behind the curtain as to what goes on there. This is an unprecedented access to the White House and more importantly an unprecedented use of the White House. I can’t remember a time when the network came in and was going to devote a significant block of time to covering an issue that was on the president’s agenda.

As Media Matters first noted, when Fox News’ Bret Baier was granted “unprecedented access” to the White House in Feb. 2008, the network billed it as a “documentary,” not an “infomercial.” Further, Fox was not only welcomed into the White House, but aboard Air Force One, to Bush’s ranch in Texas, and into the Oval Office. Baier introduced the “documentary” saying, “Fox News has been granted unprecedented access inside the President’s world. … It’s a President Bush you’ve never seen before.” Watch a compilation of Hannity last night and Baier’s special:

Prior to airing the Bush special, Baier hosted a special on the famously-reclusive vice president entitled “Dick Cheney: No Retreat.” Fox billed it as “a rare glimpse into the life of the vice president” and aired the program Oct. 13, 2007. Similarly, on Oct. 30, 2007, Fox’s Greta Van Susteren was granted what she called “unprecedented access” to First Lady Laura Bush’s tour of the Middle East.

In the period leading up to Fox gaining such access to the Bush White House, former Fox News Sunday host Tony Snow was serving as White House Press Secretary, leaving office just weeks before Baier’s first documentary aired.

When asked about her employer’s reputation for being conservative, she attributed those perceptions to the network’s primetime host lineup, not its news coverage. “There is no question that Hannity is a conservative,” she says. “But I can tell you from personal experience after having worked with O’Reilly for years now, you never know where he is going to come out on an issue. He definitely leans right when it comes to certain social, traditional value issues, but he’s all over the board on certain other issues. And Greta-nobody knows exactly what her stripes are. I think [the conservative reputation is] really because of Hannity.”

Kelly is wrong. Fox is considered “the most biased name in news” for much more than just Sean Hannity. Not only does Fox regularly parrot right-wing talking points and promote right-wing events, but its executives want the network to be the “voice of opposition” to the Obama administration. Kelly also neglected to mention Fox’s rising star, Glenn Beck, who proudly calls himself a conservative.

HANNITY: You know but it goes back – It does go back a little to the campaign. I mean, ‘spread the wealth, patriotic duty…’

PALIN: Kind of a ‘we told ya so’.

HANNITY: Well, is that how you feel?

PALIN: That’s how I feel! … And this many months into the new administration, quite disappointed, quite frustrated with not seeing those actions to rein in spending, slow down the growth of government. Instead Sean it is the complete opposite. It’s expanding at such a large degree that if Americans aren’t paying attention, unfortunately our country could evolve into something that we do not even recognize.

HANNITY: Socialism?

PALIN: Well, that is where we are headed. That is where we have to be blunt enough and candid enough and honest enough with Americans to let them know that if we keep going down these roads… nationalizing many of our services, our projects, our businesses, yes that is where we would head.

Even if the National Republican Congressional Committee and Senatorial Committee won’t have her, Palin will always be welcome at Fox News.

HANNITY: Last time I’m here, I ask you…do you want [Obama] to succeed. You gave a very long answer that got reduced to Rush wants Obama to fail. Which wasn’t what you said.

LIMBAUGH: Well, in a sense it was. It was. I don’t hide from it, I do want and I still want Obama to fail.

Watch it:

Later in the interview, Limbaugh reiterated his belief that Gen. Colin Powell endorsed Obama only because of his race and that Judge Sonia Sotomayor is a racist. Limbaugh, however, said that he may be able to “overlook” her racism and support her nomination if he comes to believe that Sotomayor is anti-choice.