Voinovich and Hannity - Audio and Transcript

Yahoo! ^ | June 27, 2007 | Sean Hannity & George Voinovich

[KayEyeDoubleDee]

 

Streaming Audio:		http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?vid=722432
Streaming Audio:		http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4818904264344912483
Streaming Audio:		http://soapbox.msn.com/?user=7196056434680278535
14MB MP3 File:		http://dl4.ohshare.com/v/1003455/voinovich_hannity.mp3.html
14MB MP3 File:		http://s24.quicksharing.com/v/4628315/voinovich_hannity.mp3.html
14MB MP3 File:		http://www.bestsharing.com/files/PcqK1Jw296513/voinovich_hannity.mp3.html
14MB MP3 File:		http://www.mooload.com/new/file.php?file=file01/280607/1183031081/voinovich_hannity.mp3&s=t
14MB MP3 File:		http://www.filefactory.com/file/ebaeea/

 

Wednesday, June 27, 2007

About 3:30PM, EDT

 

HANNITY: We're watching, we're waiting, the United States Senate, as they continue to go through these different amendments, and tomorrow's cloture vote could be key. And we're trying to get into the hearts and minds, as you've been hearing all day, of some of these senators to see where they stand on this. One of them, from the great state of Ohio, Senator George Voinovich, is with us. Senator, welcome back to the program. Thanks for being with us. Senator?

VOINOVICH: Hello.

HANNITY: Senator, Sean Hannity here. How are you?

VOINOVICH: I'm okay. I, I, was on here and I, I thought you didn't want to talk to me because the phone went dead.

HANNITY: No, I'm sorry, no, that's actually the Fairness Doctrine, liberals trying to silence us. By the way, for the record, you'd be against the Fairness Doctrine, wouldn't you?

VOINOVICH: Fairness Doctrine? I'm all for the Fairness Doctrine, whatever that is.

HANNITY: You're, you're for the Fairness Doctrine?!?

VOINOVICH: Well I think everybody had [sic] to have their, their, their, their, their opportunity to share their opinion, sure, that's a good idea. Don't you? That's what you do on, on Fox every night, is you give both sides of the story, which is great.

---

TIME: 01:09

---

HANNITY: No, but would you want to revise, bring back the Fairness Doctrine as we had, you know, prior to 1988, which is, this, you know, these, where we have this undefinable government agency monitoring -

VOINOVICH: No, no, no, no, you're supposed to let, the fairness should be -

HANNITY: Let the free market -

VOINOVICH: It's the free market, and that's why you guys have got such coverage on your, on your... on Roger Ailes, my good buddy, is doing so well.

HANNITY: Okay, I'm just checking here. I, let me, let me move to this immigration bill here. We had this cloture vote yesterday, and now it's being debated, the different amendments that are being debated here today, what is your position, we're going to have a cloture vote tomorrow, are you going to vote to end debate, or, and would you support this bill as it currently stands, or are you against this amnesty bill?

VOINOVICH: I'm, I, I am, I was, I was for continuing to debate the bill. We've had more discussion on this bill than, than many other bills that have come before the United States Senate, and I don't think that a member of the Senate ought to hide out behind a cloture vote. If we were going to, if we were going to kill this bill like we did the car check [?] yesterday, we brought it up, and they didn't have the cloture vote, it's over with. But in this particular case, we went forward with it, debated it, and I think we owe the American people a, a vote on this bill. Either for it or against it. And this bill still is in, in flux right now.

---

TIME: 02:25

---

HANNITY: But the bill, but what we're going to have is another cloture vote tomorrow, which would be intended to end, basically, the debate, limit the number of amendments that are going forward, and -

VOINOVICH: And it depends, and that depends on how many amendments we get up on the floor today, and, and, and what the arrangement is with the other side, because there are people that have legitimate amendments. For example, we were able to get an amendment up today that I voted for, they tried a, a, a, motion to table it, and that's Kay Bailey Hutchison's amendment that says these people within, within two years have got to go back home and, and then, and then re-apply and come back in the country, they just can't sit here for ten years or whatever it is before... and then, and then, ultimately, you know, get behind [sic] the line and then, and end up getting a green card. So there's a lot of amendments that are really good amendments that would make this bill a much better -

---

TIME: 03:09

---

HANNITY: But, but, didn't that amendment get shot down? I know for example the -

VOINOVICH: No, it passed today.

HANNITY: All right, but the other one, that the, Kay Bailey Hutchison also had an amendment that was tabled, 53-45, earlier today, that would require all adult immigrants to return home temporarily in order to qualify for permanent lawful status -

VOINOVICH: No, we, no, I thought the, I thought the -

HANNITY: I have, I have the AP story, let me read it to you.

VOINOVICH: Oh it's, oh it's, okay, it's, she, it failed?, I thought her amendment -

HANNITY: "The Senate on Wednesday killed a Republican proposal to require all adult illegal immigrants to return home temporarily in order to qualify for permanent lawful status in the country."

VOINOVICH: And they moved to, I thought it, I, I, I -

HANNITY: Hang on -

VOINOVICH: I thought it passed because, the, I, I, frankly, I voted for it, and I thought that, that, that it passed, because it was a motion to table her amendment, and, and, and most of us I thought had, thought voted "No" on the tabling, but the fact of the matter is that there was, what was the vote on it?

---

TIME: 04:04

---

HANNITY: The vote was 53-45 to table -

VOINOVICH: 53, fifty, forty, 45, okay the motion, that's, that's, all right, so that's, that's another, then we'll be having more amendments. So all of these things will be taken into consideration as we move along. The main important thing right now, I think, is this: Number One, is the reason why we got the problem in this country is, number one, we have not done the job in terms of securing the border. We never spent the money we do it, we typically do around this place over the years is that we pass legislation and then, the, don't provide the money to go ahead and get the job done.

HANNITY: Okay, okay, Senator, I don't, I just want to clarify for our audience here, that the headline on AP is the following: "Plan to Send Immigrants Home is Defeated".

VOINOVICH: Well, the fact of the matter is that we were, are going to continue to have more amendments and will see how that all works out.

HANNITY: So then, the bottom line is, that just reinforces, and Kay Bailey Hutchison said, without this amendment, the amnesty tag, that has been put on this bill will, will remain; it is the key issue in the bill for the American people, so that, that basically -

---

TIME: 05:04

---

VOINOVICH: Well that's, that's Kay, I mean, I, I voted for her amendment, but, but I'm, I'm, if you're asking me what I'm going to do, I'm going to weigh all of this. I'm not going to tell you today I'm either for it or against it. I, I believe that we have an obligation to, to, to vote "Yes" or "No" on this bill. I've had people back home, because of programs like your's, and others' [?], and who've [?] said to me, "And if you don't vote, if you vote for this bill, then, you know, it's the end of your political career." And I just want you to know, and I want everybody else to know, that you do not intimidate George Voinovich. This is my 40th year in this business, I call them -

HANNITY: Senator, with all due respect -

VOINOVICH: I call them as I, no wait -

HANNITY: I'm not trying to intimidate you, I'm just, I'm just trying to get you, are you saying that I'm intimidating you?

VOINOVICH: No, no, I'm just saying, though, that a lot of the radio programs have really got out there and fired this thing up, and, and so people are really hot about it, and I'm getting calls from people that, that basically are intimidating me. So you know, "If you do this, then I'm going to do that."

---

TIME: 06:00

---

HANNITY: So if they voice their opinions, and they say to you that this is a defining bill for them in terms of the type of representation they want, you view that as a threat?

VOINOVICH: What I'm trying to say to you is that during my 40 years in this business, I've voted on a lot of pieces of legislation, what I do is, I weigh them, I look at the pros, and I look at the cons, and then I make a decision. And if that decision is something that a lot of people are unhappy about, then they'll have to take that into consideration the next time I'm up for, for election.

HANNITY: Senator, fair enough. I'm just, to me, this is a defining issue, because I think this is one of the most important issues of our time. In terms of how, you know, people, if they tell you it's a defining issue, I think they're just expressing to you their, their passion about the issue.

VOINOVICH: Yeah but, Sean, let me ask you something, are you, are you happy with the current, are you happy with the current legislation [sic] that we have today? Are you, are you happy with, wait a, wait a second, are you happy with the fact that we let in 50,000 people every year from unrepresented countries? Are you happy with -

HANNITY: Senator, let me answer the question.

VOINOVICH: No, no, let me finish, let me finish.

HANNITY: You go ahead.

VOINOVICH: Are you happy with, with the chain immigration that we have here that lets in mothers, sisters, brothers, cousins, aunts? This legislation cuts it back and says, "If you get in here, you get a green card, you can bring your wife, and you can bring your minority [sic] kids, you can't bring in the rest of your family anymore." And we've set up, we've gone to the European style of setting up points, you can't get in here unless these points allow, you're, you're one of the categories that we need in this country. Our current law is, is, is stinks [sic], it's a terrible law.

---

TIME: 07:25

---

HANNITY: Nobody's enforcing it, Senator. Nobody's built the fence. You guys, you know, allocated money for 700 miles of fence. We've built two miles of it. Let, you know, to answer your question, it's five and a half years, Senator, nearly six years, since 9-11, and our borders still are not secure. You can't even tell me you've read this bill, because as of yesterday, the bill wasn't even completed and written. You haven't, you haven't read the bill.

VOINOVICH: No, no, let's, here's the statistics, okay? 18 -

HANNITY: Have you read the bill? Have you read this bill?

VOINOVICH: I have read most of the, of the summaries on it. No, I haven't read every page of it.

HANNITY: Nobody's read it because it wasn't written as of yesterday.

VOINOVICH: Well, the fact of the matter is, is that in terms of, of, in terms of the border, the border today is one heckuva lot more secure than it was three years ago.

---

TIME: 08:06

---

HANNITY: Senator, with all due respect, Senator, anybody can walk across these borders any time they want. I've been down on the border five times. These foreign borders aren't anywhere near secure, Senator. It's five and a half years after 9-11, nearly six, and I'm going to tell you, let me give you why, people that you say are fired up about this, but let me tell you why I'm fired up about it. There've been no committee hearings on the bill, Senator. There aren't going to be hearings. There's been no cost analysis about this bill Senator. None, whatsoever, when you look at it. When you look at the specifics in this bill: It allows 400,000 guest workers to come into the country every year, they're going to become eligible for permanent status; between 12 and 20 million people will immediately be on a path to citizenship; the penalty in my mind is meager for their lack of respect of our laws and our sovereignty; we're rewarding illegal behavior; it could cost, according to the Heritage Foundation, 2.5 trillion dollars for the taxpayers of this country; and, in the end, the security measures have been reduced from where they were last year, as I see it, with border fence, et cetera, and, and no consideration has been given to any of these things. That's why I'm mad.

---

TIME: 09:12

---

VOINOVICH: Okay, okay, I, you, you really didn't give me a chance. I don't really think it's worthy to talk to you right now, because you've got your mind up [sic], you're not really, you're not really interested in hearing the other side of the coin. All you want to hear is somebody agree with you. And I'm disappointed in you, 'cause I had more respect for you. I wouldn't have gone on this radio program with you if I hadn't thought that you'd give me an opportunity to -

HANNITY: Senator, you have had a fair opportunity, and you're mad that, it seems to me, you say people are intimidating you because they dare to disagree with you.

VOINOVICH: No, you haven't, you haven't even given me a chance. Sean, it's been nice talking to you.

HANNITY: So you're going to hang up because you don't have the courage to debate it? Just like the Senate.

VOINOVICH: No, because you won't give me a chance to even -

HANNITY: I'll give you all the time you want. I'll leave you for the whole hour, Senator. You want the whole hour? Let's go through it point by point. Have you guys in the Senate done a cost analysis on this, sir?

VOINOVICH: We, we know that we have spent a great deal more money on this legislation than, than -

---

TIME: 10:00

---

HANNITY: I didn't ask you that. I asked you if you'd done a cost analysis.

VOINOVICH: Yes, yes we have done a cost analysis.

HANNITY: How much is it going to cost the Social Security and Medicare systems? Heritage says 2.5 trillion; how much do you say?

VOINOVICH: I'm not talking, I'm talking about the amount of money that we're going to spend to secure the border.

HANNITY: That wasn't my question. I asked you if you did a cost analysis - if you legalize 12 to 20 million people, how much over the next 15, 20 years, is it going to cost the taxpayers for our Medicare and Social Security systems?

VOINOVICH: Well the fact of the matter is, the bill provides that the people that are here, that pay their Social Security, are not going to get their Social Security. If they stay here, and they get a job, then, then they would be eligible to receive their Social Security. As a matter of fact, Social Security has really been ahead over the years, because a lot of these people have given phony social security cards, and they're never going to be able to collect the money out of Social Security.

HANNITY: But the, but the, but, I, have you read the Heritage Foundation study, because I can -

VOINOVICH: No I haven't, no, I'm sorry, I haven't.

HANNITY: Well it's worth reading because what they have done here is they have figured out after legalization, after you grant [an] immediate path to citizenship, and once people become eligible, whatever the year is, 10, 12, 13 years later, and the average, you know, education levels, and estimated incomes of people - what they have determined is, is that, over time, it's going to cost the taxpayers of this country, drain the system, Social Security and Medicare, we're talking about illegal immigrants, 2.5 trillion dollars. Don't you think, before the Senate votes on the bill -

---

TIME: 11:22

---

VOINOVICH: No wait, before -

HANNITY: No, you didn't let me finish my question -

VOINOVICH: Hold, hold, hold it -

HANNITY: Whoa, whoa, whoa -

VOINOVICH: Just a second, okay?

HANNITY: You're interrupting me. Go ahead.

VOINOVICH: Okay, well you, if, if you count the number of minutes you've had, and I've had, I think you've had more minutes than I've had. Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! The fact of the matter is, is that I believe that if this legislation passed, that about a, a third to 40% of the people that are illegals would go into the ten month program, where they come every, you know, they work here ten months and go home. A lot of these folks, they don't want to become United States citizens. Now let's, let's say that -

HANNITY: Whoa, whoa, where, where did you get that from? That they don't want to, of course they do. But you, you still haven't answered Senator -

---

TIME: 12:04

---

VOINOVICH: No, no, no -

HANNITY: Wait, wait, wait, now let me finish my point. Because I asked you a simple question.

VOINOVICH: No, no, let me finish my point. My point is you're using -

HANNITY: Senator, you won't answer my question -

VOINOVICH: You're using 10 to 20 thousand [sic] people. I'm saying to you, that if there's 12 million people, and a third of them go home, then, that they're not a problem at all for our Social Security system, they're not a problem for our Medicare system.

HANNITY: That is an assumption that you've made never having read the Heritage Foundation report, but, but my original question to you was the following: I asked whether or not, 'cause I think Congress is rushing this bill through, it's yet to even [have] been fully written, it hasn't been read by any Senator in full, you're only getting, quote, by your own estimation, "a summary of the bill", and I asked if you, as a Senator, a United States Senator, did any cost analysis of what ultimately this could cost the American taxpayer, and what it would do to systems like Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security? Now I have read the Heritage Foundation report, and my point to you is, don't you think it would be wise, before you pass this amnesty bill, to find out what it's going to cost the American taxpayer, and just sort of guessing here on this program the way that you are?

---

TIME: 13:07

---

VOINOVICH: I don't agree with some of the prem- [ises]. Look, Sean I want to tell you something, I really appreciate the opportunity to talk with you.

HANNITY: You're running away because you can't answer a simple question.

VOINOVICH: No I, no I, yes I am running away, I, Sean, I -

HANNITY: You are, you're running away because you can't answer a question. This is -

VOINOVICH: I was supposed to be on here for five minutes. Thank you very much, and I hope the next time around we have another subject that we can be more rational about. Thank you.

HANNITY: Oh, so I'm irrational because I disagree with you?

VOINOVICH: Thank you very much.

HANNITY: The Almighty Senator, okay -

VOINOVICH: HANGS UP PHONE.

HANNITY: I got it. Thank you.

Ladies and gentlemen, this is my point here. First [of all], we were respectful to the Senator, I'm trying to get his point of view, the hostility came from him, and all I did was ask a simple question: "Hey Senator, did you read the bill?" And he answers, "No." He doesn't want to admit it, but he hasn't.

Hey Senator, let me ask you the next question, simple question: "Have you guys, before you pass this bill, has there been any cost analysis as to what ultimately this bill can cost the American taxpayer?"

"Uhhh, uhhh, no... Well I, I figure that a third will go home..."

---

TIME: 14:02

---

He's pulling these numbers out of his head.

The answer is no. The Heritage Foundation has done a cost analysis. And this is where I get into the very beginning, the bill hasn't even fully been completely written and read by these Senators, they even pass an amendment here, even the amendment to send immigrants home, it was defeated.

If you dare to disagree with them, the ad hominem attacks begin, that we're irrational, we're out of touch.

No, we've done our research, I actually read the original bill, I've read the Heritage Foundation report, we've looked at the cost analysis, we see the legal status, and we understand and we just disagree with them, and they can't stand any opposition.

"Oh, I'm not coming on your program if you disagree with me!"

I guess you can count him in the amnesty camp at the end of the day. Let's see what happens.

Quick break, right back.
 

[KayEyeDoubleDee]

This might be the most stunning political conversation that I have ever heard in my life.

[KayEyeDoubleDee]

I also have a “WAV” file of their conversation, but it’s more than 100MB in size, and I had a hard time finding a site that would let me upload such a large file.

[theDentist]

Ping for reading more closely! It was an amazing conversation.... stunning.

[kempster]

I heard this live yesterday and I was stunned to see what a complete dufus the state of Ohio has sent to represent them. Being from Michigan, I don’t have any room to speak, but this really blew my mind. This tells me that the fix is in and all this Amendment crap is just a formality to get to the next step.

[am452]

“This might be the most stunning political conversation that I have ever heard in my life.”

Agreed! Never have I seen such a “Let them eat cake” attitude. The people in Ohio need to start a recall if possible. 40 years in politics-Voinovich is the perfect example why we need to start strict term limits.

[freespirited]

Unbelievable. We must have at least couple dozen FReepers in Ohio who would be far better Senators than this oaf.

[Ikemeister]

Does Voinivich have all his marbles? I have a sinking feeling that he is all too typical of the clowns who represent us.

[silverleaf]

Thank you for posting the transcript.

The people of Ohio have reelected this man for 40 years and now he seems to think that 40 years is his entitlement to autoratic arrogance ?

I would question Senator Voinovich’s competency to remain in office after reading and hearing him yesterday. But being brain dead is no disqualifier for the Senate if your finger can punch a button.

[Anonymous Rex]

There are a few million who’d be better Senators and shamefully some of those are Democrats.

[don-o]

Good post. Everyone needs to give a listen. The key to the whole thing is the senator proclaiming, "I will not be intimidated." Breathtaking.

I heard it live and Hannity earned some respect from me from this. Now, if he can get his mind right about Rudy, and dump Dick Morris forever, he can earn more!

[Anonymous Rex]

He’s done after this term and he knows it. He’ll retire before he’ll sack up and face the music.

The only question is whether we can get him out of office any sooner.

[jwalsh07]

His competency is not in question, he is very obviously incompetent. What is most troubling is that he thinks he is a commissar in the Politburo rather than a United States Senator. How any conservative could ever again cast a vote for this clown is beyond me.

[Nomorjer Kinov]

That was Sean’s finest hour in broadcasting. No wishy-washy, feel good, my good friend BS. Hard, fair questions, insistence on answers and he pointed out the non-answers and dodges and the runaway behavior of the towering intellect that is, Voinovitch.

[Astronaut]

I fired off an email to Voinovich right away. What better proof that the elitists in DC are completely out of touch with us plebians? Voinovich was ignorant - he didn’t know what the fairness doctrine was. He got mad at Sean because Sean had the temerity to question on of his “betters” and the Senator didn’t have straight answers to basic questions. This arrogant ass needs a Freeping! Jam his switchboard and crash his email server!!

[not2worry]

I feel like we are living under the Third Reich

[WBL 1952]

Voinovich is par for the course in the US Senate. Almost every one of these clowns sounds the same way when they get put on the spot; total clueless imbeciles that only know that for some reason people will elect them to an important office based only on how they look and sound.

[Psycho_Bunny]

That was Barstool Incoherence.

[George W. Bush]

I like the part where Voinovich announced in a trembling voice that he wasn't intimidated by Hannity and all those talk-radio people.

He was shaking in his boots, trying to squeak out of it. I had the feeling he agreed to appear, thinking in his obvious confusion that it was some kind of softball interview for him.

These bastards had better be intimidated. Voinovich is just another worthless spinless incompetent that needs to be knocked to the ground and have the boots put to him before we defeat him in his next primary.

RINOs, go home.

[nikos1121]

I listened to it too, and I am a Hannity fan, but as an interviewer... Hannity has an axe to grind and he pushes and pushes with it. The senator said he:

1. Didn’t read the entire bill
2. Didn’t read the Heritage Paper

Hannity didn’t lighten up but wanted to emabarras the Senator.

He did this last night with a radio talk show host. Can’t remember his name. His point was that Hillary should be asked about her husband’s mistresses in order to get the female vote as the neglected housewife etc. The radio guy said, she would be better off not to answer those questions, but to say, “Im running not my husband.” Hannity would not let up but kept asking.

In short I don’t blame the Senator for hanging up. Hannity did not conduct a good interview but a trap.

nick

[am452]

“That was Sean’s finest hour in broadcasting. No wishy-washy, feel good, my good friend BS.”

Sean has gained me back as a hard core listener once again with his hardcore stance against the shamnesty bill. Now if he could get the riled up on Republican out of control spending and big government programs.