Senate will be forced to CRY AGAIN.
VIDEO Golden Oldie
(Pardon the Boob introducing the clip.)
Posted on 06/28/2007 6:21:44 AM PDT by KayEyeDoubleDee
| http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?vid=722432 | ||
| http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4818904264344912483 | ||
| http://soapbox.msn.com/?user=7196056434680278535 | ||
| http://dl4.ohshare.com/v/1003455/voinovich_hannity.mp3.html | ||
| http://s24.quicksharing.com/v/4628315/voinovich_hannity.mp3.html | ||
| http://www.bestsharing.com/files/PcqK1Jw296513/voinovich_hannity.mp3.html | ||
| http://www.mooload.com/new/file.php?file=file01/280607/1183031081/voinovich_hannity.mp3&s=t | ||
| http://www.filefactory.com/file/ebaeea/ |
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.
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.
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 -
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?
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 -
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."
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.
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.
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.
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 -
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 -
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 -
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?
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..."
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.
To expect him to actually know what is in this Amnesty Bill and what its associated cost, how dare Sean not to bow down to the good senator.
Let’s hope.
I disagree with you comment. As a senator he is supposed to know what is in the bill before he votes on it-or decides he is in facor of it. Who has not read the headlines across the internet/papers etc on what this bill will cost the US taxpayer? It’s been posted everywhere. He sounded incompetant at the very least.
What was the trap, enlighten us pls.
To show the Senator doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground?
Just another reason the goverment will move towards control of talk radio.
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!
I think it was clear that the senator “didn’t” read the entire bill and “didn’t” read the heritage report. HE SAID SO. End of story. Hannity THEN beat it to death. He needed to go on to the next question.
I’m a Hannity fan, but as an interviewer, he’s getting very one sided and risks losing his credibility.
He didn’t WANT to embarras the senator... the senator did that on his own. IF you are going to be interviewed and you have even an inkling of an idea of the host or content of the show, you should at the very least be prepared to give some rational answers. This senator sounded like a bonifide usda approved idiot- and Hannity had nothing to do with that.
read later
Voinovich and Lugar. Charter members of the Grab Your Ankles faction of the Republican Party. Moderates to the end.
I think it was clear from the get go, that the senator didn’t know his @ss from a hole in the ground if he had his finger in it.
I’m saying as an interviewer, he was in the past much more impartial and patient. As of late he comes in with one talking point with the objective of getting his guest to agree with him. This is not a credible approach in the long run.
He got what he wanted at the beginning of the interview when the senator admitted that he was NOT fully informed. Okay? Then go on to the next question, and make him look even dumber if that’s your objective.
That hardball idiot Matthews does this sort of thing all the time. The senator was right to bail out when he did.
VIDEO Golden Oldie
(Pardon the Boob introducing the clip.)
I listened to the interview in the car yesterday. I heard the tone of the voices. I don’t think the senator was angry or upset etc. in the beginning or even at the end. Frustrated? Yes. He’s fielded tougher questions than this, and when you listened to the interview Hannity continually interrupted him. LET the idiot speak.
Hannity achieved what he wanted early on. He should have gone on to the next question. And then after words HE sounded like a little kid trying to explain why HE wasn’t the BAD guy.
LIsten to his interviews. They are not as sharp and open as they were a year ago. He is becoming extremely biased when he doesn’t need to be.
That’s basically why very few dems or libs will go on his show.
Only a trap because the Senator was not telling the truth or at least trying to avoid telling the truth. If he stated that he had not read the bill or that he had not done a cost analysis, he wou8ld not have gotten into this argument. It was only when he tried to equivocate and then attack Hannity with diversions that the interview went South...
Senator V is an “L”
I heard it live and nearly dropped my uppers.......
“Only a trap because the Senator was not telling the truth.”
I think Hannity new from the beginning that the Senator was ill and mis-informed. His objective was to make that very clear to the audience. In that he succeeded. As an interviewer he doesn’t let his guest speak. I hate that, whether I’m talking to my kids or anyone. Let the person speak.
Another aspect of this that I find appalling, in addition to the fact that he hasn’t even read as much of the bill as the people on this forum, and he’s voting on it, is that his staff LET HIM GO ON WITH HANNITY WITHOUT TELLING HIM THE HUTCHISON AMENDMENT HAD BEEN TABLED. That is just incredible. He voted on it, he didn’t know the outcome, and NO ONE TOLD HIM. And then it comes out in the wash that this guy has been in politics for 40 years and DOESN’T know what the Fairness Doctrine is. This is one ignorant and narrowly focused elected official.
“He’s done after this term and he knows it. He’ll retire before he’ll sack up and face the music.”
And he’ll retire a wealthy man, with Mexicans tending to his lawn. So, he couldn’t care less, hence the arrogance.
Sadly, with all the Republicans have done, and are doing nationally, and on a state level in Ohio... Ohio is turning blue.
And I am NO Hannity fan, and the questions could have been better, but Voinovich sank himself, BEFORE and WITHOUT Sean's questions:.
He sounded stupid on the Fairness Doctrine, and he was clueless on the fate of an amendment he had just VOTED for.
but he’s been in this business for forty years and he’s not going to be pushed around. /s
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.