Sean Hannity and Wally George

I debated whether or not this article should be about Sean Hannity or Wally George; ultimately I gave it to Sean, because as you are about to see, Sean Hannity is the second coming of Wally George, just as Jesus was the second coming of “God” and his followers are referred to as “Christians.”

The above metaphor stretches beyond semantics, just as Jesus was able to reach a wider audience than god alone, so has Sean succeeded where Wally has faltered. Of course Wally George had a pretty incredible audience in spite of the fact that he was on a UHF channel. To maintain this audience and to publicize himself, he had to center the reason for public interest within the show itself –there had to be something within the event that caused viewers to tell friends about it, host viewing parties and attend the show.

Wally George - Hot Seat

Wally George espoused the triumphant conservative rhetoric of the 1980’s, and all of the free market capitalism that implies. Of course, he also brought his own fundamental religious morality to the table and used his forum as an almost weekly battle against personal temptation and sin. Temptation and sin in the forms of flag burners, strippers, communists, the reverend bud green (who someone needs to do a piece about ASAP) etc. The show was a veritable Pentecostal summation of The Temptation of Saint Anthony by way of The Johnny Carson Show). Obviously Sean Hannity does in no way cheapen his show by adding the gonzo Jerry Springer elements that Wally did, but he is notable in today’s cultural landscape solely because the values he purveys are identical to Wally’s.

Where Wally raged and ranted, Sean is smug and provocative, this is because he does not have to win anyone over, he is on Fox News, he’s already preaching to the choir. Wally was one of many divergent voices in a pre-cable landscape, he had to shout himself hoarse to be heard, and continue shouting to maintain the interest of his audience. This barker’s mentality hearkens back to P.T. Barnum and is continually relegated to the fringes of television and therefore has no need to be exhibited on a “major” cable news network. But, if the politics of Sean and Wally were itemized, sans delivery, they would not almost match –they would be found to be identical. The idolization of Ronald Reagan, prayer in schools, the outlawing of abortion, etc; Sean Hannity is easily the closest Fox gets to appeasing the evangelical, clinic bombing audience.
Of course Sean never loses his cool in the way that the more moderate Bill O’Reilly does; but a show this combustible has to have a release valve, and this release valve comes in the form of the “hate hannity” portion at the end of the show. The conservative rage, of the show and its viewers must always be dissimulated through the medium of the angry, inarticulate left. This point brings me to the impetus for my article.

Sean Hannity

While reading an anti-war, anti-American blog on myspace, I read a fiery exchange between a “moderate” liberal who felt himself to be a “radical” liberal and a grammatically challenged anarchist. This exchange brought to my attention the fact that throughout the spectrum of the left there is constant bickering and second-guessing. The same cannot be said for the right, if someone does not fit the agenda they are generally discredited, but never openly renounced. By the same standard, if US conservatives were as stratified as liberals Ron Paul would’ve been the same threat to John McCain this last election as Ralph Nader was to Al Gore in 2000.
Christianity is what basically strengthens the homogeneity of conservatives. Of course not everyone is cut out to be a Christian; America was founded by very strict Christians and has had the attendant morality implemented into every cultural, political and economical sphere of its being (see Max Weber’s The Protestant Work Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism) in spite of certain founding fathers’ opposition to such metaphysical tampering. Pretty much any discussion of ‘morality’ is an open invitation to put one’s religious beliefs on the table.

Because Christianity dominates the Republican Party liberals are quick to jump on Republican politicians who are caught in gay sex scandals, since both having sex and being gay are violations of ‘family values’. What I’ve regarded much more interesting is the bloodlust. If Jesus had one fundamental aspect in regards to life here on earth, it was ‘the brotherhood of man’. Yet, it is his followers who are most intent on edging radical Islamics into the realm of exteriority –beyond the group, ‘the other’. Sean Hannity, like Wally before him bristles at the idea of torture not being used on prisoners, Rush Limbaugh, an almost Sadean caricature of excess, recommended the execution of ‘drug addicts’ up until the time of his arrest for narcotic abuse. Such blatant contradiction makes Ann Coulter’s declaration that John Walker Lindh is a prime example of liberal colleges, simple and rhetorical –what part of Radical Islam is liberal Ann? Is it the scarves?

Since I have a rather dim view of humanity I don’t see why Liberals are not fond of torture as well, but can conjecture that it doesn’t have the same allure for them as it would for someone who knows, from their upbringing, that it is fundamentally ‘wrong’ and, hence, irresistible. If Jesus was an idealist who wanted to “unify” people, his followers seem to be inherently divisive; this is analogous to Baudrillard’s analysis of nature preservationists setting up designated wildlife parks as organic memorials to the now nonexistent wild.

It’s probably better to not get caught up in an imaginary debate with an entertainer over religious matters, especially since Sean has a wide variety of ideological axes to grind, and IS in fact an entertainer. Newscasters ARE entertainers, it’s time we accept that; politicians deal with politics, philosophers with philosophy, and entertainers with entertaining their respective demographic, it can’t be helped if the line is a little blurry between these three categories. But avoiding the polemic is at the forefront of my agenda, since, as Junger said: “opposition is collaboration.” I do not want to be a collaborator (with the media) instead I would opt for a structural gap like Melville’s ‘Bartleby’ and his ‘I would prefer not to.’ Zizek describes this stance as ‘clearing the table, of acquiring a distance toward the existing social universe’ and moving ‘to a politics which opens up a new space outside the hegemonic position and its negation.’ (Slavoj Zizek ‘The Parallax View’)

Wally George never had to put an ‘I love my country, but fear my government’ bumper sticker on his car, he could only thrive while the GOP was in power. In his wake Limbaugh, Hannity and O’Reilly sprang up, thriving on opposition. And in that way Wally is different from his offspring. But, of all his children only one can claim an absolute personal fidelity to the idea of America that Wally had, and that is Hannity, it’s time Wally got his due.