3 votes

Hannity Snowballs

Now clearly, Hannity will never get over the snowball thing. He will, and we should expect him to, bring it up every single time RP is on with him.

Just to throw something out there:

What if RP embraces the snowball thing. Clearly Hannity only mentions it to bring RP down and to associate him and his campaign with negativity, and violence, etc.

What if RP went on the offensive? What if RP mentions the snowballs before Hannity does?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Example Interview:

Hannity: And joining me now is Congressman and Presidential Candidate Ron Paul. Congressman, Good Evening.

RP: Nice to be with you Sean. And I must say, support for our Campaign is growing everyday; they're enthusiastic as ever and they're resting their throwing arms for more snowballs. [RP smiles and chuckles a bit in a joking way].

Hannity: [Fake Hannity Laugh] That's right. Last campaign your supports pummeled me with snowballs. And I didn't even do anything to them. (Hannity, as confused as ever because RP preempted him with the snowballs, quickly changes the subject.) Well look, you're in congress, what do you think is going to happen with the Debt Ceiling limit?

RP: [RP responds and interview gets under way.]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, if RP would do this preemptive strike on Hannity and continue to do so every time he does an interview with Hannity, the negativity associated with this will dissipate.

Case in point: If Hannity brings up snowballs, Hannity gains upper hand. If RP brings it up, RP gains upper hand.

RP needs not to play into Hannity's trap and run away from the issue. RP needs to embrace the issue (in a joking way) and needs to gain the upper hand.

In other words, RP needs to turn an ISSUE into a NON-ISSUE by facing it and addressing it FIRST every single time RP is on the air with Hannity.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Dr Paul should say I'm sorry about that,

but I can't control emotional actions of my supporters. When people see their freedom and liberty, as well their prosperity being destroyed, they tend to get emotional towards those who are selling the fascist agenda that's causing it. Maybe, if you actually read the Constitution you claim to support, you might question the direction both parties are leading us, instead of just selling ideological agendas for personal economic gain. Sean, if Congress would of chosen my plan after the attacks of 9/11, we would be in much better shape both economically, militarily, and politically. My, Marque and Reprisal, would of funded a reward for intelligence on the on the location of or the elimination of bin Laden. It would of shown the world, if you mess with the USA, we will quickly hunt you down and eliminate you. But, with a corporate fascist ideology, as the neocon's promote, that plan doesn't create the money and the plutocratic power that wars create. Now, the war on Iraq, was a treasonous war, as the reasons behind it have been proven to be complete fabrications, that the neocons sold to America. We propped up Saddam, gave him WMD's to attack Iran, forced him into large debt, and when he refused to relinquish his oil resources to pay those fabricated debts, he had to go. It's time to end the empire, bring our troops home, and secure our borders, not the borders around the world.

great idea.

comment take 2.

i think that ron can easily take matters into his own hands should he decide to.

wow.....i SO have to watch what i'm saying it's terrible.
that is - should i ever hope to have my comments kept in place instead of deleted like what just happened.

pretty much crap ass - because i've seen PLENTY of other comments - much much worse than i would ever dream of - stick around without pause.

what's the point?
REALLY?

How does that make sense

Why would he keep bringing it up every time he is on there? I would talk about it once and if it comes up again I would simply laugh it off as

"are you still not over that?"

Have you NEVER been in a snowball fight before? Seriously get over it.......

I mean why keep going over it like it matters, hannity is a prick anyways and he knows it. If all he has to complain about is snowballs then so be it.

I would tell hannity this though, if he keeps bringing it up someone might get the idea to do it anytime they see him.

Snowball fights are fun damn it lol. Maybe Ron Paul can go in WITH a snowball or two and they can have at it lol. get a smile out of that evil hannity lol.

http://shelfsufficient.com - My site on getting my little family prepped for whatever might come our way.

http://growing-elite-marijuana.com - My site on growing marijuana

That's a way to do it. Come

That's a way to do it. Come in the studio with a few snowballs saying "the last time I was on, you brought up the fact that you got caught up in a snowball fight with my supporters. Well, my supports wanted to show you there are no hard feelings and as we go to commercial break, you and I can engage in a little snowball fight ourselves."

Just SOMETHING. RP needs to face this issue head on and not get played by Hannity. Cause Hannity is only mentioning snowballs to try and hurt RP. Once the issue is settled FIRST by RP, the issue will finally be over.

Until then, Hannity will continue to say snowballs in an ill manner.

My God's not dead; he's surely alive. And he's living on the inside roaring like a lion.

totally agree normltexas

And it would be a great lead into him talking about being the only congressman to hit a home run and speak about his "throwing arm" and how it might not be wise for hannity to ATTEMPT to take a snowball to the dome from Ron Paul.

http://shelfsufficient.com - My site on getting my little family prepped for whatever might come our way.

http://growing-elite-marijuana.com - My site on growing marijuana

Instead of pre-empting

he could just fill in the rest of the story.

So Hannity brings it up first:

"...and your supporters threw snowballs at me even though I didn't do anything to them."

Dr. Paul:

"Well, while I don't condone it, I guess some supporters felt I wasn't receiving fair coverage and couldn't help showing frustration."

I think this way puts Dr. Paul in the clear in people's minds as they can see he didn't approve of it, while putting the spotlight back on the media so viewers ask, well why wasn't he receiving fair coverage?

Easy enough. He just needs to say....

"Well you know how kids are, it even happens at home in Dallas sometimes! I don't condone what the supporters did, but I can understand they can sometimes get frustrated with biased coverage."

"By the way, the Federal Reserve threw a few curve balls this week and I nailed em on it during our hearing. I just think the Federal Government's gotten a bit too big, this whole banking circus.

I'm running for President and looking to change that by the way! We need to get back to sound money. Speaking of which, how are the Mets faring this year? Heard they ran into a few buzz balls of their own!"

This way Dr. Paul has ingeniously diffused the whole thing, made a joke about it, gotten more air-time and also easily won more viewers to look his website up.

Meh. RP has been on the

Meh. RP has been on the loosing end of that way for four years. The way you say he should handle it, RP has done exactly that and look where its gotten him: Hannity says snowballs every interview.

I do agree, however, that somewhere in the conversation RP should say "Well, while I don't condone it, I guess some supporters felt I wasn't receiving fair coverage and couldn't help showing frustration."

My God's not dead; he's surely alive. And he's living on the inside roaring like a lion.

It bothers me that ANYONE would think snowballing is violence!

Snowball fights are considered FUN in my neck of the woods! That being said, your suggestion is right on!

actually....

i was there in new hampshire and it wasn't pretty.

this is the second time i've had to post this comment and i appreciate my words not being deleted. michael? was there something i said wrong?

it the truth not good enough for people here now?

really?

are you cereal?

cheerios? anyone?

want some sugar with the truth?
will that keep my comment on board? above board?

my original comment was concerning hannity's trip from the italian restaurant to his hotel.

and my POINT was that out of hundreds of supporters - happily and positively sign waving on the main street in concord - about 40 or 50 of us were close enough to witness hannity leaving the restaurant where the faux poll was being conducted.

so yes....snowball fights are great in jest - but given the slant against ron by hannity and fox just prior to this occurrence - those of us who were in the moment didn't really see the opportunity as one to miss.

i sure hope that whomever deleted my first post here understands what i'm saying - that i don't condone violence - never will - but what happened happened - and there's no need to edit out the truth.

thanks.

Well unless you are Hannity

Well unless you are Hannity or an under cover off duty cop, then they are violence. LOL! If you are normal Americans, then some silly snowballs are fun and a laughing matter.

My God's not dead; he's surely alive. And he's living on the inside roaring like a lion.

Tell that to the Boston massacre!

Personally I like that Ron's supporters snowballed Hannity. A bunch of angry patriots threw ice balls at British redcoats prompting the Boston massacre, whichwas important buildup to the revolution,

lol I agree

The only thing bruised on Hannity was his ego.

We should

We should offer to let him throw snowballs at a bunch of Ron Paul supporters as some sort of fundraiser or event

The Hannity Snowball Reparations Crew.

That's a novel approach. Who wants to volunteer? It would be sweet to hear RP say in response to the inevitable rehashing of the snowball incident:
"You know, Sean, a group of my supporters agree that that was wrong, and have volunteered to let you throw some snowballs at them if that will make you feel better. They really do think of everything!"

Or how about this

Dr. Paul immediately state that he is sorry for his supporters throwing snow balls at him because of his dishonest tactics post debate. Then follow it up with a "I never condone violence, and I certainly hope the ones throwing snow balls at you were not hired by Fox to make me look bad; you know, since Murdoch has been found to be a cheat".

Always remember:
"It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds." ~ Samuel Adams
If they hate us for our freedom, they must LOVE us now....

Stay IRATE, remain TIRELESS, an

Some valid points

Combing through your sarcasm, you make a valid point. 'Cause knowing Hannity, he won't let it go as quickly as in the example interview. RP should stress that he does not condone violence BUT he should NOT "immediately state that he is sorry for his supporters throwing snow balls at him because of his dishonest tactics post debate."

No apologies should made. And most certainly, RP should NOT start out by condemning the snowballs, rather he should make light of the situation.

For if RP were to "immediately state that he is sorry..." that move by RP still plays right into Hannity's playbook. RP is on the run from the issue.

My God's not dead; he's surely alive. And he's living on the inside roaring like a lion.

haha true

haha true

Now you see how the game is played, is always played...

Ron Paul needs to bring it up as a joke first, correct you are.

He needs to make friends with these Media pundits even though pretty much not any of them are good. They're real slick talkers, though.

A joke or two gets Ron Paul the nod so he can pitch his message. He can pitch his message right off the top of an interview, in one short blast. That way the opposition can't paint anything out of his comments. Further, its a trick that gives him more extra airtime.

Agreed

I saw somewhere buried in these posts the other day that RP needs to always be bringing up the fact that he is running for office by stating "And as President I would..."

This poster is correct. RP needs to, as the saying goes, Always Be Closing. He needs to have one point that he can always "Call Back" to. And this Call Back point would be that he is running for office.

Once he opens with a joke about snowballs with Hannity, then States his purpose, make Calls Backs to his purpose, he can close the interview with confidence.

And then, Rise and Repeat!

My God's not dead; he's surely alive. And he's living on the inside roaring like a lion.

Rinse, Lather, Repeat is right.

He needs to pitch his "sales pitch" like he was selling real estate, and they'll line up in droves.

If he actually said Rupert Murdoch is a cheat on the air (and it wasn't censored) that would score some points too....not sure if such remarks are allowed.