People have been very passionate about the candidate they’ve decided to support, which is understandable. They put a lot of work, sweat equity and finances into a campaign because they believe in their candidate. But this article, “Blame Sean Hannity for supporting Cruz and helping Hillary, NOT for supporting Trump“, is an example of how passions can get out of control and sometimes lead to irrational thinking.
The article immediately placed blame on Hannity as supporting Cruz on the birther issue and then shifted into a legal argument as to why the author, Michael Gaynor, believed Cruz was ineligible to be President of the United States. In a nutshell, his argument was that Hannity misrepresented Cruz’ eligibility and therefore, is helping to elect Hillary Clinton.
Let’s be clear. Hannity didn’t misrepresent, misinterpret or misunderstand the U.S. Constitution concerning Ted Cruz’ eligibility to be President. Neither did roughly 25 percent of the Republican party who are Cruz supporters. Hannity simply provided his opinion. Giving an opinion doesn’t mean he ‘supported’ one candidate over another. It means he had an opinion on a particular issue. The alleged crime Gaynor accused Hannity of doesn’t exist because one can’t place the burden of electing a President at the feet of a tv and radio talk show host for merely giving an opinion. The candidates, voters, delegates, and ultimately the electoral college, might have something to do with the process.
Clearly Mr. Gaynor wanted to present a persuasive argument concerning Cruz’ eligibility; however, using Hannity as an attention grabber is not the way to win the birther case. He’s not the only talk show host that didn’t buy into the Cruz birther argument. By singling him out, the focus was more on Hannity than on the subject matter, which was the eligibility of Cruz. Besides, it’s not Hannity’s responsibility to cater to Gaynor’s illogical fears. He has a right to free speech like any other citizen in this country. Contrary to popular belief, Hannity should not have to suppress his honest opinion and take sides with Trump on the birther issue in an effort to defeat Hillary Clinton. This half-baked analogy was completely based on a series of events that may or may not happen.
Gaynor’s blame game was based on assumptions that Cruz will be the Republican nominee, challenged and eventually declared ineligible. That has yet to be seen. As of today, Cruz hasn’t been challenged before the U.S. Supreme Court and in all sincerity, they probably wouldn’t take the case. But if this ever becomes a real challenge and Cruz is the nominee, it doesn’t lay at the feet of Sean Hannity. There’s probably a few things he could be blamed for, but this isn’t one of them.