Will Sean Hannity sell his soul for an exclusive interview?
So when the “Dog” drops the N-bomb five times in 45 seconds, Hannity thinks that’s just “salty” language?
The Fox News host had an exclusive interview with Duane “The Dog” Chapman after the National Enquirer publicized the controversial bounty hunter’s racially charged phone conversation with his estranged son, Tucker Chapman. In the audio tape, the “Dog” repeatedly uses the N-word in a vile and profane manner, pleading with his son to end his relationship with a black woman.

But as many public persons have learned, if you grant an exclusive interview to certain media personalities, you can expect more than favorable coverage, an empathetic ear and someone to tout your damage-control spin.  

To be upfront, Hannity in no way endorsed the use of the N-word. On the other hand, he repeatedly attempted to rationalize what was otherwise an irrational, ugly and racist telephone exchange. There are no excuses. Apologize. Ask for forgiveness. And move on.

Here’s the rundown of “Hannity & Colmes” Nov. 2:

The show begins by Hannity airing an “extended” clip of the “Dog’s” conversation with his son, which, for any one who has watched similar racial controversies play out recently knows, is the pretext for the “context” excuse. (“No, I didn’t mean what I was caught on tape saying. I was really taken out of context.”)

From there, Hannity downplays the seriousness of the issue and the remarks:

We know what Duane “Dog” Chapman does. I mean, He’s on the street. He uses salty language. He admits it. And this is a part of that language. And he wanted everybody to know it is the equivalent of him of cursing not an insult of people based on race.

So when the “Dog” drops the N-bomb five times in 45 seconds, Hannity thinks that’s just “salty” language?

No. Salty are the double cheeseburgers I get from my local McDonalds. This was abhorrent.

Later, Hannity built on the defense the “Dog” professed in the audiotape: That the “Dog” and his pups use the N-word but not in a defamatory way.

OK, you can have a reasonable argument or discussion about that. When is it OK and not OK to use the N-word? Who can say it? Where? And in what context?

But once you’ve actually heard what the “Dog” said in the taped<ul> conversation, the discussion on that topic is moot

It's not because she's black, it's because we use the word ni**er sometimes here. I'm not gonna take a chance ever in life of losing everything I've worked for 30 years because some fucking ni**er heard us say ni**er and turned us in to the Enquirer magazine.

You see, it’s that second “ni**er” that does him in. “Some fucking ni**er?” In this instance, it’s not just what was said or even who the speaker was but how it was said. Those words together signify that this woman is not only beneath “Dog,” but that in his own eyes, she was not on the same homo sapien plane as him: just “some fucking ni**er.”

To top that off, Hannity seems to proceed setting up the “Dog’s” attorney to attack the black woman who–
at no fault of her own, mind you – is at the center of this controversy.

Here’s Hannity:

As we played the extended tape tonight, there seems to be a suggestion here that –
 and I’m reading into this and maybe you can confirm or corroborate this Brook (Hart, the “Dog’s” attorney) – That she might have been, that he (the “Dog”) felt that she was trying to set him up in some way.

The unproven allegation, which the “Dog” expounds on in the “extended” cut of his rant, is that his son’s black girlfriend planned to wear a wire to catch his family uttering racist words.  Ergo, to prevent this from ever happening, the “Dog” had a genius plan: bar the black girl from ever being near his son or his family.

Here’s another suggestion, “Dog”: If you don’t want to be caught on tape using the N-word in front of a black person, don’t say it in front of a black person – or better yet, don’t say it at all.

By the way, Chapman’s attorney did a helluva job proving that the “Dog” isn’t a racist on “Hannity & Colmes.”

How so?

Well, the “Dog” is not a racist, the lawyer argued, because his minister is black. His workout partner is black.  And – here’s the kicker – his hairstylist is black.

In other words, the “Dog” is using the I-have-black-friends defense. Who would have thunk it? If only Hitler had a Jewish stylist for that toothbrush mustachio of his he could have avoided all these erroneous charges of anti-Semitism.

That, of course, was only an analogy. In all fairness, the “Dog” is not anywhere near Hitler’s hemisphere; all he used were some nasty words. The absurdity of his lawyer’s rationale, though, remains.

Lastly, of course, Hannity wouldn’t end the show without polarizing this already polarized controversy in an attempt to make a political swipe against the left.

Here are Hannity’s closing comments at the end of the first segment:

It’s not just Duane that has been caught using the N-Word. Politicians. Rock stars. Comedians. We’re going to discuss the repercussions and debate whether the N-Word is destroying America.

And who is one of the mug shots Hannity has displayed? That of West Virginia Sen. Robert Byrd, a Democrat and ex-Ku Klux Klan grand wizard who referred to “white ni**ers” in a 2001 interview on Fox News.  

It is literally possible to write a segment by segment dissertation on all the faults in this single broadcast. For instance, Hannity, Colmes & Co. also repeatedly defends the “Dog” by saying he’s using the “language of the street.” Plus, Congress of Racial Equality National Chairman Roy Innis, a black man who spoke with Chapman earlier, said, the “Dog” wasn’t a racist because he actually used the N-word.

Yes, you read that correctly.

“I suspect that the real racists would not use that word,” Innis sagely proclaimed. “He would think about it. He would feel it. But he would not utter the word. The odds are greater.”

“Dog,” do what you ask so many of your bounties to do: take responsibility. Make amends. And let’s all move on.Now that the secret's out, I suspect there’s a lot of KKK members who are going to lose their membership cards, huh?

But the issue of more importance now is A&E: What did it know and when did it know it?

A&E runs the “Dog’s” reality TV show chronicling his bounty hunting. It is apparently going under laborious discussions to decide whether to continue production or airing of his show. The one question that A&E should answer to all of its viewers is: Have the “Dog” or his family or his relatives or his employees used N-word and other racist lingo in the past? And is it the case that A&E just later edited those words out of the show to protect its franchise?

More should come out about this. Racial slurs come from somewhere. They rarely happen one day out of the blue, especially not in a rant like this. The “Dog” must have – and actually admits – to using this language before. How come his fans and viewers never saw this side of him before?

As a frequent viewer of the “Dog’s,” I’m doubtful he’s at his inner core a racist who hates black people. But does he have prejudices? Absolutely.  

The “Dog” has asked for forgiveness. I personally forgive him. But using the “context” defense, the “I-have-black-friends” defense and the attack the victim routine is making that much harder to do.

“Dog,” do what you ask so many of your bounties to do: take responsibility. Make amends. And let’s all move on.
[Sandra Rose Blog, TMZ]