(Note: This is the last column in the series.)

Pope Benedict XVI said in 2005, "Absolutizing what is not absolute but relative is called totalitarianism." To conclude this series of papers, I will say that Sean Hannity's political ideology unconsciously demonstrates a new form of totalitarianism which defines right and wrong in an artificially narrow sense; regards national security as the greatest good, elevating it above human rights and the law of God; accepts the coexistence of American big government, big business, and a swollen military to achieve the objective of national security; blends sin and sinners into a single homogeneous mass that must be defeated to preserve our national security; and intolerantly refuses to admit into its framework any clear facts that contradict its methods or call into question its objectives.

(NOTE: The essay below was the first installment of my first article written for publication. Although originally drafted as one long piece in March 2005, this article remains relevant three years later. Both Parts One and Two previously appeared in the Ethical Spectacle (February and March 2006, at www.spectacle.org/0206/sout ar.html and www.spectacle.org/0306/sout ar2.html). The article provides a condensed summary of my beliefs about terrorism and how it should be addressed. Check back later for Part Two.)

Mr. Hannity (Quoting Jeane J. Kirkpatrick): "'[The] Carter administration...actively collaborated in the replacement of moderate autocrats friendly to American interests with less friendly autocrats of extremist persuasion.'" (p. 66)

My response: This statement typifies a biased Republican slant on history, which ho