"Guest host Alison Stewart is easier on ...the eyes..." is written with the true conviction of a sexist. You're right, she's attractive. I'm sure that adds to her press creds. Welcome to our appearance-obsessed general public.

We can speculate until the cows come home about expected voter turnout in Iraq, but how `bout we just wait until Sunday and find out? Talk about a waste of time...

AS IF Armstrong Williams wasn't an intergal part of the Ghallagher discussion... I don't get your umbrage w/ Allison here. Are you suggesting she should have used "a recently busted partisan pundit" instead of naming Armstrong? Or maybe he shouldn't mention Armstrong at all in a story that alleges others will be found guilty of like transgressions?

AS IF Bush's first term failed to prove him to be less interactive with the press than any other recent American president...and AS IF President Bush is known to freely admit mistakes...what's your point? Is Allison biased because she mentions facts? Has she publicly claimed NOT to be baiased, liberal, partisan or any other term you want to use to label her? If other posts here are accurate, then MSNBC feels that "Countdown" represents liberal opinion, balancing Scarborough and the upcoming Tucker Carlson vehicle, right? So what's the problem with Allison stating her opinion, even if it is liberal?

AS IF Rumsfeld doesn't constantly answer questions with questions, rhetorical or otherwise...is it wrong or bad to label such rhetoric as "Rumsfeldian" when he's honed this oft-imitated skill to a high art? Not that you would resort to labelling anyone...heaven forbid.

C, remember the "pots calling kettles black" we discussed? You see, it's not partisan a thing--we all do it. But it's not right, and it's not fair. Now, from following OLBERMANWATCH.COM, it occurs to me that you approach every "Countdown" with the assumption that KO and his minions are at least biased and at most, downright dishonest. I wonder, however, what it would take for to be as fair as you ask KO and others to appear?

Paul,

Well, I'm reading along, thinking you're making some good points and then I come to the end and suddenly see a pot/kettle question as always addressed at me. I'd think you were trying to lobby some sort insult about my figure if I didn't know you couldn't pick me out of a police line-up.

To the pot/kettle reference: Paul, I would have no trouble at all with Keith admitting that he is as non-partisan and I am.

So I'm reading along and then I get to the piece where you argue simultaneously that TJackson shouldn't doubt Allison's partiality because she is basing her analysis of Bush, Rumsfeld... on known facts...( GREAT... then it would be accurate, authenitic and non-pejorative if Dan Rather, from his CBS news anchor desk, flatly stated that Clinton is a womanizing accused rapist...)AND arguing that TJackson also shouldn't complain because Olbermanwatch commentors have already decided that Countdown is a "crypto-liberal fest".

Well, alright then... case closed everybody...

BTW... It doesn't sound sexist for a man to notice and comment on a pretty woman. Or vice versa. It sounds like the most natural thing in the world. Or it at least it still is in red states.

Paul-

Good to hear from you once again. First, the "easier on the eyes and ears" was the full statement and it was intended as a 'shot' at KO. It's easy to go off on tangents when you use parts of sentences instead of reading and interpreting them as a whole.

Second: Where did I label Alsion? What I said was "less opinionated" and "more toned down" than KO. How do you get liberal, biased, partisan from that? The point is to once again point out that this show DOES NOT present 'neutral' news or analysis. It only serves up a daily dose of bush/republican bashing. Why should I argue every point you make? The point here is this: When was the last time the President -or- any republican was presented in a 'good light' on this show? When was the last time a democrat was 'bashed' on this show? That's the point being made. Feel free to point me to all the wonderful things KO or Countdown has presented in favor of President Bush to 'balance' his show. -Or- admit, that by KO's own definition (which we have covered), he is partisan.

P.S.

Thanks, Cecelia.

Hey! Look, everybody!

From my absolutely favoritest site on the whole world wide web!

As usual, as soon as I saw it I knew I wanted one...needed one... can't live without one...

My very own conservative pundit!

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=45208&item=5952770833&rd=1

(If only he were a "buy now"!)

Welcome Trey, and just to add one more point to your response to Paul, KO also claims he is non partisan that his is a news show, not analysis. That makes it much worse in my mind.

That was his justification for pursuing the non story of Ohio vote fraud while no one else was, that he was non partisan...implying anyone not covering the story was partisan.

C: Where did Trey or I mention the words "authentic and non-pejorative"? BTW, I mentioned sexism/appearance because if we're attempting to analyze the relative merit of one's journalistic skills, do we not trivialize them by mentioning physical attributes? It frivolous and some may even think it demeaning. (Others would no doubt be flattered).

I threw the pot/kettle in only because we've been passing it back and forth. I used it only to say that each party tends to indict one another for behaviors we both exhibit. Every time I mention the pot it gets misconstrued. NEW RULE: No more pot/kettle talk!

I DIDN"T ARGUE: that TJackson also shouldn't complain because Olbermanwatch commentors have already decided that Countdown is a "crypto-liberal fest". WHAT I SAID WAS that since "MSNBC (allegedly, acc. to OLBYWATCH) feels that "Countdown" represents liberal opinion, balancing Scarborough and the upcoming Tucker Carlson vehicle," Alison's political leanings shouldn't matter. You contort me so. (And I could only pick you out of a line-up I were allowed an interview).

Trey: To me, your comment "I'm sure Alison earned an 'I'm so proud of you' from KO when she mentioned Armstrong Williams 4 times during the conversation about Maggie Gallagher''seems to indicate that you think she's biased/liberal. If that's not your intention, I withdraw my criticism, however, if intended, although you describe Alison as "less opinionated" and "more toned down" than KO, your implication, seems clear. And yeah, you were kinder and gentler with Alison than you are with Keith--maybe because she's so darn pretty. (Sorry).

Napa, Trey shared a link to the interview in which Olby cited his contentious apolitical leanings and I acknowledged that given those comments, what KO does on "Countdown" is indeed contradictory.

I guess my chagrin stems from the tendency of this site to drone on about how scandalously liberal and biased this program is. The same allegations are repeated and repeated over and over, again, and again...repeatedly. To rebut, I sometimes feel like I should just copy and paste my old posts.

I do enjoy your playful banter, though.

Paul-

hopefully this will clarify my comments re: 'eyes and ears' once and for all. I would have said the exact same thing if a dog sat in that chair and barked for an hour straight. The comment is designed to express my displeasure with KO. That includes the sarcastic tones and facial expressions he makes.

Re: maggie gallagher, the point I find odd is that the discussion was suppose to be based on M.G and yet her name came up less times than Armstrong Williams. So who was the story really about? Why 'bill' it as a Gallagher discussion and then spend all the time talking about A.R? Why not just say... We're going to talk about A.R...AGAIN.. in case you missed every show since the news came out? Further, read the sentence as a whole. It is intended (once again) to display (what I belive to be) KO's satisfaction, not Alison Stewarts.

I do enjoy the banter myself, and encourage your continued input. I would ask, however, that in the future, before you decide what you think I may be implying, you simply ask me, if it is not readily apparent. i would be happy to expand my comments to answer any questions you may have.

And what if she is pretty? read the post. I analyzed the show, not her looks. BTW- The biggest disagreement I had with her was over Ashlee Simpson- doesn't that say enough?

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant: It's just that they know so much that isn't so."
- Ronald Reagan

Paul writes: "I guess my chagrin stems from the tendency of this site to drone on about how scandalously liberal and biased this program is. The same allegations are repeated and repeated over and over, again, and again...repeatedly. To rebut, I sometimes feel like I should just copy and paste my old posts."

Sweety, I plan to keep droning on and on about Countdown and Keith Olbermann unless he changes his spots and stops being so representative of the worst in the media or Bob Cox stops my cookies from downloading (whatever the hell that means...)

If you want to cut-n-repaste your posts have it... I think this site is for the obsessed and if you don't share that, you might tend to get bored. Or you could just hang around to watch me managle the english language. I'm rather certain I'll find new and surprising ways to do that.

Paul, the reason us saying that KO is partisan and not honest about it over and over is that he does this over and over. And we will continue to prove the point, because many will continue to try to deny it. It's like amassing all that evidence the blog world does about the NY Times absurd level of liberal partisanship, no matter how many examples are come up with the Times and the general readership refuse to look at how they are only getting half the news from the Times, at best.

So it is a job that has to be done. We have a Republic to save, after all.