Added note on this series of abortion stories -- The NY Times had basically the same story yesterday as did Countdown on Tuesday.

Buried deep down in the Times' article however is this about the partial-birth appeal:

"In fact, it would have been highly unusual for the court to turn down the appeal. A lower court's invalidation of a federal statute has an almost automatic on the justice's attention..."

Soooo, this is not a special turn of events as the KO's story of Tuesday made it appear. IOW, it's plainly an attempt to whip things up.

Get the context right!

P.S.

I think thou hit it, Friend Dollar!

All Democrats are still in denial about the election, and that is their motivation.

The UAE's port deal (I can't believe Bush won the election...) is more evidence of Bush's inability to govern (Why did he win the election! What did we do wrong!) and today Bush is pulling another one of his illegal imperial tricks (Doesn't the stupid general public know that we should have cakewalked into the presidency...) proving even further that the man-child shouldn't be in office (ARGHHHHHHHHHHH! Ohio, Ohio, Ohio...)

The end of the quote should have read: "...has an almost automatic CLAIM on the justices' attention..."

Did you miss the big graphic that said "The Tony Snow Show"? Truth is you don't verbally say "This is from X show on Y network" every time you goto a clip.

Did you misread what I wrote? I said he avoided telling anyone that the clip was from Fox News. I know it said "tony snow show" on the slide. But, rather unsuaully I thought, no attribution that it came from the evil Fox News.

Since Olby hates Fox, he will slam them at every opportunity, and if he's not delivering a slam, he will avoid mentioning them at all costs.

Just part of Olby's belief that his own loathing for Fox has to be reflected in his "reporting". And that term is used in the loosest possible sense.

Johnny,

Thanks for pointing out the "Mister" form of address that Olbermann uses for President Bush. This has bugged me for quite a while, and believe it is disrespectful.

Quick Note... lots of newscasters in the 90's referred to President Bill Clinton as "Mister Clinton".

Then it should be easy to give us some links to examples.

The libs are almost giddy at the prospect of a civil war in Iraq. The NY Times crowes, "More Clashes Shake Iraq; Political Talks Are in Ruins!" What gleeful wording! "IN RUINS." No chance of repair! It's all over now! Keith is in heaven as he bashes "Mr." Bush.

These people are a--holes with no sense of what is in their best interest as always. Leave it to Keith and the NY Times to congratulate the terrorists on their triumph in subverting the political process. Yippeee. Maybe more soldiers will die too -- a win-win scenario for Herr Olbermann and the NY Slimes!

I wondered initially whether the US shouldn't just march in and create three countries out or Iraq -- Kurdistan, Sunnistan and Shiastan. Screw the Turks if they don't want Kurds independent -- they hate us anyway. Minimally, we should tell all these a--holes to play nice or be separated, at which point the Sunnis will have a desert without oil while the Kurds and Shia will be wealthy. Let the jerks in the MSM complain about it all they want -- they hate us anyway.

Guys, everyone refers to the President as "Mr. Bush" at some point. Even O'Reilly, John Gibson, and Brit Hume. But they'll first refer to "President Bush", then maybe "Mr. Bush" or "the President" later on in their discussion.

But it sounds like K.O. does it exclusively, from what is written above - maybe he NEVER refers to "President Bush"? When I used to watch him, I did note that he rarely referred to
"President Bush".

And BTW, did you hear O'Reilly's "most ridiculous item of the day"? He's trying to get KO booted from MSNBC, stating that Phil Donahue's ratings were actually higher, and that Donahue should be allowed back on in that time slot for the good of the network. Check out the petition at: http://billoreilly.com/petitions/viewpetition?petitionID=571931160096981981

Bringing back Phil Donahue is NOT what I want. I am glad Phil is sitting at home, in purgatory with the evil Marlo.

I say give the 8pm slot to a crew of school newspaper reporters -- they might be original and they might try to understand the material they present. Even better yet, they should sell the time slot to the United Arab Emirates for use as they see fit.

Mr. Dollar,

How can I relay correspondence for your eyes only? Robert Cox is the only email address I see.

You can reach me at johnnydollarATmindspring.com or johnnydollar01ATgmail.com
You know what to do with the "AT".

Fox News is giddy over the prospect of Civil War in Iraq

http://mediamatters.org/items/200602240003

"All-Out Civil War in Iraq: Could It Be a Good Thing?"

I just wish MSNBC would start reflecting Granny's POV that the far left now has its own anchorman/spokesman/apologist in Olbermann.

I think O'Reilly could tolerate Keith's obsessive ill-will if MSNBC would start promoing Countdown as a show geared to that segment of the pop.

Johnny writes, "Olby brought in another MSM reporter, Michael Weiskopf of Time, for a predictable go-round. Iraq needs a tyrant, according to Mike, to hold the country together."

So this is what lefties have come to after decades of wailing that the U.S. supported dictators around the world as long as those dictators were hostile to the U.S.'s greatest threat-- the communists.

God almighty.

"And it was a double-header for the Soros site, which will soon pay Olby back by giving him the agreed-upon publicity."

That didn't take long. They've already got the video up. So predictable.

LMFAO! This site really brings a smile to my face. I think I hear the rest of the world & KEITH laughing at you as well. ;-)

This site is hillarious!

Hey BILLY, you're just mad because Keith shows how much of an ass you are. Keep up the good work Keith!

pretty stupid site, i will assure i will ignore the content of this site.

Yes and you're all doing such a GOOD job ignoring it so far...

I suppose it's up to me to try to convey to these Einsteins that it's somewhat contradictory to go to the trouble of telling folks that you don't take them seriously or that you're ignoring them... when you've bothered to write to them in the first place...

Yeah, guys...we can tell.... :D

Welcome to Olbermann Watch. We're glad to have pissed you off...

They're so intent on lowering the level of discourse that they don't seem to understand that we do it quite well on our own.

> The libs are almost giddy at the prospect of a civil war in Iraq.

Really? Perhaps you can explain how come Faux News had "All out civil war in Iraq. Could it be a good thing?" on one of their programs...

So Fox news says something completely stupid, and that means Olby is off the hook? Just like Olby -- Fox is the enemy until they reinforce a dopey lib view, then they get quoted! Typical Olbyfan move.

Typical con, has no ability to comprehend what he reads...

In other words.... Swash doesn't address the point that was made because he truly doesn't comprehend it... :D

I can read quite well. If you want to believe that liberals have not been patting themselves on the back at each sign of strife in Iraq, I'm not going to stop you. As for the absurd Fox News item, so what? Is Fox News the voice for all libertarians, conservatives and republicans? If Fox has Jimmy Carter on, does that make the channel a liberal haven? MSLSD has Pat Bucchanan on, does that make MSLSD an isolationist conservative channel? The point I was making is that the ABSOLUTE GLEE at the potential for a civil war in Iraq has been flowing out of the New York Times and Keith Olbermann since day one.

What is GOOD for the Democrats is BAD for the country and what is GOOD for the country is BAD for the Democrats. Democrats and liberals do not care. They will gladly sacrifice their own country for the chance to regain power.

No, no. I think the Conservatives have done a pretty good job of sacrificing this country to try and stay in power. I wonder how well the conservatives (Mr. Libby, Mr. Frist, et al) will do governing from prison?

Peppin,

You have Frist going to prison, hunh? Yeah, I will take what you say seriously!

Frist was recently named one of the 13 most corrupt politicians, and, just in case you're interested, under §10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 any person who trades in securities for personal profit, using confidential information misappropriated in breach of a fiduciary duty to the source of the information, may be held both civilly and criminally liable. Yeah, I DO think Frist will end up in prison. Fortunately, might be able to play tennis with Mr. DeLay. Oh wait, that's right... you're going to claim HE'S not corrupt either!

I see --

you have all the evidence to convict Frist before he is even indicted. very nice.

As far as which crazed lefty site you pulled your data from to list Frist as the "thirteenth most corrupt," I won't bother to ask. How can you even say something so stupid? Did they do an empiric "corruption test" on everyone in Congress? He is 13th, not 12th or 14th but 13th! Amazing accuracy! Did the same people who make the "sexiest celebrity in the world," or more likely "worst person in the world," compile that idiotic list? What did the Weekly World News have to say?

Do a nexus search on how many times the term "President Clinton" was used by the mainstream media his first few years in office vs how many times they used the term "President Bush."

It'll astound you.

The typical way they approach this is with a whole bunch of eupehemisms to avoid having to say the actual two words together 'President...Bush" which is apparently very painful for them.

Here are some pronouns
you're more likely to hear:

Mr. Bush
The White House
This Administration
Bush
The President (even that term is in disfavor now compared to the Clinton years.)

It's not just Olby, although he may be more obvious.

Big Daddy

Olby lovers (and libs in general) have descended into outright self-parody with their most recent lunatic junta that somehow Olby is catching up with Fox's O'Reilly.

Think I'm kidding? There's a diary on this topic up on DailyKooKs.

They rejoice that Countdown is now only getting slaughtered by O'Reilly by FIVE TIMES AS MUCH. (Apparently it was even WORSE for msnbc last year lol!)

And they slice & and dice the data to somehow manage to show that Countdown is up 24% while O'Reilly is down 17%.

Countdown actually did the same thing in one of the host's more recent creepy O'Reilly Obsession screeds.

Liberals know little about sports, (it's too manly for them) but perhaps this analogy would make it plain:

When the Chicago Bears are up 45-3 against the Redskins at the end of the 3rd qtr and wind up winning the game 48-6, it is absolutely true that the Redskins point total went up 100% while the Bears only rose 6%.

That's what the Olby/O'Reilly data really means.

I think O'Reilly could capture the entire spectrum of the cable news audience if he would investigate the eerie resemblance Keith Olbermann bares to the giant stone monoliths on Easter Island.

"The truth is out there..."

Big Daddy,

You are missing the bigger picture! Olby is on a ratings tear. Today a .3, tomorrow a 20% increase to a 0.36!

Ratings are only something for people on blogs like these to gloat about.

For Example:

Say I'm an American Idol fan, and one of my friends is a Lost fan, and that friend gives me reasons why Lost is better than American Idol and why American Idol is bad. Sure, I could answer the points he brought up, but it's SOOO much easier to just quote ratings and say that American Idol is obviously superior because more people watch it. This in a sense is what KfK is doing.

I hope that put things in a bit more perspective, because hopefully we all agree that American Idol sucks, despite its ratings.

CABLE NEWS RACE
TUES NITE 2/28/06
HOUSEHOLDS

FNC O'REILLY 1,636,000
FNC HANNITY/COLMES 1,351,000
FNC GRETA 1,255,000
FNC SHEP SMITH 1,037,000
FNC HUME 1,027,000
CNN LARRY KING 708,000
CNN DOBBS 631,000
CNN COOPER 481,000
CNN ZAHN 457,000
MSNBC HARDBALL 413,000
MSNBC OLBERMANN 333,000

GLOATY GLOAT DOUBLE GLOAT

American idol is more entertaining than other shows in its genre /category and it should NOT be compared to news shows. Here, we compare APPLES TO APPLES. Keith alleges he is a newsman, so he is compared to other newsmen and he loses horribly. Case closed, point made, Nonfactor on canvas, blood from nose, gore from ear.

Nonfactor,

The issue of Olbermann and ratings was most recently started by comments that Olbermann made about a 20% increase in his ratings as compared to a decline in O'Reilly's ratings.

But aside from the fact that none of you Olby fans can get it through your skulls that Olbermann started the ratings gloat...let me put your remarks in the light of certain irony by rephrasing a statement you made only hours ago...the rating Olbermann is at still sucks....

KfK, I don't know where Keith claimed he was a newsman, he's a sportscaster doing commentary on the news in a new and different way.

So lets replace American Idol with a different drama TV show that gets more viewers than Lost, but isn't as good; the analogy still works. I can't believe the things people complain about on this hate site.
---
Actually Cecelia, the ratings number game didn't start with Olbermann. O'Reilly loves to quote peoples numbers and how they're dropping, even if they aren't. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqS7W5Sa818

So aside from you being totally mistaken about the first part of your post, it kind of makes your second part seem a bit out of touch.

Nonfactor,

Well, you continue to overlook the original point that Olbermann failed to mention a more favorable poll in his nightly bad news only broadcast...which was Johnny's point at the start.

And now you're interpreting my remark about Olbermann starting the subject of ratings here at Olbermann Watch as somehow being off base because Olbermann was responding to O'Reilly when he gloated!

Sheesh! Well have it your way, Nonfactor. We here at Olbermann Watch are responding to both O'Reilly and to Olbermann.... THe point was Mr. Logic, that we were in a response mode, we had not initiated the gloat pattern....

Today I have come to understand your moniker...

Did you listen to the link I linked you? Let me see if I can get you to understand this: O'Reilly falsely says that certain people's ratings are down when they actually are up, Keith called him on it (and you interpret it as gloating) and Randy called him on it (obvious liberal media bias).

>

Here we have an example of Nonfactor engaging in mission creep and a circular argument combined...

Nonfactor originally argued-- that Olbermann foes should not make a point of Olbermann's ratings in criticising the show, because numbers are no indicator of quality.

When told Olbermann foes are merely responding to points that Olbermann, himself, raised about his numbers.... Nonfactor responds that Olbermann was responding to claims made by Bill O'Reilly....

When countered with --- what does it matter who raised the issue...your original claim ignored the fact that Olbermann foes were responding to Olbermann's own words......

the mission then creeps to... yeah, but he did it because O'Reilly is lying about them...so therefore Olbermann was not gloating when he mentioned a 20 % increase but merely correcting the record...

Then when Olbermann Watchers go back to the damn point that they made in the first place (in response to Olbermann's gloating defense) that Olbermann's motivation for mentioning his ratings is meaningless when Nonfactor's original point ignored the fact that Olbermann foes were merely responding to Olbermann's own gloating defense... and were arguing that 20% increase is meaningless when you are as behind as Olbermann is when compared to O'Reilly...

Nonfactor will no doubt then argue that Olbermann foes shouldn't BRING UP ratings because they are no reflection of quality....

Double sheesh!

Nonfactor wrote:

"I don't know where Keith claimed he was a newsman, he's a sportscaster doing commentary on the news in a new and different way."

He claims his show is a newscast. J$ can tell you all about it.

If you want us to change Keith's genre to "ex-sportscaster doing news in a bizarre way," then he will always be #1 in his category! If you want to switch to "man doing comedy news" then Keith loses to Jon Stewart, Weekend Update, and probably to E Entertainment television. Anyway you slice it, Keith loses.

I'm glad we have an expert on who wins and loses in Television.

Nonfactor writes:

I'm glad we have an expert on who wins and loses in Television."

How were Anonymous points any more subjective than the ones you made about quality vs Nielsen ratings?

Because I backed it up with an example where quality =/= ratings numbers. Even if you think American Idol vs. a Drama is flawed you can do the same with drama vs. drama.

Just saying that ratings = quality with nothing else but opinion means nothing.

Here's an example of Nonfactor's 'backing up his arguments' with compelling logic and analysis...

"I hope that put things in a bit more perspective, because hopefully we all agree that American Idol sucks, despite its ratings."

No, it's not all subjective... Nonfactor is an OBJECTIVE Lost fan... :D

Everything is objective, some more than others. If you're going to say that my example is objective, then I can just say that the people who watch O'Reilly are all objective so it doesn't matter.

The more people who watch a show doesn't mean it is better, if there is proof otherwise please provide me with it and I'll shut up.

I'm saying your statement is the essence of subjective.

Please look up the definition for objective and subjective, einstein.