If this website spent half the time debating the topics discussed on Keith's show it did on personal attacks this might actually be a good website. But chances are this won't happen any time soon.

Dear Mr. Dollar,
I have always been confused about one thing. I am under the impression that you are a rightwinger..But you seem to watch Olby every single night. Where I live they show the O'Liely factor at the same time as Olby. I was wondering if you switch from show to show as I do, or do you just watch Olby??? Your favorite liberal Bluefire.

> I am under the impression that you are a rightwinger.

Why is that?

Bluefire, talking about yourself in the third person makes you look crazy(er).

As for Keith, I tried to watch tonight for the sole purpose of commenting on his show. I got through a portion of Dana Milbank's set before "puking" and turning the channel.

First Keith smeared Drudge, then he directly stated that the email from the Good Morning America clown was "let out" by the White House. He didn't even have the sense to qualify his conspiracy theory by claiming it may have come from the White House. Instead he mumbled something about the obvious "timing" of the appearance of the email as absolute proof of it's source! I suppose Keith will soon claim it came from an NSA intercept.

As for the email itself (which this was presumably about, although Keith made it all about the White House), Keith dismissed it as an old document and not a big deal. It took Milbank to correct him and state the obvious -- that the "puke" comment implied a visceral and emotional dislike of Bush that was unprofessional. Milbank's comments were met by Olbermann with an immediate change of topic, and I turned the channel. Trekkie, I guess you'll have to send Dana Milbank some hate mail for contradicting you and Olby.

Everyone should be calm down. We should all take pity on a mentally disabled man. Lets all unite and try to get Olbermann some Phscyciatric help.

Hey J$, I'm curious why didn't you mention what Barbara Bush did to earn Worst Person? Are you afraid that O'Reilly or Mehlman or Drudge may misinterpret your intensions and not pay you this week?

The story can be found in the Houston Chronicle and the blue blogs. I don't know enough about it to say whether it's a fair knock or a bum rap. So I didn't. As for your personal attacks, it's what I expect from an Olbermanniac courageously posting as "anonymous".

It took Milbank to correct him and state the obvious -- that the "puke" comment implied a visceral and emotional dislike of Bush that was unprofessional.

Unless it (the e-mail) had some bearing on his job performance, it's irrelevant and immaterial. How in the world you can make so much out of two sentences from a two-year old internal e-mail boggles me.

"At least four" of the contestants, it was asserted, are actually "professionals". One of them had a bit part on a sitcom, another had a role in a local stage production of "The Lion King". But since none of this is against the rules, where is the "scandal"?

How about false advertising? American Idol claims that their scouring the country for unknown talent. These four people have an unfair advantage in that they have been around professional performers and worked with professional performers, so they know what tricks and techniques to use.

Of the many dogs that did not bark, how about Hillary Clinton's remarks that cracking down on illegal aliens is contrary to Scripture and the teachings of Jesus?

Did she demand that immigration policy be changed to reflect the teachings of Jesus? No? Then there's no conflict. The problem with the mingling of religion and politics is when religion is used to make policy (see faith-based initative). Senator Clinton didn't do that.

Trekkie, Why do you always defend Olberman? He never debates anyone of an opposing view why is that?

Trekkie, Why do you always defend Olberman?

Because, contrary to popular opinion, there are no other shows on cable or network news that hit the progressive side of the political spectrum. I used to like CNN's "Crossfire" until they cancelled it.

He never debates anyone of an opposing view why is that?

Because this isn't "Crossfire" or "Hannity & Colmes" or "Hardball". Does every news program (other than the half-hour network national newscasts) have to have a confrontational format?

Yeah, but he takes potshots at O'Reilly who does bring on guests he diagrees with like Al Sharpton. I want to see Olbermann debate Michael Savage. He'd be eaten for luch! Since when is being on the left Progressive?

OK so we've got some cards on the table. Countdown is a show for the "progressive side" of the spectrum. So much for Olby being "nonpartisan".

> Does every news program (other than the half-hour network national newscasts) have to have a confrontational format?

Olby doesn't have to have a confrontational format to offer both sides of an issue. He can just balance David Brock by inviting Brent Bozell once in a while. For each Al Franken or Jeanine Garafalo appearance, he can bring in a Michael Medved or a Laura Ingraham. If he wants to bring on Daily Kos, then he could reach out to Power Line or Instapundit or the like. He could try a similar balance with all the non journalists he chooses to invite on.

It's not hard at all. Instead of spinning everything to the progressive side, as you admit, he could present more than one side of a story. I doubt he'll do that, because then it wouldn't be The Hour of Spin any more. And what would I write about?

Trekkie:
there are no other shows on cable or network news that hit the progressive side of the political spectrum

Gotta' give credit to Trekkie for admitting the (by now) obvious.

Personally, I don't mind Olbermann pushing a "progressive" agenda when he has Brock or Garofalo or Franken on. What's troubling is the bias presented by the Shusters and Milbanks et al. These are ostensibly objective reporters who shouldn't be pushing any ideology on any show.

That's a lost cause, admittedly.

Funny though that Olbermann still insists that he's got no agenda on his little cable talkfest. In fact, today he said (on the Patrick radio show) that he goes after Democrats as well by citing the fact that two years ago on one show he criticized Kerry for stating that we need "regime change" in Washington.

Great. Two years ago. One show.

Versus 500+ shows since then going after the Republican/Right.

SMG

Johnny Dollar: You can always write about how Olbermann ended up in a Pschyiatric ward!

> Did she demand that immigration policy be changed to reflect the teachings of Jesus? No? Then there's no conflict. The problem with the mingling of religion and politics is when religion is used to make policy (see faith-based initative).

Hey Trekkie, if that's your position, then maybe you are on to something. Politicians who object to gay marriage because it they believe it is contrary to Scriptures and the teachings of Jesus? Perfectly fine. They aren't trying to MAKE policy; like Hillary they're just trying to prevent it. They can oppose anything they want based on religion, Scriptures, Jesus, whatever. It's only when they ADVOCATE something based on religion that it's wrong.

Wow.

Courtesy of Trekkie:

Unless it (the e-mail) had some bearing on his job performance, it's irrelevant and immaterial. How in the world you can make so much out of two sentences from a two-year old internal e-mail boggles me.

Here is a sample job description for an executive producer (Mr. Green's job at GMA until his email makes the rounds):

http://productionhub.com/jobs/description.asp?item=10978

Looking for a leader, not just a manager. Will oversee large staff and be responsible for overall show content, producing, and branding. Prefer Bachelor's degree in Broadcast Journalism and five years producing experience. Two years news management experience is required.

Yeah Trekkie, even though Bush makes Green "puke," I'm sure it won't affect his job performance! After all, he just decides what the content of the show should be. I'm sure he'll play it right down the middle!

I've said it before and I'll say it again -- Trekkie, you are a tool.

I was watching the hour of spin tonight. The O'Liely Factor, and he said something that struck me. Now we all know what the republican platform is....9/11 terrorist 9/11 terrorist....repeat 1,000,000 times. Now Mr. O Liely said tonight,"We can not send troops to Dafur because we are busy fighting a war on terror". Now-if we were to be confronted with an actual and true military threat....Let's say an Asian conflict. If we are so busy fighting a war on terra how in the world would we be able to confront any real military threat if we can't even send out a simple peace keeping mission? Is it me or do you feel a DRAFT!!!!????

It happens in every thread. Unable to defend the shoddy "journalism" of Keith Olbermann, the spinners have to bring up O'Reilly. If only this were O'ReillyWatch, it might even be relevant.

Bluefire: You may hate O'Reilly, but at least he brings on people he disagrees with. Olbermann doesn't. He's either playing a prank on people or he's just a scared little boy in an Adult's body. The fact is let's see him debate Michael Savage, he'd run away like the coward he is!

Non

As but as much of a chance of you're buddies at Media-Matters, Dailykos, Moveon, KeithOlbermann.com, Democraticunderground etc. etc. To stop the personal attacks on Bill O'Reilly. It drives me nuts that here it seems O'Reilly, and it almost seems it's night after night has been bringing attention to people, politicions,judges,newspaper editors, that could care less about kids, More about child molesters, and a so called news anchor that gos after O'Reilly for putting up an e-mail address that is avalible on a daily basis.

The point of this website is to critique a show. A HORRIBLE SHOW! But, thank God for free speech so we can see and critique on a daily basis. Just as you have the right to critique this site and Bill O'Reilly and it will stand in the record. Unlike most left wing sites that never let you post you're thoughts unless you agree with them.If this site really disturbs you start you're own O'Reilly watch! Why not or is it you can't get by the name Nonfactor? Like you use this name and we should all stand up and switch off O'Reilly. I made this challange to one of these dimwits(dopey-wan i think) Now I make it to you. Why don't you for one week WATCH! GET IT WATCH O'REILLY! For one week and report in a Olbermannwatch style. I'm sure Mr. Dollar will give you the space for a week but somehow I never think YOU WOULD MAKE IT! Go ahead NONFACTOR! Tell me what did Bill do wrong with the guest from one of you're favorites HUMANRIGHTSWATCH tonight. Bluefire and the rest of the overmedicated nutjobs bring nothing to the table. As evidenced by the fact he says he watches O'Reilly but could NEVER and I MEAN NEVER reports any errors Bill makes on a daily basis,(Why don't you use the whole comment blue insted of picking AGAIN!) so the dopey little comments. O'liely, How f'n original. You are making dopey little comments on this site when you use to have a little sense. Either bring it to the table or hang out over at whatever site and have you're Zen moment. You are better then the posted comment above.

Tonights show featured The Three Nutcases! Keith,Dana,David. Or, maybe the Three Stooges of the Democratic Party. NO! that would be slander to the good name of HOWARD,FINE,AND HOWARD!

Here in Allentown tonight the local channel ran a piece about Moveon.org protesting outside a state senator's office on the tape you could clearly see how many people were protesting. EIGHT! EIGHT PEOPLE! Were protesting. which is about how many people in the Lehigh Valley watch Countdown on a daily basis. I would give you the address but the station pulled the piece from it's site.

Hey blu

If you watch Bill, mind telling us what deal he made with the person from humanrights watch tonight?

Puck good point. The Human Rights watch was shocked at what O'Reilly said that there are child rape cases going on in this country. The Guest lost his train of thought. Olbynut on the other hand talked about South Park and American idol. Why doesn't he discuss Judges letting Molesters off and the politicians who do nothing about it.

puck, what exactly was the point of your long post besides attacking me and telling me to go to a different site?

O'Reilly is calling attention to these people? Yeah, he is, but in the process he's making himself look stupid; he goes off on tangents that descend from calling someone out to flat out personal attacks (for the record I never called him O'Liely, but if you get as mad as you got over that you'd go nuts if you saw the conservatives calling liberals "lieberals" or "Demonrats" - ugh makes me so mad! so f'n unoriginal).

This site without a bit of opposition would just be one huge circle jerk. Johnny dollar attacks Olbermann and his viewers and people reply about how great of a job he's doing; I'm a counter balance (this site would be considered fair and balanced now to the people at FOX news).

Now believe it or not, puck, I sometimes watch O'Reilly, but your "challenge" to me to critique his show in this sites style is funny. I can do that without watching his show (O'Reilly is stupid and biased and spews propaganda. His blindly stupid viewers follow his mindless garbage without knowing what they're even watching. He talked about a liberal teacher today, but lets not talk about that, let’s talk about how biased he was when he was asking the defense attorney questions! OMG! His talking points memo was soooo biased; I hate his propaganda!! And then in his most ridiculous item of the day! DON'T GET ME STARTED!).

I only saw part of the interview with the guy from Human Rights; they were talking about the tragedy in Sudan.

-----

I don’t even know what point you’re trying to get across in your last two paragraphs. I guess it’s just an extended rant on your part.

The fact is let's see him debate Michael Savage, he'd run away like the coward he is!

This is the standard-bearer you want, Tania? One of the most bigoted and close-minded people that the conservative side has ever offered. A man who was fired from MSNBC for his insensitive and crude comments on the air? If that is truly the case, Tania, we obviously have very different standards about who makes a credible opponent.

And once again the hypocrisy of the right appears. Michael Savage (and Ann Coulter) are feted as stars of the cause despite their...there is no other word but "insane"...ravings and we're told to laugh because "it's only a joke". But a man like Harry Belafonte, who on a good day is a fringe member of the left, says something outrageous and every liberal who draws breath has to apologize for it. The double standard is galling - I've never agreed with Ward Churchill and yet I'm supposed to be somehow responsible for his ravings?

Hey Trekkie, if that's your position, then maybe you are on to something.

I'm sorry, I can't tell anymore if you're being serious or patronizing me. It's an occupational hazard.

Hello Puck, Yes I do watch both. I caught the guy from Humanwatch like at the last moment. But I think O'Liely was asking him something about speaking out against the judge in ohio. But also I saw him talking to that chick to come back and debate about the peril of the people suffering from Katrina.....Why do you ask????

Give Bill O'Reilly credit, he does point injustices where judges give leneint sentences to Child Molesters. I'm sure you can agree something must be done about this injustice.

I agree that something must be done. I disagree with what Bill O'Reilly proposes. Mandatory minimums have never been a good solution to the problem of crime, irregardless of whether the underlying issue is drugs or exploitation.

The reason I want Keith Olbermann and Michael Savage to debate is that one's a Radical Right Winger the Other is a Radical Leftist.

I disagree with that simply because Keith Olbermann is not a Radical Leftist, at least not in the way the term is defined in the United States. If he were far-left, he'd be in the Green camp. And I don't think any reasonable argument can be made for that.

O'Reilly is more like Chris Matthews. Everyone knows their viewpoints but they are fair to opposing views.

I don't think O'Reilly is "fair". I think he likes to have opposing views on so that he can tell them how wrong/stupid/oblivious they are. I used to watch The O'Reilly Factor as a means of trying to understand the other side, but I quit because I had an annoying tendency to want to throw my shoe through the television set.

Keith Olbermann's Countdown is the only news program I make time to watch on a daily basis.

Hour of Spin?

Maybe your average reader takes that long to plod through your hate rants?

"Lets all unite and try to get Olbermann some Phscyciatric help."

Olby signed up for much-needed psychiatric medical attention long ago. The guy is a certified nut-case. At least Olby admits he's wacko and needs treatment. Tough to put a spin on personal mental illness, huh Keef?

Based on the above post I went a googleing.

From:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8374324/

OLBERMANN: Let me do my disclaimer. I‘ve never made a secret of this. I‘ve gone to a therapist since 1998. It saved me. Never been prescribed a drug in my life, but I have family members who have been, who were borderline irrational and who were brought back, and Ritalin was used in one case, in fact.

So we learn that Keith's mental illness is unmedicated, hence the irrational nature of his show. We also learn Keith's obsession with Tom Cruise, since this quote came during an ant-Cruise piece after Tom insulted psychiatry.

Look, I have nothing against psychiatrists or the mentally ill. I just don't want them spinning the news to gullible lefties who then vote in insane socialists.

Very classy of MELTDOWN to attack 90-year-old, ex-first lady, relief contributor, Mrs. Bush. The take-home message is that Mrs. Bush was helping with the relief effort.

Mrs. Bush... worst person in the world? Looks like a little overtime for Olby's headshrinker this month.

Hello everybody. It's your favorite liberal Bluefire. It is raining right now. I woke up with a really bad hangover and an empty box of wheat thins next to my Buhdda statue. Sides that, hows everyone doing??? Did anyone read about that 20 year study that said that kids that are crying little brats grow up to become republican's??? Sounds bout right to me.

So we find out from the libs who weigh in on this site that the real reason that Krazy Keith won't have any dissenting voices on his show is that he doesn't want "confrontation" and "shouting" and (according to the lib logic) the only way to do that is to invite only those persons who will lick Olby's boots and genuflect to his infallible wisdom. Yes, and we all believe that the check is the mail, the dog ate the homework, and your favorite girl won't go out with you because she is rearranging her sock drawer. This is such a pathetic excuse, I'm surprised that the libs on this site, as disingenious as they are, would even offer it up with a straight face. The flaws in this excuse are so glaringly obvious: 1) If Krazy Keith doesn't want shouting on his program but is really unafraid to have his viewpoints challenged, there are lots of "non-shouting" conservatives who could be invited on (Bill Bennett, Ken Starr, Newt Gingrich); 2) Tucker Carlson's show on MSNBC has a daily feature where he faces off with a liberal talk show host from Air America (I can't think of her name). During this segment, Tucker and Liberal Woman tackle 4 or 5 issues of the day and each argues their side persuasively and with passion, but it never devolves into a shoutfest. The point is, you can have a cable show about the news and politics of the day that has more than one viewpoint and keep it civil and at low decibels. So, what's the real reason KK won't do it? There are several reasons I think: 1) The most obvious: He is a coward and knows his nutty ramblings would be quickly exposed and shredded by a conservative commentator; 2) KK wants to maintain the illusion in his own mind that his program is a "news" show and bringing on viewpoints contrary to his own would somehow taint this illusion and expose the reality that his show exists to spout DNC talking points. KK deludes himself into thinking he is a great "newsman" such as Huntley-Brinkley (thus the silly opening theme music) and Edward R. Murrow (thus the equally silly "good night and good luck" closing); 3) KK simply doesn't have the temperment to abide dissenting viewpoints. You can see him seething irrationally as he talks about people who hold a view not in line with OlbyPlanet thinking (his rant against Laura Ingraham the other night is a good example of what I'm talking about here). Can you imagime what KK would have done if he had to actually engage in a live in studio discussion with a conservative in a chair just a few feet away from him? You think O'Reilly has a problem just because he has told people to shut up a couple of times? KK would simply lose it and what little credibility he has would be gone. As deluded as KK is, he at least has enough insight to recognize that he is completely unable to handle anyone who can seriously challenge his viewpoints and so he avoids it like the plague

Hank I think that you scored some excellent points here. Yes, Tucker Carlson does have an interesting program and his counterpoint, Rachael Maddow (from Air America), does a good job of presenting the very liberal side of things. She has knowledge, listens and has something most liberals seem to have lost and that is a sense of humor. This program while it is not perfect would be a good replacement for Countdown but I won't wait for that to happen. I wonder if it would do any good at all if those of us who would like to see Countdown go away could send a barrage of email to MSNBC instead of just complaining on this site. Has this been tried yet? Just a thought.

Yo Bluefire,

Does your mom still wake you up? Hey no seriously, I wanted to take you up on your offer to debate the serious issues posed during KO's show. Which of these following stories will you want to talk about:

5. Tom Cruise
4. Tom Cruise
3. Tom Cruise
2. Tom Cruise
1. Tom Cruise

Now remember, you can only pick one.

Yo Rick--
They were just talking about immigration on Air America Radio. I'd give you my thought's on the issue but I'm not too sure where I stand. There are pro's and con's on ALL issues. But I would enjoy your opinion on the immigration issue. Your favorite liberal Bluefire..........

Blufire,

How about this take on immigration. From purely an economic viewpoint if you limit the availability of cheap labor wouldn't wages have to rise in order to make jobs appealing that apparantly aren't appealing now. If I'm right shouldn't the so-called champions of a living wage, the Democrats, be interested in enforcing our borders if for no other reason.

Rick--I feel immigration is a very complex issue that would take too much time to dwell on, at least on this site. But bush sez he want's a guest worker program and I think -for now- that may be the correct approach. Also bush sez he dose not agree with the Minute Man Project. And niether do I. I also don't agree with that christian right group that protests at the funerals of American soldiers saying its a good thing that they died. Awful...

Bluefire,

I think all protests at funerals are wrong, irrespective of whether or not the protests are anti or pro war. As far as the Christian rights group that protested at the funeral, did they say it was a good thing the soldiers died or did they say they died for a good cause? I haven't read any statements made by these groups so I don't know. If they said the first, your right. If they said the second and not to be picky but I question how you worded that.

As far as the Christian rights group that protested at the funeral, did they say it was a good thing the soldiers died or did they say they died for a good cause? I haven't read any statements made by these groups so I don't know.

That's Fred Phelps and his ilk. They basicaly believe that every U.S. soldier that dies in Iraq is retribution from God for the U.S. being permisive of homosexuality.

If that is the case, then Bluefire's your absolutely right.

Thanks for the clarification Trekkie.

If that is the case, then Bluefire your absolutely right.

Thanks for the clarification Trekkie.