OlbermannWatch.com "My Faves" Set
OlbermannWatch.com Favorited Photos from other Flickr Users
Got OlbyPhotos? See some on Flickr? DO NOT email us. Send us a FlickrMail instead. Include a link to the photo. If we like the photo you will see it displayed in the Olby Flickr Flood above.
New to Flickr? Sign up for a FREE Flickr account!
New to YouTube? Sign up for a FREE YouTube account!
|Subscribe to Olbermann Watch Mailing List|
|Visit this group|
"COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN" (8:00 P.M.-9:00 P.M. ET)
Host: Keith Olbermann
"Making It Up Is Easy to Do"
It's 8:00 pm Monday, Keith Olbermann is on, and The Spin Starts Here. The debate over the "gay marriage amendment" is headlined by KO with the fair, impartial, unbiased headline "FEAR AND DIVISION". Keith pretended like it is something extraordinary for Congress to debate things that are unlikely to pass, and compared banning gay marriage to slavery. Dana Milbank (minus garish garb) said it's all an attempt to "rile up the conservative base", and made a funny, saying that protesters insist "same sex marriage will lead to more masturbation". Well, Keith thought it was funny, but The Laughing Stagehand was silent.
A recycled NBC report from "Whatever" O'Donnell on free trips for Congressmen mentioned Katherine Harris (R), Tom DeLay (R), John Boehner (R), but no Democrats. Apparently they never take such trips. Then the #4 segment, about something "hinted at" in a tip supposedly given to Judith Miller ahead of 9/11. A problem here: Miller is not well-liked in the blue blogs. KO can hardly give her a prized interview slot. So he brought in her former editor, who of course doesn't have any personal information regarding the tip. As a result, the segment was speculation. For his part, Engelberg basically said they got a whole lot of tips, this one wasn't that much different, and "we didn't have much". Perfect, an entire segment about nothing.
Back in the opening spiel, Keith bellowed about "the continuing anger" over O'Reilly's Malmedy confusion. That's as dishonest an introduction as Krazy Keith has intoned. It's precisely because the anger has not continued, and in fact has barely registered, that the Man Tan man decided he had to stoke the fires with another segment tonight.
He teased this "story" again at the end of segment one. Then another promotion at the end of segment two. Not to rest on his laurels, KO teased it a fourth time before the half hour break: "Veterans of Iraq are incensed!" Why all this hyping? Generally, the stories that get the most promotions on The Hour of Spin are the ones intended to elevate their terminally ill ratings (American Idol, Tom Cruise, etc). Keep the gullible from changing the channel. So the real purpose of Olby's mock outrage becomes apparent: do something, anything, to make some noise and try to attract more than the measly 258,000 viewers who watched The Hour of Spin's last outing. (Mr O'Reilly was doubtless much more satisfied with his audience of 1,981,000.)
KO delievered Attack #95 in the #3 slot, regurgitating his carnival pitchman voice of "outrage". He played the same clips he ran last week, and again he made the unfounded charge that "Fox News had scrubbed clean" the transcript (as we pointed out at the time, the transcript wasn't the work of Fox News at all). Now, said Olby, "they changed it back". To change it back would mean it read "Malmedy" before it read "Normandy". Where's the evidence of that, Keith? He never showed any because he didn't have any. He made it up!
Then, based on nothing at all, the infamous, deplorable Keith Olbermann said:
O'Reilly blase response to his own malicious remarks suggests he still has some doubt about the truthfulness of the story of Malmedy.
Huh? Let's diagram this sentence. "Blase response"? Opinion, but we'll let that pass. "Malicious remarks"? Of course, Olby has to claim that Mr Bill confused the Malmedy massacre on purpose, out of an intent to slander American troops. That's the meaning of "malicious". Just a bit of projection there, KO, that you might want to take up with your therapist. And "doubt about the truthfulness"? Where did Krazy Keith get that idea from? He made it up! Making it up is certainly easier than telling the truth.
Follow: Olby set the table with Bill O'Reilly deliberately slandering US troops, rather than just misspeaking in the heat of a debate. Then he throws in from left field the notion that Bill didn't believe even believe the Malmedy massacre happened. Next a little history lesson about how anti-Semites of the time, and Joe McCarthy, didn't believe it either. Get it? Bill O'Reilly is a Jew-hater. He probably doubts the Holocaust as well. Connecting all these dots, and a few others that aren't there, KO moves in for the coup de grace:
Sen Joe McCarthy, and evidently Bill O'Reilly, believe that the real victims in this story of 84 American servicemen at Malmedy, the real victims were the Nazis.
A guy misspeaks in the midst of a debate, corrects himself afterward, and four days later an envious, failing hack paints him as an anti-Semitic Nazi. Character assassination, Keith Olbermann style.
KO introduced Paul Rieckhoff as someone who was "enraged" over all this. Keith knew just what sort of questions to ask his latest anti-administration guest:
To, uh, the detail of Malmedy, and how first 60 years ago Joe McCarthy tried to turn this SS bloodbath into an American war crime, and now how casually Bill O'Reilly has done nearly the same thing, is that just a bizarre coincidence or does it underscore a lot of what you have seen among those who are waving the flag the fastest and singing the anthem the loudest relative to how they really feel when it comes right down to it about the troops?
Another Olbermann smear: people who are patriotic must really loathe American forces, and are probably Jew-hating Nazis to boot. Of course by this point, the whole construct of Keith's slander isn't even questioned. And you know Rieckhoff isn't going to say to him, um, Keith, when did Bill O'Reilly ever say he didn't believe the Malmedy massacre happened? Didn't he misspeak and then correct himself? No, those questions were tactfully avoided. Instead, the "outraged" Rieckhoff, who was never even moved to tap out a blog entry documenting his outrage, fell right into the game plan:
We need to get down to brass tacks here, find out what went on, let a thorough investigation run its course, and keep the American people informed with people from a position of credibility, like military veterans, like General Clark, not like Bill O'Reilly.
Credibility? Military veteran? Which of these applies to Keith Olbermann, again? No matter, Rieckhoff attacked O'Reilly and George W Bush, and praised leftist Wesley Clark. Olby wondered of O'Reilly: "Why do you hate our troops?" Mission accomplished.
#2: recycled NBC True Crime video, Al Gore, Brad Pitt, Angelina Jolie. Worst person: the mayor of Omaha (a nonpartisan position). Then #1, the "now debated report" about Katherine McPhee singing at TomKat's wedding. No, Keith, it's not "now debated". It was false when you reported it. It was false when it appeared on the internet. It was false when McPhee denied having ever met Tom or Kat. For all your insistence that Bill O'Reilly should admit he was wrong and apologize, he at least has done the former. You won't do either one as you desperately try to obfuscate to cover your embarrassment.
Olby's guest "expert" said Katie met McPhee at a Scientology meeting. But McPhee says they've never met. She goes on to say "I think she's a Scientologist". But McPhee says she is not. Is Ms Milito making stuff up too? She's sure on the right show for it.
Big dog that didn't bark: nothing whatsoever about the terror arrests in Canada or possible ties to persons in the US. Olby's probably saving that for a Special Report on how the curious timing points to Karl Rove as orchestrator of the whole thing.
That's The Hour of Spin for this, the 108th day of the Keith Olbermann CoverUp. And the magic number is now 5.