Buy Text-Link-Ads here
Recent Comments

    follow OlbyWatch on Twitter

    In

    John Gibson Welcomes Back the Infamous, Deplorable Keith Olbermann

    tonyome wrote: <a href="http://twitchy.com/2014/07/28/voxs-laughable-praise-of-keith-olber... [more](11)

    In

    Welcome Back, Olby!

    syvyn11 wrote: <a href="http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/keith-olbermann-reviving-worst... [more](9)

    In

    Former Obama Support/Donor Releases Song Supporting Romney/Ryan: "We'll Take It Back Again" by Kyle Tucker

    syvyn11 wrote: @philly I don't see that happening. ESPN has turned hyper left in recent... [more](64)

    In

    Blue-Blog-a-Palooza: Ann Romney Edition!

    djthereplay wrote: By mkdawuss on August 29, 2012 6:17 PM Will John Gibson be having a "Red-B... [more](4)

    In

    No Joy in Kosville...Mighty Olby Has Struck Out

    djwolf76 wrote: "But the FOX-GOP relationship (which is far more distinguished and prevalen... [more](23)

    KO Mini Blog



    What's in the Olbermann Flood Feed?
    Subscribe to Olbermann Flood Feed:
    RSS/XML

    KO Countdown Clock


    Warning: mktime() [function.mktime]: It is not safe to rely on the system's timezone settings. You are *required* to use the date.timezone setting or the date_default_timezone_set() function. In case you used any of those methods and you are still getting this warning, you most likely misspelled the timezone identifier. We selected 'America/New_York' for 'EDT/-4.0/DST' instead in /home/owatch/www/www.olbermannwatch.com/docs/countdown.php on line 5
    KO's new contract with MSNBC ends in...
    0 days 0 hours 0 minutes

    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!


    Got some OlbyVideo? See some on YouTube? DO NOT email us. Send us a YouTube Messages instead. Include a link to the video. If we like the video you will see it displayed in our favorites list in our YouTube page.

    New to YouTube? Sign up for a FREE YouTube account!

    Red Meat Blog
    Keith Olbermann Quotes
    Countdown Staff Writers

    If they're not on Keith's payroll...

    ...they should be...

    Crooks & Liars
    Daily Kos
    Eschaton
    Huffington Post
    Media Matters for America
    MyDD
    News Corpse
    No Quarter
    Raw Story
    Talking Points Memo
    Think Progress
    TVNewser
    Keith Lovers

    MSNBC's Countdown
    Bloggerman
    MSNBC Transcripts
    MSNBC Group at MSN

    Drinking with Keith Olbermann
    Either Relevant or True
    KeithOlbermann.org
    Keith Olbermann is Evil
    Olbermann Nation
    Olbermann.org
    Thank You, Keith Olbermann

    Don't Be Such A Douche
    Eyes on Fox
    Liberal Talk Radio
    Oliver Willis
    Sweet Jesus I Hate Bill O'Reilly

    Anonymous Rat
    For This Relief Much Thanks
    Watching Olbermann Watch

    Keith Olbermann Fanlisting Site I
    Keith Olbermann Fanlisting Site II
    Keith Olbermann Links
    Olberfans
    Sports Center Altar
    Nothing for Everyone

    Democratic Underground KO Forum
    Television Without Pity KO Forum
    Loony KO Forum (old)
    Loony KO Forum (new)
    Olberfans Forum (old)
    Olberfans Forum (new)
    Keith Watchers

    186k per second
    Ace of Spades HQ
    Cable Gamer
    Dean's World
    Doug Ross@Journal
    Extreme Mortman
    Fire Keith Olbermann
    Hot Air
    Inside Cable News
    Instapundit
    Jawa Report
    Johnny Dollar's Place
    Just One Minute
    Little Green Footballs
    Mark Levin
    Media Research Center
    Moonbattery.com
    Moorelies
    National Review Media Blog
    Narcissistic Views
    Newsbusters
    Pat Campbell Show
    Radio Equalizer
    Rathergate
    Riehl World View
    Sister Toldjah
    Toys in the Attic
    Webloggin
    The Dark Side of Keith Olbermann
    World According to Carl

    Thanks for the blogroll link!

    Age of Treason
    Bane Rants
    The Blue Site
    Cabal of Doom-De Oppresso Libre
    Chuckoblog
    Conservative Blog Therapy
    Conservathink
    Country Store
    Does Anyone Agree?
    The Drunkablog!
    Eclipse Ramblings
    If I were President of USA
    I'll Lay Down My Glasses
    Instrumental Rationality
    JasonPye.com
    Kevin Dayhoff
    Last Train Out Of Hell
    Leaning Straight Up
    Limestone Roof
    Mein BlogoVault
    NostraBlogAss
    Peacerose Journal
    The Politics of CP
    Public Secrets: from the files of the Irishspy
    Rat Chat
    Return of the Conservatives
    The Right Place
    Rhymes with Right
    seanrobins.com
    Six Meat Buffet
    Sports and Stuff
    Stout Republican
    Stuck On Stupid
    Things I H8
    TruthGuys
    Verum Serum
    WildWeasel

    Friends of OlbyWatch

    Aaron Barnhart
    Eric Deggans
    Jason Clarke
    Ron Coleman
    Victria Zdrok
    Keith Resources

    Google News: Keith Olbermann
    Feedster: Keith Olbermann
    Technorati: Keith Olbermann
    Wikipedia: Keith Olbermann
    Wikipedia: Countdown
    Wikiality: Keith Olbermann
    Keith Olbermann Quotes on Jossip
    Keith Olbermann Photos
    NNDB Olbermann Page
    IMDB Olbermann Page
    Countdown Guest Listing & Transcripts
    Olbermann Watch FAQ
    List of Politics on Countdown (by party)
    Mark Levin's Keith Overbite Page
    Keith Olbermann's Diary at Daily Kos
    Olbermann Watch in the News

    Houston Chronicle
    Playboy
    The Journal News
    National Review
    San Antonio Express
    The Hollywood Reporter
    The Journal News
    Los Angeles Times
    American Journalism Review
    Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
    St. Petersburg Times
    Kansas City Star
    New York Post/Page Six
    Washington Post
    Associated Press
    PBS
    New York Daily News
    Online Journalism Review
    The Washingon Post
    Hartford Courant
    WTWP-AM
    The New York Observer
    The Washington Post


    Countdown with Keith Olbermann
    Great Moments in Broadcast Journalism
    Great Thanks Hall of Fame
    Keith Olbermann
    MSM KO Bandwagon
    Olbermann
    Olbermann Watch Channel on You Tube
    Olbermann Watch Debate
    Olbermann Watch Image Gallery
    Olbermann Watch Polling Service
    OlbermannWatch
    OlbyWatch Link Roundup
    TVNewser "Journalism"

    July 2013
    September 2012
    August 2012
    April 2012
    March 2012
    February 2012
    January 2012
    December 2011
    November 2011
    October 2011
    September 2011
    August 2011
    July 2011
    June 2011
    May 2011
    April 2011
    March 2011
    February 2011
    January 2011
    December 2010
    November 2010
    October 2010
    September 2010
    August 2010
    July 2010
    June 2010
    May 2010
    April 2010
    March 2010
    February 2010
    January 2010
    December 2009
    November 2009
    October 2009
    September 2009
    August 2009
    July 2009
    June 2009
    May 2009
    April 2009
    March 2009
    February 2009
    January 2009
    December 2008
    November 2008
    October 2008
    September 2008
    August 2008
    July 2008
    June 2008
    May 2008
    April 2008
    March 2008
    February 2008
    January 2008
    December 2007
    November 2007
    October 2007
    September 2007
    August 2007
    July 2007
    June 2007
    May 2007
    April 2007
    March 2007
    February 2007
    January 2007
    December 2006
    November 2006
    October 2006
    September 2006
    August 2006
    July 2006
    June 2006
    May 2006
    April 2006
    March 2006
    February 2006
    January 2006
    December 2005
    November 2005
    October 2005
    September 2005
    August 2005
    June 2005
    May 2005
    April 2005
    March 2005
    February 2005
    January 2005
    December 2004
    November 2004

    Google

    Olbermann Watch Masthead

    Managing Editor

    Robert Cox
    olby at olbywatch dot com

    Contributors

    Mark Koldys
    Johnny Dollar's Place

    Brandon Coates
    OlbyWatch

    Chris Matthews' Leg
    Chris Matthews' Leg

    Howard Mortman
    Extreme Mortman

    Trajan 75
    Think Progress Watch

    Konservo
    Konservo

    Doug Krile
    The Krile Files

    Teddy Schatz
    OlbyWatch

    David Lunde
    Lundesigns

    Alex Yuriev
    Zubrcom

    Red Meat
    OlbyWatch



    Technorati Links to OlbyWatchLinks to OlbermannWatch.com

    Technorati Links to OlbyWatch Blog posts tagged with "Olbermann"

    Combined Feed
    (OlbyWatch + KO Mini-blog)

    Who Links To Me


    Mailing List RSS Feed
    Google Groups
    Subscribe to Olbermann Watch Mailing List
    Email:
    Visit this group



    XML
    Add to Google
    Add to My Yahoo!
    Subscribe with Bloglines
    Subscribe in NewsGator Online

    Add to My AOL
    Subscribe with Pluck RSS reader
    R|Mail
    Simpify!
    Add to Technorati Favorites!

    Subscribe in myEarthlink
    Feed Button Help


    Olbermann Watch, "persecuting" Keith since 2004


    August 18, 2006
    COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN - AUGUST 18, 2006

    "COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN" (8:00 P.M.-9:00 P.M. ET)

    Guest Host: Brian Unger

    "Fuzzy Math"

    Krazy Keith did not make Friday's show.
    It's no matter, with ratings so low.
    He's in L.A.--it's heaven.
    But he'll learn 47
    into 22 just will not go.


    Posted by johnny dollar | Permalink | Comments (94) | | View blog reactions
    user-pic

    94 Comments

    LOL Johnny. I hope 22 did the math and figured it out.

    Olby's Thursday ratings were abysmal, but what's new?

    http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/ratings/the_scoreboard_thursday_august_17_42322.asp#more

    Olby was the only MSNBC program to place 4th in it's time slot in the extraordinarily important demo group.

    I notice that CNBC was not posted. Could we have had a 5th place finish thur. night?

    It's the weekend and I was looking for something a little humorous to read. Found it in reading Olbermann's "Louisiana is a city" blog from last year.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8514671/#050905a

    Several Olberspeak sections jumped out at me as hilarious, even almost a year later.

    "As we emphasized to you here all last week, the realities of the region are such that New Orleans is going to be largely uninhabitable for a lot longer than anybody is yet willing to recognize. Lord knows when the last body will be found, or the last artifact of the levee break, dug up. Could be next March. Could be 2100. By then, in the muck and toxic mire of New Orleans, they may even find our government's credibility."

    Gee, glad to see that he narrowed it down to somewhere between March and 94 years later. I wonder if in the mud and toxic mire of New Orleans, they found his moral compass?

    "For many of this country's citizens, the mantra has been — as we were taught in Social Studies it should always be — whether or not I voted for this President — he is still my President."

    And when Olbermann refers to George Bush, not as President, but Mister, I see that he missed that lesson in Social Studies. Of course, looking closer at his opening words, "For many of this country's citizens" it's apparent that he was not one of many.

    "I suspect anybody who had to give him that benefit of the doubt stopped doing so last week. I suspect a lot of his supporters, looking ahead to '08, are wondering how they can distance themselves..."

    Gee, was that a stampede of Olbermann fans I heard running to click the remote this summer? I guess he has some experience in alienating supporters, eh?

    "For him, it is a shame — in all senses of the word. A few changes of pronouns in there, and he might not have looked so much like a 21st Century Marie Antoinette. All that was needed was just a quick "I'm not satisfied with my government's response." Instead of hiding behind phrases like "no one could have foreseen," had he only remembered Winston Churchill's quote from the 1930's. "The responsibility," of government, Churchill told the British Parliament "for the public safety is absolute and requires no mandate. It is in fact, the prime object for which governments come into existence."

    Yes, proper ways to absolve oneself from problems is an Olbermann specialty. Anyone remember how the photographer captured Olbermann "between the you and the hoo"?

    "These are leaders who regularly pressure the news media in this country to report the reopening of a school or a power station in Iraq, and defies its citizens not to stand up and cheer."

    Damn them all to Hell. Americans should sit and suck, complain and beg for bleakness.

    "And as that sorry recital of self-absorption dragged on, I have resisted editorial comment."

    But I will name anyone Worst Person in the World for expressing their opinion, even if it's labeled as such.

    CBK, thanks for bringing up that informative post from our ever-objective anchorman, KO.

    It just reinforces how long KO has been beating the "everybody is running away from Bush" drum. The first rule of propaganda, repetition.

    In addition to the parts you commented on, I noticed these, which showed, to me, the pure arrogance of Ron Burgandy, er, Keith Olbermann.

    Mr. Bush has now twice insisted that, "we are not satisfied," with the response to the manifold tragedies along the Gulf Coast. I wonder which "we" he thinks he's speaking for on this point. Perhaps it's the administration, although we still don't know where some of them are. Anybody seen the Vice President lately? The man whose message this time last year was, 'I'll Protect You, The Other Guy Will Let You Die'?

    I don't know which 'we' Mr. Bush meant."

    KO routinely fells the need to attack people for his perceived misuse of "we." Especially (no surprise) George W. Bush and BillO. Don't know why he has such a problem with it, and he never actually says.

    But then, the last full paragraph of KO's "objective" editorial tome, the first sectioned you refered to:

    "As we emphasized to you here all last week, the realities of the region are such that New Orleans is going to be largely uninhabitable for a lot longer than anybody is yet willing to recognize. Lord knows when the last body will be found, or the last artifact of the levee break, dug up. Could be next March. Could be 2100. By then, in the muck and toxic mire of New Orleans, they may even find our government's credibility."

    I wonder which "we" Mr. Olbermann thinks he speakin for on this?"


    The We he refers to are the voices inside his head.

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    And when Olbermann refers to George Bush, not as President, but Mister, I see that he missed that lesson in Social Studies.

    And you, CBK, have obviously missed the many times various people here have said that the use of "Mister" is standard practice in the news media so long as the title of "President" is used the first time President Bush is referred to in the story.

    I can't wait to see the Spike Lee Hack Joint about Katrina.
    I can predict the tone without a thought.
    Katrina was all Bush's fault with endless clips on a loop of a one mile radius of New Orleans around the dome.
    What will be left out is the negligent inept corrupt local and state (DEMOCRATIC) government. What will be left out is the hack journalism by all covering the events

    "... the realities of the region are such that New Orleans is going to be largely uninhabitable for a lot longer than anybody is yet willing to recognize. Lord knows when the last body will be found, or the last artifact of the levee break, dug up. Could be next March. Could be 2100. By then, in the muck and toxic mire of New Orleans, they may even find our government's credibility."

    first, i wouldn't be too quick to mention New Orleans if i were you, tiny mind ... the Bush administration's Katrina fuckups are surpassed only by their Iraq fuckups ...

    and second, Keith seems to have nailed his predictions pretty well -- both in the description of the mired New Orleans cleanup, and the Bush administration's toxic credibility.

    I wonder if Krazy Keith got one of them fema debt cards for a taint wax and massage while he was down there.
    The corrupt and incompetent democratic local and state government get a free pass from the msm. What a surprise.

    It's interesting. Once upon a time when Rush Limbaugh was starting out and his conservative spin hadn't yet caught on fire he claimed popularlity isn't proof you're right. Now that conservative populism grabs high ratings - Rush is #2 in radio and right-wing Fox News is tops in cable 'news' - popularity is the stamp of legitimacy.

    What conservatives are embarassed to admit is the stereotypical 'angry white male' is more alive and well than ever. Visit a Barnes and Nobles. Any table displaying political punditry will be almost exclusively conservative diatribes. Talk radio is saturated with conservative pundits. Conservatives are the only ones with a news network dedicated 24/7 to popularizing their talking points: Fox News.

    Which explains why allegedly liberal CNN only features a conservative pundit: Glenn Beck and why MSNBC features more conservatives like Scarlboro and Carlson than libs like Olbermann. But, sadly, they'll never gain on Fox News unless they wholesale give up their journalistic integrity and devote 100% of their energies to telling conservatives what they want to hear.

    It's interesting? Here's what's interesting: people who want to defend Olby so often turn out to be nothing more than the typical Fox haters. This peculiar species can be readily identified by a readiness to spout the most preposterous unprovable hyperbole.

    Examples: "Conservatives are the only ones with a news network dedicated 24/7 to popularizing their talking points: Fox News....100% of their energies to telling conservatives what they want to hear."

    Shall we take them alphabetically? Bob Beckel, Wesley Clark, Eleanor Clift, David Corn, Susan Estrich, Geraldine Ferraro, Martin Frost... OK, that's far enough. Every one of these documented Democrats and liberals works for Fox, providing analysis, punditry, and opinion.

    So what's the point? The person who wants an honest discussion might say, Fox tilts to the right, they don't have enough liberals on, etc etc. OK, that's something that can be debated in a rational manner. But the person who isn't interested in honesty, who is just a hater, doesn't care about rational discussion. He will make absurd, loony claims that Fox broadcasts GOP propaganda "24/7", and that its programming is "100%" conservative.

    What does this have to do with the infamous, deplorable Keith Olbermann? NOTHING! Defending Krazy Keith is such a lost cause that the Olbypologists don't even try. Instead they change the subject, making patently imbecilic accusations about an entirely different cable channel--the one they hate because it dares to present all points of view.

    That spin does not work with the clear-headed readers of Olbermann Watch.

    Or you can watch the MSNBC one-sided shows.
    Matthews and Olby did endless shows with one-sided panels that quoted the "Anonymous sources" and "High ranking anonymous government officials" reporting the impending Cheney and Rove arrest and "perp" walk, frothy spittle dripping from Matthews smiling orgasmic face.
    How could these hacks EVER be taken seriously after the hours of irresponsible news television?
    Have Milbank or Shuster ever said a kind word about the GOP? I mean they are brought onto the shows as alleged impartial NEWS correspondents.

    Johnny: Nice start on the list of liberals working for Fox. There are many more. I wonder if sknabt would care to start a list of conservatives working for CNN. And while he's at it, give us a list of Conservatives that work on camera at the Today show, GMA, and CBS Morning show, as well as which of all the anchors ( current or in the past ) on the big 3 evening news shows were conservative. Or how about the anchors of the Sunday morning talk shows? I think everyone gets stumped after George Will.

    I read an article about Shepard Smith a while back, where Shep stated that he wrote/edited a lot of his program's news stories to use as few words as possible. He said that our attention spans are short; that we just want to hear news stories fast and hear the pertinent parts of a story. And Shep's ratings are great!

    In contrast, there's our hero Keith, the king of verbosity. Maybe if he'd just get to the point once in a while people would watch his program. Instead, he and his verbage are in the basement of cable news ratings.

    sknabt,

    Rush is #2 in radio? Who is #1?

    Believe it or not, I think Stern is!!

    Which doesn't seem possible since he jumped to Satellite radio.

    Keep in mind that any "facts" from sknabt are of dubious validity.

    Rush is #1 in talk radio, not #2. #2 is Sean Hannity. Here's the latest chart from Talkers magazine:

    http://www.talkers.com/main/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=17&Itemid=34

    Thanks for the info. Hannity's right up there with Rush. That's good! And Imus has PUNY ratings - to hear him talk, you'd almost think his ratings were above those of Rush!

    Well can't we just call sknabt for what he is. A weekend seminar poster? Probibly works for nothing at move-on typing talking points from a prepaired statement.

    As a sidebar to this I was on amazon.com and looked up O'Reilly (Culture Warrior),and Olby(Worst Person). And found something very interesting that gos under the heading of "What do customers buy after viewing items like this."

    Bill O'Reilly- Culture Warrior

    58% pre-order the book (9-26-06)

    23% buy The O'Reilly Factor for Kids

    11% buy Sweet Jesus I hate Bill O'Reilly-Joseph Amann

    5% buy Who's looking out for you

    3% pre-order Worst Person in the world (9-11-06)

    *************************************************

    Worst Person In The World-Keith Olbermann

    79% pre-order Culture Warrior

    15% pre-order The Big Encyclopedia of Republican Hypocrites- Randi Rhodes (8-30-06)

    4% pre-order Worst Person In The World

    2% pre-order American Fascism-Chris Hedges (01-09-07)

    1% pre-order The Perfect Thing: How the I-Pod Shuffles Commerce, Culture, and Coolness- Steven Levy (10-17-06)

    Okay, 3 things jump out.

    1: Everybody sees it. It doesn't need to be pointed out.

    2: Loons love to pre-order books. Some not even due out till Jan.07.

    3: I don't know about you but I love my I-Pod and I don't need to spend $15.75 for a book not out until Oct. 06 to tell me that. But then I'm not Olber-Loon weekend seminar poster. And Kool-Aid Guzzler.

    One last thing before I leave. I didn't know Keith had a book that came out last year. (10-05)
    Amazon says it's unavalible
    Yeah, it was called "If you're scoring at Home... Even if you're alone." You have to put the book title in search,it might not come up under Olby's name. Well the title was wrong. It should have been called "If You're Scoring At Motel 6.....Bring Ties!"

    Cheers!

    sknabit writes :"Which explains why allegedly liberal CNN only features a conservative pundit: Glenn Beck."

    I didn't know Glenn Beck get promoted from CNN HEADLINE NEWS. More rock solid facts from our beloved weekend Olbermaniacs.

    The last time a checked Paul Harvey was #1. You won't likely find him restricted to the category of "talk radio".

    I'm not sure why anything I say is "dubious". Oh, I think I get it. I'm not biased your way.

    Oh, and on that list of liberal Foxies. Fox has a couple of liberal analysts who show up from time to time. One or two are actually good. Wesley Clark - it's fun to see, say, conservative Fox co-host Brian Kilmeade try to nip at his ankles. Bob Beckel used to be interesting on H&C until Hannity learned how to deal with him - bascially continually interrupt him so he can't make a point. Estrich appearances are less frequent than before. A friend saw her savaged by a conservative guest - who later admitted he was lying - which was likely her limit of the Fox treatment. Now they've got Ellis Henican - who embarassed O'Reilly in this video clip - but I'm sure O'Reilly will be more prepared in a rematch so he can tame him to be like 'liberal' pet Juan Williams.

    But none of this is really my point. My point is there is not a single solitary liberal hosting a show on Fox News. There's co-host Alan Colmes (more about him later). There's plenty of conservatives. O'Reilly. Gibson. Hume. Kasich. Cavuto. Buttner. Asman. Etc. Plus, look at the conservative guest hosts for these shows like Gingrich, Julie Banderas, and Laura Ingraham. Ever see a liberal fill-in?

    Comparisons to CNN don't work because they, at one point, dropped all pundit shows when stuff like Crossfire got canned. The only exception is them picking up right-winger Glen Beck on Headline News. Look at their other anchors. Is Larry King a drooling lib? Lou Dobbs who's more obsessed with open borders than O'Reilly? Is lightweight Wolf Blitzer (ever see his cream puff interview of Rush) a lib? Is Anderson Cooper shilling against cons like O'Reilly screams against libs?

    MSN has more conservative anchors (e.g., Carlso, Scarboro) than libs. They've got 1 lib I know of: Olbermann. Which is funny. Because this site is obsessed with him even as you joke nobody watches him. So what's the point?

    So we're down to co-hosts and 2nd stringers. Fox News has Alan Colmes, a pathetic pudtz of a lib I've never seen win an argument. Have you? Then they have a long line of O'Reilly wannabes like Banderas, E.D. Hill, Kilmeade, etc. playing the neo-con card hard to get their big break.

    The absolute proof of Fox's overwhelming bias is this. A conservative site like NewsBusters can post a couple of gotchas ever day gleaning a handful of cases of liberal bias out of literally hundreds of print articles, radio shows, and TV/cable news programs. Ironically, a liberal site like MediaMatters can do the same gleaning conservative bias.

    I can find couple pieces of right-wing bias daily just watching Fox News, a single source at my Eyes On Fox site. And the limitation of my content isn't lack of Fox News bias. It's lack of time and resources on my part. I'm hoping when my co-host gets fully set up we can up the content a notch.

    The last time a checked Paul Harvey was #1. You won't likely find him restricted to the category of "talk radio".

    I'm not sure why anything I say is "dubious". Oh, I think I get it. I'm not biased your way.

    Oh, and on that list of liberal Foxies. Fox has a couple of liberal analysts who show up from time to time. One or two are actually good. Wesley Clark - it's fun to see, say, conservative Fox co-host Brian Kilmeade try to nip at his ankles. Bob Beckel used to be interesting on H&C until Hannity learned how to deal with him - bascially continually interrupt him so he can't make a point. Estrich appearances are less frequent than before. A friend saw her savaged by a conservative guest - who later admitted he was lying - which was likely her limit of the Fox treatment. Now they've got Ellis Henican - who embarassed O'Reilly in this video clip - but I'm sure O'Reilly will be more prepared in a rematch so he can tame him to be like 'liberal' pet Juan Williams.

    But none of this is really my point. My point is there is not a single solitary liberal hosting a show on Fox News. There's co-host Alan Colmes (more about him later). There's plenty of conservatives. O'Reilly. Gibson. Hume. Kasich. Cavuto. Buttner. Asman. Etc. Plus, look at the conservative guest hosts for these shows like Gingrich, Julie Banderas, and Laura Ingraham. Ever see a liberal fill-in?

    Comparisons to CNN don't work because they, at one point, dropped all pundit shows when stuff like Crossfire got canned. The only exception is them picking up right-winger Glen Beck on Headline News. Look at their other anchors. Is Larry King a drooling lib? Lou Dobbs who's more obsessed with open borders than O'Reilly? Is lightweight Wolf Blitzer (ever see his cream puff interview of Rush) a lib? Is Anderson Cooper shilling against cons like O'Reilly screams against libs?

    MSN has more conservative anchors (e.g., Carlso, Scarboro) than libs. They've got 1 lib I know of: Olbermann. Which is funny. Because this site is obsessed with him even as you joke nobody watches him. So what's the point?

    So we're down to co-hosts and 2nd stringers. Fox News has Alan Colmes, a pathetic pudtz of a lib I've never seen win an argument. Have you? Then they have a long line of O'Reilly wannabes like Banderas, E.D. Hill, Kilmeade, etc. playing the neo-con card hard to get their big break.

    The absolute proof of Fox's overwhelming bias is this. A conservative site like NewsBusters can post a couple of gotchas ever day gleaning a handful of cases of liberal bias out of literally hundreds of print articles, radio shows, and TV/cable news programs. Ironically, a liberal site like MediaMatters can do the same gleaning conservative bias.

    I can find couple pieces of right-wing bias daily just watching Fox News, a single source at my Eyes On Fox site. And the limitation of my content isn't lack of Fox News bias. It's lack of time and resources on my part. I'm hoping when my co-host gets fully set up we can up the content a notch.

    BTW, sorry for the double-post but I got an "internal server error" the first attempt so hit my back button and tried a second time.

    > I'm not sure why anything I say is "dubious".

    OK, but remember, you asked for it.

    You claim: the programs are "100%" conservative. In your next message you admit that is false.

    You claim: the programming is "24/7" conservative talking points. You back off from that as well. Good move. Because it's also untrue.

    You claim: Fox has a couple of liberal analysts... A couple? More distortions. I listed a half-dozen of them and that's before I even got as far as the letter "G".

    You claim: Estrich appearances are less frequent than before. Than before what? I just saw her the other day. What's your documentation for this?

    You claim: Now they've got Ellis Henican - who embarassed O'Reilly... "Now"? He's been with them for years. And how does showing him scoring points over O'Reilly make your case that the channel is "100% conservative talking points"? You can't even keep your argument consistent from one paragraph to the next.

    You claim: Alan Colmes, a pathetic pudtz of a lib... Man, the last refuge of the Fox haters is to smear Alan Colmes. OK, we went over this in another thread but I'll give you a chance too. Please cite the issues where Colmes does not take the liberal position.

    And I know you want to promote your site to get it going. But I hope you're not going to site what you have there are more "proof" for your undocumented, self-contradictory claims. Like your ridiculous assertion that the Special Report all-star panel is "all conservatives", even Mort Kondracke! Of course to make that claim, you not only have to make Mort a righty, you also have to shoehorn Charles Krauthammer in as a "regular", even though his only regular appearances are on Friday, when the genuine "regular, Mara Liason of NPR, cannot appear.

    I give you points for admitting that Olbermann is a lib. Perhaps you will take the next step and concede the overwhelming bias and propaganda of his program. It might even make your next post remotely on topic.

    You have to marvel at the warp brains on the left.
    O'Reilly and H&C have obvious dissenting views expressed on their shows. They always give both sides. If you go on their shows and refuse to answer direct questions and just what to make a prepared statement they will cut you off and demand you answer a question.

    Matthews & Olby regularly bring on their "Washington Correspondent" or "MSNBC Analyst" who NEVER defend the GOP on ANYTHING leaving the casual member of the audience to think they are getting fair and balanced NEWS. Have Milbank and Shuster EVER defended the GOP. The answer is NO. Why are they not labeled as LIBERALSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!

    That is WHY Fox is #1
    and MSNBC is LAST....laughing stock of the BIZ!!!

    It seems obvious to me that FOX NEWS sustains such popularity because it is truly mainstream. Neal Gabler, Eleanor Clift etc. round out a bipartisan presentation.

    question: Is olbermann off every friday now?

    Why?

    Well, a week ago he was flying to LA for some awards show. This past Friday, rumor has it that he was flying back to NY (after spending a week in LA for what). Of course, he couldn't have worked and then commuted back on the weekend like other Monday through Friday workers. Nah, he's "special."

    The reason the Left freaks out over Fox News is because they are "Fair and Balance" and give Conservatives a fair shot if they had their way (which they still do for the most part)then all news programs whould be like KO's.

    Keith and his conspiracy theory
    So kooky you'll laugh 'til you're teary
    He's moonbat deluxe
    Insanity's his crux
    A bad trip like Timothy Leary

    Reality based Humor:

    A Conservative and a Liberal are walking down the street and see a homeless guy. The Conservative gives the guy his business card and tells the man "call me about going to work", he then reaches into HIS pocket and hands the man $20.

    This impresses the Liberal. And they continue walking along. They soon come across another homeless man. The Liberal says he'll help this guy out. So the Liberal gives the guy directions to the welfare office. Then he reaches into the Conservatives pocket, pulls out a $20, keeps $15 for amninistrative costs and gives the homeless guy $5.

    Thats Liberalism.

    i love sucking Bill O Relys cock

    Nagin left for Houston. Blanco wept. Some New Orleans cops looted. The media fabricated. The media reported rumors that were false.

    The Truth from Popular Mechanics study.

    GOVERNMENT RESPONDED RAPIDLY

    MYTH: "The aftermath of Katrina will go down as one of the worst abandonments of Americans on American soil ever in U.S. history."--Aaron Broussard, president, Jefferson Parish, La., Meet the Press, NBC, Sept. 4, 2005

    REALITY: Bumbling by top disaster-management officials fueled a perception of general inaction, one that was compounded by impassioned news anchors. In fact, the response to Hurricane Katrina was by far the largest--and fastest-rescue effort in U.S. history, with nearly 100,000 emergency personnel arriving on the scene within three days of the storm's landfall.

    Dozens of National Guard and Coast Guard helicopters flew rescue operations that first day--some just 2 hours after Katrina hit the coast. Hoistless Army helicopters improvised rescues, carefully hovering on rooftops to pick up survivors. On the ground, "guardsmen had to chop their way through, moving trees and recreating roadways," says Jack Harrison of the National Guard. By the end of the week, 50,000 National Guard troops in the Gulf Coast region had saved 17,000 people; 4000 Coast Guard personnel saved more than 33,000.

    These units had help from local, state and national responders, including five helicopters from the Navy ship Bataan and choppers from the Air Force and police. The Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries dispatched 250 agents in boats. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), state police and sheriffs' departments launched rescue flotillas. By Wednesday morning, volunteers and national teams joined the effort, including eight units from California's Swift Water Rescue. By Sept. 8, the waterborne operation had rescued 20,000.

    While the press focused on FEMA's shortcomings, this broad array of local, state and national responders pulled off an extraordinary success--especially given the huge area devastated by the storm. Computer simulations of a Katrina-strength hurricane had estimated a worst-case-scenario death toll of more than 60,000 people in Louisiana. The actual number was 1077 in that state.

    i guess this is sorta olbermann news, since it was his top story all week. Snakes on a Plane grossed about $15 million this opening weekend. It was enough to hold first place, beating Talladega Nights by about $1 million, but hardly a blockbuster.

    WHY AREN'T THERE ANY MOTHERF***ING PEOPLE IN THIS MOTHERF***ING THEATER!!!!

    Snakes on a plane was the worst movie in the world....but the power of the internet helped opening weekend....
    Wait til the word gets out how BAD this movie is!!!
    We'll see this movie tank next weekend!
    Word of mouth will be the demise of the snakes!

    Actually, Snakes came in 2nd.

    http://www.boxofficemojo.com/weekend/chart/?yr=2006&wknd=33&p=.htm

    "NOTE: 'Snakes on a Plane's estimated weekend gross excludes an estimated $1.4 million from Thursday night previews."

    My source included the additional 1.4 million. But your right in terms of friday-saturday

    Boy, Keith sure did pwn Ann Coulter though. Hahahahahahaha

    - another godless islamic who hates our troops

    Has anybody figured out why KO and CD are so investived in Snakes? Its not a Universal film, so the corporate tie-in doesn't work (I think its a Viacom/Cbs product). So why the nightly "news items" about this movie?

    I know about Snakes on a Plane. I know about the internet buzz. I am Krrraazy. I through paper into the air, 'cause I'm Krrraazy.

    throw

    Scott: "Has anybody figured out why KO and CD are so invested in Snakes [on a Plane]?"

    Keith thinks he's a late night comedy show host, hence his desire to focus on that crappy movie the way Leno and Letterman will / have / would. Olbermann should focus more on his crappy ratings, however.

    When a big story hits and people turn on news, Keith ends up in last place by a wide margin. People don't even trust him to give the latest facts about that pathetic Jonbenet story. It doesn't take a genius to see that Keith is "America's least trusted cable news source":

    The Scoreboard: Thursday, August 17
    25-54 demographic:

    1. O'Reilly 518,000
    2. Zahn 309,000
    3. Grace 288,000
    4. Olbermann 169,000

    Total Viewers:

    1. O'Reilly 2,376,000
    2. Zahn 968,000
    3. Grace 777,000
    4. Olbermann 462,000

    What this really says is Keith is incapable of pulling in normal viewers. "Big" news hits and his audience is stagnant, filled with lefty loons and psychos. The normal people look elsewhere.

    I wonder if Doofy Dan Abrams has figured this out yet?

    Did anyone watch MSNBC over the weekend? They're heavily promoting an attack piece against Bill O'Reilly-- by Joe Scarborough! How bizarre. Olby must be throwing a hissy fit over that.

    GOVERNMENT RESPONDED RAPIDLY

    While the press focused on FEMA's shortcomings, this broad array of local, state and national responders pulled off an extraordinary success -- especially given the huge area devastated by the storm.

    ---------

    absolutely, the extraordinary success in New Orleans is surpassed only by the extraordinary success in Iraq.

    I read an article about Shepard Smith a while back, where Shep stated that he wrote/edited a lot of his program's news stories to use as few words as possible. He said that our attention spans are short; that we just want to hear news stories fast and hear the pertinent parts of a story. And Shep's ratings are great!

    yeah, too many words are a real drag. 'specially the big words with all the syllables. words like 'strategery' and 'nuke-u-lar'. stoopid syllables.

    In contrast, there's our hero Keith, the king of verbosity. Maybe if he'd just get to the point once in a while people would watch his program. Instead, he and his verbage are in the basement of cable news ratings.

    yeah, Keith always uses way too many words, and all the words just keep gettin' in the way of all the points.
    too many words, too many points.

    Missy at August 19, 2006 02:33 PM



    Missy you are deplorable. Just like a liberal, you equate large words (which conservatives know too, by the way) with being smart and knowing the truth. Well missy, that ain't how it works. You can talk till you're blue in the face and it won't stop a terrorist from trying to jam a rocket up your ass.

    There is a time for talk, and a time for action. A time for warrants, and a time for warrantless protection of the innocent from the terrorists, which you call "a civil rights violation." There is a time to coddle minor criminals and a time to use more extraordinary means whatever they may be to save lives. So sit back and feel superior about your "values" all you want, but know that it is only men of action who aren't afraid of breaking a few eggs (or nutsacks) that gives you that luxury.

    "Did anyone watch MSNBC over the weekend? They're heavily promoting an attack piece against Bill O'Reilly-- by Joe Scarborough!"

    I guess the vast right wing conspiracy theory is pretty much dead. I say this is good...O'Reilley is an immoral puss.

    absolutely, the extraordinary success in New Orleans is surpassed only by the extraordinary success in Iraq.


    My god, it would not have been a success no matter how good the response would have been. I mean tens of thousands of people lost their homes and many drowned or were swept away regardless of the response. AND ,yes, many died because they didn't get help in time.

    THIS was an American tragedy, but you treat it like it was test of the emergency broadcast system. You don't mourn the dead, you use them as a punchline to make your political points.

    AND How can you even talk about it in terms of success and failure? This was not some military objective. THere was no enemy, at least not one we are capable of fighting.

    A complete Failure? Tell that to the workers who worked their asses off to get food and water to people. Tell that to the trucks that drove through miles and miles of water up to their windows trying to get people out of the flooded areas. Tell that to the initial helicopters who hovered dangerously above the ground trying to save lives.

    Natural disasters that claim lives are always stories of sadness and loss, but not failure. These stories can have heroes and uplifting tales, but they are never successes. And now that time has passed and Katrina can no longer be used as a political tool, the general public has all but forgotten about New Orleans and Mississpi. If its not something that can help or hurt Bush, why even think about it right? But we forget who hasn't forgotten. THe government continues to work to rebuild the city and help those people.

    yeah, We can yell and scream about the bad job the local, state, and federal government did in New ORleans and complain about how usless the government is. but lets all remember that these government agencies are still there rebuilding. Where are we?

    There is a time for talk, and a time for action. A time for warrants, and a time for warrantless protection of the innocent from the terrorists, which you call "a civil rights violation." There is a time to coddle minor criminals and a time to use more extraordinary means whatever they may be to save lives.

    yes, because we must decide between two mutually-exclusive choices, since you can only do one of them at a time ... talk or action ... minor coddling or extraordinary means. plus, if you look at life that way, it makes things much easier to understand. all you gotta do is just look at things as being one way or the other, and then choose between the two. that's it! (otherwise, things can get really confusing, really fast ... kind of like the middle east. and nobody wants that.) besides, who needs all those meaningless shades of meaning, and subtlety, and nuance. stoopid meaning. stoopid subtlety. like who's sunni and who's shia, and what's sectarian, and what's not. it all doesn't matter anyway, so what's the big difference? same thing with civil liberties and national security.




    first, to hawkeye gay at 11:15, why do you feel the need to use my name or a variation of my name when making a post, although i suspect anon 11:58 may be having an argument with himself. Well done.

    In responce to anon 11:58, you bring up good points, but also understand that at some point a decision has to be made. hopefully talk and appeasement and debate can make the choice better, but it has to be made. If we stay in the grey area forever, constantly trying to make everyone happy, we will never actually accomplish anything.

    oh and by the way, i am glad to see you using a moderate, non-partison source like doonesbury. YIKES!!

    In responce to anon 11:58, you bring up good points, but also understand that at some point a decision has to be made.

    yes, and the decision to be made must be between two -- and only two -- choices. otherwise, things can get way too complicated.

    and you can simplify matters even more by choosing between two FALSE choices -- ones you set up yourself in order to frame the decision, rather than looking at all the facts. that way, things become even more simpler, and that makes things even easier to understand, and much easier to choose.

    hopefully talk and appeasement and debate can make the choice better, but it has to be made. If we stay in the grey area forever, constantly trying to make everyone happy, we will never actually accomplish anything.

    yes, and the grey area is the in-between space that's between the two simple choices you have to make -- and that's the bad area. because in the grey area that's where you try to please everyone. so the grey area is definitely something you want to avoid.

    Since Andrew Sullivan is on vacation, I hope Olby is back tonight to pick up the slack on the loony conspiracy front. How long into the show will it be before he "questions the timing" of the UK arrests and just handed down indictments? Will he claim again it was a political move to distract from Lamont's victory?
    This conspiracy is as good as his "Ohio was stolen" claims and his assertions that Ken Lay was murdered by the Bushes, who then had the whole affair covered up.




    AFTER HARMING U.S. BY DESTABILIZING WRONG COUNTRY, TESTY CHIMP STRESSES IMPORTANCE OF CONTINUING

    WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Citing Iraq as a key example of U.S. resolve in "a global war" on terror, President Bush said Monday there would be no quick U.S. exit despite the strain of the war on American society. At a White House news conference, Bush also conceded that the war in Iraq, with daily bombings and U.S. casualties now standing at more than 2,600 was "straining the psyche of our country." Bush made no mention of the strain on international relations, oil prices, the federal deficit, or the U.S. military and its families.

    No WMDs, No 9/11 ... Old Iraq Rationale Mistaken ... New Iraq Rationale Correct
    Late in the conference, when asked what Iraq's role was in the World Trade Center attacks, the president said, "Nothing." Bush also conceded that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction. The president tied Iraq to the war in Lebanon and Iran's nuclear ambitions as instances where the United States and the world must make strong stands in the global struggle against terrorism. "If we ever give up the desire to help people who want to live in a free society, we will have lost our soul as a nation," Bush said.

    Helps Create Safe Haven for New Terrorists
    "A failed Iraq in the heart of the Middle East will provide safe haven for terrorists and extremists. It will embolden those who are trying to thwart the ambitions of reformers. "In this case, it would give the terrorists and extremists an additional tool besides safe haven, and that is revenues from oil sales," the president said.

    The world did not change after 9/11. We can still afford to keep our head in the sand. We should ignore patterns of behavior, or attacks on US Naval ships, or attacks on embassies, or declarations of war, and we should especially ignore UN resolutions. These resolutions are not actually made to be enforced. They are made so that we can continue to talk and do nothing all the while giving the appearance that we care as we look down our noses at those who dare defy our loon logic. We denigrate the social mores of those who disagree with us in the hope that such a distraction will bring you over to the loony side. We somehow can rationalize preaching the mantra of secularism while defending those who want only totalitarianism. We believe in darwinism but not social darwinism. We are an oxymoron wrapped in a paradox.

    Bush is a Nazi. Death to Israel.

    whoa that's deep. Cartoons really make you think.

    Some anonymous tool just posted this in the July 11th section.

    JUDGE DROPS PADILLA TERROR CHARGE

    "MIAMI (CNN) -- A federal judge in Miami has dismissed the lead terror count against Jose Padilla, the U.S. citizen once identified as a "dirty bomb" suspect and detained for three years without charges as an "enemy combatant." U.S. District Judge Marcia Cooke tossed out the first of three counts in an indictment handed down last year, Padilla's lawyer, Andrew Patel, told CNN. The dismissed count alleged that Padilla and others plotted to "murder, kidnap and maim persons in a foreign country," Patel said. Padilla has pleaded not guilty to the indictment, which includes two other counts -- conspiracy to provide material support to terrorists, and providing material support to terrorists. Those counts remain, and a trial is scheduled early next year. Padilla was originally accused of -- but never charged with -- being a potential "dirty bomber," plotting to detonate a crude radioactive device in the United States, and later scheming to blow up apartment buildings using natural gas."

    hey anon, how come in your story you left out why that charge was dropped? hmmmmmm?


    "(JUDGE) Cooke ruled that charge was unnecessary because the alleged illegal acts were already covered by the other terror-related counts in the indictment. Prosecuting all three charges, she said, would violate the Constitution's ban against double jeopardy, or prosecution of the same charges twice."

    The way your wonderfully edited version reads it would seem Padilla is on his way to freedom. Actually, the judge made a good decision that dealt with honoring the constitution, not padilla's innocence or guilt.

    I am all for persuming innocence, but going out of your way and editing stories to defend accussed terrorists seems a little much, though.




    JUST MORE GOOD OLD FASHIONED WINGUT REASONING
    New Christian broadcasting TV special featuring Ann Coulter blames Darwin for Hitler

    ST. PETERSBURG (FLA) -- An upcoming television special produced by a Christian broadcaster that features conservative pundit Ann Coulter blames Charles Darwin for Adolf Hitler. "Author and Christian broadcaster Dr. D. James Kennedy connects the dots between Charles Darwin and Adolf Hitler in Darwin's Deadly Legacy, a groundbreaking inquiry into Darwin's chilling social impact," announces a press release issued by Florida's Coral Ridge Ministries. "To put it simply, no Darwin, no Hitler," says Dr. Kennedy. "Hitler tried to speed up evolution, to help it along, and millions suffered and died in unspeakable ways because of it."

    "We keep hearing about gaps in the theory of evolution," Coulter says in the special. "The whole theory is a gap. I think Darwinism is popular as a story because it allows atheists not to have to explain why we're here," Coulter says in the special. Coulter has been widely criticized for her attacks on Darwin's theory of evolution, which she called "one notch above Scientology in scientific rigor" in her book. "The claim that there is no evidence for evolution is simply ridiculous," wrote University of Minnesota associate professor P.Z. Meyers, "there were 150,000 primary evolution research articles alone ... and an index over 4800 journals ... which contain about 12 million articles going back to 1966."

    The way your wonderfully edited version reads it would seem Padilla is on his way to freedom.

    au contraire, tiny mind, the original post included, "Padilla has pleaded not guilty to the indictment, which includes two other counts -- conspiracy to provide material support to terrorists, and providing material support to terrorists. Those counts remain, and a trial is scheduled early next year."

    Actually, the judge made a good decision that dealt with honoring the constitution, not padilla's innocence or guilt.

    precisely. the judge made a good decision, one which counteracted the administration's typical over-reaching in its usual unconstitutional haste to orchestrate a nexus of politics and terror.


    Yes, Hitler did believe in social darwinism, and did try to force evolution into creating a blonde haired, blue-eyed aryan race. That is true.

    Whats not true is that this was Darwin's fault. darwin was a revolutionary thinker and scientist who did his job (and did it well) and changed the way the world thinks.

    Hitler was a psycho who believed evolution could be used to create perfection.

    TO blame Darwin is idiotic, but we also can't ignore that Hitler drew influence from it.

    In summery, Blaming Darwin for how some psycho would interpret his work = stupid

    Saying that the world would have been better off without Darwin = stupid

    ignoring the influence hitler drew from Darwinism = stupid

    Ann Coulters views on evolution = stupid


    au contraire, tiny mind, the original post included, "Padilla has pleaded not guilty to the indictment, which includes two other counts -- conspiracy to provide material support to terrorists, and providing material support to terrorists. Those counts remain, and a trial is scheduled early next year."

    au contraire, vous n'avez pas inclus pourquoi la charge a ete lachee............tiny mind!

    hmm ... i seem to remember some wingnut somewhere recently mentioning social darwinism.

    "The world did not change after 9/11. We can still afford to keep our head in the sand. We should ignore patterns of behavior, or attacks on US Naval ships, or attacks on embassies, or declarations of war, and we should especially ignore UN resolutions ... We somehow can rationalize preaching the mantra of secularism while defending those who want only totalitarianism. We believe in darwinism but not social darwinism."

    Note: i cant remember what "charge" is in french.....lay off me!

    that cartoonist really knows the military, two SIX star generals. WOW!

    The liberal commitment to the destruction of the American way of life was shown again as Judge Anna Diggs Taylor (a woman no less) recently ruled that the Bush administration’s use of NSA wire taps is both illegal and unconstitutional. In case you’re wondering, this ruling does in fact seal the fate of all Americans. This out of control activist woman judge with the help of the ACLU (surprise, surprise) have just handed al Queda the keys to your house. The most you can hope for at this point is that the terrorists don’t track mud onto your nice carpet as they sneak into your home to slit your throat while you sleep.

    President Bush’s response to this travesty of justice was of course firm, direct, and completely correct: “Opponents of the NSA surveillance program ... simply don’t understand the nature of the world we live in… We must give those whose responsibility it is to protect the United States the tools necessary to protect this country in a time of war�. I couldn’t agree more, Mr. President. In fact, the single biggest problem with the Constitution in general is that those who originally drafted it had a pre-9/11 mindset. We live in a very different world now and we can’t allow ourselves to be constrained by the civil rights of America’s citizens. Sorry liberal traitors, if we actually want to defeat this enemy and spread freedom and democracy across the globe we no longer have the luxury of a right to privacy. Deal with it.

    While the implications of this ruling are terrifying, if there’s one thing I know about President Bush, it’s that he won’t allow this to prevent him from protecting America. He’ll find a way around this Constitution problem and defeat our Islamist foes. Until he does though, your personal terror level should remain somewhere between “completely incapacitated by fear� and “soiling your pants.� I, on the other hand, shall remain strong in the face of our impending doom. I personally understand that protecting the principles of an outdated piece of parchment like the Constitution simply doesn’t matter in the context of the War on Terror. I know this, the President knows this, and you should know this. I just pray that until the President is able to address this, that the terrorists will limit their inevitable orgy of destruction to the godless liberals who support this ruling.

    Anonymous you seem to be having lots of fun with your bogus posts regarding the NSA decision by the Carter appointed district court judge. Your elation shall be very short lived so have fun while you can. While many short sighted libs are celebrated the result, some who otherwise favored the result are alarmed at the shrill tone and thin legal reasoning, especiially for such a monumental decision. So, when the case reached the fairly conservative 6th Circuit, expect a reversal from this thoroughly shoddy junk that passes for legal jurisprudence.

    This screed was too much even for the reliably liberal Washington Post:

    The nation would benefit from a serious, scholarly and hard-hitting judicial examination of the National Security Agency's program of warrantless surveillance...
    Unfortunately, the decision yesterday by a federal district court in Detroit, striking down the NSA's program, is neither careful nor scholarly, and it is hard-hitting only in the sense that a bludgeon is hard-hitting. The angry rhetoric of U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor will no doubt grab headlines. But as a piece of judicial work -- that is, as a guide to what the law requires and how it either restrains or permits the NSA's program -- her opinion will not be helpful

    Most amusingly, Jonathan Turley, who gave Olby just what he wanted by telling him how "thoughtful" it was. A few days later he was complaining about how sloppy the decision was and how it missed many key points! It must have been that Olby Distortion Field that had affected him.

    Now we've got yet another idiot on the board! This guy posted at 10:13 a.m. today under the screen name "anonymous", because he finds it too challenging to pick a screen name. Instead, he posts a picture of himself or his wife (it's hard to tell which). Then he attributes remarks to me which were not said!

    Anyone with basic reading skills could see that I said that Olbermann is just too verbose. He uses 100 words when ten could have been used, and his verbosity adds absolutely nothing to the story being presented. I mentioned NOTHING about the category or number of syllables of the words he uses, just that it takes him too long to get a thought across.

    If you were truly a friend of Keith's, you'd take this as constructive criticism and tell him the world doesn't have time to listen to the news in the manner in which he reports. But don't take my word for it; just look at his ratings. I'm apparently not the only viewer who feels this way.

    "Hawkeye gay",

    In your very vulgar and offensive post to me, above, you are attributing words to me as if I am some liberal against any type of government surveillance. Nothing could be further from the truth - the government should be able to surveil all it needs to; I'd rather be surveilled than have our country attacked again by terrorists.

    Last week's ruling by Anna Diggs Taylor was deplorable, and will be overturned on appeal. Liberals want to be protected, yet are working their hardest so that the tools necessary for government to protect us are all taken away.

    "the government should be able to surveil all it needs to"

    spoken like a true fascist.

    ... a true Stalinist ... a true McCarthyist ... a true Maoist ... a true al-Qaedist ... a true freedom hater.

    how stupid can you possibly be? this country was conceived on the very principle that government should not "be able to suveil all it needs to". my god, the sheer depth of your unintelligence and misunderstanding of such a fundamental democratic axiom is utterly breathtaking. as part of the republican base, you are not just a useful idiot, but an absolutely invaluable one.


    KO is that you....it sure sounds like you

    how stupid can you possibly be? this country was conceived on the very principle that government should not "be able to suveil all it needs to". my god, the sheer depth of your unintelligence and misunderstanding of such a fundamental democratic axiom is utterly breathtaking.


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bill_of_Rights_is_not_a_suicide_pact

    A few days later he was complaining about how sloppy the decision was and how it missed many key points!

    Which means exactly nothing when the matter is taken up for review by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.

    Appellate courts can't reverse an appeal because it looks like a "C-" essay in Constitutional Law. If they disagree with the reasons Judge Taylor ruled the way she did, but agree with her conclusion, then the judgement will be affirmed.

    That's not necessarily true, Anon 12:25.

    The judge didn't address any of the legal points made by either side. In fact, there is so far no evidence that the plaintiffs had any standing to file the case(i.e. no evidence that these individuals were affected by the surveilance), which alone could lead to overturning her ruling.

    While it is possible that the Appeals court could agree with the ruling but not the reason, most legal experts, including Jonathon Turley as seen in interviews other than with KO, feel it will be overturned. And there is already a stay on her decision pending appeal.

    In fact, there is so far no evidence that the plaintiffs had any standing to file the case(i.e. no evidence that these individuals were affected by the surveilance), which alone could lead to overturning her ruling.

    Au contraire, sir. The plaintiffs who are attorneys showed a visible harm - that their clients overseas do not feel that they can speak freely because anyone monitoring their conversation would breach the attorney-client privilege (third-party present shatters the privilege). That no specific case of breach has been shown is not relevant - the fact that the privilege has been threatened to the point where an attorney cannot adequately represent his client because his client will not communicate openly is sufficient.

    While it is possible that the Appeals court could agree with the ruling but not the reason, most legal experts, including Jonathon Turley as seen in interviews other than with KO, feel it will be overturned.

    Based upon what (other than the argument that the Sixth Circuit is more conservative)?

    And there is already a stay on her decision pending appeal.

    Which is normal in any decision that would severely alter the status quo and where the losing party has an avenue of appeal.

    Standing in this case was established by journalists who claimed that they were in contact with terrorist enemies of the US and that after the NYT revealed that the Bush Administration was listening to overseas calls, their sources refused to talk on the phone.

    This is a joke right?


    Here is her ENTIRE in depth analysis of the constitutionality of the claim:

    "The irreparable injury necessary to warrant injunctive relief is clear, as the First and Fourth Amendment rights of Plaintiffs are violated by the TSP. See Dombrowski v. Pfister, 380 U.S. 479, 85 S. Ct. 1116, 14 L. Ed. 2d 22 (1965). The irreparable injury conversely sustained by Defendants under this injunction may be rectified by compliance with our Constitution and/or statutory law, as amended if necessary. Plaintiffs have prevailed, and the public interest is clear, in this matter. It is the upholding of our Constitution."

    Other strong analysis such as "obviously this violates the 1st and 4th amendment" are thrown in again later to further buttress the loony argument.

    With concrete evidence like this, I don't know how this decision could possibly be overturned.

    This decision reads like a first year law clerk smitten with Noam Chomsky. Thanks Jimbo. You sure can pick 'em.

    While it is possible that the Appeals court could agree with the ruling but not the reason, most legal experts, including Jonathon Turley as seen in interviews other than with KO, feel it will be overturned.

    Based upon what (other than the argument that the Sixth Circuit is more conservative)?

    Based upon a court's finding that the government's interest in securing the safety of its citizen's against tangible and credible threats is paramount to some future speculative interest of terrorists (or persons linked to terror) to converse in secret with attorneys or jounalists based in the United States. Further, the fleeting nature of the evidence requires immediate action by the Commander in Chief to authorize invesigators to listen to such calls, otherwise the narrow window for obtaining this vital intelligence will pass while we wait hours and even days for a FISA tribunal to rule.

    otherwise the narrow window for obtaining this vital intelligence will pass while we wait hours and even days for a FISA tribunal to rule.

    That's bullshit. You can get a FISA warrant up to sixty days after the fact for matters of national security, so arguing "exigent circumstances" is a loser no matter how you slice it.

    Cartoons depicting Bush as a moron are much more original.

    at least editorial cartoons -- for which there is a Pulitzer Prize -- say something, nimwit. you know, content ... meaning ... depth ... wit ... humor ... pith. but that's all pearls-before-swine among the resident morons at OW.

    by the way, how's the war going? got a new secretary of defense picked out yet? apparently, nobody wants the job. that's strange, what with things going so well in the Messopotamia. just keep on backin' brainiacs like Bush, a--hole, that way you'll NEVER have to learn anything.

    "that's all pearls-before-swine among the resident morons at OW."

    Oh, I see. You lecture the clear thinkers on your refined taste and your enjoyment of things filled with "content", "meaning", "depth", "wit", blah, blah,blah and yet you extol the virtues of Meltdown with Puppet Theater, non-stop updates on TomKat and the nausea inducing Micheal Musto and you want us to take you seriously? You are a joke, my friend.

    "by the way, how's the war going?"

    Not as well as one might hope, but finishing the job is an infintiely preferable option than deploying to Okinawa ala Murtha.

    "got a new secretary of defense picked out yet? apparently, nobody wants the job"

    Oh, you're on the hiring committee that's picking out the new SecDef? You've been reading Kos too long. The old saw that Rummy's getting fired and nobody else wants the job has been floated by the angry loonybin leftists for months now. This one is even older than "Rove's been indicted in the Plame matter and is getting ready to do the perp walk" and we already saw that one go down in flames after the loonies at truthout peddled lie after lie on that one. This bogus Rummy story is the same deal. BTW, any new developments on the stolen election in Ohio story ?

    OMG! Check out the Hitler on the front page of this site! Haven't seen taste this bad in YEARS. This site is a real find!

    Now wait, Keith raises his hand in a Hitler salute in front of a crowd, and O.W. gets accused of bad taste????????? Ah....no....but.....wait....Oh damm I never was good at Loon reasoning.

    This is awesome!!! There is actually a hitler face stuck on some body giving a nazi salute! Sweeeeeet. Hitler=funny. Imitating someone imitating someone acting like hitler is a great way to use additional Nazi imagery on your site without tipping your hand too far!!

    I'm going to make a list of all sites using hitler's image!

    This is awesome!!! There is actually a hitler face stuck on some body giving a nazi salute! Sweeeeeet. Hitler=funny. Imitating someone imitating someone acting like hitler is a great way to use additional Nazi imagery on your site without tipping your hand too far!!

    I'm going to make a list of all sites using hitler's image!

    Imitating someone imitating someone acting like hitler is a great way to use additional Nazi imagery on your site without tipping your hand too far!!

    clever