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 7, 2006
    COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN - AUGUST 7, 2006

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

    Host: Keith Olbermann

    Topics/Guests:

    • WAR POLITICS; IRAQ CIVIL WAR?: Howard Fineman, Newsweek; Lt. Col. Rick Francona, U.S. Air Force (ret.)
    • CELEBRITY ROUND-UP: Michael Musto, Village Voice

    The operative spin word on tonight's Hour of Spin was "vacation". In just the opening spiel alone, Krazy Keith noted that Bush started his vacation (1) and twice said of the President: "He's on vacation." (2,3) Beginning the top story, Olby talked about Neville Chamberlain going on vacation (4). He tried to claim that because Chamberlain went on vacation (5), World War II started nine days later. He then mentioned that President Bush "started his vacation" (6) today. KO said of the UN resolution that the President was "making it clear that he isn't not actually involved" with some of the diplomatic legwork. (Let's see: he is not not involved...does that mean he is involved?) Since the Secretary of State is taking point on this, Olby said she is "picking up the pieces of the President's foreign policy".

    The ever-accomodating Howard Fineman was there to serve as ideological silly putty. The first thing Keith asked was about the President's vacation (7). Howie said the White House claims this is a much shorter vacation (8) than prior getaways. He said Bush is often not at the top of his game when he's in Crawford, and KO asked if anybody there believed in history and why don't they realize that this shouldn't be "business as usual". This was another one of those Olby constructions about why this (or whatever the subject of the day happens to be) is a bad move for Bush. Howie said Bush's August Crawford vacation (9) is sacrosanct, and because he's stubborn nobody will tell him otherwise. The count: one "vacation" reference every 45 seconds. Not exactly subtle, but the essence of propaganda is repetition.

    After some chit-chat about Joe Lieberman's tight Senate race, the subject turned to Iraq, with KO again rehashing the testimony from last week by the Generals. Lt Col Francona was asked about "mixed messages" and "discrepancies" and what constitutes a civil war. The reply was that it turned on the "breakdown of the standing Iraqi government". That wasn't good enough for Olby, who cited a UN report about deaths and homelessness and demanded to know:

    If that doesn't define civil war, what, where are we in Iraq?

    Franconi opined it was more like ethnic cleansing, and said that in an outbreak of actual civil war, virtually all US troops would be pulled back. After another tease for upcoming Cruise News came the first break. The discredited Keith Olbermann returned with the evening's Middle East news. "People continue to die", intoned Keith, as he introduced the usual pre-taped report from NBC. And yes, after this three minutes of coverage ended, Olby gave "much thanks" "great thanks" to the videotape machine.

    This is traditionally where Countdown abandons major news, and today was no exception. After another scintillating edition of oddball (carefully crafted to appeal to the intelligence level of MSNBC viewers), KO delivered a brief update on Floyd Landis (recycled network video), and a longer piece on footage of OJ Simpson (more recycled network video). Then another break, and, naturally, a tease of upcoming Cruise News! Plus, in the middle of the break, he teased it again.

    The #2 story was about surgery to separate conjoined twins (more regurgitated network reporting), then on to sneering about Katherine Harris, "Fox Cartoon News Channel", Gene Simmons, and Mel Gibson: Day XII. After still another tease for Cruise News, we finally got there with the #1 story. The creepy Michael Musto covered Cruise, Spears, and the like, and KO contributed phony, forced laughter (the only kind Musto ever engenders).

    In the Media Matters Minute, it was a twofer for The Schmuck. First he ragged on John Gibson, claiming Gibby was "playing with facts" for questioning Olby's assertion that he did "218 consecutive shows" on the Lewinsky scandal and "nobody accused me of being a liberal". Krazy Keith's convoluted explanation:

    I didn't say I did 218 consecutive shows as in 218 consecutive shows without a day off.... Of course I took days off. They're called "days off".

    It all depends on what the meaning of "consecutive" is. Interestingly, KO did not challenge Gibson's report that Keith would refuse to get out of his bathtub, or that he is, and always has been, a liberal. The "worst" position was saved for you-know-who (here's a hint: it's attack #105). Bill's crime: citing the case of a recent rape/murder victim, he said that scantily-clad teenagers shouldn't be out drunk, walking the streets alone, at two in the morning. Sermonized Olby:

    You sick, sorry excuse for a human being.

    Preach on, Rev Olby. Drunken teenagers should be on the streets alone at 2:00 am. It's so much easier to find them that way, instead of having to find conquests in some hotel room with a cheap bottle of wine and a disposable tie.

    Dogs that did not bark: the photoshopped fraudulent Reuters photos (of course). And we got a sterling example of the Olbermann Negative Follow-Up. This is where he hypes a story that fits OlbySpin (example: the Lodi terror trial that was "irretrievably lost"), then ignores it when it doesn't turn out that way he wanted (example: the guilty verdict in said trial).

    Tonight's Negative Follow-Up: we all remember the brouhaha Krazy Keith made about a newspaper that was asking its readers to vote on whether to keep Ann Coulter's column or not. He devoted an entire segment to Annie's column, this reader survey, and how she was losing newspapers (well, one anyhow). The newspaper's readership, it turns out, voted to retain Coulter's column. Not one word about that from the infamous, deplorable Keith Olbermann.

    UPDATE: Inside Cable News has noted our write-up and comments that our quote of Keith on Gibson has some "interesting parsing". They give the quote without ellipses, and we will too:

    I didn't say I did "218 consecutive shows" as in 218 consecutive shows without a day off. I said WE DID 218 consecutive shows about Clinton/Lewinski. Of course I took days off - they're called days off!

    They have a point in that Keith's "out" ("I didn't say 'I', I said 'we'") should have been included. But is that what he said? We have a separate post that answers this question.


    Posted by johnny dollar | Permalink | Comments (68) | | View blog reactions

    68 Comments

    any guess on WPITW tonight......???

    My guess,,,Al-Reuters and and photoshopped pics......NOT!!!!!!!!!!!

    Any surprise that Krazy Keith is still flogging last week's story that, according to a top General, Iraq could possibly devolve into civil war?

    "You know, I hear people say, Well, civil war this, civil war that. The Iraqi people decided against civil war when they went to the ballot box." - President George W. Bush, August 7, 2006.

    An average of 100 people dying a day in Iraq. Thousands of U.S. soldiers caught in a cross-fire between Shi'ite and Sunni forces that seem more intent on wiping each other out than making peace.
    Thousands of Iraqis burning American and Israeli flags at a protest supporting Hezbollah.

    And here's the president, off in his "bubble" again, saying that the Iraqis "decided" against civil war. It would be funny if it weren't so damned depressing.

    A 45 year old virgin with an adam's apple!!!!????? HA AHA HAH AHAHHAHA HHAH A HOOTIE HOOOO TOOOOO FUNNY!!!!!!

    TVNewser has last Friday's ratings. Guess who is dead last in total viewers in the 8 p.m. time slot?

    http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/ratings/the_scoreboard_friday_august_4_41557.asp#more

    I looked at recent pictures of KO. He doesn't appear to have an Adam's apple. What's with that?

    Speaking of ratings and MSNBC, someone give Dan Abrams kudos for the highest rated program Friday in the all-important, life or death 25-54 demo....the 11 PM hour of the "Doc Block".

    The good news for MSNBC is...with these program changes, they could crack the Top 50 list again of cable networks.

    "A sick, sorry excuse for a human being", quote from the despicable Olbie describing O'Reilly in the WPITW segment(yet again). I couldn't help but to laugh when I heard those words come out of his hypocritical mouth. WHAT A BASTARD!

    What was O'Reilly's supposed "crime" this time?

    BO suggested that a drunk 18 year old girl, car towed, separated from her girlfriend, wandering lost in NYC wearing a mini skirt and halter top with exposed midriff has increased exponentially her chances of becoming a victim of foul play.
    And he is 100% right!

    "Preach on, Rev Olby. Drunken teenagers should be on the streets alone at 2:00 am. It's so much easier to find them that way, instead of having to go to some hotel with a cheap bottle of wine and a disposable tie."

    And beads.

    Wow. You sick, sorry excuse for a human being.

    This looks like a case of projection to me. Olbermann must hate himself to say such bile about someone else. No sane, rational person can justify saying this about a rival TV host.

    That is the type of verbiage that may be justifiable when talking about Ted Bundy or Charles Manson.

    Really, clearly, over the line. Smear-merchant? Not nice words, but not over the line.

    It's like Bill O. says, "smear merchant" and then Keith O. goes about proving it.

    Very odd.

    "You sick, sorry excuse for a human being."

    This is nothing compared to what O'Reilly has said..Remember his blow up the Coit Tower & professor face-down in the Charles River blasts, just to name two....At least Keith doesn't THREATEN anyone, talking tough & threatening people are 2 entirely different things..

    Back to tonights WP segment..NO woman, I don't care if shes a dancer at "Scores" or a high-priced call girl, NO woman deserves to be attacked for how she dresses, whether she's drunk, and/or the profession she's in....But when your an elitist/snob like Bill O'Reilly, you don't see that...

    Like the liberal comedian Bill Maher says, "If you wear a hooker's uniform, you will be treated like a hooker. If you wear a cop's uniform, people will treat you like a cop."

    RE:Anon
    Is that you KO....You sure know how to spin the facts!

    I would likr to thank the left for it's support!

    O'Reilly never said the woman deserved anything. He simply pointed out that a drunk, lost, scantily-clad woman in NYC at 2 AM has a high probability of becoming a crime victim. Who could argue with that?

    The folks at Fox News they are rolling
    An ass-kicking to Keith they are doling
    Keith's like a gnat
    Where O'Reilly once shat
    Nearly 10 times the viewers when polling

    O'Reilly did not THREATEN anyone. Here's what he said (from the MSNBC site, of all places): "Listen, citizens of San Francisco, if you vote against military recruiting, you're not going to get another nickel in federal funds. Fine. You want to be your own country? Go right ahead," O'Reilly said, according to a transcript and audio posted by liberal media watchdog group Media Matters for America, and by the San Francisco Chronicle.

    "And if al-Qaida comes in here and blows you up, we're not going to do anything about it. We're going to say, look, every other place in America is off limits to you, except San Francisco. You want to blow up the Coit Tower? Go ahead," O'Reilly continued, referring to the 1933 San Francisco landmark that sits atop Telegraph Hill.

    ---

    He was using hyperbole by stating his opinion as far as what SEEMS like a just occurence of events, if the people of S.F. voted to keep military recruiters out. Do you not see how O'Reilly and others may feel this way? Who do SOME San Franciscans think they are? Sounds like they feel that THEY don't need to participate in the protection of our country, yet expect to be afforded such protection when attacked?

    O'Reilly just stated what most of the country was thinking anyway. But of course if S.F. did come under attack, our military would be there immediately to come to their defense, whether that city participated in our country's defense or not.

    If anyone is elitist here, it's those people in San Francisco who feel that their residents do not have to participate in the defense of our country, leaving that task instead to residents of other cities or others in "flyover" country.

    The point of Neville Chamberlin wasn't that his vacation caused WWII. The point was that Chamberlin was detached and disinterested, just like Chimpy. Bad stuff happens when you're like that.

    You guys should have been cheering Fineman. He practically predicted the downfall of western civilization and the democratic party if Joementum doesn't get re-elected. The punditocracy will eat crow on that one.

    In BO'R's world, its okay to sexually harrass your producer, write creepy rape fantasy novels and of course, the victim always deserves her fate because she would have given Billo a hard-on in that outfit.

    The point of Neville Chamberlin wasn't that his vacation caused WWII. The point was that Chamberlin was detached and disinterested, just like Chimpy. Bad stuff happens when you're like that.

    You guys should have been cheering Fineman. He practically predicted the downfall of western civilization and the democratic party if Joementum doesn't get re-elected. The punditocracy will eat crow on that one.

    In BO'R's world, its okay to sexually harrass your producer, write creepy rape fantasy novels and of course, the victim always deserves her fate because she would have given Billo a hard-on in that outfit.

    The point of Neville Chamberlin wasn't that his vacation caused WWII. The point was that Chamberlin was detached and disinterested, just like Chimpy. Bad stuff happens when you're like that.

    You guys should have been cheering Fineman. He practically predicted the downfall of western civilization and the democratic party if Joementum doesn't get re-elected. The punditocracy will eat crow on that one.

    In BO'R's world, its okay to sexually harrass your producer, write creepy rape fantasy novels and of course, the victim always deserves her fate because she would have given Billo a hard-on in that outfit.

    The way Keith frets about the smallest things like whether Bill O'reilly will ever mention his name on a highly rated television show makes me wonder aloud if this whirling dervish of an Iraq war dove may someday realize a name change is in order: something like Kate Olberwomann.

    Just curious, what did Olby say about Gene Simmons (big KISS fan)

    The fact that Keith's only defence when people call him a liberal is the Monica/Clinton stuff is pretty sad. Considering that was A. about 8 years ago and B. on another show and C. he quit because he got tired of it, it's a pretty bad excuse. What has he done as of late to prove he isn't biased? Nothing. And if he did 218 shows on the CIA leak (which he is probably not far from) would he get sick of that and quit?

    As for his latest attack on O'Reilly, that's just demented. First off anyone can see that a drunken minor wondering the streets of NY at 2 AM is more suseptibal to rape. This are things kids learn in 5th grade DARE class. But somehow Keith finds a way to not just attack O'Reilly but to do it in a most vile way. And for the record I remember Bill saying this and it was several months ago, I wouldn't be shocked if Keith was saving it for a rainy day.

    Umm, Bill-O didn't just say they're more susceptable because of their clothing; he said they're 'morons' for having their car towed and for drinking. He's blaming the victim of a crime, and a rape and murder no less. Sure, they weren't wearing the best clothes to be out at 2AM in NYC (nor did anyone say planned on walking around), but to say Moore is a 'moron' who brought it on herself is wrong. There is no excuse for such brutality.

    You sick sorry excuse for a human being.

    Wow he's throwing anything he can. Like a beaten boxer way behind on points and rounds. Hoping to land that lucky knock-out punch.
    Keith you're the only sorry looking one at this point.

    Look you Loons, go pull out the old tired falafal joke all you want. Theres a girl dead here and for you to turn it around with some old dopey harasment comments that are going on a year and a half old at this point. it makes you all sorry looking too. There's a lot of things to point at. Let's see Girl parks in a no parking zone. Girl and her friend get blitzed! Not going with her friend to the hospital. After finding out the car was towed not going back to the crowded area. After somehow ending up in a cab with this mutant and going to the hotel in Weehawken and leaving the hotel, going back into the hotel. Calling the boyfriend to tell him somebody is following her, he tells her to get a cab, insted of jumping in his car to get her and keeping her on the phone or calling 911. Not thinking and saying."Shit I'm in over my head" calling mom or dad.

    Moron? Yeah maybe not the right word. Would "not the brightest bulb in the bunch" be okay for the politically correct crowd?

    In the end, doesn't matter, the girl is turning into worm food as we speak. Learn from it so it doesn't happen to you're kid.

    For Media Matters, Keith, and the Loons to use a dead girl to take a cheap shot at anybody. Well it makes them look as creepy as Musto.

    Wait! didn't a few months ago some Loon on this website use a guy who wacked himself with a gun to try and get a point across??? Sorry Loons, pardon me, I forgot. It's par for the course for you're crowd. Let's use a dead person to take a cheap shot at O'Reilly!!!! What a class bunch!!!

    Excuse me while I go throw up!

    I find it ironic that while O'Reilly is doing a segment on how some in the media go overboard in attacking others (calling people who disagree with them racists, nazis, etc), Keith Olbermann is taking an O'Reilly quote out of context and calling him a sick human being.

    In other words, Keith unwittingly demonstrated that O'Reilly is right. Of course, much of what Keith does, he does so unwittingly.


    And wasn't it nice of KO to work in a reference to his latest girlfriend er victim-to-be, Katy Tur into his show, calling her a special correspondant for his show. Oh I bet she's a special correspondant all right. Keith likes to correspond with his lady friends doesn't he? This one by the way is 22 years old.

    I Googled "Katy Tur" just to find out more info on Keith's latest conquest, and found something that is almost too good to be believed.

    http://www.dailynexus.com/opinion/2005/9992.html

    Look at the following quote from the column she wrote:

    "Respectable journalists don?t wear hot pink and they don?t die their hair blonde if they are Korean like Mia Lee, one of the anchors at KCAL. The women shouldn?t have fake tits that are pushed up to their neck and the men shouldn?t be orange."

    THE MEN SHOULDN'T BE ORANGE!!!! Perhaps she should have a talk with Mr. Murrow

    To all those who obsess over ratings, what do you make of this?

    In the July ratings for the cable news networks, Fox continues its steady year-over-year decline. This July’s book includes reporting on the Israel/Lebanon conflict. Breaking news events like this spike ratings for news programs. So when comparing this year’s July book with last year’s, it is important to note that there was no comparable news event in July of 2005. That means that the comparisons with this year would have been even worse, but for the boost caused by current events.

    UPDATE: Here is an hourly breakdown (PDF) of the numbers by demo and program, with comparisons to 2005.

    Total Day - 25-54 Demo:
    FNC CNN MSNBC HLN CNBC
    July ‘06: 293 203 109 85 56
    July ‘05: 295 144 84 104 43
    % change: -1% +45% +30% -18% +24%

    Primetime - 25-54 Demo:
    FNC CNN MSNBC HLN CNBC
    July ‘06: 404 278 142 104 61
    July ‘05: 492 210 111 151 61
    % change: -24% +32% +28% -31% 0%

    The severe decline in the Fox and Headline News primetime schedules suggests a possible audience fatigue for the bloviating pundits that populate those dayparts. That includes Bill O’Reilly, Hannity & Colmes, and Greta Van Susteran on Fox, and Nancy Grace and Glen Beck on on HLN. While the increases at MSNBC and CNN may suggest an appreciation for the counter-programming on MSNBC (i.e. Keith Olbermann’s Countdown) and the hard news flavor of CNN.

    Most of all, I believe that the significance of the O’Reilly, et al, free fall is that we may have pushed back the hands of the Armageddon Clock a half hour or so. There is still a long way to go before Fox is knocked off its pedestal, but the trends are consistently pointing toward that outcome.

    You know, with a "decline" that still beats their competitors by a million or more each night? I wouldn't be worried about it at all.

    Anonymous writes:

    "At least Keith doesn't THREATEN anyone, talking tough & threatening people are 2 entirely different things.."

    Oh, of course, not. Orange Boy is the model of mental stability especially when he holds forth on a nightly basis with his pathologically jealous fits about his vastly superior competition O'Reilly . . . oh, uh, upon reflection I may have to revise that assessment . . .

    "Now you listen to me, O‘Reilly, if you are going to call Roger Ailes and Rupert Murdoch truly evil people, I‘m afraid I‘m going to have to ask you to step outside."

    -Orange Boy from the August 4 edition of Meltdown.

    Here's wishing Offalmann many more "days off."

    Here's wishing Offalmann many more "days off."

    The ever hopeful Rocky says:

    "The severe decline in the Fox and Headline News primetime schedules suggests a possible audience fatigue . . . While the increases at MSNBC and CNN may suggest an appreciation for the counter-programming on MSNBC (i.e. Keith Olbermann’s Countdown) and the hard news flavor of CNN."

    Yeah sure, sure. Rocky, wake up and smell the coffee. A leopard doesn't change its spots and Orange Boy is still the same bitter and unappealing bombthrower he was in every other place he ever worked. People like this eventually implode and burn out and we at Olbermannwatch are faciltating this event:

    Here is a cold slap of reality:

    Fox spokeswoman Irena Briganti states,

    "Because of his personal demons, Keith has imploded everywhere he's worked. From lashing out at co-workers to personally attacking Bill O'Reilly and all things Fox, it's obvious Keith is a train wreck waiting to happen. And like all train wrecks, people might tune in out of morbid curiosity, but they eventually tune out, as evidenced by Keith's recent ratings decline. In the meantime, we hope he enjoys his paranoid view from the bottom of the ratings ladder and wish him well on his inevitable trip to oblivion."

    Hank,

    Those aren't my comments that I posted earlier.

    They are from TVNewser. I failed to include the source in my post. Please forgive me, I'm new at this blogging thing.
    I think that MSNBC may hang in with KO, as bad as his ratings may be, since CD is usually their highest rated primetime show.
    Also, you can't ignore the fact the Bill O. ratings have declined 9% from 2005, Hannity % Colmes 18% and Greta 33%.

    What's the horrible Bill O'Reilly going to do next, suggest people don't dress like a seal and swim in water where sharks are known to gather?

    Keith Olbermann: You sick, sorry excuse for a broadcaster.

    "MSNBC's ever-provocative Keith Olbermann says he first was described as a "Howard Beale kind of person" in 1989."

    http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060805/ENT03/608050375/1038/ENT

    More like Jessica Biel.

    Rocky says:

    "I think that MSNBC may hang in with KO, as bad as his ratings may be, since CD is usually their highest rated primetime show."

    If MSLSD is holding on to Orange Boy for this reason, they are asking the wrong question. They should be asking themselves "Is this the best we can do"? Any network that doesn't have the guts to tell the host of one of its featured shows (Meltdown) that his mental derangement is adversely affecting the quality of the product, will deservedly continue to suffer poor ratings.

    "Also, you can't ignore the fact the Bill O. ratings have declined 9% from 2005, Hannity % Colmes 18% and Greta 33%."

    I am not ignoring it. I am saying it doesn't matter because if MSLSD's numbers even remotely approach Fox's, it will be without Orange Boy because his "counter-programming" (to use the TVNewser term) is a predictable one trick pony --use any possible means (lie, distort, omit relevant facts, refuse to engage opposing viewpoints) in an effort to vilify conservatives. This approach may have an enduring appeal for a small segment of the available viewing audience (i.e. moonbats and the morbidly curious), but it is a disastrous approach for building broad based viewership for the long term.

    Hank,

    I doubt MSNBC ratings will ever even come close to FNC, with or without Olbermann.
    I just think the downward trend for Fox News has to make Ailes & Co. a little unhappy.
    Remember when O'Reilly had 3.1 million viewers in 2004? I realize that was an election year, but to go from 3.1 to 2.2 in less than two years should give Bill O. cause for concern.

    As previously disussed here, news cycles have a lot to do with year by year trends. In March/April 2005, the Pope's death and election of a new Pope were the big stories. Don't remember May, but June starts Hurricane season. After a big year in 2004, people were tuned in for 2005's hurricanes. In June and July, there were 6 tropical storms, 3 of which became hurricanes. This year, so far, only 3 tropical storms. No hurricanes yet.

    Where do people turn for coverage of breaking news? FNC and CNN. MSNBC has never been very good at covering breaking stories (although they are pretty good at elections), for example having Don Imus anchor their coverage of Arafat's funeral.

    Obviously, August and September's numbers will be down for all three networks unless (God forbid) there is another major hurrican, or a rapid succession of hurricanes as in 2004.

    "Here is a cold slap of reality:

    Fox spokeswoman Irena Briganti states,"

    You're kidding right?.....Cold slap of reality from FOX??..More like an OPINION from Ms. Briganti & nothing more....

    No, Keith, Hank is not kidding.

    Ms. Briganti's conclusion is a very reasonable one in light of Olby's spotty past employment history, his seething on air behavior at the mere mention of O'Reilly, his refusal to allow dissent to be expressed on his show and his self-confessed mental problems

    Ms. Briganti's conclusion is a very reasonable one

    No matter how "reasonable" it may sound, it is still an OPINION.

    And as they say, opinions are like a--holes - everyone has one and most of them stink.

    Let's use a dead person to take a cheap shot at O'Reilly!!!! What a class bunch!!!

    Umm, using a dead girl to take a shot at O'Reilly? Not really, no. Saying that O'Reilly is an ass for calling a dead girl a "moron" because she died due to an innocent mistake? Yes. What if it was your daughter lying on a slab, because her car got towed?

    It's not "[taking] a cheap shot." It's calling someone out for their divisive use of a dead girl. Bill-O's the one using the dead girl for his own agenda.

    You're a real piece of work Bob Pomfret. You work yourself up into a lather because O'Reilly opined that this girl was a moron for making the poor decisions she made that led to her very preventable death. Moron is defined as "very stupid". Bob, would you like to argue that this girl was NOT stupid in making the decisions she made just prior to her death? Try to focus on this girl's actions and give your specific reasons for your assessment that O'Reilly's conclusion that her actions were those of a moron (i.e. very stupid) is wrong. Was this girl stupid or not stupid when she made the decisions she made to put herself in this situation?

    On the other hand, you give your mentally ill last place orange hero a pass when he tries to defend his Nazi salute to O'Reilly by falsely and disingenously claiming that O'Reilly "defended Nazis". This facile claim has been thoroughly discredited by Bob Cox in a lengthy analysis elsewhere on this site. And of course Orange Boy offers no apologies for this outrageous gesture, which so offended the Jewish community, that the ADL, not exactly known as a champion of conservative causes, wrote a public letter chastising Olbermann for this childish and hateful act. But then again, Olby has got nothing else going for him except ginned up hate for anybody and anything associated with President Bush and conservatism. And you wonder why Olby's staring up from the bottom of the heap?

    Both sides of this tempest in a teapot are too defensive to actually give any quarter to the other side.

    So let me say this. Both sides have a point that is valid here.

    Words are a strong weapon, and the fact that Bill called this girl a "moron" was unnecessary, considering that she died violently and tragically. If I was a parent of the girl, I'd be beyond angry to hear her characterized in such a broad and hurtful way on national TV. He could have gotten his point across without such an emotionally-loaded label.

    However, those arguing that Bill said or suggested that she deserved to be raped and murdered are being disingenuous to make their point. The point was that she put herself in a very dangerous situation by making a number of poor choices (parking illegally, getting drunk well beyond self-control, getting separated from a friend, walking unfamiliar city streets alone in the early morning, lack of awareness of her vulnerability/her appearance heightening her target status, accepting a ride from strangers). The lesson being brought out by Bill is consistent with the general view that he regularly makes regarding personal resonsibility. The world today can be an unforgiving place for those who conduct themselves as if they live in an indestructable bubble, and being 18 is no excuse for believing one can act irresponsibly with no fear of repercussions.

    That is a reasonable point, and is a far cry from stating that Bill said "she got what was coming to her", or that "she deserved her violent death".

    Well said craig. Don't fall out of your chair but I might have even AGREED with Olbermann if he had simply said that O'Reilly should have moderated his langauge while making the point that the girl made some incredibly poor choices. But no, everything with Olby is that Bush, O'Reilly and things conservative are EVILLLL! This is why Olby has poor ratings.

    I see.. only Keith gets worked up about these things and sometimes goes a bit overboard in his wording. Right.... It seems a tad hypocritical for Bill then to personally attacks people merely for their political views, as he does regularly. Or do you choose to ignore such inflamatory statements from O'Reilly?

    Keith said how he felt - that O'Reilly is sick for justifying a rape and murder. And now you're justifying it too. I'm glad you agree that O'Reilly should have moderated his language (though I doubt he'd have mentioned it at all if he didn't feel his moral outrage and could launch a verbal assault). But no, I would not go as far as to say the girl's actions were moronic (moron also has the synonyms of "ass," "idiot," and "simpleton" by the way). Some poor judgement perhaps, but by focusing on her and her behavior, you are saying what happened is her own fault. I'd hate to think that every moron, as you say, who gets their car towed for whatever reason, will get raped and murded. Perhaps you're a fan of such harsh treatment of our fellow beings, but not I.

    "Keith said how he felt - that O'Reilly is sick for justifying a rape and murder. And now you're justifying it too"

    Bob, normally I am willing engage people who oppose my viewpoint in a give and take debate, as those who have been on this site with any regualrity will attest.

    However, your willingness to completely distort and outright lie (in typical Olbermann fashion)about what my viewpoint regarding this story (as demonstrated by the quote above from your responsive post asserting that I have "justified" a rape and a murder)) shows you are not a serious person but a partisan hack who simply hates O'Reilly and will say anything to vent your visceral hate. Since you are not a person willing to engage in good faith debate, I will not further respond to a loser and a liar like you.

    In a perfect world, women would be able to walk down the street stark naked totally unmolested by anyone. But we don't live in a perfect world. The truth and yes, it is the truth, is that getting drunk, dressing provactively, and wandering around dangerous neighborhoods in the wee hours of the morning does endanger a woman's (and anyone else's) personal safety. Those are the facts. Reminding people to be safe and the consequenes of what can happen when you don't, seem to me to be more of a public service. But in the liberal mind, it's some sort of condemnation and "blame the victim" mentality. Go figure.

    Hank - Mmmkay... "you are not a serious person but a partisan hack... I will not further respond to a loser and a liar like you."

    You're the one resorting to personal attacks here. What I did was offer my interpretation of the situation here - that by focusing on the victim of a crime and her mistakes in that way, you are blaming her. No distortions or lies. But sadly, you are unable to argue such points and, similar to O'Reilly's own arguments, choose to say I'm distorting things somehow and go on to personally attack me. Nice.

    Brandon - the way O'Reilly told the story, it certainly wasn't formulated as a Public Service Announcement. More like they got what they had coming to them because they're so stupid. Not to mention they didn't plan on wandering the streets by themselves - their car was towed.

    Bob tries to defend his lying by stating:

    "What I did was offer my interpretation of the situation here. . ."

    Here is Bob's "interpretation" of my viepoint concerning O'Reilly's report about the woman who was unfortunately murdered after parking in a tow away zone and who made other bad decisons that contributed to her demise:

    "O'Reilly is sick for justifying a rape and murder. And now you're justifying it too"

    This is what Bob calls his "interpretation" of my stated viewpoint which is posted above in full on August 9 at 12:18 pm. Read my post and then ponder Bob's "interpretation" that I have attempted to "justify" this poor girl's murder. Bob is a disgusting hypocrite. Don't like my personal attacks, Bob. Then quit lying. Don't give me any of your bullshit weasel words like "it was my 'INTERPRETATION' of what you said" when I have caught you in a perncious lie. Have fun defending your Nazi saluting Orange Hero.

    "is that Bush, O'Reilly and things conservative are EVILLLL! This is why Olby has poor ratings"

    As far as "poor ratings", I highly doubt that...One does not keep a TV job 3 years (& counting) on any TV station if they get awful ratings..TV bosses don't just keep someone on the air because they feel sorry for him/her..

    On a side note, Bill O never mentions his name & it is funny as to why he doesn't..As Keith said, their fued has been written about countless times in many newspapers....And, as far as BOR not wanting to give Keith publicity, well, Keith already got the best publicity you can get anyway with his Leno appearance...That's the best publicity any newsperson can get..

    "Since you are not a person willing to engage in good faith debate, I will not further respond to a loser and a liar like you."

    Empty threat. Or as you might say a "[pernicious] lie."

    "This is what Bob calls his "interpretation" of my stated viewpoint..."

    Umm, there's more to the interpretation...

    "Some poor judgement perhaps, but by focusing on her and her behavior, you are saying what happened is her own fault. I'd hate to think that every moron, as you say, who gets their car towed for whatever reason, will get raped and murded."

    You said her death was "very preventable," talking about her behavior. I can only assume you mean that it was up to her to prevent it, i.e. it was her own fault. I would count saying it is solely her fault as justification. It's good to know you don't think it's justified, but you sure seem to be saying it was alright.

    You should really look up hypocrisy by the way. You call me disgusting hypocrite for.. what, not appreciating personal attacks? But, I didn't offer up any personal attacks. Your accusation of lying, even if it were true, is something completely different.

    "Have fun defending your Nazi saluting Orange Hero."

    Nice way to throw in some completely unrelated inflammatory randomness.

    More Olbermann style weasel words to jusify Bob's continued lying. I called you out Bob for chraracterizing my August 9 post as "justifying" her murder. That is the point, not the bullshit you state above to try to avoid the import of your previous "interpretation" My post above certainly states that this woman's stupidity contributed to her death and her death was very preventavable had she followed some common sense rules. To say that she bears some fault for her own death is a far cry from what you accuse me of-- that I am "justifying" her death (i.e. excusing it).

    I go to the trouble to respond, not so much to engage you Bob, but to demonstrate to the readers of this site how supporters of Orange Boy and BOR haters will intentionally and knowingly twist and distort words and lie to advance their agenda and then when they are called on it, they use Olbermann like tactics to deny that they have done so (Johnny Dollar's write up about Olbermann lying about John Gibson is a good example of this).

    Yes, Bob I did throw in that so called "unrelated inflammatory randomness" as you call it in my last post. That was to get your attention and to re-read my August 9 post wherein I challenged you to defend the Olbermann Nazi salute. You are so good at detecting behavior you deem to be insensitive, why don't you weigh in on the behavior of your Orange Hero, eh?

    "I called you out Bob for chraracterizing my August 9 post as "justifying" her murder...."

    Right, you didn't understand why I said you were justifying, so I tried to explain it to you again. And you seem to agree with my characterization of your argument saying it was her own fault ("....her death was very preventavable had she followed some common sense rules."). But then you skip the part where logic says by it being her fault, you are justifying the crime: you are saying it's not the criminal's fault, it's the fault of this girl and her bad parking decisions, and hence the criminal is absolved. Of course now you are backtracking, throwing in what you'd call "weasel words," like that she "contributed," so as to take away some of the blame from her and make for less of a justification, but it's kinda late.

    "I go to the trouble to respond, not so much to engage you Bob..."

    Alright. I wasn't asking why you continue to respond, just pointing out that you said you weren't going to anymore, which has proven untrue.

    "Yes, Bob I did throw in that so called "unrelated inflammatory randomness"...why don't you weigh in on the behavior of your Orange Hero, eh?"

    Umm, mostly cause it's completely unrelated, and you're simply trying to distract from the main point. It's kinda sad when you aren't really able to argue something, and instead just bring up something else to take eyes away from your weak reasoning and insensitivy.

    Twisting words and meanings gets you nowhere, Bob.

    You continue to go through nonsensical elaborate gyrations to try to prop up your outrageous accusation against me. But this sort of game is old hat for followers of Olbermann who keeps on with the same "O'Reilly defends Nazis" canard which has been proven false by Bob Cox elsewhere on this site. You've learned very well the art of manipulation, distortion and lying very well at the foot of the master Orange Boy.

    I see you have begged off my invitation to defend a truly outrageous act (the Olbermann Nazi salute) in favor of attacking me for agreeing with common sense observations about this girl's murder. You say you won't weigh in on Olbermann's Nazi salute because it's unrelated. It really isn't. What this discussion is really about is what are your standards of decency? By trying to distort what I have said, you have engaged in a despciable Olberamann -style attempt to challenge my standards of decency. Now it's your turn Bob. You certainly had no qualms about defending your Orange hero a few posts ago (" I see.. only Keith gets worked up about these things and sometimes goes a bit overboard in his wording. Right...."), but now you're begging off?

    "You continue to go through nonsensical elaborate gyrations...old hat for followers of Olbermann...you have begged off my invitation to defend a truly outrageous act"

    So now you're completely cutting off all discussion, attempting to force the discussion onto this Nazi salute thing. You simply accuse me of "outrageous accusations" and "twisting words", while failing to point out a single instance of it. Perhaps because you can't.

    Instead of coming up with a rational argument, you say I should discuss what you want to, about how you think the saluting incident is far worse than anything Bill has done, and I should have to defend it (because you think a mocking someone's fascist tendencies is so far beyond excusing the rape and murder of a young woman on the streets I suppose). No, I really don't see this as a sort of general cable-TV-broadcaster standards of decency argument. It's more that Bill said something deplorable and you're saying there's nothing wrong with his statement.

    So, I guess I'll just have to take your not addressing the subject as your admission that you've gotten to a point where you can't come up with an argument anymore, and conceed that perhaps what Bill-O said was over the line.

    I came in here for an argument and all I got was hit on the head!

    Twisting words and meanings gets you nowhere, Bob.

    You continue to go through nonsensical elaborate gyrations to try to prop up your outrageous accusation against me. But this sort of game is old hat for followers of Olbermann who keeps on with the same "O'Reilly defends Nazis" canard which has been proven false by Bob Cox elsewhere on this site. You've learned the art of manipulation, distortion and lying very well at the foot of the master Orange Boy.

    You claim in your previous post:

    "you didn't understand why I said you were justifying" Bullshit-- I understand perfectly well why you claimed I was "justifying" the murder- you had a preconceived agenda you were determined to arrive at.

    "you seem to agree with my characterization of your argument saying it was her own fault"- Bullshit. You characterize it this way because YOU want this to be my message so you can attack with a bogus argument. What I said was she made some bad decisions and that her death was preventable. Had she made different decisons, her death might have been prevented, but then again it might not have. She certainly placed herself at greater risk. Never said it was all her fault, but you would like to twist my words to fit your purposes.

    "then you skip the part where logic says by it being her fault" Bullshit. There is no logical connection between the words you try to put in my mouth (Hank has "justified" her death) and what I actually said, so I did not "skip" anything.

    "by it being her fault, you are justifying the crime"- Double Bullshit. I never said it was "her fault". I never even mentioned the word "fault" at all in my posts and I certainly did NOT say the crime was justified. I challenge you to find where I said it was her fault and the the crime was justified.

    " you are saying it's not the criminal's fault, it's the fault of this girl"- Double bullshit. In your illogiccal world the mere mentioning of the bad decisions that this girl made means I find no fault with the criminal? What world are you living in Bob? And again, I NEVER said that this was the girl's fault. She put herself at greater risk but I never said she was totally at fault.

    "the criminal is absolved"- OK Bob you got me dead to rights here. Yep, this is EXACTLY what I said and you nailed it. You are just too clever for me to get away with it. I should have known--oh, BULLSHIT! You have earned your stripes as a liar here.

    --and here is my favorite line of yours I almost missed your manipulation here until I re-read it:

    "you . . .take away some of the blame from her and make for less of a justification, but it's kinda late."

    There is so much bullshit here. First, I never assessed blame against the girl. But let's assume that Bob the Mindreader is correct and that's exactly what I meant. The girl was totally to blame. Is that the same thing as saying I think the killing is "justified" (that the crime is excused and the killers not punished because the killing is justified). No, they are different concepts. Even if I did think the girl was totally to blame for her own death, the killers are not justified in killing her.

    You need to think through your agenda driven accusations before you start carelessly tossing them around, Bob.


    I see you have begged off my invitation to defend a truly outrageous act (the Olbermann Nazi salute) in favor of attacking me for agreeing with common sense observations about this girl's murder. You say you won't weigh in on Olbermann's Nazi salute because it's unrelated. It really isn't. What this discussion is really about is what are your standards of decency? By trying to distort what I have said, you have engaged in a despciable Olberamann -style attempt to challenge my standards of decency. Now it's your turn Bob. You certainly had no qualms about defending your Orange hero a few posts ago (" I see.. only Keith gets worked up about these things and sometimes goes a bit overboard in his wording. Right...."), but now you're begging off?

    hank If I Had A Head Like You I Would Of Got It Circumcised and I suggest you stop spending your time with sheep, and start thinking a litle "off balance

    Shawn, leave the inflammatory Country/Western song lyrics to the Dixie Chicks!

    You've been hitting the Cuervo a little too hard Shawn, go lie back down in your cot and you can sleep it off tomorrow morning.

    Wow, and I'm the one getting worked into a lather?

    "I understand perfectly well...you had a preconceived agenda"

    Apparently you don't understand. You'll have to let me know what this "agenda" I have is. Peace on Earth?

    "You characterize it this way because YOU want this to be my message..."

    I didn't do so twist your meaning. I thought that you had agreed that you thought it was her fault, but did not agree with that equating to justification. You had said "her death was very preventavable had she followed some common sense rules. To say that she bears some fault..." which seems to show your agreeing to the connection between her lack of prevention and her bearing a degree of fault.

    "I never said it was "her fault""

    No, you didn't directly say it was completely her fault. But, you said her death was "very preventable," correct? And it was very preventable by her, right? And should have known that (otherwise she'd be a "moron"), right? So from that, it would not have happened if she took such precaution and thus it is because of her own actions that the crime occurred. If it's because of what she did, that would be saying it is her fault.

    "Had she made different decisons, her death might have been prevented, but then again it might not have...She certainly placed herself at greater risk."

    Well, that sounds more reasonable. I don't presume to think you are really a horrid person who wishes people to die for their parking mistakes, but by some of your wording it kinda came off that way. It's different to say it "might have been prevented," than to say "very preventable." Because surely you would agree there is no way to say that this would not have occured had she done things differently. There are many, many such crimes that occur under conditions that are quite the opposite.

    But really, the problem that I was originally addressing was what Bill said. His point was that the girl was a moron, and placing blame on her. His focus was on condemning her actions. There's a bit of difference between your measured statement of her having "placed herself at an increased risk" and launching into a tirade about how this crime victim was a moron, implying she brought it on herself and attacking her for it. My point was that it is indeed in rather bad taste and not a "cheap shot" on Keith's part to say so.

    "the words you try to put in my mouth (Hank has "justified" her death)"

    I put that in your mouth? As in I accused you of saying yourself that you had justified it? I said things such as "O'Reilly is sick for justifying a rape and murder. And now you're justifying it too." I didn't say you agreed with my statement.

    "In your illogical world the mere mentioning of the bad decisions that this girl made means I find no fault with the criminal"

    But it wasn't "mere mentioning." This wasn't part of segment on crime prevention. It was saying she was a "moron." It was focusing on this girl's actions, saying what she did were not innocent mistakes, but the actions of an idiot that wanted this to happen.

    "let's assume...The girl was totally to blame. Is that the same thing as saying I think the killing is "justified"

    Alright. Yes, I'd say that by saying someone else is completely to blame is the same thing as justified. Why? Because it would mean that the criminal is not to blame, yes? And from the definition of justify: "To declare free of blame; absolve."

    Here is a sampling of Bob's post from above:

    "I thought that you had agreed"
    "which seems to show your agreeing"
    "No, you didn't directly say"
    "which seems to show"
    "it kinda came off that way"
    "implying she brought it on herself"

    Well, no twisting of my words going on here by Bob I can see, that's a relief

    Bob you tried to get away with characterizing my viewpoint of this horrible crime as "justified" when I point out that she made some really bad decisions (yes even stupid decisions if you want to be really straightforward about it). The last statement in your post is a good example of your continuing effort to recast my viewpoint into a message YOU want it to say by making all kinds of "thought you had agreed" and "seemed to show" contortions on your part:

    "Alright. Yes, I'd say that by saying someone else is completely to blame is the same thing as justified. Why? Because it would mean that the criminal is not to blame, yes? And from the definition of justify: "To declare free of blame; absolve."

    This is wrong once again. The girl bears some responsibility (or blame if you want) for making very poor decisons that placed her at much greater risk. But even if you completely blamed her for putting herself in those circumstances, it does not mean that I believe (or "seem to say" or that "it kinds came off that way")that her murder was "justified" and the criminals ought to not be blamed and punished.

    Blaming the girl for making stupid decisions and thus increasing the chances that she would meet her demise has nothing to do with whether the criminals are blameworthy for the crime. The criminals don't get off because the girl didn't use commoon sense.

    A "justified" killing Bob is when I shoot someone with my handgun who breaks into my house and holds me at knifepoint. A killing is not "justified" because someone made poor decisions and by doing so placed themselves in harm's way.

    So no Bob you are completely off base for interpreting my viewpoint as a statement that the girl's death is "justified". And you know, Bob you seem like a fairly intelligent guy, so I am going to guess that you have known every step of the way in this exchange that your statement is a complete distortion of what I said in spite of all your attempts to exonerate yourself ("I thought that you had agreed"; "which seems to show your agreeing"; "you didn't directly say"
    "which seems to show" ;"it kinda came off that way").

    I'd like to hear more about your statement that Olbermann was merely " mocking someone's fascist tendencies " when he fired off the Nazi salute to O'Reilly. You seem so sensitive to the parents and friends of the girl who was murdered and the effect of Bill O'Reilly's words concerning her actions prior to the murder. Can I make an inference Bob (as you did with my viewpoint about the girl's murder) about how you see the Olbermann salute? You don't seem to care about the traumatic effect that this salute has on the Holocaust survivors and others in the Jewish community, you merely focus on how O'Reilly's unspecified "fascist" tendencies and how the Nazi gesture is, in your view an appropriate response. Did you read the letter of admonishment to Keith from the ADL which points out the horrific symbolism of this salute and asking Olby to refrain from it? Has your sensitivity, which was on high alert when O'Reilly said something "insensitive", suddenly gone dormant when Olbermann does something that is horribly outrageous? We have talked enough about O'Reilly. This site is Olbermann Watch, so let's talk more about the Olby salute and let me hear more about your defense of this latest Olby embarrassment.

    "you tried to get away with characterizing my viewpoint..."

    I didn't "[try] to get away" with anything. I was attempting to give you the benefit of the doubt and thought perhaps you had understood what I was saying. I thought that if you had agreed with one part of the logic, that I could then move on to the next step to better explain that. I guess I was wrong, you either still don't understand it, or you'd rather simply attack me whether you understand or not (I still want to find out what my supposed agenda is in all of this).

    "even if you completely blamed her for putting herself in those circumstances, it does not mean that I believe..."

    But you see that's just it. I didn't say it would be legal or that the perpetrator would not be punished. I simply said that by completely blaming her, it was being justified. Apparently there's no reasoning with you, because you won't even agree with a dictionary. I didn't make up that definition - it's from the American Heritage Dictionary. Again, to justify: "To declare free of blame; absolve." That's not a "[twisting] of your words," it's English comprehension.

    "Blaming the girl for making stupid decisions and thus increasing the chances...nothing to do with whether the criminals are blameworthy..."

    Well, again, complete blame of girl would. If all the blame was reserved for the girl, there would be no blame left for there criminal. Thus that would be justifying it (by definition of "justify," see above).

    But talk about "weasel words." You go from "very preventable" and defending O'Reilly's inflammatory words to "increasing the chances." You took it down a few thousand notches, leaving room for criminal culpability. By trying to sqeeze that in there, you are really demonstrating what's wrong here. There's a lack of distinction between having a radio segment that attacks a crime victim, calling her a moron for bringing it on herself, and saying she may have increased the chances of something bad happening.

    You seem to be getting bogged down in this understanding of synonyms and such with saying whether or not it's "justification." I think the main problem here is not seeing the distinction: to say that it's reasonable not to say something measured about how teens should be more careful about their behavior, but instead chastise the dead.

    "...how you see the Olbermann salute"

    Again you try and take away from the main subject here. This site may be Olbermann Watch, but I'm not one of your columnists. My point is just that what Keith said about Bill being sick for his devisive use of a dead girl was spot on. If you want to talk about the salute, you can go over to that thread and talk. It's alright if you don't want to talk about this any more - we will probably never agree about this, and that's okay.