ICN has cable ratings for Monday. Guess who's in fourth place AGAIN at 8 p.m.! It must be sad to get bitch-slapped by Nancy Grace every night.

http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2006/08/08/mondays-numbers-19/#more-2898

That is sad...not only that but, he's getting his ass kicked in the coveted "demo". I thought he had all the young, hip viewers but it looks like they are watching Grace not Herr Orangermann.

TVNewser also has Monday's ratings, and Paula Zahn's numbers are much higher than those reported by ICN.

http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/ratings/the_scoreboard_friday_august_4_41639.asp#more

Retraction - those are Friday's numbers. I thought they were Monday's. My bad.

Who's Keith Olbermann?

Keith Olbermann is, simply put, a stone, cold punk. He's a liar and a coward, and judging by his constant baiting of Fox News, the #1 cable news network, a masochist. The man actually believes he'll bring FNC down. It's not if but when will his meltdown occur: on or off the air.

MSNBC: the place where friends greet each other with the nazi salute.

Lieberman's website crashed because he's "incompetent" and it was routine "increased traffic" that did him in.

J$, do some research instead of parroting Mainstream Media LIES:

1. Lieberman's site was on a server with a 10GB bandwidth limit. Any computer-savvy person will tell you that 10GB is way too small a pipeline for a site that's anticipating a sudden surge of traffic because of an event.

2. Ned Lamont's campaign offered to send a technical consultant to help the Lieberman campaign when their site crashed. That offer was refused.

3. Even the right-wing National Review isn't buying the story that Joe was the target of a DNS attack:
"While it’s possible that someone actually hacked joe2006.com, from what I’ve seen, this seems to be the least likely option. More likely, this whole episode started last night with a simple over-usage of bandwidth."

4. If they had suffered a DNS attack, how were they able to post a message claiming that they were under attack? (This message was taken down and replaced with the "Site Under Construction" banner.)

Hey anon, were you responsible for the website going down? I can't think of any other way you would KNOW for a fact that the MSM were telling LIES. Unless you were involved in it, you don't know any more than Kos what brought that website down.

All we DO know is that his provider says it was a DNS attack that began in the wee overnight hours. Whether it was or not, I don't know and neither do you. So there.

How can a host have a guest on his show to discuss an election without mentioning that the guest has endorsed one of the candidates in the race being talked about?

Please, can even Olbermann apologists defend that?

SMG

All we DO know is that his provider says it was a DNS attack that began in the wee overnight hours.

"It's highly unlikely this is a true DoS of DDoS attack. This is because we can ping all the IPs noted above and we can see the page at http://server1.myhostcamp.com/suspended. page. If this was a real DoS or DDoS attack, we'd not be able to see any of this and their servers would not be answering their ping at an average of 50ms (millisecond) per packet. True attacks bring down servers, routers and networks."

"4. If they had suffered a DNS attack, how were they able to post a message claiming that they were under attack? (This message was taken down and replaced with the "Site Under Construction" banner.)"

And add to that, why didn't they just put the site back up? They never claimed their server was destroyed. Any competent ISP/Web host could have corrected the problem.

Lieberman was making a pathetic attempt to play for sympathy and to blame Lamont for his own incompetence. Why anyone would want to spend the last hours of their campaign whining about a website going down is beyond me. Not many people check a website just before they go out and vote. Especially, a politician's website.

WE all have that morbid sense of curiousity, & tonight to satisfy mine, I watched the Talking Points on The Factor, hosted by easily one of the world's worst persons, one Bill O'Reilly...

He went off about these "far-left" blogs/sites & how they are not satire, but down right haters, blah blah...Now, if you're going to talk this kind of smack (yes, that's Jim Rome lingo for those familiar w/him, for the others, well, too hard to explain) you need to mention the far-right hate sites, as there are many....

Old "call FOX security" Bill will always bad-mouth the left, but anyone w/any intellectual honesty knows that the far-right (w/such heathens as Coulter, Savage, Beck, Limbaugh, & numerous others) wrote the book on hate & wishing ill on those who disargee w/them, especially Coulter..Bill gives the right carte blanche & blasts everyone & everything left of center...

So quit whinning about Olbermann, as you've got your right-wing FOX to proclaim the gospel according to wacky conservatism...

None of the people you listed are cowards. Keith Olbermann is.

So quit whinning about Olbermann,

On nearly every show - every one of them - O'Reilly will have a liberal guest or multiple guests on to challenge his arguments and views.

Can Mr. Olbermann match that? How about an opposing view on just once a week? Once a month? Every six months?

Why not?

Who did he have on this evening to discuss the Lamont-Lieberman race? Markos?

Alone.

Gimme' a break.

SMG

Do you think KO has candles lit during his marathon bath tub sessions?
Who picks up the papers he throws on the floor during his show. That poor sap.....hehehehehe....lol

Say what you will about Olbermann, he does know an astounding amount of information about. . .baseball (and that is to his credit). Also, watching him and Dan Patrick on Sports Center in the early 90's was a thing of beauty. Really, I was a huge fan of his back in my college days when I thought sports really mattered.

Beyond that, he is a shrill hack when it comes to political reporting and would do well to go back to his forte.

I'm no O'Reilly fan, but I do notice that he does try to bring in people from a variety of points of view to argue with him and other guests. Olbermann is obviously of the ilk that believes that its political opinions are merely correct and having differing points of view would be akin to having mathematicians argue the sum of 2 + 2. He represents the worst kind of partisan hackery, and his ratings consistently reflect that.

Oh yeah, he is also a boorish douche.

people people people shut the fuck up
ive been readthing this site and all
you people are doing is giving Keith
All the best ratings and more people watchin his show oh man

i agree this one poster if you dont like him
go fuckin protest outside of msnbc and go kill keith.

if you dont like him
go fuckin protest outside of msnbc and go kill keith

Well, setting your charming eloquence aside, I've got a small question: Do you make similar posts at MediaMatters where there is criticism of Bill O'Reilly and FoxNews?

Lots of media criticism on the internet - from the right left and, I suppose, the center. Should those sites be shut down too?

SMG

if you dont like him
go fuckin protest outside of msnbc and go kill keith

And what is it with the political Left and the need to use high school gutter language? Is it supposed to represent "authenticity"? Is it supposed to impress anyone?

Well, here's a clue: It doesn't.

All it does is make a person older than 15 sound like an idiot.

SMG

Hey Earl, what's happening? Have you heard from Jason? Any reason why he never uses capital letters?

.... or punctuation for that matter. But I still love his posts, though. Illuminating to say the least.

Keith claimed he is 'about the same height' as BO'Reilly. In fact, Bill O is 2 or 3 inches taller. Oh yeah, and everybody knows that Bill O would clobber Keith in a real life slap-down.

Are all the computer screens in Canada four inches wide? Is that why Jason/ Don/ Earl keeps writing posts that look like a Dr. Seuss book?

Jesus dude, learn where the shift key and period are, at least. And quit with the "protest outside MSNBC" crap.

My favorite part was
"All the best ratings and more people watchin his show oh man"

Have you ever actually looked at the ratings, or just going by what KO says?

"I'm no O'Reilly fan, but I do notice that he does try to bring in people from a variety of points of view to argue with him"

Yeah, this sounds great in theory, but it's not practiced on his show...Soon as someone says something he doesn't like, he'll interupt them, or, as was the case w/Jeremy Glick, he just threw him off the air....Glick's dad was killed on 9/11, and Bill O didn't like what he had to say, so Mr. O threw him out..

Should Keith have some critics on, yes...But if it's going to be like O'Reilly who does the aforementioned, then why bother....

"back in my college days when I thought sports really mattered"

Sounds like me..During my college days in the early 90's, I would never miss a SF 49er. or LA Lakers game, & always watched Sportscenter....Now, though I follow sports, I don't care who wins the Super Bowl, NBA Finals, etc....

What a strange blog. I'd take Olbermann over O'Rielly any day. Both have nicely sized egos, but O'Rielly shouts down people he disagrees with and says stupid things constantly. My favorite segments are when he specifically takes time to make a logical, unbiased argument. It's funny because most people try to do that all the time and because he states at least a few fallacies.

You can have Olbermann. Americans have spoken and they seem to prefer Bill over Keith by a large margin.

I agree that Keith never shouts down anybody. It's hard to shout down someone who's massaging your ego and who's in 100% agreement with you.

You state that you would take Olbermann over O'Rielly any day..because Bill "shouts down people he disagrees with"

My question to you is....How does Orange Man handle people he disagrees with? Well, when he has one on his show, please let me know what his M.O. is. I don't think he disagrees with Musto, Rocca, Wolfman, John Dean, Lawrence ODonnell, EJ Dionne, Craig Crawford, David Shuster, and Dana Milbank very often (unless it is about Family Guy or a baseball card), so please let me know when that day happens.

I think we know how Mr Man-Tan deals with guests who don't parrot his spin. He stays home, refuses to get out of his bathtub, and makes John Gibson do his job!

.Glick's dad was killed on 9/11, and Bill O didn't like what he had to say, so Mr. O threw him out..

O'Reilly threw him out because the despicable Glick used his appearance to accuse the Bush Administration of being behind the attacks.

Like Ms. Sheehan, I'm sorry Mr. Glick lost a close relative; but that doesn't give either of them the unquestioned moral authority to say outrageously sick, twisted and patently false things.

Beside Glick, can you (or MediaMatters, which I assume is your source for this charge) cite other instances where O'Reilly prevented a guest from expressing his or her views?

And this still doesn't answer the question on the table: Why won't Olbermann allow guests on to express dissenting views from the liberal orthodoxy?

SMG

I don't watch O'Reilly much - when he does something I can't stomach I have to change the channel so on the occasions I watch I never actually make it to the end of the show. But I happened to flip to his show, I believe, on Monday night and he had two people on to discuss a topic I forget. The interesting thing is that both guests were at odds with O'Reilly - one a former Clinton appointee and the other from an undescribed think tank (though it would have to be right).

Olberman won't even go toe to toe with ONE person who disagrees with him and O'Reilly had TWO at the same time. If he's not providing MSNBC the minimal intellectual heft required to tangle with ANYONE with different opinions what is MSNBC getting? I mean besides the mindless repeating of leftist talking points?

To be fair to O'Reilly, at least half the time I shut off the show because of the topic - Hollway type crap. But sometimes it's O'Reilly getting in over his head.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/col/grove

At age 47, "Countdown" host Keith Olbermann has found a novel use for his �MSNBC prime-time show: on-air shoutouts to the ladies in his life. Introducing a fake clip of Tom Cruise's daughter Suri on Monday night, Olbermann announced that it was obtained "by our 'Countdown' L.A. deputy bureau chief, Katherine Tur." That would be Katy Tur, a 2005 graduate of the University of California at Santa Barbara. Back in June, the Web site jossip.com reported that Tur was Olbermann's date to an Al Gore book party, and they seemed to be more than just friends. After receiving no response to an initial request for guidance, Lowdown called the MSNBC flack again. Didn't she get the message? "I did." Any comment? "No."

Right on, Johnny Dollar.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/col/grove

At age 47, "Countdown" host Keith Olbermann has found a novel use for his �MSNBC prime-time show: on-air shoutouts to the ladies in his life. Introducing a fake clip of Tom Cruise's daughter Suri on Monday night, Olbermann announced that it was obtained "by our 'Countdown' L.A. deputy bureau chief, Katherine Tur." That would be Katy Tur, a 2005 graduate of the University of California at Santa Barbara. Back in June, the Web site jossip.com reported that Tur was Olbermann's date to an Al Gore book party, and they seemed to be more than just friends. After receiving no response to an initial request for guidance, Lowdown called the MSNBC flack again. Didn't she get the message? "I did." Any comment? "No."

Once again, Keith Dimbulbermann is just an annoying, shrill douchebag.

My question is: who in the name of good heavens watches his show? Can someone come forward who can honestly claim to be a watcher of "Countdown"?

Because as soon as they step forward, their mental competency should be examined and challenged.

Once again, Keith Dimbulbermann is just an annoying, shrill douchebag.

My question is: who in the name of good heavens watches his show? Can someone come forward who can honestly claim to be a watcher of "Countdown"?

Because as soon as they step forward, their mental competency should be examined and challenged.

Getting back to the early discussion in this thread (before the usual Bill vs. Keith daily battle took over), there is this information regarding the bandwidth question of Lieberman's campaign website, straight from a left-leaning blog (TPM):

"I asked Samuel Hubbell (owner of the hosting firm myhostcamp.com, which Geary used for the Lieberman site), what kind of account the Lieberman campaign was paying for, and if earlier accounts were accurate that the senator's camp had taken only a minimal $15-a-month contract.

"They were actually paying quite a bit more, with over 400 gigs of bandwidth a month," Hubbell said. Hubbell declined to give an exact figure, but Geary said the campaign had been paying around $150 a month for the hosting service. (Earlier, Geary told Paul Kiel the campaign paid "a bit more" than the reported $15 monthly fee.)

"We have a range" of account types, myhostcamp.com's Hubbell said. "We do smaller ones, we do some larger ones."

Hubbell said his company's servers resided at facilities owned by Houston, Tex.-based Server Matrix, also known as The Planet. According to the firm's Web site, Server Matrix has four hosting datacenters, all located in Texas. The company offers a wide variety of security services, including at least two to protect sites against denial-of-service attacks.

When I spoke with him at 9 p.m. Tuesday, Hubbell said the site had been hacked, but declined to say what kind of attack he believes had been used.

"We're still trying to figure out where it came from," Hubbell said. "That's what we're investigating. . . I can't clearly say at this point."

Getting back to the early discussion in this thread (before the usual Bill vs. Keith daily battle took over), there is this information regarding the bandwidth question of Lieberman's campaign website, straight from a left-leaning blog (TPM):

"I asked Samuel Hubbell (owner of the hosting firm myhostcamp.com, which Geary used for the Lieberman site), what kind of account the Lieberman campaign was paying for, and if earlier accounts were accurate that the senator's camp had taken only a minimal $15-a-month contract.

"They were actually paying quite a bit more, with over 400 gigs of bandwidth a month," Hubbell said. Hubbell declined to give an exact figure, but Geary said the campaign had been paying around $150 a month for the hosting service. (Earlier, Geary told Paul Kiel the campaign paid "a bit more" than the reported $15 monthly fee.)

"We have a range" of account types, myhostcamp.com's Hubbell said. "We do smaller ones, we do some larger ones."

Hubbell said his company's servers resided at facilities owned by Houston, Tex.-based Server Matrix, also known as The Planet. According to the firm's Web site, Server Matrix has four hosting datacenters, all located in Texas. The company offers a wide variety of security services, including at least two to protect sites against denial-of-service attacks.

When I spoke with him at 9 p.m. Tuesday, Hubbell said the site had been hacked, but declined to say what kind of attack he believes had been used.

"We're still trying to figure out where it came from," Hubbell said. "That's what we're investigating. . . I can't clearly say at this point."