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 'EST/-5.0/no 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


    September 11, 2006
    COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN - SEPTEMBER 11, 2006

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

    Host: Keith Olbermann, from Ground Zero

    Topics/Guests:

    • 9/11 - FIVE YEARS LATER; WAR ON TERROR: Richard Wolffe, Newsweek; Max Cleland (D), fmr. 9/11 commissioner

    The fifth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks is obviously an occasion for remembrance, for sober reflection. And an award-winning "journalist" like Keith Olbermann knows this somber moment should not be politicized. Or does he?

    The opening spiel began with Keith a bit more subdued vocally, but still capable of false advertising...

    The President gets contentious with Matt Lauer.

    ...and still willing to truckle to the blue blogs in the hope of hyping ratings and book sales:

    A President who has turned 9/11 into a campaign slogan and a photo-op, and forgotten its real meaning.

    KO began The Hour of Spin proper by claiming the nation has never been this "fractured" since the Civil War, taking shots at Cheney, Rice, and plugging his "special comment". After dispensing with the commemorative events of the day with in about a minute's time, Keith complained that Condi was talking about links between Iraq and Al Qaeda, and that contradicted the Senate committee report "composed by Republicans". (Actually, the main work on that report was done by a staffer who campaigned for John Kerry, hired by Republican Senator Hagel.)

    Then Olby described Vice-President's "extraordinary" statement that they would have gone to war with Iraq even if the WMD situation had been known in advance, adding that it was "the most truthful thing 'Mister' Cheney has ever said". After some clips from the Cheney/Russert sitdown, KO went on to Matt Lauer's interview with "Mister" Bush, preposterously characterizing it as "pretty tense".

    The Wolffe Man showed up and said the White House doesn't want to look like it's playing politics, but "it's all political". Then it was time for Olbermann's Fun with Numbers. An NBC poll asked are we safer since 9/11. The results:

    More safe: 42%
    As safe: 32%
    Less Safe: 23%

    So how does Krazy Keith spin this?

    Fewer than half of those surveyed, uh 42%, think that as a country we are more safe than we were before 9/11; 55% combined believing we are as safe or less safe.

    Of course, the same figures could be split up differently: only 23% think we're less safe, while an overwhelming 74% think we are as safe or even safer. Or Keith could have tried something really novel: just report the numbers as written! But then it wouldn't be OlbySpin.

    Wolffie nattered on about how "extraordinarily difficult" it is for the President to make his case, and KO suggested that keeping Iraq out of the headlines is "the game plan". Olby again came back to the Matt Lauer interview, talking about "strain and friction", and the Wolffe Man played along. After giving his guest "great thanks", Keith again plugged his special comment:

    An empty pit, mirroring the empty promises of this adminstration to unite us, and also its unmistakable lies.

    The #4 story was the hunt for Al Qaeda, via a rerun taped report from Lisa Myers; Keith managed to work in a reference to that "wretcherd [sic] ABC miniseries". Oh, and he also mispronounced "clandestine" yet again. Somebody buy Edward R Olbermann a dictionary.

    There followed still another tease for the "special comment":

    The President turns 9/11 into a club to use against political opponents, and on occasion against free speech itself...

    The #3 story was about "Iraq: the great distraction". Al Qaeda's increasing control of a province in Iraq was the pretext to bring in Max Cleland (D), who Olby told us is "busily campaigning for fellow veteran Congressman John Murtha". Cleland got a "great thanks" both at the start and finish of his interview. Rest assured this chat never got "contentious", and there wasn't a hint of "strain and friction" in the softballs lobbed by Krazy Keith. Cleland declared "this is George Bush's VietNam", and it's time to "redeploy the forces" (to Okinawa?). "They" are trying to "slime" Jack Murtha, and Olby allowed Cleland to turn the segment into a campaign commercial. When Cleland put out the website address to recruit volunteers and raise some cash for Murtha, Keith figured that wasn't good enough, and repeated the URL himself in his next question! Then Cleland went on to extoll how wonderful it will be with Murtha heading up the appropriations committee, and decried the "lies" that got us into Iraq.

    Once again it's time to update The List (partisan politicos and strategists interviewed on Countdown, identified by party):

    • May 22: Lawrence O'Donnell (D)
    • May 30: Rep Barney Frank (D)
    • June 9: Lawrence O'Donnell (D)
    • June 15: Bob Schrum (D)
    • June 16: Rep John Murtha (D)
    • June 19: Al Gore (D)
    • June 20: Sen Jack Reed (D)
    • June 20: Lawrence O'Donnell (D)
    • June 23: Al Gore (D)
    • July 5: Lawrence O'Donnell (D)
    • July 12: Barbara Boxer (D)
    • July 13: Lawrence O'Donnell (D)
    • July 26: Bill Richardson (D)
    • August 8: Daily Kos (D)
    • August 9: Joe Trippi (D)
    • August 30: Howard Dean (D)
    • August 31: Barbara Boxer (D)
    • August 31: Rocky Anderson (D)
    • September 5: Tom Kean Jr (R)
    • September 6: Richard Ben-Veniste (D)
    • September 7: Sean Maloney (D)
    • September 8: Mack McLarty (D)
    • September 11: Max Cleland (D)

    Again a tease for that #$@#!@% special comment, followed by still another. This is getting worse than those headache commercials. Olby's Special Comment--Apply Directly to the Forehead!

    In the #2 position, respiratory problems among survivors of 9/11. Clip of Christy Todd Whitman blaming it on New York (and by inference, potential Presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani); no clip of Rudy's response. Up close and personal report on John Graham via Monica Novotny. And still more promotion of guess what?

    My special comment on what this President has wasted: the unity and support that we and the people of the world granted him.

    In best milk-the-ratings fashion, the infamous, deplorable Keith Olbermann held his "special comment" until the last possible Nielsen minute. But it was posted online before he even read it on the air. This was Olby demagoguery in its most virulent form. Imply the President is an "idiot" (attn: blue bloggers), make veiled references to the "mechanics" of his election (attn: black box buffoons), attack the movie you didn't watch for its "bald-faced lies" (attn: David Brock), and raise the spectre of impeachment (attn: Olbyloons everywhere).

    Oh, there was something else in this "special comment": the hole in the ground in New York City that has yet to be rebuilt. It got a passing mention or two during Herr Olbermann's diatribe, but was merely a rhetorical function on which the discredited sports guy hung his sophistic harangue. Note that while the "preview" on the web focused on the true subject--attacking Bush and suggesting impeachment--MSNBC's on-air promos for tonight Countdown led viewers to think something else:

    Five years later, where's the new building? Where's the memorial? Keith asks these difficult questions in his latest "special comment".

    Dan Abrams is not completely incompetent. He knows that Keith's internet bread is buttered with the blue bloggers, but he doesn't want to scare away regular Americans who might be watching A-Mess-NBC during the day. Therefore, the two-track PR approach: focus on impeachment and election fraud for the netroots crowd, but promise a reasoned commentary about rebuilding the WTC site to the unsuspecting tv viewers.

    NAME

    So Keith Olbermann, who lectures the adminstration about calling people who disagree "un-American" but himself used that very term to describe "Mister" Bush just a week ago, delivered his hypocritical sermon. The discredited sports guy who howls about other people "politicizing" the war on terror and 9/11, himself turns his program into a political rant. The MSM will fall over themselves with awe and reverence. Tonight's MisterMeter reading: 5 [ELEVATED].

    UPDATE: The reviews for KO's 9/11 Rant are trickling in from OlbyLoonLand...

    "perhaps his most powerful monologue ever"
    - Truth Dig

    "another amazing Keith Olbermann commentary, delivered from Ground Zero"
    - off time signatures

    "Olbermann stepping up again"
    - impolitical

    "leaves no stone unturned..."
    - Crooks and Liars

    "Olbermann's reply to the President's Address on 911"
    - Athene Biz
    (ed. KO's "reply" aired BEFORE Bush's speech)

    "watch it"
    - Jesus' General

    "Words can't describe this..."
    - The Babbling Academy

    "probably the most powerful commentary I have ever read/heard"
    - Anysia

    "A most eloquent editorial"
    - FatMixx

    "he does it better"
    - The Supreme Irony of Life...

    "reminding us of the incompetency and impeachability of the Bush administration"
    - Seven Generational Ruminations

    "Olbermann Rocks"
    - Blah3.com

    "my hero"
    - The Age of (un)Reason

    "I'm damned grateful for the courage that Keith Olbermann showed"
    - The Enlightened Hillbilly

    "It Ain't Over"
    - Jane Hamsher, Firefdoglake

    "made me cry"
    - Dependable Renegade

    "history-making"
    - Hullabaloo

    "a powerful commentary"
    - God is for SUCKERS

    "Is it time to modify the boycott to allow for Keith's show Countdown"
    - DailyKos

    "There are no words to describe Keith Olbermann tonight"
    - Shakespeare's Sister

    "fits into the history of brave moments in journalism"
    - Daily Kos

    "Take Keith's words, print them out, and send a copy to the pResident at the White House"
    - Daily Kos

    "another biting commentary"
    - MyDD

    "Keith Olbermann does it again"
    - The Democratic Daily

    "hit one out of the park"
    - Mahablog

    "it gave me chills"
    - Americ-nt

    " I'm not courting the liberals...I don't think in these issues that I'm a liberal"
    - Keith Olbermann quoted in Salon.com


    Posted by johnny dollar | Permalink | Comments (270) | | View blog reactions

    270 Comments

    http://newsbusters.org/node/7550

    Somehow I bet KO will conveniently forget this little tidbit tonight.

    I wonder if he'll have the Loose Change people on to claim 9/11 was a CIA hit job.

    This is called niche marketing.

    It is clear that Mr. Olberman is not going to catch up to the factor, there is no point in trying so what we have is MSNBC doing counter programming.

    Think of it as putting on figure skating opposite the Superbowl.

    After all the so called "nutroots", eat, sleep, buy products, go to restaurants and do everything that other people do.

    By appealing to them at this level he has given himself a floor. He will not drop below that floor because he appeals to that niche. In addition he can perhaps draw people from sites like this watching for him crossing the line.

    He will get the "nutroots" as you call them and the advertisers get a group of shall we say fanatical supporters who are likely to stick with a product that support their great prophet.

    If your goal is to be #1 it's a horrible idea. If your goal is to make a steady profit then it is smart.

    I confess I just can't get excited about this. It's a gravy train and Keith is going to ride it to the end.

    Its all about the book..KO needs that thing to sell well and if it dosen't it will really tell you about how popular he is(or isn't),I quess the next step after this will be calling for the overthrow of the goverment by KO and the Daily Kos brigade.

    > Wondering if there's some kind of Federal election law that prohibits MSNBC from airing a full hour of Democratic Naitonal Commitee Talking points/propoganda on a National Network
    > Wondering if Olberamnn now calls all the shots for NBC News and tells Russert, Brokaw, Brian Williams etc, the daily talking points to use, and what quesitons and points of view they should express on their shows
    > Wondering if David Gregory, Andrea Mitchell, Russert, Matthews and Williams are way left and all feel very thankful that they can use Olbermann to (behind the scenes) express their own views. Olbermann has had a failed career and has nothing to lose - while the others maintain some semplance of being real journalists.
    > Wondering if NBC doesn't care about Olberman's low ratings because maybe his program is possibly financed by the Dem Nat Committe and other way left orgs, and that money far exceeds any 60 sec commercial spot Olbermann's show could generate
    > I've heard no one from NBC complain about Olbermann's horribly biased show - so I am wondering if their silence and lack of criticism can be taken as approval of his highly controversial and biased primetime show

    Just wondering - don't know the answers but I would certainly ask the questions if I had a one hour interview show. I'd ask Russert, Brokaw, Williams & Gregory in a heartbeat. Seems like the same type of quesitons these hard hitting journalists would ask

    You can't compare the "A Very Special Countdown" Olbermannspeak to O'Reilly's "Talking Points Memo", or Scarborough's "I've Got Issues" thing.

    Those other guys allow their targets on the air to actually rebut the host's points...

    Does Mr. Olbermann really, sincerely believe as he states on his blog that "lying by implication" is an "impeachable offense"?

    Really?

    Even if - for the sake of discussion - Bush indeed did engage in "lying by implication", how is that an impeachable offense? That it constitutes a "high crime or misdemeanor"?

    Not to engage in "tu quoque" here, but Bush would hardly be the first president to engage in "lying by implication".

    Need I cite President Clinton, for example? And what was Olbermann's view of the impeachment of that president?

    And for what it's worth, I didn't think Clinton committed an impeachable offense.

    Neither has Bush.

    Desperate hosts with no ratings do and say desperate sounding things.

    SMG

    KO was 3th on Friday by TVNewsers count, but 4th by ICN's counts. Is this their fuzzy math again?

    CC Said:

    "> Wondering if there's some kind of Federal election law that prohibits MSNBC from airing a full hour of Democratic Naitonal Commitee Talking points/propoganda on a National Network"

    First, it's not a national network. It's a cable network. There's a distinct difference - you pay for cable, networks are free over the air.

    Second, the "equal time" provisions in election law were stricken in the mid-1980's.

    "> Wondering if Olberamnn now calls all the shots for NBC News and tells Russert, Brokaw, Brian Williams etc, the daily talking points to use, and what quesitons and points of view they should express on their shows "

    Excuse me while I laugh my ass off at such a ridiculous thought. MSNBC has about as much say on what NBC News does as TBS does with CNN. That is, ZERO.

    "> Wondering if NBC doesn't care about Olberman's low ratings because maybe his program is possibly financed by the Dem Nat Committe and other way left orgs, and that money far exceeds any 60 sec commercial spot Olbermann's show could generate."

    Stop wondering. THAT would be a violation of election law.

    "> I've heard no one from NBC complain about Olbermann's horribly biased show - so I am wondering if their silence and lack of criticism can be taken as approval of his highly controversial and biased primetime show"

    Invalid argument - just because someone says nothing about X doesn't mean they approve of X. They may have no opinion. They may not care. They may not have enough information.

    On Amazon "The Worst Person in the World" is currently ranked at 185. Somehow his "special" comments aren't boosting sales like Egomann thought it would.

    ""The Worst Person in the World" is currently ranked at 185"

    Well, how many variations of Lying Liars and Their Lying Lies Here Lies Rush Limbaugh Big Fatso ....etc...etc... before market saturation?...

    ""The Worst Person in the World" is currently ranked at 185"
    ***************************************************
    Like I said its all about the book.

    As usual, Keith going to the "special comment" well once to often.

    The good part is that you get watch Keith call for Bush's impeachment on the fifth year anniversary of 9/11. So while the world is remembering those killed in the attack, holding vigils, laying wreathes, going to church...KO is flailing away with the same old schtick....zzzzzzz.

    sssshhhh,, be quiet God ,, er Keith is on.. Why is MSNBC not allow4ed to have two liberals on since they have two conservatives on ? Or is ' fair and blanced ' unfair ?

    Politicize the nation's grief and suffering, Olby. That will sell your book for sure! What a jerk.

    Anon.. oh so Bush and clan have not politicized 9/11 ?

    Um, they're politicians.

    Geez,, Matt Lauer making a fool out of Dumbya,, imagine would Greg Palast would do to him

    Anon,, so what is more important.. the president or a TV guy ?

    Anon,, so what is more important.. the president or a TV guy ?

    Anon,, so what is more important.. the president or a TV guy ?

    Anon,, so what is more important.. the president or a TV guy ?

    Anon,, so what is more important.. the president or a TV guy ?

    less than 20 minutes into the olbyloon show and here is my first respnse: Good job olbermann! way to commemorate 9/11 by turning your pitiful show into a rant against Bush .Off all the newspapers, TV news shows and radio shows this sorry excuse for a human being may just be the biggest and most bias lying a--hole EVER to disgrace America.
    If ever there was an enemy of a free and safe America this giant traitorous dirtbag olbermann is it.
    more later.........

    less than 20 minutes into the olbyloon show and here is my first response: Good job olbermann! way to commemorate 9/11 by turning your pitiful show into a rant against Bush .Off all the newspapers, TV news shows and radio shows this sorry excuse for a human being may just be the biggest and most bias lying a--hole EVER to disgrace America.
    If ever there was an enemy of a free and safe America this giant traitorous dirtbag olbermann is it.
    more later.........

    Anon,, so what is more important.. the president or a TV guy ?

    Riverdog,, no you would be the biggest ahole.. Olbermann would be a distant third after yourself and Bill o'lielly.

    Mr. Olbermann couldn't wait until September 12?

    One more day?

    Please, Mr. Olbermann, set aside this day for commemorating the losses we suffered as Americans.

    Then, 24 hours from now, you can call for Bush to be drawn-and-quartered and his head placed on top of the Washington Monument.

    I guess that - waiting one day - wouldn't sell as many books or get as much attention.

    SMG

    So,, KO should do things that he thinks are correct when his audience clearly wants him to be as hard hitting as guys like Sean Hannity are all the time ?
    He is all the left has the rest of the media is so conservative that he is the lone voice in the forest. Bravo KO,,,,

    geez,, KO sure gets lot of grief for pushing his book.. have you ever seen all the garbage that O'lielly or the junkie offer ?

    geez,, KO sure gets lot of grief for pushing his book.. have you ever seen all the garbage that O'lielly or the junkie offer ?

    "He is all the left has the rest of the media is so conservative that he is the lone voice in the forest. Bravo KO,,,, "

    Poor lonesome lefties.

    Nothing else in the press to disseminate their view. Nothing in academia. Hollywood. No publishing houses. No magazines.

    Just Keith Olbermann.

    'Course, Olbermann insists that he's not a liberal. So, you lefties don't even have KO.

    SMG

    Yeah, those poor liberals, having to settle for ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, NPR, The Washington Post, New York Times, LA Times, 99% of Hollywood productions, Time, Newsweek, nearly the whole educational establishment, etc.

    Conservatives have talk radio and Fox News.

    SMC.... yes there are liberal books.. just as there are plenty of conservative books..academia.. I guess they should apoligize for being educated. Afterall we all know the easiest way to remain conservative is to not seek education.. Hollywood ? you mean like Bruce Willis.. Ron Silver.. Tom Selleck,,Charles Thompson..Clint Eastwood..Charlton Heston... you are right I sure wish those guys would keep their thoughts to themselves.. hell.. between the lot of them they have not made three good movies in the last decade... must be something about being a rightwinger and the ability to star in crappy movies.

    Time.. Newsweek.. liberal ? oh please I doubt you could name a real liberal magazine or a writer in those magazines. How are any of the networks liberal ? Please explain

    "Hollywood ? you mean like Bruce Willis.. Ron Silver.. Tom Selleck,,Charles Thompson..Clint Eastwood..Charlton Heston"

    You're not seriously proposing that Hollywood is dominated by conservatives?

    For every name you listed on the right, I can name 20 more on the left.

    At least I got you to acknowledge that the left has more voices in the media besides poor old Keith.

    If you stay with me a little longer, you'll be so enthralled by my thinking that you'll want to mow my lawn for me.

    SMG

    OK.. go ahead name 26 liberals in the entertainment industry... you call what you are doing, thinking ?

    oh.. and if you are going to musical performers all I have to do is respond with Country music

    "Vast, gaping, hole..." = Olby's mouth

    "Vast, gaping, hole..." = Olby's mouth

    Wonder if Keith will mention the islamofascists. Maybe have a small taped portion. Would be wonderfull if tom cruise could be the number one story tonight.

    Steve... you talking about your cranium ?

    Oh- you GOT me, O'lie... you REALLY got me...

    But, I was speaking about Krazy's very "Special Comment" where he makes the tenuous connection between the "vast, gaping hole in the ground" at Ground Zero to a "Twilight Zone" episode.

    But, your rapier wit cuts me to the quick!

    OK.. go ahead name 26 liberals in the entertainment industry...

    Please:

    Streisand, Altmann, Baldwin, Basinger, Reiner, O'Donnell (Rosie and Larry), Goldberg, Martin Sheen, Charlie Sheen, Sarandon and Mr. Sarandon, Cher, Sean Penn, everyone who starred on MASH, Hannah, Ted Danson, Bill Maher, Sidney Poitier, Harry Hamlin, Danny Glover, Oliver Stone, Ed Asner, Harry Belafonte, Mike Farrell, Woody Harrelson, Spielberg, Madonan, Lange, Clooney.....

    Try to raise the level of debate at your end, please.

    I'm getting carpel tunnel syndrome typing all this.

    SMG

    Here you go, O'lie... let me help you respond:

    "Bush is Hitler"
    "Conservatives are Evil"
    "Republicans want to starve old people and poison our water"

    There, that should help you out.
    -No charge

    The idea that Olbermann would use this, of all days, to sell his book is beyond disgusting to me. It's no secret he's a partisan hack but couldn't he have set aside his "Bush is responsible for every bad thing in this world" rant for one more day to honor those he professes to care so much about who died on 9/11/01?

    This was not the day for that kind of commentary. Today we should honor the victims, survivors and those who came to their aid. They are the real heroes.

    I think Douchebag sees the party's about over for him,,,,slumping ratings, Aletmans canning,,,,the handwritings on the wall...he needs to make his position as clear as possible before being shown the door so as to transition into AirAmerica as smoothly as possible.

    We should also do what the Left does so effectively, aggessively write/boycott his shows sponsors..while I champion free speech, to pick a day when America mourns to spew his anti-America garbage shows just how desperate the Left is...if they would have battled terrorism in the 90's as hard as they are battling GWB today, we wouldn't have had 911 t begin with.
    Remember,,these lunatics vote...get out there and defeat every liberal candidate for office..our only way to insure a peaceful and prosperous nation

    I thought Keith's special comment was too soft. I don't understand what you people need to understand reality? The continued lies of this administration are -- words fail. And the morons who walk in lock step have no understanding what the values and this country were founded upon. Does it not bother you that you don't question your leaders -- even a little, teeny-weeny bit? Hmm? Don't you get that there were no WMDS in Iraq. That they cooked the evidence? Bush and Cheney's credibility is down the toilet-- and for good reason. And on this day of all days it makes me sick to see their treasonous faces. Both men are war criminals and terrorists in their own right.

    OK.. go ahead name 26 liberals in the entertainment industry...=the easiest task EVER!!!

    I thought Keith's special comment was too soft. I don't understand what you people need to understand reality? The continued lies of this administration are -- words fail. And the morons who walk in lock step have no understanding what the values and this country were founded upon. Does it not bother you that you don't question your leaders -- even a little, teeny-weeny bit? Hmm? Don't you get that there were no WMDS in Iraq. That they cooked the evidence? Bush and Cheney's credibility is down the toilet-- and for good reason. And on this day of all days it makes me sick to see their treasonous faces. Both men are war criminals and terrorists in their own right.

    Annon... -Don't you get that there were no WMDS in Iraq-

    Let's say that the cops in your town have received word that a notorious drug dealer has set up shop in a new crack house. Undercover officers (from neighboring police departments) have been there and verified that, yep, the drug dealer is running a crack house.

    Now, As the Chief of Police, instead of simply going in with a search warrant- busting the crack house, and arresting the drug dealer, you do the following:

    1) Hold a press conference stating that you know that the drug dealer is running a crack house.

    2) During the press conference, you tell the drug dealer to stop selling drugs, or you might go to the city council and they might pass a strongly worded resolution that condemns selling drugs. (They might even pass 17 resolutions!)

    3) The drug dealer allows you to send in some city officials to inspect the property, but he only lets them look in a few specific rooms of the house. Then- when they want to look in other parts of the house, the drug dealer throws them out and changes the locks.

    4) Wait 12 years- while frequently telling the drug dealer that you might come to the crack house- then hold another press conference. You now tell the drug dealer that you are going to give him until Friday to get rid of all his drugs and let you inspect all of the the premises.

    5) On Friday (after the drug dealer refuses to let you in) you finally let the narcotics officers bust down the door and search the property.

    Lo and behold- after 12 years of warnings, and a final deadline published in the media, you find no drugs after the search! You only find scales, bags, and drug residue. No drugs. How could this be?

    As silly as all of the above sounds- that's exactly what happened in the case of Iraq and the infamous Weapons of Mass Destruction.

    A report came out this week from a former UN weapons inspector that concluded there were no WMD's in Iraq. Hmmmm... that's funny, considering that leading up to the war all the shrieking liberals told us that Sadam had them, because the evil Reagan/Bush administration sold them to him! The professional protesters also advised us that if we went in- Sadam would use these WMD's on our troops and cause WWIII!

    The truth is they were right. Well, half-right, anyway. We know Sadam did possess WMD's - because we DID sell them to him. We chose an alliance with Iraq over Iran in their war. Sometimes we do that; choose the lesser of two evils (at the time) for the greater good. Look at WWII, when we partnered with the Russians over the Nazis.

    We also know Sadam had WMD's because HE told us he had them. At the end of the first Gulf War, a defeated Sadam listed and catalogued all of the WMD's he had and provided that list to the UN peacekeepers. The dispute has been WHAT HE DID WITH THEM!

    By all intelligence accounts- British, French, Russian, and the CIA- Sadam had both the weapons and the capability to use them on his neighbors. The spooks said that he was actively working to expand those capabilities to be able to hit us. Not us in some far-flung outpost or embassy- but US- as in here in the United States. Even noted lefties as Bill Clinton, Al Gore, and current Democratic presidential nominee, John Kerry; all bemoaned Sadam’s NUCLEAR threats.

    So, the questions remain. With the cries of "BUSH LIED" continuing to ring out from the Dems- one needs to ask- "lied about what?" Isn't just a little bit conceivable that during the 12 years of finger pointing and 17 UN resolutions, and all the "we really mean it- no foolin' around" warnings that Iraq simply moved the WMD's?

    Isn't is at least possible that in light of discovering fighter jets buried in the sand and the testimony from captured Iraqi administration officials that the dreaded stockpiles of WMD's have made their way across the border into Syria? Iran? Hellewwwwoooo?

    So the olbernuttjob is rallying the troops of socialist moonbats to the cause of impeachment. Nice job idiot. Now we as Americans know exactly what this country will get if and when the democrat party wins.
    His insane and incomprehensible tirade against this President is unprecedented . I have never seen any "news" reporter be so blindly and rabidly partisan or as self righteous.
    He is strictly the new platform and messenger of the far left democrats. He is plainly nuts and becoming unhinged. I wonder just what he'll do if the democrats lose in November.
    Quoting the Twilight Zone must have put this nutjob right at home as that seems to be his permanent address. He quotes the twilight Zone about the evils of scapegoating and then go on to do just that in scapegoating Bush. About the only thing this lunatic fringe cheerleader did not do is actually come out and accuse Bush of flying one of the planes into the buildings himself.
    Who exactly does this olbermann guy think he is? I am going to write my extreme displeasure to MSNBC and let them know EXACTLY how I feel about this "news" reporter". I will demand an apology, retraction or better yet his dismissal or firing.
    MSNBC should not provide aplatform for the far left fringe of the democratic party and one way or another this pompous a--hole needs to go.

    "OK.. go ahead name 26 liberals in the entertainment industry...=the easiest task EVER!!!"

    That's for sure. My hands were cramping up.

    Heck, to save time I could have just said the entire cast from "West Wing."

    SMG

    I only caught the last minute or so of the "SuperOlberComment" tonight. Can anyone take the "newsmann" seriously when he's dragging in "The Twilight Zone" to make a point? Was this really a misplaced Oddball segment?

    I see that O'lie has gone into hiding...

    The Great Idea from the Democrats- Al Queda is the ones who facilitated flying the planes into the buildings and attacking America. Al Queda is now in Iraq and we are fighting them. Democrat plan- leave Iraq. another brilliant idea from those foilks who are supported by Kieth Olbermann.
    we need to attack the democrats and mouthpieces like this olbermann crazy before we lose this country due to their partisan lies. We need to go right at them .

    I see that O'lie has gone into hiding... after being BOMBARDED with facts.

    Anytime you want a list of liberals in Hollywood- just open the LA Phone book!

    In all seriousness, this partisan rant from Olbermann tonight was an atrocity. Karl Rove, James Carville and other political operatives on either side would never attempt anything this shameless.

    Why Olbermann wouldn't give this speech on 9/10 or 9/12, far away from Ground Zero, is beyond any rational observer. How dare this shameless, partisan snake disgrace the site of the World Trade Center like he did today.

    If Dan Abrams does not dismiss this cowardly punk, he has no sense of dignity or justice.

    I caught KO's last ten seconds on his 9/11 show...he said something about "the country will not forgive you" (Bush). He was almost choking with his personal, self-righteous rage. Shame on him. He does not belong on any tv show, let alone any medium. MSNBC: fire him immediately. He is blatantly, unapologetically partisan. His speech constitutes hate, at least Bush Derangement Syndrome. He's got it in the first degree.

    Why all the hatred. Mr. O has stated a great point, why has there been no memorial on Ground Zero, why no rebuilding.

    I wouldn't put all the blame on the President and his administration, but I would suggest that the administration and the President could have pushed to make it happen within the past five years. I don't believe that this is either unreasonable or a cheap shot.

    When idiots (on either side) go to extremes (Bush is Hitler/Dem are appeasers and in colusion with the terrorists) the ability for rational people to hear and understand their points are lost...you can't keep spouting hatred influenced by your political party, expecting the populace not to become numb to stupid-speak.

    Yes, the President has made errors, yes the Democrats are in disarray, but when ANYONE who challenges the administration with an opposing viewpoint is unilaterally attacked for free speech, then you can be sure that we have all most something precious.

    And that should help YOU out!
    - Free but not easy.

    The truth is they were right. Well, half-right, anyway. We know Sadam did possess WMD's - because we DID sell them to him. We chose an alliance with Iraq over Iran in their war. Sometimes we do that; choose the lesser of two evils (at the time) for the greater good. Look at WWII, when we partnered with the Russians over the Nazis.
    ------ Yes, and Herr Rumsfeld was his facilitator. What an assasinine argument. You even admit that he no longer had them. And it now a proven fact that Bush and the neocons wanted war with Iraq even before 911. And Osama -- he's having a beer as he watches the best person who ever happened to his jihad make another ridiculous speech tonight. Dead or Alive? Remember those famous words. And then six months later -- Osama's irrelevant. And you people are morons. I'm sorry. Truth spits in your face and all you can think of to do is criticize Keith Olbermann. How ridiculous you all are.

    Joel, if you will please step off your self-righteous soapbox for a minute, I'll clue you in... since it seems you don't have one.

    First of all no one here critzized Krazy for commenting on why construction hasn't begun at ground zero. What he has been critized for is his partisan and personal attacks during an opinion piece on 9/11.

    This is a guy who constantly claims he is "non-partisan" then consistently proves otherwise. Get it?

    We can have an honest debate- but we need to recognize that there is no honesty when dealing with Olby.

    Even responding to this O'leily bozo anymore is about as usefull as talking to a piece of used toilet paper. He is probably just some lonely ignorant moonbat from thinkprogress. org or In these times.com or democratic underground- I love that name because lately i have been thinking that's where most of the democrat paty belongs-underground.
    What we are seeing is the far liberal looney left making a last ditch effort to re-gain lost power. They are still brooding and mad over losing the Congress in ;94 and the presidency in '00 &'04. Waht we will see, I believe, is an all out effort to attack Bush and the republican party . I only ask this countries voters to THINK. Think what efforts the democrats will take to keep us secure and rember the efforts (or lack therof) of the last two democrat presients. Look what happened with Carter with Iran and Clinton in Iraq and with the other terrorists. Is this really the party you want defending this country? Not me!
    Just remember a vote for the democrats is a vote for Kieth Olbermann!!!!!

    Even responding to this O'leily bozo anymore is about as usefull as talking to a piece of used toilet paper. He is probably just some lonely ignorant moonbat from thinkprogress. org or In these times.com or democratic underground- I love that name because lately i have been thinking that's where most of the democrat party belongs-underground.
    What we are seeing is the far liberal looney left making a last ditch effort to re-gain lost power. They are still brooding and mad over losing the Congress in ;94 and the presidency in '00 &'04. Waht we will see, I believe, is an all out effort to attack Bush and the republican party . I only ask this countries voters to THINK. Think what efforts the democrats will take to keep us secure and rember the efforts (or lack therof) of the last two democrat presients. Look what happened with Carter with Iran and Clinton in Iraq and with the other terrorists. Is this really the party you want defending this country? Not me!
    Just remember a vote for the democrats is a vote for Kieth Olbermann!!!!!

    Annon...

    "Heir Rumsfield"
    "neo-cons"

    Very scary words, indeed... it still doesn't change the very real F A C T that Iraq did have WMD's and most of the DEMS belived it. The point of my post was that after all the UN resolutions and warnings over TWELVE YEARS (you know, that "rush to war" thing) some people are shocked - shocked! - to find no WMDs.

    I spit in your face, sir, as there are none so blind than those who WILL not see.

    Pres. Bush is equal to the terrorists of 9/11. This seemed to be that egomaniac's special comment. This should be offensive ot every American. "I hope Clooney does a movie about me"
    Good night --good luck--- damn keith you are an idiot.

    Pres. Bush is equal to the terrorists of 9/11. This seemed to be that egomaniac's special comment. This should be offensive ot every American. "I hope Clooney does a movie about me"
    Good night --good luck--- damn keith you are an idiot.

    It is just amazing how The great Wizard of Math found a way to manipulate those "Safe As", "Safer Than" and "Not as Safe As" statistics. I think it's called Fuzzy Math, Fuzzy Thinking or Fuzzy something.

    By the way, if the "Special Comments" are delivered on a nightly basis, do they cease to be "special"? I really believe that we are going to be in for a nightly onslaught of this and I predict that "special" will be dropped in favor of just "comments" very soon when this happens.

    JD & RC...you deserve a "special" medal for being able to stomach Countdown night after night. What is your secret for being able to endure this drivel that way? We need to know. Thanks for providing us with your insightful commentary, though, on this pathetic parody of a news show. Saturday Night Live could not do it better.

    Oh Boy it looks like Mr "anonymous" olbermann is back with his pearls of democrat wisdom. What an absolute moron you are "anonymous". Wouldn't you be alot happier sitting in your hero olbermann's lap telling him what you wanted for Chrisatmas and watching the Twilight Zone together. You are just as big a slimaball as olbermann as a matter of fact you just migh be olberamann.

    here'e a new game boys and girls
    If you think everything is Bush's fault- you might be an olbnermann
    if you think the democrats will take care of the terrorists- you might be an olbermann
    if you think it is Bush's fault that nothing has been done at ground zero - you might be an olbermann
    If you use quotes from the Twilight Zone to your point- you might be an olbermann
    If you only have people that agree with you and patronize you and suck up to you -you might be an olbermann.
    if you go on nationa TV and make an absolute a--hole of yourself- you might be an olbermann
    If you will go thru any length anf tell any lie , even as your nose grows like pinnochio's nose grows - you might be an olbermann
    If you suggest impeachment of the president for trying to keep this country safe from terrorists- you might be an olbermann.
    If you play partisan politics at the expanse of this country's national security- you might ba an olbermaann ( and a democrat)
    if you spend your entire hour show ranting and raving and trying to impress us wiht your big words, cheap suit and lousy hair- you might be an olbermann.
    If you have some slimy, creepy . repulsive little toad like Michael Musto on your show -you kght be an olbermann.
    If you comment long and loud with somebody like (ho)-Mor Rocca on presidentail flatulence - you might be an olberamnn.
    this is just a start. le the games begin and the liberals go back in hiding under their wet slimy rocks .

    “Of course, the same figures could be split up differently: only 23% think we're less safe, while an overwhelming 74% think we are as safe or even safer. Or Keith could have tried something really novel: just report the numbers as written! But then it wouldn't be OlbySpin.”

    I believe this was to show that Bush most Americans believe that Bush has done nothing (which isn’t good for Bush); if all you have is that we are “as safe” that’s not so good, is it? But what other expectations can we have from those who follow a President who admits that it is his job “to keep expectations low” (his own words. Really, most American’s believe that they are not as safe or Bush has done nothing to make them safer since 9/11. These are the expectations of mediocrity.

    “Oh, and he also mispronounced "clandestine" yet again. Somebody buy Edward R Olbermann a dictionary.”

    Bush supporters are the last people one would expect to criticize anyone for mispronunciation, don’t you think?

    As for your partisan list, what your other poster said is true, equal time went out in the mid-1980’s, with the Regan administration.

    What is wrong with calling the president an “idiot”? Really, is there any evidence to the contrary? I have always wondered if Bush could pass his own standardized tests, haven’t you?

    "If you make up a 'feud' with the top-rated cable news commentator in a vain effort to boost your own rock bottom numbers... you might be an Olbermann!"

    "I will demand an apology, retraction or better yet his dismissal or firing.
    MSNBC should not provide aplatform for the far left fringe of the democratic party and one way or another this pompous a--hole needs to go."

    Ya, OK retard.
    I can see the headline tomorrow: "Riverdog eloquently and profoundly DEMANDS the dismissal of MSNBC host and 'pompous a--hole' Keith Olbermann; MSNBC obliges and includes a retraction and apology."

    Maybe they'll even ask you who should replace him. I'm guessing Michael Savage?

    "I will demand an apology, retraction or better yet his dismissal or firing.
    MSNBC should not provide aplatform for the far left fringe of the democratic party and one way or another this pompous a--hole needs to go."

    Ya, OK retard.
    I can see the headline tomorrow: "Riverdog eloquently and profoundly DEMANDS the dismissal of MSNBC host and 'pompous a--hole' Keith Olbermann; MSNBC obliges and includes a retraction and apology."

    Maybe they'll even ask you who should replace him. I'm guessing Michael Savage?

    "I will demand an apology, retraction or better yet his dismissal or firing.
    MSNBC should not provide aplatform for the far left fringe of the democratic party and one way or another this pompous a--hole needs to go."

    Ya, OK retard.
    I can see the headline tomorrow: "Riverdog eloquently and profoundly DEMANDS the dismissal of MSNBC host and 'pompous a--hole' Keith Olbermann; MSNBC obliges and includes a retraction and apology."

    Maybe they'll even ask you who should replace him. I'm guessing Michael Savage?

    "I will demand an apology, retraction or better yet his dismissal or firing.
    MSNBC should not provide aplatform for the far left fringe of the democratic party and one way or another this pompous a--hole needs to go."

    Ya, OK retard.
    I can see the headline tomorrow: "Riverdog eloquently and profoundly DEMANDS the dismissal of MSNBC host and 'pompous a--hole' Keith Olbermann; MSNBC obliges and includes a retraction and apology."

    Maybe they'll even ask you who should replace him. I'm guessing Michael Savage?

    "I will demand an apology, retraction or better yet his dismissal or firing.
    MSNBC should not provide aplatform for the far left fringe of the democratic party and one way or another this pompous a--hole needs to go."

    Ya, OK retard.
    I can see the headline tomorrow: "Riverdog eloquently and profoundly DEMANDS the dismissal of MSNBC host and 'pompous a--hole' Keith Olbermann; MSNBC obliges and includes a retraction and apology."

    Maybe they'll even ask you who should replace him. I'm guessing Michael Savage?

    Retards -

    Riverdog's demand is no less ridiculous than Krazy's assertion that the Country will "not forgive" Mister Bush for all his evil plans.

    Or any more ridiculous than ANY of Krazy's claims/rants/opinions/"reporting".

    -Much Thanks

    "The Great Idea from the Democrats- Al Queda is the ones who facilitated flying the planes into the buildings and attacking America. Al Queda is now in Iraq and we are fighting them. Democrat plan- leave Iraq. another brilliant idea from those foilks who are supported by Kieth Olbermann.
    we need to attack the democrats and mouthpieces like this olbermann crazy before we lose this country due to their partisan lies. We need to go right at them ."


    Wow... Where does anyone with any sense start in response to this bunch of shit?
    "Al Qaeda is now in Iraq..."
    Yes. They are in Iraq. NOW. They weren't before we sent our troops there. And they aren't ONLY in Iraq either Einstein. They are EVERYWHERE, including right here in America too.

    Partisan lies?
    What are really partisan lies are the ideas that Republicans are the only ones capable of keeping America safe from terrorism. As if Dems are just going to let the problem multiply as they do nothing. PLEASE.

    Don't forget, as much as you righties don't want to admit it, 9-11 happened on YOUR GUY'S watch. Eight months into his term, after warnings.
    Say anything you want about Clinton or any other Dem, but YOUR guy was at the wheel during that tragedy.

    "We can have an honest debate- but we need to recognize that there is no honesty when dealing with Olby."

    So in other words, we can have an honest debate as long as everyone else agrees that if you agree with Olbermann you are wrong.

    Sounds like a typical RW bs honest debate to me.

    Funny how you accuse me of being on a soapbox, yet you (Anonymous) don't have the strength of character to even put forth your name in your response to my post. Sad, but expected.

    So the attacks against Mr. O that are out there are simply because of his opinion piece on 9/11. And you agree that it is shameful that we have yet to construct a true memorial. I'm glad we agree on that point.

    Then I would assume that you have the same moral outrage and vitriol ready to be launched at the President for using his speech as another attempt to justify a way against an enemy who was:

    a) contained within his own country
    b) had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks
    c) also an enemy of Al Qaida
    ... and instead we went after this country (Iraq), instead of going after the Al Qaida and Bin Laden. I can see why Keith is hated so (from your point of view).

    Was Saddam a horrible man, yes - most undoubtably...akin to Hitler, Mussolini or Stalin. Was he a threat to the USA in September of 2001, absolutely not.

    When (cowardly) people like you rant against people with opinions like Keith, or people like Murtha, then they are partisan and against the country - I don't think anyone with a brain thinks that Keith is not very liberal or against the war and against the way our President has "worked" the system to further his flawed agenda...

    ..so (according to you) there is no intellectual honesty with people like Keith since he agrees with so many of the people of the US in wondering why the President and his administration keep calling anyone who doesn't agree with their talking points a traitor, an appeaser or worse. Crazy people who have had it up to here with the human casualty and suffering by the innocents, by the Pakistan government who is shielding terrrorists...people who really attacked us.

    Maybe it is just that you think that no debate can be had with people that use facts, people who don't hide behind a message board to point fingers and just accuse and call out people they dont agree with, people who are branded as sympathizers.

    My friend, I think it is YOU who needs to find a clue, or are you going to wait for the GOP to send you the talking points first?

    Joel-

    "Funny how you accuse me of being on a soapbox, yet you (Anonymous) don't have the strength of character to even put forth your name in your response to my post. Sad, but expected."

    Look again, dumbass- it's STEVE. Its right there, but I understand most libs can't read, but damn!

    -STEVE (

    Hi idiot (oops) I mean Steve,

    This is what i was responding to, maybe you should clean YOUR glasses:


    "Posted by: Anonymous at September 11, 2006 09:34 PM

    Joel, if you will please step off your self-righteous soapbox for a minute, I'll clue you in... since it seems you don't have one.

    First of all no one here critzized Krazy for commenting on why construction hasn't begun at ground zero. What he has been critized for is his partisan and personal attacks during an opinion piece on 9/11.

    This is a guy who constantly claims he is "non-partisan" then consistently proves otherwise. Get it?

    We can have an honest debate- but we need to recognize that there is no honesty when dealing with Olby."

    Thanks for playing.

    >>>>>And anyone who claims that I and others like me are "soft,"or have "forgotten" the lessons of what happened here is at best a grasping, opportunistic, dilettante and at worst, an idiot whether he is a commentator, or a Vice President, or a President.

    Hey! You guys listening? KO's talking you you too!

    Bush is GOD. Period.
    I am a southern evangelical CHRISTIAN, and I believe in my soul that this man has it right. He says what he believes and never backs down.

    So what if there is not yet a memorial at the site of this national tragedy five years later; a tragedy that inspired and gave reason for a war? Most of the people that died were godless liberals anyway.

    So what if nothing significant has been done to rebuild New Orleans more than a year after the greatest natural disaster wiped out that city's poor? Did you not read that they were POOR? Hello? Poor people are DEMOCRATS. I didn't see too many rich people begging for food and clean water.

    Bush may be slow in response to these types of things, but that is good. Those are things that you want to be slow to respond to.

    He DID rush to the important things.
    He rushed to war didn't he?? A war that he had planned long before a reason fell into his lap.

    He rushed home from vacation to try to feed Terry Schiavo, didn't he?

    You see, Bush knows when to rush to do things. He also knows when NOT to rush to do things. And he knows that as soon as anyone criticizes him for not rushing into that unimportant stuff people like me will say its not his JOB to do that stuff. He's ONLY the President. Oh ya, he's god too.

    Joel,

    Now- to respond to your (lame/predictable)argument... (by the way- its STEVE)

    Its funny that you call me "cowardly" considering you don't know me, or of my military service, law enforcment experience, or - for that matter - ANYTHING about me. But, when has facts ever gotten in the way of liberal name-calling.

    And, its also funny when Libs say "Well, Saddam was bad- but what about North Korea? OR Iran?" Like they would be in support of invading them.

    The simple (sad?) fact is that the Dems/Libs have no plan.

    They OPPOSE:

    *The Patriot Act
    *Surveilence (Wiretaps) of suspected terrorists
    *Holding of enemy combatants at Gitmo
    *Agressive interrogations (you know, loud music, barking dogs, and water... NOT actual beheadings in the name of Allah)

    When you ask a Lib "What's the opposition's actual PLAN to fight terror?" all they can come up with is "Bush, this and Bush that".

    Guess what, Skippy? Bush isn't running in 2008.
    You can blame America.
    You can blame Bush.
    You blame those damn "neo-cons".

    But, someday, you will have to stop blaming and actually come up with a solution. You don't like Bush and his plan?

    Let's hear yours.

    Thank You Keith....thank you for telling it like it is!!

    If KO's numbers are so rockbottom and insignificant....why this namesake website?? does hearing the truth speak to power make you all that nervous??

    "So what if there is not yet a memorial at the site of this national tragedy five years later; a tragedy that inspired and gave reason for a war? Most of the people that died were godless liberals anyway. "

    How the hell is George Bush to blame for the failure of New York city officials and citizens to rebuild the Trade Towers?

    The problem with the rebuilding has to do with the internal politics and internal fighting within New York city and the various groups at odds at one another over what to put in the hole.

    Geezus, Bush is to blame for this?

    SMG

    "Was Saddam a horrible man, yes - most undoubtably...akin to Hitler, Mussolini or Stalin. Was he a threat to the USA in September of 2001, absolutely not."

    As if this was the question...

    The question you ought to be asking is did our foreign policy in the Middle East since World War II "work". From the fall of the Shah, to the Lebanese Civil War, various Israeli wars, to Somalia, to the rise of al Qaeda, that answer would have to be NO. That foreign policy, driven by a need to control Mideast oil was to support whoever could keep the oil flowing. That was the mistake we paid for on 9/11.

    If you think our foreign policy was working please discontinue reading, this post is not for you.

    Given that our policy (Dems and Republicans alike) did not work, 9/11 made it clear that it needed to change. The question, then, is how? Any takers?

    "And, its also funny when Libs say "Well, Saddam was bad- but what about North Korea? OR Iran?" Like they would be in support of invading them."

    WHAT ABOUT North Korea? Or Iran?

    If you are going to fight a war, AT LEAST fight the country/countries that are the biggest threat to you.

    Bush couldn't even get it straight WHICH country we should be at war with.

    "And, its also funny when Libs say "Well, Saddam was bad- but what about North Korea? OR Iran?" Like they would be in support of invading them."

    WHAT ABOUT North Korea? Or Iran?

    If you are going to fight a war, AT LEAST fight the country/countries that are the biggest threat to you.

    Bush couldn't even get it straight WHICH country we should be at war with.

    Riverdog Rocks...

    Olbermann is a nutjob, and his wheels come off every night. I'm not sure what Olbermann would do if he had a guest that actually disagreed with him. That would be interesting to watch.

    Someone strong like Rush Limbaugh would be great. I therefore challenge Olbermann to debate Rush Limbaugh on "The Countdown". If Olbermann takes on Rush, I will watch his show that evening.

    During the 8 years of the Dems under Clinton, this nation and its interests suffered 7 distinct terrorist attacks.

    *The 1993 World Trade Center bombing that killed
    6 and injured 1,000

    *The 1993 Mogadishu firefight that killed 18 U.S. soldiers

    *The 1995 Oklahoma City terrorist attack on the federal building by American extremists that killed 168, wounding several hundred others

    *The 1995 Saudi Arabia car bomb that killed 5 U.S. military personnel

    *The 1996 Khobal Towers bombing that killed 19 U.S. soldiers, wounding 515

    *The 1998 bombings of two U.S. embassies in Africa that killed 231 citizens, 12 Americans and injured 5,000

    *The 2000 USS Cole attack in Yemen that killed 17 U.S. sailors, wounding 39

    Clinton had 8 YEARS to come up with a plan. After less than 9 MONTHS in office, September 11th happened. Since then, President Bush has liberated two separate countries from despot rule- allowing people (even women!) to vote, closing rape and torture rooms and starting the beginings of actual democracy in the middle east.

    Is it perfect? No.
    Are things going swimmingly? Far from it.
    Was it a "plan"? Absolutely

    You whining, gutless libs can carp all you want about Bush's policies. You don't have to agree or even like them.

    BUT LETS HEAR YOURS!

    I'll tell you what Libs think of N korea and Iran problems. The same thing they think of any enemy of the US. Dems 4 steps to failure:

    A Liberal War Strategy

    First appease and avoid fact of threat posed. Second surrender your position of strength like its a popularity contest. Third get thrown out of power and let real people who can make life or death decisions go in and fix problems that could have been avoided. Fourth bitch,whine, moan and backstab the people cleaning up the mess Liberal policy has created.

    Pax,

    This website is all about truth speaking to the MSM and MSNBC.

    :)

    If KO's numbers are so rockbottom and insignificant....why this namesake website?? does hearing the truth speak to power make you all that nervous??

    If KO's numbers are so rockbottom and insignificant....why this namesake website?? does hearing the truth speak to power make you all that nervous??

    "How the hell is George Bush to blame for the failure of New York city officials and citizens to rebuild the Trade Towers?

    The problem with the rebuilding has to do with the internal politics and internal fighting within New York city and the various groups at odds at one another over what to put in the hole.

    Geezus, Bush is to blame for this?"

    Bush is not necessarily "to blame" for this. I personally just think that its ironic that someone who COULD flex his muscle to get it done chooses not too.

    What he DOES choose to use his leverage on is a war (in the shadow of that tragedy), and a STUPID religious dog and pony show (Schiavo).
    It just shows what is really important to him and his constituents.

    Yesterday, Olbermann said about the ABC 9/11 series:
    "It's [the movie] a blatant attempt to shift blame for the nightmare to the Democrats and the Democrats alone."

    Well, after seeing Part II and the portrayal of the boobs in the Bush Administration - and they were boobs about 9/11 - I don't know how KO can still stand by that claim.

    Boy, the Cheney character looked like some senior citizen trying to find his car in a crowded parking lot.

    And yes, my Bush hating friends, the Administration deserves some of the blame for not stopping the attacks.

    Just one more small example of the tendentious reporting by Mr. Olbermann.

    SMG

    "Given that our policy (Dems and Republicans alike) did not work, 9/11 made it clear that it needed to change. The question, then, is how? Any takers?"

    How about going after the people that were responsible for 9/11?
    How about keeping the resources in Afghanistan to catch Bin Laden?
    How about seriously investigating the country which turned out the majority of the terrorists (Saudi Arabia, NOT IRAQ) to determine how they could have coincidentally almost ALL come from there?

    I think those points would be a fair start.

    "I personally just think that its ironic that someone who COULD flex his muscle to get it done chooses not too."

    Sorry, you've lost me with that response.

    How is any president supposed to get the folks in New York (or any city/state) to settle their differences over something like this?

    If one wants to point fingers, they should point them at Pataki and Bloomsberg for starters. If the governor and mayor can't work things out, the president of the US can't just unilaterally jump in.

    Particularly since Bush's approval ratings in New York are probably about 10%. He's got zero influence there.

    One can blame Bush for a lot of failures, but this isn't one of them.

    SMG


    The fact that this self-serving right wing blog exists and you Swift Boat-lovin' right wingers are so rabid and foaming at the mouth about who you call an "Award Winning" journalist is merely proof to the rest of the planet that Keith Olbermann speaks the truth. Truth is something that is not common on TASS, oops, I mean Fox "News" that's why you have difficulty understanding it. Propaganda is not truth. Scapegoating is not truth. UNITED WE STAND? I think the rest of it is DIVIDED WE FALL and that's what the right's been doing since 1994.

    But that's OK. Eventually, the American people will see this for what it is and your "movement" will end up where it belongs: In the crapcan along with Communism, salvery and other broken and failed political movements of the past that were also based on lies. It's too bad you've done such damage to a great country before you go down, though. I'll pray for you though, in the name of the Sermon on the Mount, the one part of Christ's teaching I never hear from Republicans. You know, that part where Jesus says it's not OK to hate the poor? Remember that part?

    is this guy olbermann really worth 100 comments? Are olbermann's defenders really worth debating? They can't win an election with this tripe.

    I say ignore them, they don't have a life, spend your time living yours.

    Big Jim is a dummy...

    "Given that our policy (Dems and Republicans alike) did not work, 9/11 made it clear that it needed to change. The question, then, is how? Any takers?"

    How about going after the people that were responsible for 9/11?
    How about keeping the resources in Afghanistan to catch Bin Laden?
    How about seriously investigating the country which turned out the majority of the terrorists (Saudi Arabia, NOT IRAQ) to determine how they could have coincidentally almost ALL come from there?

    I think those points would be a fair start.


    Posted by: Anonymous at September 11, 2006 11:13 PM"

    What Dems would do about above Questions. They wouldnt go after the people responsible for 9/11 proven by their inaction on first world Trade Center attacks and the Cole and Khobar Towers etc. Catch Bin Laden? Thats a huge talking point for you dems......your hopes and dreams rest with a man who must hide out for the rest of his short life in caves making poor quality videos. Huge Dem mistake. Clinton passed on chances to get him FACT. Investigate Saudi Arabia? We all know they cause a lot of the problems. But proving culpability is not possible, there time will come. As long as Dems arent in power. Clintons making a fortune giving anti-american speeches in that country and others.

    "Clinton had 8 YEARS to come up with a plan. After less than 9 MONTHS in office, September 11th happened. Since then, President Bush has liberated two separate countries from despot rule- allowing people (even women!) to vote, closing rape and torture rooms and starting the beginings of actual democracy in the middle east"

    I count 77 deaths in 8 years by NON-AMERICAN terrorists under Clinton.
    I count 3000+ in the first 8 months under Bush.

    Saying Bush has "liberated two separate countries from despot rule..." etc... is pretty much a joke. Neither country is ANY better off than before we went in.
    THAT IS A FACT.

    Even if you make the argument that these were just wars, and I will certainly argue Iraq was not, you admit that things have not gone swimmingly.

    POOR PLANNING, POOR FOLLOW THROUGH, POOR EVERYTHING other than the initial attack on the country. Calling people that disagree with these policies "gutless" from the comfort of your keyboard is the only gutless thing I can see.

    I'm sorry... that last post made me sound like a regular, name-calling, ol' Olbyloon.

    I MEANT to say:

    Big Jim is a whiny, liberal, partisan, dummy.

    He puts "News" in quotes when referring to Fox news- citing the ratings BLOCKBUSTER of BO'R. But, like most Libs, he fails to see the difference between NEWS and OPINION/COMMENTARY.

    BO'R states (quite often) that his program is COMMENTARY- and actually has people with opposing views.

    Krazy Keith continues to claim (with a straight face!) that his is a "news" program and that he is non-partisan. Oh, yeah- and he NEVER has ANYONE with an opposing view.

    Weighed on the scale of "Fair and Balanced" Mr. O takes the prize.

    Annon...
    Thanks for paying attention to the thrust of my post: WHAT IS YOUR (dems) PLAN?!?

    If "POOR PLANNING, POOR FOLLOW THROUGH, POOR EVERYTHING" defines this administration's policies- fine.

    WHAT IS YOUR PLAN?

    Oh, yeah- that's right:
    Dems Plan: "We hate Bush"

    So now the loony-libs are all crying about the rescue workers having "respiratory problems?" When will they learn if you can't bother to be one one the richest 1% of the population Our Fearless Leader doesn't care about you. When will these Dumocrats ever understand personal responsibility? First they cry about "Agent Orange," then the "environment," then, snivel rights, not following the "Constitution." Our Fearless Leader (all hail George the Great) determines what the Constitution says and what laws he follows. It's about time the libanistas understood that.

    So now the loony-libs are all crying about the rescue workers having "respiratory problems?" When will they learn if you can't bother to be one one the richest 1% of the population Our Fearless Leader doesn't care about you. When will these Dumocrats ever understand personal responsibility? First they cry about "Agent Orange," then the "environment," then, snivel rights, not following the "Constitution." Our Fearless Leader (all hail George the Great) determines what the Constitution says and what laws he follows. It's about time the libanistas understood that.

    So now the loony-libs are all crying about the rescue workers having "respiratory problems?" When will they learn if you can't bother to be one one the richest 1% of the population Our Fearless Leader doesn't care about you. When will these Dumocrats ever understand personal responsibility? First they cry about "Agent Orange," then the "environment," then, snivel rights, not following the "Constitution." Our Fearless Leader (all hail George the Great) determines what the Constitution says and what laws he follows. It's about time the libanistas understood that.

    Dems Plan: "We Hate Bush"

    "First appease and avoid fact of threat posed.
    1. Most liberals I know think that after Afghanistan, North Korea and Iran were more of a threat than Iraq and were more necessary to be dealt with. If diplomacy failed action would be NECESSARY. Not so with IRAQ.

    Second surrender your position of strength like its a popularity contest.
    2. Surrender your position of strength? What? Please explain this, as it doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

    Third get thrown out of power and let real people who can make life or death decisions go in and fix problems that could have been avoided.
    3. Get thrown out of power? In 2000? Was that a real strong victory for W? Let real people who can make life or death decisions go in and fix problems that could have been avoided? Like Bush fixed the threat of 9/11 before it happened? Like Bush avoided an unnecessary war in Iraq?

    Fourth bitch,whine, moan and backstab the people cleaning up the mess Liberal policy has created."
    4. We had 8 years of liberal policy in the last twenty six. I think its more than fair to say that since you had over THREE TIMES the time in charge the mess is YOURS.

    Liberals would be vigilant in bringing the responsible parties to justice. They just wouldn't be as vigilant in bringing the parties that weren't responsible to justice.

    Being "Vigilant" isn't a plan

    Truth-

    You make some VALID points concerning Iraq and such. Even your arguments about Bush seem to be well thought out.

    However,please- PLEASE - tell me what the liberals ACTUAL PLAN is for fighting people who want to kill us.

    "Particularly since Bush's approval ratings in New York are probably about 10%. He's got zero influence there.

    One can blame Bush for a lot of failures, but this isn't one of them."


    I think some sort of Federal recognition of the tragedy on or near the site is not too much to ask, regardless of the state's incompetence. He IS still the President, and this was a national tragedy.

    Wow imagine that a war that didnt go swimmingly. And people died too. Wow big shocker. You are the reason the left cannot be trusted to run anything but those crime ridden cities that they are the mayors of.
    You count 77 deaths but they get an A for effort under Billy Boy. Cause they sure tried like hell to bring down the towers from the bottom which would have been a staggering death toll. Whats scary is Billy Boy would of loved a successful attack of that magnitude giving him a chance to bite his lip and act like a big kid on the world stage, its been stated that Billy Boy would have re-acted better than Bush. What a joke. Clinton, Gore, Kerry, Pelosi, Kennedy and the rest of the dem talking heads arent fit to lead a boyscout camp out let alone a country at war. Thank God for Bush!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Keith Olbermann is just a moutpiece for the DNC, the Iranians and AlQaeda. He's a traitor to this nation and a complete jerk. All he does is bash the government without providing and Alternative. He's most likely trying out for the Press Secretary for Presdient Hillary or a Mouthpiece for the coming Islamic Republic of America!

    "I say ignore them, they don't have a life, spend your time living yours"

    Unlike the people who chronicle every word a cable talk show host utters EVERY NIGHT, then spend hours explaining how its all irrelevant.

    Wow imagine that a war that didnt go swimmingly. And people died too. Wow big shocker. You are the reason the left cannot be trusted to run anything but those crime ridden cities that they are the mayors of.
    You count 77 deaths but they get an A for effort under Billy Boy. Cause they sure tried like hell to bring down the towers from the bottom which would have been a staggering death toll. Whats scary is Billy Boy would of loved a successful attack of that magnitude giving him a chance to bite his lip and act like a big kid on the world stage, its been stated that Billy Boy would have re-acted better than Bush. What a joke. Clinton, Gore, Kerry, Pelosi, Kennedy and the rest of the dem talking heads arent fit to lead a boyscout camp out let alone a country at war. Thank God for Bush!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Are you Olbyloons getting it yet?

    For the sake of argument, I will concede EVERY point you can make about the Bush administration's mistakes and failures in the War on Terror.

    Iraq a quagmire? Sure.
    Need to catch Bin Ladden? Okay.
    Patriot Act getting in the way of calling your overseas terrorist relatives? Fine.

    Given all of the failures and problems of Bush and Co.- please tell us what Hillary, Gore, Kerry, Pelosi, Kennedy, et al WILL DO?

    Bush is bad. We get it. Really.

    Please tell us YOUR plan!

    The silence is deafening.

    "I think some sort of Federal recognition of the tragedy on or near the site is not too much to ask, regardless of the state's incompetence. He IS still the President, and this was a national tragedy."

    Okay. Although the bitterness within New York over this makes that problematic.

    Whatever he (any President) would do would anger some group in New York and just create more of a controversy.

    Don't you find it interesting that neither Hillary Clinton or Schumer have jumped into this matter? They know it's a loser too.

    SMG

    "What Dems would do about above Questions. They wouldnt go after the people responsible for 9/11 proven by their inaction on first world Trade Center attacks and the Cole and Khobar Towers etc."

    Every Dem I know insisted on going after the terrorists after 9/11. Name some that didn't please.

    "Catch Bin Laden? Thats a huge talking point for you dems......your hopes and dreams rest with a man who must hide out for the rest of his short life in caves making poor quality videos. Huge Dem mistake. Clinton passed on chances to get him FACT."

    Dead or Alive, remember? It was a huge talking point for your man too, until he realized he wasn't going to be able to do it. Now he's 'a man who must hide out for the rest of his short life in caves making poor quality videos'. Funny how that works out. I suppose he has NO power in the world of terror, right? And the Clinton passing on him thing was A LIE. STRAIGHT UP. Prove it otherwise. Everyone connected has denounced it.

    "Investigate Saudi Arabia? We all know they cause a lot of the problems. But proving culpability is not possible, there time will come. As long as Dems arent in power. Clintons making a fortune giving anti-american speeches in that country and others."

    Now that's the funniest one yet. They cause problems, but their time will come, as long as DEMS aren't in power...
    Are you smoking crack?? Seriously?
    Clinton's making a fortune making "anti-American" speeches, and THAT is the reason we can't deal with the Saudis?
    Do you expect ANY credibility with that?
    You don't think that maybe BUSH and CHENEY's involvement with the Saudi's is the most legitimate reason they are allowed to do as they please?

    Seriously, get your friggin head out of the sand!!!

    All liberals have ever done in war is successfully fight WWI, WWII; Korea to a standstill (Ike cut and ran) which stopped the spread of Communism. While conservatives have successfully botched Iraq twice, Afghanistan once, and cut and ran from Lebanon (I wonder if that emboldened the terrorists). And why don't conservatives get more credit for successfully arming Iran, the mujahadeen (al qaeda) and Iraq and paying off the terrorists.

    Annon...

    AGAIN, those were very nice rebutals and talking points.

    WHAT IS THE DEMS PLAN TO FIGHT THE PEOPLE WHO WANT TO KILL US?

    What's the plan?
    Not "get your head out of the sand",
    what's the plan.

    You don't like what Bush and Cheney have done- WHAT WILL THE DEMS DO???

    Hey, Colbert-

    Great commentary on what dems and republicans HAVE done...

    can YOU tell us what dems WILL do?

    epe, od yjod doyr s vpzqaryr esdyr.

    Okay, okay- I'll stop asking libs to actually articulate an actual P L A N for fighting terror.

    I just wish they had the honesty to say-
    "We don't have a plan, we just wanna bitch about Bush."

    Kieth gets antsy when his colon acts up.

    When you get him away from his home base, broadcasting on location, he has to use a community toilet-something which freaks Kieth out.

    Don't say 'armitage' in his presense, or he'll crap his pants.

    "Truth-

    You make some VALID points concerning Iraq and such. Even your arguments about Bush seem to be well thought out.

    However,please- PLEASE - tell me what the liberals ACTUAL PLAN is for fighting people who want to kill us."


    First off, thank you Steve for the compiment.
    I can not speak for all of the liberals in the world. I can only speak for myself and the ones I know. Having said that, I think the plan is pretty simple.

    1. Find out who was truly responsible.
    2. Use our military resources to find and kill them. Unfortunately for Mr. Bush and some of his cronies, this includes MANY of your business partners. The fact that the Saudis have yet to be seriously investigated and dealt with is a joke. It isn't limited to the Saudis though. Any and all enemies must be killed. Its as simple as that.
    3. Take measures to best ensure that this doesn't happen again.
    This is a step that I fail to fall in step with most people you would consider "liberal". I think when you say "liberal" a lot of times you are referring to the FAR left. That part of the party is lonely and not well-represented.
    I personally think you MUST do profiling and surveilence. I honestly think most people agree with that, except in the most extreme of cases. In terms of civil rights violations its not perfect, but in order to save lives you must allow for some stiff measures.

    Very nice, Colbet.

    Posting a link to the Dems talking points.
    I've already read this 10 page collection of platitudes and promises.

    "More funding for Homeland Security"
    "Dialogue with the community of nations"
    "Finding real solutions"

    Can you please break it down for the rest of us? What are the actual concrete things they are going to DO to keep us safe?

    -'cause I gotta tell you- "Dialouging" Iran and pouring more money to search grandma at the airport ain't making me sleep any better at night!

    "Wow imagine that a war that didnt go swimmingly. And people died too. Wow big shocker. You are the reason the left cannot be trusted to run anything but those crime ridden cities that they are the mayors of.
    You count 77 deaths but they get an A for effort under Billy Boy. Cause they sure tried like hell to bring down the towers from the bottom which would have been a staggering death toll. Whats scary is Billy Boy would of loved a successful attack of that magnitude giving him a chance to bite his lip and act like a big kid on the world stage, its been stated that Billy Boy would have re-acted better than Bush. What a joke. Clinton, Gore, Kerry, Pelosi, Kennedy and the rest of the dem talking heads arent fit to lead a boyscout camp out let alone a country at war. Thank God for Bush!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

    I'm trying really hard to go to bed, but posts like this make it impossible.
    Clinton would have "loved" a successful attack on America. Beautiful.
    He wouldn't have reacted better than Bush?
    Is it even possible to act worse than Bush?
    The dems aren't fit to lead a boyscout camp.
    Genius! Wow you're pretty smart.
    There have been many dems who've controlled things better than Bush in wartime. Please don't make me go into all of them, I don't have all night.

    Safe is to say that WWII and the Bay of Pigs are two easy examples.

    Now please go finish watching Hannity and get some sleep.

    I guess my main (and original) question is this:

    HOW?

    1. Find out who was truly responsible.
    HOW?
    You don't like how Bush has been trying... what would Kerry do?

    2. Use our military resources to find and kill them.
    HOW?
    You don't like how the militar is deployed right now - HOW would Kennedy do it?

    3. Take measures to best ensure that this doesn't happen again.
    WHAT measures? You don't like the Patriot Act, Wiretaping suspected terrorists, Locking them up at Gitmo, etc.

    See? The Dems plan is all "We don't like Bush's ideas, we've got BETTER ones. Trust us."

    But, WHAT ARE THEY?

    There's not "there" there.

    Truth,

    At least Colbert TRIED to answer the question. Its not his fault that the "Official" dem's plan doesn't have ANY specifics.

    What is YOUR (dems) plan to fight the people who are trying to kill us?

    Bitching about those damn "neo-cons" isn't going to do it!

    I'm sorry reading is so difficult for you, Steve. Us conservatives just ain't too good at them liberal learning stuff sometimes.
    Kill bin laden and finish off the job in Afghanistan (with more troops).
    Double the size of Special Forces.
    Strengthen the National Guard making sure they're well equipped and trained.
    Enact a GI Bill of Rights.
    By 2010 secure all loose nuclear material (mostly in the Soviet Union) which Bush refuses to fund.
    Implement the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission.
    Screen 100% of cargo which enter the U.S. as opposed to the 5% Bush bothers with.
    Improve communications and other equipment for the first responders.
    Achieve energy independence by investing in alternative fuels.
    Those are just a few of the concrete policies Democrats advocate. But what fun is it to actually make ourselves safe. We couldn't be scared then.

    Keith never misses an opportunity to present himself as the steaming heap of sour shit that he is. A vote for a Democrat is a vote for Keith Olbermann.

    Oh, well- you got me, Colbert...

    I guess Bush's "Let's let bin laden live" program is wrong after all.

    And Cheney's "Cut the size of Special Forces in half" iniative is also a failure.

    Don't forget Rumsfeld's "I want to cut the National Guard and making sure they don't have any equipment" plan!

    My favorite is Secretary Rice's "Ignore all the loose nuclear material" scheme and her "Let all cargo enter the U.S. unchecked" plan.

    All of your "plan" is simply promises to improve on or add to existing policies. Basically- the dems have said, "we don't like any of Bushes ideas, but we will make them better!"


    *WhEw* I'll give you the whole "Implement the 9/11 commission's recommendations (but that wasn't really the DEMS's idea was it? It was the commission's)

    I'm not even sure what a "GI Bill of Rights" is, but I like it. I'm not sure how it alone will help keep us fight people who want to kill us, but I do like anyting positive for the troops!

    Other than that, "Improve communications and other equipment for the first responders" and "Achieve energy independence by investing in alternative fuels" are (again) nice goals- but no specifics on HOW to do any of that.

    Well, Mickey's big hand is on the 6 and his little had is on the 12 -so, I'm off to bed. Here's hoping for good dreams of killing terrorists running through my head.

    Has he lost his last wit? I mean even further off the deep end tonite - and for him that's really saying something.

    Calling Bush a liar - I mean just ugly for a journalist on a National news network to do that - shame shame shame on NBC News - a low point

    > Did he actually blame Bush for there not being a bulding or something - on Ground Zero. I mean - get the rubber suit ready - he's unstable. What the hell does Bush have to do with a city's memorial. I guess slick Willy designed the Okla City memorial - but I never knew that. Didn't know the President was zoning offical and architect. This may have been the dumbest statement I heard on National news.

    > What in the world was the Twilight Zone, Rod Sterling rambling. Really - he needs a leash, some rabbie(sp?) shots. He's foaming at the mouth.

    > I thought Cindy Sheehan was a loose cannon but always felt after losing a son - the hardest thing in life - hey let her do and say whatever. But Olbermann is left of Sheehan. And on nightly on NBC News.

    Abrams - you're turning out to have the ethics of a two bit ambulance chaser letting this moonbat rave uncontrollably

    Shame on NBC news. Don't ever again preach how great Brokaw was - he had his chance tonight to rebut Olbermann one minute ater CD ended - and apparently was just fine with the hour of horror

    Journalist whore themselves out to their special interests - Olbermann leads the pack

    Truth, isn't the bounty on bin Laden up to about $50 million at this point? If he was to be found, don't you think someone would have done so by now?

    I saw something on TV a few months ago, which showed that there are TONS of people in Pakistan, Afghanistan, and other areas, who devote their entire lives to tracking him down. But they have not been able to do so. He's smart enought not to use technology at this point, because that would facilitate in his detection. So these people are simply trying to hunt him down. But no such luck!

    So yes, we know the dem's goals, which are common to us as well: catch bin Laden, protect our country, lower taxes, improve education, health care for everyone, etc. But Steve asked you HOW you dems would do so. You mention getting tough with the Saudis, and that IS something that Bush should in fact do. But getting strict with surveillance is something that the dems have fought him on, and will probably continue to do. Most of us on the right truly believe the dems would rather protect the rights of the terrorists than to go after them in hopes of saving American lives. In fact, Jonathan Turley actually told O'Reilly the other day that that IS in fact what he believes. Sorry, but if we're obliterated as the terrorists desire, there won't be a lot of people remaining who will need to worry about their rights.

    Is there Irony in Four eyed sports flunky using the Twilight Zone as source material? Somehow the cliched script from a 50-60's TV series is great literature? Is this the extent of his ramblings? Other than the introduction this hideous,biased ghoul spent the bulk of his closing ramblings attacking the Bush Administration. I only wish these twisted milquetoasts would point their fingers where the blame belongs,across the ocean. With vile collaborators like olberwoman,is it any wonder the Democrats can't win the Whitehouse?

    Is there Irony in Four eyed sports flunky using the Twilight Zone as source material? Somehow the cliched script from a 50-60's TV series is great literature? Is this the extent of his ramblings? Other than the introduction this hideous,biased ghoul spent the bulk of his closing ramblings attacking the Bush Administration. I only wish these twisted milquetoasts would point their fingers where the blame belongs,across the ocean. With vile collaborators like olberwoman,is it any wonder the Democrats can't win the Whitehouse?

    Talking point for tomorrow's show.

    Rasmussen
    The number of Americans calling themselves Republican has fallen to its lowest level in more than two-and-a-half years. Just 31.9% of American adults now say they're affiliated with the GOP. That's down from 37.2% in October 2004 and 34.5% at the beginning of 2006. These results come from Rasmussen Reports tracking surveys of 15,000 voters per month and have a margin of sampling error smaller than a percentage point.

    The number of Democrats has grown slightly, from 36.1% at the beginning of the year to 37.3% now.

    Is there Irony in Four eyed sports flunky using the Twilight Zone as source material? Somehow the cliched script from a 50-60's TV series is great literature? Is this the extent of his ramblings? Other than the introduction this hideous,biased ghoul spent the bulk of his closing ramblings attacking the Bush Administration. I only wish these twisted milquetoasts would point their fingers where the blame belongs,across the ocean. With vile collaborators like olberwoman,is it any wonder the Democrats can't win the Whitehouse?

    What the friggin hell are you Right Wing Nutjobs talking about?

    Bush has a plan, to stay the course, even while 30 percent of Iraq is occupied and controlled by AL QAEDA!!!! Guess what? It isnt working!!! We cant pull out of Iraq because it would send the message to the terrorists that America is weak.....OKAYYY keep telling yourself that while THEY ALREADY KNOW they are winning!!! Bush hasnt done ANYTHING but stake us down in a war that we will not win. His plan is to do damage control until he does not have to deal with it anymore. THAT is the BUSH PLAN FOR IRAQ!!!!!

    You people dog about Keith Olbermann?

    At least Olbermann has the balls to ask real questions and not just slam on Democrats for NOT BEING IN OFFICE. Fake (oops, I mean) Fox News is about as balanced as a teeter totter with a fat sandbag on the bottom and a feather on the top.

    God bless the soldiers for defending such idiocy in the form of Free Speech.

    You Busheep make me sick!!!

    Rummy shaking hands with Saddam nice pic.
    Those WMD were made by the good ole USA and given to Iraq to kill Iranians.
    We are paying for aver 20 years of really bad middle east diplomacy.
    It is still OK to speak out in this country isn't it?

    Rummy shaking hands with Saddam nice pic.
    Those WMD were made by the good ole USA and given to Iraq to kill Iranians.
    We are paying for aver 20 years of really bad middle east diplomacy.
    It is still OK to speak out in this country isn't it?

    All liberals have ever done in war is successfully fight WWI, WWII; Korea
    **************************************************
    It should be noted that the Generals that were the ones that actually led and won those conflicts were Republicans like Dwight D. Eisenhower and Douglas MacArthur.

    d rather be watching a rerun of the X-files presently, but I didn’t want anyone to think I had abandoned them, or forgotten them, or took anyone up on their misguided offer about a dead horse (unless, that horse in question, clearly and emphatically dead, is the commentary on Olbermann Watch... your silly attempt at figurative speech).

    So, anyway, I want to make this nice and easy.
    To do that, I will provide a list of “facts”. I expect you people to do something “creative” with the list. A distinct lack of creativity will be ignored.

    My name is Sarah.
    When I was a child my father would affectionately refer to me as “Sar-Sar”.
    In the fifth grade Jessica Pieffer, a fan of Salt-N-Pepa, re-christened me “Sarah-Ca-Sarah”.
    According to my mother I was named after Sarah Bernhardt.
    My mother let my father decide if I would be “Sarah” or “Sara”; he chose the former.
    I own 2 Fleetwood Mac albums, neither of them are “Tusk”.
    I do not own any Hall and Oats albums.
    I do own Jefferson Airplane / Jefferson Starship / Starship “Greatest Hits”. I bought the album because I wanted “Third Week in Chelsea” on CD (I had the cassette). “Bark” has never been released in the US on cd.
    My favorite version of “Sara” is on Bob Dylan’s “Desire”.
    My favorite color is purple.
    I have never seen “The Color Purple”.
    I’ve never understood the appeal of Prince, or the artist formerly referred to as TAFKAP.
    I don’t the Voodoo Love Gods album, but I enjoy the sentiment of the remake.
    I’ve never understood the infatuation with the Mona Lisa, but I enjoy the sentiment of LHOOQ.
    Rene Magritte and Amedeo Modigliani are two of my favorite artists.
    I find classical portraiture to be utterly boring.
    I find that most people who know very little about art enjoy classical portraiture immensely.
    Pink Floyd is my favorite band.

    There is an anecdote in art which I will state in general and vague terms. Person A draws a picture. Person X purchases the picture. Person X then erases the picture, frames the erased picture, and displays it publicly.

    But, more importantly, if a tree falls in the forest, does anyone hear it?
    So, if someone counters a counter to a counter to a counter, but the original counter counter counter chooses not to read the counter counter counter counter, what then?

    Perhaps the question shouldn’t have been where’s the mockery, but rather where’s the content that could be described with the word “clever”?

    And the question really isn’t a question, but isn’t the adage definition of insanity to do the same thing repeatedly and expect different results?

    I know it’s futile to read anything on this site, in fact, I don’t have to. It’s all cliché, and it’s cliché because there is no creativity. If there was, then the content of the nightly obsession with Keith Olbermann would have evolved from the hackiness of “tasteless mockery”, which in actuality is just bland derisions of obsessive dislike, to the level of satire. It hasn’t. And that’s the difference between liberal comedy and conservative comedy; mostly that conservative comedy revolves around guttural things like piss, shit, and fart jokes. Think about the difference between “Blue Collar TV” and, say, “This Hour has 22 Minutes”. And I mean old school THH22M, when Rick Mercer was still on the show.

    The satire isn’t here, it really is just obsessive dislike and name calling. Neither Rob or Johnny can accurately replicate the cadence of Keith Olbermann for any sort of humorous effect, you haven’t mastered parroting; because once you master parroting, then you realize the humor in malapropism, neologism, etc. And, those just aren’t demonstrated here.

    The silliness in that you actually remarked that someone mispronounced words on a live broadcast. Was that supposed to suggest something? You didn’t follow up the statement with anything. And certainly anyone with common sense and a television has seen it before. So, why mention it? Just to make the column one sentence longer?

    It’s not like you’re artfully pointing out the obvious (because that’s the hack diametric counter argument to the question that I just posed... which ignores the fact that I have pointed out the lack of a follow up statement, which leads to the second hack counter argument of inference, which is absurd. Say it, or don’t, but don’t post-pretend to have inferred.) You either have direction of specificity, or you don’t, why would you want to function outside of false choices, after all?

    Rummy shaking hands with Saddam nice pic.
    ****************************************
    And that proves what?..Sometimes you have to choose between the lesser of two evils..How about that famous pic of FDR,Churchill and Stalin?..Stalin killed millions during his reign but the allies had to deal with him to fight Hitler who was the greater threat at the time,same with Saddam at the time Iran was the greater threat in the area and Iraq was fighting them so we had to deal with him.

    Those WMD were made by the good ole USA and given to Iraq to kill Iranians.
    **********************************************
    Uh..I thought you guys said Saddam didn't have WMDs?.The left loves to say how we armed Saddam but almost all the weapons found in Iraq have made in France,Russia and Germany on them.

    We are paying for aver 20 years of really bad middle east diplomacy.
    ***********************************************
    Thats right its always our fault never the poor terrorist who have made it very clear that their number one reason to kill us is because we don't follow their extreme view of Islam.

    In that 20yr figure do you include Carter and Clinton?...just wanting to know.:)

    It is still OK to speak out in this country isn't it?
    ***********************************************
    Yes it is..but that dosen't mean that your shielded from people criticizing you back..free speech works both ways.KO,The Dixie Chicks,Mother Sheehan all believe they can say what ever they want but that no one can dare say anything back.Well quess what it dosen't work that way,If KO says something stupid we'll call him on it.

    The poster who calls himself Bill O'lielly wrote:
    "Time.. Newsweek.. liberal ? oh please I doubt you could name a real liberal magazine or a writer in those magazines."

    You're right. Jonathan Alter and Anna Quindlan are so blatantly in the pocket of those bastard's at the RNC that they lack all credibility. It is obvious that when Alter wrote the the Dems first priority in '06 and '08 should be winning the majority, not electing the best person for the job (in reference to the Liebermann/Lamont race) that he was writing from a memo sent to him by Karl Rove.

    To paraphrase the brilliant musings of Mr. Olbermann, How dare you, Bill O'leilly. Think things through before you come here and rewrite what you read on Kos, DU, or Huff & Puff.

    Goodness gracious is The Oracle angry or what!

    Makes you understand how he resonates with those members of his insane clown posse who post obscenities here.

    I know if I had been the cameraman or a stagehand anywhere near Olbermann during his "special comments", I would have worried that by the time he reached his frothing crescendo, I would come to and find his huge chicklet-square choppers planted in one of my body parts.

    Life is tough for these folks being squelched as they are. Murtha, Olbermann, Sheehan...all must bear the immense injustice of having those who they criticise return the privilege...

    Just makes you want to rant and rave and try to sell a book or two...

    I like Republicans because they have no shame. They're only true fear is having people like Olbermann call them on it... without any shame of their own.

    Of course, if Olbermann's words are so easy to deride, then why should anyone pay attention to them?

    Because he has a point. A point that does not sit well with the folks who run this site. Therefore HE MUST BE DESTROYED!!! JUST LIKE ANYONE WHO DARES TO HAVE A DIFFERENT TAKE ON WHAT IS HAPPENING IN THIS COUNTRY!! OLBERMANN IS JUST A VILE LITTLE CUNT BECAUSE HE'S DIRECTING HIS DERISION AT OUR TEAM!!!

    It's just a schoolyard playground as far as Mr. Dollar is concerned. Throw your rocks and your feces and mud at those who dare see things differently. It's fun!! Do you guys build a snow fort in the winter??

    Do what you feel is right folks. Neither you, nor Mr. Olbermann are really hurting America all that much. In fact, you and K.O. are America. You are both Americans. Do what you do and he'll do what he does. No one will be killed in the process. It's not Keith or Mr. Dollar who truly wishes death upon our great nation. That's what Osama wants.

    I'm on board with the freedom part. You know, FREEDOM. After five years, I can't for the life of me understand how we have become our greatest enemy, because any elementary school student shall tell you... we're not.

    Olbermann is one of the most despicable, vile, lying pieces of trash ever to grace the TV. He is beneath contempt. Nothing he says makes sense and little is true. And this comment comes from someone who actually found him at times humerous while he was at ESPN. He must be proud of the fact that his greatest journalistic moment was "put the biscuit in the basket".

    Did anyone happen to catch Sandy Berger on Wolf Blitzer on Friday evening. What was going on with his mouth and tongue after every time he spoke? Has he had some type of stroke. Seriously, I mean the man no disrespect. I am just wondering... It was quite noticeable at the beginning of the interview, and then toward the end the director was able to cut away almost immediately after he stopped speaking.

    I'm not entirely sure what the big deal is all about. Slice the numbers any way you like, but very few people are watching Olbermann or Matthews. It's truly astounding they have shows with such consistently poor numbers.

    If a tree falls in the woods and nobody is there, does it still make a noise? If nobody is watching, does it really matter what Keith says?

    Cable news is a business. MSBNC and ultimately, NBC, have chosen to ignore that simple fact.

    I wish Keith would read the comments about his ratings. In the end, that is what counts. Even he must understand coming in last or near the bottom gets a person fired.

    "Worst Person" is 32% off on Amazon, or

    Not sure why anyone would buy his book. Judging from his show, I would guess there is nothing of value in there.

    Keith is god..

    Bob M - I noticed the same thing with Berger. It was wierd.

    I will add that having seen the Path to 9/11 I think the Clintonista concern about the film was overwrought. Both Madeline Albright and Condi Rice came off badly (Condi was even played the same actress who played that crazy bitch wife of Dennis "David Palmer" Haysbert). Clinton was barely mentioned at all (same for Bush). The real focus on the film was the terrorists themselves - who they were were, how they operated... I thought the film did about a good a job as it could in raising as many examples of pre-9/11 failures as it could and most of them are what I would "systemic" issues - like the poor security at airports, the inability to get approval to look at Zaccarias Moussoui's laptop, the inability so sift intelligence on a real-time basis, the lack of Arabic translators, etc. Overall, I hope that the over-arching message of the film would get through: that we are at war and that the attacks will continue.

    Joel wrote:

    "Mr. O has stated a great point, why has there been no memorial on Ground Zero, why no rebuilding...I would suggest that the administration and the President could have pushed to make it happen within the past five years. I don't believe that this is either unreasonable or a cheap shot."

    I am going to assume that "Joel" is not from New York because if he or she was then Joel would know that the rebuilding at Ground Zero has been held up for many reasons and that none of them have anything to do with President Bush. First, in case it did not occur to you, it was 9 months before they removed all the debris from the site (I was there for that ceremony in June 2002), Second, there was a major issue over insurance - whether the owner of the property on which the WTC was built could collect and how much. Until that money was paid out there was no money to finance any work on the site. Third, the WTC itself was not privately owned but sat on private property which was leased from a private company. The WTC was owned and operated by the Port Authority which is a special type of entity - an "authority" that is set up to be independent of the government(s) that create it. In this case the Port Authority was created by the states of New Jersey and New York. Of course, the WTC site is in New York City. So, you any rebuilding had to get the approval of the Mayor of New York City and various city agencies, the Governor of New York State and various state agencies, the Governor of New Jersey and various state agencies, the insurance companies and the property owner (Larry Silverstein). You might also recall that the Governor of New Jersey was somewhat preoccupied during this time and ultimately resigned, then a temporary Governor took over, and then New Jersey elected Job Corzine governor. And, of course, you had all of the familes of the victims which organized into various groups - all of which had some gripe with some aspect of the plan. No politican was prepared to get into a fight with the families. Then there was the city planning people, the architectural review board. Pretty much every state and city agency and every community group in the tri-state area wanted a say in what happened at the WTC site.

    So then we got a bricklaying ceremony in 2004 and they were ready to begin work.

    Buit, at this point, they ran into more problems. First, the NYPD and the FBI rejected the plan due to security concerns. Second, the plan included building a "tolerance" museum museum that became a hodge-podge of competing, politically-correct themes which somehow managed to bring in Martin Luther King, American Indians, and various "aggrieved" peoples from around the world. The only entrance to the memorial for the victims was through the tolerance museum which was basically an homage to left-wing propaganda (you lefites might not like that characterization but whatever you call it the idea that the site would do anything other than simply honor the people who died at the site did not sit well with many, many people). The tolerance museum was eventually scrapped and so a new plan was created that took that out and addressed the security concerns.

    Out of all this we finally got the Freedom Tower design and a plan that was approved by all of the required parties (not that everyone is happy because many, including some families, are still complaining). Meanwhile, other buildings AROUND the actual site of the two two towers (the WTC was, I think, actually SEVEN buildings), were being built. Some of them have been completed. They also had to first rebuild the PATH trains and subway station underneath the site (one of the largest commuter rail transportation hubs in the country). Once that was done they had to rebuild the "bathtub", the retaining walls that keep the Hudson River from rushing into the excavacted site.

    So, all that has now been done and, according to an interview with the site's owner, they are very close to beginning to lay the foundation for the Freedom Tower (once they do all the tower itself will go up rather quickly - I think people will be surprised).

    I wrote this off the top of my head and I am not going to go fact-check myself on every detail. This is basically correct but if folks want to add or correct any specific detail feel free to chime in.

    Now, Keith Olbermann lives in New York. And any New Yorker with half a brain knows all about this because it is in the newspapers and on TV every friggin' day. So, how is that Keith can go on TV, broadcasting live from the site, and put forward the absolutely aburd, completely disingenuous notion that President Bush is responsible for the current state of the WTC site?

    I write about KO quite a bit and normally even his most idiotic remarks don't phase me because I know he is a fool and so give his words the weight they deserve - none. But blaming Bush for the fact that Freedom Tower has not been competed is offensive on many levels. That Keith wants to wrap himself in the "flag" of "I lost friends that day" to do it makes me want to throw up. Only Keith Olbermann would USE the tragic death of his "friends" to attempt to insulate himself from criticism in blaming President Bush for the delays in rebuilding on the WTC site when it is patently false.

    Therefore, I not only do not agree that Olbermann has "stated a great point" but believe last night served to illustrate what makes him so loathsome. Given this, I am really not interested in your observation that you "would suggest that the administration and the President could have pushed to make it happen within the past five years" because you obviously do not a damn thing about it. You, Joel, are an excellent example of an OlbyLoon. You know very little. What little you do know enters your pea-sized brain after being filtered by the likes of Keith Olbermann, George Soros and the blue blog nut jobs.

    Now that you DO have an answer to your "question" as to "why has there been no memorial on Ground Zero, why no rebuilding..." perhaps you would like to reconsider your latest brain fart - that KO's claim was not "unreasonable or a cheap shot".

    Have a nice day.

    Do you guys seriously enjoy sitting in your little mosh pit of self-inforced retardation and "liberal"-bashing? I mean, you have this whole website devoted to making fun of some random pundit (you guys have some serious jackasses too, I may remind you). 170 comments on a speech that you don't even want to hear. No "liberals" will read your site or be convinced by your bilious poopfest.

    In fact, the only thing this site shows is that Keith Olbermann (who?) really pushes your buttons. Have fun supporting your politically / morally bankrupt administration. Their time is mercifully short.

    I'm glad I hit this site today. At least you're good for giving some of us a laugh.

    You losers are fascinating...if KO is as insignificant as you'd like to claim then why dedicate a whole blog to him?
    What you fascists fail to recognize is that the blowhards on the Right are selling-out you and your Party.Limp-baugh and O'Reilly and Hannity are business men first, and will say anything to keep the ratings going, hardly a patriotic thing to do in a time of war.Any suggestion of KO and links to the DNC talking points is laughable considering the Right-Wing propaganda machine's echo chamber, which to my amazement even has your commander-in-chief repeating the assenine "islamo-fascist" slogan.Your pundits are laughing all the way to the bank, for in the upper echelons of the RNC the motto must be" There's a sucker born every day." So, in the words of your cherished glorified frat-boy president: " Bring it on!" It's just a matter of time before the party of Nixon is exposed for what they are. And when they are you can all go find a new ideology which will provide a safe-haven for you prejudices and your breath-taking stupidity.Olberman Rules!!!

    You losers are fascinating...if KO is as insignificant as you'd like to claim then why dedicate a whole blog to him?
    What you fascists fail to recognize is that the blowhards on the Right are selling-out you and your Party.Limp-baugh and O'Reilly and Hannity are business men first, and will say anything to keep the ratings going, hardly a patriotic thing to do in a time of war.Any suggestion of KO and links to the DNC talking points is laughable considering the Right-Wing propaganda machine's echo chamber, which to my amazement even has your commander-in-chief repeating the assenine "islamo-fascist" slogan.Your pundits are laughing all the way to the bank, for in the upper echelons of the RNC the motto must be" There's a sucker born every day." So, in the words of your cherished glorified frat-boy president: " Bring it on!" It's just a matter of time before the party of Nixon is exposed for what they are. And when they are you can all go find a new ideology which will provide a safe-haven for you prejudices and your breath-taking stupidity.Olberman Rules!!!

    Clint Eastwood has made many movies. From 1964-2004 I count 44 movies he was in. He has recently directed a few that aren't on this list. O'Leilly, you aren't qualified to be a movie critic. See the link.

    http://www.geocities.com/mattreigns/index.html

    Tell it like it is....I love it!!

    Tell it like it is....I love it!!

    Afraid of Keith Olberman? Sure seems that way


    An old boss of mine had a great saying that applies to you folks
    "Bucks with short horns stand close together".

    An old boss of mine had a great saying that applies toyou folks
    "Bucks with short horns stand close together".

    "We are ou own enemy" really does remind me of the hypocritcal accusations of "Politicizing" the terrorist threat. Step outside the bush-hating box and realize you people have been brainwashed to hate a political advisary more then Islamic terrorist bent on killing you?

    Opie has clearly crossed the journalistic line into - using his Twilight Zone reference - into another dimension

    I mean - if he was actually not acting - and really sincere about his rabid disgust that George Bush didn't build something on Ground Zero - and his Twilight Zone rambling - he may be at this point be a danger to society. President's, to my recollection, usually don't do constuction as a side job. Loon, kook, moonbat, whatever - I think all his career failures have driven him over the edge.

    Thank God he never had a wife or kids - a restraining order would be appropriate.

    He's getting the glazed look in his eye of a terrorist. I can see him in Lebanon jumping up and down burning the American flag - or running the obstacle courses and jungles jims in Afghanistan . If anyone knows him and loves him - explain to him that failing in 10 broadcasting jobs is by no means the end of the world. Plenty of people make career changes at 50

    Dude,

    That pretty much sums it up.

    Everyone here seems scared. What is it? What is it that scares you so much? The Neo-con agenda failed. That failure is now coming to light and I see no problem with exposing the failure. Political ideas die all the time, this a free country and people have a choice on where take it. Now, is there anyone smart enough or brave enough to find something possitive in KO's comment?

    Everyone here seems scared. What is it? What is it that scares you so much? The Neo-con agenda failed. That failure is now coming to light and I see no problem with exposing the failures. Political ideas die all the time, this is a free country and people have the choice to decide what direction it goes. Look, O'Reilly has one message and olbermann a differrent. Read both, digest the info and decide for yourself. I like both of them and they both make good points on different issues.
    Now, is there anyone smart enough or brave enough to find something possitive to say about KO's comment?

    I stayed up most of the night watching the reporting and specials on the five year anniversary of 9/11. Some the news reports had some criticisms of Bush but had relatively little in the blame departmant. The PBS special was great.
    My complaint, the root of my outrage is that this olbermann guy blatantly used his entire hour long show as a platform to bash the President.olbermann complained about Bush polticizing 9/11 but then this nut went on to politicize the day himself in what sounded like a bad ammalgamation of the worst of the far-far left sites. I found one central theme running through olbermann's entire show. Bash Bush and in typical liberal hypocritical form do exactly what he accused the President of doing. His show was a one hour free publicity stunt for the far looney left democrat party.
    The leftards that come here and rail aginst those of us who dislike in the strongest terms the lies and rantings of absolute partisan madman at a time of national tragedy. Nice job lefties what's next on the "get back in power at any price" tour? At this rate you will actually accuse Bush of killing and eating children in the White House. The sad part of this all is that some of you far left nuts actually look up to this olbermann guy and come to a site like this and waste your time and prove what utter sheep you are trying to actually defend this olbernutt. Yeah you can disagree with the President. That is American to be sure. But when you take that disagreement to the next level and beyond to the point of outright lies, misplaced responsiblity, and doing exactly what you are accusing the President of doing then you cross over into crazy land right on the border of traitor land.
    You don't use the fifth anniversary of what has to be become the Pearl Harbor of our times and maybe one of the very worst times in American history ever and use that to call for the impeachment of the President. You don't use your ambition to see your party gain on the backs of the losses of somebody elses pain and misery. You don't use your air time to make a point by quoting and obscure and antique episode of the "Twilight Zone" and not have people think that you are in the Outer Limits of reasoning and reality. If you use the Twilight Zone as basis of your politcal thought and of your juvenile, incessant rantings against the President I have some other TV shows you might be interested in. First of all Olbermann you ought to watch your own show to see just how partisan and crazy you look and sound. Self realization might be good for you to see that using a national day of morning to call for the impeachment of a president because he tried too hard to defend this country just might not be sound politcal strategy. People just might start to rightfully ask about what side you are on and throught the tragedy just what you hope to gain from it. But we already know the answer to that. You are strictly a partian democrat shill.
    Now I know olbermann that to some on the far left fringe you are a hero. The crazy conspiracy theorists who insist that 9/11 was actually done with explosives by the government to gain new powers. Hey! that just might be a grat foundation for Olbermann's 6th year anniverary commentary . I expect that your nuttiness is boundless and you will spend the time up until the November elections rallying and cheering for your party to win and eviscerate America of those evil Republicans. But what you have to think , what you really have to ask yourself is that will somebody or some political party olbermann supports really be able to defend this country? Think of how somebody like a John Kerry or (gasp) Howard Dean. Do you feel safer yet?
    Well Olbermann and followers I just will say that having someone who distorts the truth and the blame as much as you do do not deserve to be in power until you grow up and learn to deal with failure. The true root of angriness on the left comes from being out of power. Since 1994 and the past two presidential elections the American people have essentially "fired" the democrat party and for good reason. All I have heard is "redeployment of troops and anything but Bush from your party. Wanting to win back power just for the sake of that power alone just shows that you are truly unworthy of the American people giving you that power. Having ranting raving incoherent lunatics like olbermann as one of your cheerleaders is not such a good idea.
    Once again olbermann shame on you for doing your show from "ground zero" and fouling the memory of those fallen souls and that hallowed ground with your ugly and hateful bias and poltiical grandstanding. You are a national embarrassment and just a thinly veiled partisan hack. That you would use your platform at time like that in a place like that to show your naked hostility and contempt for the President shows that you and your party have no place being in power or even being listened to anymore. You show to exactly what depths some people will go to use the emotions and frailty of the national heart to try and place blame for your ulterior motive.
    You really should ask yourself the question "have you no shame"?

    Robert your long rejoinder on why it is not Bush's fault (what is his fault, by the way?)that the memorial has been held up in red tape and bureaucratic wrangling is a pretty typical "see no evil" approach. Sure, there are valid reasons why an almost completely rudderless operation has drifted off course. But all these reasons stem from the fact that there was no one at the helm. You can find a million and one valid reasons why Iraq is not the administration's fault, why the Katrina response was not their fault, why Iran waxes in power both externally and internally and that is not their fault, why we can't even seem to secure Afghanistan and that is not their fault, why federal spending and deficit has accelerated and grown larger than ever and that is not their fault. Ultimately all those reasons are just expedient means to detour around one big black hole.

    We have a single top executive in this country for exactly this reason, so that there is someone to cut through the clutter and provide strong leadership when the situation becomes too complicated for a standard systemic response. Bush has essentially declared 9-11 a holy event. He and his party used its imagery ad-nauseum in political rallies, ads, attacks, and defenses. He has--in a very piecemeal, disorganized, and haphazard way-- ignored or reinterpreted any law or principle that he deemed fit to address "the meaning of 9-11." This includes our traditional prohibitions of torture, search and seizure laws, habeas corpus, many of the most fundamental principles of the republic. All that is fine, and you can simply say that this is a completely new threat that requires a completely new set of rules. I disagree with much of his approach as do most Americans, but I'm quite sure you do not--the point is that these type of judgements are why we have an elected executive.

    But please don't wink at all this and then try to tell me that the most unilateral, power grabbing executive we have probably ever had can't overcome local red tape to get a memorial built on the site. It is impossible for the federal government to overcome the objections of private developers and local police departments? That is a joke. There are ten ways to Sunday that the feds could have taken the lead in this project and ironed out the difficulties. How about declaring the site a national monument? IMPOSSIBLE!! They can beat the legs off a secret detainee, but they cannot infringe on the property rights of billionaire developers!

    Once again, we see where the lines are drawn with this group. 9-11 is the event which completely changes all the rules except one. And that rule is aptly summed up by the assumed name of your partner in left-bashing, the estimable Mr. Dollar.

    Not really scared of much - maybe getting too close to a black bear or hitting a moose in my car - Not a neo con either - some good by the dems - some good by the repubs -

    Just never saw anyone act like Opie on National news. Debate & opposing views are great for the country. But Opie is losing it. He reminds me a lot more of David Kouresh (sp?) than Edward Murrow (sp?)

    Anon 1:11 PM,

    You ask that I not "tell (you) that the most unilateral, power grabbing executive we have probably ever had can't overcome local red tape to get a memorial built on the site."

    Let me get this straight? You want to hold President Bush responsible for the slow pace of redeveloping the WTC site because he is the "single top executive in this country". Newsflash: the President is the top executive for the Federal government not the entire country. Man, what a typical OlbyLoon.

    I do love your OlbyLogic.

    Remember how Bush & Co are fascists? That Bush=Hitler?

    Yet numb-nut here is now arguing that the President ought to have the authority to unilaterally settle multi-billion dollar insurance claims, choose an architectural design for a commercial real estate company, override the authority of state and local governments, steamroll the 9/11 families and usurp private property - all while ignoring the security concerns of the New York Police Department, the New York Fire Department, the Port Authority Police, the Metropolitan Transit Authority, and the FBI!

    And you think BUSH is a fascist?

    As for your notion that there are "ten ways to Sunday that the feds could have taken the lead" you propose appropriating private property. Careful, your communist slip is showing :-)

    FYI, I updated the post with a roundup of the blue blog reax to Olby's 9/11 Rant. Some classic stuff there, scroll back up if you did not read it already.

    Robert --

    I assume that while Keith decries the Bush Administration as being some sort of crypto totalitarian budding dictatorship, he apparently slams Bush for not being some sort of totalitarian dictator for not supressing all rules of law and rights of property in getting construction at Ground Zero going.

    Aside from the intergovernmental squabbles, you had questions/battles about the insurance settlement Silverstein was to receive which he needed to pay for recnostruction (he claimed the attacks were two seperate events, while the insurers said it was a single attack, and therefore worth just half the money he was seeking), and concerns over how to replace the lost office space from WTC 1 and 2, when eight of the 16 acres at the site are to be reserved for the memorial (a problem mostly since solved with the purchase of the damaged Deutsch Bank building that was contaminated beyond repair on 9/11). And the Port Authority authorization to assume the lead role in the site's rebirth had to require a quid pro quo of agreeing to finance a new rail tunnel from New Jersey (via Keith's MSNBC stop in Secaucus) to midtown Manhattan, since officials there didn't want New York to be the beneficiary of all the PA's attention (Jersey required the PA to buy the bankrupted PATH in 1962 before they would let them buy the WTC site and build the towers in the first place, so this is a long-standing interstate rivalry).

    Someone who actually was paying attention to the situation and not just getting his news from the usual leftist internet sites might have understood there were many conflicting interests in this situation, all of which had/have to play out in the private sector and on the state and local governmental level. But Keith knows what he knows and follows the Michael Moore standard that it's OK to fudge the facts a little or even lie outright if it gets people to comprehend the "higher truth" of the evil of Mister Bush and his cronies.

    John - thanks for filling in some more details.

    Apparently to be a true OlbyLoon you can never, ever admit that Keith is wrong about something even when every known fact contradicts his absurd claims last night.

    Afraid of olbermann? not in the least. If anything he is to be pitied and laughed at.
    Bucks with short horns standing together fits the herding mentality of the far left to a "T". But liberals have not the survial instinct of deer. They are much more like sheep or turkeys or other domesticated animals who cannot fend for or protect themselves. One coyote can decimate a whole herd or flock because the individual cannot think on it's own. They have the same sense of self preservation and survival that liberals do. Instead of turning and fighting the attacker they would either want to negotiate with or just run from the threat. And of course they would simply blame Bush for the attack with no mention of the coyote.
    Good point CC but olbermann reminds me more of Jim Jones . Olbermann serves his faithful followers his kool aid daily and they drink heartily. If olbermann was more like Koresh the FBI would lock him up in a building with a few kids and burn them alive and then pat janet reno on the back.
    actually the olbermann is more like Pee- Wee Herman. The only difference is more people watched Pee- wee Herman.
    I still want to know when the olbermann is going to actually debate someone or at least have someone on his show who even remotely disagrees with him. Everybody that olbermann rants and raves about at least has the sense of fairness to respond to criticsm other than having them on "the worst person in the world" .
    By the way olby how's the book sales coming along??

    Okay, a couple of ideas for this great and valuable site.

    1. From now on, all Olby "special comments" are to be dubbed Keith's "You go girl" moment as they're completely the creation of the show's/host's attempt to garner a few "yeah, you go girl!" responses from the looney left blogosphere.

    2. (this one would need help from commenters, but you're getting plenty) The items in the show that are obviously derived from gleaming across kosatriosavarosiscrooksandliarshuffingtonpostkrugman and the rest are thusly allocated. So, when Olby is obviously reading his text that his staff cut n' pasted from atrios, the segment (say, #4 on the show) is titled "The atriette broadcast moment" or "The kossack broadcast moment" where Keith - he of the "what, me, liberal? Why, I'm not a liberal" - fame is nailed for his shilling for the left-wing blogs...with evidence. I'm sure you could get other sites to climb on board in order to save research...you could post the item (let's face it, we're not gonna watch that crap) and many of us can plug in the actual source - or, most likely source - in the comments, along with the corresponding links. You get a twofer: more people helping out w/research plus more links from folks as everyone wants to see their work posted somewhere else. A running talley of the segment sources ("this is the 17th item on a supposed news channel that was obviously taken directly from the pages of the dailykos.com web site") would provide further fodder. Once this takes off & the site gains even more prominence, readers from the MSM will have to check in from time to time (in between their reading of kosatriosavarosismarshallyglesias) and see where the "unbiased" Keith is really coming from.

    3. A final signoff for each show given as a summary of the overall sources for the data within the show. "40% of tonight's show was brought to you by Markos Moulitsas and his moonbat commenters" and the like, you know?

    I just got back into the office today and after going through the important stuff. I went on amazon to check what should have been the top ten seller Keith Olbermann book.

    It's out two days and ranked.......#178!?!?!?!?!?!!

    The book comes out and it drops in rank????????

    How bad can this book be?????????????

    Well I'm going to have to visit my local Borders tomorrow where I'm sure there will be plenty on hand (178) and give my non-partison, fair and balanced, no-spin review!!!!!!!!

    Ya know I want (lol) to be fair about this!!!!!!

    I have been reading the posts here for about 2 months (without commenting myself) and agree with the prevailing opinion that Olbermann is a hack.

    But now, I am afraid he is a hack with a new mission.

    It seems Ubermann has decided that he will play "Mister Bush" as his personal foil.

    This plan seems to replace his previous, pathetic baiting of Bill O'Reilly.

    The leftist/Stalinist blogoshpere is responding pretty forcefully to the, "Special Comments," and THE NATION (communists in sheep's clothing) practically wet themselves with ridiculous praise.

    But, as is the law of programming: "no ratings rise, no show.".....So I will continue to review the latest Olber-rants from narratives on this site and continue to watch reality based TV.

    Sorry you have to expose your brain to him nightly, Robert. You are performing a service for good people everywhere!!!!

    This guy's a Bush-bashing hypocrite parading a "non-partison jounalist". I encourage everyone to e-mail him and MSNBC to voice our complaints over his untruthful rant last night.

    This guy's a Bush-bashing hypocrite parading a "non-partison jounalist". I encourage everyone to e-mail him and MSNBC to voice our complaints over his untruthful rant last night.

    TVN shilling for Keith? Color me shocked: Not. Isn't that what the kid gets paid to do?

    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^

    I just got done watching Olby's special comment.

    I should be shocked and e-mailing MSNBC but really. What do you expect? I look at this and I said. "Does this guy really take his viewers to be that big a bunch of chumps?"

    I feel sorry for you Loons. To lap this stuff up, no questions asked. Yes thats right! NO QUESTIONS ASKED!!!! I wonder how will you feel when this has-been finally has his train wreck?

    Anybody, who has been anywhere near New York the last five years and has picked up a Daily News, Times, Post, knows that Bloomberg, Pataki, The Landlord, The Architect,The P.A., have been fighting over the WTC . Johnny, Robert did I miss anybody? Where's does Bush fit into this? EVERYBODY KNOWS THIS!!!!!

    Look Dopey is this close to falling off the deep end. The book is out and it's not even on the amazon top one hundred. He can't beat O'Reilly fill-ins. And, He is about to relize that he is the Loon's useful Stooge of the Week.

    And you Loons lap this stuff up like thirsty dogs, not even one little question. At this point the only question is "Why do you hate Bush soo much?" I mean I have my issues with The President but not to the point where I'm going to turn into a Zombie for Keith and The Loons.

    By the way tvsnoozer had "Special Comment" on his website so, I have this question there Brian. How many "Talking Points Memos" have you posted on you're site? Because if the answer is zero? Then since Olby is The Stooge of The Left" this should make you Olby's Stooge.

    Johnny, Robert, anybody. Help me out here, has Brian posted a talking points memo or whatever any of the other prime time hosts (cnn,msnbc,fox) call their talking points segment? Yes Brian you posted pro and con statements, but. You posted the video. Never seen anybody else. Could be wrong, please correct me.

    Look folks I stand by original statement. He is gone a little after the election and no doubt before Dec.31st. That's the window and if you haven't marked my words do it now and take it to the bank!!!!!!

    At this point it almost doesn't matter if he is right or wrong. He is just unwatchable!!!!!!

    Apologies for the long post. But for some reason today I feel sorry for the people that belive this garbage, no questions asked!!!!!

    once again Edward R. Olbermann speaks the truth to power with his "Special Comments" section.

    read em and weep, losers.

    rage against truth and justice.

    you pathetic chimp chumps.

    by the way, how's the war going?

    The war's going pretty good...

    We destroyed the Iraqi army.

    We deposed Saddam and his two heirs were killed attempting to resist capture.

    The entire Baath leadership has been captured or killed.

    Saddam is now on trial along with his pals for crimes against humanity.

    We faciliated the first free elections in Iraq - three of them!

    We helped the Iraqis draft a Constitution, seat a freely elected parliment and install a new cabinet including a Prime Minister.

    GDP is growning at 5% a year.

    Oil production is back on line.

    There are hundreds of newspapers publishing a wide variety of news and opinion; TV networks are informing and entertaining the public.

    15 million people registered to vote.

    We killed the top al Qaeda commander and captured or killed much of the al Qaeda leadership in Iraq.

    We have insured that Saddam and his Baathist regime will never again go to war with their neighbors, develop chemical, biological or nuclear weapons or use them against their neighbors, their own people or the U.S.

    We have begun to reverse Saddam's genocidal policy against the Marsh Arabs in the South and the wetlands are slowly returning.

    The antiquated oil industry infrastructure has largely been replaced with modern equipment.

    We have stood up a well-trained Iraqi Army with over 100,000 men.

    Electrical power and gasoline is readily available throughout the country.

    Roads and bridges have been rebuilt.

    All the political prisoners locked up by Saddam have been released.

    People around the Middle East, inspired by the Iraqi voters, are beginning to yearn for their own political freedom with Syria being driven out of Lebanon and a nascent democratic government in place in yet another Middle Eastern nation.

    Not bad for three years work.

    I think I am headed over to Barnes and Noble to get a peak at Keith's book. I don't plan to buy it, I just plan to browse it while I drink my Starbucks and then put it back on the shelf.

    Hopefully I won't dribble coffee on the book like I did when I peaked through a few of Michael Moore's books.

    True, Robert, and all that with losing less soldiers per day than in any war in our nation's history.

    I think I am headed over to Barnes and Noble to get a peak at Keith's book. I don't plan to buy it, I just plan to browse it while I drink my Starbucks and then put it back on the shelf.

    Hopefully I won't dribble coffee on the book like I did when I peaked through a few of Michael Moore's books.

    I think I am headed over to Barnes and Noble to get a peak at Keith's book. I don't plan to buy it, I just plan to browse it while I drink my Starbucks and then put it back on the shelf.

    Hopefully I won't dribble coffee on the book like I did when I peaked through a few of Michael Moore's books.

    so who are you today anonymous? I like the anita hill touch. it suits you just fine but Edward R. olbermann? now that's funny. Yup your moonbat olbytard is making America safe FOR communists. Short bus drop you off early today?
    BTW the war is going great we are fighting the terrorists that caused 9/11 and we have them relatively contained in one province in Iraq. But the bad news about Iraq is a usual the democrats led by Edward R Oblernuttjob demand that we surrender and peacefully leave Iraq and apologize very nicely to the American people for GASP fighting terrorists. How stupid we are to think that we could actually fight them and win? What were we thinking? How will the democrats EVER regain power if we actually win??
    Nice try traitor but if surrender is your idea of winning policy I suggest you move to france and take your little Kiethy "twilight Zone" Olbermann with you.
    Democrats- the party of surrender, failure and Olbermann. Their motto- vote for us or else we'll have olbermann do another "special" commentary.
    hey moronomous tell your hero kiethy we all said hi, that is if you can take your head out of lap long enough.
    hey with such astute and articulate friends like this here moronomous defending Mr Twilight Zone the election is in the bag.

    How appropriate. I applaud KO for not glazing over the hard ruth with idle comments on those who were lost. The truth of the matter is in what has been done. Some false show of sentimentality or lament will not do proper justice to honor the dead. I'm glad he didn't wait until Sept. 12 to talk hard about what the administration did (and is doing wrong).

    I know a lot of you sheep like to hide from inconvenient truths, but KO put it out there.

    yup it's so nice that Mr twilight zone "came out" and used the anniversary of the death of 3000 murdered Americans to tell us how much we need democrats to keep us safe, How very friggin appropriate. Your pet moron did everything but blame Bush himself for flying the planes into the building. I hope America really remembers you hero's incongruous and spittle filled rant. Then they will really know who is playing politics with the memory of the dead.
    Sheep we are eh? it really looks like you are the one who has the wool pulled over his eyes. if you so blindly and obiediently follow olbernuttjob like the good little lamb you are. personally i would rather run with the wolves than be led to the slaughter like democratic sheep. all we need now is for your little kiethy to come out of his closet and watch more re-runs of the twilight zone so he can get more material for his- ahem- "commentaries"

    but tell me what is "hard ruth"? is that some kind of code or was it just an olbermann inspired Freudian slip?

    Olbermann is as close to god as anyone can be.

    "True, Robert, and all that with losing less soldiers per day than in any war in our nation's history."


    Ha!

    yeah, Iraq is going great. so's the middle east. as every neocon knows, a mere 100 billion and 1000 dead each year to occupy the second largest oil reserves in the world is a bargain. even the price of oil is starting to drop. yeah, thing's are goin great. man, it is SO much easier to be ideology- or faith-based instead of reality-based.

    put down the bong and step away from the computer "olielly. you don't need to prove to us that you are fool and an olbermann worshipper. we already know.

    riverdog said:

    "Democrats- the party of surrender, failure and Olbermann."

    Name ONE PROMINENT DEMOCRAT advocaing surrender or SHUT THE FUCK UP, a--hole! Enough of this "Some Democrats" BULLSHIT! Name names or quit your damn bitching!

    Everything is Mr. Bush’s fault
    Half a lifetime ago, I worked in this now-empty space. (I couldn’t hold down the job and was fired) And for 40 days after the attacks, I worked here again (out of work again – desperately taking advantage of 9/11 to find employment), trying to make sense of what happened, and was yet to happen, as a reporter (If you consider a person with 10 sportscaster jobs in 20 years a reporter). All the time, I knew that the very air I breathed contained the remains of thousands of people (right from the X Files ) , including four of my friends, two in the planes and -- as I discovered from those "missing posters" seared still into my soul (note - during physical exam doctor unable to determine if Opie had soul - no soul found) -- two more in the Towers. And I knew too, that this was the pyre for hundreds of New York policemen and firemen, of whom my family can claim half a dozen or more, as our ancestors. I belabor this (yeah you do) to emphasize that, for me this was, and is, and always shall be, personal. And anyone who claims that I and others like me are "soft," (arrogant, biased, dishonest) or have "forgotten" the lessons of what happened here is at best a grasping, opportunistic, dilettante and at worst, an idiot (that sure sounds like the cat calling the kettle black) whether he is a commentator, or a Vice President, or a President (that’s Mister President to you). However, of all the things those of us who were here five years (stated above why I was there – scrounging for work) I was ago could have forecast -- of all the nightmares that unfolded before our eyes, and the others that unfolded only in our minds -- none of us could have predicted this. Five years later this space is still empty (Joe Wilson stole the design plans – you can get them – but he’d have to kill ya). Five years later there is no memorial to the dead. Five years later there is no building rising to show with proud defiance that we would not have our America wrung from us (be tough to wrung America from us), by cowards and criminals. Five years later this country's wound is still open. Five years later this country's mass grave is still unmarked. Five years later this is still just a background for a photo-op. (And by doing the broadcast from here I’m taking full advantage of it) It is beyond shameful. (Does that mean it’s worst that the worst person of the day) At the dedication of the Gettysburg Memorial -- barely four months after the last soldier staggered from another (another field – which one?) Pennsylvania field (if you would have been there you would have been covering the baseball game in Harrisburg) -- Mr. Lincoln said, "we cannot dedicate, we cannot consecrate, we cannot hallow this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract." (so Lincoln did nothing right?) Lincoln used those words to immortalize their sacrifice. Today our leaders (Leaders? - this will end up being Mister Bush’s fault – just wait) could use those same words to rationalize their reprehensible inaction. (Hunh –Not sure Lincoln had the same zoning issues at Gettysburg in the 1860s that they have in NYC) - "We cannot dedicate, we can not consecrate, we can not hallow this ground." So we won't. (Yes we will) Instead they bicker and buck pass. They (who is they ??– must be Mister Bush) thwart private efforts, and jostle to claim credit for initiatives that go nowhere. They (who is they – must be Mister Bush) spend the money on irrelevant wars, and elaborate self-congratulations, and buying off columnists (I wouldn’t go there Keif – the bought off columnist has more credibility than you) - to write how good a job they're doing instead of doing any job at all (is Opie saying they bribed a columnist to write an article that a memorial had been erected). Five years later, Mr. Bush, (that’s Mister to you Keif) we are still fighting the terrorists on these streets (somehow I missed the reporting of the terrorists fighting on the streets of NYC) - . And look carefully, sir, (Mister Bush) on these 16 empty acres. The terrorists are clearly, still winning. (So the terrorists are taking over New York City – and I was only away for one weekend) And, in a crime against every victim here (hunh – what crime, was section of the penal code is this crime listed – just so I don’t get arrested myself) and every patriotic sentiment you mouthed but did not enact, you have done nothing about it (about what?) And there is something worse (worst person of the day coming up??) still than this vast gaping hole in this city, and in the fabric of our nation. There is its symbolism of the promise (what promise) unfulfilled, the urgent oath (what oath) reduced to lazy execution. (Shakespearian I guess – not sure what lazy execution is) The only positive on 9/11 and the days and weeks that so slowly and painfully followed it was the unanimous humanity, here, and throughout the country. The government, the President in particular, was given every possible measure of support. Those who did not belong to his party -- tabled that. ( yeah – for a month) Those who doubted the mechanics of his election -- ignored that (That damn Florida recount again) Those who wondered of his qualifications -- forgot that. ( Keif – to be honest – it’s your qualifications – 10 failed sportscaster jobs in 20 years – we wonder about. What the hey are you doing reporting for NBC News) History teaches us that nearly unanimous support of a government cannot be taken away from that government by its critics. (Exactly where does history teach us this Keif - source?) It can only be squandered by those who use it not to heal a nation's wounds, but to take political advantage. Terrorists did not come and steal our newly-regained sense of being American first, and political, fiftieth. Nor did the Democrats.(my, my never the Democrats) Nor did the media (Well maybe ABC – see below) Nor did the people. The President -- and those around him -- did that. (and remember Bush caused Katrina too – is this an impeachable offense – squandering a newly regained sense of freedom) They (Who is they – the Dems or Repubs) promised bi-partisanship, and then showed that to them, "bi-partisanship" meant that their party would rule and the rest would have to follow, or be branded, with ever-escalating hysteria, as morally or intellectually confused (hate to say it but your resume and ranting builds quite a consensus that you might be the one morally and intellectually confused), as appeasers, as those who, in the Vice President's words yesterday, "validate the strategy of the terrorists." They promised (and provided) protection, and then showed that to them "protection" meant going to war against a despot whose hand they had once shaken (Hell, Roosevelt shook hands with Stalin at Yalta) a despot who we now learn from our own Senate Intelligence Committee, hated al-Qaida as much as we did. The polite phrase for how so many of us were duped into supporting a war (so Mister Bush duped ya, duped all the Dem Senators, quite a duper that Mister Bush) , on the false premise that it had 'something to do' with 9/11 is "lying by implication." The impolite phrase is "impeachable offense." (and if Iraq had nukes – and used em on us – that too would be an impeachable offense) Not once in now five years has this President ever offered to assume responsibility for the failures that led to this empty space, and to this, the current, curdled (milk curdles, does open space curdle too), version of our beloved country. Still, there is a last snapping flame from a final candle of respect and fairness: even his most virulent critics (Opie) have never suggested he alone bears the full brunt of the blame for 9/11 (and Clinton did what to try to get ABC to stop the docudrama) Half the time, in fact, this President has been so gently treated (quite the literary license here Keif, gently by who – the NY Times, Newsweek, the Press) that he has seemed not even to be the man most responsible for anything in his own administration. Yet what is happening this very night? (What is happening is that you are spending yet another entire hour bashing Bush – but alas – no Tom Cruise story today) A mini-series, created, influenced -- possibly financed by (did that darn Soros fund another politically charged propaganda piece) -- the most radical and cold of domestic political Machiavellis, continues to be televised into our homes. The documented truths (ya know – the ones Joe Wilson told me) of the last fifteen years are replaced by bald-faced lies (bald or bold); the talking points of the current regime parroted; the whole sorry story blurred, by spin (imagine spin – from this unbiased journalist) , to make the party out of office seem vacillating and impotent (not sure you want to refer to Clinton and impotent in the same sentence) , and the party in office, seem like the only option. How dare you, Mr. President, (Keif’s talking back to the Pres) after taking cynical advantage of the unanimity and love (love?), and transmuting it into fraudulent war and needless death, after monstrously transforming it into fear (Madrid, London, never mind) and suspicion and turning that fear into the campaign slogan of three elections? How dare you -- or those around you -- ever "spin" 9/11? (only I can use 9/11 for career enhancement) Just as the terrorists have succeeded -- are still succeeding (but remember you just said the London “project” we thwarted was overblown - -so maybe not to worry? ) -- as long as there is no memorial and no construction (hate to harp on this but Mister Bush really isn’t the one to build the memorial Keif – doubt he’s even had a hammer in his hands for awhile) here at Ground Zero So, too, have they succeeded, and are still succeeding as long as this government uses 9/11 as a wedge to pit Americans against Americans. This is an odd point to cite a television program (glad you said it, I mean the rest of the world doesn’t get the connection between Ground Zero and a Twilight Zone episode), especially one from March of 1960. But as Disney's continuing sell-out of the truth (and this country) (ut oh – Disney and ABC surely headed to Keif’s worst person in the world list) suggests, even television programs can be powerful things (you’re straying here Keif , this column is to knock Bush - save the ABC/Disney bashing for tomorrow – it’s starting to sound like you hate ABC/Disney more than you hate Bush) And long ago, a series called "The Twilight Zone" broadcast a riveting (did you really say riveting) episode entitled "The Monsters Are Due On Maple Street (Does anyone else in America remember the name of an episode of a weekly TV series)." In brief: (note to readers - this isn’t so brief) a meteor (Scientology) sparks rumors of an invasion by extra-terrestrials disguised as humans (Michael Musto – Tom Cruise). The electricity goes out (Bush’s fault) . A neighbor pleads for calm. Suddenly his car -- and only his car -- starts. Someone suggests he must be the alien (Tom Cruise). Then another man's lights go on (Dems must have fixed this after Bush ruined it) . As charges and suspicion and panic overtake the street, guns are inevitably produced ( wait – lights go out and guns are inevitably produced – OK, I follow ya ) . An "alien" (Tom Cruise) is shot -- but he turns out to be just another neighbor, returning from going for help. (I’m losing you here – can you send the DVD) The camera pulls back to a near-by hill, where two extra-terrestrials (You sure you’re not confusing this with War of the Worlds) are seen manipulating a small device that can jam electricity. The veteran tells his novice that there's no need to actually attack, that you just turn off a few of the human machines and then, "they pick the most dangerous enemy they can find, and it's themselves." (You completely lost me when the lights went out – what happened to Bush and getting impeached) And then, in perhaps his finest piece of writing (this really isn’t brief) , Rod Serling sums it up with words of remarkable prescience, given where we find ourselves tonight (I find myself on the sofa) : "The tools of conquest do not necessarily come with bombs and explosions and fallout. There are weapons that are simply thoughts, attitudes, prejudices, to be found only in the minds of men (a little chauvinistic – what – women can’t have this in their minds) . "For the record, prejudices can kill and suspicion can destroy, and a thoughtless, frightened search for a scapegoat has a fallout all its own -- for the children, and the children yet unborn." (Is this Tolstoy, Michener or are we still in the Twilight Zone) When those who dissent are told time and time again (I guess that’s it for the Twilight Zone episode) -- as we will be, if not tonight by the President (ha – didn’t get the speech before hand – eh) , then tomorrow by his portable public chorus (portable public chorus?) -- that he is preserving our freedom, but that if we use any of it, we are somehow un-American...When we are scolded, that if we merely question, we have "forgotten the lessons of 9/11"... look into this empty space behind me (the one I’m fully using opportunistically) and the bi-partisanship upon which this administration also did not build, and tell me: Who has left this hole in the ground? (ah – Keif, the terrorists did) We have not forgotten, Mr. President. You have. (I have forgotten what the heck this is about) May this country forgive you. (Forgive him for what – or are these Rod Serling's words and we’re still talking about the Twilight Zone episode – with the lights out, etc.)

    Blaming Bush for the hole in the ground still being there pretends there isn't the world's biggest socialist bureaucracy in NYC to deal with. UberOlber should know that, if in fact "he worked there." Fool of a partisan. What a freakin' frothin' hack. With ratings like those, what's he doing next?

    LOL. This translation should be required reading for the Olbyloons who think that they've got a modern-day Edward R. Murrow on their hands instead of the certifiable whackjob that he is.

    All praise Keith.. We speak Keith's name

    ***"to occupy the second largest oil reserves in the world is a bargain."***

    So, when are we going to start getting that oil? You moonbats have been trying that line for years (beats independent thought, I guess) & with oil at $67/barrel it would be nice if there were any REALITY within your asinine atriette talking points. Or are you still trying to figure your way out of your "they're going to bring in the draft if Bush is re-elected" lies?

    Go ahead & check your lefty blogs so you can find out what to say & let us know.

    OHHHH Boy....4th place again in BOTH total and the sacred Demo:

    http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/ratings/the_scoreboard_monday_sept_11_43687.asp#more

    Olbermann's diatribe got more exposure on the web than on his own show. Advertisers should remember this when they consider using MSNBC.

    Olbermann is an idiot.

    Democrats- the party of surrender, failure and Olbermann. Tsk tsk Moronomous my are'nt we PMSing today? Democrats- the party of surrender, failure and Olbermann. All the democrats-or at leats the far liberal democrats that the liberal anti-Bush meida love to parade out are calling for "re-deployment" In English Mr Moronomous that means cut and run,leave Iraq- go somewhere else not in country anymore. In my country we call thate surrender. I am sorry if your comprehension of the English language is not what it should be.

    Democrats- the party of surrender, failure and Olbermann
    Democrats- the party of surrender, failure and Olbermann
    Democrats- the party of surrender, failure and Olbermann
    Democrats- the party of surrender, failure and Olbermann
    learn how to read and how to listen to what the democrats are saying anf when you grow up come back and try to have a civil converstaion with some semblance if intelligence.
    I refuse to have abttle of wits with someone as helpless and unarmed as yourself and besides should you not be getting ready for The Daily Dose of Marxism " starring Kieth "twilight Zone" Olberman?
    Democrats- the party of surrender, failure and Olbermann

    Uumm..... the Twilight Zone would work if Keith wasn't looking out at a grave of people murdered by terrorists. Or are they the "Aliens", who did it themselves, have sworn our destruction, repeatedly.
    Fear mongering!? If anything is fear mongering it's HIS SHOW. He shoudl be scared of Murrows grave spinning causing an earthquake.

    Dude ,you are 110% right man but you have to understand it is not the fact that all those poor innocent people died it is the fact the George Bush is president that is the real motivating factor in Olbyloon's mind.

    With Repubs being beat down, Bush's numbers at around 40%, libs looking like they might increase their chances in November, with more people wanting to get out of Iraq...WOULDN'T YOU THINK THERE WAS AN AUDIENCE FOR OLBERMANN IN THIS ENVIRONMENT?? HOW CAN YOU F*CK THIS UP, UBER?

    EVEN LEFTISTS DON'T CARE FOR HIM!!!

    I am grateful for KO proving there is still freedom of speech in this country. Of course the WH and many of the posters in wingnuttia would like to silence him. In scanning the comments on this post, I ran across this:

    Hey, Colbert-
    Great commentary on what dems and republicans HAVE done...can YOU tell us what dems WILL do?

    I wonder if commenter Steve could have told us in 2000 what the Republicans would do if elected. Could Steve have predicted what the GOP would do if it took control of House, Senate and WH? Did Steve know there would be a ballooning deficit, coordinated terrorist attacks on the WTC and Pentagon, the invason/occupation of two countries, the warrantless wiretapping in violation of FISA, the systemic torture of prisoners, etc?

    First, you people need to have your Brainwashing-By-Rush redone. President Carter wasn't president within the past 20 years. Even Bush and Cheney now admit there were not any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Even Bush and Cheney now admit there was never any evidence tying Saddam Hussein to 9/11. Even the Republican-controlled Senate Intelligence Committee admits there was no connection between Saddam and al Qaeda and he hated al Qaeda. Republican Presidents continued to support Saddam after he had committed atrocities against the Iranians and the Kurds. It seems odd to go after him for those atrocities 15-20 years after they occured when we supported him while he did them and immediately after he did them.
    It's obvious you're extremely jealous and obsessed with KO. Simply because he has continued to be hired (even by Fox)and paid far more than any of you is no reason to hate him. Fox and company obviously saw far more talent in KO than all of you combined.
    Now to this sheepish thought discussion. Republicans have been attacking Democrats for not having the same views on Iraq. Republicans brag about their cohesion and similarity of thought on all things. The problem is conservatives don't understand what facts are. You argue that maybe aliens secretly placed WMD in Syria. You argue that all the fossils were secretly placed there by humans or by God to confuse us. You argue that Bush didn't really say things he's on tape saying. You argue Jimmy carter was President in the past 20 years. You don't believe in facts, unless Rush tells you it's true. Aren't you embarrassed by your total lack of any thought or disagreement with your leaders? How is it possible for so many people to completely agree on everything if they think for themselves?

    First, you people need to have your Brainwashing-By-Rush redone. President Carter wasn't president within the past 20 years. Even Bush and Cheney now admit there were not any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Even Bush and Cheney now admit there was never any evidence tying Saddam Hussein to 9/11. Even the Republican-controlled Senate Intelligence Committee admits there was no connection between Saddam and al Qaeda and he hated al Qaeda. Republican Presidents continued to support Saddam after he had committed atrocities against the Iranians and the Kurds. It seems odd to go after him for those atrocities 15-20 years after they occured when we supported him while he did them and immediately after he did them.
    It's obvious you're extremely jealous and obsessed with KO. Simply because he has continued to be hired (even by Fox)and paid far more than any of you is no reason to hate him. Fox and company obviously saw far more talent in KO than all of you combined.
    Now to this sheepish thought discussion. Republicans have been attacking Democrats for not having the same views on Iraq. Republicans brag about their cohesion and similarity of thought on all things. The problem is conservatives don't understand what facts are. You argue that maybe aliens secretly placed WMD in Syria. You argue that all the fossils were secretly placed there by humans or by God to confuse us. You argue that Bush didn't really say things he's on tape saying. You argue Jimmy carter was President in the past 20 years. You don't believe in facts, unless Rush tells you it's true. Aren't you embarrassed by your total lack of any thought or disagreement with your leaders? How is it possible for so many people to completely agree on everything if they think for themselves?

    Steve,
    I didn't realize Bush invented the Special Forces and war and his energy policy out of his head and everything else he has done. Good thing we got that guy. According to your definition of "plan" I don't think anyone has any plans. Most things have already been thought of by someone at some point in history so everyone is trying to do those things better. But according to you we shouldn't do anything better. I guess we should just stop trying to catch criminals because we already caught some so why improve? Why continue going after the terrorists? We already caught some so why improve? In fact it should be illegal for all Americans to ever accept a job promotion or raise. We already have jobs so why try to improve them? This conservative policy of never improving anything sure is easy.

    You Olby-ites keep telling yourself that Bush is brainwashing while you worship and grovel at the altar of Olbermann. The more I read from you looney liberals the More I believe that liberalism is a mental disorder and that Bush Derangement syndrome -the irrational hatred of George Bush, is a real sickness. you leftards never got over your traitorous candidate Kerry losing did you? You never grew up. While we conservatives grit our teeth tru eight long years of Clinton and her sleazy husband run this country into the sewer.
    Carter is a good point to bring up. I was around during his tenure and remember it well. he was a national and international embarrassment. That is when we first had trouble with gas prices and availabilty, He made a laughingstock of us and exacerbated troubles in Iran that persisit to this day. He was a do n othing spineless liberal democrat. Hey America! If you lover Carter and Clinton you just love what the new democrats have in store. If they win ( which they will not) we had all better uncover those cold war era fallout shelters and learn Farsee or Arabic.
    Colbert what you know about The Special Forces could fit alonside your brain nicely on the head of a pin.
    all you poor pathetic leftards come here to defend your poor pathetic little hero the olbyernuttjob. You believe everything he says, you defend him like the Bolshevieks defended communism and the ideology is pretty much the same too.
    Oh and tell me about the unit cohesion of the democrats. What a laugh! They are like the keystone cops running around and saying all kinds of outright stupid things. When asked about their paln for Iraq- they have none, when asked about their plan for national securtiy and fighting the war on terror, they have none.
    All the democrats have is raising taxes, so called gay "marriage" ,more taxes, "new Direction" blah- blah, anything but Bush, Blah- blah, :this administration" blah- blah. all they do is bitch moan and complain about Bush because they are out of power and they offer NO, ZERO,ZIP, NADA, ZILCH, plan or strategy. Yeah they are the party to keep America safe. Half of them can't even tie their own shoes and we are supposed to entrust the safety and security of this country to them? NOT ME.

    riverdog:

    "Democrats- the party of surrender, failure and Olbermann"

    Again, with clarity - NAME NAMES OR SHUT THE FUCK UP, a--hole!

    IS THAT CLEAR ENOUGH OR DO I HAVE TO USE A FUCKIN' SLEDGEHAMMER?

    Robert, word to the wise. Lie down with dogs, rise up with fleas. Your standards for reasoning, argument, and attribution are really falling. You are simply spending too much time listening to and thinking about a stupid partisan television show, and you are beginning to resemble your enemy. Why do I say "beginning?" You do resemble your enemy. Clean yourself up and get out of the TV gutter. It's called an idiot box for a reason. Do you really want to pal around with the likes of Olberman on the one side and riverdog on the other?

    First you make a lot of assumptions.

    "I do love your OlbyLogic.
    Remember how Bush & Co are fascists? That Bush=Hitler?"
    mmm-kay. Is that "CoxLogic?" Where did I say that? You are arguing with the voices in your head, my hopelessly fixated friend.
    "And you think BUSH is a fascist?"
    Uh, no. I'm not generally given to stupid hyperbole and I didn't use it in my post. Again "CoxLogic?" Lie down with dogs, rise up with fleas.
    "As for your notion that there are "ten ways to Sunday that the feds could have taken the lead" you propose appropriating private property. Careful, your communist slip is showing :-)"
    Yeah, I'm a communist like Teddy Roosevelt. Listen Mr. Speedy, the only argument I made is that it is at least as ridiculous to try and excuse Bush as having his hands tied by local red tape as it is to gripe at him for not using imminent domain to seize the land-- like he did with his baseball stadium. Was his communist slip showing on that one? Was that a more pressing issue? I'm not even going to address your comment about Bush not being "the executive for the whole country." I don't think you are serious about that, I don't think he would offer that "defense," and I think you just can't give an inch while the partisan hoards goad you on. Suffice to say I think we left your implied conception of federalism behind about 150 years ago.
    Again, he can suspend habeas corpus (actually, eliminate, given the endless nature of this "war"), affix "signing statements" that create ad-hoc legal loopholes allowing torture, but you are claiming he can't designate a national monument or use or support any form of imminent domain for said use without becoming a "fascist" or a "communist." Despite the fact that he did it before for the grand public use of a for-profit baseball stadium from which he personally profited rather immensely? Turned around his rather miserable, failed career with that maneuver.
    Personally, I'm not that interested in some soul-searching memorial at all, and I think those two inspiring shafts of light they've got there now must be more inspiring to the terrorists and the NY Power Authority than they are to anyone else. When are we going to quit acting like crazed victims and stop making a fetish of our "terrible suffering?" I guess the answer to that is "when people quit seeing a way to make a profit off of it."
    The best response to 9-11 in my book is to write it off for the relatively minor national blip that it was. It didn't "change everything," any more than some yearly jump in transportation fatalities does. It suggests we need better intelligence and police work, we need to pay attention to obvious weaknesses, and we need a long term approach to reducing radicalism and mindless hatred of America. Big woo. I would expect the moderate right to make this argument. But they seem uncharacteristically content to pump hysteria and emotion and make up goofy doomsday scenarios about why we need to enshrine torture in our laws--or at least they are content to remain silent while shriller, more spastic parts of the party take the lead. That is why my former party is going down, as the hangover wears off. 9-11's only use now is as fodder for endless, meaningless, pseudo soul-searching TV programs and political exploitation.
    Let's take a more meaningful example than some rhetorical memorial. Many of the 9-11 firefighters who died did so because their radios did not work and they didn't get the message to evacuate. Flat out, that is why these people are dead. Everyone agrees this was a broadcast spectrum problem, and everyone agrees the way to solve it is to take back some licensed spectrum from some TV stations. The switch still, five years later, has not occurred because the stations won't give it back. Where is the administration's leadership here? Is this another case of the federal government being powerless because of federalism, this time in the face of local TV stations? Or is there some other way to read this that I am missing? I don't know many of the details, but I'm not that sure I need to, because I know the bottom line. Nothing productive gets done, excuses proliferate, and enormous chunks of money are moved around. And from Afghanistan, to Iraq, to Iran, to New York, to New Orleans, that is the story. And that's what you get when your leader only knows how to fight rather than lead.

    Oh my god,Bob! You've got to make Posted by: Anonymous at September 13, 2006 09:28 AM an OlbyWatch Classic!

    It's the GOLD STANDARD of Olbyloonthink!

    Anon 9:28 AM writes:

    "I don't know many of the details, but I'm not that sure I need to, because I know the bottom line. "

    Thank you for providing the clear-thinking readers with a text-book example of OlbyLogic.

    More?

    You object to my lumping your comment in with other anonymous, OlbyLoon comments but insist on posting anonymously. Duh!

    If you would like me to differentiate your remarks try identifying yourself in some way. A full name with a link to your blog and a "real" email address would be nice but even "nonfactor" and "hit_escape" understand that if they want people here to respond to them directly they need to provide some way for others to do that - like picking a name and sticking to it.

    As for your most recent comment, I have to wonder if even some OlbyLoons - or the Chief OlbyLoon himself - would support some of your most offensive statements such as equating the 9/11 attacks with an auto accident or claiming that the display of lights at Ground Zero is more inspiring to terrorists than Americans.

    I trust I am not alone in not being quite so willing to write off 9/11 for the "relatively minor national blip that it was".

    You do, however, provide another valuable service for the clear-thinking readers on this site when you talk about "goofy doomsday scenarios". You have perfectly captured the left's assumption about terror - that it's not real.

    As you are not from the New York area (hint: our electic company here is "Con Ed") it is perhaps understandable that you do not feel threatened by terrorism but for those of us who were there that day, it's not quite so easy to hide our head in the sand, even if that sand lies by the shores of Lake Erie, north of Cleveland, or some other remote corner of the country.

    America cannot afford to allow people with your mindset to have decision making power in the United States. Thanks for making it so clear what is at stake this fall.

    Cecelia,

    Our comments criss-crossed. Obviously, I agree with your assessment.

    Anonymous 2:35 AM wrote:

    "Democrats- the party of surrender, failure and Olbermann"

    Again, with clarity - NAME NAMES OR SHUT THE FUCK UP, a--hole! IS THAT CLEAR ENOUGH OR DO I HAVE TO USE A FUCKIN' SLEDGEHAMMER?

    ======================

    The OlbyLoon wants names? I've got names! Try these 17 names on for size...

    ======================

    H.R. 4232: End the War in Iraq Act of 2005
    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h109-4232

    Official Title: To prohibit the use of funds to deploy United States Armed Forces to Iraq.

    Status:
    Introduced (By Rep. James McGovern [D-MA])
    Introduced: Nov 4, 2005
    Last Action: Nov 4, 2005: Referred to House International
    Relations

    Sponsor: Rep. James McGovern [D-MA]hide cosponsors

    Cosponsors
    Rep. John Conyers [D-MI]
    Rep. Chaka Fattah [D-PA]
    Rep. Barney Frank [D-MA]
    Rep. Raul Grijalva [D-AZ]
    Rep. Carolyn Kilpatrick [D-MI]
    Rep. Dennis Kucinich [D-OH]
    Rep. Barbara Lee [D-CA]
    Rep. John Lewis [D-GA]
    Rep. James McDermott [D-WA]
    Rep. Donald Payne [D-NJ]
    Rep. Janice Schakowsky [D-IL]
    Rep. José Serrano [D-NY]
    Rep. Fortney Stark [D-CA]
    Rep. Edolphus Towns [D-NY]
    Rep. Nydia Velázquez [D-NY]
    Rep. Maxine Waters [D-CA]
    Rep. Lynn Woolsey [D-CA]

    ======================

    Now, what was that you yammering about?

    "I trust I am not alone in not being quite so willing to write off 9/11 for the "relatively minor national blip that it was"."

    Congratulations Mr. Cox on having mastered the rhetorical flourishes that almost every politician right or left espouses nowadays. When are you going to run for office? You need to hurry, the time for hysteria is running out. We are safer, but we aren't safe enough!!! We need to be really really really safe!

    "You object to my lumping your comment in with other anonymous, OlbyLoon comments but insist on posting anonymously. Duh!"

    Well, good point, although I did check and no one using "anonymous" referenced either fascism or Hitler in this thread, that was reserved for you and the usual far right wing suspects. Go ahead and check. And the tone of my post had no such rhetorical trash in it, so I thought maybe you could sort it out from those voices you hear. But as responding to my actual points does nothing for your shrill rhetoric attempting to paint anyone who understands what a failure Bush is as a leftist kook, I can understand the mistake.

    >>>I don't know many of the details, but I'm not that sure I need to, because I know the bottom line. "

    >>>>>>Thank you for providing the clear-thinking readers with a text-book example of OlbyLogic.

    Thank you for providing us with yet another example of CoxRhetoric, that manages to dodge any real discussion of an issue, supplanting it with "tasteless mockery" based on some obscure tv guy. "OlbyLogic" again, huh? I hope the Smurfs don't sue you for the idea of using a generic adjective to describe everything in the world. The sad thing is you yourself had just got done with a post stating that you weren't sure of all the facts on an issue (who ever is?) that you were using to browbeat a lefty.

    Ah well. What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. Let's just start over. Why don't you tell me clearly and rationally why 3000 people dying in 9-11 attacks is so much worse than say 3000 people dying in a war that has only served the interests of our enemies, or 30,000 people dying in traffic accidents? And then tell me why you think the light spires that remind everyone of the successful attack would not be heartening to terrorists. The greeks used to put up exactly this kind of trophy on the battlefields where they had success.

    Take a deep breath, sort out what I am saying from the demonic characatures in your head, and try to be reasonable about it. Do you support the use of these airwaves for emergency services now, or not. Do you think the executive has any role in making this happen?

    riverdog,
    Conservatives grit their teeth during the Clinton years? Your mommy didn't let you watch the impeachment proceedings or follow the investigation which cost $70 million? I guess she didn't want her little boy exposed to all that sex talk.
    I guess your brainwashing didn't include the oil crisis we had in 1973 while Nixon was president. That was before Carter. I guess your mommy must have forgotten to mention that. Again, basic facts that you have such a problem with. I didn't bring up Carter. You or your fellow Rushee said Carter was president within the past 20 years. I simply pointed out that is factually wrong.
    Now al Qaeda is going to take over America? There are maybe a few thousand of those people and they'll invade with their non-existant army and take over? Oh dear God. We're all going to die. While we're at it we better outlaw driving pronto. Over 42,000 people die every year in automobile accidents. If we have to tear up the Constitution and be this frantic over less than 3,000 deaths, we should ban driving over 42,000 deaths per year.

    Erie Bob writes:

    "Why don't you tell me clearly and rationally why 3000 people dying in 9-11 attacks is so much worse than say 3000 people dying in a war that has only served the interests of our enemies, or 30,000 people dying in traffic accidents?"

    Well, when you put that way...

    As you are so interested in being "clear" and "rational" why don't you first try asking a clear and rational question instead of comparing Geese to Ganders. It makes no sense to ask me to compare the deaths of the people who died in the attacks on 9/11 with 3,000 people dying in some unspecified war. It makes even less to make a comparision between the 9/11 victims and ten times that number in traffic fatalities.

    That I might have to explain the difference between people dying in a terror attack and soldiers being killed in a war or people dying as a result of a traffic accident, something self-evident to any rational person, seems odd but I will go ahead and "explain" what is obvious to every other readers on this site (right and left). A U.S. soldier understands the risks in volunteering to serve and knows going into battle that they might be killed. There is no malice in an accidental death such as a traffic accident. The attacks on 9/11 were pre-meditated murder carried out against men, women and children with the only objective being to create as much carnage as possible. As you presumeably know this yourself I am not sure what point you are attempting to make other than that you are an idiot.
    ]
    "tell me why you think the light spires that remind everyone of the successful attack would not be heartening to terrorists"

    It may well be that the light spires might be "heartening to terrorists". I am sure you know more about what gives moral encouragement to terrorists than I do. But, what you wrote - and what I responded to - was that they were "more inspiring to the terrorists and the NY Power Authority than they are to anyone else". I have no doubt you can sympathize with the POV of the terrorists but I am not clear what makes you think you understand my feelings upon seeing those lights - or anyone else's for that matter.

    "Do you support the use of these airwaves for emergency services now, or not."

    Yes

    "Do you think the executive has any role in making this happen?"

    Yes.

    Do I think you are an idiot?

    Yes.

    It's humorous to hear Kerry called a traitor while Bush is a big war hero. Who fought in Vietnam and was awarded silver stars and purple hearts? Oh wait. According to conservatives the U.S. Army is a bunch of commie traitors. That worked out well for McCarthy. Which one had his daddy get him out of Vietnam and into the National Guard which he went AWOL from? It's odd no one seems to remember him in Alabama and he can't prove he was there.

    The other thing I find humorous is the fascist/Nazi references. First, the conservatives wanted to appease Hitler and fought against our involvement in WWII and our assistance to Britain. Go look up the Neutrality Acts sometime. They were pushed by conservatives. Second, it's obvious none of you have a clue what fascism is. But conservatives are inbred illiterates so I wouldn't expect you to be able to read anything and understand it.

    Yes, yes, we know... you liberals are all frickin' geniuses...you all live in the superior "blue" states... you are the enlightened, world-travelers... you all attended top colleges and have graduate degrees from elite universities...

    I love how liberals like to portray themselves as tolerant, open-minded people without a prejudiced bone in their body as they proceed to demonstrate their intolerance, close-minded, bigotry against people who do not share their POLITICAL ideology.

    You might be interested to know that I am smarter and better educated than you, live in New York, have worked and lived throughout North America, in Europe and the Far East, have dual-citizenship (EU & USA) and have, as many of my closest friends, die-hard liberals who make you look like a John Bircher. That's because I am able to seperate the person from their political and religious beliefs, am willing to listen to their point of view while making my case for my own.

    I am sure it gives you great comfort to imagine that the people who don't agree with your politics are sub-human. Enjoy it!

    Leftist Democrats like Keith Olbermann are the main reason why Republicans will be retaining control of the House and Senate this November. Democrats like to dream about nonsense like the impeachment of President Bush rather than offering real solutions to our problems. In contrast, Republicans are honestly trying to make this world a better, a safer, and a more democracy-filed place to live. I vote for Democrats when they deserve my vote. I won't be voting for any Democrats this year. None. Nada. A vote for any Democrat this year is a vote for surrender, treason, higher taxes, more spending, and bigger government. Conservatives and moderates need to mobilize and unite. Let no Democrat receive a vote this November from those of us who love America. Let us concede no seat of power to the Democrats. Let us send a strong message to the political party that hates America. Let us mobilize and drive out the Democrat scourge from Congress. Let us deal them a crushing defeat in the very hour of their greatest hope. We must take no prisoners. The stakes are too high.

    Robert,
    The Founding Fathers were proud of being educated. They thought education was extremely important to our country. They were in favor of a natural aristocracy, meaning intelligent, well-educated people rise above stupid, uneducated people. I simply quoted U.S. government statistics which show blue staters are better-educated, earn more, are less likely to be impoverished than red staters. If you have a problem with the statistics, direct your anger at the government or help change the facts.
    You're smarter and better-educated? Let me guess. You have a business degree? I assume that because you think wearing a suit to class makes you smart. You don't realize business isn't a hard degree to get. Yeah my math and economics degrees and biometry masters from Cornell can't compare to you.
    Calling people an idiot and other names falls into what part of that lecture of your's?
    Does being a citizen of Europe make you a more patriotic American? I ask because you people brag about being great patriots and us being America-haters. If I became a citizen of another country would I be more patriotic like you?

    Robert,
    The last post to you by anonymous was by me. It didn't list my name for some reason. Sorry about that.

    My previous post was made with a bit of sarcasm intended. However, I hear too many Republicans screaming that they will either stay home or vote for the Democrats in November. They want to send a "message" to the Republican Party. Such suicidal proposals will not help us in this time of war. In peacetime, we can consider such strategies. In war, we must be more cautious. The political party that is in greatest need of a strong and undeniable message is the Democratic Party. During war, we need strength from both parties. We don't have that right now. We need to unite and send a strong message to the Democrats rather than to the Republicans. A defeat in the current political environment will send a message that may rescue the Democratic Party from the left-wing fanatics that are now holding it hostage. It is our best hope for the future and the time is short.

    My previous post was made with a bit of sarcasm intended. However, I hear too many Republicans screaming that they will either stay home or vote for the Democrats in November. They want to send a "message" to the Republican Party. Such suicidal proposals will not help us in this time of war. In peacetime, we can consider such strategies. In war, we must be more cautious. The political party that is in greatest need of a strong and undeniable message is the Democratic Party. During war, we need strength from both parties. We don't have that right now. We need to unite and send a strong message to the Democrats rather than to the Republicans. A defeat in the current political environment will send a message that may rescue the Democratic Party from the left-wing fanatics that are now holding it hostage. It is our best hope for the future and the time is short.

    Nuclear Physisist,
    Your diatribe is laughable. John Dean is right about you people. Have you turned your TV on in the past six years? Have you seen any polls or read any newspapers? Sixty percent of Americans think invading Iraq was a mistake. A majority (53% I believe) want us to leave Iraq. Are the majority of Americans traitors and leftists? Have you seen the budget deficits and national debt Bush and the Republcan Congress have run up? Clinton gave us surpluses. The government has increased in size under Bush. It shrunk under Clinton. Even conservatives have complained about the out-of-control spending by the Republican Congress and Bush. He has vetoed one bill in his six years and that wasn't because of the spending amount. If you think Democrats won't gain any seats in November you're more delusional than you seem. Maybe you could move to a theocracy after the Democrats take the House in November. You won't have to worry about smut and amoral liberals in Iran.

    Mr. Colbert,

    The majority of Americans supported the war in Iraq when it began. The fact that they don't seem to like it anymore is human nature. That's why this country uses a commander-in-chief rather than a popular vote to make war decisions. War is hell.

    I want us to leave Iraq too, so I would be one of those showing up in the referenced polls. But, like most Americans, I want it to be according to our own terms rather than those of terrorists and insurgents.

    Growth in government under Bush has been driven primarily by war and security issues. What were our alternative choices under the circumstances? Bush didn't veto spending bills, because they met the criteria that he outlined in his proposed budgets.

    Shrinkage of the government under Clinton was driven by Republicans in Congress.

    Shrinking the remainder of government programs will take time and I'm in favor of pressuring politicians on both sides of the isle to move forward on realistic proposals for doing so. Needless to say, based on history, I don't believe Democrats in Congress will ever be able to take such government reforms seriously.

    riverdog:

    Have you READ H.R. 4232? The short title does not EXPLAIN what the bill does. It is NOT a "cut and run" bill!

    SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON USE OF FUNDS TO DEPLOY ARMED FORCES TO IRAQ.

    (a) Prohibition- Except as provided in subsection (b), funds appropriated or otherwise made available under any provision of law may not be obligated or expended to deploy or continue to deploy the Armed Forces to the Republic of Iraq.

    (b) Exception- Subsection (a) shall not apply to the use of funds to--

    (1) provide for the safe and orderly withdrawal of the Armed Forces from Iraq; or

    (2) ensure the security of Iraq and the transition to democratic rule by--

    (A) carrying out consultations with the Government of Iraq, other foreign governments, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), the United Nations, and other international organizations; or

    (B) providing financial assistance or equipment to Iraqi security forces and international forces in Iraq.

    (c) Rule of Construction- Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit or otherwise restrict the use of funds available to any department or agency of the Government of the United States (other than the Department of Defense) to carry out social and economic reconstruction activities in Iraq.

    Nice try, wingnut. NEXT!

    Anonymous,

    So, the subject bill doesn't change anything with respect to the approach currently being implemented in Iraq by the Bush administration. Looking at the title and weasel-worded language in this bill, it sure looks like the Democrats wanted to stipulate a cut-and-run approach for Iraq, but they did not do so because they feared a backlash from the American people and a challenge in the Supreme Court. This proposed bill was pure political posturing by the Democrats as they continue their straddle-the-fence approach to national security. They make people like you happy by the phoney title and protect their buts by making sure that it doesn't preempt the role of the President as the commander-in-chief of the armed forces. I think that riverdog was right on the mark. It is you who are delusional.

    Nuclear Physicist,
    Bill Clinton's Reinventing Government initiative cut the size of government. By cutting the size of government I mean under Bill Clinton the number of federal government employees decreased. That was done by Clinton. If the Republicans are so good with money, why do Reagan, Bush and Bush account for roughly 2/3 of our national debt? Real discretionary, non-defense spending has ballooned 27.9% under Bush. Total real discretionary spending has risen 35.8% under Bush. Pork-barrel spending has also ballooned under Bush. But I guess conservative, government-waste watchdog groups just hate America. The Republicans control both houses of Congress and the White House.
    Americans want to leave Iraq now. They see and hear what is happening. Our own military assessments claim Anbar province is controlled by al Qaeda in Iraq. We have created a new safe haven for terrorists and given Iran a new ally. But no one is to blame. Let's stay the course.

    "By cutting the size of government I mean under Bill Clinton the number of federal government employees decreased. That was done by Clinton."

    Sorry, Colburn, this is a shell game that was continually trumpeted by the Clintons (much like like the 100,000 new cops on the street) and you bought it. The government did have fewer employees, but they were simply retained by the government as contractors so there was practically no reduction in the number of federal workers at all.

    "Americans want to leave Iraq now"

    That would include you as well, Colburn? Is that your plan, we just pack up and leave Iraq (the Cindy Sheehan Plan)? Or perhaps you like the Murtha Plan where we deploy to Okinawa, where our troops will be a short 22 hour jaunt from Iraq-- why it's practically like being right on the battlefield.

    Hank:

    "Or perhaps you like the Murtha Plan where we deploy to Okinawa, where our troops will be a short 22 hour jaunt from Iraq-- why it's practically like being right on the battlefield."

    Dude, you've made your point. Murtha said something stupid...ONCE! Has he ever REPEATED it? NO!

    Meanwhile, the Commander-in-Chief keeps talking aout "standing down when the Iraqis stand up". BUT THE IRAQIS ARE NOT STANDING UP! In fact, all of this talk about "transfer of power" is just paper - Iraqi forces have barely enough equipment to protect a medium-sized city, let alone a country. And Americans will continue to maintain final command-and-control on a majority of the missions.

    So whose the buffoon?

    Colbert:

    Here are the bare facts from factcheck.org regarding discretionary spending increases under President Bush:

    Discretionary budget authority:3-year increase

    Homeland Security (non-Defense): 180.0%
    Department of Defense: 52.5%
    Other Operations of Government: 16.0%

    Total, Discretionary budget authority: 35.7%

    So, the actual spending increases under Bush that are not directly related to 9/11 are about 16% over three years and this includes spending increases due to inflation. Just for your edification, here is some more detailed information from the Heritage Foundation on the Other Operations of Government category:

    Examples of discretionary spending increases between 2001 and 2006 include the following:

    Education is up 62 percent, or 10 percent annually; International affairs is up 74 percent, or 12 percent annually; Health research and regulation is up 57 percent, or 9 percent annually; Veterans' benefits are up 46 percent, or 8 percent annually; Science and basic research is up 40 percent, or 7 percent annually.

    So, please tell me which of the above areas where discretionary spending increases have occurred should President Bush not have proposed increases. Most of these increases have been demanded by the public, necessitated by real problems in our world, and accepted by both Democrats and Republicans in Congress. Americans need to remember that they usually get what they demand/ask for. Furthermore, the issues concerning discretionary spending are dwarfed by those involving entitlement programs and Democrats have consistently blocked any efforts to implement cost-saving reforms for these programs.

    The budget woes of this country are far more complex than most Americans want to admit and the American people are complicit in the failures to fix these problems. Although I believe that President Bush and Congressional Republicans are not blameless, they will never be able to propose and implement real-world solutions as long as Democrats continue their current political agenda of sabotage and obstruction that is aimed at returning them to the seats of power in Washington.

    Robert can I ask you why you feel it is neccesary to include invective in your posts to me? I didn't do it to you, so not even the tit for tat that passes as high morality these days dictates it. You should be above this--especially given the fact that you profess to be discussing topics that you find serious, important, and worthy of respect. I can understand your desire to drop to the level of people who come on here and just shriek and shout emotionally-- WITH THOSE PEOPLE. But Riverdog can handle that side of things for you. Since you are one of the only people here capable of having an intelligent civil conversatioin, why not do it? Others will take up that ratty banner for you and It would do much for this site.

    Onward.

    You find my suggestion that a great big memorial to 9-11 is heartening to terrorists both "offensive" and evidence that I "sympathize with the point of view of the terrorists." Maybe your personal wounds on 9-11 were very deep and you lost people you knew and love. I have several friends in NY, but I did not lose any of them. I did lose someone I knew and loved in a traffic accident. I can tell you it does not matter to me one bit whether there was "malice" involved. I'd like to hear your theory on why this is so important, if you can overcome your disdain for my inability to grasp what is so obvious. I suggest that if that is really an issue, your wound is not as deep as you think.

    9-11 was a human tragedy. The people who died there were mostly not heroes, but ordinary people going about their business who became the victims of a mix of madness, an understandable lack of vigilance, and confusion. This is not to undervalue the everyday heroism of every public safety employee that makes danger their profession, a heroism that came to the fore in the media through this event. Although by your standards, the deaths of those who willingly choose dangerous occupations are somehow less upsetting. Truth be told, all those firefighters, and all our men and women in Iraq were expecting to come home from work just as much as you or I.

    I would be interested to hear what the 9-11 lights do mean to you. I drive by the spot from time to time where my friend died. The tiny memorial there means a lot to me, but it is in no way "heartening." It is a painfull reminder of my loss, it makes me sad, reflective on death, grateful for what I have left, and a bit cautious in my driving. I wouldn't want it gone (and it wouldn't matter if it was...the spot would be the spot) but I certainly wouldn't want to be able to see it from across town. On the other hand, if someone had murdered my friend and was proud of it, I'm sure they would see it as a trophy. Do you really think it takes some kind of odd "sympathy" with the murderer to see that? I would suggest that if you cannot see that, you don't understand this enemy well enough to be an effective opponent. But then I honestly don't think that the current crew are effective opponents to terrorism, so maybe you and/or they really do lack this understanding. I'd prefer to think this is just rhetoric.

    Is this such an "idiotic" consideration? The terrorists attacked what they did because of it's grand visibility. They wanted to replace that with a fearful kind of visibility and have that fear live among us. To me, the best response to these contemptable, insane, nihilists is to deny them this visibility. Let New York swallow it's wound in its natural, organic, living way. Let that be the silent response to these merchants of mindless death.

    I am honestly interested in hearing what the 9-11 memorial means to you--both why you think it is so important and yet somehow not important enough for the kind of maneuvers Bush's group used to get the baseball stadium built. I am also interested, based on your other responses, whether you think the executive has lead appropriately and effectively on the emergency spectrum issue, which you seemed to have cut short with your contemptuous sign-off.

    ----

    Do I think you are an idiot? No.

    Colbert,

    Let me explain how a "debate" works. If you are not using some agreed upon fact to support your point then you need to provide some evidence - like a link. When you post anonymously or pseudonymously you can't then claim personal attributes or accomplishments. Remember that you are just a pseudonym here. If you would like to identify yourself and then provide some support for your claims about your education you are welcome to do so but until then your claims about any education you may or may not have are irrelevant. Rest assured, whatever education you have you are not as intelligent or witty as I am.

    I am a dual-citizen because my grandparents were emigrated from Ireland and that makes me eligible under Irish law. It has nothing to do with patriotism; my primary motivation in applying for an Irish passport was to use the shorter line at Heathrow when I was going back and forth to London on business several years ago. I have no idea whether YOU are more or less patriotic than me but whether you do or do not have or are eligible for dual-citizenship is entirely beside the point.

    As for the rest of your "thoughts", I find it humorous that the person who wrote "conservatives are inbred illiterates" now takes offense at my calling people names. Given your hypocrisy and inability to provide facts to support your case makes your passion for Keith Olbermann quite understandable.

    You, my good sir, as an OlbyLoon.

    "...Rest assured, whatever education you have you are not as intelligent or witty as I am."

    Ugh. Come on...Rush already has the patent on this schtick. Don't do this.

    The truth hurts.

    Mmmm. I guess you need it, so here you go: I'm so smart I'm like infinity to the infinity power smart! And you'll never be as smart as me because it is like impossible because I have lots of degrees and stuff.

    Now that that is out of the way, any response to my post above, Robert? Or are we done here.

    Hi Robert.
    It's so nice to see you finally figured out how to respond after a day. I notice you didn't list your great education credentials or reasons presuming to be the smartest guy in the world. I'll assume that means by education trumps your's. There's no shame in that.
    Now let me explain how a "debate" works for adults. I wrote two paragraphs of well-known facts. You can use one of Bush's many internets to see Kerry was awarded a Bronze Star, a Silver Star, and three Purple Hearts. It took me about three seconds. http://www.factcheck.org/article231.html
    There's a link since using the internet to find the information is above your head.
    I believe it is well-known W. was in the National Guard and didn't fight in Vietnam. I didn't provide links because I wasn't mentioning hidden or unusual information.
    I told you to look up the Neutrality Acts and fascism. It's not my fault you weren't smart enough to handle that simple task.
    Where are the links for everything you post Bob?
    You chose to ignore all that and focus on part ofm my last sentence, responding with four paragraphs.
    You couldn't have made it anymore obvious you're desperately in need of assurance. I'm Sorry your self esteem is so pitifully low you need strangers on a message board to kiss your ring. You're a genius Bob. You the man. Everyone likes you. Ladies love you. LL Cool Bob. You're the smartest person ever. Thanks for inventing calculus and topology. You should be president. Did you stop crying yet? Are you going to be okay? I didn't mean to hurt your feelings. I didn't realize how fragile you are. Ladies love that sensitivity though.
    Unlike you, I don't need my ego stroked by strangers on an internet message board. I only responded with specifics about my education because you asked me to. You're the one who was calling people idiots who never insulted you. I just wanted to follow your lead. I don't need some guy who seems close to being an obsessed stalker of Keith Olbermann to know all my personal information. You can keep your pathetic obsession squarely on KO. I'm sorry he doesn't want you the way you want him. You should move on.
    By the way, why do you only attack liberals who are partly anonymous? I gave a name so you can argue my points on here. Conservatives post anonymously and you've never said a word to them. If you think people should be accountable for their words, shouldn't you apply that standard to conservatives too?

    The Fact Check article you cited proves Bush lied about discretionary spending. You're correct about your numbers although you didn't respond to the numbers I cited for his entire presidency thus far. Bush is spending more on non-defense, non-homeland security than Clinton did. The Cato Institute and Heritage Foundation have criticized Bush for his spending. They claim it's a lot more than defense and anti-terror funding. "Pork" spending is out of control as well. All this assumed every bit of homeland security and defense spending is justified, economical and proper. If you have seen TSA reports on airport security, reports on the Homeland Security Department, reports on preparedness, the recent reallocation of security funding (cutting NYC while raising Omaha, etc.) that assumption is very shaky.
    However, I think a 16% spending increase over three years is large. Inflation was included in the numbers I cited which show over Bush's first five years his spending has gone through the roof.
    A big problem you're missing with Bush's enormous spending is how poorly things are going for most Americans. Incomes are stagnant. Poverty is increasing. The numbers of uninsured are growing. The majority of Americans realize Iraq isn't going well. Afghanistan is shaky. The Homeland Security Department is a mess. The federal government looks incompetent.

    Nuclear Physicist
    The Fact Check article you cited proves Bush lied about discretionary spending. You're correct about your numbers although you didn't respond to the numbers I cited for his entire presidency thus far. Bush is spending more on non-defense, non-homeland security than Clinton did. The Cato Institute and Heritage Foundation have criticized Bush for his spending. They claim it's a lot more than defense and anti-terror funding. "Pork" spending is out of control as well. All this assumed every bit of homeland security and defense spending is justified, economical and proper. If you have seen TSA reports on airport security, reports on the Homeland Security Department, reports on preparedness, the recent reallocation of security funding (cutting NYC while raising Omaha, etc.) that assumption is very shaky.
    However, I think a 16% spending increase over three years is large. Inflation was included in the numbers I cited which show over Bush's first five years his spending has gone through the roof.
    A big problem you're missing with Bush's enormous spending is how poorly things are going for most Americans. Incomes are stagnant. Poverty is increasing. The numbers of uninsured are growing. The majority of Americans realize Iraq isn't going well. Afghanistan is shaky. The Homeland Security Department is a mess. The federal government looks incompetent.

    Erie Bob,

    You wrote: "I'd like to hear your theory on why this is so important"

    "This" meaning that the light display on 9/11 was MORE heartening to terrorists and the NY Power Authority than to me (or most other Americans)?

    You keep attempting to put forward the straw-man that it was I who said anything about the light display at Ground Zero being "heartening" to anyone. I didn't. You did. I find your attitude offensive for many reasons among them because you presume to know or understand something about my emotions with regard to 9/11. You don't but that you presume to do so while at the same time attempting to trivialize the seriousness of the 9/11 attacks and the nation's (nay, the world's) response to them is pathetic. To tell anyone who lost friends, family and neighbors - as anyone who lives in the New York metropolitan area did - "your wound is not as deep as you think" and to do so anonymously makes plain that you are not only an idiot but a coward.

    As to what you think of the victims of 9/11, you seem to be under the delusion that I could care in the slightest what some anonymous OlbyLoon thinks about them. My impression of you, based on your comments on this site, is that you are not fit to pass judgement on anyone let alone the people who died in the 9/11 attacks and those who knew them.

    As for telling how I feel about 9/11, I have not the slightest interest in sharing you with my feelings about 9/11. Maybe you can share with us how you have managed to transmogrify your feelings over losing a friend as the result of a car accident into such disdain for the suffering of others. Are you really so self-centered to believe that because you respond to grief and loss one way that everyone else in the world should feel as you do? I would never deign to judge your feelings for your friend or what happened to that friend. Yet somehow you feel that your experience entitled you to pass judgement on all of humanity?
    I am sorry you lost a friend in a car accident. And you are welcome to your opinion that the best response to the 9/11 attacks is to pave over Ground Zero and put up a parking lot. But given that many people have very strong emotions on the subject I am not sure what would make you think that your loss entitles you to question the sincerity of other people's emotions and how they choose to deal with or otherwise express their grief. And it is that which is so idiotic about your remarks here. Who are you to pass judgement on how other people grieve? Your just an anonymous OlbyLoons posting on a comment thread.

    As for what you want from me - my opinions about baseball stadiums and the emergency spectrum and the Bush presidency - I think I'll take a pass.

    Colbert,

    What are you, like 12?

    My CV is online and you are welcome to Google for it.
    I did not respond to the rest of your post because I've heard the same tripe many times before and it is not worth the response. I don't recall disputing Kerry's war record or Bush's record of military service and I have no idea what the "isolationists" in the Congress in late 30's has to do with "conservatives" today.

    You wrote "you're a genius Bob. You the man. Everyone likes you. Ladies love you. LL Cool Bob. You're the smartest person ever. Thanks for inventing calculus and topology. You should be president."

    Now you are starting to make sense!

    As for the rest of it, where in all that you have written is a coherent argument for or against something?

    Now I have to admit that I have plenty of liberal friends and so I have seen this problem before. Liberals tend to hang out with other liberals and a liberals idea of a "debate" is to get together with other liberals, sit around and imagine what a conservative might say and then each liberal to try and top each other - extremist, religious fanatic, Nazi, fascist, Hitler, blah, blah, blah. It's the reason you guys can't win elections - you never ACTUALLY debate someone who disagrees with you and is as smart and informed as you (in my case that would be SMARTER and MORE INFORMED). I just scrolled back through your recent posts to check and was able to confirm that you have not actually put forward an argument for any particular point but just made random assertions and asked loaded questions. Why don't you pick a topic, stick that one topic for more than a few seconds, and duke it out. Because, quite frankly, all this Bush=Bad stuff just puts me to sleep.

    Colbert:

    The three years that I show stats for include the period of greatest increase after 9/11. Therefore, the five years that you are talking about will be no worse. And, a 16% increase over three years is not large when you consider that half of it is inflation and the other half was primarily in response to real issues confronting Americans. The fact is that spending under President Bush, when measured as a percentage of the GDP, is right in line with what previous Presidents have spent.

    Your other economic points are baseless and have been debunked by numerous economists. Americans are not worse off financially under President Bush. Simple averages that have been used by many journalists don't factor in changes like the retirement of baby-boomers and a younger workforce (i.e., changing demographics). In the last ten years alone, due to technology-driven cost reductions, the buying power of lower wage earners has been significantly improved. When I was making $10,000 per year with a wife and three children back in 1977, I could not begin to buy what the current generation is buying within the equivalent wage/economic strata. This has been my actual experience, so forget the statistical exercises. They don't impress me.

    Finally, you can say what you want about the Homeland Security Department, but there have been no successful terrorist attacks on the homeland since 9/11. Furthermore, attacks against foreign civilian US interests like embassies have significantly declined on President Bush's watch. As they say, the proof is in the pudding.

    Colbert:

    One more thing. Bush Whitehouse spokesmen admitted that he didn't have his facts right when he talked about reductions in discretionary spending. When are Democrats going to step forward and start admitting to their numerous mistakes and lies about the Bush Presidency??????????????

    Robert, I'll give you credit, you do know how to push the rhetorical buttons, and you are one unique dude.

    Your eagerness to lapse into a shocked and offended silence, and to do it so incredibly loudly, would serve you well on television or radio. You seem to have one DEFCON level, which I guess is appropriate for entertainment's sake. I am now "not only an idiot but a coward," I have "passed judgement" on the people who died in the 9-11 attacks, I "question the sincerity of other people's emotions," and I've "passed judgement on all of humanity," and "transmografied" my friends death into "disdain for the suffering of others."

    Here's what I said that has you madly penning inference after inference;

    "I think those two inspiring shafts of light they've got there now must be more inspiring to the terrorists and the NY Power Authority than they are to anyone else."

    I do think that. I've been through personal tragedy and I simply can't see how reflecting on tragic death can be "inspiring" to anyone who isn't trying to accomplish tragic death. I didn't say "usefull" or "meaningful" or "important" or "human," I said "inspiring." And all I'm saying is I personally don't understand how it would be. And you fly off the rails, too shocked and appalled and disdainfull to explain to my worthless and morally bankrupt Olberloon self how it might be inspiring or how you see it differently.

    Really this is pretty good. You have a talent for taking a statement like "people don't wear bowler hats anymore" in the stricktest and most sensitive possible sense. And then you fly into the invective: "What?! I know someone who wears bowler hats and I am shocked and appalled that you would imply they are sub-human!! I will not stand here while you slur a whole class of people as animals."

    I know. I know. Now I've trivialized the whole issue by comparing it to wearing bowler hats and you are shocked and appalled, and I've proven once again that anonymous olbyloons are not worth responding to. Even if you did set up a whole website made up mostly of you responding to anonymous olbyloons, and dedicated most of your life to it.

    You seem to make a big deal about whether someone is "annonymous" or not. I guess that means "Robert Cox" is your real name. Doesn't mean anything to me, and google has about 100 CV's for various fellows named Robert Cox. Very common name. I will admit that the claim that you raised three children and have a wife surprises me. A lot. But I can't check it. Your claim to have a lot of liberal friends surprises me. A lot. But I can't check it. I would be truly astonished if you were getting enough exercise and fresh air. Can't check that either.

    Now personally, I don't make a habit of throwing names like "idiot" and "coward" in people's faces in any company, certainly not in totally unknown company. If I did, I probably wouldn't use my real name. And I wouldn't call that cowardice, but a decent sense of shame. I understand that entertainment, as opposed to civil discussion, has different standards, and I think that may be more what you are aiming at. If so, I hope you get your show someday. You certainly work hard enough at it, and while I think you often overestimate your wittiness, you aren't bad at times. I think this could fly. Do you have any photos or recordings of yourself?

    "As for what you want from me - my opinions about baseball stadiums and the emergency spectrum and the Bush presidency - I think I'll take a pass."

    That's probably for the best. I don't think it would serve your purposes here.

    Erie Bob,

    That you are new to this site and not familiar with me - and apparently don't know how to use Google effectively - is YOUR problem. Not mine. And I have four kids not three.

    As for what you believe or don't believe about me is really beside the point. You are on MY site. I don't need to justify myself to YOU. If you put up your own blog and I post anonymously on your site you are welcome to hold me to the same standard - or not. The way this works is MY site, MY rules.

    I actually don't make a big deal about whether someone is anonymous or not which is why have completely open comments. What I make a big deal about is someone who posts anonymously and then want me to respect their opinions or credit some claims they make about themselves. If you want respect stand by your own words by identifying yourself with them. Otherwise, my policy is to treat anonyous commenters who come on this site to criticize or argue with me as cowards. If you don't like that you have a choice - stand up and be counted, bugger off or take what you get and like it.

    It is telling that you attempt, in your most recent post, to falsely portray my original reply as being directed at a single comment. You apparently believe that neither I nor my readers can recall that you wrote a rather long, offensive post and that I was responding to a wide range of statements that you made all of the common theme that any memorial to the victims of the 9/11 attacks is "heartening" to our enemies.

    You are free to express your opion that you "can't see how reflecting on tragic death can be 'inspiring' to anyone who isn't trying to accomplish tragic death". Just as I am free to express my contempt for you and your opinions. I am not sure you are now covering any new ground - you said your piece, I replied. What else is there to say?

    BTW, I did like one line you wrote "You seem to have one DEFCON level". I'd like to see you adjust that to read:

    "You have one DEFCON Level, DEFCON 1: Maximum force readiness."

    BTW, I did like one line you wrote "You seem to have one DEFCON level". I'd like to see you adjust that to read: "DEFCON 1: Maximum force readiness."

    absolutely hilarious, silly little man.

    "If you don't like that you have a choice - stand up and be counted, bugger off or take what you get and like it."

    Stand up and be counted? By who? What the hell are you talking about? Er, Ah...as a good Straussian, I think I'm leaning towards the central option.

    >>>>BTW, I did like one line you wrote "You seem to have one DEFCON level"

    I thought you'd like that. It's cool and strikes the appropirate note of the giant clash of civilizations in which Brave Bob soldiers on. But in essence, you're right. We're done here. You are not interested in conversation or anything like it. Like I say, I hope you get your show. Are there any pictures of you out there?

    Can anyone find Bob's CV on google? I am interested in this guy, especially if he really went to Chicago.

    Mocking an obscure dude for using Nazi imagery by using Nazi imagery? Trying to build popularity by attacking someone more popular who tries to build popularity by attacking someone more popular? Calling everyone who comes to his papably loony website a "loon."

    The levels of irony are priceless.

    Considering that Anonymous is someone who compared the deaths of 9/11 as being tantamount to a blimp in yearly motor vehicle fatality stats... I'd say a personally directed appellation of "silly little man" from he/she should be cause enough for immense relief.

    (I wouldn't share info about how many children I have with this person, Bob)

    "Mocking an obscure dude for using Nazi imagery by using Nazi imagery? Trying to build popularity by attacking someone more popular who tries to build popularity by attacking someone more popular? Calling everyone who comes to his papably loony website a "loon." The levels of irony are priceless."

    . . .

    touche. but you must remember that the subtleties of nuance and irony are beyond the resident tiny minds, their criminal neocon overloards, and the pathetic gatekeeper cox.

    OlbyWatch URL fees: 20$/month
    Web Site Obsession: 80 hours/week
    Being a Legend in Your Own Mind: Priceless

    "Mocking an obscure dude for using Nazi imagery by using Nazi imagery? Trying to build popularity by attacking someone more popular who tries to build popularity by attacking someone more popular? Calling everyone who comes to his papably loony website a "loon." The levels of irony are priceless."

    . . .

    touche. but you must remember that the subtleties of nuance and irony are beyond the resident tiny minds, their criminal neocon overloards, and the pathetic gatekeeper cox.

    OlbyWatch URL fees: 20$/month
    Web Site Obsession: 80 hours/week
    Being a Legend in Your Own Mind: Priceless

    "OlbyWatch URL fees: 20$/month
    Web Site Obsession: 80 hours/week
    Being a Legend in Your Own Mind: Priceless"

    Watching people spend time, effort, and bandwidth carping about how unworthy it all is:

    Marginally entertaining...


    "Considering that Anonymous is someone who compared the deaths of 9/11 as being tantamount to a blimp in yearly motor vehicle fatality stats... "

    No that was me, Cecelia the female, and it was not a "blimp." Concentrate! The fate of freedom hangs in the ballance!

    Watching people carping about watching people spend time, effort, and bandwidth carping about how unworthy it all is:

    Slightly ironic and even more marginally entertaining...

    "No that was me, Cecelia the female, and it was not a "blimp." Concentrate! The fate of freedom hangs in the ballance!"


    Here's your "legend in your own mind", Anonymous...


    Watching people carping about watching people spend time, effort, and bandwidth carping about how unworthy it all is:

    Slightly ironic and even more marginally entertaining..."

    Agreed. Now let's get back to what this site is really about. Mocking Keith!

    Thanks for the link. Olbermann's still my hero. :P