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 13, 2006
    COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN - SEPTEMBER 13, 2006

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

    Host: Keith Olbermann

    Topics/Guests:

    • SADDAM AND AL-QAEDA CONNECTED?: Dana Milbank, Washington Post

    As Keith Olbermann bellowed his way through the opening spiel, its dependance on Democrat talking points was more evident than ever. Murtha is mad. Obey is mad. Those damn Republicans dare to disagree with a Senate committee. KO was fired up. He had a rare bump out of fourth place on Tuesday and he was determined to stoke the "momentum" for all it's worth. (Never mind that yesterday's show actually had less propaganda than the typical Hour of Spin. Keep in mind we're dealing with OlbyLogic here.)

    Keith led off with "yet another call today on Capitol hill" for Rumsfeld's resignation. Yes, another of those meaningless "resolutions" that have no force of law. Wait, isn't this what Herr Olbermann has condemned repeatedly as "politicizing" the war? Not on OlbyPlanet it isn't. A lengthy clip from Murtha talking about his resolution to be rid of "Rumsfield". Hey, where's our snarky Keith, who makes fun of people when they make embarrassing public bloopers, like getting the name of the Secretary of Defense wrong? That Keith never shows his orange face when it's a (D) showing his stupidity.

    After all that free time for Murtha, KO showed his impartiality and balance by running a clip from David Obey (D), who raised the spectre of Joe McCarthy. Then Countdown the campaign ad for the Democrats continued with Olby promoting a website set up to oppose "George 'Macaca' Allen" and running its video, free of charge.

    At this point, it was time for Countdown Crony Dana Milbank, minus mangy mufti. KO immediately cited the new NBC poll: Congress's approval rating is a meager 20%. He asked a wish-fulfillment question suggesting the low ratings are really more for Republicans than Democrats, and Dana dittoed, while noting that there are trends "in the Republican direction". Krazy Keith, eager to reverse any such trends that exist, wondered if Murtha had "the right idea": get the talk off national security and back onto Iraq, and cited the "powerful" internet ad he had just given free airtime to. Then we got a classic Olbermann leading question:

    When the speaker of the House says Democrats don't know who they enemy are, is there not some chance that a statement that outrageous might actually hit home with people who'd say, what in the hell are you talking about?

    In Keith Olbermann's America, Richard Durbin can liken US troops to Nazis and Communists, and Harry Belafonte can call the President the "world's greatest terrorist" without a peep from Edward R Olbermann--because statements are never "outrageous" when there is a (D) after the speaker's name. Going into the break, Olby teased his upcoming story, calling Cheney, Rice, and Tony Snow liars for daring to disagree with a Senate committee about Iraq and Al Qaeda. Krazy's on a roll tonight!

    In the #4 slot, the infamous, deplorable Keith Olbermann sang the praises of "facts" (this coming just two days after his preposterous "special comment" that had the same relationship to facts as a lightning bug has to real lightning). Intoned Rev Olby:

    The persistent lie of a link, a pre-existing link, between Iraq and Al Qaeda.

    Clips of Condi talking about "ties", the Veep talking about CIA testimony of a "relationship", and Snow stating there was no "operational relationship, but there was a relationship" (tightly edited to remove the rest of what he said). To give an impartial, nonpartisan "analysis", who better than Jonathan Alter? They have "zero" credibility, "they've lost", it's like the "commies" in the Cold War, yada yada yada. Alter's spin couldn't have been more predictable: Keith took his party's line with every query, and the egg-headed pundit regurgitated it right back. KO got to use one of his pet phrases ("faith-based reality"), and a good time was had by all.

    After the break ("Countdown with Keith Olbermann is brought to you by Verizon...") came an Emmy-worthy dose of "oddball". All of this was bad enough, but with the #3 story Olby went on a voyage to the bottom of the barrel. Yes, the discredited sports guy reran Matt Lauer's interview with loathesome rapist and child abuser Deborah LaFave, who was all decked out in fancy clothes and a new hairdo.

    Why, exactly, are the self-serving excuses of a sexually disturbed criminal considered "news" on Countdown? Even if this interview hadn't already played, over and over, throughout the day on A-Mess-NBC, would it have been any less repellent? What if the situation were reversed, and it wasn't an attractive female? What if it was an older man who exploited much younger women for sleazy sexual trysts? Would Dan Abrams permit him to appear on Countdown? Oh, wait. Bad example.

    #2: The Canadian school shooting (relegated to recycled video from NBC), Anna Nicole Smith's son, Whitney Houston, Bobby Brown, Tucker Carlson, and Meredith Viera (lots of clips from Today, an NBC property, natch). #1: Celebrity shopping, and the "lonely girl" internet hoax.

    Krazy Keith has fallen all over himself to give Air America free PR, inviting its hosts on The Hour of Spin for fawning interviews on multiple occasions. (He has had conservative talkers on his show too--but not in person, only as "worst person" targets.) Tonight, he was conspicuously silent about the impending bankruptcy of the leftist network he has himself appeared on over and over.

    There was another dog that didn't bark. Remember when KO would track every downward tick of the President's approval numbers in every poll he could get his hands on? Down to 40. Down below 40. Down below 35. Since then reports of Presidential ratings became increasingly scarce on The Hour of Spin. We can't remember the last time Olby trumpeted Bush's approval numbers.

    Today there was a new NBC poll. We know because Keith Olbermann reported on it. Or more accurately, he reported on one question from the poll (about Congress). NBC's poll has the President's approval rating up over 40% now, as do several other surveys. Yet none of these get so much as a word from Edward R Olbermann. Another reason why it's called The Hour of Spin.


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

    94 Comments

    11 minutes until God is on camera.. All praise Keith.. We speak your name...

    I think a lot of voices in your head are speaking to something.

    God is on my TV.. sweet.. Damn Keith is not old and addicted to a loofah,, maybe he needs a loofah to improve his ratings ?

    Man.,. it would have been nice if Rummys plane had gone down in flames on the way back from Iraq

    It's refreshing that Jonathan Alter and Olby are discussing a subject they know well - commies.

    oh yeah.. Anon, just how simple are you or are you a facist ?

    Keith for truth with comedy. And we have Jon, Steven and Bill. Funny how people freak out about just four guys who it seems are speaking for a great many of us out here.

    Have been stopping by here for a number of days - read quite a bit of this site. I can understand that you disagree strongly with Kieth - what also seems apparent is that there is something personal about this to you. Ex- coworker, employer, lover?

    FAQ should be interesting if you ever complete it.

    Oh, Olby's a comedian all right.

    Maryland liberals vote for the white guy over the black candidate. Does this suprise anyone here? Blacks should run NOT walk away from the Democrat Party of Rich White Guys. But keep queasy mfoolme.

    "Speak for many of us"??? Have you checked the ratings recently?

    "Speak for many of us"??? Have you checked the ratings recently?

    I heard KO mention that his book is now averaging 4.5 starts on Amazon based on TWO reviews. That's pretty pitiful. I took the liberty of submitting a review and would encourage all clear-thinkers to take a moment to go through the Amazon process for submitting reviews (it takes about a day for the review to appear; make sure you really "review" the book and don't just slam Keith).

    "What if it was an older man who exploited much younger women for sleazy sexual trysts? Would Dan Abrams permit him to appear on Countdown? Oh, wait. Bad example"

    HAHAHAHA!!!

    As for Bush poll numbers, I suspect it will be an amazing spectacle to see what happens among hte Dems if they do not retake the house this fall as they have been predicting for months.

    Olbermann:
    "When the speaker of the House says Democrats don't know who they enemy are, is there not some chance that a statement that outrageous might actually hit home with people who'd say, what in the hell are you talking about?"

    The Speaker of the House is Dennis Hastert.

    The person making the above statement (sorta') that Olbermann referenced was John Boehner who is the House Majority Leader.

    Thanks, Mr. Olbermann, you're on the ball as usual.

    SMG


    "When the speaker of the House says Democrats don't know who they enemy are, is there not some chance that a statement that outrageous might actually hit home with people who'd say, what in the hell are you talking about?" Everybody knows what the statement infers because it is so spot on. Saying "what in the hell are you talking about" never occurs to the Dems because they know the what and why of it. And there words will continue to haunt them......

    Keith Olbermann just continues spewing propaganda as always. He's nothing but a mouthpiece for the DNC and George Soros. He's a coward and doesn't allow competing views. At least Chris Matthews does.
    I would love to see an Olbermann vs. Michael savage debate. Far Right vs. Far Left.
    My money would be on Savage!

    SMG,

    Haster? Boehner? Getting facts straight? Quoting acurately? Quit picking nits...you are missing the "big picture"!!!!

    It's the BIG PICTURE dammit!!!!

    > I heard KO mention that his book is now averaging 4.5 starts on Amazon based on TWO reviews.

    yeah, the purpose was to get OlbyLoons to head off to amazon and post adulatory reviews. And it'll probably work.

    Anon,
    "Maryland liberals vote for the white guy over the black candidate. Does this suprise anyone here? Blacks should run NOT walk away from the Democrat Party of Rich White Guys. But keep queasy mfoolme."
    Gee, I wonder why anyone could think you're a racist. Maybe it's because you make fun of black people's names. Black's should name their kids Billy Bob or some other redneck name, right? Now a liberal has to vote for every black candidate? There are black people in Maryland who vote (you probably try to avoid them). I bet some of them voted for the white candidate. Does that make them racist too? How many black Republicans are there in Congress? Most politicians in both parties are rich white guys.
    Let's see if I can explain reasons why blacks vote
    for Democrats. The poverty rate amongst blacks declined considerably under Clinton but has risen under Bush. Incomes for blacks went up under Clinton but have declined under Bush. Crimes against blacks went down under Clinton but are going up under Bush. I know what you're thinking. You can say this about the population as a whole. Blacks have this weird thought that Southern conservatives, which run the Republican party, are racists who fought against civil rights for blacks.

    It did, Johnny. Olby's Pavlovian methods worked like a charm on the liberal hounds and they slobbered all over Amazon by posting reviews.

    Wow, If my teenage child was molested by his teacher the one thing I would thrive to see is Eugene Levy's stunt double introduce an interview with my child's rapist under the heading of "HOT FOR TEACHER". Poor taste even for Uberman..

    Well, Olby's so classy. Just like using the spiritual "He's Got the Whole World in His Hands" as theme music to the stupid story about the guy who unclasped bras with one hand.

    Moral force, indeed.

    Anon,
    I thought of a better way of explaining why blacks vote for Democrats. Blacks don't feel Republicans care about them or what they care about. They also probably don't appreciate the condescending attitude of Republicans. Somehow rich white men telling blacks they know what is better for blacks than blacks do doesn't work. It'd be like Democrats telling rednecks to stop voting for this God-crap because you're being used. Think about it. The Republicans have been in power for twelve years. They've controlled the White House for the vast majority of years since LBJ. They've controlled the SCOTUS for about 20 years now, I believe. They've controlled all branches for the past six years. How many of the problems Republicans have been promising to fix have been fixed? Deficits are out of control. Abortion is still as legal as ever. Gay marriage hasn't been banned by Bush and company. There's more smut on TV than ever. Crime is now going up. You people are being played as fools and are too stupid to realize it. If the Republicans banned abortion, gay marriage and smut there'd be no reason for religious nuts to go vote anymore. They never used to in big numbers until the Republicans brought up these social issues. Solving the problems to the satisfaction of those voters would lose those voters which would lose power for Republicans.

    No offense but Republicans DONT care about them. They are concerned for themselves as we all should be. If people want special attention because of the color of there skin then they probably should vote Democrat. Just dont expect white liberal hippocrites to vote for black candidates when they can vote for white folks. If that opinion offends you tough nuggies.
    Now tell me this. How many white red necks drive into the black neighborhoods and shoot black people and deal drugs to them? NONE. Whats good for black people is the same that is good for white people you racist fool. Not something different. Elected Democrats govern most heavily black populated areas. And like all good Democrats they over tax and over regulate business's out of those areas destroying the economies as they go.
    Lastly governments dont solve peoples problems, independence does. Your just to thick to see that. You pray off of people with the attitude whats in it for me. The loudest and quickest to protest and the slowest to do something for yourself. All opinion and no action. Yep your a Democrat alright.

    wow this sight makes me sick. How dare you put hitlers face on keith oberman. Not only is the the only anchor out there actually telling the truth, he is jewish...so that dosent make sense and not to mention he is nothing like hitler and to make that comparison is completely twisted, demonic and wrong. Who ever the hell is the person who is running this sight i sugest to take another look at your beliefs and where you get your information from

    colbert,
    a better way to explain my opinion is most blacks vote democrat(thats a changing trend lynn swan,michael steele,ken blackwell,condi rice etc.) because they currently are still buying into "poor me" politics. Unfortunately for you and fortunately for them Blacks are the fastest growing ethnicity in the middle class. As there prosperity rises your party looks for the next victim group and hopes they too can be spoon fed anti-white, race baiting Democrat talking points and will vote Dem. Hopefully not as the new hope Hispanics are Catholics(pro-life) with good work ethics and wont for the most part be led by the nose.Put that with Libs aborting there fetuses at an alarming rate you can look forward to many more years of being the "minority" party. And that pleases me to no end. LOL.

    scooter

    Lancerkngight (sic?) I suggest you look exactly at the context of the situation before you infer that this site is anti-semetic. The man who lists any conservative as "worst person" in the world for merely mentioning the word "Nazi" was marching around with an O'Reilly mask giving the Nazi salute in order to further his supposed fued and sell his book.

    Uh, he's not Jewish.

    Lance wake up man KOs a self hating white guilt ridden loser. The Hitler deal serves him well as he already has publicly given the salute. And bandies the accusation around freely himself. You reap what you sow.

    scooter

    Lancerkngiht... I really hope you're joking. If not... I'll give you the short story:

    That's a photo from Keith talking at a TV Critics dinner, where HE lifted a HITLER mask over HIS face. He was doing his "impression" of O'Reilly.

    So if you think it's offensive... you should probably support the Anti-Defamation League, who condemned Keith's actions, and then go ahead and write a letter to MSNBC asking for him to be taken off the air.

    PS- I AM Jewish, and knowing that something so reprehensible came from another Jew, who over looks the murder of 6 million of his own people, to gain ratings and make a name for himself, is truly sickening.

    Anon,
    If Republicans don't care about blacks why are you crying about blacks voting for Democrats? We vote for whoever is the best candidate as most people do. If I prefer a black candidate to a white candidate I vote for the black candidate. I vote based on views, not race. I know that isn't how racists like you operate.
    Why is the economy better under Democrats than Republicans? The GDP is higher, the unemployment rate is lower, wages are higher, the poverty rate is lower. Roughly 2/3 of our national debt has been incurred by Reagan, Bush and Bush. The fact is the enocomy performs better under Democratic administrations than Republican administrations. Studies have shown this and the facts tell us this.
    If you translate the rest of your right-wing blather into English I'll respond.

    Anon,
    Blacks have done better under Clinton. Their incomes rose and poverty rate dropped. Their incomes have declined and poverty rate risen under Bush. Maybe they aren't as stupid as you claim they are. Maybe they vote for Democrats because they do better under Democrats. That 7% of the black vote Bush recieved in 2004 was huge. There's no doubt the Republicans are taking over the black vote. Swann is going to lose in PA. Rice says she isn't running for anything. Steele is going to lose in MD. and Blackwell is going to lose in OH.
    That is impressive though. You can name four black Republicans.
    Your racist stereotypes notwithstanding, Hispanics do vote overwhelmingly Democratic. Many Catholics are pro-choice. Catholics even have abortions and get divorced. You might be shocked to learn rates of abortion and divorce are lower in New England than in the Bible belt. The real hypocrites are the right-wingers. The number of people claiming to be Republican has been falling since 2004 while Democrats have been rising. Republicans make up 33% of Americans while Democrats make up 37%.

    Just wanted to drop by and see whos head was exploding.

    Keith called it tonight, he spoke truth to power.


    The Bush administration are a bunch of lying SOS. (sacks of sh1t) The Iraq Al quidea connection, is the only way to still try to justify Bushs Vietnam. It is their lie and they are sticking to it.

    So as per usual, the bunch of right wingers here, will try to cover up the Bush administrations lies, by attacking the messenger.

    Seems to me, it wasnt so long ago, that the truth mattered to republicans. After all, that is why they went after Clinton.

    Or maybe it was just an excuse. That seems more plausible, and a more honest assessment of what we have seen from these hypocrits.

    One final note, maybe we now understand why republicans count on the religious right so much, the RR are PROFESSIONAL hypocrits and liars.

    When the truth absolutely doesnt matter, when lies are OK and acceptable if it suits your current need, become a republican.

    "The fact is the enocomy performs better under Democratic administrations than Republican administrations. Studies have shown this and the facts tell us this."

    What about Jimmy Carter's economic record?
    Hmm?

    "When the truth absolutely doesnt matter, when lies are OK and acceptable if it suits your current need, you're name is Keith Olbermann."

    Simpson,

    One of the koolaid drinking right winged hypocrits I spoke of ?

    You bet !!!!!

    I bet you are a BIG Bill ORielly fans huh ?


    Have your own autographed set of faloofas ?

    Of course you do, cause all you need is your faloofa set, a picture of your hero, and some KY jelly, and a large root vegitable for your version of mind blowing sex. Oh, and a big glass of republican koolaid.

    SMG:

    Hastert did say that Democrats were confused about who the enemy actually is. I know this, I saw the words come out of his mouth and into the airwaves.

    When I can find a transcript from the show, I will show you exactly where it is.

    KO is an ego maniac who will do whatever it takes to further his image. He is a hate monger, hates Bush, hates our country, hates anyone that is ahead of him. Bush and O'Reilly are not the only ones he says terrible things about. He quipped recently about a celebrity that had been arrested for DUI,"I wonder if worry about his receding hairline made him do it?" This from a guy that wears a 'neon' piece with wandering gray highlights that are in a different place every night and big painted Groucho Marx eyebrows. Then there was Rita Cosby whom he said was "as dumb as a suitcase full of rocks." He could not have beaten her in the ratings if she had been in the same time slot as he, just as he can seldom beat Zahn or Grace.
    He sees himself as a great journalist that is going to make the big expose'. He is no journalist, and he evidently did not make it as a sports caster.
    He is a good example of the "Peter Principle."

    That was your rebuttal? I supposedly watch Bill O'Reilly? Weak...

    The DNC doesnt let many blacks run on a national level. This is because they (the DNC) prefer Rich White Guys to Blacks for power. The DNC does still want blacks to vote Democrat. I'm sure your a real leader of the color blind society Colbert, but you wont have many oppurtunities to vote for blacks because the DNC doesnt allow them equal oppurtunity to run beside white candidates in important races. Remember the Sandra Day O' Conner seat on Supreme Court? And how people said a women should get her seat out of fairness? Well heres one for you when Kennedy or Kerry leaves office maybe the enlightened peoples republic of Mass might maybe let a black run for office up there. I highly doubt it but we'll see. Same with New York. In fact the whole of the NorthEast political seen in that sea of blue is permanant positions for rich whites only. And you think the south is racist. Smell what your shoveling. Peww. But if the subject bothers you feel free to just claim you dont understand the point I am making. Change subjects, hurl insults or whatever works for you. But the US senate makes my point with its 1% black representation.

    as a tribute to Rob-bob and John-Jon, I'm going to do what you do and phone it in.

    Same bland, flavorless stuff. Keith Olbermann is an affable guy with charisma, and you can't stand it, on account of your unrequited man-crush. I know, I know... it's hard when the one you love doesn't love you back. Okay, actually, I don't know what that feels like, but I'm pretending to empathize.

    So, anyway, "over 40" is actually 42%, why not just state 42%? Seems silly. But then, your numbers are always kind of silly, because anyone can interpolate anything from numbers that they want, like your analysis of ratings — which is the only thing that is ever funny about your commentary, although only inadvertantly. The ratings demographic that's important isn't 24-54 year olds. It's 18-35 year olds. That's the true target demographic of most shows (say, from the Daily Show to WWE Raw). When you skew the data to represent up to 54 year olds, you're stretching, and you know it. Ratings relate directly to sponsers, and sponsers key target is 18-35.

    Anyway, same dull half-wit generic vague prattle as usual.

    Sarah, I don't know who told you 18-35 was the key target but you're wrong. As usual.

    Colbert,
    I believe that blacks vote for the Democratic for many complex historical reasons which has more to do with the breakup of the Southern Democratic party over civil rights than they do about their economic status under Clinton or Bush. But let's take a look at your claims anyway.

    You wrote:"Blacks have done better under Clinton. Their incomes rose and poverty rate dropped. Their incomes have declined and poverty rate risen under Bush"

    Here is a chart from the Census Department:
    http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/poverty05/pov05fig04.pdf

    As you can seen, the number of people living in poverty during the Clinton Administration reached 39.5 million people (1993), a figure not seen since they first began keeping records - close to an all-time high. During the Bush Administration the highest that figure reached as 37 million people (2005) and it has now begun to decline.

    You will note that the poverty rate (an estimate of the percentage of Americans living in poverty) stood at 12.6% in 2005 which is up slightly from then Bush took office, and has also began to level off.

    The problem with looking at this data in absolute terms is that the poverty rate is one of the most lagging of lagging economic indicators. As you do not have a degree in economics from the University of Chicago like I do, let me explain that economic indicators are leading, current, lagging and the terms refer to whether they began to change before, during or after a change in the overall economy. As an economy begins to grow coming out of a recession the poverty rate may stay low or actually decline for a period of time because the workers living at or below the poverty line are also the least skilled and/or youngest works and therefore the last to be hired in an economic upturn; these workers will not show up in the poverty statistics for many months after a downturn because they will initially get unemployment benefits.

    Now, you claim that the "poverty rate amongst blacks declined considerably under Clinton but has risen under Bush". As you can see the poverty rate for EVERYONE declined from 1994 to 1999 because the U.S. was in a period of economic expansion with a correspondingly low unemployment rate. We began to go into a recession in the last 18 months of the Clinton administration and, as you can see, the poverty rate increases slightly.

    Some of this may even have to do with the Welfare Reform Act of 1996 which Clinton signed - and began to kick in the last couple years of his administration.

    As you are attempting to make an anti-Bush statement maybe what you are attempting to say is that the poverty rate for blacks increased disproportionally under the Bush Administration.

    Let's take a look...

    The Census Bureau compiles 2 and 3 year average data tables so we can use that to look at the period from 2003 to 2005 and compare:

    http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/poverty05/table5.html

    As you can see the poverty rate has remained relatively constant for ALL RACES and for WHITE-NON HISPANIC, BLACK, HISPANIC. It has declined for ASIAN, HISPANIC and NATIVE HAWAIIAN/PACIFIC ISLANDER. The only decline has been for AMERICAN INDIAN/ALASKA NATIVE.

    Whoops, the recent data does not support your claim! Darn.

    But wait, maybe if we look back to as far as when Bush took office? Maybe THEN we will see this disproportionate increase in the poverty rate for blacks?

    Well, here is an article from the Washington Post from last August:
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/30/AR2005083001727.html

    Hey look, they have a quote from some guy, E.R. Anderson, chief of staff in the Commerce Department's economic directorate, which oversees the Census Bureau, on lagging indicators:
    "The poverty rate seems to be the last lonely lagging indicator of the business cycle".

    The article says "the poverty rate climbed in 2004 to 12.7 percent, from 12.5 percent in 2003 -- the fourth year in a row that poverty has risen."

    Whoa! You may be on to something now!

    It continues,

    "The increase was borne completely by non-Hispanic whites, the only ethnic group that saw its poverty rate rise. The percentage of whites in poverty rose from 8.2 percent in 2003 to 8.6 percent. African Americans saw no change in their poverty rate, which remained at 24.7 percent. The poverty rate for Hispanics remained at 21.9 percent, while Asian Americans' poverty levels dropped by two percentage points, to 9.8 percent."

    Oh damn! It turns out that there WAS a disproportionate increase in the poverty level BUT it was disproportionally WHITE Americans who experienced an increase in the poverty level. Blacks are actually doing better than whites under Bush.

    I am not going to bother taking the time to Google around for the rest of the data. If you have some links from a government agency with some standard data I will take a look. I think you want trend data for real disposable income by race but as that is derived off of census data and BEA data I am not sure there is even a good, current set of data for this figure. Provide a source but remember that Wikipedia, Daily Kos are any organization funded by George Soros are not considered sources. Same for the crime data. Let me know if you can find something that supoprters your claims that Incomes for blacks went up DISPROPORTIONALY under Clinton and have declined DISPROPORTIONALY under Bush.

    As for your claim that Crimes against blacks went down under Clinton but are going up under Bush - that makes no sense. Law and order is a local issue. How would the federal government be responsible for local law enforcement?

    Regardless, your claim that "Blacks have done better under Clinton" because "Their incomes rose and poverty rate dropped" and "their incomes have declined and poverty rate risen under Bush" is demonstrably false. I think you will also find many members of the black causcus feel Bush sold them out on the poverty issue when he signed the Welfare Reform Act of 1996.

    Do me a favor, next time you feel the urge to make an unfounced economic claims take a breath and don't. You will spare yourself further humilation.

    Colbert wrote:

    "Maybe it's because you make fun of black people's names. Black's should name their kids Billy Bob or some other redneck name, right?"

    Don't you OlbyLoons ever bother to get your facts straight before opening your pie holes? Kwesi Mfume's parents did not name him Kwesi Mfume. He gave himself that name. His parents gave him the name "Frizzell Gerald Gray".

    LanceKnight,

    The photo of KO is based on a real photo (many OlbyLoons put forward the theory that the original photos was somehow faked by Getty Images as part of some grand conspiracy). It comes from the annual Television Critics Association event in California held every summer. To correct one commenter, Olbermann put on a paper mask of Bill O'Reilly and then gave the Nazi salute to guffaws from an audience made up of TV critics, most of whom are notoriously left-wing. He then went on the Tonight Show and promoted his "joke" further with Jay Leno.

    The "joke" was based on a false claim by Olbermann that Bill O'Reilly had accused American troops who were killed at Malmedy, a Nazi atrocity during WWII, were war criminals. This site dissected these claims at length and found them to absurd and utterly without merit.

    Days later the Anti-Defamation League condemned Keith for his "joke".

    If you knew what you were talking about you might also know that Keith has, in the past, been very critical of people who use Nazi imagery to make some rhetorical point.

    In that context, the animated gif on the home page serves as daily satirical reminder of Olbermann's hypocrisy and long-standing habit of making ad hominem attacks against public figures based on false or distorted information.

    That you believe Keith Olbermann is "the only anchor out there actually telling the truth" is about as accurate as your claim "he is jewish". You might want to note the double-n in his name.

    Perhaps you will do us all a favor and take another look at your beliefs and where you get your information from". You are not 'demonic". You are just a typical OlbyLoon who apes his hero by working yourself into mock indignation based on false or misleading information and then pat yourself on the back for "telling truth to power".

    If you are really so upset about the use of Nazi imagery why don't you send Keith a letter an express your "outrage" to him?

    I see that a few OW readers posted reviews over on Amazon. Good work people. I love how the positive reviews come from people who never even seen the book and just "love Keith".

    The overall rating has now dropped from 4.5 to 4.0. Keep it up people. Dont' forgot to "vote" on every review - low ones are "Helpful" and high ones are "unhelpful".

    For some reason MY review is not on the site. Maybe Keith is blocking me?

    KO's ratings have increased dramatically over the last couple days. Any of you OlbyLoons care to write a GUEST POST on this topic? You can find all the ratings data over at TVN.

    Well, the sensitive and compassionate Colbert is likely to think that "Kwesi Mfume" and "Frizzell Gerald Gray" are equally preferable to some non-DNC consistency, poor white trash name like “Billy Bob”, Bob.... :D

    In answer to Simpson from 12:45 AM, Jimmy Carter doesn't count. The Dems are taking a mulligan on him. That's their only mulligan. Jimmy Carter and Vietnam.

    I mean there are two mulligans, JC and Vietnam aftermath. And also on the Vietnam aftermath. How did they know that cutting off funding to South Vietnam might end up with tens of thousands drowning in the South China Sea and later the slaughter of millions of Cambodians? So there are two mulligans. JC, Vietnam, and establishing that you can lie under oath and still be President.

    I mean there are three mulligans...........

    For some reason MY review is not on the site. Maybe Keith is blocking me?
    ****************************************************
    Now KO wouldn't do that after all he believes in open debate with all sides being heard....HA,HA,HA,HA,..oh man you can't say that with a staight face..:)

    Brandon: Excellent work!

    Colbert just thinks he is superior to anybody else that dares disagree with him and his socialist ideology. Hey Mr. defender of the poor downtrodden classes: the blacks keep voting for the democrats because the dems raise taxes for programs that keep blacks in perpretual poverty so they will keep voting for dems.It's democratic job security. None of the programs that the dems have ever done has helped reduce the poverty rate among blacks only exacerbate poverty. Both the democrats amd certain black "leaders" need to keep racism alive so they have a job. Without somebody to blame - white people , especially white republicans folks like jesse jackson and sharpton are out of work and blacks vote for republicans.
    Funny you should mention abortion, so called gay "marriage" and smut, the three cornerstones of the democratic party. This is the genesis of the real anger at conservatives by the lunatic fringe which now seems to hold the puppet strings of the democratic party. The far left gets upset when it can't kill babies, celebrate sexual degenerates and have their fuck books . They feel very threatened when they think that somebody might take their leisure time persuits and compromise their little hobbies. Instigated and controlled by the far left fringe the democrats have now become the party of degenerates. The party of "anything goes". Then they package it it some neat clean looking package and deliver it via someone like olbermann. Somebody like this colbert fella is probably just upset because he thinks that Bush and the big bad conservatives are keeping groups like NAMBLA down and he is upset that the law does not allow him to "marry" children yet. I would guess he would need to do that to in order to have someone on his own intellectual and emotional level but those damn "bigoted" conservatives just don't understand liberal love. With all those "advanced degrees" you claim to have colbert you are upset that the right to smut and abortion may be compromised by those evil white conservatives. How would you ever occupy all your spare time? Go ahead and tell me abortion on demand and more pornography along with laughingly allowing homosexuals to "marry" will improve society. Thanks to liberal democratic policies we have become a sex obssesed society. Child rape, child abduction, sex crimes including adult rape and all kind of vile perversions are now considered the "norm" . Thanks dems for ending all that "sexual repression" and bigotry- you have made the world a safer place for degenerates.
    All the democrats have for a platform is - surrender in Iraq, surrender to the terrorists , continue racism in the name of job security, abortion, so called, gay marriage. taxes, taxes, taxes, and lots of smut. Great plan for America!
    Yeah colbert you are regular liberal rocket scientist. You are one of the best advertisements for the democrats I have read in a long while. As a matter of fact this election season I will be using your posts and ideology to show America exactly what you liberal democrats have in store for America. I will put on display the REAL reason that liberals hate Bush.

    Simple Sarah wrote:

    "anyone can interpolate anything from numbers that they want"

    Sarah, the meaning of this sentence is open to interpretation. I suppose you would say it is open to "interpolation"! Perhaps you meant to say:

    "one can interpolate [sic] anything one wants from THIS number"

    NOT

    "From numbers that they want, anyone can interpolate anything"

    Of course, your use of "interpolate" is improper. Interpolation is only possible when more than one value is given. Mr. Dollar gave you only one value. Perhaps you meant to use the word "interpret"? If you want to be an uberlib, Sarah, you have to talk the talk.

    As far as your "18 to 35" diatribe, please provide us with the source material for your fascinating assertions.

    Oh yeah- Countdown for 9/13/04. The usual anti Bush & co rants followed by the usual recycled, dated material from the net . As usual no real guests who might actually challenge, disagree, dipute, debate or question the great OZ oblbermann. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain- you will obey the great OZ.
    Why don't they just call the show what it really is- Demcocratic Jihad.
    People like olbermann can't have real guests on his show because they can't hold up under the light of scrutiny or dissent. Olbermann just may be the perfect democrat. Liberals suppress the debate by sterotyping anyone that disagrees with their liberal ideology as racist,or bigoted or anti women or my personal favorite the dreaded homophobe. Democrats and liberals just cannot stand debate and disscussion and seek to silence all dissent. The very highly self esteemed "colbert" proved my point perfectly.

    Isn't posssible to get acces to any of the transcripts, articles, broacasts of Keif's failed job in Boston (6 months), LA 2xs, etc. Sounds like he was ranting untrollably then too

    Here's the quesiton of the day If Opie could design the memorial at Ground Zero, what would it be and what would it look like.

    1. Baseball card trading store.
    2. Home of Dem National Committe, Move-on and Media Matters
    3. Portraits of the worst person of the world pictures would be the only "art work" allowed.
    4. A padded room where you just scream and vent your anger
    5. A room dedicated to Rod Serling, showing nothing but Twilight Zone reruns
    6. A special computer room - set up so Opie can secretly send his obscene e-mails to "fans"
    7. A "Sun" room where you can get the patented orange tan.
    8. A Liberal talking points room where he and his Libs can coordinate their daily attacks
    9. Certainly rooms for companions Milbanks, the guy that sound like Barney Fifie, Liar Creepy liar O'Donnell, Fineman and of course Musto
    10. Plenty of head clearance

    The rest of the space would be pictures - with darts, of all the people Opie has lost to - in his 20 year career, in his ratings battles

    And oh yeah - office space for Opie after Jon Stewart and Colbert replace him on MessNBC

    ou forgot a bathtub.

    Oh yeah- Bush speeches surrounding 9/11/06. The usual Bush & co rants followed by the usual recycled, dated material from the "war on terror". As usual no real debate that might actually challenge, disagree, dipute, debate or question the great decider Bush. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain- you will obey the great dictator.
    Why don't they just call the war what it really is- Republican Jihad.
    People like Bush can't have real discussion because they can't hold up under the light of scrutiny or dissent. Bush just may be the perfect republican. Conservatives suppress the debate by sterotyping anyone that disagrees with their conservative ideology that's racist,or bigoted or anti women or my personal favorite the dreaded homo. Republicans and conservatives just cannot stand debate and disscussion and seek to silence all dissent.

    Opie's book not cracking Amazon's top 100 (Coulter still on NY Times bestseller list)

    Opie would be a terrific study in (abnormal) Psychology/Human Behavior. How does this guy keep failing at everything he does, despise so many people, make so many enemies, lie, rant uncontrollably - yet still show up for work every day as if all is well with his life and he is a raving success.

    Mad at the world, no wife, no kids, no ratings, really - a normal person would have faced reality by now - This guy is knocking 50 and nothing has worked. I know there are meds - but man they must be high doses. It would be awfully interesting to find out just what sent him down this long, lonely, desolate road

    I can just imagine the conversations when he calls Media Matter and Move-On to prepare his nightly program. Well - how about if I call the President of the United States an idiot- on air, on NBC News? How about if I blame the President for not building a memorial to ground zero? Do you think it would work if I make myself look angrier? I mean even the moonbats must be shakling their heads - probably telling him Keif - you tried everything and nothing worked - we just don't see any hope

    Hey KFK:

    Just keep on giving it to Sarah. She's obviously not listening to me.

    Hey KFK:

    If I move to your computer, I can retire. Whaddya say? I'm tired of working for that nutjob Sarah anyway.

    gee moronomous did you think that brilliant response all by yourself? I now that you are leftard, you really don't have to keep proving yourself.
    At least Bush talks with leftists like Lauer and takes questions. your man olbernuttjob won't even take ONE dissenting opinion. Why do you insisit on proving your hypocrisy moronymous? Still cannot get over the '04 elections can ya?
    I'll bet your one brain cell is very, very lonely.

    gee moronomous did you think that brilliant response all by yourself? I now that you are leftard, you really don't have to keep proving yourself.
    At least Bush talks with leftists like Lauer and takes questions. your man olbernuttjob won't even take ONE dissenting opinion. Why do you insisit on proving your hypocrisy moronymous? Still cannot get over the '04 elections can ya?
    I'll bet your one brain cell is very, very lonely.

    Robert,
    "I see that a few OW readers posted reviews over on Amazon. Good work people. I love how the positive reviews come from people who never even seen the book and just "love Keith".

    The overall rating has now dropped from 4.5 to 4.0. Keep it up people. Dont' forgot to "vote" on every review - low ones are "Helpful" and high ones are "unhelpful"."

    You're complaining about liberals who haven't read it posting good reviews. How many of the people who posted bad reviews have read the book? I guess that's the Fox News "fair and balanced" coming through.

    If you read the reviews you will see that many of the pro-KO reviews say right up front that the person did not read the book.

    Nothing like a bunch of illiterate DUmmies giving a book they never read a good rating. And they wonder why they can't win elections.

    Anon,
    The U.S. House blows the point to smithereens. There are 42 black Democrats out of 201 Democrats. That is 21%; 12% of the population is black. I'd say that's pretty good representation. Overall in the U.S. Congress there are 43 black Democrats out of 245 Democrats. That is 18%. So while only 12% of the U.S. population is black, 18% of Congressional Democrats are black. What was that about the DNC refusing to let blacks run and being racist? It must suck to be a conservative. The facts never match the rhetoric. By the way, since 1969 when the Congressional Black Caucus was formed, there have been two black Republican Representatives and one black Republican Senator. Talk about diversity.

    >How many of the people who posted bad reviews have read the book?

    Gee, I wondered how Keith Olbermann could slam, bash, and denounce a movie for three days in a row that he hadn't even seen. I don't recall "Colbert" objecting to that.

    Well, Olby's one-day ratings bonanza is over. He's turned back into a pumpkin again.

    http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2006/09/14/wednesdays-numbers-24/#more-3248

    His bitch-slapping by competitors resumes.

    riverdog,
    Bush is the President and our employee. He answers to the people. Unfortunately for him the Constitution still exists. People get to vote. Democracy. People run things. All that liberal garbage you and Osama hate. If the free market rules what is the problem with smut? It's been proven sex sells. Let the people have what they want. It's a free country. You know who else hates smut, sex, abortion, divorce, fags, women, liberals? Osama bin Laden and the rest of the Islamic terrorists. The conservatives agree with them perfectly. Tucker Carlson even realizes this. He was talking about it yesterday. He said his lesbian friend (I assume Rachel Maddow) has more to worry about from the terrorists than conservatives. If Osama took over, the gays would be killed, smut would be banned, women would be made subservient and not be allowed to go outside without a man, women would be completely covered, abortions would be banned. You'd have your conservative paradise, riverdog.
    Speaking of sex predators, riverdog, you still defending your hero David Koresh? It upset you greatly he wasn't allowed to continue molesting kids. You're still pissed about it. Did it hit too close to home?
    If you had enough intelligence to read, I'd post links for you showing poverty amongst blacks has fallen under Democrats' programs.

    I notice that y'all spend a lot of time whining about KO's style, but you say nothing of the substance. For God's sake people! Your leaders are out there telling you the sky is green (i.e. there was a link to Al Queda and Iraq/Saddam) and you are just supposed to accept it. If by link you mean that Saddam hated Al Queda, then you have a point - but that negates yet another reason we invaded that country. Just like they said there were WMD's. Don't you see how little respect they have for your intelligence? But judging by some of the posts here, you DESERVE to live under a green sky!!!

    "Let the people have what they want" says the illustrious and mutlti advanced degreed Moronymous OK fine - I want an open season on liberals like you.
    I know you are still upset about losing the whole gay "marriage" thing but I hear you got into NAMBLA just on your credentials alone. I just know you like little boys . Say weren't you one of thiose sickos featured on that sting on TV where the creeps went to the house and got busted? I bet you even like the idea of teaching homosexuality in kindergarten so you can be recruiting little kids to your "lifestyle". You homos like little boys don't ya? you demented sicko.
    Gee we need to make america safe for infanticide and homos .
    I never defended koresh shit head I only said that spoke the truth when i said the FBI and janet reno executed them and that is typical of tha way liberals separate church and state- with flame thrower. I guess it's OK to murder Christains to make America safe for homos and abortion clinics. Is that your great liberal plan for religion once you get your socialist liberal agenda. Kill all the religious people or put them in liberal re- education camp?, Declare the Bible hate speech because it condemns sodomy and abortion.
    man you are thick headed.you lose everytime and you stilll come back for more-moron. i have beaten you morally, intellectually and now you want to fight guerilla style . You are the little energizer bunny leftard- you just keep going and going even after getting your as kicked.
    you still never told me about your "advanced" degrees and all. I guess now they give advanced degrees in being and a--hole and for faggotry because in that respect it sounds like you have your Phd. you lose moronymous.

    Anon,
    The U.S. House blows the point to smithereens. There are 42 black Democrats out of 201 Democrats. That is 21%; 12% of the population is black. I'd say that's pretty good representation. Overall in the U.S. Congress there are 43 black Democrats out of 245 Democrats. That is 18%. So while only 12% of the U.S. population is black, 18% of Congressional Democrats are black. What was that about the DNC refusing to let blacks run and being racist? It must suck to be a conservative. The facts never match the rhetoric. By the way, since 1969 when the Congressional Black Caucus was formed, there have been two black Republican Representatives and one black Republican Senator. Talk about diversity.

    Posted by: Colbert at September 14, 2006 06:12 PM

    Hey big dummy if blacks are a majority in the district they get to run for office.How generous. What a novel idea. What about higher office? There shut out. Queasy Cantfoolme was NAACP and Maryland liberals wouldnt vote to put him in office. If he aint Democrat enough with those credentials aint nobody. He's suffers BDS, thinks like a bigot, acts like a bigot. Would vote to socialize everything he could and he was rejected. Its the color of his skin man. Hes pure Democrat and Maryland white liberal voters wont vote for a black man in the 21st century. Deal with it. Queasy wasnt electable in a liberal state, for the Senate, in a primary, in the 21st century!! Blacks are gonna figure you libs out this century. Exposed by the vote. Liberals are the white supremist racists!! Face it.

    scooter

    The Bible also advocates slavery and women being less than men. Oh sorry. I'm on a right-wing site. You people all advocate that stuff too.

    Scooter,
    Why don't Republicans let blacks run in disrticts with a majority of blacks? If what you're saying is true the Republicans should have some blacks in Congress too. My post proved beyong any doubt who is against the blacks running for Congress.

    The Bible also advocates slavery and women being less than men. Oh sorry. I'm on a right-wing site. You people all advocate that stuff too.

    Blacks do run in those districts and win you sighted the seats they hold. Republicans dont have many blacks under there wing yet but where they do they get asked to run for prominent office because we are breaking the media created stereotype of blacks arent Republicans. JC Watts, Rice, Blackwell, Steele, Swan. Times they are a changing and your play book is worn out and may need Old Yeller treatment.

    You are a fool Colbert. And cant back up your claim that people on this site advocate slavery(absurd) and women as less than equal. Condi Rice is in the line of succession has a Minority Democrat ever been put in that high of a position? You can change your mind but you cant change FACTS. Funny someone as enlightened as you can only think of 1 religion and book with slavery and female subjagation in it? You are a narrow minded bigot who thinks blacks cant succeed without help, sees women as victims instead of as accomplished, educated, capable citizens who have the same oppurtunites as males. You think christians push there view down your throat when the truth is they are entitled to participate in the political process same as someone who worships Castro, Mao, Marx. You abhor free thought and reasoned debate because your ideas are failed and outdated. Your reduced to demonizing people who dont think like you. You Colbert are the one who is a racist, bigoted, christian bashing hater. Whats that feel like? Creepy i hope. All that bile in your throat morning noon snd night. Seek counseling and pray. I will pray for you too.

    scooter

    Robert,
    I see you're pretending to have an economics degree now. Good move. The business degree isn't impressive at all. It's funny you compare Chicago to Cornell but conservatives hate the Ivy League because they aren't smart enough to gain entrance. Better luck next time.
    Even you should be smart enough to follow the blue lines in your first link. Up is bad and down is good. Does that make it easier? No? Still confused? It goes down during the Clinton years which is good. It goes up during the Bush years which is bad. Also, estimates are estimates for a reason. Namely, the real poverty rate isn't yet known. You're heard of lagging indicators. You are smart. It's too bad you don't understand them. According to you poverty lags by five years when speaking about Bush but not at all when speaking about Clinton. That doesn't make any sense. Clinton took over a bad economy from Bush. Bush took over a better economy from Clinton. The recession began in March 2001 and ended in November 2001 according to the National Bureau of Economic Research. That means we entered the recession under Bush. That also means we've been out of the recession for nearly five years. Yet poverty is still rising. If you're going to pretend to have an economics degree at least use coherent, unbiased reasoning.
    Your next point makes me think you live in your mommy's basement. If you were ever in the real world you would know people care about their financial situation. Do you honestly think an impoverished black guy who can't pay his rent or feed his kids properly is okay with that if the white guy next door is also poor? Are you as retarded as you seem? If I did not make this perfectly clear to you (I'm sure you aren't smart enough to understand)let me try this. Black people, like all people, only care how their financial situation is. If everyone is doing worse that is still bad. Relativism doesn't count. If you think it does, ask yourself this: Does third world country citizen A feel good because he's not quite as impoverished and malnourished as third world country citizen B?
    Wait. Are you serious about welfare? All you people did was whine and bitch about it. Then Clinton changes it and you people try to take credit. Now it's a horrible thing that hurt blacks and the poor and Clinton is evil for it? Can I have some of the drugs you're on?
    Your black poverty rates are for a one-year change. Bush has been in office since 2001. The black poverty rate has risen under Bush. I never said it didn't remain the same two years in a row. You aren't smart enough to be blessed with my presence. I'll try to teach you something before we're done though. They have real disposable income by race data at census.gov. The crime statistics were from something called the Federal Bureau of Investigation. It's undoubtedly some commie organization.
    I didn't mean to embarrass you by proving you have no clue about economics or statistics. Come back with some more Republican talking points next time. You might want to claim the Republicans deserve all the credit for the great economy under Clinton.

    Colbert,

    A riddle: A mexican,black,and white are riding down the road. Who is driving?

    I make deliveries in poor oppressed neighborhoods. They have amazing survival skills that always astonish me. (I deliver to stores and gas stations) Example: Some of the best selling items in these neighborhood stores are Beer and Liquor, Lottery and Tobacco. Most patrons are reasonably dressed and most have managed to get a cell phone, tattoos, gold crowned teeth, name brand shoes. There appears to be enough money that a drug trade flourishes there also. Again like I said poor people have survival skills that get them the things i mentioned and those things are mostly optional. So i wouldnt lose much sleep over the poverty level. Its just figures. And most people are doing really well in the USA. Even as i mentioned in poorer parts of the country.

    I make deliveries in poor oppressed neighborhoods. They have amazing survival skills that always astonish me. (I deliver to stores and gas stations) Example: Some of the best selling items in these neighborhood stores are Beer and Liquor, Lottery and Tobacco. Most patrons are reasonably dressed and most have managed to get a cell phone, tattoos, gold crowned teeth, name brand shoes. There appears to be enough money that a drug trade flourishes there also. Again like I said poor people have survival skills that get them the things i mentioned and those things are mostly optional. So i wouldnt lose much sleep over the poverty level. Its just figures. And most people are doing really well in the USA. Even as i mentioned in poorer parts of the country.

    Poverty rates meant something back in the 70s. A phone was possible, but forget about a car or having a reasonable amount of space per occupant within the residence. Now poverty includes cable television, a car with standard equipment that couldn't have been purchased at any price in the 70s, and an obesity epidemic.

    If the poverty figures are to mean anything - and they should, there is still a real 'core' poverty problem of 1 or 2% that should be tracked - they need to be revamped.

    So, if a tree falls in the forest, does it make a sound?

    I'll just copy this from my 1990 edition of Merriam Webster's Ninth New Collegiate dictionary:
    (page 632)

    interpolate
    verb
    1a. to alter or corrupt (as a text) by inserting new or foreign matter.
    1b. to insert (words) into a text or into a conversation.
    2. to insert between other things or parts: INTERCALATE.
    3. to estimate values of (a function) between two known values —vi— to make insertions (as of estimated values).

    Now, the Merriam-Webster comment on the order of "senses":

    "The order of senses within an entry is historical: the sense known to have been first used in English is entered first. This is not to be taken to mean, however, that each sense of a multisense word developed from the immediately preceding sense. It is altogether possible that sense 1 of a word has given rise to sense 2 and sense 2 to sense 3, but frequently sense 2 and sense 3 may have arisen independently of one another from sense 1." (p. 19)

    Hey dipshit, it is unfortunate that you never learned English, don't have a large vocabularly, and have never held a dictionary in your hands, let alone read it. So, you don't understand the meaning or usage of the word "interpolate", and you have demonstrated this for everyone here.

    Even Rob-bob and John-jon won't defend you, lol.

    Sarah, might I suggest you spend your time in a classroom teaching instead of lecturing to us here at Owatch? You seem to think this is a forum to correct spelling/grammar issues. But I guess when you can't argue with facts you are forced to dwell on the trivial. Perhaps it explains your obsession with Mr. Olbermann: he speaks to your trivial-mindedness and far-flung conspiracy theories.

    Simple Sarah,

    Do you believe your own nonsense? None of the definitions you cite prove you correct. Interpolation of data is well defined, and even Mirriam Webster can't save you. Congratulations on compounding your error with this fervent and nonsensical defense. Your treatise on "the order of senses" is precious. Of course it is also irrelevant.

    You spent a considerable amount of time on this flimsy defense, only to look like a defensive and unhinged nut. How about spending some time backing up your assertion that "18 to 35" is the real demo? I see you ignored that question entirely.

    Brandon, the LAST PLACE crazy Sarah should be is in a normal classroom. She should be teaching the course "how to be obnoxious" at Code Pink conferences, or helping the "truthers" write "9/11 was a hoax" pamphlets.

    To Sweetie and anon,
    Poverty has a specific definiton and specific thresholds. They don't throw darts to determine how many people are impoverished. For a family with two children (I chose two children because the average American family has 2.3 children) the poverty threshold is $19,806 (for 2005). That figure includes earnings, unemployment compensation, workers’ compensation, Social Security, Supplemental Security Income, public assistance, veterans’ payments, survivor benefits, pension or retirement income, interest, dividends, rents, royalties, income from estates, trusts, educational assistance, alimony, child support, assistance from outside the household, and other miscellaneous sources. That figure is before taxes. Think about all the bills people have. Poverty doesn't mean anything? Only 1% or 2% of people have financial problems? It must be nice having mommy and daddy take care of you and never having to work a day in your life.

    Hey Colbert,

    How much does a welfare recipient get per month (tax free)?

    We wish to commend you for your brilliant commentary. You have the courage to express what so many of us certainly feel. BRAVO for you!!!

    Thank you, Eunice & Eugene.

    Colbert,

    "I see you're pretending to have an economics degree now"

    I am not "pretending", I graduated from the University of Chicago Graduate School of Business with a degree in Economics and Business Policy. Two of my professors (Merton Miller and Robert Fogel) won the Nobel Prize in Economics and a third (Kevin Murphy) will likely win a Nobel Prize in the coming years.

    "It's funny you compare Chicago to Cornell but conservatives hate the Ivy League because they aren't smart enough to gain entrance"

    Actually, I went to Chicago for several reasons having nothing to do where I gained entrance. If you knew what you are talking about you would know that Chicago is one of the most selective business schools in the country - more so than the Ivy League schools except for Penn and Harvard. At the time I went there the school was ranked #3 in the USN&WR rankings behind Northwestern and Wharton (in other words ahead of 9 of the 10 Ivy League schools). You might also be interested to know that I attended Chicago from 1991 to 1994 and during that time was a registered Democrat and voted for Clinton for President.

    As for your "analysis" of economic data, I think I will take a pass on debating a nitwit such as yourself. I am perfectly confident that I do not need you to explain economics to me.

    You wrote:

    "Clinton took over a bad economy from Bush. Bush took over a better economy from Clinton. The recession began in March 2001 and ended in November 2001 according to the National Bureau of Economic Research. That means we entered the recession under Bush."

    You are correct to say that the economy went into recession under Bush 41 and was in recession when Clinton took office (some would say Clinton took office BECAUSE the economy was in recession - recall "its the economy stupid!"). And you are correct to say that the NBER originally dated the early 2000s recession in the United States as beginning in March 2001. What you don't seem to know is that the data used to reach that conclusion is always revised. That data has been revised four times and the NBER is now considering MOVING the date of the beginning of the recession to the fall of 2000.

    Whether they do or not, what happened at the time the NBER originally defined the cycle, was that there were 3, non-consecutive quarters of decline in GDP with a slight blip in the other quarter according to the original numbers.

    Here is the original report from the Business Cycle Dating Committee at the National Bureau of Economic Research

    http://www.nber.org/cycles/july2003.html

    Here is one of many articles from an economic research center exploring whether or not the data should be moved:

    http://www.incontext.indiana.edu/2002/nov-dec02/spotlight.html

    Here is the Wikipedia entry which discusses the pending decision on whether to move the date
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_2000s_recession

    Based on what I have read so far, I expect that the date will be moved up.

    Regardless, you would be hard-pressed to make the case that Bush 43 CAUSED a recession that the NBER originally dated as beginning a few weeks after he took office. At the same time, you can make a strong case that the initial tax cuts Bush pushed through in that first summer helped make the recession milder and shorter than most past recessions even despite the 9/11 attacks.

    "your next point makes me think you live in your mommy's basement. "

    As far as your analysis of the economics of race, I did not make an claims about race myself but was merely refuting with some cold hard facts that the claims advanced in this regard were wrong. I know this because my mommy told me so.

    "Do you honestly think an impoverished black guy who can't pay his rent or feed his kids properly is okay with that if the white guy next door is also poor?"

    No, and I don't recall ever asserting this or anything remotely close to this.

    "All you people did was whine and bitch about it. Then Clinton changes it and you people try to take credit."

    I am not sure what you mean by "you people" but Clinton signed the Welfare Reform Act after vetoing it twice. He gave in to pressure from Republicans and his signing it was part of the Dick Morris "triangulation" strategy which had Clinton playing off both Dems and Republicans in Congress. You may also recall that many Dems, especially members of the black caucus, were very upset about Clinton caving in on this issue. I do give him credit for signing it and I think the result of signing it has been positive in helping people move off welfare.

    "I didn't mean to embarrass you by proving you have no clue about economics or statistics. Come back with some more Republican talking points next time. You might want to claim the Republicans deserve all the credit for the great economy under Clinton."

    I have provided links and data to support my argument. You have challenged my well-reasoned analysis with vituperation and hyperbole. If you think you are putting forward some kind of coherent economic argument then it is you who ought to be embarrassed. I doubt you would be because as an OlbyLoon, you are never embarrassed when facts do not comport with your world view or when you are unable to employ simple logic to present agreed upon facts to form an argument.

    As far as who deserves credit, politicians TAKE credit or ASSIGN blame for something they have very little ability to impact directly - the U.S. economy. We live in a global economy and, starting with a currency crisis in Mexico and then Asia and debt problems in Japan, the slow down we experienced here in the U.S. was the effect of problems elsewhere in the world. Within our country the single biggest lever the government has in effecting the economy is the Fed Discount Rate which is determined by the Chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank. It does not make sense but if you want to pick people to credit it would make more sense to pick Paul Volcker and Alan Greenspan then any president.

    What you lefties always fail to understand is that the U.S. economy is driven primarily by consumer demand not by the government so if you want to give "credit" to anyone try giving it to American consumers (i.e., the middle class) who own homes and purchase durable goods in large numbers. And what seems to have proven to work best is to keep the effective marginal tax rate on the middle class at about 16%.

    Colbert, WTF? Did you miss Robert's 16 other references to his economics degree? As I continue to be amazed that someone claiming his creditials (repeatedly) spends his life online mostly barking madly about a tv talking head, I stumble across this:

    >>>"Do you honestly think an impoverished black guy who can't pay his rent or feed his kids properly is okay with that if the white guy next door is also poor?"

    No, and I don't recall ever asserting this or anything remotely close to this.
    >>>

    Actually, someone just did a "happiness" poll that pretty much showed exactly this, that relative income level is more important than absolute income level as a predictor of happiness. In other words, if everyone else is "poor," you will be happy being "poor" too. But if there are a few non-poor folk around, you will no longer be happy being poor. How do you think the Soviet Union lasted so long, and why there is a strain of nostalgia for it in Russia now?

    On the economic debate at hand, I think it's pretty obvious that presidents are simply not responsible for short or medium term economic cycles. Where I think the republicans do deserve some blame is that their policies have helped shift most of the economic benefits from the recovery and strong economy to the upper class, while middle and lower income households have have far underperformed the recovery as a whole, which I think is a historical oddity, subject to your review, Dr. Cox.

    Kerry was making the point in the election that the middle class under Bush is shrinking or stagnant. I don't know where that claim falls now, but would you see that as a long term problem Robert, given your belief that the middle class ultimately drives the American economy?


    I don't recall making 16 references to my degree but if you say so it must be true.

    As for whether the middle class is shrinking or stagnant, there are numbers that will support whatever view you want to take but obviously it would be a bad thing if the middle class were t shrink for economic AND political reasons. The long-term problem that we face in the US is that lower wages in countries like China and India are off-setting the benefits of the traditionally higher productivity of American workers. That will be compounded if (as is likely) if companies in these countries employ new technologies that increase the productivity of their workers.

    The long-term solution begins with increasing productivity in the U.S. further through investments in education, demanding more from our schools, our teachers and our students; through encouraging capital accumulation in the U.S., through investment in technogy, etc. This as opposed to say adopting protectionist measures or attempting to force higher wages on our competitors or raising the cost of their good sold here through tariffs.

    But you know what. I do not really find this a very interesting discussion to have on this site and while you two may want to hash it out I doubt it will hold my interest here.

    "there are numbers that will support whatever view you want to take,"

    Really? can you find numbers that show it is growing?

    "...I doubt it will hold my interest here."

    Just pretend some random tv talking head said it then. But I am sorry, I forgot to abide by the terms of Olbermannwatch. Let me rephrase:

    Robert Cox is a wildeyed, mildly bitter, overweight mediocrity who's half-phoney ego act outstrips his good capacities by a pretty wide margin. The only thing not indicating the early heart attack that usually strips the mortal coil from these types of overeducated and underemployed Republican hacks is the thick protective layer of naivete that has grown around his heart, as it has stewed in the cesspool of mindless foolery he calls a website.

    Now then, personally, I think that if you have already shown an extremely high rate of productivity growth over a fairly long time period, and yet poverty grows slightly and the middle class remains stagnant, while at the same time the upper class enjoys very high gains... well, can the answer to that imbalance really be further productivity gains?

    Straussian that I am, I noticed your "central" tenet:

    "through encouraging capital accumulation in the U.S."

    Hmmm... how could we do that. Let's see.....

    As I said, I don't find this discussion interesting.

    "As I said, I don't find this discussion interesting."

    I do. It is always interesting to see where people choose to exit the conversation. Especially when it is on their own turf.