Buy Text-Link-Ads here
Recent Comments

    follow OlbyWatch on Twitter

    In

    John Gibson Welcomes Back the Infamous, Deplorable Keith Olbermann

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

    In

    Welcome Back, Olby!

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

    In

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

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

    In

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

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

    In

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

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

    KO Mini Blog



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

    KO Countdown Clock


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

    OlbermannWatch.com "My Faves" Set

    OlbermannWatch.com Favorited Photos from other Flickr Users

    Got OlbyPhotos? See some on Flickr? DO NOT email us. Send us a FlickrMail instead. Include a link to the photo. If we like the photo you will see it displayed in the Olby Flickr Flood above.

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


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

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

    Red Meat Blog
    Keith Olbermann Quotes
    Countdown Staff Writers

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

    ...they should be...

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

    MSNBC's Countdown
    Bloggerman
    MSNBC Transcripts
    MSNBC Group at MSN

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

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

    Anonymous Rat
    For This Relief Much Thanks
    Watching Olbermann Watch

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

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

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

    Thanks for the blogroll link!

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

    Friends of OlbyWatch

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

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

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


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

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

    Google

    Olbermann Watch Masthead

    Managing Editor

    Robert Cox
    olby at olbywatch dot com

    Contributors

    Mark Koldys
    Johnny Dollar's Place

    Brandon Coates
    OlbyWatch

    Chris Matthews' Leg
    Chris Matthews' Leg

    Howard Mortman
    Extreme Mortman

    Trajan 75
    Think Progress Watch

    Konservo
    Konservo

    Doug Krile
    The Krile Files

    Teddy Schatz
    OlbyWatch

    David Lunde
    Lundesigns

    Alex Yuriev
    Zubrcom

    Red Meat
    OlbyWatch



    Technorati Links to OlbyWatchLinks to OlbermannWatch.com

    Technorati Links to OlbyWatch Blog posts tagged with "Olbermann"

    Combined Feed
    (OlbyWatch + KO Mini-blog)

    Who Links To Me


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



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

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

    Subscribe in myEarthlink
    Feed Button Help


    Olbermann Watch, "persecuting" Keith since 2004


    September 5, 2006
    Who's Missing from MSNBC Promotion Campaign?

    NAME

    Let's see? Tucker Carlson... Chris Matthews... Joe Scarborough...

    Hmmm. That's pretty much the whole primetime lineup, right? Oh wait...


    Posted by Robert Cox | Permalink | Comments (44) | | View blog reactions
    user-pic

    44 Comments

    Hmm, maybe he was attending an ESPN reunion and missed the photo session?

    Okay, how about in Bushco fascist America, one doesn't want to be too conspicuous?

    Or given his track record of getting along just swell with co-workers, maybe he teed off the MSNBC photographer?

    Endless possibilities.

    SMG

    Was he in the bathtub? Was he out buying wine glasses in bulk? Maybe MSNBC made that staffing decision when he went AWOL to LA for a few weeks. He's so dependable, that Olby.

    I think even the folks at MSNBC are starting to realize countdown is not a news show. I feel a tiny bit bad for Olbermann, as we all know it's just a matter of time before the wheels come off of this guy while he is on air. Everytime a catch a clip of him, I can tell that he is not playing with a full deck. When he completely loses it on air he will get some ratings. But those ratings will be on you tube as everyone will hear about eating the camera or something crazy. He's tried everything else to get attention and noone is giving it to him. Especially not O'Reilly.

    In the bathtub's where Oafie is hiding
    Tell them that's where he's residing
    Such a pitiful fool
    He's Dan Abram's tool
    NBC is where news is misguiding

    He's hiding with his younger lady, under the desk!

    I think he is too "busy" with his buddy Michael "cum dumpster" Musto to be bothered with something so inconsequential as an election.

    They can't include KO because they have to pretend that they are Non-partisan in the election coverage and even MSNBC knows there is no way they can claim KO as that.

    I'm shocked that MSNBC wouldn't highlight the Murrow of my generation???? Must be a horrible oversight.

    I'm shocked that MSNBC wouldn't highlight the Murrow of my generation???? Must be a horrible oversight.

    Not include KO as a liberal commentator? It is rather shocking isn't it. Maybe they're too afraid he'll go postal on-air and they'll have a real life Howard Beale on their hands. Or maybe it's because he's simply too lazy to show up for work?

    Poor Keith. He is so done at MSNBC. :)Who are we going to bag on when his show is cancelled?

    It's probably because that if does election coverage, that might actually mean interviewing )if that's what KO does can be called) a person with a conflicting opinion.
    Keith doesn't interview anyone with a differing opinino.

    It would also require on-the-spot commentary and analysis.
    Keith doesn't think too well on his feet.

    G-Monster, I think Krazy Keith has a bright future on Air America Radio, if it is still operating by the time he gets sacked.

    TVNewser is ignoring this, like he's ignored every other negative Keith Olbermann story in the past 3 years unless severe pressure is put on him. Has anyone else been laughing at Brian Stelter's sucking up to Katie Couric all day? The starry-eyed child reminds me of my 4-year-old when I give her a piece of candy.

    Consistent viewers of MSNBC and its excellent political coverage across the board - know the difference between Keith Olbermann and the others who are part of the Decision 2006 team: All of the others are either straight up NBC anchors or political talk show hosts, a former congressman who brings an insight noone else can on the panel, and a recognized inside Washington commentator who has cut his chops on PBS, CNN, and MSNBC. Olbermann can be a straight up anchor/interviewer/talk-show host/analyst, but isn't - nor does he pretend to be on the specific show Countdown. He's not on the "Decision 2006' team because his show is not like NBC Nightly News or Hardball. And it's not trying to be like anything else on MSNBC or any other network. Keith's show asks intelligent viewers to bounce around between serious news one minute and Oddball segments the next.We realize not everyone can keep up with that format. Those too slow for Keith should just watch the other guy on at 8 on that other 'fair and balanced' network. As for Keith's much needed commentaries as of late, they represent the half of this country that is tired of playing kid glove with the Karl Rove machinery that has used fear and smear to win election after election. Like Keith, we say 'no more' and 'not this time.' Forget liberal or conservative, right now it's about the disenfranchised taking truth to power. I feel sorry for the now-less-than-half of America out there who don't care that Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc. have no limits to what they will say or do for re-election...even if it means scaring on-the-fence red staters into continuing this farce of the last 6 years as they (finally!) begin to ask questions. As for us blue staters - you know, the ones who actually face a terror attack in one of our cities - we'll stick with Keith and hold our noses and yes, pray, that America does the right thing this November. It's looking real good by the way.

    He had his head in the sand.....again.

    Actually, Dobermann, Olby has always denied that he's a liberal. He truly believes he is an objective journalists presenting "facts."

    See: http://newsbusters.org/node/4763

    Of course, all those "facts" and all of his guests seem to exclusively support the leftist world view, which certainly gives lie to his laughable claims of objectivity, claims which even his employer does not appear to believe.

    "they represent the half of this country that is tired of playing kid glove with the Karl Rove machinery that has used fear and smear to win election after election. Like Keith, we say 'no more' and 'not this time.' Forget liberal or conservative, right now it's about the disenfranchised taking truth to power. I feel sorry for the now-less-than-half of America out there who don't care that Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc. have no limits to what they will say or do for re-election.."


    Well, there you have it.... a mindset completely oblivious to the fact that such statements are inately politically partisan in nature.

    Here you have mindset that thinks that because people are upset about the course of the war in Iraq that they also buy into the whole litany of liberal talking points about Karl Rove and Dick Cheney.

    How very Olbermannesque...

    I've been watching Countdown since it first aired so you can spare me the argument that Olbermann wouldn't be exactly as critical and as partisan as he is, if the Bush Administration wasn't so...(use your favorite pejorative)... if Bush hadn't gotten us into Iraq...etc...etc.

    Countdown would be precisely what it is no matter if the Bush Administration existed or not. If John Kerry had won, Olbermann would now be involved in ridiculing and marginalizing any Republican critics of the Kerry Administration. And more than that... and about criticising and marginalizing Republicans in general...just as he does now.

    And he'd do it while labeling biased, other television competitors and political opponents who do air both sides of an issue. He do it just as he does now.

    My theory is that Keith is not a part of MSNBC campaign coverage by choice. In that setting he'd have to appear with people who do understand various political ideologies and who do understand the political scene in Washington and who do feel some compulsion to be balanced. Keith is not about to put himself at such a disadvantage.

    Olbermann doesn't care about such things. He's merely an ideologue, he's not someone who loves ideas.

    He opts out of such venues by choice. He's not about to put himself in a scenario where he has to entertain the thoughts of others.

    He was done with that when he left The Big Show. He doesn't feel like he owes anyone that basic courtesy. Least of all the people he despises.

    Dan Abrams said:

    “This is really unprecedented for us to get all of the NBC News stars coming together so much before an election.”

    So, apparently doesn't think Olbermann is a "star."

    Olbermann doesn't do live election coverage. It should be apparent.

    It's apparent that when Sir Olby does do live coverage of any type, it's punctuated with "uh's," repeated phrases, and strategically placed deer-in-headlights looks.

    One question for you, Nonfactor: if Keith "doesn't do live election coverage," why is he clearly doing live election coverage from the 2004 Republican National Convention in this photo:

    http://www.olbermann.org/ko/images/gallery/big/53.jpg

    Photo credit: www.olbermann.org

    Maybe Nonfactor's use of present tense when he used the word "doesn't" was intentional.

    Now if they were to move said election to a baseball field, KO would be all over it.

    anon asks - "I ask Johnny Dollar to explain why he has decided to criticize Keith Olbermann for something that is STANDARD NEWS INDUSTRY PRACTICE!" I am going to add that to the FAQ.

    That said, I think J$ has provided an answer several times. It is just that you don't like the answer. I agree that you sometimes see someone on TV say "Mister Bush" but it is not "standard practice". It is instead of he said/she said why don't you just provide a link to some video supporting your point or link to some news stories in a reputable newspaper.

    The "standard practice", as far as I can tell, when presenting a news story is to write or say "President Bush". Regardless, there is no doubt that in the context in which Keith says "Mister Bush" it is intended as a form of insult - that somehow he is not fit to be the President or that he stole the election in 2000 and 2004, or as a sop to his loony left fan base. The real issue here is a point raised by another commenter that is very interesting to me - KO's mixing of news and opinion. As he does do this, it raises the question whether KO is following standard practice in repeatedly saying "Mister Bush" or expressing an opinion (as described above or some other). I don't think it is a black and white issue and you have a fair point but you are wrong to say that J$ has not addressed your point.

    As for "demanding" a response. Anonymous or psuedonymous posters to this site have no "rights" so you are in no position to "demand" anything. You will take what you get and LIKE IT!

    someone wrote

    "they represent the half of this country that is tired of playing kid glove with the Karl Rove machinery that has used fear and smear to win election after election"

    there is a hard core base of lib-dems that acccount for about 30% of the electorate - not half. These are the people who ALWAYS give a negative answer to any question about a Republican or Republican policy. There is a comparable base on the right. 40% of Americans are moderate/independent. They don't share your lib-dem view and so are not obessed with Karl Rove. It only seems that way because you are an OlbyLoon.

    I liked this example of OlbyLoon Logic...

    "Forget liberal or conservative, right now it's about the disenfranchised taking truth to power"

    in light of another comment saying quoting KO saying...

    "I'm not political. I don't vote -- I don't believe journalists covering politics should"

    If this person means that KO is "talking" truth to power and that he is "disenfranchised" then KO only has himself to blame because he chooses not to vote. If he means that the voters are going to turn out Republicans in the fall election that how can people who are "disenfranchised" vote? Unless you mean that illegal aliens are going to vote. They are disenfranchised because we don't allow people who are not citizens vote.

    What is even more mausing about the KO quote is that he says he does not vote because he covers politics. Given his checkered work history he has "covered politics" for less than 4 years in his long and illustrious career - most of which has been spent covering sports. So how is that he says he does not vote? A better explanation might be (a) he is lying; (b) he is too lazy to vote and is wrapping himself in a blanket of supposed journalistic integrity. And what of that notion that journalists who cover politics shouldn't vote. Every citizen has an obligation to their country - paying taxes, serving on juries, serving in the military if called...and voting. I don't recall any exemptions for journalists or sports anchors from my high school civics class. This is a lot like lawyers saying they shouldn't have to serve on juries because they are "too close" to the justice system - just an attempt by some elitists to absolve themselves of a civic duty by placing themselves about the "riff raff".

    Another OlbyLoon Logic classic is this one...

    "As for us blue staters - you know, the ones who actually face a terror attack in one of our cities - we'll stick with Keith and hold our noses and yes, pray, that America does the right thing this November."

    Here is the 2004 election map:
    http://mwhodges.home.att.net/2004-election-map.gif

    here is a list of the most populated cities in the U.S.:
    http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0763098.html

    1 New York, N.Y. - BLUE STATE
    2 Los Angeles, Calif.- BLUE STATE
    3 Chicago, Ill.- BLUE STATE
    4 Houston, Tex. - RED STATE
    5 Philadelphia, Pa.- BLUE STATE
    6 Phoenix, Ariz. - RED STATE
    7 San Antonio, Tex. - RED STATE
    8 San Diego, Calif.- BLUE STATE
    9 Dallas, Tex. - RED STATE
    10 San Jose, Calif.- BLUE STATE
    11 Detroit, Mich.- BLUE STATE
    12 Indianapolis, Ind. - RED STATE
    13 Jacksonville, Fla. - RED STATE
    14 San Francisco, Calif. - BLUE STATE
    15 Columbus, Ohio- RED STATE
    16 Austin, Tex. - RED STATE
    17 Memphis, Tenn. - RED STATE
    18 Baltimore, Md.- BLUE STATE
    19 Fort Worth, Tex. - RED STATE
    20 Charlotte, N.C. - RED STATE
    21 El Paso, Tex. - RED STATE
    22 Milwaukee, Wis.- BLUE STATE
    23 Seattle, Wash.- BLUE STATE
    25 Denver, Colo. - RED STATE

    13 out of the 25 most populated cities in the U.S. are in red states and 12 are in blue. If look at the top 50 cities it is 30 out of 50 cities are in red states. I suppose the idea is that for some reason Miami and Houston and Phoenix and Cleveland and Denver are all exempt from terror attacks. I am sure those folks will be relieved to hear that.

    I really enjoyed this...

    "WOW........ I thought you were an authentic Olbermann fan site! How pathetic... someone speakes the truth and you just can't take it! Open your minds, he is not the enemy."

    I am not sure what "authentic" means.

    RC,

    I like the fact you point out that there is a 30-40-30 rule. I think you are on to something.

    Robert,

    Although I agree with your point of view generally speaking, there are two points you made in your last comment that I think weaken your argument and leave you open to criticism:

    1) This is a lot like lawyers saying they shouldn't have to serve on juries because they are "too close" to the justice system - just an attempt by some elitists to absolve themselves of a civic duty by placing themselves about the "riff raff".

    This is very clearly not at all the intent of what Olbermann was saying, whether he was being truthful or not. His rather obvious point was that, because journalists have the potential to influence elections by swaying the minds of voters, this power needs to be balanced in some way. In theory, if a journalist is not "attached" to the result of an election by virtue of his having voted for one candidate or another, he should be able to show greater impartiality.

    Of course, this is a silly and probably disingenuous argument, because the real attachment to the outcome of an election comes not from the vote itself, but from the perceived merits of the candidate or the candidate's political party. In other words, a more appropriate legal analogy would be that since laywers don't participate on the jury, they can be impartial about the outcome of the trial. This is clearly ridiculous, and is definitely a failure of logic, but not in the way you described it. I certainly don't think it indicates elitism in the sense of being "above the riff raff" (other things he says and does might, but not this in particular), but it is a rather pathetically transparent attempt to put himself and his profession on a pedestal of integrity that simply isn't credible.

    2) 13 out of the 25 most populated cities in the U.S. are in red states and 12 are in blue.

    Hmmm... I don't think you really thought this one through before you included it. Population by itself is simply not a reliable measure of terrorist potential. One city (Washington, D.C.) which has already suffered an attack is not even on the top 25 list, and another (Boston) from which the terrorists departed on 9/11 isn't either. Yet, if I were an insurance actuary creating a list of the cities most likely to be targeted by terrorists, I would put both Boston and D.C. far ahead of places like Houston, Phoenix, Cleveland, Memphis, etc. It's not just about population, but about visibility and prestige.

    Can you name any landmark buildings in Phoenix or Indianapolis without using Google? Even if you're a trivia nut, do you think most people can? Yet I bet most of those people knew of the Empire State Building and the WTC before 9/11. That's what the terrorists want: to strike as wide-ranging a psychological blow as they can. That's why they're called terrorists, and it's why Dobermann, weak and suffocatingly partisan as most of his arguments are, is essentially right in saying that the blue states are much more likely targets of attack.

    Pretty much everything else he says can simply be ignored, which is why I responded to you despite your errors being relatively minor by comparison. In my view, it's far more important to refine the argumentation of those who may be mistaken but are operating in good faith than it is to beat one's head against the wall in a futile attempt to reason with a rabid partisan of any stripe.

    The "standard practice", as far as I can tell, when presenting a news story is to write or say "President Bush". Regardless, there is no doubt that in the context in which Keith says "Mister Bush" it is intended as a form of insult - that somehow he is not fit to be the President or that he stole the election in 2000 and 2004, or as a sop to his loony left fan base. The real issue here is a point raised by another commenter that is very interesting to me - KO's mixing of news and opinion. As he does do this, it raises the question whether KO is following standard practice in repeatedly saying "Mister Bush" or expressing an opinion (as described above or some other). I don't think it is a black and white issue and you have a fair point but you are wrong to say that J$ has not addressed your point.

    Wow. Or he could say Mr. Bush beacuse that's what you do in radio, television, and print. You introduce someone with their formal title, but if you keep saying "President Bush" "The President" "Mr. President" it seems a bit too formal. But you seem to know the inner workings of Olbermann and his writers. Oh, and Mr. Cox, most of those cities you quote as being in Red States are Blue cities. The most populated cities go Democrat.

    "that's what you do in radio, television, and print."

    I invite you to take the challenge I laid out earlier. Point me to any other tv "newscast" where the "anchor", in the course of 25 minutes, refers to the President as "Mister" Bush no less than 9 times.

    Robert Cox wrote: "This is a lot like lawyers saying they shouldn't have to serve on juries because they are 'too close' to the justice system - just an attempt by some elitists to absolve themselves of a civic duty by placing themselves about the 'riff raff'."

    Actually, at least here in my state, lawyers are barred from serving on juries by statute. The legislature felt that lawyers would use their own particular knowledge of the law to determine the outcome rather than deciding on the facts and law presented by the parties.

    I invite you to take the challenge I laid out earlier. Point me to any other tv "newscast" where the "anchor", in the course of 25 minutes, refers to the President as "Mister" Bush no less than 9 times.

    How many times in this 25 minute newscast did he refer to him as "President" and how many times did he refer to him as "Mr."?

    I'll take that as a refusal to accept the challenge.

    What? PMSNBC isn't proud of Keith Olbermann?

    What? PMSNBC isn't proud of Keith Olbermann?

    If Keith can't work well in a group setting. It makes one wonder how provocative those one on one conversations with his Motel-6 babes are.

    I'll take that as a refusal to accept the challenge.

    No, it was a question. If you don't want to answer you just have to say so.

    Keith's gig is clearly different than the others involved in the big election coverage day at MSNBC. He shouldn't be on the list. His show is a mix of so many different ideas mixed with irony and humor as well as serious news and commentary. He is really more in the arena with Jon Stewert; just a little more serious.

    Keith may be a lefty, it feels to me that he might lean that way, but I really believe his interest lies more in commenting on hypocracy, oddity in all forms and generally finding interesting things to talk about on TV. His show is a good mix of sublime to absurd to outrage.

    Chris Matthews plays Hardball; Keith plays Oddball...their shows reflect their personalities. I, for one, like them both and watch them almost every day. Joe Scarborough is getting more interesting lately, though I wish he would not get into those Rita Cosby-like story's. They are beneath his IQ level.

    Speaking of Rita Cosby...let's not encourage her to comment on anything. She belongs on The View or some such drivel.

    Terri K writes:

    "Chris Matthews plays Hardball; Keith plays Oddball...their shows reflect their personalities."

    Terri what do these e-mails that Olby wrote say about his personality?

    Olbermann's exchanged e-mails with his antagonists who said in their e-mails that dead Al Qaeda terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was Olbermann's "hero," prompting the television star to advise:

    "Hey, save the oxygen for somebody whose brain can use it. Kill yourself."

    After the e-mails were leaked, Olbermann later excused his behavior stating that he was "succumbing to the natural wish to confront hate?"

    Here are some examples of Olbermann "confronting hate":

    "Given how far you are from knowing your ass from your elbow about my industry, you couldn't be stupider, wronger, or dumber ..."

    "Go f- your mother."

    "You 'Americans' still watching that evil f- O'Reilly?"

    Apparently, they are. Fox News' Bill O'Reilly draws four times the viewership of his 8 p.m. weekday rival.

    “Rita’s nice,” Olbermann wrote to a fan from his MSNBC E-mail account, “but dumber than a suitcase of rocks


    Bob,

    I just realized why Olbermann is not pictured. You know how Olbermann always claims to be "non-partisan" because he doesn't vote? Well, this absurd abstention from performing his duties is most likely an extension of his deranged attempt at "neutrality." It is, of course, nonsensical, but that's our Olby!

    I suspect the reason is quite simple. Keith has said in interviews that he made a deal with MSNBC when he "agreed" to return (begged is probably more like it) that he would not have to present both sides of an issue or have two guests from opposing points of view (for you OlbyLoons who are preparing to challenge this go read the transcript of Brian Lamb's interview of Olby on C-SPAN before you make fools of yourself).

    Given that Keith will not allow anyone on his show who is there to support Bush, his policies, the GOP or GOP candidate, even NBC realized that it did not make sense to include Keith in their "election coverage" promotion. Keith is not interested in "covering" the election but effecting an outcome in it - electing Democrats.

    I don't mind that Keith is working for the Democrats (just like I don't care that Sean Hannity works for the GOP). I just get sick of the Dems having their people (George Stephanapolus, Jake Tapper, Tim Russert, Chris Matthews, Maria Shriver, Chris Cuomo, etc.) taking what are ostensibly "news" positions at the networks while purporting to be "offended" that Fox News is loaded up with Republicans. When you consider the audiences available to these people on the broadcast networks and compare that to "big bad" Fox News you just have to laugh at the "outrage".

    I think most Republicans would be happy to trade Fox News for putting Republican staffers in charge of all the Sunday morning talk shows, running the DC bureaus for the networks and loading up the networks with the family members of Republican icons. While we are at the GOP can trade The Washington Times and National Review for The New York Times, Washington Post and LA Times.

    To Mr. Cox a newsman can't be objective if you take a personal position on an issue.

    And if you don't provide any evidence that Olbermann said what you claim he said I have no reason to believe you.

    By ANY definition, you can't be objective if you take a personal stand on an issue.
    -=Mike

    I am pro-choice, but if I were in the news I'm sure I could report on an issue about abortion without parading my personal feelings. Every time someone in the news Mr. Cox suspects of being a Democrat is reporting on something he tries to claim someone will not be objective right away.

    You can be a Democrat or a Republican and still report on something without having a bias.

    Non, said: "You can be a Democrat or a Republican and still report on something without having a bias."

    No, you can't. Some reporters may be able to report on something without SHOWING balance, but anyone who is uninformed enough to be without an opinion (a bias) on abortion, stemcells, Iraq, or anything else is not someone you or I should want reporting the news.

    Some reporters and anchormen are capable of reporting objectively on topics and events, without their personal opinions showing through. KO is not one of these. His leading questions ("Is anybody still buying this?") and "Special Comments", which are obvious pandering to the left, are far beyond the scope of anything that Murrow, Cronkite, or Brinkley would have imagined.

    NF wrote
    "To Mr. Cox a newsman can't be objective if you take a personal position on an issue."
    I think it is very difficult, if not impossible, for any human being to be objective on a topic on which they have a "personal position", reporters included. The argument for "objective journalism" is that people will trust news sources that articulate a commitment to objective coverage of the news yet decades of surveys show that 60-80% of Americans agree with me that journalists are not objective and that journalists cannot be trusted to be objective. This distrust (which I share with most Americans, not "conservatives") is only heightened when high profile people who loudly proclaim their objectivity make public statements that indicate they are not objective.
    For example, Ted Koppel repeatedly claimed that his infamous Memorial Day weekend "tribute" to troops killed in Iraq was not a political statement. Yet he also stated that when his producer came to him with the idea for the "tribute" that producer said he was inspired by a photo spread in Life magazine and that THEY hoped their show would have a "similar effect". I have already written extensively on this so just google for my piece from that time but the "effect" Koppel and ABC News sought to emulate was to encourage opposition to the war in Iraq (the Life magazine spread is often cited in histories of the evolution of opposition to the Vietnam War). I am not interested in arguing THIS point - it is true and if you wish to learn more about it go read my previous piece. Koppel was unable to square his defense with the point that if he was really honoring the troops he would have included ALL the soldiers who died in all areas where troops were righting after 2001 and not just those who "killed by enemy fire" and "killed in Iraq" as was the case until Koppel came under fire. They belatedly included the additional soldiers. Clearly the show was political. If you viewed Koppel's famous interview of Michael Brown in the days after Katrina hit you will find that he based most of his questions on erroneous news reports and false rumors which he demanded that Brown explain/defend. When Brown attempted to rebut the news reports and rumors Koppel jumped on Brown. The rest of the media took their cue from Koppel and you saw others like Anderson Cooper do the same. The rest of the media praised Koppel for his aggressive interviewing of Brown. Neither ABC News or the rest of the Koppel fan club ever went back and reviewed that tape in light of what we later learned to be the case. Again, I've written about this at length so you will have to go Google my past piece for more.

    More recently Koppel appeared on the Today show to discuss his putatively objective look at the trade-off between "rights" and "security". He dropped the line "a liberal is a conservative who has been arrested". Most fair-minded viewers would say that this statement reflects what Koppel really thinks. The kind of line Koppel might toss off at a cocktail party among link-minded friends. I'd venture to guess Koppel regretted saying that but has his guard down during what can only be described as a syncophatic interview by Matt Lauer. I believe that Koppel's statement reveals his liberal bias; that (a) only liberals care about the Bill of Rights (b) that conservatives position on security is not sincere.
    Koppel is widely revered by many within the world of TV journalism; he is often held up as a paragon of virtue - of what TV news should REALLY be all about. Yet I don't trust him because I think he is being disingenuous when he says that he is objective in his reporting, that he is a liberal and that his liberal leanings come through quite clearly (except to another liberal who sees Koppel as "accurate" because he is saying what liberals believe).

    ...if you don't provide any evidence that Olbermann said what you claim he said I have no reason to believe you.
    This statement suggests that I give a rat's ass what you believe or don't believe. If you were a regular reader of this site you would know that this subject was covered in depth after Brian Lamb interviewed Keith. That you don't know your facts is YOUR problem...not time.

    NF wrote:
    "if I were in the news I'm sure I could report on an issue about abortion without parading my personal feelings."

    Great! Since you are so sure why don't you give us 500 words on the Terry Schiavo case with quotes from 3 sources - 1 each from the two sides in the case and one from a medical source. I am sure it will be very balanced.