[ed. I deleted this post of KO's special comment because it was a very long duplication of the Appendix to the post above]

What exactly is the point of reposting that again?

Florida Rep. Mark Foley's resignation came just hours after ABC News questioned the congressman about a series of sexually explicit instant messages involving congressional pages, high school students who are under 18 years of age.

In Congress, Rep. Foley (R-FL) was part of the Republican leadership and the chairman of the House caucus on missing and exploited children.

He crusaded for tough laws against those who used the Internet for sexual exploitation of children.

He used the screen name Maf54 on these messages provided to ABC News.

Xxxxxxxxx (7:46:38 PM): lol no
Xxxxxxxxx (7:46:40 PM): im single right now
Xxxxxxxxx (7:46:57 PM): my last gf and i broke up a few weeks agi
Maf54 (7:47:11 PM): are you
Maf54 (7:47:11 PM): good so your getting horny
Xxxxxxxxx (7:47:29 PM): lol...a bit
Maf54 (7:48:00 PM): did you spank it this weekend yourself
Xxxxxxxxx (7:48:04 PM): no
Xxxxxxxxx (7:48:16 PM): been too tired and too busy
Maf54 (7:48:33 PM): wow...
Maf54 (7:48:34 PM): i am never to busy haha
Xxxxxxxxx (7:48:51 PM): haha
Maf54 (7:50:02 PM): or tired..helps me sleep
Xxxxxxxxx (7:50:15 PM): thats true
Xxxxxxxxx (7:50:36 PM): havent been having a problem with sleep though.. i just walk in the door and collapse well at least this weekend
Maf54 (7:50:56 PM): i am sure
Xxxxxxxxx (7:50:57 PM): i dont do it very often normally though
Maf54 (7:51:11 PM): why not
Maf54 (7:51:22 PM): at your age seems like it would be daily
Xxxxxxxxx (7:51:57 PM): not me
Xxxxxxxxx (7:52:01 PM): im not a horn dog
Xxxxxxxxx (7:52:07 PM): maybe 2 or 3 times a week
Maf54 (7:52:20 PM): thats a good number
Maf54 (7:52:27 PM): in the shower
Xxxxxxxxx (7:52:36 PM): actually usually i dont do it in the shower
Xxxxxxxxx (7:52:42 PM): just cause i shower in the morning
Xxxxxxxxx (7:52:47 PM): and quickly
Maf54 (7:52:50 PM): in the bed
Xxxxxxxxx (7:52:59 PM): i get up at 530 and am outta the house by 610
Xxxxxxxxx (7:53:03 PM): eh ya
Maf54 (7:53:24 PM): on your back
Xxxxxxxxx (7:53:30 PM): no face down
Maf54 (7:53:32 PM): love details
Xxxxxxxxx (7:53:34 PM): lol
Xxxxxxxxx (7:53:36 PM): i see that
Xxxxxxxxx (7:53:37 PM): lol
Maf54 (7:53:39 PM): really
Maf54 (7:53:54 PM): do you really do it face down
Xxxxxxxxx (7:54:03 PM): ya
Maf54 (7:54:13 PM): kneeling
Xxxxxxxxx (7:54:31 PM): well i dont use my hand...i use the bed itself
Maf54 (7:54:31 PM): where do you unload it
Xxxxxxxxx (7:54:36 PM): towel
Maf54 (7:54:43 PM): really
Maf54 (7:55:02 PM): completely naked?
Xxxxxxxxx (7:55:12 PM): well ya
Maf54 (7:55:21 PM): very nice
Xxxxxxxxx (7:55:24 PM): lol
Maf54 (7:55:51 PM): cute butt bouncing in the air
Xxxxxxxxx (7:56:00 PM): haha
Xxxxxxxxx (7:56:05 PM): well ive never watched myslef
Xxxxxxxxx (7:56:08 PM): but ya i guess
Maf54 (7:56:18 PM): i am sure not
Maf54 (7:56:22 PM): hmmm
Maf54 (7:56:30 PM): great visual
Maf54 (7:56:39 PM): i may try that
Xxxxxxxxx (7:56:43 PM): it works
Maf54 (7:56:51 PM): hmm
Maf54 (7:56:57 PM): sound inetersting
Maf54 (7:57:05 PM): i always use lotion and the hand
Maf54 (7:57:10 PM): but who knows
Xxxxxxxxx (7:57:24 PM): i dont use lotion...takes too much time to clean up
Xxxxxxxxx (7:57:37 PM): with a towel you can just wipe off....and go
Maf54 (7:57:38 PM): lol
Maf54 (7:57:45 PM): where do you throw the towel
Xxxxxxxxx (7:57:48 PM): but you cant work it too hard....or its not good
Xxxxxxxxx (7:57:51 PM): in the laundry
Maf54 (7:58:16 PM): just kinda slow rubbing
Xxxxxxxxx (7:58:23 PM): ya....
Xxxxxxxxx (7:58:32 PM): or youll rub yourslef raw
Maf54 (7:58:37 PM): well I have aa totally stiff wood now
Xxxxxxxxx (7:58:40 PM): cause the towell isnt very soft
Maf54 (7:58:44 PM): i bet..taht would hurt
Xxxxxxxxx (7:58:50 PM): but you cn find something softer than a towell i guess
Maf54 (7:58:59 PM): but it must feel great spirting on the towel
Xxxxxxxxx (7:59:06 PM): ya
Maf54 (7:59:29 PM): wow
Maf54 (7:59:48 PM): is your little guy limp...or growing
Xxxxxxxxx (7:59:54 PM): eh growing
Maf54 (8:00:00 PM): hmm
Maf54 (8:00:12 PM): so you got a stiff one now
Xxxxxxxxx (8:00:19 PM): not that fast
Xxxxxxxxx (8:00:20 PM): hey
Xxxxxxxxx (8:00:32 PM): so you have a fetich
Maf54 (8:00:32 PM): hey what
Xxxxxxxxx (8:00:40 PM): fetish**
Maf54 (8:00:43 PM): like
Maf54 (8:00:53 PM): i like steamroom

I'M A REPUH PERV AND I NEED SOME GAY BUTTSEX!

Must have been posted by a DUmmy. How many minutes did this useless diatribe waste?

HASTERT IS A FAT PIG!

WHY DOESN'T THAT FAT FUCK GO ON A DIET!

WHERE'S THE CAPS-LOCK MOONBAT TONIGHT?

HIS RETARDEDNESS IS THE MAIN REASON I COME HERE!

LOL!

Time to ban some IP.

Whenever we see vulgar writing on this site, it's initiated by a lib. Why is that? Is that the only way they can communicate?

Hi, I'm A-HOLEBUSH...
Republicans are dumb.
Fat too.
That's all I got, 'cause I'm a lib.
We call people names.
That's what we do.

Those who run out of good arguments resort to insults - just like Olby.

Thank goodness for Keith. The only light of truth on cable. Bush has lied. There is not question about it. And anyone who disagrees with his and Cheney's policies are accused of being weak or worse, traitors. The strawmen that they set up are falacious. Some say is always the lead in -- but they can never come up with that "some say" person. The GOP believe in party before country. Interesting that 41 and Baker are on CNN and Fox tonight. Looks like it's time to bail out idiot son. Why did they wait so long?

Good Night, and Good Luck.

The Republicans and you people need it.

A-HOLEBUSH here again,
in addition to name calling, I forgot the most important thing for us libs to say...
Bush lied.

Thanks Jill.

Thank goodness for keith. The only light of truth on cable. That's just sad jill. As for calling people traitors, every american has a duty to point out those who wish this country harm, which democrats certainly do. Democrats can hide their completely insane base (ANSWER/CODE PINK etc.) for a while, with help from the media of course, but they will eventually rear their ugly insane heads and the american people will see democrats for who they truly are.

Isn't it ironic to hear Olby brand someone a liar? But hey, at least it's good for a laugh, much like the majority of posts here tonight by the Keith defenders.

Hey Jill, Is falacious the same as fellatio. Just asking. That makes as much sense as anything else that I've seen come out of your keyboard.

Janet Hawkins
AKA gRAMMIE

Mr Olbermann- Please get off the air , you are boring and hateful.

Mr Olbermann- Please get off the air , you are boring and hateful.

Thank goodness for someone like Keith-some one that is not afriad to face my president, and yes he is my president, in the face and tell it like it is. This president needs to know that many of us in the Heartland (Minnesota) know that he is not telling the truth and we wonder if he would know the truth if it bit him on his nose. Or would he think it was some how the results of the Democrates. This man needs to go and go soon and fast. Lets elect Dems and see just what they knew and how they lied to us. GO KEITH

Maybe someone should post some of Keith Olberman's "naughty emails" he was sending to his female viewers....

Maybe someone should post some of Keith Olberman's "naughty emails" he was sending to his female viewers....

Randy, you can spell Minnesota- but not Democrates? Or Some How?

And "Lets elect Dems and see just what they knew and how the lied to us."? What the hell does that even mean?

GO RANDY!

Does Hugo Chavez ghost write Keith's "specious comments"? Krazy Keith's legacy will be his ability to condense three hundred pages of crazy into one single-spaced page.

How many times will KO give the same damn "special comment"?..this is really getting old.

Oh where has Bush ever said anyone that disagrees with him is a traitor or unamerican?.

It's KO and his fellow lefty's that say they have the right to protest and criticize the president and his supporters but act like no one can criticize them..well KO its like this..the first amendment is a two way street..you can say what you want about Bush and we can say what we want about you and if you don't like it...TFB.

I love this site and hope you guys keep defending the GOP (grand old pedos). You repugs keep slandering over 60% of Americans and frothing at the mouth like koolaid drinking maniacs and it won't be a question of if the dems will regain power but for how many decades. Keep going nuts like this and you all are going to start scaring more Americans than the terrorist you claim to hate. The question I have is if you hate Bin Laden so much why are you giving him all the recruits he can handle and culling our freedoms here at home (which is his goal)? The country is waking to your childish insanity and the more hate you spew the sooner we will be in power. Keep up the hate, kids. You guys are to thank for the future speaker Pelosi and you can't stop that. All you can do is sit back and whine like little brats. Thank you, right-wing nutjobs, for scarring the country into voting democrat.

Thank goodness for someone like Keith-some one that is not afriad to face my president, and yes he is my president, in the face and tell it like it is. This president needs to know that many of us in the Heartland (Minnesota) know that he is not telling the truth and we wonder if he would know the truth if it bit him on his nose. Or would he think it was some how the results of the Democrates. This man needs to go and go soon and fast. Lets elect Dems and see just what they knew and how they lied to us. GO KEITH

Hi, I'm Richard, let's see if I can live up to my liberal credo...

*Name Calling- Check! (pedos, repugs, Koolaid drinking maniacs, nuts, childish, kids, brats, nutjobs)

*Hyperbole- Check! (slandering over 60% of Americans, scaring more Americans than the terrorist, giving [Bin Laden] all the recruits he can handle, culling our freedoms here at home)

*Delusional- Check! ("speaker Pelosi")

mlong,

Keith is just playing a part. He has chosen his character, and he writes vitriolic nonsense to look passionate and important on stage.

These special comments are all about appearance, both to Keith and to his crazy audience. The same kooks that make huge papier mache heads for their parties . . . er . . . I mean "protest rallies" . . . love Olbermann. It's all about the show, man! It's about protest, man. Che t-shirts! Moa t-shirts! Go Chavez Go!

Thank goodness for someone like Keith-some one that is not afriad to face my president,
**************************************
Please..people have been attacking Bush since day one there is nothing brave about what KO says..what would be brave for KO would be the day he has the courage to face someone who disagrees with him..

Right now KO has one of the only "news programs" on where there is no open debate just a one sided leftest point of view of the days events..even lefty Chris Matthews allows people on his show that disagree with him.

Once again I ask KO defenders to tell me why KO is afraid of open debate..so far no one will give me a reason.

Hey, Randy- thanks for the repeat of your "deep thoughts". You are "some how" one of the good "Democrates".

Hi Steve. I hope you realize that name-calling, hyperbole, and dellusion are all staples of republican campaigns and media. Can you name a conservative figure in the media who does anything but spout trash? Cause I can name dozens who do nothing but. Coulter, O'reilly, Hannity, Rush, Hewitt, Malkin, Bush, Cheney, Snow...etcetcetc. They all demonize, demean and ridicule anyone who disagrees and I hope you are disgusted that they represent your party. Name calling is as much if not more of a repug credo, and if you have any credibility you know that.

Funny stuff Randy! Let's look at your post:

"Thank goodness for someone like Keith-some one that is not afriad to face my president . . . in the face and tell it like it is [yes, it is good to "face someone in the face"]. This president needs to know that . . . we wonder if he would know the truth if it bit him on his nose [so "truth" bites?]. Or would he think it was some how the results of the Democrates [ah yes, "Democrates," mentor to Plato!]. This man needs to go and go soon and fast [yes . . . go soon fast quick and rapidly!]. Lets elect Dems and see just what they knew and how they lied to us [I agree -- let's see how much the Dems knew and how much they lied]."

Keep on posting Stevie!

Sure, Dick- and NO ONE on the left does any of those things... right?

Go back to the DU.

I'm looking for where I said that democrats don't lie and I don't see it. All politicians lie. Yet you are acting like it's just a democrat thing. It's really sad when one becomes so partisan that they can admit no flaw to their own party. And as your party self destructs in scandle after scandle all you can do is blame dems. Sad sad sad. So, you can paint me as a blind partisan but it's fairly obvious that title belongs to you. I'm just glad your time to ruin the country is ending soon.

I'm looking for where I said that democrats don't lie and I don't see it. All politicians lie. Yet you are acting like it's just a democrat thing. It's really sad when one becomes so partisan that they can admit no flaw to their own party. And as your party self destructs in scandle after scandle all you can do is blame dems. Sad sad sad. So, you can paint me as a blind partisan but it's fairly obvious that title belongs to you. I'm just glad your time to ruin the country is ending soon.

I recently stumbled on this wonderful website. It's nice to know that lots of people see Keith as the left-wing nut case that he is. Today, I had the luck to catch is "special comment." I was expecting 2 men with a straight jacket to grab him and haul him off. Even lefties must be getting embarrassed by KO's near-hysterical rants.

"scandle after scandle"

"It's really sad when one becomes so partisan that they [WRONG PRONOUN] can admit no flaw to [WRONG PREPOSITION, POOR STRUCTURE] their own party"

Jeez Louise, have any of you lefties been to school?

No, DICK... I was just pointing out what a good little liberal you were-

*Name Calling
*Hyperbole
*Delusional

Sorry I struck such a nerve... you can go back to MoveOn now, they'll pat you on your back and tell you what a good little boy you were posting such wonderful talking points on that mean 'ol "neocon" site.

Buh-bye now.

J$,
This might be nitpicking but Keith used "President" before using "Mr. Bush."

Is English your second language? Last night you claimed Ben-Veniste said something yet mysteriously never showed the quote when asked. Tonight you claim "Some three years, though, after a senior Congressional aide says he told Speaker absolutely prHastert about Congressman Foley's behavior," means "he reports this allegation as fact." First, at multiple points in the show Keith did mention Hastert's denials. Second, the quote says an aide made an allegation, not that the allegation was true.

In general, every night, you fail to mention Keith quotes Hastert, Boehner, Reynolds, etc. The contradictions come from their own quotes. As far as the three new pages, everyone is reporting it. Who is disputing it?

I'm confused about your obsession with Keith showing taped peices. Fox News never shows tape of anything? O'Reilly's show is taped. Was Keith supposed to harrass the Amish into holding their funerals until 8:30 pm so he could show live footage?

The court didn't reverse the decision about the NSA wiretapping. It let's the program continue until it can be appealed. The staffer who criticized the CCC lover was fired.

Maybe, Louise could go to school... if the government would fund it, and impliment something more all encompasing than "No Child Left Behind".

YES! Annon... you're right! MORE MONEY- that's all the public schools need.

Thanks for the brilliant (and typical) liberal idea!

Oh, sorry- "Progressive"

Please... go back to school --- you could not even read the second half of my post...

Maybe, Louise could go to school... if the government would fund it, >>> and impliment something more all encompasing than "No Child Left Behind".

Colbert... I agree with you.

Colbert... I agree with you.

Once Krazy has said "President" once, then- "Mr." is acceptable.

However, I think that the folks here (myself included) simply can't stand the absolutely condescending WAAAAAAAAY that Krazy says "MISTER" in his patronizingly Keith style.

Just a thought.

Sorry Steve I can see why you were confused. Lets elect some Democrates and lets see how the Republicans lied to us about the WMD and that Iraq had ties with the 9/11 attackers. They did not and we all know it unless you watch Fox News and most people with a IQ above 75 do not. And to malong, my President has said several times that if we are not with him we are against him, you can not question him nor can you disagree with him. So he has called me a traitor many times.

No nerve struck here. I'm used to the insanity from your side of the aisle. At the end of the day you can do nothing but blame and complain. What a sad little child. And actually the internet is a free place so I don't have to leave. I don't need anyone to pat me on the back. Apparently you do. And you seem to be doing great on the delusional name calling hyperbole. Repugs have always been much better at that. Yep, you guys do nothing but mud-sling. And then when someone throws back you go running under your mother's skirt. You are a great example to the modern repug party. Now your party is willing to shelter pedos just to retain power. And all you can do is shout about the dems. Good lil neocon.

Way to go, DICK!

"Insanity, sad little child, delusinoal Repugs, pedos (again- and TWICE!), neocon"

Good job!

George Soros is calling- pick up the phone.

Another one from Steve: How can George Soros --- or anyone else --- be calling if we are on line ???

Another one from Steve: How can George Soros --- or anyone else --- be calling if we are on line ???

Um... Annon- its called a cable modem.
Or DSL.
Or Satellite.

Welcome to the year 2000.

How is calling Foley a pedo name calling? are you denying what he did?

Good job deflecting criticism of the gop. Your check from Richard Scaife is in the mail.

Steve: fair enough. Are there any services that cancel you from being on my screen?

DICK,

My point is (was?) this:
This is OLBERMANNWATCH. We watch and discuss Keith. We don't just attack Dems. We point out how the "Newsman" never has anyone with a different point of view on his show.

And that's okay- except HE keeps telling us how fair and objective he is. You see, O'reilly leans to the right- but he TELLS us he is providing commentary. Keith falls over the leftist cliff, yet tells us he's fair and balanced (pardon the pun). O'reilly- whatever you think of him- has opposing views on his show. Keith does not. Hence this site.

Now, in response to your last post- is Foley a pedo? Did he actually HAVE SEX WITH A MINOR? To my knowledge, he did not. AS OPPOSED TO THE DEMOCRATIC congressman Gerry Studds who actually DID.

"In 1983, Democratic congressman Gerry Studds was found to have sexually propositioned House pages and actually buggered a 17-year-old male page whom he took on a trip to Portugal. The 46-year-old Studds indignantly attacked those who criticized him for what he called a "mutually voluntary, private relationship between adults."

See the difference? Foley acted inappropriately, resigned and has been condemned by the Republicans. Studds continued on and was re-elected by the dems of his district (and CELEBRATED as a brave, gay man in the face of those horrible neocons!)

So, there- go back to your name calling, and please- go back to your dailyKos.

Annon Said:
"Steve: fair enough. Are there any services that cancel you from being on my screen?"

Sure, Annon... its the little "off" switch on your RadioShack Tandy 100.

Is this all that people do on this website? Pick on those with other views (namely Keith Olbermann?)

One more thing, DICK-
In 1994- DEMOCRATIC congressman Mel Reynolds was convicted of (acutally) having sex with a 16 year old girl. He was sent to prison.

He was in prison until President Clinton pardoned him and now, he works for Jesse Jackson.

So, please- spare us all the "Repug's" are Pedos rants? Okay?

Now, put on your Streisand records, light one up- and don't inhale.

Annon said:

"Is this all that people do on this website? Pick on those with other views (namely Keith Olbermann?)"

At the risk of sounding like a name-calling lib- Annon, you are one dumb sonofabitch.

The NAME of the site is www.olbermannwatch, and you ask if this is what we do? Talk about Olbermann?

Sweet Georgia Brown, turn off your computer and go watch the Daily Show!

Steve: Watch the daily show... before you make one of these blogs and get it cancelled! Oh no!!!

"Steve: Watch the daily show... before you make one of these blogs and get it cancelled! Oh no!!!"

?

I stand by my "you are one dumb sonofabitch" line. Call me a name-caller.

pe‧do‧phile  /ˈpidəˌfaɪl/
–noun Psychiatry.
an adult who is sexually attracted to young children.
(thanks dictionary.com)
In reality repugs liked Foley so much that they ignored pages claims of inappropriate behavior and actually put him in charge of said pages. Was Studds put in charge of pages? And did the page he slept with complain about his advances. Cause there is records of Foley's boys pointing out his advances. And as someone who watches his show regularly I have never heard Keith claim to be "fair and balanced". And O'Reilly "leans right"? I thought he was an independant? In fact I've heard him chide several people for daring to call him a repug. And he never lets anyone with a differing view get a word in edgewize. Your lack of reasoning is astounding.

Oh please Steve... don't tell me that you are not working to get Keith Olbermann cancelled and that you would much rather just be talking and talking and talking forever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever because you "hate them Olbyloons" and 'that Krazy Keith'" --- woah woah woah is our world... as the real world passes you by in many, many ways. Well... as long as it gives you something to do... I hope...

Hi!

As you folks are fond of pointing out, Countdown's audience is a fraction of the size of O'Reilly's.

And yet you are thoroughly obsessed with documenting Olbermann's every newscast down to the Nth degree.

Worried, much, that Keith's ratings spikes are a sign of times to come as more and more Americans wake up from their terror-mongering-induced coma and start to ask just what the hell is happening to this wonderful country of ours under the Bush/Cheney stewardship?

Or are you just desparately in need of -- oh, what are those things called -- ah, yes! -- lives?

Cheers, all!
Robin Michael

Dick...

Foley- IM's with an 18 year old
Studds- ACTUALLY HAD SEX WITH A MINOR
Reynolds- ACUTALLY HAD SEX WITH A MINOR
(pssssst... see the difference?)

I said O'reilly leans to the right. I didn't say he was a republican. He says he is an independent. My point was that he does have people with opposing views on his show (Bob Woodward just last night). When was the last time you saw anyone on Keith's show that wasn't a Keith clone?

O'reilly may shout or dominate the conversation, but he has them on.

As far as Keith saying he's independent- check the archives on this site. He is quoted (several times) in a variety of media as saying that he is an IMPARTIAL journalist. He is not. That's okay- its okay to be a partisan... just admit it.

Annon... you are STILL one dumb sonofabitch!
Seriously- total 'tard.

Steve: you probably posted as RobinMichael...

Oh, and Steve: stop calling me "Anon". I have a name.

Annon...

I know you're new to computers and all, but the administrators of this site can confim that I only post as "Steve". This is through the magic of ISP's that can be seen by their supernatural eyes... tard.

stop calling me "Anon". I have a name.

Actually it was a 15 y/o page. And Foley made several attempts to meet him at his apartment where he said he would buy beer for them. I guess we don't know if they really did the act, but we know several repugs knew he was doing hugely inapropriate things and left him in charge of the pages. How do you feel about that? Hastert knew but didn't think it was worth remembering. Boehner knew because he said he told Hastert. And about Studds: what he did was inapropriate. But it was also concentual and with someone over consenting age. And I don't feel like wallowing through the partisan hackery to look for your claims of Keith claiming to be non-partisan. Plus this site is hardly a reliable source for info on Keith. If I wanted the truth about Bill-O I wouldn't go to Sweetjesusihatebillo'reilly.com. If you have an unbiased source you can post I would love to see it.

I have an unbiased source of information: Media Matters for America.

Dear KfK, If I could stop laughing long enough I'd say I think I'm in love. [ah yes, "Democrates," mentor to Plato!].

You have a rapier wit. So refreshing after the broad axes the libs swing around.

One quick question. Thats not the Democrates in "Poor Democrates. I knew him well."

When I get silly (your fault) its time to log out.

Janet Hawkins
AKA Grammie

Democratic congressman Gerry Studds, 1983. Whatever! Big deal!

I'll remember this in the year 2029 and bring up Foley. I'm sure in 2029 every Republican will say its "old news" and wonder what my I am so fascinated by "gay sex".

I have gotten over Gerry Studds gay sex just as I have gotten over the fact that back then President Bush was an admitted drunk, 6 yrs. removed from his drunk driving conviction.

I don't go back in history and bring that up every time a Democrat is convicted of drunk driving! "Oh Bush did it too! You Republican hypocrites!" That is just a lame arguement.

Oh great, Janet Hawkins is here... that means I need a screen name...

Democratic congressman Gerry Studds, 1983. Whatever! Big deal!

I'll remember this in the year 2029 and bring up Foley. I'm sure in 2029 every Republican will say its "old news" and wonder what my I am so fascinated by "gay sex".

I have gotten over Gerry Studds gay sex just as I have gotten over the fact that back then President Bush was an admitted drunk, 6 yrs. removed from his drunk driving conviction.

I don't go back in history and bring that up every time a Democrat is convicted of drunk driving! "Oh Bush did it too! You Republican hypocrites!" That is just a lame arguement.

DICK,

First, recent ABC News reports (you know- ABC, that real CONSERVATIVE network?) now claim that the page was in fact 18. But, just for fun- lets say he was 15. When will acknowledge that ACTUALLY HAVING SEX with a minor (like the two DEMOCRATIC congressmen I mentioned) is worse than inappropriate IMing or emails.

"Hastert knew but didn't think it was wort remembering... how do you feel about that?"

I guess I feel the same way you did when you found out that Barney Frank (DEMOCRAT from Mass.) was running a gay male prostitution ring out of his basement with congressional pages.

Hmmmmm... I'm looking at your posts and I don't see the outrage over that either.

I get it- Foley = bad. Got it. I admit it. Now, will you put down your copy of New Republic and admit that DEMOCRATS actually HAVING SEX WITH MINORS is a greater offense?

And stop your false outrage?

HeHateMe: Then the Democrat in the room with you will get all upset: 'Why are you bringing up people of illicit sexuale behavior?!?!?!? GASP!!!'

Uh, HATE?
I brought up Studds because some of you libs seem to think that inappropriate IMing and emailing is on par with ACTUALLY HAVING SEX WITH A MINOR.

I also see that you failed to mention convicted pedo, former DEMOCRATIC congressman Mel Reynolds - who ACTUALLY HAD SEX WITH A MINOR and was pardoned by President Clinton.

Oh, wait- I forgot... Foley is a Republican (Repug for you loons) so therefore whatever a Dem did is irrelevant. Got it.

Steve: You brought up Studds... and you brought up funding, and name calling, and Radio Shack, and computer programs, and Pedos...

---

Someone please put Annon to bed...

Steve: Anon is now v v v v

No... on second thought- Annon, you and HATE, and DICK, and all the other Olbyloons take over-

I'm going to bed.

Stay classy San Diego.

Yes... I fyou can not take the heAt... get out of the kitchen...

Well, looks as though this is the only site I can post. Spud at ICN banned me because i criticized his hero Krazy Keith. All I didi was make snide comments, none of which used obscenities or sexual innuendo. I guess since tanne was mad that her/his beloved KO (or, was it Mr. I run from Borax Mules himself?) was criticized.

Just to show that liberals and KO lovers are retards.

Well, looks as though this is the only site I can post. Spud at ICN banned me because I criticized his hero Krazy Keith. All I did was make snide comments, none of which used obscenities or sexual innuendo. I guess since tanne was mad that her/his beloved KO (or, was it Mr. I run from Borax Mules himself?) was criticized.

Just to show that liberals and KO lovers are retards.

is ICN free, or you have to register your password?

lol. You sound like you're about to pop a blood vessel. Calm down, kid. I said what Studds did was wrong. And I also said it was with someone over the age of consent (which he was). Therefore, while it was certainly wrong it was not criminal. And if you did read the reports you would know this has been going on for years and with multiple pages. Some as young as 15. And the real bad thing here is that your leadership covered it up. For years. Disgusting. And this is the repug credo: Always excuse bad behavior with more bad behavior. Never take any responsibility. I thought that repugs were the party of moral values and personal accountability? Nope, just say that dems did something bad 20 years ago to excuse what your side is doing today. Way to be. And about Franks, were the prozzies underage? Once again wrong but not nearly as bad as your pals covering for pedos.

Sorry for the multipost.

Posted by: Jill at October 5, 2006 09:52 PM:

"Thank goodness for Keith. The only light of truth on cable. Bush has lied. There is not question about it. And anyone who disagrees with his and Cheney's policies are accused of being weak or worse, traitors. The strawmen that they set up are falacious. Some say is always the lead in -- but they can never come up with that "some say" person. The GOP believe in party before country. Interesting that 41 and Baker are on CNN and Fox tonight. Looks like it's time to bail out idiot son. Why did they wait so long?"

-----------

No doubt.

They waited so long, so that two of the dozens of culprits of a three-terms-deep-warfare-racketeering syndicate can be apologists for their collective self - as they do, usually 'once in a blue moon', or on 'red-letter dates' - in high hopes that we'll 'buy it' this time. Maybe Junior's ratings will follow suit with Murdoch's; perhaps issues such as the fraudulent pretexts for war, imperial circumvention of The Constitution, and the terrifying eradication of civil liberties in defieance of domestic and international laws will be swept with a broad stroke under the rug, literally; and all will be fine up and down Pennsylvania Avenue. After all... Daddy War Bucks and his trusty Old Guard flanker are speaking (their version of) The Gospel. They can't say it if it wasn't right, true?

ch'yeah... they're waaaayyy "right"!

Hats off to you, Keith Olbermann! Hats off to champions of objectivity, balance and peace who find themselves amongst the ethically-bankrupt media moguls and messengers' majority of mind manipulators who monger maliciousness, mayhem and menagerie for mega-money.

I see that part of this has been covered already but since I already had it in mind ...

How much propaganda and bias did Jivin' Johnny put into his three statements?
1. He claims KO "reports this allegation as fact" while JD obviously ignores "aide says he told". Not "aide told" → "aide says he told."
B. "Olby's own guest … dismissed this allegation." And? It doesn't change the fact that KO DID NOT 'report' as 'fact' the allegation. Nor does Scarborough's opinion make it a fact. I actually agree with that Scarborough is probably right. I am skeptical of Reynold's view.
III. I agree that KO should've said "Hastert's office." However, is it a lie? No, since (via ABC News) Fordham claimed Hastert knew about COS Palmer's meeting with Foley then, in effect, it is reasonable to say "aide says he told Speaker Hastert." It would be like me telling person A to tell his Boss B and if A tells B, then I have told B.
Two instances of slanting and one outright falsehood. Not bad but typical J$.

"Olby gave Shuster a chance to do some damage control and back off his prediction of yesterday"
I was unable to respond to this yesterday since I didn't watch until too late, yet I had a hunch you were spinning here. Now that I've seen the transcript I see I was right. It's clear that Shuster made no such prediction of Hastert's resignation. He said, specifically, "we‘ve been told by every lawmaker, every Republican lawmaker we‘ve called has said that Dennis Hastert will not be the speaker of the House this time next week." That is not 'predicting', it's called reporting. You would've done better to say "I wonder how many lawmaker's he actually spoke to."

Hold still: Even if Keith Olbermann was an objective kind of guy... would he be spreading loving whispers of freedom on Bush? ...

BTW, any word on BobbyC's phone-in with Dr. Phil?

Well... I am going off line... I would like to know what ICN is... so ... if any one here knows what that is ... I will be checking this site out again, hopefully.

He was in prison until President Clinton pardoned him and now
Posted by: Steve at October 5, 2006 11:45 PM

I absolutely LOVE this spin by Repugs! The implication is that Clinton pardoned Reynold's for his pedophilia (ephebephilia, whatever). That is a lie, Clinton did not do that!
Wait, let me back off a second from calling it a lie. If you've been listening to Fox News you probably heard it and believed it without looking into it. Therefore, since you believe it to be true and have no suspicion that it is false then it reall isn't a lie, is it?

Evidently, ICN is "Inside Cable News"
http://insidecable.blogsome.com

Am I right? Do I win anything?

Who cares about ethnic slurs agains George Allen? George Allen is a public figure who holds a position in the Senate and had the possibility of running for the president of the United States. Why do I care about some random person's racial slurs against George Allen? What does that random person do for me? I am most concerned with George Allen's use of racial slurs because he represents those whom he has racially disrespected. If George Allen is a racist, then he might hold preferrential treatment to one race over the other. How does that compare with some random individuals racial slur against him? You are overshadowing the meaningful issues with excuses. I think that you are missing the real issues by trying so desperately to find meaningless discrepencies. Who cares about Olbermann's spot on Amazon.com with relation to Bill O'Reilly. It's just not important. There are other issues that hold much importance over these insignificant points that you bring up. Read Olbermann's special comments to get a HINT!!!

It is sort of like the President's reference to Iraq as being like a "comma" in the history books. Tony Snow can spin it all he wants. The most revealing aspect of this administration is the belittling of the most important of issues for ratings or political standing. And now, we are seeing that the GOP leadership has done the same thing. I am appauled! How could they allow for a congressman to sexually harrass a minor or a few minors? It is so unprofessional. Of course, Clinton was unprofessional too! But, that's why we need accountability. Thank you ABC for doing your job.

Accountability is what is missing from this administration and the GOP lead congress. Doing undemocratic actions just to keep reublicans in the majority causes these scandals. Accountability can only occur when all parties involved believe that it is necessary and essential. It is a shame that these powerful individuals can skirt their responsibilities and not be held accountable for their actions. It is because of websites like yours that the story us spun so wildly that we debate insignificant issues. Stick to the issues that mean something to humanity and maybe you might learn something.

Who cares about ethnic slurs agains George Allen? George Allen is a public figure who holds a position in the Senate and had the possibility of running for the president of the United States. Why do I care about some random person's racial slurs against George Allen? What does that random person do for me? I am most concerned with George Allen's use of racial slurs because he represents those whom he has racially disrespected. If George Allen is a racist, then he might hold preferrential treatment to one race over the other. How does that compare with some random individuals racial slur against him? You are overshadowing the meaningful issues with excuses. I think that you are missing the real issues by trying so desperately to find meaningless discrepencies. Who cares about Olbermann's spot on Amazon.com with relation to Bill O'Reilly. It's just not important. There are other issues that hold much importance over these insignificant points that you bring up. Read Olbermann's special comments to get a HINT!!!

It is sort of like the President's reference to Iraq as being like a "comma" in the history books. Tony Snow can spin it all he wants. The most revealing aspect of this administration is the belittling of the most important of issues for ratings or political standing. And now, we are seeing that the GOP leadership has done the same thing. I am appauled! How could they allow for a congressman to sexually harrass a minor or a few minors? It is so unprofessional. Of course, Clinton was unprofessional too! But, that's why we need accountability. Thank you ABC for doing your job.

Accountability is what is missing from this administration and the GOP lead congress. Doing undemocratic actions just to keep reublicans in the majority causes these scandals. Accountability can only occur when all parties involved believe that it is necessary and essential. It is a shame that these powerful individuals can skirt their responsibilities and not be held accountable for their actions. It is because of websites like yours that the story us spun so wildly that we debate insignificant issues. Stick to the issues that mean something to humanity and maybe you might learn something.

 MSNBC

Mr. Dan Abrams
c.c. Dan Patrick 

Dear Gentleman;

Please refer to Rules #1,5,12 and 14 from the book; Cable TV - Viewership & Ratings - Avoiding The Path to Guaranteed Network Destruction and Mass Viewer Exodus.


1.   Don't intentionally and gratuitously turn off customers !

5.   Don't pretend to be smarter than the customer !

12. Don't lie to the customer, over and over and over....... !

14. Don't ever put a "monkey" in a pinstriped suit wearing Ashlie Banfield's glasses that still has rug burns on his chin from his last cage cleaning, on the air at "prime time"!



If you must bend rule #14, at least be sure the monkey in the suit - at a minimum - has had even the smallest amount of success in sports news or broadcasting!


Just a little "monkey love" from a concerned individual.

> Who cares about Olbermann's spot on Amazon.com with relation to Bill O'Reilly. It's just not important.

Olbermann does. He brought it up night after night.

Another top knotch special comment from KO. I don't see any arguments here other than "Democrats did it too", so I think Olbermann must have hit pretty close to his mark.

Enough with the strawman arguments and lieing Mister Bush!

None of the mentioned members of Congress in this thread are pedophiles. Pedophilia refers to sexual fascination or acts with children 13 years of age or younger. That did not happen with Studds or Foley - at least given what we know at this point.

However, why is Congresssman Studds cited without mentioning Congressman Dan Crane, a Republican who also had sex with a House page? Because the argument is stupidly partisan. The intelligent and reasoned response to Studds, Crane, Foley and all of their ilk is that their behavior is immoral and just plain unacceptable.

Good night and God (please) Bless America. :-)

Tonight's was the first episode of Countdown that I've ever watched from beginning to end, and I have to say I found his Special Comment... *astounding.

"...then the questions your critics need to be asking are no longer about your policies.

They are, instead, solemn and even terrible questions, about your fitness to fulfill the responsibilities of your office."

I believe that we may now be entering a new stage of discourse. I've been noticing actual fear in some of the recent rhetoric, fear and disbelief - not as much "how did we get to this place", but "I will not allow myself to aknowlege, yet, that we are where we are. I cannot."

But aknowledgement happened tonight in this speech.

Our president is a liar, and our country, under him, has done something horrible in Iraq. Something sinful. And we don't want to look at it, because it's too horrible to contemplate... but we can't escape what we've done. What Bush has done, to Iraq... and to us.

He has divided us. He has put us in great danger, from without - and within. He lies, daily. He mocks those who question him, shrilly, with desperation and fear in his voice, and has encouraged others to do the same by his sickening example.

I don't think it would be possible to remove him from office. The NeoCon machinery works too well, is capable of using fear and lies in too many contexts. We - the country - are essentially helpless until the next presidential election.

The best thing we can do is to remember. We can't allow someone like George W Bush to do something like this to us again, ever.

"a federal appeals judge reversed the lower court order"
Incorrect. A 'reversal' would be a disagreement with the lower court order that reverses the ruling of the lower court. Even the article you provided makes it clear this is not a 'reversal'. It was expected and it makes sense. While I'm not a lawyer, it is more a "stay of execution".

"The Dow hit record highs for the third day in a row, and KO spiked the story for the third day in a row."
I'm sorry, but I thought this was Countdown with Keith Olbermann, not Cavuto's fake business program. While I don't get much of a chance to watch KO, I can't ever recall him doing business news. Does Cavuto or BORe cover baseball? If not then they must be 'spiking' baseball news.
BTW, it sure is impressive that after(what six years?) the DOW has finally returned to Clintonian levels.

"Nothing either on the ethnic slurs directed toward George Allen (R)"
Ethnic slurs from a low-level staffer whose boss doesn't even know who he/she is? Yep, that's a big story like George Allen's repeated racism through the years.

"but we understand why "Monkey" Olbermann might feel a little self-conscious reporting on someone else's anti-Semitic name-calling."
Is the old tactic of "repeat a lie long enough, and it becomes true?" You know as well as I that KO has not engaged in "anti-Semitic name-calling." That is a lie.
As I said, I'm not a lawyer, but be careful. Even though KO is a public figure, I've heard that you can be held libel for repeating a lie like that.

BTW, I've mentioned this before, but when are you ever going to learn that a single word is encapsulated in single quotes while multiple words are encapsulated in double quotes? So it should be 'Monkey' Olbermann not "Monkey" Olberamnn.

OW[ub],

The "... would he be spreading loving whispers of freedom on Bush?" part is kinda' vague.

Do you mean... shouldn't Keith flip the coin over and do some positive commentary on Bush and Co.?

If Bush and Co. do something so altruistically restorative and mindful, like... deciding against attacking Iran and/or Syria, or deciding to lift the collective punishments against the Palestinian population, then yes: Keith should give positive recognition to them for it. He should spend plenty of time doing it too.

Problem is...

There's not a whole lot to be praising our Congress and Executive about these days. As far as foreign policy goes, IMO, there hasn't been for decades.

It's hard to downplay one's own passionate dissent when so much is at stake for our country and the Mideast under the gun of an increasingly imperial Executive. Keith calls it like he sees it. If the merits constitute recognition, he comments on it accordingly. He has a penchant for 'speaking truth to power' - a rare, dignified asset these days in mainstream news commentary.

Do you mean... shouldn't Keith flip the coin over and do some positive commentary on Bush and Co.?

LOL. Good luck.

Good Grief so what's Keith going to say next that Bush PLOTTED 9/11 NEXT? I'm just waiting for him to say that. He's gonna say that one of these days.

BTW to all you 9/11 Conspiracy NUTS see the Google Movie "SCREW LOOSE CHANGE" you can see both the crazy conspiracy theory movie and get the REAL TRUTH at the same time.

Anyway again I USED TO LIKE KEITH OLBERMAN I used to think his show was funny but now he's just a venemous snake.

WHY DO YOU ALWAYS MAKE CONSERVATIVES THE WORST PEOPLE IN THE WORLD? WHAT OSAMA OR ZARQAWI ARE WORSE THAN O'REILLY!? Have you EVER made ANY terrorist the Worst Person in the World?

About the WMD on August 8th 2005 we found 1500 GALLONS OF CHEMICAL WEAPONS IN MOSUL WHICH You "MISTER OLBERMAN" and your media friends REFUSE TO MENTION. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/13/AR2005081300530.html

Anyway about Foley. YES HE'S A SICK MAN AND A JERK HOWEVER...MISTER OLBERMAN...He at least had the decency to RESIGN! UNLIKE YOUR DEMOCRAT FRIENDS WHO REFUSE TO RESIGN...

GARY CONDIT DEMOCRAT OF CALIFORNIA: Chandra Levy found DEAD IN D.C. and he HURT the investigation by delaying it by LYING FOR REAL TO POLICE. He REFUSED TO RESIGN...he had to be unelected.

DEMOCRAT WILLIAM JEFFERSON: Over $90,000 cold hard cash found in his FREEZER from inside deals and when the FBI investigated him Nancy Peloci and other DEMS SCREAMED "HOW DARE YOU FBI INVESTIAGE A CONGRESSMAN! THAT'S AN ABUSE OF POWERS!" Yet when it's to investiage a Republican THEY ARE A-OK WITH IT

KENNEDY JR. DEMOCRAT FROM MASS: CRASHED HIS CAR, IS DRIVING DRUNK AND HIGH ON COLD DRUGS...AGAIN REFUSES TO RESIGN, INSTEAD GOES TO REHAB. The Republicans didn't turn the Congress upside down for him.

AT LEAST: TOM DELAY, DUKE CUNNINGHAM, AND FOLEY...YES...ALL BROKE THE LAW...ALL POLITICAL PERVERTS BUT AT LEAST...AT LEAST...UNLIKE THE DEMS DIDN'T HANG ON TO POWER THEY GAVE IT ALL UP FOR THE SAKE OF THEIR PARTY.

Look I'm glad Foley's going to jail, I'm glad they caught him. And I WON'T PRETEND TO BE NO SAINT! I ain't perfect I've seen more than my fair share of "CINEMAX LATE NIGHTS" and I haven't had a perfect or that conservative a lifestyle. But unlike FOLEY I do know the difference between right and wrong and where to stop sexually. It's the DEMS WHO CELEBRATE PERVERSITY. If Foley was a DEM, Peloci would have said, "OHHH...but the Page and Mr. Foley are IN LOVE...let's have a marriage right here" But no because he's a REP..."LYNCH HIM!!!" AND RIGHTFULLY SO. But don't PRETEND THAT YOUR PEOPLE THE DEMS DON'T HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM!!!

By the Way MISTER Olberman you love to say "We're a FACIST DICTATORSHIP NOW WITH BUSH AND THE GOP" And that BUSH IS EVIL BECAUSE HE DISAGREES WITH HIS CRITICS!?!?!?

Funny, KIM JONG ILL LITERALLY KILLS PEOPLE WHO POLITICALLY OPPOSE HIM. THE SAME FOR FIDEL CASTRO AND THE REAL HITLER OF IRAN!!! Bush doesn't KILL POLITICIAL OPPONENTS...BUT YOU MAKE IT SOUND LIKE HE DOES!!!

Listen to me carefully before you rant on about me being a NEO-CON or something...

I WANT THE REPUBLICANS TO LOSE THE MID-TERM ELECTIONS...YEAH...YOU HEARD ME!!! I want the GOP to lose. For two reasons. A: To teach the GOP a lesson for spending so much money and for not doing a damn thing about illegal immegration and to revamp the party. B: TO SHUT PEOPLE LIKE YOU THE HELL UP!!!!!!!!!!!!! If the Dems win an ELECTION FOR ONCE......tell me MISTER OLBERMAN? Will you say the election was STOLEN? Will there be any complaints about Voter Fraud or Voter Machine Tampering like the DEMS ALWAYS BITCH ABOUT WHENEVER THEY LOSE AN ELECTION!!!

But if the Dems win they'll Say "OHHH...no need for a recount...we're fine...we're good"

Listen this Foley scandal may have done PERMANENT DAMAGE TO THE GOP that may take months, even YEARS to overcome.

By the way I also THINK HASTERT SHOULD RESIGN SIMPLY BECAUSE I DON'T THINK HE'S DONE THAT GOOD A JOB AS SPEAKER AND BECAUSE HE'S JUST TOO MUCH TROUBLE TO KEEP AROUND.

Listen MISTER OLBERMAN if the DEMS lose the Mid-Terms it will be because of people like you saying and SPOUTING REALLY STUPID THINGS and the voters may ask themselves. "Do we really want lunnatics like this?"

Again WHEN REPUBLICANS IN CONGRESS GET IN TROUBLE WITH THE LAW THEY USUALLY RESIGN...

But when DEMOCRATS GET IN TROUBLE THEY SCREAM: "DISCRIMINATION!!! HOW DARE YOU INVESTIGATE ME!!! HELP!!! THE GOP IS WITCHHUNTING ME!!!"

I'm sick of the HYPOCRACY ON BOTH SIDES. However the GOP may NEVER AGAIN mention "Family Values" for a very long time because of this, now they are hypocrites. But so are the DEMS in saying they want the FBI to investiage Foley but they SCREAMED BLOODY MURDER when the FBI raided DEMOCRAT JEFFERSONS HOUSE IN NEW ORLEANS.

In Closing I'm SICK OF BOTH PARTIES HYPOCRACY AND WITCHHUNTING. It's a pity we went from singing "GOD BLESS AMERICA" on the steps of Congress on 9/11. Down to this...

Has Bush made severe errors on the War on Terror DUHHH!!!! HELL YES!!! BUT QUIT PUTTING WORDS INTO 'PRESIDENT BUSH'S MOUTH' MISTER OLBERMAN...BUSH NEVER...NEVER...EVER...SAID...THAT THE DEMOCRATS AND THE TERRORISTS WERE ONE IN THE SAME...IT IS YOOOUUUU WHO OWE BUSH AN APOLOGY!!!

I don't question your freedom of Speech SIR...MISTER OLBERMAN...and NEITHER DOES BUSH...He NEVER said freedom of speech was no longer valid...IT IS YOU WHO IS LYING BY SAYING BUSH SAID THOSE THINGS YOU SAID!!!

BOTH PARTIES GOP AND DEMS SHOULD BE PUT TO SHAME THIS YEAR...NEITHER PARTY DESERVES TO WIN THE MID-TERMS...BUT FOR THE LOVE OF PETE...MISTER OLBERMAN...QUIT PRETENDING BUSH IS WORSE THAN THE ACTUAL TERRORISTS OR THAT HE'S A DICTATOR THAT YOU IMAGE HIM TO BE...Because if Bush is as EVIL and as SINISTER as you say he is...then you sir WOULDN'T BE HERE RIGHT NOW...Like I said, Fidel Castro, Kim Jong Ill, and the ISLAMO-FACSITS are the REAL PEOPLE WHO KILL THOSE WHO DISAGREE WITH THEIR POLICIES...

GOOD NIGHT...AND...AHHH...SCREW IT ALL I'M TIRED OF THIS!!!

Ask yourselves why all of the viciousness? Where did this come from? Isn't there a point in government where the buck stops here, and we agree we're either driven toward the betterment of our country or toward a Civil War with no end in sight and a crippling remnant of what we once were?
When does this idolotry stop and we realize that what's at stake isn't a convoluted conversion play on the football field, but the future liberties of ourselves, children and grandchildren? I don't know about you, but I really don't want to fight with Evangelical Christians, or Southern Baptists, or soldiers in need of the GI Bill and believe in Freedom, or Appalachian folks in need of medical or dental care. I love people and taught my children to do the same. Jesus taught me early on to care for others.
But then I watch what happened on election day 2000 and 2004 and I wonder where Jesus went. It
s hard to fathom why many people voted for a president that clearly doesn't care about them, and just wants to keep his party in office and lying about a war to make it happen. They talk about small gov't not intruding in our lives, --but their debt will haunt your great grandchildren and alter your retirement in ways you might not have believed. Small government equals big power and the rich are laughing their #$%@ over you. They're not politicians and they'll admit it, they hate government and want to drown it in a bathtub--the Norquist whirlpool-- Leaders lead by winning over the enemy. This bunch pits Americans against Americans and weakens the lot-- The gap is gotten bigger. Less dollars for student loans, Pell Grants and work study. If you're not in the $200,000 a year class or above. YOur kid doesn't stand a chance.
Get it finally. At least the "evil" democrats gave a shit about your poor kids. These guys don't. Let them whinny about what Clinton did, and believe me they aren't creative enough to change the tape. But the bottom line is they don't know how to lead, to govern or protect.
I'm not affilated with any party but have just had enough of the lies.
Worst administration and congress ever.

But the bottom line is they don't know how to lead, to govern or protect.
I'm not affilated with any party but have just had enough of the lies.
Worst administration and congress ever.

Posted by: Casey at October 6, 2006 02:38 AM

They don't know how to lead. Only to divde, attack, slander and pander.

I agree with this:

"They don't know how to lead. Only to divde, attack, slander and pander."

Posted by: codas at October 6, 2006 02:57 AM

Keith Olbermann is right on target when it comes to the fk'd up sh't.

I have been watching the Dimbulbermann for some time, and have to a conclusion I have seen in relatives and friends who have a similar problem:

Keithboy is a drunk. Or a cokehead.

There can be no other explanation for someone who blathers on night after night, about wholly senseless things, without their being drunk or strung out on cocaine.

Now, I may be wrong about the drug of choice, but someone needs to investigate what Keithboy is on. Because he needs to get cleaned up, and quickly, before his bobble head explodes. After all, Jack Cafferty on CNN was a drop down drunk for years until he hit a biker in NYC and ran, and CNN finally said that he needed help or told him he would be fired.

Does anyone have MSNBC's e-mail address. I would like to send them a letter asking if they can get Keithboy into rehab.

There can be no other explanation for someone who blathers on night after night, about wholly senseless things, without their being drunk or strung out on cocaine.
Posted by: Alexander Alt at October 6, 2006 04:08 AM

Cant defend against the message? Attack the messanger. Do you feel the same way about Sean Hannity, or ORiely? Of course your right about Limbaugh.

TO ALL OF YOU OPPRESSED BRAVE FREEDOM FIGHTERS COWERING IN LONELY FEAR OF THE EVIL BUSH REGIME you make me sick.

We have just left the century that saw up to SIXTY MILLION PEOPLE dead at the hands of two men, HITLER and STALIN. And you sit in your safe comfortable homes bandying words and sentiments that boggle the mind.

Do any of you have a sense of recent history? Have any of you ever read an autobiography of a concentration camp or a gulag survivor? Pol Pot? Mao Tse Tung? Have you ever read any of the KGB files released after the fall of the Soviet Union? Are you the spawn of a vacuum?

Do you have any idea how thin the margin of victory in WW2 was? The razor edge England was teetering on in 1940 and 1941? The debt of gratitude we owe Winston Churchill (first and foremost) and Franklin Rosevelt?

I remember one autobiography I read as a teenager. It was by a young Jewish man who had been in a concentration camp when he was 16 or so. As the Russians approached from the East the SS killed as many as they could up close and personal and then culled out the strongest and fittest. Then they drove them on foot through the Eastern European winter towards Germany so their value as slave laborers would be preserved. I have read reproductions of instructions from Stalin to Party officials in various cities. Round up and eliminate five, ten, fifteen thousand for elimination. WHY? No reason other than to instill fear.

Oh yes, we really live under oppression from the evil regime of BUSH & COMPANY. How do I know? I'm told it everyday in the newspaper, on the radio, on TV and on the internet. And those cattle cars chugging off to the camps keep me awake at night. And I don't know what happened to all the family and friends who have mysteriousally disappeared.

Less then two thousand years ago Christians were a very small group in the Roman Empire. Within three hundred years the Emperor Constantine made Christianity the official state religion. Our modern age is much faster.

No way some manical zealots from the backwards middle east can subjicate us. No way. The EVIL BUSH REGIME is the real danger in the world.

I have never faced personally the horrors that hundreds of millions have faced just in my lifetime. I KNOW I would not have been a hero. But I pray I would not have been a mewling puling fool throwing rotten vegetables at Winston Churchill.

The decision facing this generation is how should we mobilize to face this new danger. I support President Bush because there is no one in the wings waiting to do more. You oppose him because because you think he is doing too much.

As I told someone else, if you're right I'll dance in the streets with you. If you are wrong God help us all.

Janet Hawkins
AKA Grammie

Radmod had a problem with J$ saying, "but we understand why "Monkey" Olbermann might feel a little self-conscious reporting on someone else's anti-Semitic name-calling."

And responded, "Is the old tactic of "repeat a lie long enough, and it becomes true?" You know as well as I that KO has not engaged in "anti-Semitic name-calling." That is a lie."

No, radmod, it is not a lie.....it is an arguable point of opinion that the slur "monkey" (oh, sorry, 'monkey') against Chris Wallace was anti-semitic. J$ and others have documented elsewhere why it could be interpreted as a racist slur....keep up with us, "punk" (oh, sorry, 'punk').

Throwing around the word, "lie" (oh, sorry, 'lie')is a tactic that the liberals in this country are undertaking....It is a dangerous path that will continue to polarize the discourse.

The "special" (oh, sorry, 'special') comment is based on the arguable point of whether "Mister" (oh, sorry, 'Mister') Bush mislead the American people. The line between fact and opinion is so blurry now, I cannot even watch "Mister" (oh, sorry, 'Mister') Olbermann anymore because it is brain numbing. Utilizing the transcripts at least allows one be reread the sentence when there is difficulty following the "logic" (oh, sorry, 'logic').

So, in "conclusion" (oh, sorry, 'conclusion'), ramrod should stop, take, take a deep breath, and try to understand the opposition's comment about something instead of going straight to demagoguery. "Lie, lie, lie, lie," gets very tedious......As seen with Franken's and Olby's wonderful ratings and book sales which are "flat" (oh, sorry, 'flat') or dropping.

Have a "good" (oh, sorry, 'good') day, all.

Whoa......Grammie, you are on fire!

Great rebuttal to the sniviling do-nothings' sniping....especially their commander-in-chief...

KEITH OLBERMANN

Dear Cee, I AM ON FIRE. Suggesting that people are the spawn of anything is pretty strong. Please tell me that the internet exposes one to this tripe and it is only an abberation.

I could have said a lot more but I don't know how to type and I don't know how this new world of computers work. Its a b***h.
I would say I envy younger people but I don't. I suspect the world has to go up in flames every two or three generations.

Its been my good fortune to have lived between the flames.

Nice to have met you Cee. I have cheered you on many times reading your posts. You and Cecelia are admirable women.

One day we.ll have to get together and have some martinis and canapes.

Janet Hawkins
AKA Grammie

"TO ALL OF YOU OPPRESSED BRAVE FREEDOM FIGHTERS COWERING IN LONELY FEAR OF THE EVIL BUSH REGIME you make me sick."

I think I'm going to rent a billboard and put this on it!

If a tree falls in the forest, does it make a sound?
Selection 3

“Meanwhile, far away, in another part of town...” oh, wait, that’s Bob Dylan’s “The Hurricane.” It should read: meanwhile, in another part of the country...

Robert, with his round head and barely there neck was thinking to himself that if he saw one more acre of corn he was going to lose his mind. He was almost expecting to come across a horse and buggy. This certainly was the styx.

What he wasn’t terribly concerned with was what had prompted him to do what he was doing. It wasn’t, after all, usual. It wasn’t normal. Why was he driving this gas guzzling Econoline down some country highway in the middle of nowhere? And where was nowhere? Why was he compelled to go nowhere? And once he got there, what was he really going to do? What was he going to accomplish?

Those questions were the furthest thing from his mind, because if he had to answer them, well, he was either on a quest of some sort or deep within the clutches of a mental disorder. What he could tell you, were you to ever think to ask, was that “Sarah Knight” was the female equivalent to being named “John Smith.” There was at least one address registered to someone named Sarah Knight for each of the fifty states and D.C., and in many cases as many as 135. If you googled the name all this useless information about some long dead socialite named Sarah Kemble Knight came up in the results. So, then, there were all the other Sarah Knights to wade through... there was some Australian woman, some woman from the Joint Information Systems Committee acting as the programme manager for the e-Learning and Pedagogy, some woman teaching fourth grade in Nixa Missouri, some girl from the University of Maine, an amazon.com customer residing in Suitland, Maryland, some woman who directs movies, some University of Leicester Lecturer whose main interests are in Renaissance literature, particularly comedy and satire in English and Latin, and in the intellectual and literary culture of the early modern universities, a fashion design major from Tulsa, Oklahoma who graduated from the University of Cincinnati, some Alumni of the University of Arkansas, some woman teaching math in Anchorage, Alaska... Cripe, it was like “Sarah Knight” was this utterly common name shared by these virtually interchangeable individuals, distinguishable only by the fact that none of them seemed to be the Sarah Knight that Robert was looking for. He had some facts, and in spite of the endless stream of females named Sarah Knight with online profiles — they just didn’t seem to jive.

He would have never admitted to anyone what he had spent at those online sites for profiles of public records of people named Sarah Knight, or just how many cities he had since crossed off his list (which was many at this point). He was road weary, and he was hoping that this next one was going to be it. Mind you, he wasn’t precisely certain of why it was so important that he find this girl, just that he find her.

Robert knew, of course, that there were rules. Robert was fond of rules, and noticed frequently any attempts to side or bend rules by people he disliked. Robert went to great pains to see to it that those rule breakers were informed of the rules they had broken or bent or had never before been aware of. He was conscious, of course, that in spite of the fact that as the webmaster of a forum he could easily view someone’s IP address — that it was actually illegal to post personal information about his posters on the basis of their IP addresses on the very forums on which they posted — as that was against the Data Protection rules of the forum — which as the webmaster and user of someone else’s copyrighted software he would be in violation of. Lest someone take a screen cap of the offense and send it off to the proprietor.

But, anyway, there he was in the Econoline, traveling down yet another country highway flanked with corn fields and other crops that as a city boy he could not identify.

Zeke was sitting just inside the dirty oversized glass window which took up most of the front wall of the living room, or rather the room they chose to use as the living room of the rickety old farmhouse. He looked up just briefly to see the van drive by, only to watch with both amusement and suspicion as the van stopped, reversed, and parked in front of the long, winding driveway. He quietly folded the screen down on his lap top and slowly moved away from the window. He stood at the back of the room where he could watch the man who seemed to fail at his attempt to walk unseen through the mess of trees that obscured the house from the road. Normal people simply walked down the driveway.

But as this fat (expletive deleted) did a poor job of slinking his way through the trees, Zeke noticed that he recognized the poor silly bastard, while simultaneously wondering if this ninny was such a city-boy that he didn’t realize that folks out in the country tend to notice when an entire flock of birds flies off in a noisy huff, which generally only happens in the sudden company of people. Stealth was not a word that Zeke would have ever applied to Robert, especially not now.

“What does this ****er want?” Zeke wondered to himself. Didn’t he have a television show that he disliked watching to watch and then compose a poorly written editorial on? What was he doing out here in the middle of nowhere? And did he really think that he was out of sight?

Zeke watched as the face cupped by hands appeared pressed against the bottom of the window, and as a small cloud of fog then appeared on the window. In typical fashion, this was followed by a hand wiping off the window, before the peering face appeared again.

“Sh**,” Zeke cackled in his low gruff voice, “would it ever occur to him that this is gun country?” Zeke briefly amused himself with the thought of going out the back and sneaking up on this poor silly bastard from behind just to watch him piss himself, but that wasn’t what he was going to do...

**to be continued.
© Sarah Knight, all rights reserved.

Sarah, I won't give that polite society respect of Dear. Take a hike. You have less of a life than I do.

Who cares what you have to say. If you can't say it in a million words, put a sock in it.

Janet Hawkins
AKA Grammie

Sarah, I am calling a forensic psychiatrist -- I believe you may be dangerous.

You have "Borderline Personality Disorder," and I suggest you get help.

Has this idiot ever had anything substantial to say about Olberman? Seems that his commentary is a lot of vague references and ad hominems.

Olberman has a lot to say and I don't see anyone refuting it very well. Maybe because it is the truth...

"BTW, any word on BobbyC's phone-in with Dr. Phil?"

I posted elsewhere that I was bumped for time. I am waiting to hear when they will air the show they taped yesterday.

So, I wasted an hour waiting around to get called. They did like the pre-interview with me and said they will be doing other shows on the internet/blogging and I am not on their list. So, that's something.

PS, this is hardly the first time I have been bumped. I was booked several times on MSNBC and was bumped each time including when the Pope died shortly before I was to go on.

Well, Rob-Bob...

I wish you'd expound a bit here on how internet blog sites can be created to launder the news for the MSM. The thing with the pedophile blogsite and Foley has me curioius about those dynamics.

I'd also like to see you and Johnny live-blog a Countdown episode one night. Especially after putting away a few drinks and in your teetotler case...maybe having had a few doublestrenght shots of espresso...

A live blog of Olbermann would be tough. Keith is extremely talented in providing inuendo, falsehoods, and baseless context in minimum amount of words. It takes some time to decipher the lunacy of Olbyspeak, but if anyone could do it, it is Johnny.

TO ALL OF YOU OPPRESSED BRAVE FREEDOM FIGHTERS COWERING IN LONELY FEAR OF THE EVIL BUSH REGIME you make me sick.

We have just left the century that saw up to SIXTY MILLION PEOPLE dead at the hands of two men, HITLER and STALIN. And you sit in your safe comfortable homes bandying words and sentiments that boggle the mind.

Janet, because I don't think that the current administration is being wise in it's decisions on the war on terror is not a reason to be lumped in inadvertenly with the death of sixty million people. I know it may suprise some of you to know that some people who oppose the administrations policies do so because they are very aware of the dangers facing us currently and would like nothing better than to have a well thought out and strategicly planned policy against people who would love to see us taken down. Just because they are doing (something) doesn't make them effective. As a matter of fact, I think it can be argued that they have made things worse. I don't trust them. i question their real motives. I believe, rightly or wrongly that a large portion of the people that have been supporting them are doing so only because they need to believe in their leaders. It would just be too much for them to go against all information they are fed daily from the republicin media machine that has been steam rolling this country for to long. And one of the things they do is convince you that when you encounter someone who is not one of them, they must be a socialist liberal, therefore guilty of Lenin, Stalin and the rest. Apeasing the terrorists. Haters of America first. It's called propaganda, and it keeps people in power who don't deserve it.

Johnny Dollar said:

"Now, much to their shock and amazement, a federal appeals judge reversed the lower court order, and 'domestic spying' can continue pending further proceedings."

Johnny, you say you're a lawyer and yet you completely blew this! It's not a reversal, it's a stay pending appeal. There's a difference. The lower court's ruling simply cannot be enacted. It hasn't been struck down.

Also, everybody expected a stay to be entered while the case went up to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. When the Sixth Cirxuit actually decides the case, then there will be news.

"

No way some manical zealots from the backwards middle east can subjicate us. No way. The EVIL BUSH REGIME is the real danger in the world.

I have never faced personally the horrors that hundreds of millions have faced just in my lifetime. I KNOW I would not have been a hero. But I pray I would not have been a mewling puling fool throwing rotten vegetables at Winston Churchill.

The decision facing this generation is how should we mobilize to face this new danger. I support President Bush because there is no one in the wings waiting to do more. You oppose him because because you think he is doing too much.

As I told someone else, if you're right I'll dance in the streets with you. If you are wrong God help us all."

Grammie, with some respect, I think your entire post was emotional tripe and lacked objective insight. Hitler's situation and rise to power was a result of the weariness of europe after WWI combined with a weak, desperate people who happily fell for his lies; there's not a meaningful power in that position today other than perhaps North Korea. Stalin's rise after the Russian Civil War gave him the same situation as Hitler: A weakened country, a desperate people, a gullible populace. Note that both of these dictators rose to power after cataclysmic events; Iran and N.Korea have been stable for a long time.

We're the greatest nation on the face of the earth. We are not in danger of islamofascist takeover - and I say that with conviction because in 1990, a single one of our 20-odd Ohio-class subs could take out every major russian city with nukes to spare; in an age of nuclear deterrence, there is absolutely no reason to fear loss of our sovereignty by force. China's standing army (and again I'm going off of 90's data) outnumbered ours by something like 20:1 ... but do you think we really need to fear a chinese invasion? Ever? Not in a post-WWII world, not as a nuclear power.

What we do need to be cautious of is terrorism - turning those weapons of mass destruction against us. That is more of a police role than an aggressor role; covert operations, intelligence reports, better border control, etc.

Our society is significantly dumbed down as far as I can tell. I am not a huge KO fan, but here's the difference between me and half this board; I listen to him and then check to see if he's telling the truth. In this case, he certainly is. Bush is putting words in the democrats mouths practically nonstop, and has been for a good while. If you listen to right wing pundits, same deal. I don't like the left much more than the next guy, but I will not be lied to consistantly. That is not the way to get my vote. Give me the truth.

"I'm not going to take any advice on morality from a party that accepts 100K in hush money from a pedophile."
-- Congressmen Steve Ford, Jr.

==========

"The decision facing this generation is how should we mobilize to face this new danger. I support President Bush because there is no one in the wings waiting to do more. You oppose him because because you think he is doing too much."

no, the decision facing this generation is how to combat the imminent threat of american fascism. and there is an entire country ready to combat both the external terrorists and the internal fascists -- and they're not waiting in the wings. and yes, we do oppose fascists who "do too much", that's what the constitution is all about -- guaranteeing checks on abuses of power.

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

"None of the mentioned members of Congress in this thread are pedophiles. Pedophilia refers to sexual fascination or acts with children 13 years of age or younger."

wrong.

pe-do-phile
noun; Psychiatry.
an adult who is sexually attracted to young children.

I am new to this site but I see no purpose. The commentary is at best sophomoric. If you want to indicate disagreement or discontent with someone or something at least do it with intelligence.

This reads as a high school underground newspaper taking immature swipes at an unpopular teacher.

I am new to this site but I see no purpose. The commentary is at best sophomoric. If you want to indicate disagreement or discontent with someone or something at least do it with intelligence.

This reads as a high school underground newspaper taking immature swipes at an unpopular teacher.

He called Roger Ailes "fat ass"
Keith truly exhibits no class
There's so much lying
Keith looks like he's crying
Special Komments prove that he's crass

> It's not a reversal, it's a stay pending appeal.

I'm sorry but I disagree. It IS a reversal, not a reversal of the original opinion, but a reversal of the order granting the stay. Which is precisely what I said. Olby made a big deal about the stay being ordered in the first place, and it's not mere happenstance that when the stay is lifted he just didn't have time to mention it for two nights in a row.

Codas, you really had me going there for a while. Until I read I had inadvertently lumped you in. The last time I used that word was fifty years ago in its proper context.

Your statement indicates in the beginning you are addressing me. Than you veer off into 'some of you and go on with the following:
=======
I don't trust them. i question their real motives. I believe, rightly or wrongly that a large portion of the people that have been supporting them are doing so only because they need to believe in their leaders. It would just be too much for them to go against all information they are fed daily from the republicin media machine that has been steam rolling this country for to long. And one of the things they do is convince you that when you encounter someone who is not one of them, they must be a socialist liberal, therefore guilty of Lenin, Stalin and the rest. Apeasing the terrorists. Haters of America first. It's called propaganda, and it keeps people in power who don't deserve it.
===========

You pretend to have read what I wrote and then go on to reguritate the same old crapola. Are you Hyacinth from the BBC?

Codas, you are persona non grata with me.

Janet Hawkins
AKA Grammie

Just found this on another site, interesting.

"RESUME OF GEORGE W. BUSH
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington , DC 20520

Education And Experience:

Law Enforcement - I was arrested in Kennebunkport, Maine, in 1976 for driving under the influence of alcohol. I pled guilty, paid a fine, and had my driver's license suspended for 30 days. My Texas driving record has been "lost" and is not available.

Military - I joined the Texas Air National Guard and went AWOL. I refused to take a drug test or answer any questions about my drug use. By joining the Texas Air National Guard, I was able to avoid combat duty in Vietnam.

College - I graduated from Yale University with a low C average. I was a cheerleader.

Past Work Experience - I ran for U.S. Congress and lost. I began my career in the oil business in Midland, Texas, in 1975. I bought an oil company, but couldn't find any oil in Texas . The company went bankrupt shortly after I sold all my stock. I bought the Texas Rangers baseball team in a sweetheart deal that took land using taxpayer money. With the help of my father and our friends in the oil industry, including Enron CEO Ken Lay, I was elected governor of Texas.

Accomplishments as Governor of Texas - I changed Texas pollution laws to favor power and oil companies, making Texas the most polluted state in the Union. During my tenure, Houston replaced Los Angeles as the most smog-ridden city in America. I cut taxes and bankrupted the Texas treasury to the tune of billions in borrowed money. I set the record for the most executions by any governor in American history.

With the help of my brother, the governor of Florida, and my father's appointments to the Supreme Court, I became President after losing the popular vote by over 500,000 votes.

Accomplishments As President - I am the first President in U.S. history to enter office with a
criminal record. I invaded and occupied two countries at a continuing cost of over one billion dollars per week. I spent the U.S. surplus and effectively bankrupted the U.S. Treasury. I shattered the record for the largest annual deficit in U.S. history. I set an economic record for most private bankruptcies filed in any 12-month period. I set the all-time record for most foreclosures in a 12-month period. I set the all-time record for the biggest drop in the history of
the US stock market.

In my first year in office, over 2 million Americans lost their jobs and that trend continues every month. I'm proud that the members of my cabinet are the richest of any Administration in U.S. history. My "poorest millionaire," Condoleezza Rice, had a Chevron oil tanker named after her.

I set the record for most campaign fund-raising trips by a U.S. President. I am the all-time U.S. and world record-holder for receiving the most corporate campaign donations. My largest lifetime campaign contributor, and one of my best friends, Kenneth Lay, presided over the largest corporate bankruptcy fraud in U.S. History, Enron.

I presided over the highest gasoline prices in U.S. history. I changed the U.S. policy to allow convicted criminals to be awarded government contracts. I appointed more convicted criminals to administration than any President in U.S. history.

I created the Ministry of Homeland Security, the largest bureaucracy in the history of the United States government. I've broken more international treaties than any President in U.S. history.
I am the first President in U.S. history to have the United Nations remove the U.S. from the Human Rights Commission.
I refused to allow inspectors access to U.S. "prisoners of war" detainees and thereby have refused to abide by the Geneva Convention. I am the first President in history to refuse United Nations election inspectors (during the 2002 U.S. election).

I set the record for fewest numbers of press conferences of any President since the advent of television. I set the all-time record for most days on vacation in any one-year period. After taking off the entire month of August, I presided over the worst security failure in U.S. history.

I garnered the most sympathy for the U.S. after the World Trade Center attacks and less than a year later made the U.S. the most hated country in the world, the largest failure of diplomacy in world history. I have set the all-time record for most people worldwide to simultaneously protest me in public venues (15 million people), shattering the record for protests against any person in the history of mankind.

I am the first President in U.S. history to order an unprovoked, pre-emptive attack and the military occupation of a sovereign nation. I did so against the will of the United Nations, the majority of U.S. citizens, and the world community.

I have cut health care benefits for war veterans and support a cut in duty benefits for active duty troops and their families.in wartime.

I am the first President in history to have a majority of Europeans (71%) view my presidency as the biggest threat to world peace and security.

I am supporting development of a nuclear "Tactical Bunker Buster," a WMD.

I have so far failed to fulfill my pledge to bring Osama Bin Laden [sic] to justice.

Records And References

All records of my tenure as governor of Texas are now in my father's library, sealed and unavailable for public view. All records of SEC investigations into my insider trading and my bankrupt companies are sealed in secrecy and unavailable for public view. All records or minutes from meetings that I, or my Vice-President, attended regarding public energy policy are sealed in secrecy and unavailable for public review.

I am a member of the Republican Party.

PLEASE CONSIDER MY EXPERIENCE WHEN VOTING IN THE 2006 MID-TERM ELECTIONS."

I need to go fact check it.. hadn't heard that 70% european stat before. The rest is pretty much old news.

Thought at second glance, those economic factors on job loss are off. Still, interesting.

"Hats off to you, Keith Olbermann! Hats off to champions of objectivity, balance and peace"

Too funny. The implication that Olbermann has any of those qualities is rather amusing.

"Hats off to you, Keith Olbermann! Hats off to champions of objectivity, balance and peace"

Too funny. The implication that Olbermann has any of those qualities is rather amusing.

-----------------------

True or false: "177 of the opposition party said 'You know, we don't think we ought to be listening to the conversations of terrorists.'" (Bush)

Anyone with a shred of objectivity? False.

True or false? ""If you listen closely to some of the leaders of the Democratic Party," the President said at another fundraiser Monday in Nevada, "it sounds like they think the best way to protect the American people is — wait until we're attacked again."" (Bush)

Anyone with a shred of objectivity? False. This means taking the time to actually listen to what they say, not what a pundit or newscaster spins them into saying.

True or False?

"No Democrat, sir, has ever said anything approaching the suggestion that the best means of self-defense is to "wait until we're attacked again."

No critic, no commentator, no reluctant Republican in the Senate, has ever said anything that any responsible person could even have exaggerated into the slander you spoke in Nevada on Monday night, nor the slander you spoke in California on Tuesday, nor the slander you spoke in Arizona on Wednesday… nor whatever is next." (Olb)

True. Well, the second part is a tad subjective, but it's not unreasonable.

--------------

I'm not for KO. I'm for objectivity and reason in discourse. I'm not seeing a lack of objectivity in his effort; at least he quotes accurately, unlike our president.

Posted by: Robert Cox at October 6, 2006 09:27 AM

Damn, that's too bad. Quite frankly, I admire anyone who's willing to do anything like that. As you doubt have noticed, I tend to be laborious in my commentary. I doubt I could ever function well in an interview.

Bill O'Reilly's book isn't selling well? If I heard correctly on Bill's Radio show it will be showing up on the New York Times best seller list this Sunday.

Keith's book didn't make it into the list at all, topping out around #18?

Opps! Looks like we might have another fabrication from the "Merchant Of Stupidity"!

I just got done watching (well not really I listened while I took a dump) to the latest thrill packed "Special Comments For The Short Bus Crowd" segment. Somebody posted that it sounded the same as the other ones.

They were right! Let's see somebody use to do that. Oh yeah that Hitler guy. The one Keith likes to do his signature salutes to.? But Hitler had that little buddy of his say the same line over and over. Can't Keith find a little buddy in his "Phone Booth of Friends?"

Do you think Jill buys in bulk?

Oh yeah! For somebody who talks big and bad, How many different points of view did "Chicken Little Keith" have on this week?

Zero?....Oh yeah, why we don't want "The Merchant Of Stupidity" looking...........Stupid.

Special to Loons! The Post Office would like to know if any of you have the tracking number for "The Karl Rove Indictments" it seems they got lost in the mail. I know, I know. A Republican must run the Post Office.

When Loons post IMs. Do you think they do it with one hand?

Well I see that somebody had to post, book ratings mean nothing. Damm it took that long? O'Reilly has been ahead of Keith's book since 9-26 and were just getting that comment now?

Bill will be on "The View" soon and I'm sure Rosie is going to debate him on his book. Wait, Rosie/Bill different points of view? Debate! That never happens on Keith's show. Maybe Rosie has something Keith doesn't. A SET OF BALLS!

Oh yeah, Keith won't even go on that show. He might have to debate that one conservative woman.

Cluck! Cluck! Cluck! Chicken Little.

Funny sidebar, I was over at the Media Matters website and in one of the comment sections a lib posted how he didn't like it if they won this way (Mark Foley) cause it would be winning ugly and they should be winning on their platform and ideas. Of course they jumped on him like rabid dogs but thats not what shocked me. I was shocked that there was anybody who still thought like that on the lib side.

How's this for a prediction. MSNBC is looking into cutting all their live prime time news shows because they all have constant crappy ratings.

So think of it. Keith loses his job, doesn't get hired anywhere. Doesn't have any friends left, so next year insted of getting free tickets into Yankee Stadium. He can't even afford to buy his way into the bleachers. So, Keith will have to hang out across the street at "Stan's Scoreboard Bar" saying. "Do you know who I am?" Yeah your the guy who use to have the crappy cable news show! Hey! get the has-been in the corner another Ballantine!

But don't worry Loons he will always have a roof over his head on Central Park South. He probibly sublets a rent controled apartment.

Oh but wait, what if he has to move back home. No worry, Libs love living home well into their 40's!!!!

Alright I've had enough fun. Back to work. Everybody have a nice weekend.

Nah! One last thought. Actual sex between two consenting adults in the Oral Office, no big deal! Internet sex between two consenting adults? Very Bad! Terrible!

Fair and Balanced thoughts from you're freinds on the Lunatic Fringe.

Lunchbreak, or should I call you Hyacinth? That was a very erudite dissertation on the causes of the rise of fascism in post WWI Germany. I can think of a few points you left out and I am sure others wiser than either of us could come up with more.

However, that was not what I was addressing. To leave no doubt of the thrust of my post, I will reproduce it below.

TO ALL OF YOU OPPRESSED BRAVE FREEDOM FIGHTERS COWERING IN LONELY FEAR OF THE EVIL BUSH REGIME

The point was that a large segment of our population fear our current administration more than flourinated water. That is what is scary.

I wish that we were so powerful that we had nothing to fear, not even fear itself. But NO NATION has lasted longer then the Roman Empire. And they fell to diffuse pressures. And that led to the dark ages.

But, lunchbreak, when I get to the end of your screed its the same-o same-o.
==========
Our society is significantly dumbed down as far as I can tell. I am not a huge KO fan, but here's the difference between me and half this board; I listen to him and then check to see if he's telling the truth. In this case, he certainly is. Bush is putting words in the democrats mouths practically nonstop, and has been for a good while. If you listen to right wing pundits, same deal. I don't like the left much more than the next guy, but I will not be lied to consistantly. That is not the way to get my vote. Give me the truth.
===========

Lunchbreak, I reccomend a permanent lunch break for you untill you can stop spewing out the same old spiel that all the other loons do. You impress as having too much pride to run with that pack

Janet Hawkins
AKA Grammie

Believe me, I'm not a violent person, but if I saw Olberdouche walking down the street I would kick his ass.

It's not a reversal, it's a stay pending appeal.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 6, 2006 10:50 AM

From what I've read, you are correct. 'Reversal', IMO, was deliberately used to make it seem as they disagreed with the lower court ruling. That was not the case (yet).

This website is a joke.

Keith Olbermann virtually effortlessly dominates the neo-con mafia, Bill O'reilly, and the rest of the far-right-wing megalomaniacal madmen.

All you haters keep huffing and puffing, but you can't blow down cable news' House of Truth: Keith Olbermann.

"Believe me, I'm not a violent person, but if I saw Olberdouche walking down the street I would kick his ass."

then by definition, you are a violent person, tiny mind -- well worthy of the party of opportunistic torturers and war profiteers and pedophiles.

"...Records And References

All records of my tenure as governor of Texas are now in my father's library, sealed and unavailable for public view. All records of SEC investigations into my insider trading and my bankrupt companies are sealed in secrecy and unavailable for public view. All records or minutes from meetings that I, or my Vice-President, attended regarding public energy policy are sealed in secrecy and unavailable for public review."

Is all of the above true? Has Bush ever been asked about why these various records are sealed or unavailable?

It's hard to come to any other conclusion than that these records, taken together and individually, would damn him if released. I can't think of another likely reason why any of this information would be sealed.

As this information slowly gets released over the next several years or decades (and it all certainly eventually will,) Bush, and those that blindly supported him, will be judged for what they really were - black marks on our nations history.

Bush may end up being this country's greatest single shame, and I really mean that - I don't think there is a single person or event that quite matches him.

"...Records And References

All records of my tenure as governor of Texas are now in my father's library, sealed and unavailable for public view. All records of SEC investigations into my insider trading and my bankrupt companies are sealed in secrecy and unavailable for public view. All records or minutes from meetings that I, or my Vice-President, attended regarding public energy policy are sealed in secrecy and unavailable for public review."

Is all of the above true? Has Bush ever been asked about why these various records are sealed or unavailable?

It's hard to come to any other conclusion than that these records, taken together and individually, would damn him if released. I can't think of another likely reason why any of this information would be sealed.

As this information slowly gets released over the next several years or decades (and it all certainly eventually will,) Bush, and those that blindly supported him, will be judged for what they really were - black marks on our nations history.

Bush may end up being this country's greatest single shame, and I really mean that - I don't think there is a single person or event that quite matches him.

"TO ALL OF YOU OPPRESSED BRAVE FREEDOM FIGHTERS COWERING IN LONELY FEAR OF THE EVIL BUSH REGIME you make me sick."

Janet, do you want to explain just who it is you are addressing here? There seems to be a creeping tendency on the administration side of things to just talk to the air. Are you guys aware that the characters you lecture to are mostly made up? What would you think about one of us Loons just posting wild rants based on characters we created from being overexposed to riverdog? Do you think this kind of behavior is in line with your calls for decency and moderation?

I guess everyone likes to cut loose from time to time. But shouting about how other people make you sick isn't the right way to approach things. Things are shrill enough, don't you think?

VOICE OF BUSH'S GOD REVEALED TO BE CHENEY ON INTERCOM

WASHINGTON, DC -- Telephone logs recorded by the National Security Agency and obtained by Congress as part of an ongoing investigation suggest that the vice president used the Oval Office intercom system to address President Bush at crucial moments, giving categorical directives in a voice the president believed to be that of God. While journalists and presidential historians had long noted Bush's deep faith and Cheney's powerful influence in the White House, few had drawn a direct correlation between the two until transcripts of meetings recently became available. In a transcript of an intercom exchange recorded in March 2002, a voice positively identified as the vice president's identifies himself as "the Lord thy God" and promotes the invasion of Iraq, as well as the use of torture in prisoner interrogations.

Grammie,

I'm not a regular on this board, nor do I run to others to get my opinions - they are entirely my own. In regards to

"Lunchbreak, I reccomend a permanent lunch break for you untill you can stop spewing out the same old spiel that all the other loons do. You impress as having too much pride to run with that pack"

If my scphiel is the same as the rest, perhaps we're on to something. I do take pride in having thought about my positions, and additionally, I take pride in being careful not to shove words in my opponent's mouth:

"TO ALL OF YOU OPPRESSED BRAVE FREEDOM FIGHTERS COWERING IN LONELY FEAR OF THE EVIL BUSH REGIME

The point was that a large segment of our population fear our current administration more than flourinated water. That is what is scary."

Where is this segment of our population "cowering in fear" ? My instant read on this: Propaganda. Bullcrap. Hooey. BS. You are spewing excrement. You unjustly attribute falsisms to percieved opponents in the name of ... what, I'm not sure.

Exercising our rights as citizens to call an administration on its lies, illegal practices, and immoral debate style (all of which are documented, not just my opinions) is what makes this a great country. I may not agree with your opinion, but I will defend your right to have it. That said, I think you (and everyone) should spend more time thinking about the verity of what you are saying, and less time following this administration's tactic of blathering on about things the opposition didn't say.

Here's what gets me. It seems to come as a HUGE shock to Olbermann to learn that politicians lie, hedge, and spin the truth. I have news for him and his addled-brained fans: it's called politics and all politicians do it, both Republicans AND Democrats. Was he this outraged though when Clinton was lying and doing an intern in his office? Nope. Don't recall a single outraged "special comment" on KO's about THAT. But perhaps that's because KO has no problem with a forty-something guy boning a 20-something year old woman. Man on fan. That's what Olbermann's name apparently translates out to in German.

Since today I have far more time on my hands than normal,

"It seems to come as a HUGE shock to Olbermann to learn that politicians lie, hedge, and spin the truth. I have news for him and his addled-brained fans: it's called politics and all politicians do it, both Republicans AND Democrats. Was he this outraged though when Clinton was lying and doing an intern in his office?"

A point on this. A good percentage of the country (and most of the world) could care less about our President getting head in office, from another adult, with consent. That's pretty tame when you take history into account. What was reprehensible was his lying in court about it.

This administration lies on a regular basis, and not about a blowjob. I wish I'd known better in 2000.

I should add in my comment that I don't want to see our Nation fall, Grammie. However, I am not sure what can be done to prevent the collision course of culturalism we're on in this country... other than better education, more intelligent and factual debate, and a better system of accountability by both our media and our government, and by each of us, the people.

True or false? ""If you listen closely to some of the leaders of the Democratic Party," the President said at another fundraiser Monday in Nevada, "it sounds like they think the best way to protect the American people is � wait until we're attacked again."" (Bush)

One could reasonably construe that by opposing coercive interrogation, including such things as loud annoying music and sleep deprivation, while labeling all of these techniques as torture, is in fact like waiting for the other shoe to drop.

Wanting to afford suspected FOREIGN terrorists the same constitutional rights as AMERICAN CITIZENS is like saying "these people are no different from us" and should be treated accordingly. In a war, one must recognize the enemy and treat them accordingly, unless of course your objective is to lose. No one is suggesting that American citizens should lose their right to Habeus Corpus only that intellegence concerns and pragmatism for that matter, suggests that trying these enemy combatants in civilian court as counter-productive.

Refusing to acknowledge this argument by shouting things like Bush is pro-torture or this is a facist regime in order to garner votes and delay appropriate legislation in approaching this NEW WAR is like waiting for us to be attacked again. The hyperbole is what must go, not the debate. Debate the proposition on the merrits.

Bush is opposed on everything all the time for sometimes legitimate and often political reasons all the while questioning his motives as if he is the second coming of Adolf Hitler is so ridiculous that can you blame him for feeling as if the dems don't, in fact, want to do anything real, but instead, are more interested in scoring political points. Because political capital is needed to garner legislation, Bush too, must engage in said hyperbole and more accurately, stereotypes.

"One could reasonably construe that by opposing coercive interrogation, including such things as loud annoying music and sleep deprivation, while labeling all of these techniques as torture, is in fact like waiting for the other shoe to drop."

While simultaneously proposing increasing the number and training of our covert operatives around the globe ? This is exactly what happens with the lazy citizens of our nation: they only listen to half of an argument. Bush's half.

"Wanting to afford suspected FOREIGN terrorists the same constitutional rights as AMERICAN CITIZENS is like saying "these people are no different from us" and should be treated accordingly. In a war, one must recognize the enemy and treat them accordingly, unless of course your objective is to lose. No one is suggesting that American citizens should lose their right to Habeus Corpus only that intellegence concerns and pragmatism for that matter, suggests that trying these enemy combatants in civilian court as counter-productive."

A) We're not at war, unless I missed a declaration.
B) The provisions the opposition was voting against was due to the fact that Bush can define "enemy combatant" any way he chooses,
C) Yes, we're all about giving rights to the people we suspect of criminal activity - that's what makes us a country of laws. We tried the Japanese and the Germans after WWII. Affording the enemy the same rights as an american citizen gives our system a moral leg to stand on. Without it, we're reprehensible.

"Bush is opposed on everything all the time for sometimes legitimate and often political reasons all the while questioning his motives as if he is the second coming of Adolf Hitler is so ridiculous that can you blame him for feeling as if the dems don't, in fact, want to do anything real, but instead, are more interested in scoring political points."

Let me get this straight, you're claiming the party that is in the minority and has had the vast majority of their legislation attempts shot down over the past few years doesn't want to "do anything real" ? They've been trying.

Again, listening to half an argument.

But perhaps that's because KO has no problem with a forty-something guy boning a 20-something year old woman.

Why would he? it is a perfectly legal affair between consenting adults and frankly does not affect KO's life. Now lying to get us into a war on the other hand does.

The legislature hasn't formally declared WAR since we declared war against the Japanese.

But...

The president of the United States has no clear constitutional authority to declare war without congressional approval. However, the U.S. Supreme Court has determined that the president, as commander-in-chief of the military, does have the authority to recognize a "state of war" initiated against the United States and may in these circumstances unilaterally send U.S. troops into battle.

U.S. presidents after World War II have assumed most of the authority to send U.S. troops into battle. The Korean War (1950-1953), for example, was regarded by the U.S. government as a police action rather than as a war, and President Harry S. Truman never sought a declaration of war from Congress. And in 1964 Congress passed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, which effectively ceded to President Lyndon B. Johnson the ability to wage war against Vietnam. Congress passed a similar resolution on January 12, 1991, authorizing President George H. W. Bush to use force against Iraq in the Persian Gulf War.

The current president Bush also never sought a formal declaration of war from Congress. Instead, he requested, and received, the authority to use armed forces "as he determines to be necessary and appropriate" to defend American interests against "the continuing threat posed by Iraq."

A) We're not at war, unless I missed a declaration.

But that's the whole point isn't it? You and others view this as a police threat.

B) The provisions the opposition was voting against was due to the fact that Bush can define "enemy combatant" any way he chooses,

So..... The president can pardon anyone he chooses. FDR had already set this precedent with inturnment.

C) Yes, we're all about giving rights to the people we suspect of criminal activity - that's what makes us a country of laws. We tried the Japanese and the Germans after WWII. Affording the enemy the same rights as an american citizen gives our system a moral leg to stand on. Without it, we're reprehensible.

Again, INTURNMENT CAMPS. We detained people simply because they were Japanese or German until the end of the war. Nobody is even remotel suggesting that. Hell we don't even deny propaganda and hate from being aspoused from madrasas.

"The sky is falling!!!! The sky is falling!!!! middle eastern folks get extra scrutiny at airports!!!! Bush is a Nazi!!!!

How about some historical perspective for God's sake?

>One could reasonably construe that by opposing >coercive interrogation, including such things >as loud annoying music and sleep deprivation, >while labeling all of these techniques as >torture, is in fact like waiting for the other >shoe to drop

Wow! could we make a bigger strawman if we tried? here let me make my own strawman to respond to this. if you are for the war in iraq (which recent reports show have increased U.S. danger.) then you are for America being attacked again. Feels good to strawman an argument. Now since I have summed up your position as being for the U.S. getting attacked again we can conclude you are an enemy combatant and send you to guantanamo.

>One could reasonably construe that by opposing >coercive interrogation, including such things >as loud annoying music and sleep deprivation, >while labeling all of these techniques as >torture, is in fact like waiting for the other >shoe to drop

Wow! could we make a bigger strawman if we tried? here let me make my own strawman to respond to this. if you are for the war in iraq (which recent reports show have increased U.S. danger.) then you are for America being attacked again. Feels good to strawman an argument. Now since I have summed up your position as being for the U.S. getting attacked again we can conclude you are an enemy combatant and send you to guantanamo.

"But that's the whole point isn't it? You and others view this as a police threat."

Again, did I miss a declaration? - "The current president Bush also never sought a formal declaration of war from Congress." ... So, are we at war, or not? It's a rather serious difference.

"B) The provisions the opposition was voting against was due to the fact that Bush can define "enemy combatant" any way he chooses,
So..... The president can pardon anyone he chooses. FDR had already set this precedent with inturnment."

Because your underlying (misguided) assumption is that American Citizens wouldn't lose Habeus Corpus. See "any way he chooses" in a new light. The opposition actually pays attention to nuance of terminology.

""The sky is falling!!!! The sky is falling!!!! middle eastern folks get extra scrutiny at airports!!!! Bush is a Nazi!!!!
How about some historical perspective for God's sake?"

I'm all about historical perspective. Stalin and Hitler lied their way into power and the masses bought it. I don't want to see us do the same thing. Incidentally, while I'm sure your intention wasn't to make vast assumptions about my politics and preferences and try to put words in my mouth, I'm all for racial profiling as far as screening goes. I don't think it tramples anyone's rights. There's a huge difference between racial profiling at airports or borders, and unlawful detentions in violation of the geneva convention using the terminology "at war" while simultaneously ducking the responsibility of actually declaring it.

Less you missed the hairs I split,

FDR was a wartime president making decisions during a declared war. Interment camps were during a time of declared war. I'll just cut from a source:

"Japanese American Internment refers to the forcible relocation of approximately 110,000[1] Japanese and Japanese Americans (62 percent of whom were United States citizens)[2] [3] from the west coast during World War II to hastily constructed housing facilities called "War Relocation Camps" in remote portions of the nation's interior.

President Franklin D. Roosevelt authorized the internment with Executive Order 9066, which allowed local military commanders to designate "military areas" as "exclusion zones", from which "any or all persons may be excluded." Twelve days later, this power was used to declare that all people of Japanese ancestry were excluded from the entire Pacific coast, including all of California and most of Oregon and Washington.[4] In 1944, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the exclusion, removal, and detention, arguing that it is permissible to curtail the civil rights of a racial group when there is a "pressing public necessity."[5]

Some compensation for property losses was paid in 1948, but most internees were unable to fully recover their losses.[3] In 1988, President Ronald Reagan signed legislation which apologized for the internment on behalf of the U.S. government. The legislation stated that government actions were based on "race prejudice, war hysteria, and a failure of political leadership",[6] and beginning in 1990, the government paid reparations to surviving internees.

The American camps were only meant to isolate the Japanese, in contrast to the Nazi concentration camps which existed to eliminate their captives. Some 120,000 U.S. residents of German and Italian descent across the country were also arrested and interned as security risks, but no compensation was ever paid to them.[7][8] Similar internments occurred across Canada as well."

I'd like to thank left wing dumbass Keith Olbermann for helping me get an 11 point lead in my senate race in Virginia. Keep saying I'm a racist.... dumbass.

Lunchbreak.....George Bush can not be President after January 2007. That's, it no more. The current congress is about to be held accountable in an election in one month.....lets talk about our decay into fascism the day after election day and see if your, "democracy was saved!"

By the way, in regards to your examples of Hitler and Stalin.....they did a lot more than lie......political assasination, fomenting violent riots, violent intimidation by paramilitary supporters, and total control of information were just a few obvious tactics George Bush has yet to employ.

The internet is sure a great place to see Bush's totalitarian techniques in action!

Hello? Are you there, W? Hail my leader!

Between polarized voters whose main stream media contains more fluff than fact, and the highly questionable situation of our E-Voting debable-to-be,

"The current congress is about to be held accountable in an election in one month.....lets talk about our decay into fascism the day after election day and see if your, "democracy was saved!""

I'm not really sure how true that is. I sure wish we had more accountability and fact floating around instead of facetious excrement, though.

debable -> debacle

Codas, you are persona non grata with me.

Janet Hawkins
AKA Grammie

I know I am. And I feel so dam bad about it. Oh no. Maybe if I had only read a little more about Pol Pot or Mao Tse Tung. I shouldn't spout BS about the evil regime of BUSH & COMPANY. And I should know that "Less then two thousand years ago Christians were a very small group in the Roman Empire. Within three hundred years the Emperor Constantine made Christianity the official state religion. Our modern age is much faster."And the truth is that I oppose him because because I think he is doing too much. I shouldn't go on to reguritate the same old crapola. But what I realy think now is...oh how dare I say....what will Janet think. Maybe I will use a word that she hasn't heard in the wrong context....I will look so dumb... I know.. How about -- ---- --------!

The point about war is that we no longer declare war like we did previously. E.G. Korea, Vietnam, Iraq I, Afghanistan, Iraq II.

Is it your contention that none of these military actions constituted a war? According to the supreme court, the president can declare a state of war and act unilaterally. He didn't even do that, intead he used the "War powers act of 1973" getting authorization first and then providing updates every 60 days.

In short, YES you missed the memo. We are at War. Because you don't acknowledge this as war time, your want to reign in presidential authority with more checks on power does seem somewhat explainable. I contend that in a time of war, however, it is often more prudent to have fewer people involved in the decision making process. Intelligence concerns as well as an ability to adapt policy are just two reasons for this case. Hello NY Times. This is not to say that the President can do whatever he wants, but he, as chief prosecutor of the executive, can certainly declare someone a "suspect" or "enemy combatant". Interpretation as to who is providing "material assistance to the enemy" should be left to the executive, but like all new laws it will eventually be heard by the courts as soon as the ACLU petitions on behalf of some guy who just happened to be walking through the Iraq desert with a RPG in one hand and a bag full of IED's in the other, just minding his own business.

I did NOT write the little ditty that someone put my name to above.

That's really low.

Lunchbreak.....perspective....perspective....

No one has presented evidence that elections have been stolen, or that they can be. The media has many serious journalists (Olbermann NOT included) out there doing their job.....Furthermore, wouldn't the scoop of electoral fraud just be the juiciest story they could publish? The incentive to report any maleficence is alive and strong in our open society....look at the Foley case for goodness sake!

"In short, YES you missed the memo. We are at War."

Except for, you know, actually being at war?

"Because you don't acknowledge this as war time, your want to reign in presidential authority with more checks on power does seem somewhat explainable. I contend that in a time of war, however, it is often more prudent to have fewer people involved in the decision making process. Intelligence concerns as well as an ability to adapt policy are just two reasons for this case. Hello NY Times. This is not to say that the President can do whatever he wants, but he, as chief prosecutor of the executive, can certainly declare someone a "suspect" or "enemy combatant". Interpretation as to who is providing "material assistance to the enemy" should be left to the executive, but like all new laws it will eventually be heard by the courts as soon as the ACLU petitions on behalf of some guy who just happened to be walking through the Iraq desert with a RPG in one hand and a bag full of IED's in the other, just minding his own business."

The point I'm getting at is this:

If we were indeed at war, we'd have declared it on someone. "Oh, the terrorists" - that's not a country, not a religious movement, it's something out of 1984 ... "The Enemy" ... who? "The Enemy", duh!

Let's take it a step further and say we ARE "At war with the terrorists" ... what is our plan, our rationale, then?

1) Identify their support structure and eliminate it,
2) Identify their leaders and eliminate or capture them,
3) Subjugate their will and ability to fight so that we can declare victory.

Now, any reasonable thinker will note a few problems in both what is required to pursue this plan, and how we've pursued it.

1) Identify their support structure and eliminate it,

We've failed on multiple fronts here. We correctly identified the Taliban and dismantled their regime, then incorrectly identified Iraq. We've failed to eliminate the Taliban (they are, in fact, flourishing) and our continued occupation of Iraq is doing the exact opposite of "eliminating" their support structure. If you needed the recent NIE to tell you that, you haven't been following world news.

2) Identify their leaders and eliminate or capture them,

We correctly identified several Al'Qaeda leaders, and incorrectly identified Saddam Hussein as a conspiritist. We've captured the guy we incorrectly identified, and our Commander in Chief has said he "doesn't think about" Osama, the man everyone else in the world (except for the less educated Americans) identify with 9-11. Stellar.

3) Subjugate their will and ability to fight so that we can declare victory.

This is the kicker. We've failed at this utterly, as is evidenced by growing world disapproval at our conduct and policies and the regular violence we see directed at our troops in the middle east combined with reports of "growing" terrorist numbers.

If we are indeed "at war" and "the decider" should be "interpreting who is providing material assistance to the enemy", given his record above, what reasonable person says, "Ok, sure, I trust you." ?

I'm confused. We're not at war, and you're asking us to put our faith in a guy that lied us into Iraq and lies about the situation there, and who wants to focus on an abstract enemy. Terrorism is by definition a crime, and as you may have noticed, the British seem to be doing just fine in treating it as such.

Part of our disconnect might just be idealogical difference, but I'm not sure you've actually put any thought into what kind of record you're supporting.

can certainly declare someone a "suspect" or "enemy combatant".

Yes, he can declare an American an enemy combatant the new legislation is stating enemy combamtants' do not have habeus Corpus rights, meaning the president is saying he can take the right of habeus Corpus away from Americans if he chooses. He can do this because we are at war with a concept (terror). I wonder if this means he can declare someone an enemy combatant under the war on poverty?

Sarah:

What the fuck are you talking about?

"Lunchbreak.....perspective....perspective....

No one has presented evidence that elections have been stolen, or that they can be. The media has many serious journalists (Olbermann NOT included) out there doing their job.....Furthermore, wouldn't the scoop of electoral fraud just be the juiciest story they could publish? The incentive to report any maleficence is alive and strong in our open society....look at the Foley case for goodness sake!"

My perspective was that you were posting flotsam that wasn't meant to be taken seriously. As far as the media, journalistic rigor is undermined by editorial control. There's been plenty of outcry already on both sides of the Foley case... and as an aside, some lefty sites have interesting case studies on how much air time the Republicans get vs. the Democrats, and it's not a pretty picture. What's the point of a "free" press when they "only" interview "one" side in a heavily biased ratio? As for the E-machines, a Princeton research group proved how easily it was to completely engineer a voting record to favor whichever side you wanted. I know enough about programming to be very doubtful of companies that refuse to take security flaws into account - and I know that E-machines are being mandated into many districts. There's quite a hubbub on some sites about it, and as an average voter concerned with accountability, I'm more than a little concerned that I haven't seen their complaints addressed.

"The sky is falling!!!! The sky is falling!!!! middle eastern folks are trying to create a Caliphate and kill us all!!!! Islamists are Fascists!!!!

How about some historical perspective for God's sake?

I'm seeing a lot of "Keith is insane, rambling, etc." You're all entitled to your own opinions, but if you're going to say such things, why not back them up with fact to refute what he says? He says that Bush lied about the issues he mentioned in the special comment. If that is NOT the case, then present facts that say that Bush is telling the truth about the issues mentioned in the special comment. If not, then this board/blog gets nothing accomplished, does it?

But then i have to ask, is there a goal of getting anything accomplished or does this solely exist to shoot Olbermann down? If the latter is the case, then it's a waste of bandwidth.

So we are not at war with Al Qaida even though Osama openly declared war on us in 1996? The war in Iraq is over, I guess and we should return home? The war in Afghanistan is over?

"Can we declare war on an enemy combatant under the war on poverty?" (paraphrased)

What are you? 10? Gee I don't know I guess we'll have to test that theory. You available?

"I'd like to thank left wing dumbass Keith Olbermann for helping me get an 11 point lead in my senate race in Virginia. Keep saying I'm a racist.... dumbass."

yeah, racist repugs are big on voting for racists.

""Can we declare war on an enemy combatant under the war on poverty?" (paraphrased)

What are you? 10? Gee I don't know I guess we'll have to test that theory. You available? "

He correctly identifies that making "war" on a "concept" is about as constructive as bailing a boat with a seive. Logistically accessible operational targets are one thing... sweeping abstracts, another.

"No one has presented evidence that elections have been stolen, or that they can be."

oh yeah? just google "election fraud" tiny mind (and don't forget to deny everything you read).

Again I ask:

So we are not at war with Al Qaida even though Osama openly declared war on us in 1996? The war in Iraq is over, I guess and we should return home? The war in Afghanistan is over?

"oh yeah? just google "election fraud" tiny mind (and don't forget to deny everything you read)."

You can thank the dems and the ninth circuit court of appeals for furthering the cause of fraudulent elections.

"I did NOT write the little ditty that someone put my name to above. That's really low."

no, really low is the level of integrity and competance of the lying, torturing, war profiteers you are suckers for.

"Again I ask:

So we are not at war with Al Qaida even though Osama openly declared war on us in 1996? The war in Iraq is over, I guess and we should return home? The war in Afghanistan is over?"

George Bush: Osama who?

As far as the "war" in Iraq, in my eyes it was over the day we found Hussein hiding in his foxhole with nary a single real "WMD" in the entire country after weeks of searching. What ARE we still doing there, anyhow, because it's certainly not "winning the war on terror".

As far as Afghanistan goes, as many have said, we pulled out and diverted troops to Iraq long before the job was done. Were you to believe some of our now retired intelligence operatives, we let Osoma get away because our CIC refused to authorize a special forces drop once we had him cornered.

Again I say:
Part of our disconnect might just be idealogical difference, but I'm not sure you've actually put any thought into what kind of record you're supporting.

"no, really low is the level of integrity and competance of the lying, torturing, war profiteers you are suckers for. "

Yep you got it. We are for torturing people and we want to profit from it. You got us. You've made it all so clear now. How could I have been so wrong? Hey man....thanks for clearing that up for me. Bush is a Nazi, America is terrible, Hugo Chavez is god.....ah much better.

One could reasonably construe that by opposing coercive interrogation, including such things as loud annoying music and sleep deprivation, while labeling all of these techniques as torture, is in fact like waiting for the other shoe to drop.

wow, you're really ARE an idiot. torture=proactive and non-torture=non-proactive? how rediculous.

-------

Wanting to afford suspected FOREIGN terrorists the same constitutional rights as AMERICAN CITIZENS is like saying "these people are no different from us"

of course it isn't.

--------

No one is suggesting that American citizens should lose their right to Habeus Corpus only that intellegence concerns and pragmatism for that matter, suggests that trying these enemy combatants in civilian court as counter-productive.

bullshit. it says the prez has the power to designate enemy combatants -- including U.S. citizens -- and the prez has the power to define how much they are tortured.

--------

Refusing to acknowledge this argument by shouting things like Bush is pro-torture or this is a facist regime in order to garner votes

not garner votes, protect the constitution -- which is the actual oath of office, looney.

---------

and delay appropriate legislation in approaching this NEW WAR

each war is a new war, moron. tactics, strategy, you name it. 9/11 was not thedayeverythingchanged. that's a load of bull you've been sold and fell for.

--------

is like waiting for us to be attacked again.

not at all.

---------

The hyperbole is what must go,

yes, yours (i.e., BusCo's)

---------

Bush is opposed on everything all the time for sometimes legitimate and often political reasons all the while questioning his motives as if he is the second coming of Adolf Hitler is so ridiculous

hardly. Bush advocates/implements the very restrictions on freedom that fascists do. he's taking all the wrong steps in the wrong direction.

Anon, I googled "erection fraud" by accident and got a lot of progressive site hits......"Oh my eyes!"

Seriously.....conspirisy theories are fine, you have your right to read about them and believe them. I am talking about evidence. Do I think no erection (uh, sorry, election) fraud occurs? Yes, I'm not naive. If there was a grand republican conspiracy run out of Rove's half-bath, I think some half-witted journalist could dig it up.

"Believe me, I'm not a violent person, but if I saw Olberdouche walking down the street I would kick his ass."

then by definition, you are a violent person, tiny mind -- well worthy of the party of opportunistic torturers and war profiteers and pedophiles.

No, 'Anonymous', I'm not a democrat.

Record 9/12/2001 - Present Day = 0 attacks on homeland. 1 falsely imprisoned AMERICAN citizen. All 27 amendments in tact.

That's the only record I care about.

"Anon, I googled "erection fraud" by accident and got a lot of progressive site hits......"Oh my eyes!"

Seriously.....conspirisy theories are fine, you have your right to read about them and believe them. I am talking about evidence. Do I think no erection (uh, sorry, election) fraud occurs? Yes, I'm not naive. If there was a grand republican conspiracy run out of Rove's half-bath, I think some half-witted journalist could dig it up."

A) Because they are progressive, they're all smoke and no fire? Lazy americans.

B) I'm sure Black Box voting was one of them - I'd recommend visiting the site and reading it. Every american should have a vested interest in the authentication of their vote, and if you think they're in any way taking a partisan view, say so and cite specifics (to them, not me) given their stated mission goal is simply to prevent voting fraud.

Anyhow, folks, it's been a fun few hours, but I'm getting out of here to do some work. Best of luck in your Olbermann bashing, and please... try to think a little bit before opening your mouths to put words in the mouths of others. Accountability, objectivity, reason... America needs more of it. As does the world.

Record 9/12/2001 - Present Day = 0 attacks on homeland. 1 falsely imprisoned AMERICAN citizen. All 27 amendments in tact.

that's a laugh.

-------

That's the only record I care about.

that figures.
if you were less fascist, you'd care more about the constitution.
but that would require more intelligence and more patriotism.

"no, really low is the level of integrity and competance of the lying, torturing, war profiteers you are suckers for. "

Yep you got it. We are for torturing people and we want to profit from it. You got us. You've made it all so clear now. How could I have been so wrong? Hey man....thanks for clearing that up for me. Bush is a Nazi,

WOW YOU GOT IT ALL RIGHT !! (up to this point)

Anon.

You did exactly what I said people like you would do. Actually defining the interrogation techniques does not mean that Bush wants to torture people. The Geneva convention explains it this way: "No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment".

I am sorry if a woman interrogating a muslim man is degrading and thus torture, then maybe the whole torture thing needs to be defined more appropriately.

But you are too insanely stupid to acknowledge this, in fact, I suspect your whole meaningless life sitting in your parents' basement pounding away at the keyboard, revolves around those you hate and your next America sux meeting. You mistake skepticism for intelligence and you certainly can't see how fortunate you are. Fortunate enough that you are somehow able to actually tie your shoes and possibly brush your tooth maybe next year you'll learn how to eat with a fork. The glass is half full you amazingly ignorant jackass.

This place is bringing out the worst in me and making me MEAN and NASTY. Is this how "some of you" got so hostile? Writing is too easy. It's better than bashing heads but it's too easy to say horrible things like "YOUR NOT WELCOME"!!!!

Actually defining the interrogation techniques does not mean that Bush wants to torture people.

Ha! "redefining" ... "clarifying". bullshit.
bushco advocates torture.
the u.s. conducts systematic torture.

-----------

The glass is half full you

of course it is.
always has been.
but ya'll are fuckin' it up.

Anon.

You did exactly what I said people like you would do. Actually defining the interrogation techniques does not mean that Bush wants to torture people. The Geneva convention explains it this way: "No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment".

I am sorry if a woman interrogating a muslim man is degrading and thus torture, then maybe the whole torture thing needs to be defined more appropriately.

But you are too insanely stupid to acknowledge this, in fact, I suspect your whole meaningless life sitting in your parents' basement pounding away at the keyboard, revolves around those you hate and your next America sux meeting. You mistake skepticism for intelligence and you certainly can't see how fortunate you are. Fortunate enough that you are somehow able to actually tie your shoes and possibly brush your tooth maybe next year you'll learn how to eat with a fork. The glass is half full you amazingly ignorant jackass.

Keith put the smackdown on Duh-bya!

Keep it up KO!

Keith put the smackdown on Duh-bya!

Keep it up KO!

the Geneva Convetion was intended to prevent torture.
your "redefining" of it is intended to allow torture.
cowards torture.
traitors torture.
subhumans torture.

oh my goodness...where to start...OK:

Mr O wants proof that any of 177 Dems said we shouldn't listemn to terrorists...fine, but what proof does O have of "It is the terror and the guilt within your own heart, Mr. Bush, that you redirect at others who simply wish for you to temper your certainty with counsel." What special powers does O have to look into people's hearts and discern things?

"Rhetorically, it is about an inch short of Mr. Bush accusing Democratic leaders, Democrats, the majority of Americans who disagree with his policies of treason." - Please define a rhetorical inch so that this application of legnth can be used elsewhere. Example: does Nany Pelosi's statement today that she wants to roll back Bush's lowering of the tax rates (which has led to the highest tax revenues in our nation's history) come within a rhetorical inch of saying she wants to raise taxes? or does Grand Canyon come within a rhetorical inch of hole in the ground?

"This president--in his bullying of the Senate last month and in his slandering of the Democrats this month--has shown us that he believes whoever the enemies are, they are hiding themselves inside a dangerous cloak called the Constitution of the United States of America." -- wha???? and or wha??? and proof please? (is it akin to Harry Potter's cloak of invisibility...I just love that)

"Habeus corpus neutered; the rights of self-defense now as malleable and impermanent as clay; a president stifling all critics by every means available..." -- once again, provide examples please; Also, if he tunes into his own network (or even reviews tapes of his own show) at what point has he or they been stifled?

"ferocity of your venom against the Democrats..." -- ummm, please check O's own comments (be they "special", or 'special', or not) from just the last 3 months alone for ferocity and venomous attacks on PRESIDENT Bush (much less the contirbutor to democratic underground, moveon.org-who had to shut down their forum due to comments posted there by their own constituency, or even half the post here by Annonomous and others who share his beliefs)...

"Mr. Cheney lives on, in defiance, and spreads--around him and before him--darkness, like some contagion of fear." -- defiance of ......what? defiance of O? of the people at DU or Daily Kos? I think he is must have switched gears and is referring to Emporer Palpatine (sp?) for the Star Wars saga...

----------
If O is objective (definition per Miriam-Webster online: expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations) how can he give a quote like that about Cheney or giggle like a second grader when calling Hastert or Ailes fat...

Fair...(marked by impartiality and honesty : free from self-interest, prejudice, or favoritism)...you decide

balanced...(equality between the totals of the two sides of an account)..please point out the balance in his reporting or am I missing all the opposing viewpoints he brings on the show since I only read the transcripts and cannot bring myself to watch the show...or if it is not reporting and it is not a news show please state that it is a commentary show (BOR points out all the time that his show is a news commentary show)

Finally how many times has the worst person in the world been someone other than a republican or BOR...anyone else ever? someone not from our country? someone who has physically taken the life of another? someone who has killed multiple school age Amish girls execution-style maybe? for christ sake, maybe even BEARS????

Also, MISTER O, George Bush was elected to the office of President of the United States (TWICE, each time receiving far more and a higher percentage of votes than former President Bill Clinton-who you emabarrassed yourself fawning over by the way-in either of his two elections)...so please have the common courtesy shown by such Bush lovers as Begala and Carville to refer to him as President Bush...

PS: Grammie for pres in '08...

now for a tag line from my favorite news journalist..."that is it, and I am outta here..."

oh my goodness...where to start...OK:

Mr O wants proof that any of 177 Dems said we shouldn't listemn to terrorists...fine, but what proof does O have of "It is the terror and the guilt within your own heart, Mr. Bush, that you redirect at others who simply wish for you to temper your certainty with counsel." What special powers does O have to look into people's hearts and discern things?

"Rhetorically, it is about an inch short of Mr. Bush accusing Democratic leaders, Democrats, the majority of Americans who disagree with his policies of treason." - Please define a rhetorical inch so that this application of legnth can be used elsewhere. Example: does Nany Pelosi's statement today that she wants to roll back Bush's lowering of the tax rates (which has led to the highest tax revenues in our nation's history) come within a rhetorical inch of saying she wants to raise taxes? or does Grand Canyon come within a rhetorical inch of hole in the ground?

"This president--in his bullying of the Senate last month and in his slandering of the Democrats this month--has shown us that he believes whoever the enemies are, they are hiding themselves inside a dangerous cloak called the Constitution of the United States of America." -- wha???? and or wha??? and proof please? (is it akin to Harry Potter's cloak of invisibility...I just love that)

"Habeus corpus neutered; the rights of self-defense now as malleable and impermanent as clay; a president stifling all critics by every means available..." -- once again, provide examples please; Also, if he tunes into his own network (or even reviews tapes of his own show) at what point has he or they been stifled?

"ferocity of your venom against the Democrats..." -- ummm, please check O's own comments (be they "special", or 'special', or not) from just the last 3 months alone for ferocity and venomous attacks on PRESIDENT Bush (much less the contirbutor to democratic underground, moveon.org-who had to shut down their forum due to comments posted there by their own constituency, or even half the post here by Annonomous and others who share his beliefs)...

"Mr. Cheney lives on, in defiance, and spreads--around him and before him--darkness, like some contagion of fear." -- defiance of ......what? defiance of O? of the people at DU or Daily Kos? I think he is must have switched gears and is referring to Emporer Palpatine (sp?) for the Star Wars saga...

----------
If O is objective (definition per Miriam-Webster online: expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations) how can he give a quote like that about Cheney or giggle like a second grader when calling Hastert or Ailes fat...

Fair...(marked by impartiality and honesty : free from self-interest, prejudice, or favoritism)...you decide

balanced...(equality between the totals of the two sides of an account)..please point out the balance in his reporting or am I missing all the opposing viewpoints he brings on the show since I only read the transcripts and cannot bring myself to watch the show...or if it is not reporting and it is not a news show please state that it is a commentary show (BOR points out all the time that his show is a news commentary show)

Finally how many times has the worst person in the world been someone other than a republican or BOR...anyone else ever? someone not from our country? someone who has physically taken the life of another? someone who has killed multiple school age Amish girls execution-style maybe? for christ sake, maybe even BEARS????

Also, MISTER O, George Bush was elected to the office of President of the United States (TWICE, each time receiving far more and a higher percentage of votes than former President Bill Clinton-who you emabarrassed yourself fawning over by the way-in either of his two elections)...so please have the common courtesy shown by such Bush lovers as Begala and Carville to refer to him as President Bush...

PS: Grammie for pres in '08...

now for a tag line from my favorite news journalist..."that is it, and I am outta here..."

Hey Anon:

How do you "redefine" something that has never been defined? Its not porn you douchebag. You don't always know it when you see it. E.G. I didn't know playing loud music was torture.

If you think it is, then your a hippie panzy ass sissy that has no idea about the real world. The University of Marxist Propaganda and effeminate Tendancies in the liberal Male called. They have an opening for Dean of Douchebags. Can you pry yourself away from your cheetos and Mountain Dew long enough to take the job. It's PRESTGIOUS.

I hope Marcus is still here.....

Mr. Olbermann stated, rather dramatically, in the middle of his 11 minute commentary:

"I tonight quote not Jefferson nor Voltaire, but Cigar Aficionado Magazine. On Sept. 11th, 2003, the editor of that publication interviewed General Tommy Franks, at that point, just retired from his post as commander-in-chief of U.S. Central Command--of Cent-Com. And amid his quaint defenses of the then-nagging absence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, or the continuing freedom of Osama bin Laden, General Franks said some of the most profound words of this generation.

He spoke of 'the worst thing that can happen' to this country: First, quoting, a 'massive casualty-producing event somewhere in the Western World--it may be in the United States of America.' Then, the general continued, 'the Western World, the free world, loses what it cherishes most, and that is freedom and liberty we've seen for a couple of hundred years, in this grand experiment that we call democracy.'

It was this super-patriotic warrior's fear that we would lose that most cherished liberty, because of another attack, one--again quoting General Franks--'that causes our population to question our own Constitution and to begin to militarize our country in order to avoid a repeat of another mass-casualty-producing event. Which, in fact, then begins to potentially unravel the fabric of our Constitution.'

And here we are, the fabric of our Constitution being unraveled, anyway.

Habeus corpus neutered; the rights of self-defense now as malleable and impermanent as clay; a president stifling all critics by every means available and, when he runs out of those, by simply lying about what they said or felt.

And all this, even without the dreaded attack."

Oh my........

Marcus, I'll rebut this divel from the great Murrow of our generation with some (hopefully)civil discourse.

The congress of the United States passed, with a majority in both houses, a law that codifies a power of the executive. The bill passed through the CONSTITUTIONALLY prescribed procedures....it was not inacted ad hoc by the executive, nor was debate stiffled. The democrats could have even filibustered the bill in The Senate.....but they chose to allow cloture! So, Olbermann LIES! Our Constitution is not being unraveled.....

1) The executive is under the jurisdiction of the constitutuion and will be gone in 1 year, 3 months! (To your hapiness I am sure)

2) The current representatives will be examined under the hot lights of a nationwide election in less than 1 month!

3) Any idiot lawyer can go to any federal court house in this great land, WITHOUT FEAR OF INTIMIDATION, and file grievances in front of an independent judiciary!

4) Habeus corpus is still in play in all domestic court procedings, federal, state and local!!!!!!!!! The new law only applies to enemy combatants. Yes, the executive says who that is.....and he will be held accountable by the people of this great land of ours! If Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid or Michael Moore suddenly disappear, I am sure we would all think Bush has put them in GITMO as enemy combatants. Give me a break!

5) People are free, without fear of violence or death, to express ANY political idea they want. President Bush's words do not stop you, me or the queen bee to say anything in return. I am sure there are thousand of angry e-mails on The White House server everyday from people disagreeing with this adminstration.....they likely get read and then filed. Almost every newspaper editorial page in this country is FULL of anti-Bush thought and commentary.

EVERY MEANS AVAILABLE!!!!! says Olbernut...... what is he talking about????.....I hear more noise from Air America radio, NPR and even on this blog that is anti-establishment than ever before! The freedom of speech is being celebrated in this country! Olberloon himself has had over ONE HOUR now of special comments aired on a major news network....heard by less than 1 million people! He still lives and breathes..............I could go on and on.

By the way, The President is allowed to interpret what people say and do just as much as you and I are. He did not lie in the quotes Olbermann strarted with.....THEY ARE THE PRESIDENT'S OPINIONS!!!!!!!!!!!!

I am sorry....I'm getting a little angry.......

Perspective has been lost by the left in this country.....That is the real danger! I could go on to other parts of the idiot's special comment if you like.....

And I agree....Grammie for prez in 2008!

How do you "redefine" something that has never been defined?

the Geneva conventions defined torture,
in order to prevent torture.
your "redefine" is intended to allow torture.
which makes you a fascist.
plus (and this is the kicker) it doesn't work.
so as usual, you incompetants are advocating something both evil, you evil doer, and ineffectual.

or to quote strother martin from butch cassidy,
"morons, i've got morons on my team."

Snide, self loving, self serving, kill or be killed, must submit and obey the president unless he is a democrat, than you can impeach him for lying about sex under oath but praise to the republican decider of all things and fear for your life everyday so you can be assured he will protect you, because the Lord has annointed him with Robertsons and Dobsons blessings because he is against all that is unholy and remember this is just a comma that no one will remember the 2700 and still counting human beings that were killed to bring the divine will of the appointed king. His helpful apostles spread the gospel of "your with us or your with the terrorists". Spreading democracy is hard work when so many people don't see it your way and he needs the power to put people in stress positions if they don't submit and obey. Submit, and obey the will of the king of democracy.

Anon, take your demagogic speech somewhere people want to hear it. The Geneva Conventions did not say, "Torture is......." That's the problem, you dunce.

",,,,,,,,,,,,"

Anon, take your demagogic speech somewhere people want to hear it.

pro-torture = demagogic.
anti-torture = non-demagogic.
free speach is a bitch, aint' it bitch.

The Geneva Conventions did not say, "Torture is......."

wrong again, dummy.

To this end the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:

(a) Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;

(b) Taking of hostages;

(c) Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment;

just what part of "humiliating and degrading treatment" don't you understand, you fool.

the geneva convention was intended to prevent torture.
you want to allow torture.
which makes you a sick, fascist, cunt.

and speaking of sick, fascist cunts ... here's a few more ...

Gitmo Guards Brag of Beatings

AMP PENDLETON, Calif. (AP) - Guards at Guantanamo Bay bragged about beating detainees and described it as common practice, a Marine sergeant said in a sworn statement obtained by The Associated Press. The two-page statement was sent Wednesday to the Inspector General at the Department of Defense by a high-ranking Marine Corps defense lawyer. The lawyer sent the statement on behalf of a paralegal who said men she met on Sept. 23 at a bar on the base identified themselves to her as guards. The woman, whose name was blacked out, said she spent about an hour talking with them. No one was in uniform, she said.

A 19-year-old sailor referred to only as Bo "told the other guards and me about him beating different detainees being held in the prison," the statement said. "One such story Bo told involved him taking a detainee by the head and hitting the detainee's head into the cell door. Bo said that his actions were known by others," the statement said. The sailor said he was never punished.

The statement was provided to the AP on Thursday night by Lt. Col. Colby Vokey. He is the Marine Corps' defense coordinator for the western United States and based at Camp Pendleton. Calls left for representatives at Guantanamo Bay on Friday were not immediately returned. A Pentagon spokesman declined immediate comment. Other guards "also told their own stories of abuse towards the detainees" that included hitting them, denying them water and "removing privileges for no reason." "About 5 others in the group admitted hitting detainees" and that included "punching in the face," the affidavit said.

"From the whole conversation, I understood that striking detainees was a common practice," the sergeant wrote. "Everyone in the group laughed at the others stories of beating detainees." Vokey called for an investigation, saying the abuse alleged in the affidavit "is offensive and violates United States and international law."

Guantanamo was internationally condemned shortly after it opened more than four years ago when pictures captured prisoners kneeling, shackled and being herded into wire cages. That was followed by reports of prisoner abuse, heavy-handed interrogations, hunger strikes and suicides.

Military investigators said in July 2005 they confirmed abusive and degrading treatment of a suspected terrorist at Guantanamo Bay that included forcing him to wear a bra, dance with another man and behave like a dog. However, the chief investigator, Air Force Lt. Gen. Randall M. Schmidt, said "no torture occurred" during the interrogation of Mohamed al-Qahtani, a Saudi who was captured in December 2001 along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border.

Last month, U.N. human rights investigators criticized the United States for failing to take steps to close Guantanamo Bay, home to 450 detainees, including 14 terrorist suspects who had been kept in secret CIA prisons around the world. Described as the most dangerous of America's "war on terror" prisoners, fewer than a dozen inmates have been charged with crimes. This fall, the Navy plans to open a new, $30-million maximum-security wing at its prison complex there, a concrete-and-steel structure replacing temporary camps.

Perspective has been lost by the left in this country.....That is the real danger!

Posted by: cee at October 6, 2006 04:15 PM

There you go. You say the real danger is the perspective of the left. Maybe a stress position is in order. Maybe if they get a little taste of the presidents interpetation they will come around.

And don't forget, tiny minds: It is worse to call someone who advocates torture a sick, fascist c*nt than it is to advocate torture. In fact, it's even worse than committing torture!

And don't forget, tiny minds, part II: The hall mark of a hypocritcal tree-hugging democrat is that they are hateful -- and call those who advocate torture sick fascist c*nts.

Hating someone who tortures, or advocates torture, sounds about right.

Annonymous- you say the geneva convention defined torture, correct?

is their definition of torture: "No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment."

If so:

If I lock you in a 10x10 jail cell, is that torture?

If I lock you in a 20x20 lovely hotel room suite without windows and no key to the honor bar and no remote control is that torture?

If you are stuck in an elevator with Muzak playing, is that torture?

If I place handcuffs on you is that torture?

If I feed you McDonald's value meal while questioning you for hours is that torture?

If I have Christina Aguilera playing on a boom box out of reach is THAT torture?

If I cut off the head of the person sitting next to you is that torture?

If I broadcast that throughout the world so that the headless man's family has to see it and have it reported on is that torture?

If I have a woman question a Muslim male is that torture?

My point here is that President Bush asked the Congress to DEFINE torture so that if someone tries to pull any of our men into world court for war crimes against the geneva convention, we could point out at least that our country says this is torture and this is not. Both houses of Congress passed the bill without any filibuster to delay the voting.

Personally, if I am in a room with sacry uncle Olbermann on and I don't have access to the remote control to change the channel, I CONSIDER THAT TORTURE SIR!!!!!!!

The definition provides a framework for what we can and cannot do. Otherwise, you say torture is cooling a room below acceptable levels and I say that is my workplace every day of the year. I say listening to Katie Couric is torture and yet you tape it and replay it over and over. Thus the codifying of what is or isn't is essential or else one man's torture is another's pleasure...

No, I am using persepective defined as "A mental view or outlook: 'It is useful occasionally to look at the past to gain a perspective on the present' (Fabian Linden)."

The left can have their own opinion. It is just that Olbermann's arguments are so void of logical context (perspective) that he comes to the erroneous conclusion that Bush is operating outside The Constitution......I guess articles of impeachment are in order then if he holds that opinion.

And as the fear grows
The bad blood slows and turns to stone
And it's too late to lose the weight you used to need to throw around
So have a good drown
As you go down
All alone
Draged down by the stone

Pink Floyd

Anon, take a break. I find your language torture.... and unnecessary....I like this blog because we rarely see the profanity you are using.

Riverdog (bless his crazy soul) was recently banned for similar rants.....calm down....have a nice discussion with the tiny minds....

Ditto connor_in

Anon, take a break. I find your language torture.... and unnecessary....I like this blog because we rarely see the profanity you are using.

Riverdog (bless his crazy soul) was recently banned for similar rants.....calm down....have a nice discussion with the tiny minds....

Ditto connor_in

"I am sorry....I'm getting a little angry......."

I'd hate to see how many exclamation points and capital letters you'd use if you got REALLY ANGRRYYYYYYY!!!!!!!!!

I don't remember how I stumbled on this little nook but I was genuinely amazed at it, especially that something so recursive and tiny could be the work of a serious minded person with real credentials and brain power. But it is. While it has always been pretty phony, and always tetered on the edge of simple right wing venality, it's kind of interesting that someone is doing this site at all. It's kind of like performance art. It's a giant, angry, living electronic sculpture of a T.V. character, that matches this character's every perceived hipocrisy with one of it's own.

I guess the Hitler face should have warned me off. Recent events have turned it ugly. Riverdog the regular right wing nut turns into a stark raving homobashing security risk. Grannie and cee turn into a two-headed self-reinforcing anti-Howard Beale. Robert and his giant Limbaugh ego is in some kind of lockdown over the stupid Republican "No Child's Behind Left Alone" scandal. Cecelia has now permanently set her phaser on "continuous flippant retaliation" after being gored by the high-horse. The field is a shambles. I'm thinking it is a sign of the impending Republican melt down. You're all bound to get even less reality-based as this goes on. You'll get kookier and angrier as the far left get's kookier and angrier. That's what you're here for. You like it.

Anyway, I've given it my best, but this place is neither fun-spirited nor serious minded. I think I've mostly maintained a tone that has been consistently calm, decent, upbeat, and honest, and this while I'm recovering from prostate cancer surgery and haven't been feeling top notch for the time I've been here. As I heal up, I'm thinking that if I have enough energy to come here and type politely, I have enough to do something that is not a total waste of time. Something other than just urging other people not to waste their time.

Maybe I'll check back again if you continue to hold every branch of government after the elections. Hopefully not. Hopefully as we return to the sanity of divided government, democrats will take some ownership of the war so it can stop being a stupid political football, and people like Olbermann and you all will have less ammunition to load up your partisan cannons of distortion and anger.

Well, I can hope anyway.

So farewell and good luck Cecelia the girl, Robert, et al. A shout-out to you too, cee, for your headfake towards sanity before the angry outbursts. We who are about to live salute you.

You'll need to elect a new head Olberloon.

Is there a single refutation of anything Olbermann said in his special comment? Any challenge to the idea that George Bush has lied in the ways Olbermann indicates? Does this mean that Olbermann's attackers on this site don't disagree with his claims, they just don't like the man and want to complain about him? Hmmm . . .

Matt, try reading the posts before you. Many aspects of Olbermann's rant have been addressed, and I could continue.

The last Anon post (I think I know from who) is a great example of the usual contempt thrown around a site when someone just cannot defend their position.

Democracy is moving on and is safe with the current leadership, despite what Olbermann postulates.

I have tried to argue some points from the last special comment and all I get is analysis of my punctuation. I am sorry to hear that Anon is recovering from an illness and I hope him all the best.

This continuing saga of an attention-starved commentator makes for good stimuli to examine my own opinions. So far Olbermann has made me more resolute in my beliefs. His emotional pleas for truth from people who have not lied gives me satisfaction that the point of view of the left is based on a crumbling foundation of rhetoric and theory.

Real leaders take action, and the liberals, as personified by Keith Olbermann, are not ready for leadership. If my fellow citizens think differently, fine because I know our country will still succeed because of the great foundation that is our Constitution. It has weathered much worse.

If there are anymore of Olbermann's comments you want to argue about, put 'em up.....I will check back in about 2 hours to see if someone wants to have a rational discussion without profanity or stupidity.

cee,

I will never critique your punctuation. My question is this, though: isn't the president lying when he says Democrats are not interested in listening to the phone conversations of terrorists and that they want to wait to be attacked again? I mean, c'mon. That's at least a little bit of fib, don't you think?

By the way, I get that you don't like liberals and Democrats, so you don't need to throw in any gratuitous bashing. Let's just stick to the proposition at hand, i.e. the president lied. Yea or nay.

cee,

I will never critique your punctuation. My question is this, though: isn't the president lying when he says Democrats are not interested in listening to the phone conversations of terrorists and that they want to wait to be attacked again? I mean, c'mon. That's at least a little bit of fib, don't you think?

By the way, I get that you don't like liberals and Democrats, so you don't need to throw in any gratuitous bashing. Let's just stick to the proposition at hand, i.e. the president lied. Yea or nay.

Real leaders take action, and the liberals, as personified by Keith Olbermann, are not ready for leadership.
Posted by: cee at October 6, 2006 07:16 PM

The denial of reality is scaring me a little. Liberals have led this country through some of it's toughest years. If you believe in the constitution so much, you should be worried about what you consider real leaders think of it. Once again, if you question authority like Keith does, you are lumped in with your concept of liberals, which means your a socialist. And we know if your that you are a stalinist and guilty of 60 million deaths. In ten years, even a picture or a glimpse of some of these wonderful leaders that we have right now will turn peoples stomach as they wonder how they let them have such power. They sicken some of us already.

Re Cee's 07:51 PM post:

Did you just write that if you question authority, you are a KO-style liberal, which means you are a socialist??? And then follow that with the notion that if you are a socialist, you are a Stalinist???

Just checking.

Record 9/12/2001 - Present Day = 0 attacks on homeland. 1 falsely imprisoned AMERICAN citizen. All 27 amendments in tact.

That's the only record I care about.

Oh Good. How about this one.

Attacks on Clinton's watch = 0
Attacks on bush's watch = 1

Only record I care about

With regards to Bush's speech Olbermann quoted,

"177 of the opposition party said, 'You know, we don't think we ought to be listening to the conversations of terrorists.'"

This is not a lie. The 177 representatives (all democrats) voted against a bill that modernizes the electronic survellence program - HR 5825. Does not this bill involve the program primarilly used to secretly listen to the conversations of terrorists? One part reads:

"If the Attorney General authorizes such emergency employment of electronic surveillance, the Attorney General shall require that the minimization procedures required by this title for the issuance of a judicial order be followed. In the absence of a judicial order approving such electronic surveillance, the surveillance shall terminate when the information sought is obtained, when the application for the order is denied, or after the expiration of 120 hours from the time of authorization by the Attorney General, whichever is earliest. In the event that such application for approval is denied, or in any other case where the electronic surveillance is terminated and no order is issued approving the surveillance, no information obtained or evidence derived from such surveillance shall be received in evidence or otherwise disclosed in any trial, hearing, or other proceeding in or before any court, grand jury, department, office, agency, regulatory body, legislative committee, or other authority of the United States, a State, or political subdivision thereof, and no information concerning any United States person acquired from such surveillance shall subsequently be used or disclosed in any other manner by Federal officers or employees without the consent of such person, except with the approval of the Attorney General if the information indicates a threat of death or serious bodily harm to any person."

After educating myself about the bill, (warrants are still going to be obtained most of the time) I agree with the majority who passed it because time is of the essence, these are professionals protecting our country against terrorists and a judge's warrant is not always going to be readily available. Unlike the 177, I agree with the President. They voted NO for the modernization act.....NO on listening to the calls......it may not be how you want the vote interpreted, but it is a matter of opinion....not fact....not a lie.

With regards to Olbermann's use of this quote,

"Democrats take a law enforcement approach to terrorism. That means America will wait until we're attacked again before we respond."

....First off, what party has been vocal in opposition of preemptive action taken by the administration?

The Democratic Party. One example...Iraq....what were the party affiliations of ALL the "no" votes in authorizing the Iraq invasion? Democratic.

And who now is constantly beating the drum concerning withdrawl (and so then defeat in my opinion) in same country? Democrats.

Yes, this was preemptive because there was widely accepted intelligence that showed Saddam Hussein had WMD and his anti-american views made him a likely weapons source for terrorists. Now, when Al Queda has made Iraq a place they want to defeat The United States, which party is constantly saying we need to get out...."Just like Vietnam." The Democrats.

Democrats/preemption example...now for law enforcement....

If you do not identify a looming danger and preemptively take care of it, what happens? The "crime" occurs, right? So, logic could say that this could be the result of not taking preemptive action. Former Democratic President Jimmy Carter has come totally down against preemption, which is very consistent with how he governed. We all know what letter come after his name.

A matter of opinion, or shall I say interpretation, of the behavior of The Democrats....but still that...an opinion....not a lie!

By the way, Bill Clinton did have attacks under his watch....1993 WTC, Embassy bombings and The Cole....so it wasn't Clinton 0. Bush 1.

Lie, lie, lie....I have been hearing it for almost eight years now and I still do not understand why people just want to cut off all discussion by calling their opponent a liar? Argue, rebut, do something else so that we can generate some kind of dialogue and get along.

"177 of the opposition party said, 'You know, we don't think we ought to be listening to the conversations of terrorists.'"

This is not a lie.

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

This is not a lie. This is not a lie. Had it been an actual lie, a friendly Olbermann Watch moderator would have told you that the lie is so, and would have whined and whined about the lie. This is only a test of the misinformation alert system. Please remain seated. This was not a lie. This was not a lie.

BEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEP!!! EEEEEEE!!!

Thank you. Proceed with your day. Thank you.

Annonomous...1 small error in this:

Attacks on Clinton's watch = 0

even if you only count on our homeland soil...change that to at least one ... The first bobming of the world trade center...

next , do the USS Cole and embassy bombing count as home soil or just US interests abroad?

Apparently if the Dems are counting they don't. But they do and we all know it.

Annonomous...thank you for your concern as to seeing I do not get banned for my as you call them "rants"

If what I have done in my few posts can be called rants, what do you call Mr O's special comments?

Also, if you noticed, was using the classic argument style...use your opponents words or concepts and question them...is that so crazy as to be referred to as a rant?

I am sorry if you think so...

Oh and as to your use of phrases like dummy and tiny little minds, etc in your posts above...do we as debators of ideas really need to stoop to name calling...even if someone calls you a name (which I do not belive I have called anyone a name save for referring to Mr O as scary uncle which was only a tip of the hat to a friend over at Newsbusters), is it really necessary to respond in kind?

"Lie, lie, lie....I have been hearing it for almost eight years now and I still do not understand why people just want to cut off all discussion by calling their opponent a liar? Argue, rebut, do something else so that we can generate some kind of dialogue and get along.

Posted by: cee at October 6, 2006 10:48 PM"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Huh? The name of this page is Olberman Watch. What do you expect to find here? Think about all the slanted propaganda news out there on all the cable and network television. CNN Fox MSNBC NBC ABC CBS, it is all bullshit pretending to be informative useful information. It's like arguing about whether black or white is more like red. All this back and forth about Clinton is so fucking stupid.

Washington DC is a corporate occupied territory. Both Democrats and Republicans are owned by big money. One is more cynical than the other though. The fact that Republicans have a totally fake theme of being the "party of family values" makes them all the more disgusting.

Bill Clinton is a very good politician and so is his wife. Are they more likely to put an end to big money coming before the American voter? No way. But are they what the Rush Limbaugh ditto heads make them out to be? No fucking way. Hannity and Limbaugh are so hung up on the Clintons I am certain they have nightmares about him. All this referring to what the Clintons did and didn't do; is this the way the party of "personal responsibility" demonstrates how the Republicans take responsibility for anything that goes wrong under their watch? You bet it is. Totally hypocritical dumb asses. All day today they are talking on Fox and Billy O'really about how the Democrats kept Mark Foley's secret for an opportune time. Forget the fact that the entire republican congress did the same to protect their hold on power. What a fucking joke these sleaze bags are.

Arguing with people that defend the Bush crime family and this corrupt beyond corrupt republican controlled congress is a waste of time. Telling them off is the only commentary they are worthy of.

Duh: It takes some time to get use to the Olbermann Watch ironic fan club... they will taunt Herolbermann and try to find lies... but... they hang on his every word and do not seem like they like Bill O' Reilly very much --- not even to go against Keith! Bill O' Reilly: not the best person in the world!!!

Obermann Watch.com: If any "Olbyloon" needs any ---and I mean any--- meritt for Keith Olbermann's ferocious and odd tempests against Bill O' Reilly --- just see the last part of Keith Olbermann's book "The Worst Person in the World". This would be the last week in July where Keith Herolbermann cites Bill O' Reilly 5 times in a row throughout the week as the gold contender as Worst Person in thee World --- all for Bill O' Reilly's quirkiest blunders, then finishes it all off with Bill O' Reilly's Battle of the Bulge lie-then history rewrite-then lie again (infront of the same guest as the first lie) - THEN LIE TO THE E-MAILING AUDIENCE! (and I wondered why Olbermann Watch never really took the book itself to task --- HUH!)

We really should thank Keith Herolbermann. He is thee only one in this playpenn willing to throw the deservedly enough sand in the toy truck of whinny schoolyard adolescant Bill O' Reilly. Keith Olbermann is not nearly jealous or envious or wanton of Bill O' Reilly's no-karma-whatsoever success mountain in FOX. If Bill O' Reilly had any true success, the religious or spiritual or dharma-like success that Bill O' Reilly deserves... then... maybe Keith would be envious of Bill O' Reilly. The fact of thee matter is... Bill O' Reilly lies and misinforms --- to his LOYAL audience on a seemingly never ending basis. The personal attacks are too much, as well. At least when Keith makes a personal attack (example: Robert Altman...) it is in direct refernece to something that Keith does not like. As simple as that.

Olbermann Watch.com continues to be a fascinating website for me to explore... If it were a Quantary geologic formation... it definatly would be Australia. Adding to what I have stated earlier... it seems as though these Conservative-types "hate" Keith Olbermann. Yet... I see absolutely no attempt to go away from it... they crave the scorching hot, sunbaked glory other continents find appalling. Whimsically called "the Outback" --- or in this case "Krazy Keith" --- there is a oneness and a kind of subconscious acceptance of the one of the worst things in the world: daily drought. Ah, but instead of just ignoring Keith Herolbermann... they continue on & on in their archives, dilligently composed of multiple personalities, and on an ever-growing basis accomondating their Murrow-esque pal, their strong ratings support fan base, and most importantly, the irony symballizing everything in existance: That there are tones and tones of herbivores, but only one destined carnivore. In this case... they know who it is... and they don't mind.

(P.S.: Steve is Tanzania: small, and unchartered, yet wonderous, and worthy of a stop any time you are able to reach him/the island. Johnny Dollar is New Zealand: smart, like the main continent, only it refuses to directly be apart of any official Keith Olbermann/Australia reputation. Maybe like has more incommon and a better history with Oceania/FOX.)

Scratch that --- Tazmania, not Tanzania.