Hour of Spin... shit,, has this website switched to Oreillywatch.com ?

Wonderful! A discussion about a partisan armed forces....our nation's future looks bright!

I like how Senator Graham sees it. (From AP)

"Sen. Lindsey Graham, a former reserve judge for the Air Force, said vocal complaints by active-duty members represented a 'disturbing trend' that threatened to erode the cohesiveness of the military.

"'We've had a long tradition making sure the military doesn't engage in political debate,' said Graham, R-S.C. 'We don't need a Democratic Army and a Republican Army,' he added."

Nice. Will Keith discuss this with the brain trust?

Looks like I was correct in my prediction that O'Reilly would be nominated again for the 'Worst Person' segment today. I wonder if Groucho has to meet some type of quota for bashing O'Reilly every week.

LOL

this site is a joke.
Olbermann has real fortitude, thank God for Olbermann!

Oh great. A cartoon character endorses a caricature. Sounds like an Olbyloon.

and that my friends is pretty much the definition of an Olbyloon!

Yes, Fred Flintstone, Olberdork looks like he's been fortified.

Yaba daba doo.

olby had his favorite fag-toad on tonight! olby had BillO as one of the worst persons in the world AGAIN tonight.
olby bashed Bush tonight
olby bashed republicans tonight
olby tried pimped for the dimmocrats tonight
olby pimped fpr the code pinko anti war moonbats and once again olby showed what an a--hole he is tonight.
good boy olby!

olby had his favorite fag-toad on tonight! olby had BillO as one of the worst persons in the world AGAIN tonight.
olby bashed Bush tonight
olby bashed republicans tonight
olby tried pimped for the dimmocrats tonight
olby pimped for the code pinko anti war moonbats and once again olby showed what an a--hole he is tonight.
good boy olby!

olby had his favorite fag-toad on tonight! olby had BillO as one of the worst persons in the world AGAIN tonight.
olby bashed Bush tonight
olby bashed republicans tonight
olby tried pimped for the dimmocrats tonight
olby pimped for the code pinko anti war moonbats and once again olby showed what an a--hole he is tonight.
good boy olby!

You stupid people. Olbermann is the only great journalist America has right now. He is telling the truth to fight against this fledgling dictatorship.

When you're all under the boot heel of the Federal Reserve (a private banking institution) and their puppet regime, you'll look back in your stupidity and wonder where your freedoms went. Fools.

And, so we should look to Olbermann to save us?

Journalist? Hardly. Anyone seen him set foot out of the studio to cover the war in Iraq? No. Anyone seen him go cover the Gulf Coast after Hurricane Katrina? No again. He stayed in NJ. The only fields he "reports" from are baseball fields. He's NO Journalist. He refuses to have anyone on his show who doesn't parrot his opinion and doesn't break news stories, he simply doesn't know how unless they're sports-related. sorry but your the fool here if you think that what he does is journalism.

Johnny Dollar said:

"In the Media Matters Minute, Olby went after a gubernatorial candidate in Nevada (R)."

Yeah, he did, because that candidate (Rep. Jim Gibbons) is being accused of ASSAULTING a woman. If he didn't do that, he exercised extremely BAD judgment by trying to help an intoxicated woman drive herself home (and he should know better since he's on the Congressional Stop DUI Caucus).

Here - listen to her 911 calls and read the police reports and judge for yourself:

http://www.lasvegasnow.com/Global/story.asp?S=5562308&nav=168Y

Olby, look what could happen if you mess with an intoxicated woman who is 30 years younger.

Why can't you guys running this site accept Olbermann's right to his ideas, and, our rights to listen to his ideas if we want to? He is no worse than Hannity and a number of others on the right...he's just left of center. Whats the problem?

Listen, I can't get in my car and turn on my AM radio without hearing Limbaugh, Hannity, Savage, and a host of other right wingers rant, and rant, and rant, and on cable TV, you have an entire network pushing right wing ideas 24 hours a day. Why do you people have such a problem with someone doing it on the left?

After listening to right wing talking points all day long, I happen enjoy taking a little refuge in a show like this, that I will readily admit, is not exactly "fair and balanced". But then, neither is Fox. The Bush administration has ample opportunity to use free air time to push it's views on us, and believe me, they take advantage of it...day in and day out, using the same mainstream media you guys just love to call "Liberal".

Why don't you just give it a rest????

I personally dream of the day when Bill Maher comes back to free cable. Then you'll have to make a whole new web site for that one.

Free cable?

Do you get free cable through your tin-foil hat?

I guess I should have just said cable. Maher is on HBO, not regular cable.

Ford must be in more trouble than I though if both Chrissy Matthews and KO need to try to warp that GOP ad into some sort Racist attack..thats really trying to play voters for fools..but thats the party line and Crissy and KO are just following their marching orders from the DNC....also I see KO didn't say anything about Harold Ford Sr. calling someone a "cracker".

Now in Maryland Michael Steele the GOP candidate who happens to be black has been victim of some really dirty and racist tactics by the Dems...

Chuck Schumer's DSCC staffers illegally obtained Michael Steele's Social Security number and credit records.(of course Schumer opposes listening in to Terrorist phone calls or intercept their bank records because it in fridges on their privacy rights..but it's ok to do it to a Black Republican).

House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-MD)said that Steele work "slavishly" for the GOP.

At a press conference,Dem protesters threw Oreo cookies at Steele.

and his opponent Cardin had to fire a staffer after he referred to Steele as an "Oreo."

Now have either Chrissy or KO condemned these tactics?

The Bush administration has ample opportunity to use free air time to push it's views on us, and believe me, they take advantage of it...day in and day out, using the same mainstream media you guys just love to call "Liberal".

Why don't you just give it a rest????
Posted by: Mike at October 24, 2006 10:05 PM

They want it all mike. It's a control thing. Keith reminds them that there are other people who don't share their world view. That drives them nuts. Hannity and Limbaugh are so much more arrogant and ignorant than Keith so it's not an issue about truth in the media or personality. It's just about control. Control the media, control other countries, control judges, control control control.

Nothing will ever top what the right wing pulled with "Swift Boat". Yes, the all time classic in gutter politics, compliments of the right. This is one of the reasons many of us, including Olby, are so damned angry at the Republicans.

In reference to the Steele/Cardin race, isn't it ironic that in addition to Olby not making any mention whatsoever about the deplorable attacks against Mr. Steele, that he also chose to completely ignore that Senate race altogether when he discussed the current key races this evening on Countdown...in spite of the fact that the most recent published poll on that race on realclearpolitics.com shows it as being a dead heat.

Of course, how can you work that one in, when you have to spend more time on the "Man on Dog" double digit deficit instead?

Olby is entitled to his opinion, becuase like a--holes, everyone has them and it's clear he's an a--hole with lots of opinions. But the problem is that he's presenting his opinions as fact when they are anything but.

Keith Olbermann + Katy Turd = FatKat

Nice summary. Olby is getting ready for the playoffs -- by that I mean the elections. He'll have his Democrat penants and extra special chants all ready, appropriately enough, by Halloween.

We shouldn't forget, however, that Olby is "non-partisan" because he neglects his civic duty and doesn't bother to vote.

Nothing will ever top what the right wing pulled with "Swift Boat". Yes, the all time classic in gutter politics, compliments of the right. This is one of the reasons many of us, including Olby, are so damned angry at the Republicans.
************************************************
Yes because hearing the truth about Kerry was the one thing the left couldn't stand.

They want it all mike. It's a control thing. Keith reminds them that there are other people who don't share their world view. That drives them nuts. Hannity and Limbaugh are so much more arrogant and ignorant than Keith so it's not an issue about truth in the media or personality. It's just about control. Control the media, control other countries, control judges, control control control.
************************************************
The left overwhelmly controls the news media NBC,ABC,CNN,PBS,MNBC,CNBC,BBC,TIME,Newsweek,New York Times,LA Times,NPR,Air America..(do I need to go on?)...so KO is not a stand out all the MSM thinks and acts like him.

The left overwhelmly controls the news media NBC,ABC,CNN,PBS,MNBC,CNBC,BBC,TIME,Newsweek,New York Times,LA Times,NPR,Air America..(do I need to go on?)...so KO is not a stand out all the MSM thinks and acts like him.

Posted by: mlong at October 24, 2006 10:29 PM

Like I said, you want it all. Anything less than total agreement is considered "the left". If anyone says anything other than what Limbaugh or Fox news has designated as truth it is liberal bias. The right wing has the whitehouse, the senate, and the congress, Fox news is their press secretary. You have been sold a "I am a victim" mentality in order to win your vote and keep in power people whose only goal is power and money.

You guys love to talk about whiners, but I've listened to you people the right whine about the "liberal media" all my life, and, for the most part, you are wrong, and have always been wrong on this point. When you are that far to the extreme right, everything else looks left to you...it's just that simple.

As for Kerry, Swift Boat was nothing but a smear, and you people know it. Yea, the Dems can try as they might to get down in the gutter, but you guys on the right are the masters at that.

And yes, That anti-Ford commercial engineered by Mehlmann is nothing but a smear as well. My hope is that these things will finally start to backfire....against ANYONE who campaigns like that, left ot right.

Steele?? Did Krazy Keith mention NY Chuck Schumer underlings being prosecuted for fraudulently obtaining Steeles financial records with intent to smear Mr. Steele????? I am going to guess the Tan-Man did not utter a peep about that because the premature ejaculator doesn't cover Demo-corruption.

I just like to thank Keith Olbermann and his fellow Leftists for their demoralization of the US. Allah willing, we are on the verge of a historic victory. Soon the crusaders will be driven out of Iraq and Afganistan, Israel and Europe will fall.
Thanks to the Left we will win!

Sorry Mike, but Mark Halperin of ABC News was on O'Reilly tonight refuting your premise. He states that there is, in fact, a bias against Republicans and for democrats.

If you were watching O'Reilly tonight (instead of seeing Keith simply attack him), you would have seen it for yourself.

Yesterday, SteveMG referenced the thoughts of Halperin and his colleagues at ABC News: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/TheNote/story?id=156238

I just like to thank Keith Olbermann and his fellow Leftists for their demoralization of the US. Allah willing, we are on the verge of a historic victory. Soon the crusaders will be driven out of Iraq and Afganistan, Israel and Europe will fall.
Thanks to the Left we will win!

He states that there is, in fact, a bias against Republicans and for democrats.

Posted by: Missy at October 24, 2006 10:52 PM

At this point anyone with any common sense should have a bias against Republicans only because they have finaly been exposed to the public. It's not realy a bias, It's just the truth looks that way because it is not on their side. I'm sorry, but it's the truth. Blame the media if you want. All the power they could ask for was theirs and they fucked it all up. War, debt, division, scandel, religious manipulation, I could go on....

Imagine that; O'reilly has a guest on claiming media bias against the poor republicans!

The left/right paradigm is a LIE. At the very top of the political tree there are no Democrats or Republicans. There is The Federal Reserve (a private banking institution you pay taxes to), the Bilderberg Group (the world's kingmakers) and whatever government that is smoking the genitalia of these corrupt pedophiles.

Olbermann, O'Reilly, Limbaugh, Hannity mean NOTHING. They just spout words, some more attractively than others granted, but its just bluff and bluster to confuse and blur lines.

Watch Aaron Russo's new documentary "America: Freedom to Fascism" on Google video. It will change your life.

Codas,
I agree with your criticism of the Republicans. However the Dems aren't that better. They belive in kissing up to the UN, France and the Islamic nations. I say boycott the elections.
As for the Media, they're pro-Islamic tendancy shows and they want in Islamic victory.
example CNN showing Islamic propaganda from Iraq and the Media's rooting for Hizballah.
Honestly the American political system sucks I wish there was a Military coup.

Every time I read comments by individuals who dislike olbermannwatch it always centers on how bad the President and Republicans are. They use outrageous claims like "regime" or "tyrant" when talking about the so called right wing. Why dont Olbermann fans debate his journalistic merits and not always revert to the standard Bush is an idiot and dictator line to defend him. Olbermann practically never engages in debate on his show with people of opposite opinions and never looks at a news story in an objective manner (if anyone disagrees please provide specifics guests and dates) O'Reilly, Hannity, and any other conservative journalists have the intellectual capacity to debate liberals on their shows and this is why they win the ratings battle every night. Olbermann is just too scared or ignorant to attempt anything similar to that. Olbermann gives his opinion as fact in a self righteous manner, when in reality it is extremely prejudice towards anything right of center. You don't gain esteem in the news community by hosting a show that is an echo chamber for an unequivocally liberal host. Olbermann is what is wrong with American liberals. You cannot always revert to the standard talking points of Bush, Republicans, and Fox News are evil, but need to base your arguments on facts and not simply on opinion. Americans aren't stupid and know an idiot when they see one. That is why Countdown will never rise above a pathetic third place in ratings and continually be destroyed by shows with hosts who have real journalistic integrity.

Every time I read comments by individuals who dislike olbermannwatch it always centers on how bad the President and Republicans are. They use outrageous claims like "regime" or "tyrant" when talking about the so called right wing. Why dont Olbermann fans debate his journalistic merits and not always revert to the standard Bush is an idiot and dictator line to defend him. Olbermann practically never engages in debate on his show with people of opposite opinions and never looks at a news story in an objective manner (if anyone disagrees please provide specifics guests and dates) O'Reilly, Hannity, and any other conservative journalists have the intellectual capacity to debate liberals on their shows and this is why they win the ratings battle every night. Olbermann is just too scared or ignorant to attempt anything similar to that. Olbermann gives his opinion as fact in a self righteous manner, when in reality it is extremely prejudice towards anything right of center. You don't gain esteem in the news community by hosting a show that is an echo chamber for an unequivocally liberal host. Olbermann is what is wrong with American liberals. You cannot always revert to the standard talking points of Bush, Republicans, and Fox News are evil, but need to base your arguments on facts and not simply on opinion. Americans aren't stupid and know an idiot when they see one. That is why Countdown will never rise above a pathetic third place in ratings and continually be destroyed by shows with hosts who have real journalistic integrity.

Americans aren't stupid Sam, they're in a coma.

WAKE UP AMERICA. None of this means anything, you're whistling up your own trouser legs.

www.infowars.com

Watch Aaron Russo's documentary as described above. THIS IS TOO IMPORTANT TO BE DISCUSSING WHETHER THE LEFT OR RIGHT ACTUALLY EXIST.

Resist.

You forgot to mention icky-icky David Icke's lizard people who actually rule us all. As in they PWN THE WHOLE WORLD!!!! They are teh bomb!!!

Americans aren't stupid Sam, they're in a coma.

WAKE UP AMERICA. None of this means anything, you're whistling up your own trouser legs.

www.infowars.com

Watch Aaron Russo's documentary as described above. THIS IS TOO IMPORTANT TO BE DISCUSSING WHETHER THE LEFT OR RIGHT ACTUALLY EXIST.

Resist.

Fox News...Oh yeah thats the cable channel with the dreaded far-right wing Alan Colmes, Bob Beckel, Susan Estich spewing their far-right wing hate 24/7. Yeah you're right I'm shure glad we have all those other channels to balance it out!!

Air-America was put on to balance Rush,Shawn,Levin, on radio.........What Happened?

I think I know why Bill is really getting under Olby's skin. Yeah I know he crushes him in the ratings night after night. And book sales? Fergetabouit!!! And minute for minute The Factor is just a better show. But I've noticed that everytime Bill says on his show that someone declined to come on Bill will say. "He must be hiding under his desk." Is it just me or.........

Arron Russo, wasn't he the guy that tried to run for president in 04' But didn't make the ballot on the Libratarion ticket? Didn't he use to produce Porn movies? And the only place he can get his film on is Ya-Hoo? Arron, change to a Democrat. Olby will have you on his show tomorrow!

Do you get free cable through your tin-foil hat?

Posted by: Anonymous at October 24, 2006 10:08 PM

ROTFLMAO!!!!! Great one, Anon.

Hey Aaron... stop promoting your movie here... we're not going to watch it. Nobody is 'controlling us'... there is no huge conspiracy that we all need to be afraid of.

And how do I know this? Because what would the point of this behind-the-scenes conspiracy be? Money... clearly whom ever you claim to be doing this already has a lot of money, or else they wouldn't be in that positions... and what could they possibly need more for? Power... power means nothing if you can't wield it... and staying behind the curtain telling people what to do really isn't all that impressive. World domination... yes because who doesn't want to control the world... and then... um... sit around and watch things happen. I mean, come on... grow up.

Perhaps the only reason could be sex... but believe it or not... you don't need money, power, and/or to dominate the world to have sex. It does help, however, to GET OUT OF THE BASEMENT once in a while.

Do us all a favor... stop posting here, and just go shout on a street corner.

but need to base your arguments on facts and not simply on opinion. Americans aren't stupid and know an idiot when they see one. That is why Countdown will never rise above a pathetic third place in ratings and continually be destroyed by shows with hosts who have real journalistic integrity.

Posted by: sam at October 24, 2006 11:25 PM

You say Americans aren't stupid and know an idiot when they see one.Why is Oriely number 1? What shows are you talking about that have real journalistic integrity? Fox news? You are making a joke arent you? I know they never give their opinion as fact in a self righteuos manner do they. Rush Limbaugh is a great American I suppose. What if Keith was found out to be taking 12 oxycontin tablets a day? Or Newt Ginrich and Ollie North of Fox. Newt being a wonderful example of integrity and Ollie thinking trading weapons to Iran was a neat idea. What if Keith did that? But no, Fox is true blue American. Well, not to me.

Olbermann is an embarrassment to Cable News!
O'Reilly is the KING of Cable News!
Looney Liberals can't handle the truth!

Signed,
Refugee from the Democratic Party

Sam:

Why can't you get off your "Olbermann isn't a jounalist" argument? Who is calling him one? It is not a hard news report, nor is it intended to be. Can't you just accept the fact that he is a simply a pundent with an agenda, just like Limbaugh, and leave it alone?

KO is not the only thing we on the left watch and listen to all day. I personally don't care to see Olbermann debating right wingers. MSNBC also has Hardball, and Chris covers that angle well enough. To get the news, I watch the headlines and read the papers, and yes, I even occasionally tune in to Fox "news".

Once again I ask; why are you on the right so damned obsessed with what a guy who is admittantly third in the rating is saying or doing? wFor that matter, why does this web site even exist?

Codas is right....you want it all. I suppose you won't be satisfied until the only "media" any of have to watch are Fox news clones. It's called brainwashing!

O'lielly :
Doesn't it suck being on the floor licking the shoe's of your hero Bill? Now we know why moronic so-called news journalist's have to hate the good ol' USA because of idiot's such as you that are too stupid to come up with an original name for the game and do a frankennut and mouch off the GOD O'Rielly. Remember Frankennut, O'lielly? He had a gig on a commie station that you commie lover's couldn't hold up. GOD bless Fox News. The number 1 news station on earth. Even GOD watches Fox to see who he's sending to the dump heap of demonut ratings land. LMRAO

I checked the infowars site and it is one of the loonier sites i've seen so far, why am i not surprised they're fans of olbermann?

great Scott's think alike. Now if all demonut's named there son's Scott then we wouldn't have these American hating demonuts. Where's polpot when you need him to rid the world of the pathetically stupid?

Destroyer, all anyone has to do is read your posts filled with profanity, insults, and made up words, and it becomes very clear who the "pathetically stupid" one is. It also makes me glad that I actually like Olbermann, knowing that those who don't are being represented by people as ignorant as you.

Don't waste time responding with more ignorat rants. I will have signed off and gone to bed.

"...they don't call the Hour of Sping for nothing..."

No, THEY don't. You do!

Codas: You must be a troll. No one can be such a stoolie!

***

Personal jabs aside, Olbermann has the courage to talk about what matters, the laws of the land.

If you can't have laws that ensure freedom, you don't have a free country.

I see no interest in viewing Olbermann for his personality, but rather the information he diseminates. When it comes to the issues of Haebius Corpus and the War Commision's Act, let the bigger picture be the focus, this should be a primary concern to all Americans.

If any one person here believes that a few chortles of "Krazy Keith" is more pressing than said matters, I question your patriotism in the most truest sense of the word.

His special report on the War Commisions Act is eruditive and warrents attention to all true patriots.

Let this not be a focus on the personality of pundits and anchors, but about the message of pertinance that we should all hold dear.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15321167/

A response akin to playing the world's tiniest violin will only strengthen the urgency of the message.

Codas: You must be a troll. No one can be such a stoolie!

***

Personal jabs aside, Olbermann has the courage to talk about what matters, the laws of the land.

If you can't have laws that ensure freedom, you don't have a free country.

I see no interest in viewing Olbermann for his personality, but rather the information he diseminates. When it comes to the issues of Haebius Corpus and the War Commision's Act, let the bigger picture be the focus, this should be a primary concern to all Americans.

If any one person here believes that a few chortles of "Krazy Keith" is more pressing than said matters, I question your patriotism in the most truest sense of the word.

His special report on the War Commisions Act is eruditive and warrents attention to all true patriots.

Let this not be a focus on the personality of pundits and anchors, but about the message of pertinance that we should all hold dear.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15321167/

A response akin to playing the world's tiniest violin will only strengthen the urgency of the message.

http://www.stazzz.net/shemales.php shemales pics [url=http://www.stazzz.net/shemales.php]shemales pics[/url]

habeas corpus

Miss it yet?

posted by al ciada:

"You stupid people. Olbermann is the only great journalist America has right now. He is telling the truth to fight against this fledgling dictatorship."

Let's see, he ran the Valerie Plame/Karl Rove thing into the ground. What happened? Then when Rove was cleared he had to have David Korn come on to promote his book about the incident that is so full of ship that it stinks.

Let's see, Halliburton. Hum, went nowhere.

Abramhoff? One US Rep. That's it. Those fuzzy pictures with a highlited dot on someones head nobody recognizes is real proof he is in GW's backpocket.

Just to name a few.

I have been wondering... can you have a "sex" scandle when you don't have sex?

Posted by mickey:

"Why can't you guys running this site accept Olbermann's right to his ideas, and, our rights to listen to his ideas if we want to? He is no worse than Hannity and a number of others on the right...he's just left of center. Whats the problem?

Listen, I can't get in my car and turn on my AM radio without hearing Limbaugh, Hannity, Savage, and a host of other right wingers rant, and rant, and rant, and on cable TV, you have an entire network pushing right wing ideas 24 hours a day. Why do you people have such a problem with someone doing it on the left?

After listening to right wing talking points all day long, I happen enjoy taking a little refuge in a show like this, that I will readily admit, is not exactly "fair and balanced". But then, neither is Fox. The Bush administration has ample opportunity to use free air time to push it's views on us, and believe me, they take advantage of it...day in and day out, using the same mainstream media you guys just love to call "Liberal".

Why don't you just give it a rest????

I personally dream of the day when Bill Maher comes back to free cable. Then you'll have to make a whole new web site for that one."

Why don't you excercise your free right to not visit this site. What's the matter, you can't take it when someone exposes a piece of slime for what he is.

You realy have personal problems if you litsen to right wing show hosts all day. I mean, you must really be sick to listen to something all day that makes you miserable. To be a liberal is to be miserable to begin with. They tell us every day how bad we are supposed to feel. They got you.

If you think FNC is a conservative network you are dumb. Hannity has Colmes. No other show host is pushing the conservative agenda. Mathews and Olby are so biased it stinks. FNC 90% of the time has points of veiw from guests on both sides moron. Olby has one left media clown after another.

If you hate what you read here leave. I personally dream of the day I meet Mahre, Olby, Moore, Franken, Begala, Carville, Donahue, Robbins, Penn, Redford, Reiner, Colbert, Stewart, in my neighborhood and find out how far I could get my boot up their ass.

If you hate what you read here leave. I personally dream of the day I meet Mahre, Olby, Moore, Franken, Begala, Carville, Donahue, Robbins, Penn, Redford, Reiner, Colbert, Stewart, in my neighborhood and find out how far I could get my boot up their ass.

Posted by: Brick at October 25, 2006 08:10 AM

I don't hate what I read here at all. I find some commenters to be a real challange. And then there's you. You seem to be delusional about Fox. You are also delusional about Chris Mathews. He swooned over Big Dick Cheney for years. You would like people like me not to come to this site wouldn't you. The front line is everywhere and it is here also. You call Keith a piece of slime while the slime from Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh pours all over America. You name a bunch of actors who you would like to stick your boot up their ass. What about all the conservitives who are coming out against Bush? Pat Buchanon thinks he could be impeached on his immigration stance alone. Getting back to slime, has there ever been more in the congress and the senate?

Krazy Keith needs a sanity hearing
All of his colleagues are jeering
He's stark raving mad
His show's very bad
His manner is never endearing

Nothing will ever top what the right wing pulled with "Swift Boat". Yes, the all time classic in gutter politics, compliments of the right. This is one of the reasons many of us, including Olby, are so damned angry at the Republicans.

Posted by: mike at October 24, 2006 10:19 PM

--------
but its ok to say...if you vote republican, more black churches will be burned down...the man in texas who was dragged to death behind a vehicle occurred becuse of republican politicians...old people will die and/or have to eat only cat food if you vote republican

BTW...so what if the girl in the Ford ad was white...I know so many inter-racial couples today, i can't believe this is an issue...or do democrats think that you should only date those of the same race?

Everytime I hear "swift boat" I can't help but be reminded of that classy retort "liar, creepy liar".

Codas, quick semi-rational question that in your 1235am post, you basically say that Americans are stupid because they watch O'Rielly and Fox News...the extension of this argument is that Americans are stupid because they elected W and a republican Congress (this argument has been made time and time again by many other democrats-although I freely admit I have not seen you use it)...my question is this, IF Americans elect a Democratic congress and in 2008 a Democratic president...then does that mean that Americans are no longer stupid?

posted by al ciada:
"You stupid people. Olbermann is the only great journalist America has right now."

Posted by Mike:
"Why can't you get off your "Olbermann isn't a jounalist" argument? Who is calling him one? It is not a hard news report, nor is it intended to be."

Do you guys want a minute or two to caucus and decide if you want to present Olbermann as a real journalist, you know, the "edward r. murrow" of his generation or if you want to go ahead and admit he's a commentator trying to pass off his opinions as news?

BTW--get some old archive tape of Murrow if you can. Olbermann has copied his gestures, right down to the dramatic head turns and the casting of the eyes up and down. Maybe you two might want to agree on a new word to describe Olby: ACTOR.

Osama bin olbermann is now trying to say that the republicans are terrorists! It is olbermann who is defending the "rights" of terrorists.
another progressive nutjob trying turn the blame away from himself.
Olbermann supports the rights of terrorists.
Calling the Republicans terrorists is like blaming cops for child molestors. HEY OLBERMANN nobody believes you! You are the one supporting terrorists by whining about their habeus corpus "rights".
Maybe some muslim nutjob will fly an airpalne into a building with you in it.
Olbermann you are a terrorist.

I think the reason that Americans watch fox news is because "we" want our opinions regurgitated. 99 percent of people that watch orielly, olbermann or other host agree with the opinions of the respective host.

You have got to love how the crazy left can't handle Foxnews. It is fair and balanced unlike the other cable news networks. But then again you Looney libs are smarter then the rest of us.....LOL!!!!!

Excerpt from Townhall.com:

The Democrats' contract with America By Ben Shapiro Wednesday, October 25, 2006

Democrats claim they have consistently lost elections over the past six years based on their inability to define a platform. Democrats were for the war before they were against it; they were for social security reform before they were against it; they were for sexual impropriety by politicians (Bill Clinton, Gerry Studds, Barney Frank) before they were against it (Mark Foley); they are unsure about the morality of gay marriage, but will slander those who oppose it. Democrats are consistent on two issues, and two issues only: abortion and tax cuts. They're for the former and against the latter. Which is, of course, why Democrats have not fully defined their platform: Their platform is unpalatable to most Americans. Ambiguity is a better option than clarity.

Ambiguity remains a better option than clarity for today's Democratic Party. Hence the fawning over first-term Senator Barack "Blank" Obama (D-Ill), who, to paraphrase Abraham Lincoln, can compress the most words into the smallest ideas better than any man in politics. Obama is the culmination of a decade-long Democratic attempt to run from their own ideas. He refuses to be pinned to policy. According to Blank's own proclamations on "Meet the Press" on October 22, he is for "common sense and pragmatism" and "smart government." This will surely distinguish Blank from those politicians who campaign on the basis of stupidity, impracticality and imbecilic government.

My word, there are so many NWO shills on here.

My word, there are so many NWO shills on here.

Fox News is about as balanced as a one legged man at an ass kicking party. It's nothing more than a Bush administration propaganda machine.

All cable news is garbage. Olbermann is pretty good though, even though he needs a new haircut.

NWO...they were my favorite rap group back in the day!

How can you debate these looney liberals? They are tooo far gone!

I expect olbs to take on Michael J. Fox in a special comment, at least worst person in the world. This is because he uses fear in his recent tv ad for the dems. Fox is a fear monger.

Brick, you sound like a real intelligent guy. You can't even make a post without stooping to the level of calling someone a "moron", or letting us know how much you would like to "see how far you could get your boot up someone's ass".

I remember...yes, you are the one who "wouldn't question anything Bush does": That, Brick, is one of the most moronic statements I have ever heard anyone say or write - EVER!

Take a moment to think of someone like Hitler and how much you think you hate everything he stood for. How do you think he obtained the power to do everything he did? Yes, Brick....he did it by gradually winning the trust and admiration of his own people until he had a mass following who also "wouldn't question anything he did". Then he began to focus his trusting masses on his "enemies", both within and outside Germany. The rest is history.

Yes, Brick. This is why we have to question our leaders and their motives, especially during controversial times. In fact, it is our job as citizens.

By the way, if you really believe something like the Hannity and Colmes show is a true liberal vs conservative clash of ideas, that further illustrates how far on the extreme right you really are. Why do you think they picked an ugly guy with no charisma to represent the "left" and "oppose" an all American type with unbounding charisma to represent the right? This is not a clash of ideas, it is a showcase of "good vs bad" pundants.

Now the show I would really like to see would be something like Hannity & Olbermann: Then we might have something!

By the way, Codas asked you a very good question: Why don't you ever say anything about characters like Buchanon, a TRUE conservative who opposed and continues to oppose Bush on the war and other things from the right? I could name others. Why is it always just the "lefties" you go after on these points?

Here are just a few examples of why FOX is biased...

---On March 23, 2003 the FOX News channel headline banners were rolling: "Huge chemical weapons factory found in Iraq... Reports: 30 Iraqis surrender at chem weapons plant... coal. troops holding Iraqi in charge of chem. weapons." On the next day the Dow Jones Newswires reported that U.S. officials had admitted that morning that the site contained no chemicals at all and had been abandoned long before the Iraq War.

---A news article on the Fox News website during October 2004 by Carl Cameron, chief political correspondent of Fox News, contained three fabricated quotes attributed to Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry. The quotes included: "Women should like me! I do manicures," "Didn't my nails and cuticles look great?" and "I'm metrosexual [Bush's] a cowboy." Fox News retracted the story and apologized, citing a "jest" that became published through "fatigue and bad judgement, not malice."

---Photocopied memos from Fox News executive John Moody instructed the network's on-air anchors and reporters to use positive language when discussing pro-life viewpoints, the Iraq war, and tax cuts, as well as requesting that the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal be put in context with the other violence in the area.

---According to a Journalism.org survey of 547 journalists from various publications and news outlets, Fox News Channel was found to be most easily identifiable for serving a partisan ideological position.

---John Gibson said, "George Bush is going to be president. And who needs to know that he's not a legitimate president?"

---Alan Colmes is touted by Fox as "a hard-hitting liberal", but he admitted to USA Today that "I'm quite moderate"

----Fox News reporters, anchors and writers for its website alter their language to immediately parrot the rhetoric of the Bush administration. For example, in 2002 the White House began referring to suicide bombings as "homicide bombings"

---The same can be said for "terrorist surveillance", referred to as NSA wiretapping by most Fox News commentators until the White House redesignated it.

---Critics of the network contend that Fox specializes in "political sabotage" by putting up moderate to conservative "Democrats" as token liberals against more staunchly conservative Republicans. Examples of the so-called Fox News liberal include:
----------------Alan Colmes - Co-host of Hannity & Colmes who is supposed to represent the political left opposite conservative Sean Hannity, but who admitted to USA Today that "I'm quite moderate."
-----------------Pat Caddell - Who has called the Democratic party a "confederacy of gangsters"
-----------------Susan Estrich - Known for her opposition to liberal Democrats and support for the Democratic Leadership Council, and who once told Sean Hannity that she was his "biggest liberal friend."

---A interview on Hannity & Colmes in which two guests were brought on, one a Republican and the other supposedly a Democrat, to debate an issue. However, the Democrat, former congressman Jimmy Hayes, was actually a Republican. Neither Hayes nor the hosts acknowledged the misidentification

---In August 2006, two Fox News producers resigned from the network, citing its coverage of the Israel's conflict that month with Hezbollah in Lebanon. Their resignation letter read in part: "We can no longer work with a news organization that claims to be fair and balanced when you are so far from that...Not only are you [Fox News] an instrument of the Bush White House, and Israeli propaganda, you are war mongers with no sense of decency, nor professionalism."

---During an interview between a republican and democratic strategist on Weekend Live, the host at the end of the interview, said, "Well, if voters vote for republicans, at least they're voting on the side of America."

---FOX has habit of using 'cut lines.' Brief explanations of the story currently airing at the bottom of the screen. These cut lines are typically anti-democrat and pro-republicans. Especially popular is the use of question marks to legitmize a cut line with a negative connotation. Examples include, "Dems want us to lose?" , "Dems killing morale?" , "Dems lead not as big as thought". Then pro- republican cut lines, "Bush best president ever?" , "GOP fighting for US" , GOP fighting liberal media too?".

---Brett Baier's special "Why He Fights," a positive look at Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has been criticized as bias. Baier questions Rumsfeld in a very 'soft' manner, leading with positive questions like, "Is this harder to win that you thought?" , "Does the attack on your character strengthen your resolve." Then, berrating and attacking critics of the Defense Secretary in the same piece, "How can you criticize this man's work when he's fighting to protect you?" , "Why don't you give him the benefit of the doubt when he's trying to win war?"

- This is just a few examples. Any clear-headed person can't look at all this and think FOX isn't biased.

James, the name of this board is OLBERMANN-WATCH, hence, we are here to discuss Keith Olbermann, not Fox News. The "yeah but Fox News does so and so" "argument" really doesn't cut it here as a defense of your hero Olby, although, once again, an Olbyloon attempts to change the subject in order to get the heat off of their hero, Edward R. Olbermann, better known to some of us here as Man-On-Fan, OrangeTan, and ManTan.

And as for those so-called "Special Comments" of his: It does seem that in Olber-the-hill's Bizarro-esque version of history, the "revered" Constitution is to be a "suicide pact" in times of national danger (i.e. the War of 1812, the Civil War, Pearl Harbor). You'd think by that yardstick, he would've wanted, say, the Confederates to prevail in the "War Between the States" (as just one example), as he would've been frothing at the mouth if he were around then (never mind now) over Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus for the duration of the war.

Hi James! Geat Thanks!

I love some of your proofs on Fox News (even though I didn't realize this entire thread was about Fox News, but thanks for setting us straight...)

----------------Alan Colmes - Co-host of Hannity & Colmes who is supposed to represent the political left opposite conservative Sean Hannity, but who admitted to USA Today that "I'm quite moderate."
{But of course the self identified non-partisans of MSNBC -Chris Matthews & Keith Olbermann- aren't located anywhere left of center on the American policital spectrum}

-----------------Susan Estrich - Known for her opposition to liberal Democrats
{Since Estrich was also the campaign manager for Michael Dukakis' 1988 presidential run, she must have misjudged Gov Dukakis as a raging moderate}

-----------------Pat Caddell - {I admit he does not seem to be much of a Dem, but was heel for them back in the days fo Carter and McGovern---then again he could be an olde tyme Dem whose party has left his kind behind, like Zell Miller and a number of old southern dems-which came to known as Reagan Democrats)

Your same arguments about FoxNews Dems can be made for the MSNBC republican talking heads...oooops, wait, I mean the ones on Chris Matthews shows (now that Michelle Malkin is persona non grata)...I corrected myself because KO only seems to have a republican on every 3 months or so and is VISIBLY unhappy about it

oh and btw...the survey of journalists that identify fox as most easily identifiable for serving a partisan ideological position...these are the same journalists who vote in the ballpark of 85% to 90% democrat, right?

Brandon...please refer to me by my correct identifier:
The Alfred E Newman of our generation

Thank God for me and my bravery in journalism for discussing TomKat as my #1...oh and Bill O'Reilly is the worst person in the world because he contributes to global warming by transforming O2 into CO2 day after day after day!!! (of course I am sure ho is directed to do this by Rove)

Foxnews is good foxnews is great. I must vote against the demo-flip-floppers.....take me to your leader....Bill O'Reilly...he is my god!

"we are here to discuss Keith Olbermann, not Fox News"
Posted by: Brandon at October 25, 2006 12:37 PM

Ok Brandon, get back to Olbermann. I hate to keep harping on this but I have to- can you or anyone here attack Olby by presenting counterpoints to his arguments? Again today all I see is stupid attempts at poetry, the word "loon" and references to him apeing Murrow. Now let's see some substance from the mindless, grinning bulldogs out there!

indierik...for your answers...please re-read the summary/rebuttal at the top of the page...

dependentrichard- yeah, I saw what Johnny $ wrote. On lefty blogs I read (Mydd, Media Matters, et cetera)the author of the thread begins the discussion and those commenting expand on it. On olbywatch after the author submits the piece it is mostly followed up with name calling and other juvenile attempts at hacking up Keith. So I guess you're saying the "substance" begins and ends with Dollar and Cox's rebuttals.

It's not my fault if the Olbyloons reading comprehension is so piss-poor. Every single day, both Bob and Johnny Dollar present fine, well-researched point-by-point details of Olbermann's latest outrageous statements and falsehoods. Now the fact that you wish to argue these FACTS and instead post pointless, off-topic posts about the supposed sins of Fox News and other distracting, off-topic posts to get the heat off your boy is not my problem. The facts are here, you just refuse to believe them and keep trying to change the subject. Typical Olbyloon behavior. But hey, at least you're reliable in your methods and oh so amusing.

---On March 23, 2003 the FOX News channel headline banners were rolling: "Huge chemical weapons factory found in Iraq... Reports: 30 Iraqis surrender at chem weapons plant... coal. troops holding Iraqi in charge of chem. weapons." On the next day the Dow Jones Newswires reported that U.S. officials had admitted that morning that the site contained no chemicals at all and had been abandoned long before the Iraq War.

Fox was wrong. It happens, ask Rather.

---A news article on the Fox News website during October 2004 by Carl Cameron, chief political correspondent of Fox News, contained three fabricated quotes attributed to Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry. The quotes included: "Women should like me! I do manicures," "Didn't my nails and cuticles look great?" and "I'm metrosexual [Bush's] a cowboy." Fox News retracted the story and apologized, citing a "jest" that became published through "fatigue and bad judgement, not malice."

Apologized, Olby should try this when he is wrong.

---Photocopied memos from Fox News executive John Moody instructed the network's on-air anchors and reporters to use positive language when discussing pro-life viewpoints, the Iraq war, and tax cuts, as well as requesting that the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal be put in context with the other violence in the area.

That is too bad they were to use "positive language". Putting the Abu Ghraib scandal in context, not a bad idea.

---According to a Journalism.org survey of 547 journalists from various publications and news outlets, Fox News Channel was found to be most easily identifiable for serving a partisan ideological position.

Survey from 547 journalists, how many were liberals. My guess is most of them, of course they hate fox news. This suprises me about as much as if 547 college professors were surveyed.

---John Gibson said, "George Bush is going to be president. And who needs to know that he's not a legitimate president?"

So Gibson indicates Bush is not a legitimate president, that has a liberal ring.

---Alan Colmes is touted by Fox as "a hard-hitting liberal", but he admitted to USA Today that "I'm quite moderate"

When asked most everybody is a "moderate". Olbs claims the he is down the center of the road politically.

----Fox News reporters, anchors and writers for its website alter their language to immediately parrot the rhetoric of the Bush administration. For example, in 2002 the White House began referring to suicide bombings as "homicide bombings"

Both accurate descriptions.

---The same can be said for "terrorist surveillance", referred to as NSA wiretapping by most Fox News commentators until the White House redesignated it.

I have also saw it called domestic wiretapping, not really accurate.

---Critics of the network contend that Fox specializes in "political sabotage" by putting up moderate to conservative "Democrats" as token liberals against more staunchly conservative Republicans. Examples of the so-called Fox News liberal include:
----------------Alan Colmes - Co-host of Hannity & Colmes who is supposed to represent the political left opposite conservative Sean Hannity, but who admitted to USA Today that "I'm quite moderate."
-----------------Pat Caddell - Who has called the Democratic party a "confederacy of gangsters"
-----------------Susan Estrich - Known for her opposition to liberal Democrats and support for the Democratic Leadership Council, and who once told Sean Hannity that she was his "biggest liberal friend."

Again most journalists likely would claim to be "moderates" if asked. Ask olby if he leans one way or the other and he would deny it. Most people find the DLC to be a liberal groug.

---A interview on Hannity & Colmes in which two guests were brought on, one a Republican and the other supposedly a Democrat, to debate an issue. However, the Democrat, former congressman Jimmy Hayes, was actually a Republican. Neither Hayes nor the hosts acknowledged the misidentification

Not sure if this was a honest mistake. Can see it happening since Hayes was a dem the switched to repub.

---In August 2006, two Fox News producers resigned from the network, citing its coverage of the Israel's conflict that month with Hezbollah in Lebanon. Their resignation letter read in part: "We can no longer work with a news organization that claims to be fair and balanced when you are so far from that...Not only are you [Fox News] an instrument of the Bush White House, and Israeli propaganda, you are war mongers with no sense of decency, nor professionalism."

They had a difference of opion and resigned, it happens. Ask olbermann, a difference of opion has gotten him fired many times.

---During an interview between a republican and democratic strategist on Weekend Live, the host at the end of the interview, said, "Well, if voters vote for republicans, at least they're voting on the side of America."

---FOX has habit of using 'cut lines.' Brief explanations of the story currently airing at the bottom of the screen. These cut lines are typically anti-democrat and pro-republicans. Especially popular is the use of question marks to legitmize a cut line with a negative connotation. Examples include, "Dems want us to lose?" , "Dems killing morale?" , "Dems lead not as big as thought". Then pro- republican cut lines, "Bush best president ever?" , "GOP fighting for US" , GOP fighting liberal media too?".

Cut lines?? Olby has a habit of doing a whole show that is pro-democrat and anti-repubilcan. The WPITW is basically a nightly anti-repub segment.

---Brett Baier's special "Why He Fights," a positive look at Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has been criticized as bias. Baier questions Rumsfeld in a very 'soft' manner, leading with positive questions like, "Is this harder to win that you thought?" , "Does the attack on your character strengthen your resolve." Then, berrating and attacking critics of the Defense Secretary in the same piece, "How can you criticize this man's work when he's fighting to protect you?" , "Why don't you give him the benefit of the doubt when he's trying to win war?"

Is a soft interview bad? If Baier really wanted to kiss ass he would have handed over a check to start the interview.

- This is just a few examples. Any clear-headed person can't look at all this and think FOX isn't biased.

It appears that fox is into the business of opinion journalism and business is good. Olby is in the business of opinion journalism and business is not so good.

Oh please Indierik, I bet you good money I can go through ANY thread here and the majority of off-topic posts will have been made by the Olbyloons. And why? Because you desperately seek to change the main topic of discussion to get the heat off Olbermann. Furthermore, your agument simply makes no sense whatsoever. You state you want concrete facts of Olbermann's lies and distortions, his outrageous slurs, etc. And then you ADMIT that Dollar and Cox do indeed provide them. Your complaint is with people using "insults" and "namecalling" (yeah, like the Olbyloons aren't guilty of THAT on a daily basis). But let's all have a pity party here for poor, defenseless Olby. You know, the same guy who goes around labeling people WPITW, the same guy who insults women, calls them sluts on air, attacks co-workers, degrades anyone he remotely perceives as a threat to him. That guy? Why don't you have a word with HIM first on manners and decorum before you bring your preachy, hypocritical self here and decide to pooh-pooh the content of Dollar & Cox's posts because you don't like the follow-up comments made by other posters. I couldn't make you people and your twisted logic up if I tried.

"Typical Olbyloon behavior"
Posted by: Brandon at October 25, 2006 01:12 PM

Brandon, you're making my point. Add something of substance to the argument. Are you incapable of thinking for yourself, or maybe even doing a little research by yourself? Do Dollar and Cox give you every answer in all aspects of living?

To Anon at 1:20 PM- You gotta be kiddin' me? Don't you know that we're all wasting our bosses time/money by blogging this site? We don't have that much time to read through all that!

You are an Olbyloon, what else am I supposed to call you? And yes, I think for myself and do quite well at it, thank you very much. But I do have a full-time job and it's not Olbermannwatch and my full-time job responsibilities prevent me from doing the in-depth research you apparently seem to want from me. Besides, I really don't think I could do as fine a job as Cox or Dollar so I don't try. I will however continue to speak out on his and his fans idiocy. And that I believe is your primary problem, you don't want to be insulted, but you don't mind insulting me, you don't want Olbermann "insulted", but you don't mind his idiotic insults towards others. I think it's called being a hypocrite. And oh by the way? That's not an "insult", it's a fact.

Indierik-
what's the point of arguing something that is settled?

----------
Olby- "water is dry"
olbywatch- KO said that "water is dry", when water is, in fact, wet (see hyperlink)

------

indierik: water is dry...why don't you repugs accept it and moveon...how come nobody ever answers my argument but only calls me a loon and a bumblef*ck (oh, wait SirLoin calls people bumblef*cks, sorry)...since no one answers my argument I win and am right....yea me!

/end scene

...how about a 3 stooges t~shirt with chief doberman of dumbdown, darkmood achmeintinjihad of iran, and bugle charface of venezuela walking arm in arm in front of the united nations to put his special comments in perspective....

I just (re) read Johnny Dollar's assessment from last night. It's not like $ really disputes KO's claims with any facts/research, he more or less just pointed out that KO doesn't report the Democratic screw-ups like he does the Republicans. It would be like me reporting on Limbaugh's show by saying "Rush bashes Dems but goes easy on the Repubs!" Well no shit. How about I accept Rush will never report evenly on the political parties, so why don't I go over to Google and find some credible sources to dispute his claims instead.

...how about a 3 stooges t~shirt with chief doberman of dumbdown, darkmood achmeintinjihad of iran, and bugle charface of venezuela walking arm in arm in front of the united nations to put his special comments in perspective....

Indiekirk has got to be one of the densest Olbyloons on this board. The reason we give Olbermann such a hard time about his constant complainaning about Republicans and his failure to point out Democratic gaffes is that Olbermann CLAIMS TO BE OBJECTIVE !!!!! he says he is "not political" and claims not to vote. The MSLSD website states that Countdown is a "news" show and that Olby is a "news anchor".

Rush is not an objective news reporter-- he is a conservative and is quite transparent about it.

Get it? Olby is a far left cheerleader who pretends to be objective and is therefore a fraud. Rush holds himself out to be exactly what he is-- a conservative commentator, so he is not a fraud.

Brick:

I do stand for something, just not the same things you do. For one thing, I stand up for the constitution, the same one Bush is shredding right in front of our eyes. I stand up for American values, even if it means we don't always get the information we crave. When we stoop to a standard of behavior below traditional American values, we actually make the enemies own arguement - that we are no better than they are (and recruitment for them goes up). I happen to believe we ARE better than they are, but we have to continually prove it with our actions. This means we don't torture - EVER - regardless of the stakes. This is called standing up for principal. Olby and I are clearly in agreement on this point. By the way, I believe your Senator, Lindsey Graham, is one of the few Republicans out there with real integrity. He also seems to understand that his job as a Senator is not to capitulate to everything the President wants. Unfortunately, my two Republican Senators, Burr & Dole, are both Bush lapdogs - wanna trade?

You say you believe an armed citizenry is an important deterent to a government takeover, and I don't really disagree with that. However, you and the leaders you revere so much should have seen the insurgency in Iraq coming based on that very same principal. They were armed to the teeth, and NOBODY wants to be occupied, no matter how bad their government is.

For all you guys who think we need keep the subject about Olbermann, you might ask; how does all this relate to Olbermann? Well. he believes the same things I was just talking about and his "special commentary series proves it! Polls say 30% of Americans describe themselves as "angry" over the Iraq debacle. I am one of that 30%, and I'm pretty certain that Olby is too. I would also bet that the majority of that same 30% were the very ones who believed invading Iraq was a terrible idea from the beginning.

For any of you who believe we did not want us to succeed in Iraq, simply because we thought it was a bad idea, you are wrong. I hoped against hope that I would be proven wrong, and in the early days, it almost appeared that I was.

If 30% of Americans are angry over he war, why do so many of you have a problem just because there are a couple of spokesmen on the air who are not to speak strongly on our behalf, such as Olbermann and Mathews?

hank- in anything I've ever seen or read about Olby I don't recall at anytime him saying he's "objective". If you have a link (you know, proof) to show where he claims to be "objective" I would sincerely like to see it.

Also, Glenn Beck hosts what is called a "news" show and I wouldn't call him "objective".

Get it? Olby is a far left cheerleader who pretends to be objective and is therefore a fraud. Rush holds himself out to be exactly what he is-- a conservative commentator, so he is not a fraud.

Posted by: hank at October 25, 2006 03:38 PM

Rush is a conservative commentator? No the fuck he isn't! He is a lying hypocrite. Oxycontin addicted running around with viagra fucking some ugly pig and spouting some bullshit to get a dumbass fired up about shit he knows nothing of. He got rich and famous being a complete a--hole. Fuck him, and the horse he rode in on.

I'm not sure some of you would be calling Olbermann such a lefty if:

(1) - We had not invaded a country that did not attack us.
(2) - We not now bogged down in a war resulting from that invasion.
(3) - The Administration had not lied about both of the above.
- AND IF -
(4) - The administration were not in the process of dismantling the Constitution AND the Geneva Convention.

These are the things he is speaking out against, and I'm not so sure that makes him a screaming liberal.

These are the things he is speaking out against, and I'm not so sure that makes him a screaming liberal.

Posted by: Mike at October 25, 2006 04:02 PM

I said it before. You are a screaming liberal if you point out that the truth. Conservatives are coming out against them and are being trashed by them. "They" loved Bob Woodward when he was telling them things they wanted to hear. In point of fact he was telling us some things we should know like Bush asnwers to a higher father. The fact that they saw that as a compliment speaks volumes to the reality problem they have. Now of course Bob is on their shit list. It's a good place to be I think. It means you have at least seen how really unconservative they are. Ask George Will.

In a different decade I was considered a "moderate". Now Pat Buchanon is known as a "moderate". I never thought I'd live to see this day.

Pat Buchanon was part of the nixon administration. I grew up detesting Nixon. I would glady take him now because I think he would kick a bunch of these religious hijackers of everything that's good about Christ, our country,war loving ding dongs right in the ass. Pat Buchanon says a lot I disagree with "Terri Shiavo" but he knows that we should be leaving other countries business to themselves, not meddling and screwing around with their culture and religion. It's theirs. I never thought I'd say... I wish Pat Buchanon was president right now. He would be perfect for the times we're living in.

codas...per 410pm...

W is unconservative? or ultra right wing nut job fascist conservative?

indierik:
Pat is an isolationist...that makes him a moderate?

richard- W ran as an isolationist in 2000 and that didn't exactly make him a moderate. It just made him a flip-flopper.

I personally don't consider Pat a "moderate". It's just that the conservatives have moved very far right over the last few decades and he now appears that way. They've left the poor ole guy in the dust.

I don't agree with Pat on many issues, but I do think he does think for himself and doesn't let his belief in JJJEEEZZZZZUUUSS override his reasonings.

"hank- in anything I've ever seen or read about Olby I don't recall at anytime him saying he's "objective". If you have a link (you know, proof) to show where he claims to be "objective" I would sincerely like to see it."

OK, I'll do the research for you.

From the 11/30/04 USC Annenberg School of Journalism- Online Journalism Review- Interview with Keith Olbermann (Interviwed by Mark Glaser):

OJR: How would you describe yourself politically on the liberal-to-conservative spectrum? How important do you think it is for MSM to be transparent on their political affiliations?
KO: I'm not political. I don't vote -- I don't believe journalists covering politics should (and I don't think the democracy would suffer if however many of us there are, recused ourselves). I have no more interest in the political outcome of an election than I did in the winner or loser of any ballgame I ever covered.

http://www.ojr.org/ojr/stories/041130glaser/

As I said before, Olbermann is a fraud because he is a transparent Bush attack dog while claiming to be objective. I could have pulled up the MSLSD website and showed you where it is claimed that Meltdown is a "news" show, but I figured you could at least do that much.

hank- I won't have a chance to read it today (I will though), but I do (sincerely) appreciate someone on this site doing more than throwing out words like moonbat, loon, et cetera.

And that is far from the only interview Olby has given where he claims to be "apolitical". DO your own research and you might find out how your hero's words and actions differ like the difference between night and day. But of course you just don't have time to READ it now do you? Typical.

Being "apolitical" does not preclude having strong opinions about certain issues!

indierik,

Let me get this straight...you come to the site and don't bother to read the FAQ. You make a statement that we Olbermann Watchers know to be untrue - that Keith has never claimed to be apolitical - that is addressed in the FAQ. You imply that any claims that disagree with your false assertion must be concocted. You demand that WE prove your unsupported statement to be false rather than you providing some support for YOUR claim. When a reader takes the trouble to provide you a link and excerpts the relevant portion - words that directly contradict your statement - you reply "I won't have a chance to read it today" but that that you "sincerely" appreciate Hank not calling you names.

And that has we know you are an OlbyLoon. More than that you are an idiot.

You toss out a knee-jerk defense of Olbermann. You were wrong when you did it - wrong on the facts and wrong in your tone. You were given a direct quote with a link that clearly demonstrates you are wrong. Yet, rather than simply admit your wrong and apologize for your tone you avoid this with the specious claim that you don't have time to read something you obviously read because it was contained in the comment directly above yours that you were responding to in your reply to hank.

Here's a novel idea. Next time try knowing what you are talking about when you post on Olbermann Watch. When you don't know, try asking and learning. When you are wrong admit it.

Sheesh. "I won't have a chance to read it today". Give me an f-ing break.

Cox- I read through a portion of the FAQ a few weeks ago and it simply looked like a series of one-liners from a failed standup comic.

When I said "I won't have a chance to read it today" and then you again quoted me in your comment as saying that, you also conveniently left out the "I will though" portion I said directly after it. Cox, I have a life outside of Olby Watch as I hope you do. Sometimes I have to step away from the computer and go have some fun.

My problem with many of those commenting here is they make claims that offer no substance. And many of the claims are more National Inquirer tabloid gossip (e.i. Olby is a premature ejac)than having any true info to dispute what he states on his show. So, yeah, I pounded your "fans" the last few days to see if any could bring something to the table other than throwing out the predictable "loon", "moonbat" names.

And when we do, you choose to ignore them. Nice. And oh so typical.

Indierik, I need some help from you to distinguish between the two indieriks.

Are you the rik that bemoans the lack of civility, facts and logical arguments by the OW fans?

Or, are you the rik who posted this earlier:

==========================
Missy- you and Rush maybe the only persons in the United States that actually deserve Parkinson's Disease. I can't say I've ever wished a terrible health ailment on someone before, but in this case I do. Here's to bad health (for you).
==========================

Not quite a sterling example of civility and logic. I would contend that statements like that show a deep down nastiness that is beyond childish.

You are living in a glass house. Perhaps you should reconsider the bricks you have tossed around.

Janet Hawkins
AKA Grammie

You are living in a glass house. Perhaps you should reconsider the bricks you have tossed around.

Janet Hawkins
AKA Grammie

Posted by: Janet Hawkins at October 26, 2006 08:12 PM

Hey Grammie, You thrown any bricks lately?

Scream, I happily and justly admit to being snide and sarcastic in response to, and on point to one dgree or another. But I DON"T hurl obscenities and death wishes to others.

I have been joining this debate for about five weeks. In that time I have been called: a 'barbaric c**t, a bitch, a brain dead parrot, a 'mad bitch' etc and have been accused of all manner of moral and sexual perversions. And I couldn't begin to list the accusations of my imbecility, inbred birth, racism and all manner of mental and moral disorders.

I have also had pain, horrendus illness, death and suffering wished on me and sometimes mine.

First, he bemoans the behavior of others as being illogical and nothing more than name calling. Second, he had wished illness and death on two people by name shortly before.

One, indierik can defend himself if he has a defense and wishes to respond. Second, I consider it perfectly proper and not hypocritical to call him on this point.

Janet Hawkins
AKA Grammie

ScreamThyLastScream writes:

"Hey Grammie, You thrown any bricks lately?"

No, she hasn't wished Parkinson's Disease on anyone since that's what's meant by "bricks".

She has argued that just because you have Parkinson's Disease doesn't make you above having your speech and actions analysed, especially when you have used your circumstances as a rationale for the promotion of a certain political candidate of a particular public policy.

That you could possibly conceive THAT position as being as much a throwing of stones as wishing disease and death on someone, speaks volumes.

"She has argued that just because you have Parkinson's Disease doesn't make you above having your speech and actions analysed, especially when you have used your circumstances as a rationale for the promotion of a certain political candidate of a particular public policy."

right. Regardless of the fact that, the "analysed," person is being accused of lying about the symptoms of their illness with no proof or even reason to suspect they are lying, other than the person is endorsing someone on the left.

it's interesting to note: that no one was "analyzing" Fox's symptoms when he was campagining for a Republican like Spector.

JT, are you Scream or did you just jump in to heap a little extra illogical point into the discussion?

I have said nothing about Rush Limbaugh. I didn't know about any political ad M J Fox made several years ago for Arlen Spector. What did it say and how was it presented? How can I have an opinion on something that I've never seen, heard or read.?

I have made quite a few posts re this subject and they boil down to:

1. It is legal to fund all stem cell research. The exception for the feds is that funding of the development of new EMBRYONIC stem lines is not FEDERALLY funded.

2. EMBRYONIC stem cell research has been a bust so far.

3. No ones illness, pain or misery gives them the right to lie and to interject themselves into the political arena immune from verification and accountability.

“I have said nothing about Rush Limbaugh. I didn't know about any political ad M J Fox made several years ago for Arlen Spector. What did it say and how was it presented? How can I have an opinion on something that I've never seen, heard or read.? “

I am simply pointing out that their seems to be a Republican backlash against Fox because of his latest ad. I think it is interesting to note there was no such backlash when he was campaigning for Spector. if you have no comment on the matter fine. I don't remember asking for one or addressing that point to you.

“I have made quite a few posts re this subject and they boil down to:

1. “It is legal to fund all stem cell research. The exception for the feds is that funding of the development of new EMBRYONIC stem lines is not FEDERALLY funded.”

Some are in favor of Stem cell research being federally funded. Some have in fact endorsed a candidate based on that belief.

2. “EMBRYONIC stem cell research has been a bust so far.”

Meaning it doesn't cure Parkinson's or other things currently. So what? Most scientist think the greatest potential to cure such ailments lies in stem cell research Is your position that these scientist are wrong and if so what are your reasons?

"3. No ones illness, pain or misery gives them the right to lie and to interject themselves into the political arena immune from verification and accountability."

What lie specifically are you accusing him of? In the case of Limbaugh the accusation was that he lied about his symptoms. If you are not accusing Fox of that, and disagree with Limbaugh’s stupid statement then I apologize for suggesting you think that way.

I will from this point on, call Rush an idiot and leave you out of it. However, I would like to know what untruth you are accusing Michael j. Fox of making. Because I just heard him endorse a candidate because of where that candidate stands on an issue.

JT, I included Arlen Spector in my response to you beacause of the exchange between Cecelia @ 12:48 PM and you @ 3:31 PM today. After responding to you I noticed the following that I obviuosly missed earlier.:
======================
FOX: Biomedical research could cure hundreds of diseases, save thousands of lives, and prevent millions of tears. I understand that, and so does Arlen Specter. He helped double the funding for biomedical research, more dollars for more research, for more cures.

Arlen gets it. It�s that simple.

SEN. ARLEN SPECTER �, PENNSYLVANIA: I�m Arlen Specter and approved this ad to tell you there is hope for the future.
========================

I don't see much in common from this ad from several years ago to the one M J Fox made and disseminated recently. One, biomedical research and NEW EMBRYONIC STEM CELL lines and research are not the same thing. A person can be for biomedical research and opposed to the subset of the development of and research on new embryonic stem cell lines. Two, based on my general knowledge of Arlen Spector I am sure that the ad stated his position accurately. Perhaps that accounts for your misreading of why some people have no problem with one and are speaking out against the other.

I would guess that a poll of a thousand adults at ramdom would indicate that most people can't differentiate between stem cell research, new embryonic stem cell lines and existing embryonic stem cell lines. There is a very real difference between the three and the creators of that ad must know it.

Concentrating on the red herring that Rush created is not going to help. Rush stepped over the line on that one. It has not been helpful to the debate of the facts of the matter.

I stated the fact that ALL stem cell research is legal and ALL receive federal funding EXCEPT FOR NEW EMBRYONIC STEM CELL LINES. You stated:

===========================
Some are in favor of Stem cell research being federally funded. Some have in fact endorsed a candidate based on that belief.
===========================

I'm sorry. I don't understand what you are trying to say. I would go further and state that virtually everyone is in favor of funding stem cell research. And it is being funded by the feds, states, charities and private investment. The only exception is using federal funding involving creating new embryonic stem cell lines. The feds do fund embryonic stem cell research on existing lines. Their is also no federal laws preventing others from creating new embryonic lines and engaging in research with them.

You are wrong in the following statement:

===========================
Meaning it doesn't cure Parkinson's or other things currently. So what? Most scientist think the greatest potential to cure such ailments lies in stem cell research Is your position that these scientist are wrong and if so what are your reasons?
===========================

The greatest gains have involved ADULT STEM CELL RESEARCH (which IS federally funded) and umbilibcal cord blood stem cells (also federally funded). This research has already produced viable treatments. The scientific community also sees some major breakthroughs coming in the near future. They know enough now to make knowedgable predictions.

The potential for EMBRYONIC stem cell research results has been vastly overhyped. Not only have no viable treatments materialized, enough is now known that the scientific community doesn' see it coming soon. All of this information is available to the layman in many magazines, newspapers and on the internet.

I can tell you one major obstacle I read about recently. Embyonic stem cells cause tumors in lab animals. A professor from MIT said that solving the tumor problem is the equivalent to finding a cure for cancer. Quite a big problem to be solved before they can even start develope to individual applications.

Now, to your last point:
========================
I will from this point on, call Rush an idiot and leave you out of it. However, I would like to know what untruth you are accusing Michael j. Fox of making. Because I just heard him endorse a candidate because of where that candidate stands on an issue.
========================

Fair enough. His current ad addresses stem cell research. But he is talking about EMBRYONIC stem cell research. And this is a difference with a real difference. I would say this is the first red herring.

Second, in the ad in Missouri he accused Talent of trying to criminalize the science that gives a chance for a cure and voted against stem cell research. Neither statement is true. Jim Talent voted for funding embryonic SCR but against funding for new embryonic SCR. He also opposes an ammendment to the state constitution that would legalize human cloning.

Either way, M J Fox at best unwittingly confused new embryonic SCR with SCR or did so deliberately. I'm putting my money on the deliberate. He should be very knowledgable about this because of his foundation. And if he isn't he should have done his homework.

Then on to Maryland. Same, or similar, ad for Cardin against Steele. Only it turns out Cardin, the democrat, voted against a SCR funding bill because it excluded funds to develop new embryonic lines. Steele is in favor of stem cell research, just not creating new embryonic SC lines.

Generally speaking, the objection many have to creating new embryonic SC lines is ethical. Additionally, there is ongoing research that many think will allow the production of these new SCL to be created without destroying a life.

Additionally, I suffer from a chronic, debillitating and frequently painfull disease. Close to fifteen years now. And it will end my life sooner rather than later. And that doesn't entitle me to lie and than hide behind my poor, pitiful victimhood. That was the point that seems to have gotten so many in a dither. How callous and uncaring Grammie is.

Well, you see I'm entitled. Don't argue with me and don't you dare ask me to justify my remarks. Pretty ridiculous attitude don't you think?

Janet Hawkins
AKA Grammie

Janet writes:

"JT, I included Arlen Spector in my response to you beacause of the exchange between Cecelia @ 12:48 PM and you @ 3:31 PM today."

I don't have exchanges with JT. There's not enough penicillin in the world.

Superb post, Grammie!