Michelle Malkin rocks.

Michelle Malkin is nothing but another rightwing hack who is doing her best to take time away from Man Cu--ler and Laura Ingrahm, hell Debbie Shusshel is higher on the rightwing hag pecking list.

To Michelle Malkin readers,
As a Libertarian I have some disagreement with you on social issues and Immigration, However you guys see the dangers of the Islamic threat to Western liberties. Therefore we are allies and I will join you in the struggle against Islamo-Fascism!

O'lielly, O'lielly..such a demonut you are. All you speak is proof all need to discover why it is the JACKASS is the demonut symbol.

O'lielly, O'lielly..such a demonut you are. All you speak is proof all need to discover why it is the JACKASS is the demonut symbol.

Glad all the new visitors to the site got to see Crazy Cox is action. Let's play a game: "How many words into Bob's post before we find a 6th grade level spelling mistake?"

Under/Over is 3

The intellect of the right wing paranoid, on display once again.

Keith Olbermann is the Islamists's version of Tokyo Rose

Robert, I took an unscientific poll today (was inspired to do so by your AOL poll thread the other day), and all Americans who participated said that this blog should be closed since the threads are poorly written.

I love how Kossacks, DUmmies and Olbyloons who flood this site and try to spam it with a bunch of junk.

Yet, their sites, now to include Colorado Bob, delete anything not in agreement with them, regardless of the tenor of the post. I also noticed Col. Bob doesn't publish a "contact" page with a real email, yet he is up to flooding his opposition with hate mail and spam.

Nice to see "speaking truth to power" includes a oneway conversation.

Eddiebear...
Don't you know that the libs know what's best for us common folk? We need to be TOLD what to think, listen to, and how to live our lives. We can't have people posting thougts that run contrary to the words of Sage Olbermann.

If they let real people post real opinions on their sites, then- why, the loons might actually start to THINK for themselves.

And we can't have that.

thougts = thoughts

(sorry, there goes my "6th grade level spelling" again!)

Sandy wrote: "all Americans who participated said that this blog should be closed since the threads are poorly written"

Wow! You are quite a wit.

Here's a thought...if you'd like to help improve the writing in the comment threads then just stop posting here. That would be a dramatic improvement.

The guy is OLD and boring. Is it true he is dating a much younger woman? He probably drives a sports car too.

He doesn't drive because he damaged his eyesight when whacked his noggin on the top of a subway car door when he was younger.

Apparently he must think he has a lot to prove by (allegedly) dating a woman 25 years younger. I wonder why? Hmmmm...

Yeah, Rob. He's dating a 22-year old girl from Los Angeles, Katy Tur. There were links to pictures of her on this site. He's 48. She's barely out of her teens and he's almost eligible for an AARP card.

There were actually TWO errors in the first sentence - the hear/here error and the link that followed. It was supposed to link to Michelle's post. Both are fixed and you can not click the link to see Michelle's post of three screen grabs (courtesy of Olbermann Watch) which show how the Times back-tracked on their racial slap at Malkin.

He meant "now link" not "not link"

He meant "now link" not "not link"

I, for one, support both Michelle Malkin and OlbermannWatch. I also support Michelle Malkin's right of free speech which is under attack by liberal extremists who, rather than engage in intellectual discourse, routinely embarrass themselves by throwing out (or should that be "throwing up") ad hominem attack combined with vitriol. Comments left by liberals on such sites as Daily Kos, Huffington Post, Dem. Underground, etc. are overwhelmingly full of mindless hatred, pettiness and bitterness. Very few actually attempt to raise valid points and present liberal POV's without degenerating into childish namecalling. Even the majority of comments left on this blog by the left merely support this. Only until the left make a concerted effort to leave the personal attacks at the door (so to speak) will they ever make decent headway with the average American. Otherwise they will continue to lose.

I, for one, support both Michelle Malkin and OlbermannWatch. I also support Michelle Malkin's right of free speech which is under attack by liberal extremists who, rather than engage in intellectual discourse, routinely embarrass themselves by throwing out (or should that be "throwing up") ad hominem attack combined with vitriol. Comments left by liberals on such sites as Daily Kos, Huffington Post, Dem. Underground, etc. are overwhelmingly full of mindless hatred, pettiness and bitterness. Very few actually attempt to raise valid points and present liberal POV's without degenerating into childish namecalling. Even the majority of comments left on this blog by the left merely support this. Only until the left make a concerted effort to leave the personal attacks at the door (so to speak) will they ever make decent headway with the average American. Otherwise they will continue to lose.

Nice to see "speaking truth to power" includes a oneway conversation.
*******************************************
Thats how KO and company work..the right of free speech is only reserved for them and while its "brave" for them to speak "truth to power"(even though there's no threat to them for doing so)if anyone else comments and disagrees with what Ko and others say or believe then their labeled "hatemongers" or worst.

Thats why I believe if KO is ever confronted by someone who openly debates him on something he said..he'll have a breakdown because he can't handle it..thats why MSNBC gave him this onesided left-wing show.

What the Olberloons don't realize is that he started going after the adiminstration once it was "popular" to do so. He waited until Bush & Co. were under 40% approval ratings to hammer at them with his "special comments."

Donahue, Maher and Michael Moore were actually the anti-war pioneers who got labeled unpatriotic. Keith is doing too little too late.

The actions against Michele Malkin point are more evidence of the alliance between the Left and Islam.
Of course the Leftists like O'Liely, Hit_Escape and Radmod will attack the Christian Right, Neocons and Zionists. They never try to answer my point about their sympathy towrads Islamo-Fascists like Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

The actions against Michele Malkin point are more evidence of the alliance between the Left and Islam.
Of course the Leftists like O'Liely, Hit_Escape and Radmod will attack the Christian Right, Neocons and Zionists. They never try to answer my point about their sympathy towrads Islamo-Fascists like Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Between KO and Dean Ismay, it's a toss-up as to which is the least logical, or the most rabid of Islamofacist apologists. That any rational thinking American takes either one seriously is a mystery to me.

Robert wrote "Here's a thought...if you'd like to help improve the writing in the comment threads then just stop posting here. That would be a dramatic improvement."

Next time don't post conclusions about polls that aren't supported by fact. It's simple really- if you just tell the truth all the time and don't make things up, then there would be no need for me to post here. Or should it be "post hear"?

Carl wrote:

"Only until the left make a concerted effort to leave the personal attacks at the door (so to speak) will they ever make decent headway with the average American. Otherwise they will continue to lose."

Pretty amusing writing considering the rightwing can credit all of their success to the same type of namecalling you seem to stand against.
For example, rightwingers refuse to engage the left in a real foreign policy debate- instead they dismiss anyone not in agreement with them as treasonous terrorist sympathizers. People who stand for civil rights are dismissed as aiding and comforting the enemy. People who don't want to have their children force-taught Christianity in taxpayer funded schools are "godless" and evil, intent on stealing Christmas from true American patriots. A rightwinger who never served his country even went so far as to morph the face of a decorated Vietnam hero into the face of Osama Bin Laden.

The hateful language and vile personal attacks we have witnessed from the right are unparalleled by anything in recent memory, going all the way back the the hatefilled McCarthy-lovers of decades past.

Ha ha ha, man this is the funniest sight I have been to in a loooooong time. Sniff sniff, wipes tears of mirth from eyes.

Sandy says:

"The hateful language and vile personal attacks we have witnessed from the right are unparalleled by anything in recent memory . . ."

Oh really? How's about this little gem from everyone's fave liberal anti war activist:

In her new book Peace Mom, which hit bookstores September 19, the antiwar icon Cindy Sheehan admits she has fantasized about going back in time and killing the infant George W. Bush.

Oh, before I forget-- I guess you are also aware of the the new movie courtesy of the Toronto Film Festival. It has now hit the U.S. and it's all the buzz within the lib anti-war community-- "The Death of a President" depicting the assassination of our President by actually superimposing the face of GWB over the actor's actual face thereby creating a very real looking enactment of the President's murder.

But hey, no need to ruminate over such matters when Chris Wallace is on the loose spewing "hateful language and vile personal attacks" by asking Bill Clinton about his lapses in foreign policy.

Welcome Michelle Malkin Readers!!!!!!

Welcome to one of the true free speech sites on the internet! Read about Michelle getting tossed on you-tube but one has got to realize this was going to happen. The Zombie Loons got their marching orders and went to work. They never can win in the arena of ideas. But being the intelligent well in formed folks that you are. I'm just going over old ground.

What you will find here is Zombie Loons in their purist forms, INTELLECTUALLY BANKRUPT!

You find common threads that you match up to their talking points that are either the "attack of the Week or, a talking point that is two, three or five years old.

But in the true meaning of free speech they are able to post here. Something I am sure most of you have found is not the case at the far wacko lunatic fringe websites. Free speech at DU or Daily Kos? Whats that?

Zombie loons are quite amusing because all they do is repeat what Keith, Who I have dubbed "The Merchant of Stupidity". Says in his Special Comment for the short bus crowd segments.

Let me do say there are a few libs that post here that are genuinely good people, please respect them.

But the Zombie Loons? Don't take them seriously, have fun with them. They post here for our entertainment.

I was a kool-aid drinking, mind numb, Zombie Loon for many a year. Ate what ever they fed me. Then, I did the unthinkable! I started to think! HELL! I started to ask questions! That got me banned right out of Looney Left Land! I'm a Libratarian so ,I have issues with the right but, at least I can talk to you folks. The Dems? all they want to do is raise the piss out of you're taxes. Screw with you're Buisness, Make you as miserable as they are. Zombie loons? Forgetaboutit! Like Savage says Liberalism is a mental disorder. And how can you talk to a mental patient?

Watch Keith, he never has someone on to debate the other side. Why? Well he's Chicken Little Keith. I wouldn't even put him up to bully status. Paper Tigers laugh at him. Forget O'Reilly, Paula Zhan has more different points of view on then Keith. Keith couldn't win a debate against the janitor in the MSNBC building. And I heard the janitor doesn't even speak english! And then, the janitor would end up on Worst Person the next night. Keith would probibly say the janitor was a Fox plant.

Oh, Happy 10th Fox News!!! Pissing off Looney Libs for Ten Years!!!!!

By the way Zombie Loons if Fox News is so right wing, what was George Soros doing on Neil Covuto's show last week? And Huffington on O'Reilly? Don't let you're brain expload over that one.

Sidebar to my Yankee friends: Pitching that doesn't have an AARP card and a third baseman that knows the meaning of the word CLUTCH would help next year.

Again, Welcome!!!!!!!!

Libertarian......opps!

What's your point hank? There are individuals who have extremist views all across the political spectrum. My post was speaking to the nationwide coordinated campaign of personal attacks and smears by the rightwing that has grown in intensity since 2001. People who have never served comparing decorated war veterans directly to Osama Bin Laden. Conservative leaders like Ann Coulter who have suggested the execution of liberals.

My point is that Carl's little piece about left wing personal attacks is quite amusing considering what we have seen from the right. Of course there are nutjobs on the left too with some pretty insane theories and ideas. Fortunately, unlike radical conservative fundamentalists whose idea of being pro-American is to shred the Constitution, those leftist extremists are very few in number and don't hold much power. I don't see Cindy Sheehan given the mic to broadcast her bizarre messages on MSNBC nearly every night the way Ann Coulter practically has her own show on Fox News. I don't see her being invited on CBS News and given an extended platform to spew her radicalism the way Rush Limbaugh did.

Puck wrote: "By the way Zombie Loons if Fox News is so right wing, what was George Soros doing on Neil Covuto's show last week? And Huffington on O'Reilly? Don't let you're brain expload over that one."

Do you bother to watch the shows Puck? Is it your claim that bias can only be determined by who is on a TV show and not also by how they are treated and what types of questions they ask? Fox loves to ask softballs of its convervative guests but I rarely see softballs floated to leftwingers. On Fox there is a difference in what questions are asked and how the guests are characterized on the next night's show depending on whether the guest is left or right. Cavuto has not asked any of his rich Republican guests like Jack Welch about how they handle their taxes, but he immediately tried to make Soros appear like a tax evader and cut him off when Soros was explaining how he did in fact pay taxes on the money he made.

The interview was still okay I thought, but then Cavuto railroaded him the next night when Soros was not there to respond. I felt the same way about O'Rielly who had Huffington on the air for just a couple of minutes- the interview was fine, but Bill had to come back and attack her the next night when she wasn't there. Don't you find it funny how Fox hosts never pull these stunts when the guest is Ann Coulter, Laura Ingraham, or Ollie North? You never see Sean Hannity asking Coulter questions about her alleged voter fraud, do you?

Sandy said: "Don't you find it funny how Fox hosts never pull these stunts when the guest is Ann Coulter, Laura Ingraham, or Ollie North?"

No Sandy, what I find funny is that Krazy never has ANY guest on who's opinion differs from his. Ever.

You just cited two examples of the big, bad Fox folks - yet, they had two (kinda) big names on two different shows. Keith's show exists in an echo chamber.

I pity the NeoCon who comes here thinking he's found likeminded shills...

Pity the neocon?

Huh?

I say rejoice for those who are former leftests now in the conservative camp. Rejoice for those who believe in a Realist approach to foreign policy.

Keith rides on the Yankee bandwagon
They played like they drank from a flagon
Headlights on the deer
Let's give a Bronx cheer
Detroit slayed the Steinbrenner dragon

I say rejoice for those who are former leftests now in the conservative camp. Rejoice for those who believe in a Realist approach to foreign policy.

Posted by: Crash at October 8, 2006 09:21 AM

Realist approach my ass.

186kpersec...can you contact me please. I can't find your email address on your site and your comments do not appear to work.

Robert wrote: "No Sandy, what I find funny is that Krazy never has ANY guest on who's opinion differs from his. Ever."

From what I have read, most conservatives refuse to go on his show. The party of "kick ass", to use your words from the other day, doesn't seem to like showing their face too much outside the cozy softball Fox environment.

Regardless of that though, your statement which emphasizes that Olbermann "never has ANY guest on who's opinion differs from his. Ever" is simply false, as you know from watching the program so often. Ultra conservative Pat Buchanan has been on the show a number of times voicing disagreement, as has the conservative Joe Scarborough to name a few. What's that you were saying about "never...ever"?

Are you going to stand by your statement which was easily disproven, like your claim about the AOL poll? Like I said before, if you would just tell the truth in your statements there would be no need for me to post here, though I probably would post here and commend you for your hard work and attention to detail. Media watchdogs are one of the most important parts of democracy in my opinion, whether their focus is the left or the right. But when they are just as loose with the facts as the media, if not more so, then what's the point?

Buchanan and Scarborough? They are employees of MSNBC! Olby doesn't book them of his own accord...he puts them on because they're under contract. And when he had Buchanan on, it wasn't to disagree with him. It was to slam the Iraq war as a disaster and say it was Bush's war. In other words, he put Pat on to be his echo chamber.

We keep a running list of partisan politicians and strategists that KO brings on to "analyze" the news. It's a string of dozens of Democrats, one after another. Oh, there was one Republican in there: because he had just called for Rumsfeld to resign--and that was the only issue Olby permitted him to discuss.

> From what I have read, most conservatives refuse to go on his show

Why don't you name some conservatives who have refused to go on The Hour of Spin? And cite your sources. Because this claim is just more OlbySpin.

Just can't help but point out that KO is right. Everyone sees it except the blindly faithful rightwingnuts. No matter though, the end is mercifully near. Thanks to the hardheadedness off the Rove-amaniacs, the Senate is ours too. Keeping Hastert was the final plunge of the dagger.

Funny how that works.

Johnny wrote: "Buchanan and Scarborough? They are employees of MSNBC!"

What difference does it make to Robert's claim?? Need I repeat the unequivocal statement of your colleague Mr. Cox:

"what I find funny is that Krazy never has ANY guest on who's opinion differs from his. Ever."

Both Buchanan and Scarbarough have disagreed with Olbermann before- I have watched the show. Another flatout falsehood from the authors of Olbermannwatch.com- then what do you do? You try to spin it around into something different. Suddenly your argument changes from "Krazy never has ANY guest on who's opinion differs from his. Ever." to well yeah he does, but their employees of MSNBC and they don't really disagree with him anyway. What a joke. Bill O'Rielly for one has refused to go on Olbermann's show. I am sure it was because he had to accept his Peadbody that day- you folks watch the show, you should know this. The WaPo also reported Keith saying that most conservatives won't go on the show: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2006/04/03/BL2006040300434.html.

Now I am sure that, without any evidence mind you, you will allege Keith is lying and making it all up. But you have already committed one factual misstatement today, one several days ago with your made-up statement about the AOL poll, and you have issued no retractions. I still cannot believe you have not issue a retraction your false conclusion about the AOL poll, that is just amazing. Is it possible for someone's credibility to be less than zero?? If so, you folks qualify.

But "they are employees of MSNBC!" Sheesh, give me a break. Spin spin spin spin spin spin spin.

The entire basis of the current right wing movement is based on what they have created Democrats and Liberals to be. They've made them into some sort of boogeyman who wants to raise your taxes, appease terrorists, and destroy America. Facts to back up these accusations? Who needs facts when you're using reactionary speech to work up a likeminded person's emotions. The problem with this movement is that it's not reserved just to the people insulting one and other on blogs, but it's worked its way up to the President, the Republican Congress, and even the independent cabinets (Defense, State, etc.).

I'd love to debate policy with someone I disagree with, it's one of the favorite things I like to do with my friends, but the difference between my friends, and the people involved in this movement of ad hominem attacks and absurd claims backed by no facts is that my friends don't believe I hate America, or love the terrorists, or want to take away individuality. The only way this radical movement of the right wing can stop is if they stop acting like crusaders on a political journey, but rather people, who may disagree with someone, but still respects them enough not to claim they're anti-American.

Good luck, I expect the partisanship to resume.

> Bill O'Rielly for one has refused to go on Olbermann's show.

What utter nonsense. Would any news channel allow one of its top people to go on a program that was on AT THE SAME TIME as his own? Why don't you claim that Katie Couric has refused to go on Brian Williams's show. Or David Letterman has refused to go on the Jay Leno show? Are you making this stuff up as you go along?

> The WaPo also reported Keith saying that most conservatives won't go on the show:

The word of Keith Olbermann? LOL! I prefer a more reliable source, since he has lied about Bill Frist, Matt Drudge, Bill O'Reilly, John Gibson, and a host of others. Come up with proof, not the claims of a liar. This entry is a nice one-stop compendium, with links to about a dozen documented Olbermann lies:

http://www.olbermannwatch.com/archives/2006/09/countdown_with_114.html

In fact, the only time I know of when a known conservative republican WAS invited to appear on Countdown, he readily did so, and disagreed with Krazy Keith on camera. Problem was, it was Keith's producers at MSNBC who demanded that he put someone on to disagree with him, because they thought his crazy rant about homeland security was so biased that to have some fairness he had to put on a dissenting voice.

So don't tell me that "most conservatives won't go on his show". Most conservatives haven't been ASKED to appear. Do you really think he'd call people "fat ass", or "ugly", or "monkey", if he was going to invite them to come on and throw his embarrassing playground insults back in his face? Any claim that he wants conservatives who disagree with him on his show but can't get them is, plain and simple, another Olbermann lie.

Read it and weep:

http://www.olbermannwatch.com/archives/2006/05/the_list.html

Sandy,

While I agree with J$, as a point of order you are quoting Steve at October 8, 2006 01:41 AM when he wrote:

"No Sandy, what I find funny is that Krazy never has ANY guest on who's opinion differs from his. Ever."

If you would like to inform yourself on this matter go back and look at KO's Q&A interview with Brian Lamb on C-SPAN in which Keith addresses this very point - that as part of his deal with MSNBC he does not bring on guests with opposing point of view. In the interview he cites his reasons for this. Whether they are valid or not you can decide yourself but do us a favor and don't come in to the #1 Olbermann blog on the web and start telling US what's what with Keith. We are the recognized experts on all things Olbermann and our word on these matters is final.

Nice try Johnny- but don't try to spin this around. I am not falling for your smokescreen diversion. Again Robert said flat out:

"what I find funny is that Krazy never has ANY guest on who's opinion differs from his. Ever."

This is absolutely and unequivocally false and made up, just like this web sites thread the other day that an AOL poll concluded that most American's dislike Keith.

This web site has a pattern of making false statements in these threads and when they are called out you try to divert to another issue- cherrypicking a persons post to a seperate statement, as you have done here today. My statement simply said "from what I have read From what I have read, most conservatives refuse to go on his show." That is not a statement of fact- if it were, I would have posted sources. But because it is what I have read and seen in the past, and I don't have the sources to quote, I pointed out this is "what I have read." O'Rielly had the option to go on and chose not too. O'Rielly did choose to go on Jon Stewart, but Stewart is not as agressive against O'Rielly as Olbermann is on his program, so maybe that had something to do with it. If you want to say it was because he did not want to decrease his own ratings fine. That doesn't change anything though. I also linked to a WaPo article where Keith said as much. Again, you can say Keith is lying, but this does not discount my statement which again, is, from what I have read, most conservatives won't go on the show.

You want to rely on the word of Matt Drudge, who has blamed the Foley sex victims and called them "beasts"? Your perogative. You want to say from what you have read most conservatives are willing to go on his show but are not invited? Fine- that is what you have read, which differs from what I have read.

Funny though that you claim "Most conservatives haven't been ASKED to appear"- you state this as a fact, and yet you yourself don't offer any evidence of this. On what is this statement based? You also ask if he would invite people to come on after insulting them. Why not? Fox insults George Soros on a daily basis- Neil Cavuto has bashed him so many times it ain't even funny.

If you want to have a discussion about how biased the show is, fine. But stop with the BS smokescreens- your web site has been caught making ficticous statements twice in the last several days- either issue retractions or stand by your statements that have already been proven false. But enough with the smokescreens.

Sandy,

We are right and you are wrong.

Robert- you were confronted with two guests, Buchanan and Scarborough, both who have disagreed with Olbermann on his show. This was after you claimed that no guest "ever" is on that disagrees with him. This is your second falses statement this week. Your response?

"We are the recognized experts on all things Olbermann and our word on these matters is final."

I think that says it all right there- you say its so, and so it must be, even when confronted with factual evidence proving what you wrote is fiction. Enough said.

> My statement simply said "from what I have read...That is not a statement of fact

Thank you. On that we agree. It is definitely not factual.

> You want to rely on the word of Matt Drudge

What in the wide world of sports are you talking about? Where did I ever cite "the word of Matt Drudge"? Quite the contrary, I pointed out where Keith Olbermann LIED about Drudge, based not on his word, but based on facts reported in the Washington Post.

>Neil Cavuto has bashed him so many times it ain't even funny.

That's the difference between Cavuto and Olbermann. Cavuto knows what it means to let all sides be heard. Whatever criticisms he has of Soros, he lets the guy come on and gives him a half hour of air time. There is no name calling, nobody gets branded a "fat ass" or a "monkey", and Soros agrees to a return visit.

> from what I have read, most conservatives won't go on the show.

So who are these conservatives who were asked and refused to appear? I invite you to document ONE EXAMPLE over the past, say, three months. He's had lib after lib on for the last 90 days, you should be able to identify one conservative who says he refused to appear with Krazy Keith after being asked.

I won't hold by breath, because you can't. All you have is the word of a liar. That's coin of the realm on OlbyPlanet, but not here.

Sandy,

As I keep trying to tell you, that Steve who wrote that not me.

Regardless, go read the C-SPAN interview and come on back when you know what you are talking about. As part of his deal Keith does not bring on guests to provide a "contra" point of view to his own.

Now, is that the same thing as saying that Keith will not have any Republicans on his show? No. When the GOP Senate candidate from New Jersey was attacking Rumsfeld Keith was more than happy to book him to attack Rumsfeld. John Dean was a Republican (not sure if he still is) but he has become a regular on Countdown for his willingness to attack conservatives.

Keith has had on Jack Jacobs, Howard Fineman, Pat Buchanan, Joe Scarborough and many other guests (MSNBC analysts all) who have SAID things that did not fully agree with Keith's take on some topic. Those folks may not agree with everything KO says. However, they are never booked to take the opposing side on a topic. Only occassionally do you hear a guest say something that contradicts a KO POV but when that happens it is typcailly because Keith is trying to "lead the witness" and they are not willing to go completely in the tank for Keith.

All of this is very different from Keith booking someone who is on the right and is coming on to argue the other side of some topic. He does not do that. He has talked publicly about why he does not do that. He has talked publicly about the terms of his deal with MSNBC under which he is not required to present alternative points of view.

I'll add that the few times Olbermann has had on people who disagree with him (mostly regulars) people on this blog have claimed that he was only "pretending to disagree." The thing is, Olbermann doesn't normally give his opinion on a subject when he's interviewing someone, and to claim that you know what his position is on every issue, simply because you've religiously watched his show since 2004, isn't based in reality.

NF,

Well maybe can agree on the following:

1) whatever issue Sandy has with what Steve wrote I did not make the claim she has ascribed to me.

2) Keith has said that as a condition of him coming back to MSNBC he would not be required to put on guests to provide a "contra" point of view on a given topic.

3) Keith does not book guests to come on this show to provide a "contra" point of view

4) Only rarely do you hear a guest say anything that contradicts Keith

NOTE TO SANDY - I make the same offer to you as I make to all OlbyLoons. If you would like to write a guest post for Olbermann Watch on some KO-centric topic you are welcome to do so. KO-centric can include criticism of Olbermann Watch.

1. Agree.
2. Don't remember interviews verbatim. Transcript link?
3. Contra to what? Olbermann usually asks questions in interviews, instead of opinion.
4. Agree.

NF, the link to the C-SPAN interview is in the right-hand rail; scroll down to KEITH IN THE NEWS.

Keith's questions are often, not always, leading questions designed to elicit a specific answer or to get the quest to agree with Keith. Not saying others (like BOR) don't do it. Just that Keith does it. Regardless, Keith is a liberal. The show presents the news from a liberal-Dem perspective. So, a "contra" guest would be somebody who is going to argue the conservative or Bush line. I trust we can agree that you do not see too many Bush supporters on Countdown. There ARE exceptions, for example, KO had Ken Blackwell from Ohio on; Blackwell ran the Bush-Cheney Ohio campaign in 2004. But Blackwell was there to defend against blackboxer claims that he had manipulated the outcome in Ohio not to discuss Bush policy.

" whatever issue Sandy has with what Steve wrote I did not make the claim she has ascribed to me."

Upon review, Robert Cox is correct and I owe him an apology for claiming he made a factual mistatement today when in fact it was poster Steve.

So Robert, that takes it from two factual mistatements this week that I have noted down to one due to my error noted above. I haved no problem correcting the record when I have erred. To that end, will you be issuing a retraction or correction for your false conclusion about the AOL poll the other day or are you going to stand by your report, a la Dan Rather, that the AOL Poll did conclude most Americans dislike Keith Olbermann when any visitor to your site can easily see no such conclusion could possibly come from the poll?

Michelle Malkin ought to go back to the Philippines where she can make a living pole-dancing at strip bars for American sailors.

Those little twerps who constantly use the term "neo con" obscenely seem to forget a few things.

The Neo-Con movement came out of the old, sensible, pro-Defense wing of the Democratic Party who saw danger in Detente, especially when George McGovern and one gutless bigoted howdy-doody clone in Georgia were sucking up to the Soviet Union. Nowadays, the Neo-Con haters, and yes, there are a few in the wacko Buchananite wing of the Right as well as the Neo-Fascist Nutcase Dems, use the term to single out Jews - and Christians who don't believe in "Cut and Run" or appeasing the greatest threat to America since Hitler.

Fact is, the original Neo-Cons were Scoop Jackson, perhaps the greatest Senator in American History and Daniel Patrick Moynihan. Hubert Humphrey too, while not quite a Neo-Con, endorsed their views when he saw what his beloved Democratic Party was turning into - a bunch of bigoted, cowardly pissants, pussies and perverts. Yes, there were Jewish Intellectuals - many of them former Communists - and so what! Bless 'em.

And furthermore, It was these Neo-Cons, good patriotic Americans, quite unlike the rubbish from Air Hate America, MoveOn.Org, The Daily Kositlerites whom the Dems love, it was these Neo-Cons who were the pointmen for one of the greatest Presidents ever elected in American History, Ronald Wilson Reagan. That is something the Carterite and Clintonite Neo-Fascists will never forgive, especially a clown like the brain dead Keith Olbermann.

It was kind of telling that Bill Clinton, himself elected by many Neo-Cons, including Les Aspin, turned on the movement and went back to the failed, anti-military imbeciles who served Carter. Also telling when Clinton himself chose to use "Neo Con" in a denigrating manner - rather than fess up to his own cowardice and lack of character. But then again, that's Bill Clinton.

Michelle Malkin might be shrill at times, like Ann Coulter, but she's usually dead to rights on defense and immigration issues, unlike the idiots who thought Madame Albright was marvelous or Jamie Gorelick competent. About as competent as a bedbug in the winter.

Those little twerps who constantly use the term "neo con" obscenely seem to forget a few things.

The Neo-Con movement came out of the old, sensible, pro-Defense wing of the Democratic Party who saw danger in Detente, especially when George McGovern and one gutless bigoted howdy-doody clone in Georgia were sucking up to the Soviet Union. Nowadays, the Neo-Con haters, and yes, there are a few in the wacko Buchananite wing of the Right as well as the Neo-Fascist Nutcase Dems, use the term to single out Jews - and Christians who don't believe in "Cut and Run" or appeasing the greatest threat to America since Hitler.

Fact is, the original Neo-Cons were Scoop Jackson, perhaps the greatest Senator in American History and Daniel Patrick Moynihan. Hubert Humphrey too, while not quite a Neo-Con, endorsed their views when he saw what his beloved Democratic Party was turning into - a bunch of bigoted, cowardly pissants, pussies and perverts. Yes, there were Jewish Intellectuals - many of them former Communists - and so what! Bless 'em.

And furthermore, It was these Neo-Cons, good patriotic Americans, quite unlike the rubbish from Air Hate America, MoveOn.Org, The Daily Kositlerites whom the Dems love, it was these Neo-Cons who were the pointmen for one of the greatest Presidents ever elected in American History, Ronald Wilson Reagan. That is something the Carterite and Clintonite Neo-Fascists will never forgive, especially a clown like the brain dead Keith Olbermann.

It was kind of telling that Bill Clinton, himself elected by many Neo-Cons, including Les Aspin, turned on the movement and went back to the failed, anti-military imbeciles who served Carter. Also telling when Clinton himself chose to use "Neo Con" in a denigrating manner - rather than fess up to his own cowardice and lack of character. But then again, that's Bill Clinton.

Michelle Malkin might be shrill at times, like Ann Coulter, but she's usually dead to rights on defense and immigration issues, unlike the idiots who thought Madame Albright was marvelous or Jamie Gorelick competent. About as competent as a bedbug in the winter.

My first post on olbermannwatch.com. Kudos to you guys for keeping the forum open to all opinions, whether you agree with them or not. More of that ... less of the anti-democratic forces that attempt to stifle the opinions of those who disagree.

Anti-kudos to the personal attacks ... aka "loonies", "nuts", "wingnuts", "pussies", "whack jobs", "imbeciles". It might be convienent to believe a sane and intelligent person cold never hold an opinion contrary to one's own. Deal with it!

Personally Obermann is decent; if a little shrill. The indignation seems a little "faux". We'll see if now that his ratings are up if he'll go "Fox News" .... aka become essentially a propaganda entity. He's teetering on the edge. Jon Stewart seems to have given up on lampooning the Dems; too bad. My byline for to '06 election: the evil vs. the stupid.

It funny how iritating the "neo-con" label is to some (watch its effect on Bill O'Reilly, for instance). We should note they are "self-proclaimed" neo-conservatives. This is not a tag-line invented by their oponents. Sure a lot of 'em seem to be Jewish. Poor students of the Talmud they are.

Michelle Malkin ought to go back to the Philippines where she can make a living pole-dancing at strip bars for American sailors.
**********************************************
They always attack her race....it is funny how Malkin gets under the skin of "open minded" liberals so much that they show their true colors as the racist hypicrits they really are.

Seems you people on this website are Bush lovers, and to hell with anyone who talks bad about him or his cabinet, especially Rumsfeld, who by the way is very much a laugh and embarrassment to the United States, as is G. Bush as President.
I truly hope the truth in history books is printed about Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld, and not covered over, this has got to be the worst administration ever in the US. They are money grabbing , lying, cheating supposed lesders of the Free World. It's really not funny how they made money on this war, or atrocity, and left us taxpayers to make up for the carte blanche attitude of these three. Just ask Halliburton, what a slap in the face.
Print emails that are against what your website stands for, not just what you want to let viewers see, you're just like the Bush administration, you hide things, manipulate things for you own good.
At least Olbermann is talking the truth, and you people cover your eyes, ears, and mouths, as if you were monkeys .
You people should be ashamed to hold up for these money grabbing people, where was Bush during Vietnam? hiding....what about Cheney? and Rumsfeld had no business planning the attack in Iraq, he is an ignorant man when it comes to military operations. What happened to Osama, what happened to Afganistan..............You people make me puke!

Seems you people on this website are Bush lovers, and to hell with anyone who talks bad about him or his cabinet, especially Rumsfeld, who by the way is very much a laugh and embarrassment to the United States, as is G. Bush as President.
I truly hope the truth in history books is printed about Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld, and not covered over, this has got to be the worst administration ever in the US. They are money grabbing , lying, cheating supposed lesders of the Free World. It's really not funny how they made money on this war, or atrocity, and left us taxpayers to make up for the carte blanche attitude of these three. Just ask Halliburton, what a slap in the face.
Print emails that are against what your website stands for, not just what you want to let viewers see, you're just like the Bush administration, you hide things, manipulate things for you own good.
At least Olbermann is talking the truth, and you people cover your eyes, ears, and mouths, as if you were monkeys .
You people should be ashamed to hold up for these money grabbing people, where was Bush during Vietnam? hiding....what about Cheney? and Rumsfeld had no business planning the attack in Iraq, he is an ignorant man when it comes to military operations. What happened to bin laden, what happened to Afganistan..............You people make me puke!

You people make me puke!
**********************************************
Maybe you shouldn't come here if you can't handle it. :)

You sound like your hero KO..he can't stand different views either that way he avoids them on his show.

Warp the world to fit your needs...........KO has hit the world with truth. American truth. Protecting Republican power is not worth killing our Country or our principles. Shame on you!

Warp the world to fit your needs...........KO has hit the world with truth. American truth. Protecting Republican power is not worth killing our Country or our principles. Shame on you!

it was these Neo-Cons who were the pointmen for one of the greatest Presidents ever elected in American History, Ronald Wilson Reagan.

Posted by: Alan at October 8, 2006 11:33 PM

What did Reagen do to make him considered in the same sentence as Jefferson, Washington, Lincoln, T.Roosevelt. F.Roosevelt.H.Truman on and on. Nothing thats what. He didn't bring down the Soviet Union. You believe in a projection of greatness, which is what he was good at.

Isn't it funny how anyone who disagrees gets deleted? It's almost like watching Hannity "shout down" the opposition. The thing you cant shout down is the embarassment of a nation, the greatest nation in the world under the leadership of George W. Bush. We've had two presidents in my lifetime that were total disapointments. Both were from Texas. OH! thats right G.W.Bush is'nt from Texas. Ha, another lie.

Hey guys. I just found your website today trying to find some info contradicting what I saw Olberam spewing last week. I am in the process of preparing a Word document to email or send US Postal to their sponsors. I thought I was the only one that was fed up with his lies deceit and his "Special Comments" that make Mike Moore look like a Patriotic American. I agree witht he statement that he is one of the most dangerous men on TV today. The likes of him give hope, strength, and resolve to fight on in their attacks on our troops. The streets of Iraq are red from their words. Olberman said GW called democrats traitors. Iknow that is a lie. But, I will call them traitors.

Isn't it funny how anyone who disagrees gets deleted?
---------------------------------------------
Really? Then how come your post is still up?

By the way. I just mover to SC after living the past 13 in NC. I voted for the first time in my life to send Mrs. Dole to DC and send Erskin Bowels home in defeat. Then I got to help send him back home in '04. I know what the power of the vote is. I just registered last week in SC. I was shocked to learn a liberal holds the Congressional seat in my district. I just sent him an email notifying him that I will vote against him. I just read some of the garbage from Olberam supporters above. Ever wonder why liberal says some of the most outrageous statements or lies on TV? It works.

Ralph Norman for Congress.

I'm sure we can all relate to the double standard burdened on whites in terms of racial and ethnic pride. However, I feel that other groups and organizations in America especially cant and will not tolerate white pride of any sort, no matter if we support their right to have black pride or latino pride or whichever. In modern-day Olbermanic America, white pride is a threat. A threat to multiculturalism, zionist supremacism and all those other isms that are sprung on you in college and meant for you to feel guilt and pity for being a Caucasian. As much as I would like to believe in an optimistic future of all races living in harmony and respecting each others boundaries, it just seems highly improbable. America is now a nation in the hands of a disloyal government that thrives on the gradual undermining of the white race. In order to retain our full dignity in society and government I think our only option may be to use force. Revolutionary force if necessary. The Olbermen have gone too far.

Jack Wilden wrote: "Isn't it funny how anyone who disagrees gets deleted? It's almost like watching Hannity "shout down" the opposition.

As regular readers of this site know, I do not delete comments based on political persuasion. I delete spam and ban spammers, Occassionaly, I will also delete or edit posts that I deem to be disruptive (for example, repeating the same three words 400 times or SHOUTING). I have banned a handful of readers for not acceding to my repeated requests not to be disruptive having nothing to do with their political persuasion.

So, while you are welcome to comment here and have at it please do not post lies that any comments have been deleted due to political orientation. I look forward to your apology.

I agree that Olbermann is a daner. his ilk give terrorists hope, strength, and resolve to fight on in their attacks on our troops. He encourages the forces of evil on our own streets in America too with his shameless pandering to minorities and their "terrible" problems.

This just adds to the realization that the left are most definitely the MONOLOGUE-ISTS that they claim others to be.

Is this chick black??!!? She looks white to me.

That's the thing. These days, lily white chicks as white as the driven snow are driven to act like you're standard run of the mill welfare queen.

This just adds to the realization that the left are most definitely the MONOLOGUE-ISTS that they claim others to be.

I have nothing to apoligize for. My comments were truthful interpretations of what i have seen over the last five years. The present administration is an embarrasment to most americans. I am niether democrat or republican, as i can see little difference in the two. What i am is an "American" with a disdain for watching my country being torn apart.

You guys are fucking morons.

The great thing about this website is that it exposes those of you who are so obsessed with hating one media personality that you spill your ingnorance in anonymous rants that clearly come from fear born of intellectual shortcomings. Good job providing a place for useless hate to fester. Don't do anything, just keep blogging. The more you just keep writing your personal insults to a person who has a real platform, the more you show how truly jealous you are. The rest of us can get on with the job of actual political debate and the resulting action that comes from it. Again, thank you for providing a place for this misguided idiocy. A valuable public service that keeps most of you out of the real game.

Jack,

It is not "truthful interpretations of what i have seen over the last five years" to claim that your or other pro-KO or anti-Bush comments have been deleted from this site. You lied. That you were caught in a lie and do not want to acknowledge that or apologize for it only shows you to be an OlbyLoon in good standing. Keith would be proud!

"We have often said that Keith Olbermann is the most dangerous man in television today - and the recent response to his "Krazy Keith" antics has only served to validate this belief."

You can't think of yourself as credible and then write this paragraph. You sound more paranoid than rational. How can someone who averages a 4th place in ratings and around 200,000+ viewers a night be "dangerous"? Looks to me like no one pays attention to him except you and some of your "paranoid" friends here. Please come back to earth Robert Cox.

Bawh wrote "in ratings and around 200,000+ viewers a night be "dangerous"? Looks to me like no one pays attention to him"

Take off your blinders, dude! Keith has been getting MASSIVE amount of media coverage. Today, he has a major profile from the AP that is running in almost every major newspaper in the U.S. He was one of the most popular topics on the blogs. He has been invited on Letterman and Leno over the past few weeks.

And guess what, he was getting 200,000 viewers a night back in 2004. Last week he got 800,000+ viewers on Monday.

Get your head out of the sand!

He IS dangerous.

I dont trust that thar Keith Olbermann. He are a communist socialist famma-nazi. He say it not OK to Like prezdint BUSH! He say it not OK to have sex with 16 year old boys, If old cletus could hear that!! Wooo we would have us a laugh!

You guys keep after Keith, No one shuld kwestion the authority of our Lord and Savoir Gearge W. Bush!

God bless America!

Oh, dear, bwah...You are scared of Keith? That's cool. His ratings are rising because people actually do begin to change their opinion of the administration as it crumbles. Even the staunchest supporters of the current administration are wavering. As well they should. No one expects non-players like most of the ill-informed posters on this blog to ever admit they may have been wrong. It could be that those of you who focus your hate on some MSNBC commentator should think about what it must feel like to be injured or killed in Iraq, and spend more time volunteering at the local USO or better yet, join the armed forces. Talk is so cheap when you are siding with the status quo. Labeling people loons or gabbing about a news show is so lame. Watch Bagdhad E.R. on HBO. See what is really happening. Most of you loudmouths would run and hide your heads rather than actually get involved. But, of course, if the draft came back, most of you would also be way too old to need to worry. Easy to have a knee-jerk opinion when there are no consequenses for you.