Buy Text-Link-Ads here
Recent Comments

    follow OlbyWatch on Twitter

    In

    John Gibson Welcomes Back the Infamous, Deplorable Keith Olbermann

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

    In

    Welcome Back, Olby!

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

    In

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

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

    In

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

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

    In

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

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

    KO Mini Blog



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

    KO Countdown Clock


    Warning: mktime() [function.mktime]: It is not safe to rely on the system's timezone settings. You are *required* to use the date.timezone setting or the date_default_timezone_set() function. In case you used any of those methods and you are still getting this warning, you most likely misspelled the timezone identifier. We selected 'America/New_York' for 'EST/-5.0/no DST' instead in /home/owatch/www/www.olbermannwatch.com/docs/countdown.php on line 5
    KO's new contract with MSNBC ends in...
    0 days 0 hours 0 minutes

    OlbermannWatch.com "My Faves" Set

    OlbermannWatch.com Favorited Photos from other Flickr Users

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

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


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

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

    Red Meat Blog
    Keith Olbermann Quotes
    Countdown Staff Writers

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

    ...they should be...

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

    MSNBC's Countdown
    Bloggerman
    MSNBC Transcripts
    MSNBC Group at MSN

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

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

    Anonymous Rat
    For This Relief Much Thanks
    Watching Olbermann Watch

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

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

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

    Thanks for the blogroll link!

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

    Friends of OlbyWatch

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

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

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


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

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

    Google

    Olbermann Watch Masthead

    Managing Editor

    Robert Cox
    olby at olbywatch dot com

    Contributors

    Mark Koldys
    Johnny Dollar's Place

    Brandon Coates
    OlbyWatch

    Chris Matthews' Leg
    Chris Matthews' Leg

    Howard Mortman
    Extreme Mortman

    Trajan 75
    Think Progress Watch

    Konservo
    Konservo

    Doug Krile
    The Krile Files

    Teddy Schatz
    OlbyWatch

    David Lunde
    Lundesigns

    Alex Yuriev
    Zubrcom

    Red Meat
    OlbyWatch



    Technorati Links to OlbyWatchLinks to OlbermannWatch.com

    Technorati Links to OlbyWatch Blog posts tagged with "Olbermann"

    Combined Feed
    (OlbyWatch + KO Mini-blog)

    Who Links To Me


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



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

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

    Subscribe in myEarthlink
    Feed Button Help


    Olbermann Watch, "persecuting" Keith since 2004


    January 4, 2007
    COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN - JANUARY 4, 2007

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

    Host: Keith Olbermann

    Topics/Guests:

    • THE NEW CONGRESS: Dana Milbank, Washington Post national political reporter and MSNBC political analyst; Jonathan Alter, Newsweek senior editor and MSNBC political analyst
    • PRESIDENT BUSH CAN READ YOUR MAIL: Jonathan Turley, George Washington University law professor
    • NEW CONGRESS: Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.), chair of Senate Intelligence Committee

    Olby was in great form bellowing the opening spiel: a snipe at Denny Hastert, another plug for cutting off funds supporting our troops, and a claim that "Mister Bush has authorized himself to read your mail". [1] Plus UFOs, meteorites, and "something strange" (no, not the KO/KT arrangement).


    MADMAN

    Monkeymann was positively giddy about this "historic" day, with a lengthy clip from "Stretch" Pelosi. Since yesterday Olby had on a Democrat Congressman (Barney Frank), tonight, fair and balanced, he brought on...another Dem! John Madden Murtha. The List, an ever-expanding documentation of Olbermann's overwhelming bias, has been updated accordingly. KO slobbered all over the unindicted co-conspirator, and immediately asked him to "turn off the spigot" (i.e., withhold money from our troops in harm's way), but he ducked the question and talked about "hearings" and "consaulting" with the Congress. It was on to "the generals", with JMM saying victory is "not achievable", talking about "Secretary Rumsfield", and silently thanking The Great and Powerful Olb for not raising any questions about ethics. Olby was worried about Sen Levin not following the game plan (he said he would consider supporting a "surge"), which gave us our first glimpse at the template Krazy Keith will use to claim that he is "nonpartisan": criticize Dems who aren't far left enough!

    After great thanksing the unindicted co-conspirator, it was time for Dana Milbank, without weird wardbrobe. DM threw some water on Herr Olbermann's orgasmic fantasies, and pointed out just what we noted above: Murtha refused to commit to cutting off funds and ducked the question. Then Dana pointed out that the surge talk was premature, as there is "no set White House policy at this point". Huh? Didn't we just get a rambling, apopleptic Speshul Komment about the policy? And didn't Olbermann Watch sagely point out at the time that the so-called policy hadn't even been announced yet? Finally, The Hour of Spin catches up with what we said 48 hours ago. Fat Ass preposterously claimed that the honeymoon for the Dems has ended. Not on OlbyPlanet it hasn't!

    After talk about the administration "demonizing" Stretch Pelosi, DM was great thanksed. Then it was on to the President "giving himself the right to open and read your mail whenever he wants". [2] After repeating that gem [3], he went on to say that Bush is claiming "a new claim of power" [4]: to open the mail "of any American" without a warrant. This was all mere introduction to another episode of Olby and The Perfessor. But what do these [numbers] refer to? They count how many times Edward R Olbermann lied about the law. Because there is no "new power" involved. The law for decades has recognized exigent circumstances as an exception to the 4th amendment. Even the FISA law permits warrantless physical searches under some circumstances. So where did Olbermann get the idea that Bush claims the right to "read your mail whenever he wants"? Where did he get the idea that this was a "new claim of power"? He made it up! The technical term for this is: Another Olbermann Lie.

    The Perfessor was off on his usual tear: Bush has an "obsession", his legal advisors are "radical", and then said that the White House contends:

    You could take a citizen off the street, unilaterally strip him of all of his rights, hold him until you wanted to release him if at all.

    The lessening of habeas corpus rights does not affect US citizens. It says so right in the law. Either the Perfessor is ignorant and doesn't know what he's talking about. Or he's deliberately spinning in order to suck up to "Man on Fan" Olbermann, which would make that statement Another Turley Lie.

    To bring a different point of view to all this, Krazy Keith brought on...another Dem! Jay Rockefeller. Man, we couldn't make this up if we tried. Naturally, The List has been updated again. How can anyone defend the one-sided partisan propaganda-fest that is The Hour of Spin after consulting The List? But we digress.

    Olbermoronn rattled off a list of possible investigations for Rocky to launch. But KO was more concerned with--guess who?--Carl Levin, for saying he would consider a "surge". Yes, it does appear we have a picture forming of the Olbermann of the Future. This was yet another anti-Polident interview (i.e. toothless), with all the usual OlbySpin points. Good grief, is the discredited sports guy so cowardly that he can't air even one interview with someone offering a different opinion? Is he that worried about getting "nauseous" in the presence of someone with a dissenting view? After all, he could have The Laughing Stagehand under the desk with a barf bag.

    Next some regurgitated video about NY heroes, then Donald Trump and Miss USA: the latter may do a Playboy cover. It will surprise no one that Edward R Olbermann did not acknowledge where he lifted the story from: the eeevil bete-noir of all things Olbermann, Page Six. Aside from this semi-plagiarism, KO showed his class by mocking the way Trump speaks. Then the #1 story: UFOs and attacks from outer space. O.K.

    In the Media Matters Minute, another attack on "dim-witted" O'Reilly (Olbersaurus update) for being critical of demagogues who claim the President is waging war just so profiteers can profit. But the "worst person" was Sen Richard McCain. Hey, wait a minute. Didn't KO make O'Reilly the "worst person" because he disagreed with Sen McCain? But now Monkeymann can slam McCain and...never mind. Don't bother to make sense of it. It's Olbypocrisy.

    OLBY

    Silent Schnauzers: Still no mention of the Dems breaking a campaign promise regarding minority rights in the House. Just like he has spiked the uncomfortable video of Cindy Sheehan disrupting and shouting down a Democrat press conference. To be sure, he expertly avoided reporting "Stretch" Pelosi's boastful statement that she is the most powerful woman in America. He again protected his party by avoiding any mention of Hillary dissing Obama, not to mention the latter's drug use.

    NAME

    Olbermann's book The book that bears Olberman's name continues to rocket at amazon.com: it's now all the way up to #5,757, while Mr Bill's "Culture Warrior" is #101. The OlbyTome stands at #2,457 at Barnes & Noble, but O'Reilly's book is #533 there, as well as being one of the year's top ten best sellers per Nielsen's BookScan. On the night of his big-deal Speshul Komment Krazy Keith found himself in third place, coming in behind a rerun of Deal or No Deal. On Wednesday, when he wasn't insulting the intelligence of viewers with a "special" rant, the discredited sports guy actually did better and while still being crushed by The Factor, narrowly eked out a second place finish over Paula Zahn, both in total viewers and in the critical, beloved, all-important, coveted "key demo". Tonight's MisterMeter reading: 2 [LOW]


    Posted by johnny dollar | Permalink | Comments (510) | | View blog reactions

    510 Comments

    Rockefeller is "far left?"

    My gosh, you must be to right of Ghengis Khan if you see him as "far left!"

    I think The Perfessor is off his rocker. He's lost it and jumped the shark at the same time. If you're a paranoid loony, Countdown is the perfect venue for spouting your crackpot views.

    Unless your contract is signed, Olby, you shouldn't be making jokes about cable news shows being canceled. It could be a jinx.

    "Anonymous" (if that is in fact your name) Turley is one of the nation's most respected constitutional scholars.

    Of course, that means nothing to you, I suppose.

    So it's been said. He's also a paranoid loon. Or course, that means nothing to you, I suppose.

    But of course, you version of the Constitution stops at Article 2.

    Whatever your President does, however he shreads the Constitution is OK with you, I guess.

    We liberals look at the whole document, not just the part about the President.

    Of course, if it was up to you, I suppose we'd just get rid of Congress and the courts and set up your president as king.

    Pretty much everybody else in America look like "paranoid loons" to the extreme right wingnuts that roam the bowels of this site!

    > Turley is one of the nation's most respected constitutional scholars.

    And yet he told at least one lie in chatting with Herr Olbermann just tonight. Either that or he is an ignoramus. And I doubt he is an ignoramus.

    What lie did he tell, Johnny?

    This site is funny.. sort of like watching a collection of shitheads going down in quicksand and being mad at the man hastening their demise by stepping on their heads sinking them deeper. Their dark period of error is over. They should just take a pistol and finish themselves off.

    > What lie did he tell, Johnny?

    It will all be in the writeup to appear shortly.

    "Oh you lucky people who don't have to watch the infamous deplorable one"...

    Yea, you know it really is a bitch being tied down in front of my television set every night with no access to a remote!

    Mcain put in his place as the right wing fantatic that he is. No maveric, just a partisan Republican.

    As usual it is the Democratic party that moves the country forward with Nancy Pelosi becoming the Speaker. Women everywhere should be proud of her and should remember to what party she came from.

    No lie, there, Johnny, Bush has claimed the right, in his signing statement, to open anyone's mail in "emergencies."

    Of course there is absolutely no objective definition of "emergency," it is whatever Bush defines it to be.

    Regarding habeus, Bush can indeed, according to his view, detain an American citizen if that citizen "materially aids the enemy." Again, definitions of such are up to Bush.

    I mean, my gosh, you need to look no farther than what happened to Jose Padilla, an American citizen
    to see that this is true.

    All you can do is name-call. Turley actually has studied the constitution.

    Pardon me if I take his word rather than yours.

    If I were Olbermann, I'd love this site. The vindictive, low-brow name-calling you smears about him you all invent just show what an impact he is having.

    Johnny Dollar thinks he's a voice of reason, but he just makes himself look like the moron.(Dollarmoron?)

    Another of the far right who has played deaf dumb and blind the past 6 years with the GOP Congress and this president , but gets his magnifying glass out for Olbermann.
    How funny is that !

    Talk about being a partisan hack !

    I'm watching 2 good things. On The History Channel the History of Cults and on the Military Channel The battle for Rome. Interesting stuff. Better than the Propaganda on Olbyland.

    As opposed to the propaganda you see on FOX on every single show?

    Red Wolf: You mean the battle for Rome against them nasty ole "Islamo Fascists"?

    Hey Johnny boy, seems like your site is having the opposite effect of what you have carefully planned out.

    Too many educated people here at OW to swallow your nonsense.It's a real shame !

    Oh..I guess Red State hasn't gotten back yet from his History Channel hour.
    Wouldn't it be funny if it was covering the "The Disgrace of Richard Nixon !"

    Hey Johnny boy, seems like your site is having the opposite effect of what you carefully have planned.

    Too many educated people here at OW to swallow your nonsense.It's a real shame !

    Oh..I guess Red State hasn't gotten back yet from his History Channel hour.
    Wouldn't it be funny if it was covering the "The Disgrace of Richard Nixon !"

    I know this site is about Keith but Joe Scarborough just put Bill OReily in his place. Joe is a conservative who knows a suck ass when he sees one. Go get em Joe.

    Good strong program tonite , KO.
    Having a constitutional lawyer present must be hard on the right wingers.
    The Constitution is like kryptonite to them.

    Having a constitutional lawyer present must be hard on the right wingers.
    The Constitution is like kryptonite to them.

    Posted by: Bob at January 4, 2007 09:31 PM

    Truth is like kryptonite to them.

    Donora Pa and Paul Falduto,
    Both of you are miserable intolerants. To you anything that's has diverse views is propaganda. Fox at least has people with divergent views. Doe it lean Right, yes but it give people on the Left a fair shake. CNN used to be fair but has lurced leftward. MSNBC is only slightly right of Joseph Stalin. Tucker and Scarbourough are paid to attack their own. I criticize the Right on many things. But I attack the Left also. They don't. I'm Left on some issue and Right on some issues. My main concern is the threat of Islamo-Fascism be it Al-Qaeda, Hizballah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Iran and C.A.I.R. that threaten Western civilization. The Left doesn't see the Islamic threat hence that's why I attack them.
    What has Bush done that has personally affected your lives.

    "No lie, there, Johnny, Bush has claimed the right, in his signing statement, to open anyone's mail in "emergencies."

    This is false. Before you make assertions about the signing statement maybe you should read it first. You can find the entire text here: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/12/20061220-6.html

    The word "emergency" does not appear anywhere. In fact, the president did claim the right to have mail opened,
    "in a manner consistent, to the maximum extent permissible, with the need to conduct searches in exigent circumstances, such as to protect human life and safety against hazardous materials, and the need for physical searches specifically authorized by law for foreign intelligence collection."

    Although this sounds vague "exigent circumstances" is in fact a recognized legal standard by which to measure the constitutionality of a warrantless search.
    There is absolutely nothing new here.

    Paul:

    Just ignor Red Wolf. He is the site idiot! He's good for a laugh but God forbid, don't take him seriously.

    If the Founding Fathers heard Jonathan Turley's interpretation of the Constitution they would hang him on the spot as a traitor, screwball, and dingbat.

    How Bush has effected me personally is irrelvant, Red Wolf. I'm concerned about how he has effected the country.

    And I couldn't care less if FOX wants to be all-conservative, all-liberal or in between. But I certainy don't see many liberals getting "a fair shake" on FOX.

    Rico, do you realize how stupid you sound calling one of the country's formost Constitutional scholars a 'screwball' or a 'dingbat'.

    No wait, I know the answer to that question...you don't realize how stupid you sound because the more ignorant you are, the less you understand how much there is to know.

    rico, why is that so many conservatives always talking about hanging as traitors whoever disagrees with them?

    Does this not show some disturbing pyscosis among the far right?

    Paul,

    Liberals appear on Fox news shows on a regular basis. Charley Rangel, for example, appears on Hannity's radio and TV shows constantly. How many conservatives appear on Krazy Keith's show? Liberals do get a fair shake on Fox. If you do not understand that then you are deluded.

    Happy days are here again.

    Paul Falduto,
    ZBush hasn't affected my lif. I don't care about him one way or another. There's more to life than Bush. Watch sports or something. Bush is a President like all others. He'll be gone in 2 years. then what will you have to bitch about? What will Olbermann bitch about?
    Nothing. His whole ideology is shallow it's bash Bush. He has no subsatce. Other than comedic almost nervous breakdowns!

    Anonymous,
    You're just like Olbermann an intellectual coward. Give yourself a name!

    And Red Wolf, there is no such thing as "Islamo Fascism." That is a term with no meaning. Fascism is an economic and political ideology that has absolutely no relevance in this case.

    Islamic radicals, fine. That's accurate. But the word "fascism" thrown around much too often when it is not relevant, by both the far left and far right.

    But Red Wolf, Olbermann has a name, yet you still call HIM an "intellectual coward"!

    Red Wolf, don't make me laugh. What is the difference b/w posting as "Anonymous" or "Red Wolf?" Aren't you just as anonymous as "Anonymous?"

    I'm assuming of course that "Red Wolf" is not your real name.

    And just because liberals sometimes appear on FOX doesn't mean they get a "fair shake."

    They bring them on so they can have someone to argue with. That is their "schtick" and that's fine. Olbermann's show is different, it is opinion only and not presented as anything else.

    Jonathan Turley is one of the most respected Constitutional scholars in the country?

    Huh?

    I'm not totally dismissing his knowledge - although I often disagree with his views - of the law. But to state that he is one of the most respected scholars is a bit of a reach.

    How many books has he authored on the Constitution? Has he ever argued before the Supreme Court?

    Turley's expertise is in environmental law. Not constitutional law.

    Again, I'm not just dismissing him as a nothing; but let's no overstate his credentials.

    Redwolf,
    For starters, I'm pretty sure the 3,000+ dead soldiers in Iraq and their friends' and relatives' lives have been affected by Bush.

    You said the History Channel was showing the "History of Religions"?

    Ohboy,
    You might want to do a little research on Professor Turley's resume before making an even bigger jackass out of yourself.

    The followiing is from the George Washington University Law School website. As you can see, Dr. Turley has substantial con law, military law, and national security law credentials:

    Biographical Sketch: Jonathan Turley is a nationally recognized legal scholar who has written extensively in areas ranging from constitutional law to legal theory to tort law. After a stint at Tulane Law School, Professor Turley joined the GW Law faculty in 1990, and in 1998 became the youngest chaired professor in the school’s history. He is the founder and executive director of the Project for Older Prisoners (POPS). He has written over three dozen academic articles that have appeared in a variety of leading law journals at Cornell, Duke, Georgetown, Harvard, Northwestern, and other schools. He most recently completed a three-part study of the historical and constitutional evolution of the military system. Professor Turley has served as counsel in some of the most notable cases in the last two decades, including his representation of the Area 51 workers at a secret air base in Nevada; the nuclear couriers at Oak Ridge, Tennessee; the Rocky Flats grand jury in Colorado; Dr. Eric Foretich, the husband in the famous Elizabeth Morgan custody controversy; and four former U.S. attorneys general during the Clinton impeachment litigation. Professor Turley has also served as counsel in a variety of national security and terrorism cases, and has been ranked as one of the top ten lawyers handling military cases. He has served as a consultant on homeland security and constitutional issues, and is a frequent witness before the House and Senate on constitutional and statutory issues as well as tort reform legislation. He is also a nationally recognized legal commentator; he ranked 38th in the top 100 most cited ‘public intellectuals’ in a recent study by Judge Richard Posner and was found to be the second most cited law professor in the country. He is a member of the USA Today board of contributors and the recipient of ‘2005 Single Issue Advocate of the Year’—the annual opinion award for the Aspen Institute and The Week magazine. His more than 400 articles on legal and policy issues have appeared i

    Current Semester Courses: Constitutional Law/Supreme Crt, Environmental Law Clinic, Environmental Legislation Proj, Prisoners Project, Torts

    Colbert:
    "You might want to do a little research on Professor Turley's resume "

    Again, Turley is not considered a "Constitutional scholar."

    His expertise is in environmental law. He has not authored a single textbook on the Constitution. He has not argued a single case before the Supreme Court.

    Every law professor writes articles - academic or general public pieces - on constitutional issues. That's their job. That does not make them a "renowned scholar".

    Scholars are individuals who have spent decades studying constitutional law. Turley's specific field is environmental law.

    Try to raise the level of debate here; if you can't, I'll not respond any further.

    ohboy, perhaps it is you who need to do some research, see my post just above yours.

    If you go to the website of almost ANY law school, the law professors will have their biographies laid out or made public.

    In each, that professor will have a quite impressive list of published articles or academic pieces. That's part of their job.

    Here's UCLA Professor Eugene Volokh's biography.

    http://www.law.ucla.edu/volokh/

    His expertise is in certain, special areas of constitutional law (generally First Amendment/Free Speech). He is not, and does not consider himself, a "constitutional scholar."

    To say that someone is a "Constitutional scholar" is to say that they have written extensively - including books - on the Constitution as a whole.

    Turley is a scholar on environmental law. And with his recent work, can be considered an expert on issues such as the habeas corpus. Those are specific areas.

    He is not a "constitutional scholar."

    moonbats/wingnuts
    did you all call off sick from work so you could watch the hag by the bay bang the gavel. i think you all need to back away from the juice. you all seam to be fired up was the 911 truthers meeting called off. oh i know what it is the first of the month and the welfare checks are in so it's thunderchicken for all the moonbats. calm down and save some of your check for the end of the month so you don't have to get an advance on feburary's welfare check. oh yeah olbermoron still is as anal as he was in 06 and you sheep keep falling for him

    moonbats/wingnuts
    did you all call off sick from work so you could watch the hag by the bay bang the gavel. i think you all need to back away from the juice. you all seam to be fired up was the 911 truthers meeting called off. oh i know what it is the first of the month and the welfare checks are in so it's thunderchicken for all the moonbats. calm down and save some of your check for the end of the month so you don't have to get an advance on feburary's welfare check. oh yeah olbermoron still is as anal as he was in 06 and you sheep keep falling for him

    About this whole Olbermann does not talk enough about Liberal failings... which party has the executive branch of the United States of America? That is the party that I think most Americans want to hear the negative points more about. When Liberals get control of that branch... then the focus of mistakes will definately go to the Liberals & Democrats.

    I would think that a man who teaches a course at GWU on Constitutional Law and the Supreme Court can well be a "constitutional scholar."

    I never said he was the top con law scholar, or the best one, but he clearly is one.

    Typical conservative: deny the facts when they don't fit your pre-conceived notions.

    moonbats/wingnuts
    did you all call off sick from work so you could watch the hag by the bay bang the gavel. i think you all need to back away from the juice. you all seam to be fired up was the 911 truthers meeting called off. oh i know what it is the first of the month and the welfare checks are in so it's thunderchicken for all the moonbats. calm down and save some of your check for the end of the month so you don't have to get an advance on feburary's welfare check. oh yeah olbermoron still is as anal as he was in 06 and you sheep keep falling for him

    jtm371

    Your ann ass.

    Colbert,
    I have a cousin in Iraq. I'm gonna ask you a question, How many people die from Gang violence every year. How many people die from car accidents. The only thing that's certain in life, is death.
    That's why Islam will win, they love death more than we love life. Also you're a bigot. It's funny that the Left talks tolerence but is intolerant of people with faith. Olbermann style hypocrisy.

    Paul Falduto,
    "Olbermann's show is different, it is opinion only and not presented as anything else."
    Olbermann claims he's not a Left or bias. So he's either pretending to be a Lefty or he's lying. Which is it?


    "hag" by the "bay"

    Do our leftwing posters here know the difference between a constitutional scholar and a scholar on aspects of the Constitution?

    There are First Amendment scholars and Fourth Amendment scholars and scholars on the executive branch and so forth.

    A scholar on the First Amendment spends decades studying that amendment. That does not make him a scholar on the Constitution as a whole. He, for example, may know almost nothing about the Fourth Amendment.

    Turley is a scholar on environmental law and in recent years a scholar on issues such a habeas corpus and the rights of the accused.

    That does not mean he is a scholar on the Constitution.

    Geezus, lefties are slow.

    Turley's "credentials" are irrelevant. The Appeal to Authority is one of the oldest logical fallacies in the world. Whether he's right or wrong has nothing to do with how many letters he has after his name, or how many diplomas he has. It is simple: did he characterize accurately, or did he not? All you have to do is read the law and it's clear: he did not.

    Johnny Dollar has FOX News credentials. What are you doing on an Olbermann-bashing site ?

    "I would think that a man who teaches a course at GWU on Constitutional Law and the Supreme Court can well be a "constitutional scholar.""

    Geez, there are thousands of law professors who teach con law across this country.

    Are all of them "scholars"?

    Turley was arguing in the 1990s that Clinton should have been impeached and convicted.

    Was he a scholar then?

    Does anyone know what language jtm371 was using, or is that like ghetto trash talk?

    my gosh, ohboy, talk about "splitting hairs."

    Admit it, you were wrong.

    Turley is a a propaganda toy. He's funded by George Soros like Olebramnn is.

    Washington - President Bush has quietly claimed sweeping new powers to open Americans' mail without a judge's warrant, the Daily News has learned.

    The President asserted his new authority when he signed a postal reform bill into law on Dec. 20. Bush then issued a "signing statement" that declared his right to open people's mail under emergency conditions.

    That claim is contrary to existing law and contradicted the bill he had just signed, say experts who have reviewed it.

    Bush's move came during the winter congressional recess and a year after his secret domestic electronic eavesdropping program was first revealed. It caught Capitol Hill by surprise.

    "Despite the President's statement that he may be able to circumvent a basic privacy protection, the new postal law continues to prohibit the government from snooping into people's mail without a warrant," said Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), the incoming House Government Reform Committee chairman, who co-sponsored the bill.

    Experts said the new powers could be easily abused and used to vacuum up large amounts of mail.

    "The [Bush] signing statement claims authority to open domestic mail without a warrant, and that would be new and quite alarming," said Kate Martin, director of the Center for National Security Studies in Washington.

    "The danger is they're reading Americans' mail," she said.

    "You have to be concerned," agreed a career senior U.S. official who reviewed the legal underpinnings of Bush's claim. "It takes Executive Branch authority beyond anything we've ever known."

    A top Senate Intelligence Committee aide promised, "It's something we're going to look into."

    Most of the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act deals with mundane reform measures. But it also explicitly reinforced protections of first-class mail from searches without a court's approval.

    Yet in his statement Bush said he will "construe" an exception, "which provides for opening of an item of a class of mail otherwise sealed against inspection in a manner consistent ... with the need to conduct searches in exigent circumstances."

    Bush cited as examples the need to "protect human life and safety against hazardous materials and the need for physical searches specifically authorized by law for foreign intelligence collection."

    White House spokeswoman Emily Lawrimore denied Bush was claiming any new authority.

    "In certain circumstances - such as with the proverbial 'ticking bomb' - the Constitution does not require warrants for reasonable searches," she said.

    Bush, however, cited "exigent circumstances" which could refer to an imminent danger or a longstanding state of emergency.

    Critics point out the administration could quickly get a warrant from a criminal court or a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court judge to search targeted mail, and the Postal Service could block delivery in the meantime.

    But the Bush White House appears to be taking no chances on a judge saying no while a terror attack is looming, national security experts agreed.

    Martin said that Bush is "using the same legal reasoning to justify warrantless opening of domestic mail" as he did with warrantless eavesdropping.

    You know what --- give Olbermann the Oval Office power... he will be openning other people's mail in the blink of an eye.

    Paul,

    Let me put it again, this time as a gentleman. If the Founding Fathers heard Turley's interpretation of the Constitution they would hang him as a traitor. Period.

    If liberals felt that they were unfairly treated on Fox they would not appear there. If there is a network that treats conservatives better than Fox treats liberals then name that network.

    I love it. I wonder if Ohboy saw the Turley bio post before he wrote his knock of Colbert? Don't you just love people who make s**t up off the top of their heads like Ohboy? :-) I'm saving this exchange to the hard drive. This is classic Internet right here. :-) :-) :-)

    > Bush, however, cited "exigent circumstances" which could refer to an imminent danger or a longstanding state of emergency.

    Exactly. Exigent circumstances has been an exception to the need for warrants for years. No make that decades. Maybe even a century. The Supreme Court has stated so over and over. So much for Bush claiming "new powers".

    NBC.

    "Admit it, you were wrong. "

    Now, that's funny.

    You folks think that a person who simply teaches con law means that they're a "top constitutional scholar."

    If that means he's a "top scholar", then we've got thousands of "top scholars" in the country all because they teach con law.

    Wow.

    As JD noted, even worse, Turley doesn't know his law in this case. As he didn't regarding the detention of enemy aliens.

    Oy, some scholar.

    Warrants? Warrants? We don't need no stinkin' warrants!

    Warrants are for sissies and liberals!

    Oh mah Gawd, jtm371, yor right! Mah welfare check is late agin! I'm jus gonna have to rite to my fren Olbamann to see if he can hep me out with an advanc or sumpin!

    donra pa
    what's the matter hits alittle to close to home. if you are in pa then your probably pickled by now.don't for get to clip those coupons to make that check stretch don't want to brake your new years resolution. i donra pa will live within my means. will not over spend even though i'm subsidize by the government that i hate. by the 20th what will it be ripple or rubbing alcohol? don't forget olbermoron still blows.

    Johnny Dollar,

    If you look up at the sky tonight you can see the moon is still full. That explains a lot.

    Warrants are for the FBI...

    Today is very trying... the moon is no longer full... it is first quarter waning creasant... sheesh !

    And just what exactly are your con law credentials, ohboy?

    Forgive me if take Turley's word instead of yours.

    Don't you know there's still the Duke scandal going on?!! Gosh, people, get your priorities straight, like Bill O'Reilly..he stays on message!

    Olbermann Watch [Us Bicker],
    NBC fair to the right? It's barely to the right of Josef Stalin.

    Bicker,

    No, it still appears 100% full to the naked eye. What are you, a "moon nerd"? If you are saying that NBC treats conservatives better then Fox treats liberals then how about an example? I gave one. What show on NBC treats conservatives nicely? It sure ain't SNL.

    He's the 2nd most cited law professor in the country, but he's not a top constitutional scholar?

    I loved too the idea that Bush didn't saw he had the right to read mail in an emergency, he had teh right to read mail in "exigent circumstances"! Um... in other words, an emergency.

    The only reason that Bill O' Reilly is staying on the message is because he is becoming paranoid... "S-Ps", "everybody" @ NBC "hates" Bush, "Culture Warrior"... I used to think that Bill O' Reilly used to hide the silliness behind a mascarade of intellectualism ... but now it just truly is paranoia !!!

    Dana Milbank had his hair perfectly colored and quaffed for the Democratic takeover.

    They were all so giddy tonight with the secret handshakes and the shots of kool-aid prior to the show.

    The "list" is truly incriminating for Citizen Keith. Keep it up Johnnny.

    But NBC News management does not care. #2 in the key demo has them worshiping at the alter of greed. They are crunching the numbers as we speak figuring out how to pay Olbermann $4,000,000 a year.

    I find this Most Minor Blog to be really absurd, in that this boy is making it his life's work to make ridiculous, childish, sophomoric claims about a NEWSCASTER, trying to paint Keith Olbermann as the Villain who's out to ruin the nation, when we've been shoved down a battered brick road by a psychopath-made-president: a once cocaine-addicted, drunken-driving, VietNam-evading CHEERLEADER from UT, whose father was president......& whose grandfather was a Nazi conspirator & banker. How Nonsensical is this Land of Mirrors this blog-boy is living in!!!
    This place where UP is DOWN & the Right is So Very Wrong! Where the heroes (like John Murtha & Max Cleland & the young John Kerry) are made out to be the villans & the truly EVIL ONES are allowed to call all others "evil".
    & get away with it!
    You're sadly deluded, OlbermannWatchingBoy!

    It's funny the Lefties follow a guy who almost had a nervous breakdown. Nice spokesman for your cause!

    SO Rico:

    So, founding fathers would see 'misinterpreting' the Constitution is a 'hanging' offense! Thats amazing....and to think, all this time I've been under the impression that the founders, and the constitution both embraced free speech! How could I have been so wrong?

    You really do have a few mental issues, old buddy!

    NBC gave allowance to Joe Scarborough to yell into the camera. I hope that he is getting some real yelling from a higher-up boss for that...

    ABC was elected Media Matters' misrepresntor of the year of 2006...

    CBS was fair and balanced long before FOX News claimed to be...

    Joe Scarborough is a conservative who has his own show on NBC.

    This latest O'Reilly thing about them is even nuttier than his "War on Christmas" BS.

    "Forgive me if take Turley's word instead of yours"

    You should (generally) because his credentials are superior to mine (three or four law courses) That doesn't mean he's right because if you look at the law, he's wrong here.

    But I would clearly defer to a LAW PROFESSOR over a non-expert.

    He is a law professor. He teaches law. He has specialized in environmental law. Recently, he has been involved in issues regarding habeas corpus and enemy detainees.

    By no measure is he considered, as others here have stated, "a top constitutional scholar." Because he simply isn't one.

    And at this point, arguing with you folks on the left is a pointless exercise. You live in your own fantasy world. Enjoy it.


    Paul: I feel sorry for Nill O' Reilly... that whole "S-P" thing prevented Bill O' Reilly from going on his war on Christmas

    Anonymous,
    "You really do have a few mental issues, old buddy!"
    Like your hero Olbermann. I doubt it Rico shakes, face turns red, runs out of breath and almost crys when he expresses his opinions!

    And then of course there is Tucker Carlson, also a conservative, Chris Matthews, who is pretty middle-of-the-road and hits Dems as hard as he does the GOP many times and who both often have conservative guests.

    "And just because liberals sometimes appear on FOX doesn't mean they get a "fair shake. They bring them on so they can have someone to argue with. That is their "schtick" and that's fine. Olbermann's show is different, it is opinion only and not presented as anything else."

    Paul is talking out of his ass here because he worships the mentally ill Orange Boy, host of Meltdown. The fact that Paul is unable to deny is that persons with dissenting viewpoints are heard on Fox and given an opportunity to express their points of view.

    Paul, I will concede that the Fox format where there are discussions in which two persons on opposite sides of an issue that last only for several minutes rarely allow for the complete exploration of an issue. But, the value in having a represntative speaking for each side is that each can act as a "check" on the other if a mispresentation is made. In the format favored by Orange Boy, he is free to
    misrepresent "facts". The "no dissenters allowed" policy encourages sloppy research (or no research at all, except pulling stories off the blue blogs). Olby knows he will never be challenged so he does not have to make any effort at all to "get it right". Is that really the kind of format you think makes for better journalism? This type of show is not "cutting edge" or "edgier" or "hipper". It is shittier.

    Naturally, Olbermann does not allow dissent. Paul claims that Olby is honest and upfront about the fact that Meltdown is "opinion only and not presented as anything else." But is Paul's assertion really true or is Paul ignorant (or lying) about Olby's hypocrisy? Has Olby really come clean (like hosts such as Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity) about his political leanings or is Olbermann pretneding to be objective and all the while cheerleading for the far left fringe? Here is an interview with the Orange One conducted by the USC School of Journalism's Online Journalism Review:

    OJR: How would you describe yourself politically on the liberal-to-conservative spectrum?
    KO: I'm not political. I don't vote. . . 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/index.cfm

    Or maybe, Paul, you might be intersted in knowing what the MSLSD website has to say about Olby's show and whether it is an "opinion" show or a news show:


    "Keith Olbermann is host of ?Countdown with Keith Olbermann.? ?Countdown,? a unique newscast that counts down the day?s top stories with Keith?s particular wit and style, telecasts weeknights, 8-9 p.m. ET on MSNBC."

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3080446/


    In short, Paul thinks Orange Boy's lying about being an objective reporter of the news and his one sided cheerleading for the left fringe is preferable to a show that gives all sides a chance to weigh in.

    Yes, it's very interesting to see that the once BushApologist, Joe Scarborough, one of the Reddest of the RED in his "ScarboroughCountry" is now decrying both his previous cohort Bill O'lierly & his beloved prez. He did make it a point, in his "shouting episode" tonight, to say that george & his neocons have made wrack & ruin of not only the nation, but their Republican party. Barry Goldwater & Gen/Pres Eisenhower must be spinning in their graves these days, trying to rise from them & throttle georgie in his bed. (as the senior Bush is probly wishing that they might do now, as well!)

    Al Jazeera @ 30 Rock.

    Red Wolf has a nervous breakdown on this site every single day. I would love to nominate his 'works' for the "stupidest and most paranoid posts on the Internet award". Is there such an award?

    Mr. R. needs help... his secular progressive stuff is spilling into his war on Christmas career! Not to mention his prestigious life as an influencer of gas prices and other commodities...

    Mr. R. needs help... his secular progressive stuff is spilling into his war on Christmas career! Not to mention his prestigious life as an influencer of gas prices and other commodities...

    Monkeymann sits at the left hand of Michael Moore.

    > Joe Scarborough is a conservative who has his own show on NBC.

    No kidding. Joe didn't bother to play the clip where Joe was cited, and O'Reilly made it clear he was talking about NBC broadcast, not NBC cable. Now why do you suppose Ol' Joe left out that part of the clip? That's a editing trick clever enough for The Hour of Spin, and I fully expect Herr Olbermann to appropriate it for Friday's show.

    Orange Boy? My gosh, you all certainly come up with some creative names for Mr. Olbermann.

    How is he orange?

    Scarborough Watch time

    Olbermann Watch (Us Bicker):

    What a surprise to hear that about O'Reilly. I thought he was winning his "war on Christmas". After all, didn't he tell us he was?

    Joe Scarbrough ditched his conservative values and whored them for Olby's lead in. He's a sad sack

    i think REDWOLF needs to adjust the color settings on his 1980 vintage TV.....i've looked & looked, trying to find this "OrangeBoy" he keeps ranting about & only see Keith Olbermann's skin tone as the same as all of his guests.
    oh well.
    maybe it's just because i don't have one of those press-on "color tv" films that they provided the less-than-privileged for their b&w tvs back in the 50s.
    (& yes, i am old enough to remember that......& much more than the boychild who writes this "blog".)

    Rush and Hannity "came clean" about their political leanings?

    What was there to "come clean" about? It isn't obvious that they are conservatives?

    If they aren't, they're hiding it really well!

    The last time I checked... I am certain that Hannity and Colmes were the recipiant of that noble flame... although... they spiced the war on Christmas t up the way that they liked it ...

    Dollar, i hope this isn't nit-picking, but I was almost thrown by the "consaulting" thing, then I decided it must be BF's way of saying it.
    Having got past that, and thoroughly enjoying the nightly synop, I was taken with the " Senator Richard McCain" thing. Must be a typo.

    No, Murtha said consaulting, just like he said Rumsfield. As for Richard McCain, that's Olby's way of referring to the Arizona Senator. At least it was on one occasion and so I drag it out every once in a while to mock him.

    Joe Scarborough used to be a conservative but he no longer appears to be one. They made him drink the water. As far as Tucker is concerned, is he still on? He was last seen getting voted off of same dancing show. But he is on the Right, that is true. Somebody mentioned CBS. Isn't that the place where "Rathergate" took place?

    But having one conservative host on doesn't mean the network is fair. It just means that it's not a complete shutout. For every conservative guest who appears on Fox a liberal is there too, and they get as much time to talk as the Righty. That is "fair and balanced".

    I know he called Chris Wallace a monkey..
    Who did Olby call a "Fat Ass"?

    Love the references.....hilarious.

    L.F.

    Dollar, thanks for responding, seems I missed the McCain slip-up in the past. Updating the lexicon now.

    The anti Olbermann attack goons on this site think people just can't figure out for themselves where KO stands, so they have to make it their daily struggle to bring light to this 'dark' corner of the news world.

    You guys ever heard of the saying "your just pissing into the wind"? Thats exactly what you're doing!

    > Who did Olby call a "Fat Ass"?

    Just check the Olbersaurus (link provided in the article).

    I am guessing David Asman.

    "Here we have a slacker son of a powerful patrician father who resolves unconscious Oedipal issues through inappropriate acting-out in foreign countries. Hello? All the king's task forces can gather together the shards of the policy, number them, arrange them, but it never made sense when it was whole and so it makes even less sense now.

    American boys in armored jackets and night scopes patrolling the streets of Baghdad are not going to pacify this country, any more than they will convert it to Methodism. They are there to die so that a man in the White House doesn't have to admit that he, George W. Bush, the decider, the one in the cowboy boots, made grievous mistakes. He approved a series of steps that he himself had not the experience or acumen or simple curiosity to question and that had been dumbed down for his benefit, and then he doggedly stuck by them until his approval ratings sank into the swamp.

    He was the Great Denier of 2006, waving the flag, questioning the patriotism of anyone who dared oppose him, until he took a thumpin' and now, we are told, he is re-examining the whole matter. Except he's not. To admit that he did wrong is to admit that he is not the man his daddy is, the one who fought in a war.

    Hey, we've all had issues with our dads. But do we need this many people to die so that one dude can look like a leader?

    It's time for 41 and 43 to work something out, and they can't do it by way of James A. Baker III or Brent Scowcroft. Pick up the phone, old man, and tell 43 you love him dearly and it's time to think about sparing the lives of American soldiers, many of whom have sons too."

    Garrison Keillor January 4, 2007

    I happen to like Bob Beckel...he said he was a Christian tonight. refreshing. Fox has many more democrats on their shows versus MSNBC having conservatives. and that's a fact.

    January 4 2007 is today. Nothing romantic about putting the date underneath when the day is today !

    I don't have a hard time at all believing that Olbermann doesn't vote and doesn't care who wins.

    You all think that the only reason anyone might criticize your beloved president is because they have some "partisan vendetta" against him.

    Isn't it possible that Olbermann is outraged about the facts in front of his face, the ones you all deny, that this president is shredding the Constitution, misleading the American people on a whole host of issues and ruining our once high standing around the world as a nation to be admired? I just saw a poll regarding opinions about us in 8 foreign countries and all but one (Jordan, which went from 1% approval to 15%) showed substantial loss of support for us abroad since Bush took office. Are they all wrong? Are the 60% of Americans who disapprove (40% of whom strongly disapprove) of Bush all wrong too?

    Perhaps it is Olbermann's lack of political affilation that allows him to approach it objectively and see that our Emporer has no clothes. Makes perfect sense to me.

    Rico baby:

    So I guess Scarborough has now become a 'liberal' because he has finally caught on to how badly you're heroes have botched the war, and now recognizes the inevidible failure of our inane policies?

    Maybe he just doesn't want to see more promising young American lives thrown into the fire!

    So that's you're definition of a converted 'Liberal'?

    Well, as I've already pointed out, you're not exactly the brightest bulb on the tree!

    How is opening mail that may have anthrax a violation of one's constitutional rights? I don't care if this happens to my mail, if it will save lives and stop terrorists. Plus, I have nothing to hide.

    Olbermann has no perspective on reality.
    He's very deplorable.

    LF

    Joe Scarborough clearly manufactured that whole rant @ the end of the segment. There was no reason to shout into the camera and call out Bill O' Reilly like he did, and I certainly am not going to sit here and pretend that all of that slop was at all percotious or enlightening. The same with Ol' Big Mac

    Posters named "Anonymous" are lame asses. No exceptions. Their comments might as well be in invisible ink.

    If the worst thing you can think of to bash Murtha with is his accent, he must be doing something right.

    Murtha is in fact a moderate-conservative Democrat backed the invasion but who again, unilke you all, can see the facts that we can't "win" in Iraq and need a new strategy, a real one, not "stay the course plus 20000 troops."

    Freechie:

    Mark Foley said he was a "Christian". Bob Naye said he was a Christian, as did Bob Cunningham, and the list goes on and on and on.

    If that's what it takes to win your narrow minded approval, you are a pretty sad individual indeed!

    Freechie:

    Mark Foley said he was a "Christian". Bob Naye said he was a Christian, as did Bob Cunningham, and the list goes on and on and on.

    If that's what it takes to win your narrow minded approval, you are a pretty sad individual indeed!

    Anonymous said: "So I guess Scarborough has now become a 'liberal' because he has finally caught on to how badly you're heroes have botched the war"

    Damn straight!!

    Spit on the U.S. military for botching the War!

    *** Democrats in '08. Demeaning the miserable men and women of the U.S. military since 1963 ***

    I like Senator Wrangel. I believe his pleas for a draft.

    January 4 2007 is today. Nothing romantic about putting the date underneath when the day is today !

    Posted by: Olbermann Watch [Us Bicker] in Technicolor at January 4, 2007 11:21 PM
    ___________________________________
    Uh, did I say I meant it to be "romantic"?? He said it today, you nitwit: that was the point.
    It wasn't a year ago, or a month ago. It was 1/4/07: the day that the wishes of the majority of the nation were finalized with the official take-over of the House by the DEMOCRATS. (particularly by the "SanFranciscoLiberal",WOMAN, Nancy Pelosi)
    Mark that down in your dirty, stained little calendar.

    More to the point: the debate of INTELLIGENT people should not be about what Keith Olbermann eloquently said to or about whom, but about how INeloquent, how incapable of correct, coherent speech that YOUR President is, & how inept he is in his dealings with the world.

    Rico, I'll ask you the same question I did Red Wolf, which he ignored: how you are, simply using the name "Rico," any less "anonymous" than "Anonymous"?

    "I speak for the left," Scarbourough said that Bush bothched the war, not the troops!

    Do you wingers lie about EVERYTHING? It sure seems that way!

    Left said: Spit on the military for botching the war"...

    Well, not exactly stupid! The military has done a fine job. They were led by total idiots with either no plans or inept plans.

    Finally dumbass, there was NEVER anything 'Conservative' about invading, occupying, and trying to change the culture of a far away land.

    How is opening mail that may have anthrax a violation of one's constitutional rights? I don't care if this happens to my mail, if it will save lives and stop terrorists. Plus, I have nothing to hide.

    Olbermann has no perspective on reality.
    He's very deplorable.

    LF

    Posted by: Little Feechie at January 4, 2007 11:26 PM
    _____________________________________
    Interesting, isn't it, that no one thot to make signing statements about opening the mail after
    Ted Kosinski's sending bombs through the mail?
    Have we heard anything about bombs in the mail lately? Or even Anthrax in the mail since the flurry after the Oh, So Forever LIFE-CHANGING 9/11?

    Keith's mailing incident does not qualify as a terrorist act...

    Oh, the old "I have nothing to hide" defense rears it's ugly head again.

    That's not the point. The point is that the president is claiming a power he does not have under the law.

    That should bother every American, even those with nothing to hide.

    ...The closest that it came to was mail harassment. Nothing like terrorims. Nothing even near close.

    Keith's mailing incident does not qualify as a terrorist act...

    Posted by: Olbermann Watch [Us Bicker] in Technicolor at January 4, 2007 11:40 PM
    ___________________________________
    I wasn't talking about "Keith's mailing incident", I was talking about the Anthrax mailings to Democrats after 9/11. How old are you? Or maybe I should ask, "how much memory retention do you have?"

    Mna... i forgot to read cassidy's mind before I posted on her vaguely worded remarks... sorry !

    Anonymous said, "Finally dumbass, there was NEVER anything 'Conservative' about invading, occupying, and trying to change the culture of a far away land."

    So you were for Bill Clinton's signing of Iraqi Regime change policy and his attack against Iraq in 1998 based on WMD evidence? (btw, yes...I was). Were you?

    LF says; "I don't care if this happens to my mail", & "I have nothing to hide"....

    Lets carry this a step or two further; "I don't care of they kick down my door and ransack my house...I have nothing to hide, and if it makes me safer!"

    Let the government kick down doors. Only if you are found innocent should the dfoors be repaired.

    Paul,

    If somebody doesn't fill in their name they are "Anonymous" by default. The point is to know who everybody is. When lots of different posters end up with the same moniker then we don't know which real person said what. It doesn't matter what name you use, but it does matter that only one poster uses that name. If you see a post by "Rico" you know who did it. All posts by "Anonymous" are really by many different people.

    I guess I must have missed something, "Anonymous," when was it exactly that Bill Clinton invaded and occupied Iraq?

    Lets carry this a step or two further; "I don't care of they kick down my door and ransack my house...I have nothing to hide, and if it makes me safer!"

    Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 11:44 PM
    _______________________________________
    Exactly.
    Don't we all (except OlbWatch, whose mind seems to be rather short) remember the 12 yo girl in the uh, "Heartland", whose home was raided a couple of yrs ago becuz someone had reported that she had an anti-war poster hanging in her bedroom?

    Paul Falduto,
    Why does the Left care aboout what other countries think about us? Screw I say. We need to become energy independent, put tarrifs on foreign goods, recreate our industrial base, Pull out of the UN, World bank, IMF, NATO,WTO and NAFT. It's time to go back to splendid Isolatrion. We need to pull our troops not only out of Iraq, but also Afghanistan, Bosnia, Kossovo, Korea and Germany. Let the world fall to Islamic and Chinese Imperialism. What should we care. We have 5,000 Nukes.

    Besides.. .in the future there will be incinerating laser canons to just zap away doors. I like those kinds of idea!

    Besides.. .in the future there will be incinerating laser canons to just zap away doors. I like those kinds of idea!

    Rico, I see your point there.

    ohboy,
    What textbooks has Turley written about environmental law? That was one of your requirements to be a scholar and you claimed Turley is an environmental law scholar.

    Actually, Red Wolf, we have 10000 nukes and so does Russia.

    That should be our main foreign policy concern, not terrorism.

    Not that terrorism isn't important, but terrorists can't destroy the planet.

    We and Russia can.

    Wrong again, Rico....son, WHY are you always so wrong?

    Anybody on this site could easily use the name 'Rico' too, if they chose to do so!

    As far as I know 'Rico' is not registered or copyrighted.

    Waiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit a minute... you have to write a piece about the enviroment to graduate ?!?!? That sounds stupid... Why can not it be universal or something that is even more omnipresent of an issue ?!?

    It's time to go back to splendid Isolatrion...... What should we care. We have 5,000 Nukes.

    Posted by: Red Wolf at January 4, 2007 11:49 P
    _________________________________
    I'm trying to assume that you meant to become ISOLATIONISTS, poor little child raised by wolves.....& to be an Isolationist means the exact opposite of occupying soverign nations & attempting to force them to accept, (cough cough) "American style 'democracy'".
    And, oh, yes, using our "5000 nukes" would be a lovely solution----one that wouldn't affect our quality of life in the least,
    You DIMFUKINGWIT.
    Thank a ProvidentGod that we're moving to Mexico next month & away from this american madness!

    Paul Falduto,
    Qe should be self suffientr and withdraw from global politics. we don't have the stomach to fight Islamo-Fascists. Let's stop fooling ourselves here. Let's withdraw and let the world go to hell!

    Anonymous,
    Get a name!

    I am sick and tired of getting involved in foreign affairs... raise the anchor and let us just heave-ho !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Paul,

    Thanks. I would love to disagree with you some more tonight but I am gainfully employed and must retire for the evening.

    Peace Out!

    Olbermann Watch [Us Bicker],
    Wow we actually agree on something!

    Anonymous, I see your point too. Anyone who does not use their real full name is "anonymous." Not that I see anything at all wrong with not using your real full name, but anyone can make up any "handle" and no one knows who they really are.

    That said, however, it would be easier, in the back and forth that goes on here and on other blogs, with one person responding to another, if everyone would choose a "handle" even if only for that day, so everyone knows which poster they are responding to.

    Rico: You mean you have a job? Yucko! I prefer my monthly welfare check.

    Actually... this Keith Olbermann is starting to get on my nerves... oh... it starts out easily enough to defend the hairdo... but when this website's daily assignment calls for watching this punk on a regular basis... then he gets a little bit loathsome is right...

    I am sick and tired of getting involved in foreign affairs... raise the anchor and let us just heave-ho !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Posted by: Olbermann Watch [Us Bicker] in Technicolor at January 5, 2007 12:00 AM
    _______________________________________
    Pardon me, OlbyWatch, but I think that would mean going against your beloved chimpy Prez & pulling our children outa Iraq NOW!

    You neo-isolationists are deluding yourselves. This is not the 1930s. We live in a world that is getting smaller all the time and simply "shutting the door" is not an option, even if were a good thing to do (which it is not, in my opinion).

    We need to think of ourselves as "earthings," for lack of a better world, rather than Americans, Germans or whatever. We're all in this together.

    We all live on one planet and either we will live together in peace on it or we will surely destroy it.

    I don't know about you all, but that is not something I want to see happen.

    Liberals are lucky that they were able to stem their annoyabliity-factor enough to get elected back into the house. The leftists are so annoying.

    Sorry, I meant "earthlings" in my post, not "earthings."

    I'd much rather be annoying than destructive, as was the previous congressional majority.

    "We need to think of ourselves as 'earthlings' ... rather than Americans, Germans or whatever. We're all in this together."

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

    Clarification time: If there was a title that could save the world, I would call for that. Frankly there is not. We could call eachother Space aliens and everybody would still be gathering up on eachother in this whole mess where everybody wants uniform peace, but nobody wants to make the recognicive leaps needed on everyone's part to make the world a much better place. So if some people, me for one, feel a little bit as though there is a soar thumb factor in this planet... that goes souly to the people in it who's dfream of pece outwrigh any fractal ability to go through the steps necessary for civil society to survive.

    Paul Falduto,
    The Left makes no sense. You guys want an end to foreign wars. Yet when someone explains how to do this you guys don't like it. Make up your minds. I'm sorry but I'm American not Earthling. Screw Nato screw the UN!

    "We all live on one planet and either we will live together in peace on it or we will surely destroy it."

    Islam is out to destroy the world. They divide the world into 2 Zone. The Dar es Islam (House of Islam) and The Dar al Haab (The House of War).

    "annoying not destructive"

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

    Annoying can be destructive. Here is a very good example: There are nearly a quater million troops in Iraq. They are all being shot at in some places and rather than being helpfull an putting the war in perspective what some are doing is putting the war in a negative light because the war is in bad taste. That being said, I think the destructive element does not have to be the troops in Iraq, but those planting mines in the roads that our troops use to get through that nation !

    Red Wolf is right. We could use just a couple of hundred of our 10,000 nukes to wipe out the Middle East and save the rest just in case anybody else wanted to mess with us!

    They'll get the message then. Why can't the left understand this?

    The left are too urbane.

    Anonymous,
    It wouldn't even come to that. If we left world affairs, we'd be left alone. If someone meses with us we nuke them. We say this publically we'll be left alone!

    OMG. I'm awash in a sea of idiots & able to hold onto Paul's too "urbane" shoulder to keep from drowning. I'm afraid I'm going to have to abandon this leaky, rat-ridden barge & go on to more intelligent lands.
    Adios,Amigos de Esquierda! Farewell, you sad&lost little olbywatchers!
    There are blogs with far more relevant discourse that actually bear need for participation.

    OMG. I'm awash in a sea of idiots & able to hold onto Paul's too "urbane" shoulder to keep from drowning. I'm afraid I'm going to have to abandon this leaky, rat-ridden barge & go on to more intelligent lands.
    Adios,Amigos de Esquierda! Farewell, you sad&lost little olbywatchers!
    There are blogs with far more relevant discourse that actually bear need for participation.

    Really why are we so involved in foreign affairs? If everyone hates us why can't we just step away let them resolve their own disputes? And whats the deal with us and Israel? Do the jews really run this country?

    alright Red Wolfie:

    Where ya gonna buy your clothes, since most of em are made in China. Ditto for most of your TV sets, radios, dishes, toys, etc. You see, we don't make much of anything anymore...I have to admit it's a little beyond my understanding as to exactly what it is that is actually sustaining this "make nothing" economy.

    Most of our cars are made all or in part off shore as well....and here is the kicker, we are importing most of our oil to run them on. All of this is being paid for by piling up massive foreign debt.

    So you see, it's not really all that practical to isolate ourselves from the world anymore. It might have worked 40 years ago, but not today.

    Anonymous,
    If you read my earlier posts, You see I said to become energy self sufficient and rebuild our industrial base.

    Thats a tall, tall, order!

    Liberals do get a fair shake on Fox. If you do not understand that then you are deluded.

    Sure they do...they get a chance to be cut off before they get to make a point, or just when they start..oops...time for a commercial.

    It gets more comical that whenever Hannity is taking a beating, the louder he shouts over them.

    Joe Scarbrough ditched his conservative values and whored them for Olby's lead in. He's a sad sack.

    Little Feechie sure has his hand on the pulse of MSNBC.

    George Bush turned around Joe Scarborough POV.
    Joe is an intelligent human being.He couldn't stomach the lies and bad policies of Bush any longer and started telling it like it is.
    Many right wingers have woken up this exact same way.
    The only Bush supporters still capable of actually admitting they're in his corner either have a political ax to grind or like you Little Frenchie, too stupid or blind to know any better.

    Dollar: No, Murtha said consaulting, just like he said Rumsfield. As for Richard McCain, that's Olby's way of referring to the Arizona Senator. At least it was on one occasion and so I drag it out every once in a while to mock him.

    Do you mock Bush the thousands of times he mispronounces words or bungles his syntax?
    Or are you willing to admit you're not fair and balanced?

    Let the government kick down doors. Only if you are found innocent should the dfoors be repaired.


    We have a lot of Constitution scholars here tonight.

    Yes, When I write for Bush Watch I mock Bush. And when I write for Olbermann Watch I mock Olbermann. That, in case you didn't notice, IS the name of this site. OLBERMANN watch.

    I often wonder what George Bush is really like. I would love to talk to someone who actually knows him on a personal level or spent time with him.
    I came across the next best thing.... a piece on the web of a professor of Bush's when he was at Harvard.As revealing that it is, it didn't surprise me a bit.It was written in 2004.
    Check this out:
    "At Harvard Business School, thirty years ago, George Bush was a student of mine. I still vividly remember him. In my class, he declared that "people are poor because they are lazy." He was opposed to labor unions, social security, environmental protection, Medicare, and public schools. To him, the antitrust watch dog, the Federal Trade Commission, and the Securities Exchange Commission were unnecessary hindrances to "free market competition." To him, Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal was "socialism." Recently, President Bush's Federal Appeals Court Nominee, California's Supreme Court Justice Janice Brown, repeated the same broadside at her Senate hearing. She knew that her pronouncement would please President Bush and Karl Rove and their Senators. President Bush and his brain, Karl Rove, are leading a radical revolution of destroying all the democratic political, social, judiciary, and economic institutions that both Democrats and moderate Republicans had built together since Roosevelt's New Deal. " Yoshi Tsurumi, Glocom Platform

    "He was opposed to labor unions, social security, environmental protection, Medicare, and public schools."
    His policies as president prove that he hasn't changed a bit !

    Bob:

    If that's true, isn't it interesting that someone born with a silver spoon in his mouth would concude that "people are poor because they are lazy"!

    It certainly sounds reasonable because he has 'governed' like he is bent on tearing down every single check and balance that we have spent the last 200 years building and refining.

    And the far right wonders why we 'hate' Bush!

    Mike....You never know on the internet what is exactly true. I checked out Glocom Platform and it's a Japanese global communications site, probably where Bush's ex-professor works.

    The thing that struck me is that all of the issues that Bush has been and is still opposed to, as abhorent as they are, many in the right wing feel the exact same way.
    It's one of the wonders of modern civilization how a man of George Bush's diminuative stature could become president and affect so many lives.

    Peace brother

    This is sweet !
    January 4, 2007 -- WASHINGTON - Rep. Charles Rangel has evicted Vice President Dick Cheney from his office in the Capitol, and the Harlem heavyweight is moving into the prime digs today, The Post has learned.

    Gilded letters were freshly painted atop the office door yesterday proclaiming "Ways and Means Committee" - confirming that the office now belongs to Rangel, the House panel's new chairman.

    Sources said Cheney's and his staff's belongings were removed over the holidays.

    The new digs give Rangel some of the choicest and most politically central real estate in all of Washington - as well as a measure of sweet revenge.

    Rangel moved at lightning speed to boot the man he once told The Post is a "son of a bitch."

    How did those unions do for the people at GM and Ford... excuse me... let me clarify... those unemployed people at Gm and Ford.

    Bob,

    Yeah, I loved that too. I hope they only gavehim 15 minutes to clean out his desk.

    They also need to make rules that no minority-party member of the house can wear pants in session, and they have to walk around with flutes stuck in their asses, so they make comical sounds when they walk to their seats.

    Pelosi numerous times prior to the election promised the "minority bill of rights" that the Reps are whining about now - in exchange for some respect and cooperation while the Dems were still in the minority - but she got jack-shit. So the Dems are going to take care of business now, with the the Reps relegated to the kids' table. At some point I hope a more open set of rules are adopted, but b=not until the fascists suffer sufficicient humiliation and the damage they did to our country has been set right.

    From the long-running "Bagdhad Burning" blog by the anonymous, courageous, and articulate young Iraqi woman called "Riverbend":

    You know your country is in trouble when:

    1. The UN has to open a special branch just to keep track of the chaos and bloodshed, UNAMI.
    Abovementioned branch cannot be run from your country.

    2. The politicians who worked to put your country in this sorry state can no longer be found inside of, or anywhere near, its borders.

    3. The only thing the US and Iran can agree about is the deteriorating state of your nation.

    4. An 8-year war and 13-year blockade are looking like the country's 'Golden Years'.

    5. Your country is purportedly 'selling' 2 million barrels of oil a day, but you are standing in line for 4 hours for black market gasoline for the generator.

    6. For every 5 hours of no electricity, you get one hour of public electricity and then the government announces it's going to cut back on providing that hour.

    7. Politicians who supported the war spend tv time debating whether it is 'sectarian bloodshed' or 'civil war'.

    8. People consider themselves lucky if they can actually identify the corpse of the relative that's been missing for two weeks.


    "Riverbend" stopped posting for a few months this past fall, and many feared the worst - but she's back.

    And another Iraqi has a different opinion, Sir Loin of Milquetoast.....

    "Meanwhile other anti-American powers moved to escalate the confrontation on the Palestinian, Iraqi and Lebanese fronts in a way that reflects a renewed hope in a near triumph against the US and its project in the region. We again began to hear voices saying that it's only a matter of time before a chopper evacuates the American ambassador from the IZ to mark a logical end (from their point of view) for the struggle of the mighty extremist powers.

    "The ideology of the extremists believes in "either victory or martyrdom" and now they think they are closer to the former and this will be used to attract more of the reluctant to the camp that considers itself close to victory and we'll see intensified media efforts invested in this field.

    "What I want to say here is that now I believe more that I must disagree with those who claim that wrong American policy breeds extremism, and now I believe more than ever that wrong signals that might be interpreted as weakness are what can be exploited by the enemy to give more credit to extremism especially under the current circumstances.

    "To put it simply; saying that a policy that aims at ridding the world of regimes and criminals such as Saddam, al-Qaeda, Ahmadinejad or Assad is a wrong policy that breeds extremism is utterly stupid.

    "I personally do not think that America changed its policy from victory to exit but I see that it hasn't been good at expressing its intentions nor sending the right signals, and when I say right I mean clear even to those who have a problem understanding things.

    "What the free world needs to do, the US and UK in particular, is to make their messages clear and loud so that wrong interpretations by extremists do not cost us losses that can be otherwise avoided.

    "The message ought to be clear and loud that the change in strategy will be to renew and empower the strategy from one of victory to one of nothing but victory.

    "Here I see steps such as considering adding more troops in Iraq and imposing sanctions on Iran to have a positive impact; more strategic than tactical though as this will express beyond doubt that nothing short of victory would be the goal of the new strategy."

    Mohammed.....http://iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/


    This quote is so telling of the result the radical left of The United States wants AGAIN.....

    "We again began to hear voices saying that it's only a matter of time before a chopper evacuates the American ambassador from the IZ to mark a logical end (from their point of view) for the struggle of the mighty extremist powers."

    I know you guys and Olbermann are just hoping for that picture again....America defeated.

    Well, we will see....The lessons from history regarding the mistakes made by those who had honorable intentions in 1968 must be applied to the same bankrupt attitude the left had then.....and now!

    Truth stick......come on now, open your minds...

    cee,

    This Iraqi you cite - whereever in the world he may be blogging from - sounds as stupid and blindly receptive to neocon dogma as you are.

    There is nothing in his excerpt but the cynical false positiveism of his imperial schoolboy masters - he's probably taking a break from blogging to fetch Bill Kristol a frappaccino and rub his gouty feet.

    Riverbend is out in Bagdhad and has been since the war started. You should peruse her blog if you are interested in what life is like in occupied Iraq.

    Typical liberal- only wants to hear his left side. Thats's why KeithO is the preferred propaganda beacon of these whacko. Parrot the talking points and take them ALL as facts. Thats also why Fox News' moniker of Fair and Balanced is often mocked by the liberals. When the opposite side is offered- and opposed their preconceived notion- it is false or a conspiracy. WHACKOS with a capital W-H

    I hear the right-wing side everyday, anon; I just judge it to be totally full of shit.

    As you sound to me! Best part is- when people put facts in front of your dumb ass- you basically shut down. Because you can't handle the truth. Facts are facts. You liberals work in conjecture and hunches.

    I did not expect anything different from Sir Loin of Milquetoast, Anon....

    The elitist left always dismisses the opposition as either...

    stupid
    ignorant
    sycophantic
    easily lead (sheep mentality)
    or, when all else fails.......evil

    Nevermind that the website I mentioned and many others like it, have also been posting since 2003.

    Loin just can't admit he wants defeat and retreat....the helicopter rising from the embassy roof as desperate Iraqis raise their hands for help.

    Such a humanitarian! Leave the country to the very people who are causing all of the problems
    Riverbend complains about. Good luck Riverbend, see you later!

    This is the left's dream.....total defeat and abandonment of people we have sworn to protect.

    I wonder if we should do this in Newark, NJ.....the crime rate increased last year...gangs running around killing eachother....yeah, let's get those cops out of there and just let those people fend for themselves.

    Update: The Somalians and Ethiopians are about to wipe out the last stronghold of the Islamic movement militiamen led by al-Zawahri. What a bittersweet day for you liberals. Pelosi takes the gavel BUT on the other side of the world, these radicals you insist on giving rights and liberty to are about to be sent to Allah. Win some- you lose some!

    Nice job Grizzle Boy- and there aremany people that want us to stay. But you'll just pick and chose your input.

    Cee:

    No, we "guys and Olbermann are" NOT "just hoping for that picture again....America defeated". You are the pretty much the only one on here showing a so called "bankrupt attitude", and as I told you yesterday, youngster, argue all you want to, you simply do not have a reality based understanding of the Vietnam conflict, or the lessons we SHOULD have learned!

    Where the hell were you during the leadup to this particular insanity? I can guess....you were one of the ones leading the charge, cheering them on, weren't you? Even in your hopeless "state of denial", you knew as well as I do that the REAL mistakes were made in the runup and the initial execution of the invasion, but YOU want the same fools who made all THOSE mistakes to continue to call all the shots....amazing!

    You're already doing it....how stupid can you get? You are already making excuses for who was to blame in this fiasco. Yes...in your hopelessly twisted mind, it's those damned "Liberals' again! They just wouldn't go along with this insanity long enough and just keep their mouths shut! The American people wouldn't have voted out the Republicans if the 'leftists' had not brainwashed them, would they? The people are just to stupid to see for themselves the realities that only the REALLY smart people like you see!

    You are a piece of work!

    Hopefully, we CAN handle the aftermath of this fiasco a little better than in Vietnam, but that remains to be seen.

    You have yet to make one post that details exactly what 'victory' is. How would you achieve this illusive 'victory' and what will it look like? Exactly where is the 'front' in this war?

    Talk about being "morally bankrupt", you are the one calling for more US troops to indefinitely be thrown into this fire without a clear plan for success. We had to have an election and elect an opposition Congress before Bush would even sit down and rethink his 'plan', something he should have been doing all along.

    We've discussed this before but here I go again; What are YOU personally sacrificing for this elusive goal? Who in your OWN family do you want to see put in harm's way? Nobody, right? You've already given an incredibly cold and morally bankrupt answer to THAT question...more than once! No, you just want to sit there on your comfortable little sofa every day and criticize the 'Left' for the failings of the 'Right'!

    What a piece of work you are!




    From http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/26/AR2006092601721.html

    Ambiguity at the end of that article Loin....

    "Particularly in mixed neighborhoods here in the capital, some Sunnis say the departure of U.S. forces could trigger a genocide. Hameed al-Kassi, 24, a recent college graduate who lives in the Yarmouk district of Baghdad, worried that rampages by Shiite militias could cause "maybe 60 to 70 percent of the Sunnis to be killed, even the women, old and the young."

    "There will be lakes of blood," Kassi said. "Of course we want the Americans to leave, but if they do, it will be a great disaster for us."

    "In a barbershop in the capital's Karrada district Tuesday afternoon, a group of men discussed some of the paradoxical Iraqi opinions of coalition troops. They recognized that the departure of U.S.-led forces could trigger more violence, and yet they harbored deep-rooted anger toward the Americans.

    "I really don't like the Americans who patrol on the street. They should all go away," said a young boy as he swept up hair on the shop's floor. "But I do like the one who guards my church. He should stay!"

    "Sitting in a neon-orange chair as he waited for a haircut, Firas Adnan, a 27-year-old music student, said: "I really don't know what I want. If the Americans leave right now, there is going to be a massacre in Iraq. But if they don't leave, there will be more problems. From my point of view, though, it would be better for them to go out today than tomorrow."

    "He paused for a moment, then said, "We just want to go back and live like we did before."

    I guess Loin is for assisted suicide..... desperate people who need help....."ah, nevermind, just let 'em die."

    Just the attitude of the isolationists prior to WWII....if Europeans want to kill eachother....what do I care?

    Nice ideology...vacant and inhumane.

    Try again, Sir Loin of Milquetoast.

    I wish Bob Cox could initiate some sort of column titled Our Daily Hoot that comprises the self-contradictory behavior we regularly see from some of the hyperbolic types on this site.

    Here we have Bob, Sir Loin, and Mike engaging in behavior that is the exact definition of "circle jerk", a term they mistakenly throw out at any political opponent who compliments the argument made by another of their political opponents.

    Here we have the boys blithely shooting the bull and tripping the daily light fantastic that comprimises the cartoon planet of their souls and engaging in a little fan talk of their dear ole political party (in way that's seldom seen from even the most ardent Bush supporter)and getting a little Bush as Skeletor time in too.

    We've got a report from a former Harvard professor about Bush's druthers 30 years ago, to accept as gospel, and as fodder for the daily earnest and adolescent exclaimations such as 'and these fascist rightwingers wonder why we hate greedy capitalist and peasant killer George Bush' (I paraphrase).

    That NAFTA scrubbed the power of organized labor, that welfare reform and tighter standards for rationing healthcare via Medicare and Medicaid changed those entitlements forever, that there was GATT and a plane load of now dead corporate types being flown by now dead Commerce Secretary Ron Brown, into parts of Bosnia (the newly opened frontier...) and beyond to work their corporate magic and all on behalf of the Clintons is beyond their Democrat groupie kin.

    That Pelosi and company (on whose behalf Sir Lion does breathless spin, as airly as his old stuff about unofficial Democratic investigations into war profiteering) haven't addressed Iraq yet, THE reason Charlie Rangel is able to move into the office he wants, and the cause of for all major over-the-top screeds, daily ripping of the sackcloth, and other borderline hysterics we see here regularly, is another bit of political reality that's quite beyond their kin.

    Party groupies. They're never so cute as when they play liberal champions of social justice...

    Shaddup- "we support the troops"- I love how you Liberals rally for our troops. Like when you call our forces "Occupiers." You know damn-well that "occupiers" is a rallying call for the opposition fighters. The terrorists call us "occupiers" in their rally chants. And you liberals chose the same words when you describe our men. You call us occuppiers. (see grissle's 8:55 post) Its obvious to us and the troops that you don't support our men.

    Or when they claim Bush (i.e., the troops) have killed Iraqis and deny the existence of the presence of insurgants as one of the regular KO apologists did here yesterday.

    Mike, Mike, Mike....

    Your ignorance of my personal activities as well as your biased view of history makes your rantings hollow. I have said to any who bring up the canard about sacrifice....it is none of your business....you are not my judge.

    You specifically never address my historical points, my quotes, my primary sources. Instead, you retreat to personal attacks, hatred and dismissal.

    "The American people wouldn't have voted out the Republicans if the 'leftists' had not brainwashed them, would they?"

    Show me one post where I ever suggested this....I see the loss of will to follow-through on promises made as wrong...morally wrong... whether it is one person or 99.99% of the population. It was wrong in the 60's and 70's and it would be wrong now.

    Gerald Ford agreed with me, and you can't even address this point.

    The left changes right and wrong to suit their political aims. You, Mike, are the dupe.

    Mistakes need to be CORRECTED, not erased or ignored. The mistakes in Vietnam should not have resulted in surrender and abandonment of millions of people. Nor should it again in Iraq....that is the lesson from Vietnam.

    Yeah- what Brandon said too

    This is reposted from yesterday, for the benefit of all you Archie Bunkers out there... enjoy!

    "My summation FOR VIETNAM was the "ideology" or world-view of the enemy was that of the leftist....
    NVA....Secularist/Communism....the world-view of the radical left...
    Shall I get my truth stick out again?"
    Posted by: cee at January 4, 2007 01:58 PM
    No, that's OK, cee... Leave it at home, & sit back & listen for a minute...
    I really love your 'worldview, Cee.' You are absolutely right... If only America had supported all of these right wing regimes over history, then our world would be perfect. I mean, why should we have even stood up to George III? He was, afterall, the EXISTING government in 1770's America, wasn't he? & a wish to preserve that which exists is to conserve, where the word that so represents the 'right-wing' party in this country, CONSERVATIVE, is based, no?
    & the German Right Wing during the First & Second World War... Those were great RIGHT wing governments, also, no?
    Why should things ever change... We had it great in the '50's... Why should we make PROGRESS, & 'free' our minds (or LIBERATE them [from the core latin word LIBRA, or free), as the case may be) as people when we could be CONSERVING our positions? To quote Archie Bunker, "Baby, we could use a man like Herbert Hoover again!"
    Because it's all about all things being to the left being wrong.... Right Cee? Right Grannie? Right Big Re(i)d?
    The three of you guys, (as well as ALL of you republic-FASCISTS [as, with apologies to a recent ex-senator from my state, is a term generally used for a RIGHT-wing government]) must be the biggest losers in the world... I mean, you actually BELIEVE the Bullshit that they are feeding you in their Fox News talking points... Your blind devotion to the administration of one man, to one master absolutely belies me. One man is your G-d... His name isn't Jesus, though... It's George W. Bush!
    Closely followed in your worldview ONLY by his apostoles, from cheney to Rummy, to Tony Snow to Condogina Rice...
    Admit it... You are so disingenuous that you would rather continue taking the country down the fiery pit of Iraq than admit that he was wrong to take us into this war... That is sad... What is truly pitiful is that you make up approximately 25% of the general public...
    All of you are hypocrites... ALL of you SAY that you would go into battle & would fight a war for this country, but wouldn't lift a fist if someone punched their eldest daughter in the jaw... It really is pitiful, but funny at the same time. You are the prototypical ‘Grandma in tennis shoes’ which my father, olev v’shalom, always warned me about when telling me tales of republicans when I was a child.
    Oh yeah, & Cee, Please don't take that LEFT turn on your way home tonight... Your gonna crash with that poor peripheral vision of yours...

    Posted by: PROUD to be a LIBERAL at January 4, 2007 08:35 PM

    Its just as weak today as it was yesterday- way to waste the space twice!

    And the great rebuttal can be read on yesterday's thread...I won't waste the space out of repect for our wonderful hosts.

    Get a life, Proud....

    "You specifically never address my historical points, my quotes, my primary sources. Instead, you retreat to personal attacks, hatred and dismissal."

    Posted by: cee at January 5, 2007 09:50 AM

    This might be, Cee, because your 'Historical' quotes are not very historically accurate, your quotes are specious at best, & your 'primary' sources are not very good, on point, or, for that matter, primary to what you are yapping about.

    & you go & accuse people of personal attacks, hatred & dismissal? You need some real help, my friend... You need to learn to read the things you have written, & I am certain that, just over the course of the past couple of days we could certainly come up with circumstances where you have commited all three of these 'High Crimes!'

    I will give you credit for persistence, though... If I were losing as badly as you are, (in both these arguments & in the scope of national events,) I'd have put my toys down & run... You? You are Rocky balboa's evil twin... You take a beating, & keep on ticking!

    Go for it Proud, find where I dismissed an argument out of hand.....

    or said I hated anyone in any term you would like to use....

    Go for it.....you will not find it.

    "This might be, Cee, because your 'Historical' quotes are not very historically accurate, your quotes are specious at best, & your 'primary' sources are not very good, on point, or, for that matter, primary to what you are yapping about."

    Yep, Proud's caged mind is really responding well to the truth stick....he lies.

    I have nice things called LINKS to such things as people's letters and writings at the time....check 'em out, Proud.

    And BTW.....Remember how Rocky ALWAYS comes through in the end...thanks for the complement!

    "Hey, wait a minute. Didn't KO make O'Reilly the "worst person" because he disagreed with Sen McCain?"

    Johnny, the transcript you connect to in that sentence doesn't mention anything about WPITW. And McCain has changed his position. Three years ago, he said Iraq was going to be easy. NOW he says he knew BACK THEN it was going to be hard. You can't have it both ways.

    Pelosi's head might soon explode
    Humility isn't her mode
    "The most powerful" bitch
    Will raise tax on the rich
    It's part of the Democrat's code

    How is the change in direction for Iraq working out for the dems??? Wasn't that why the Dems were elcted?

    President Bush is a sick son-of-a-bitch for taking away our rights. First, he starts gulogs and secretly ships americans there by the thousands. THen he takes away our right to talk to people in other countries entirely. Then he kill billions of Muslims. Then he tries to take away islamic extremists god-given right to kill whoever they want. Now he is reading every piece of mail that goes threw the post office. We need to fight back. Tear it all down!!!! A FREE SOCIETY!!! AN EQUAL SOCIETY!!! I dream of a world where the right wing murderers are gone, and then the socialists and anarchists can sit down and no doubt come to a peaceful solution for all the worlds ills.

    When that bomb kills me, at least i'll be comforted that my letter to my Uncle Bob was never read by the government. Imagine the repercussions of something like that?

    Cecilia: Here we have Bob, Sir Loin, and Mike engaging in behavior that is the exact definition of "circle jerk", a term they mistakenly throw out at any political opponent who compliments the argument made by another of their political opponents.

    Oh Cecilia...still in denial of the political realities present in America.
    Sir Loin , Mike and myself represent the sane 85% of this country.
    You , Dr. Lapdog( Cee) and your minions represent the tiniest of minorities in the country.
    Your minority status has been well deserved and earned on (lack of ) merit.
    Your side has financially and spiritually bankrupted our country and led us into a war that is a complete disaster.
    That you and your lame minions continue to spout the tired and disgraced rhetoric is nothing short of folly.
    Your discredited philosophy has been proven so ineffective and even deadly to the USA , that when you come on here and shout from the rooftops it does nothing more than provide clearer thinking people everywhere with much mirth and entertainment.

    And cee..what can I say to a total jack boot propaganda absorbing Bush apologist !
    Your quote:Sitting in a neon-orange chair as he waited for a haircut, Firas Adnan, a 27-year-old music student, said: "I really don't know what I want. If the Americans leave right now, there is going to be a massacre in Iraq.

    Dr. Lapdog tries to prey on our emotions and ridiculouly feels that the USA should institute policy based on isolated opinions from Iraqis.

    Besides being just a plain run of the mill warmonger, Lapdog wants to continue to enable the Iraqi people with the US doing their job for them.
    So much for self determination eh Cee ?
    As long as the US enables the Iraqi troops, they will never be able to stand on their feet alone.
    But that is what Cee wants.

    Do you forget that our (supposed) purpose in Iraq( actually reason #6 for those keeping score at home ) is to help train the Iraqis and then leave and let them defend their own country?

    But the most sane reason for leaving Iraq is that the Iraqi people have stated unequivocably that they want us the hell out of there, and by a very large margin.
    They don't only want us to leave but over 50% feel it's acceptable to kill American troops.

    The Iraqis want us out. Cee wants us to stay.

    He knows whats best for the Iraqi people !
    Any light bulb turning on yet?
    Ever ?

    So take your total nonsense and scare tactics about massacres after we leave and tell them to your less educated friends.
    There are massacres in Iraq now with us there, and there will be massacres when we leave.
    There is just a lot better chance of lessening the violence with the "invaders" out of iraq.
    And make no mistake about it, the Iraqi people DO consider the US the invaders.

    So when Cee prints these little ditties that attempts to tug at our heart strings, it is just another of his fantasies where he tries to persuade less knowledgable people of his discredited neo-con views.

    Posted by: you show em olbermann at January 5, 2007 11:04 AM

    A true Olbermann fan?
    "Now he is reading every piece of mail that goes threw the post office." From what I hear Bush only looks at the pictures, not really into reading.

    If we did leave- and it got worse- you liberals would change your mind AGAIN... AND blame the other side for the withdrawaL. You have no focus or purpose. waffle boys and girls.

    Someone expendible falsely claimed:

    > Johnny, the transcript you connect to in that sentence doesn't mention anything about WPITW.

    Sigh. Providing a link isn't enough any more. Do I now have to read it out loud to people? To wit:

    "But the winner, Bill O‘Reilly. Honestly, we should just retire the award to him. But this is for explaining the usefulness and appropriateness of torture to his on-air guest, Senator John McCain"

    O'Reilly is slammed for disagreeing with McCain. Meanwhile, Keith can make McCain WPITW and call him delusional, and that's perfectly fine. Olbypocrisy.

    Hey Keith was it warm in Murtha's lap?

    Amidst all the specious rote rhetoric, Bob gets something right:

    "when you come on here and shout from the rooftops it does nothing more than provide clearer thinking people everywhere with much mirth and entertainment"

    More than you realize, my friend...

    How is the change in direction for Iraq working out for the dems??? Wasn't that why the Dems were elcted?

    Here is your typical response, by a typical member of the minority party.
    The Democrats have been in power about 24 hours and this moron thinks there should AlREADY be a change of direction in Iraq.
    Let me put this issue in a manner where dumbo might be able to understand it.
    You come across a totally burnt out building that you've just purchased. The previous owner then asks you why ( within 24 hours) why it doesn't look like that mansion over there on the hill yet ?
    "Welllll..You said you'd improve it ?
    Well" ?

    Is that simplistic enough for you to understand ?

    This is George Bush's war.He invaded, he screwed it up, and now you want the democrats to clean up his( and your mess)

    The past 6 years you've dimwits have played dead, dumb and blind with this GOP Congress and this president.
    Now that the Democrats are in charge of COngress, you'll be getting your magnifying glasses out and criticizing them before their seats are even warm.
    Don't you dare say you care what's best for this country!
    We see thru your bullshit, and we're not putting up with it this time.

    I love when people use Iraqis want us out as why we should leave. STOP THE PRESSES!!! new headline: Invaded Country Wants Invaders Out!

    This is unprecedented. I thought Iraqi bombing of AMericans and the slaughtering of eachother was a clear sign they wanted us. Every other country that has been invaded in history has always loved their conquerers. Why Japan has monuments of Truman on every street corner. German people still pray to Roosevelt. Iraq was greeted with open arms in both Iran and Kuwait. I just dont get it. Conquered people don't like being conquered. Huh? Who knew?

    Bob- the Dems aren't offering to clean it up! You want to leave the house and run away. Thats not leadership- thats not productive- thats punk!

    Okay, okay, but Darfur will definitly welcome us with open arms.

    "Sigh. Providing a link isn't enough any more. Do I now have to read it out loud to people? To wit:"

    I DID click the link Johnny. IT IS NOT THERE!

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8883271/

    That is where your link goes - it has the five stories for that date (August 8th, 2005) but no Oddball or WPITW transcript. We have only YOUR WORD that that is what it says.

    Don't call me a liar when I do EXACTLY what your link says.


    BUSH `LISTENS` TO GENERALS, THEN REPLACES THOSE OPPOSING SURGE

    -- Foolishly Appoints Navy Admiral Lackey To Command All Ground Forces --

    WASHINGTON -- In what appears to be a military shakeup surrounding Iraq, President Bush has replaced both the top US general in the Middle East and the top general in Iraq, ABC NEWS is reporting on air. Admiral William J. Fallon will replace Gen. John Abizaid, US commander in the Middle East, who announced his retirement in December and was expected to leave the post in March. Abizaid was a critic of Bush's efforts to add more troops to Iraq, but the circumstances of his early departure are unclear. "Fallon, who is in the Navy, is currently head of Pacific Command; he will be overseeing two ground wars, so the appointment is highly unusual," ABC reports.


    Cecilia doesn't realize the joke's on her.

    Cecilia is a member of
    The few, the proud, the 15% !

    When your side has totally screwed up as badly as you have, for you to spout off with ANYTHING, makes you look like a total fool.

    The war,the debt, the stifling of science,Katrina response,the backward views of global warming
    ( enjoying the 65 degrees in the NE this month ?)
    the tax breaks to oil companies,The oil companies allowed to write our energy policy for Christ's sake , no health care plan,weakening clean air laws,No Child Left Behind in shambles,immigration,a do nothing GOP Congress, the deficit,and this is just a partial list.

    Please Cecilia, tell us what you have to crow about the past 6 years!

    See if you can explain to us why the American people repudiated YOU and your president in Nov.

    Cecilia wears her denial like a warm, fuzzy blanket.

    > Don't call me a liar when I do EXACTLY what your link says.

    I didn't call you a liar. But I might call you stupid, because that transcript reads exactly what I quoted.

    Here's a clue. Every browser has a thing called "search". When you go to a page you ask your browser to search for a word. Just search for McCain. When you press enter, then the browser magically takes you to that word on a page. This is especialy helpful for people with reading comprehension problems who can't find the word simply by looking at the page. This would include a large percentage of OlbyLoons.

    "But I might call you stupid, because that transcript reads exactly what I quoted."

    I clicked on the link, then clicked on the "Find" function, then typed in O'Reilly. Guess what I got?

    NO RESULT FOUND.

    I've read that page three times now, and Bill O'Reilly is NOT in that transcript ANYWHERE. So either you are talking about a different transcript or you have a bad link.

    I'm not an idiot. I can follow directions. It's just that your directions are lousy.

    Here are some complaints that I have about the former Republican control.

    1) The explosion of earmarks (e.g Transportation Bill)
    2) The monumental increase in spending including medicare and welfare
    3) The lack of enforcing the border
    4) The expansion of overall government size (e.g Homeland Security)

    Somehow these so-called conservatives became liberals. I am not sure how the dems are gonna do anything but make these issues even worse.

    By Glenn Kessler
    Washington Post Staff Writer
    Friday, January 5, 2007; A06

    Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.), chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said yesterday that he believes top officials in the Bush administration have privately concluded they have lost Iraq and are simply trying to postpone disaster so the next president will "be the guy landing helicopters inside the Green Zone, taking people off the roof," in a chaotic withdrawal reminiscent of Vietnam.

    "I have reached the tentative conclusion that a significant portion of this administration, maybe even including the vice president, believes Iraq is lost," Biden said. "They have no answer to deal with how badly they have screwed it up. I am not being facetious now. Therefore, the best thing to do is keep it from totally collapsing on your watch and hand it off to the next guy -- literally, not figuratively."


    Let the Dems clean up our mess.
    Such leaders those Republicans!
    TDF

    > I clicked on the link, then clicked on the "Find" function, then typed in O'Reilly. Guess what I got? NO RESULT FOUND.

    Hahaha! This is classic. Why don't you use the "find" function for McCain? Trying to find O'Reilly will only work if you type in a curly quote instead of the standard apostrophe. "McCain" doesn't have any fancy glyphs in it so that will take you exactly to what you seem unable to see.

    Then you can apologize for repeatedly claiming I have a bad link.

    Bob- the Dems aren't offering to clean it up! You want to leave the house and run away. Thats not leadership- thats not productive- thats punk!

    See my above link . There is no cleaning up this mess your party made !

    "We see thru your bullshit, and we're not putting up with it this time."

    Well, you're here putting up with it...

    It should occur to you that you have no one to thank but yourself, Mr. Hissy.

    Go back and read your own and your friend's hyperbole.

    You don't have to scroll up very far, Bob, just go to the last post where you confuse buzz words with argument. In other words, your most recent post...

    "Your discredited philosophy has been proven so ineffective and even deadly to the USA..."

    So you've simultaneously argued that your political opponents here remain clueless about the major source of damage to American stability and the main reason Democrats are now in the majority, while also arguing that one should not expect your party to put the matter on the front burner!

    To be perfectly serious here, for a minute, I don't know or care how anyone else who posts here feels, but at the risk of being called some pejorative against people of faith, I DO pray that your party can help matters in Iraq and that they'll do it in a way that would leave you and the people who think like you, entirely impatient and unsatisfied were it policy devised by a pol who did not have (D) after their name.

    Frankly, as someone aware of political realities, I'm fairly optimistic that I'll get my prayer too, rather than your getting your rhetoric. And I'm completely CERTAIN that you'll do an expert job of not noticing.

    Fair enough for me...

    "Then you can apologize for repeatedly claiming I have a bad link."

    I will no because I did exactly what you said to do - NO RESULT FOUND for McCain in that document.

    Ensign Expendable

    It's in the transcript. About two-thirds of they way down, just before KO moves on to the segment about the Michael Jackson jurors.

    I wonder if Bush tried to give the German Chancelor Merkel a back rub this time during her visit.
    I bet she was a little apprehensive about coming to HIS house this time.
    (it's sad to say he lives in OUR house)
    She probably had security with her at all times, even in her private quarters.

    This president has been such an embarrassment to this country in more ways that can even be mentioned.

    Hey Bush apologists: Tell me you haven't winced more than once and been embarrassed at this president ( that you'd admit to, anyway )

    Yeah Bubba just woulda nailed her.

    Okay, now that I have found it (depite my browser's find function not functioning), I apologize to Johnny Dollar.

    But I disagree with your position. The subject that got O'Reilly WPITW that night was "torture" - that was what he disagreed with John McCain about.

    McCain got WPITW in this show for suddenly saying that he knew in 2002 and 2003 that the War in Iraq would be hard, when his quotes FROM 2002 and 2003 have him saying it would be easy.

    I DO pray that your party can help matters in Iraq .

    I have not read ANYWHERE where anyone feels there is anyway in helping this disaster that your president perpetrated on this country and the world.

    Have you ?

    "I have not read ANYWHERE where anyone feels there is anyway in helping this disaster that your president perpetrated on this country and the world.

    Have you ?"

    So where is Pelosi's, Kerry's, Reid's, Biden's bill to pull troops from Iraq completely?

    Since you say this is the biggest impediment facing us and the reason they were elected to the majority, why aren't you clamoring for such a bill, instead of doing party spin about justifications for ignoring this dire threat to the country?

    `This is George Bush`s war.He invaded, he screwed it up, and now you want the democrats to clean up his( and your mess)`

    GWB`s Pottery Barn: I BROKE IT ... NOW YOU FIX IT!
    some situations are simply untenable.
    iraq has become one of them.
    thanks GOP.
    you stupid f---s.

    . . . . .

    -- Foolishly Appoints Navy Admiral Lackey To Command All Ground Forces --

    SUPPORT OUR TROOPS IN IRAQ! (appoint a seaman to command them!)

    . . . . .

    `top officials in the Bush administration have privately concluded they have lost Iraq and are simply trying to postpone disaster [for] the next president`

    totally.
    BushCO is in damage control.
    The GOP is in damage control.
    The U.S. military in Iraq is in damage control.
    Say goodbye to the whitehouse StormTroopers.
    The longer this mess lasts, the longer you`ll be out of power.
    Couldn`t happen to a nicer bunch of fascists.

    > But I disagree with your position.

    Another typical tactic. You make a claim that a quote doesn't exist. Then when that proves to be wrong, you suddenly come up with a new reason to defend Olby, because this was about torture and that was about something else yada yada yada. Because it's wrong for O'Reilly to disagree with McCain about torture, but it's perfectly wonderful for Olby to disagree with McCain about troop surges? Because O'Reilly is not permitted to disagree, but Olby is?

    It's not just about Thursday's WPiTW for McCain. It's also KO smearing McCain and suggesting he's delusional because he favors a troop surge. Now you explain to me why O'Reilly gets attacked for disagreeing about torture, but Olbermann is perfectly free to call McCain delusional and disagree with him about troop levels? Shouldn't Olby make himself WPiTW since he committed the same "crime" as O'Reilly?

    I accept your apology, but not your tortured (!) logic.

    To any of the women here:

    Have you ever experienced a situation where some bozo you may or not even know comes up behind you and starts to give you an unwanted backrub?

    How did you feel about it ?

    Imagine how Chancellor Merkel felt when Bush did this to her, in front of the entire world.

    Now think about all of the times you've defended him and made excuses for him.

    Hmmmmmmmmm


    BUSH PROMISES GERMAN CHANCELLOR `NO MORE BACKRUBS`

    -- Merkel Says She`d Prefer No More Decidering --

    WASHINGTON (BBC) -- President Bush has revealed a policy change during a visit by German leader Angela Merkel -- no more back rubs. Mr Bush raised eyebrows last July at the G8 summit in Russia, when he walked up behind a seated Mrs Merkel and briefly massaged her shoulders. She initially threw her arms up and grimaced, then smiled when he let go. `No back rubs,` a smiling Mr Bush joked as the two leaders ended a joint news conference after talks at the White House in Washington.


    Since you say this is the biggest impediment facing us and the reason they were elected to the majority, why aren't you clamoring for such a bill, instead of doing party spin about justifications for ignoring this dire threat to the country?

    I am "clamoring" for such a bill.If it was up to me, I'd bring our troops home TODAY...
    so not another US soldier loses their life in Bush's dirty little war.

    "Because it's wrong for O'Reilly to disagree with McCain about torture, but it's perfectly wonderful for Olby to disagree with McCain about troop surges? Because O'Reilly is not permitted to disagree, but Olby is?"

    Olbermann isn't disagreeing with McCain - McCain is disagreeing WITH HIMSELF. He said one thing in 2002 and 2003, and now he is saying he was saying THE OPPOSITE THING AT THE SAME TIME.

    "It's also KO smearing McCain and suggesting he's delusional because he favors a troop surge."

    No, it's for McCain saying he knew it would be hard in 2002 and 2003, when ALL THE EVIDENCE says that McCain was saying how easy it would be.

    Merkel Says She`d Prefer No More Decidering -

    That's precious !

    The Decider !

    If the reign of error of Bush's wasn't so tragic, we could all be laughing for decades of his antics.

    For now, we'll have to settle for 4 volumes( and growing ) of Bushisms currently on Amazon.com

    "GWB`s Pottery Barn: I BROKE IT ... NOW YOU FIX IT!
    some situations are simply untenable.
    iraq has become one of them.
    thanks GOP.
    you stupid f---s."


    More dazzling brilliance...

    Insult political opponents here as having their heads in the sand about a catastrophic policy error that endangers the country and of being the reason the Democrats are now in power...THEN engage in party spin when the Democrats fail to articulate even a minor policy intention concerning the war, within a PR laundry list of intended bills.

    And you guys call yourselves war opponents... :D

    "I am "clamoring" for such a bill.If it was up to me, I'd bring our troops home TODAY...
    so not another US soldier loses their life in Bush's dirty little war."

    Funny how your clammoring has sounded like justifications for Dems not addressing what *YOU* tear your hair out on Olbermann Watch, nearly everyday...



    The new D Congress accomplished more in one day than the "do nothing" GOP Congress did in 6 years :

    Jan. 4 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. House of Representatives, after installing its new Democratic leadership, voted to ban lawmakers from flying on corporate jets and accepting gifts and meals from lobbyists.


    The House passed, 430-1, a package of rules aimed at demonstrating Democrats' commitment to cleaning up Congress. Tomorrow, the House will vote on rules designed to end the anonymous sponsorship of pet projects, or earmarks, that have been quietly tucked into spending measures.

    ``The culture of the last Congress came to be defined by a phrase now common to Americans throughout the country: it was a culture of corruption,'' said House Rules Committee Chairwoman Louise Slaughter, a New York Democrat. ``The American people stated loud and clear that they were ready for a new culture to take hold in Washington: a culture of commitment.''

    Funny how your clammoring has sounded like justifications for Dems not addressing what *YOU* tear your hair out on Olbermann Watch, nearly everyday...


    Funny how YOU have written ad nauseum how much you have supported this war and what a great idea it was for this president to invade a country that didn't attack us.

    Not funny how it's turned out.

    Funny how you've yet to admit you were wrong.

    Not surprised, though.

    Olbermann isn`t disagreeing with McCain - McCain is disagreeing WITH HIMSELF. He said one thing in 2002 and 2003, and now he is saying he was saying THE OPPOSITE THING AT THE SAME TIME.

    No, it`s for McCain saying he knew it would be hard in 2002 and 2003, when ALL THE EVIDENCE says that McCain was saying how easy it would be.

    . . . . .

    sheesh.
    ya gotta explain every little thing to the jackboots.
    (that`s why they`re jackboots)
    only the most uninformed/uncurious/unintelligent populate their paltry 15%.
    and as iraq, katrina, nsa, deficit have clearly demonstrated, just to name a few,
    it wasn`t such a good idea after all
    to elect an uninformed/uncurious/unintelligent buffoon to the white house.
    now was it?


    "The new D Congress accomplished more in one day than the "do nothing" GOP Congress did in 6 years :

    Jan. 4 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. House of Representatives, after installing its new Democratic leadership, voted to ban lawmakers from flying on corporate jets and accepting gifts and meals from lobbyists."

    !!!!!!!!!! :D


    Like I said... despite all the virtual reams of the most outrageous hyperbole imaginable, when the nitty hits the gritty, they'll dazzle you with assiduously "not noticing".

    The fight has started. Nancy and Harry have sent a letter to W. Someone will read it to him.

    It says "We will not support additional troops for a surge". "It will be a serious mistake"

    Let the games begin

    Bob,

    I've never written that I've supported this war, I've written that what you write about the war is little more than ridiculous rhetorical rant that in the ends boils now to less conviction about about it, than dislike for Bush and Republicans.

    I'd thank you for proving me right, but there was never any doubt.

    It says "We will not support additional troops for a surge". "It will be a serious mistake"

    Let the games begin"


    Bob won't agree with that. According to him, the war is Bush's mistake, let him fix it...

    Did you go to Yale Barry? I doubt your credentials... dummy!


    POST-9/11 CAPITOL HILL SECURITY STYMIED BY INEPT GOP

    -- 26 Year Secret Service Veteran, Frist Appointee: Dems Will Be More Responsive --

    WASHINGTON -- Senate Sergeant at Arms Bill Pickle ended four years in office yesterday with a plea to lawmakers and law enforcement officials to keep their guard up against what he called an inevitable terrorist attack on the Capitol. `Nothing has changed since 9/11,` warned Pickle. Pickle, a 26-year veteran of the Secret Service who was chosen by then-Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist criticized the outgoing Republican House leadership for resisting his efforts to develop a unified security strategy for the entire 233-acre Capitol complex. He predicted that incoming Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the House Democratic leadership `are going to be more responsive` to his successor, former Capitol Police Chief Terrence Gainer, in beefing up Capitol security.


    Hey- I just want to make it clear that I am not the anonymous that posts idiotic fake headlines. I apologize for the other anonymous's simpleton posts.

    unfortunately the stories are all real, Storm Trooper.

    Hey anonymous that didn't post "fake headlines"!

    Give yourself a name..or..live with the confusion!

    I'll just let the audience figure it out- moronic fake headlines and articles- THAT would be you. Intelligent post sparking interesting debate- THATS me!

    I've never written that I've supported this war, I've written that what you write about the war is little more than ridiculous rhetorical rant that in the ends boils now to less conviction about about it, than dislike for Bush and Republicans.

    I'd thank you for proving me right, but there was never any doubt.

    Are you on drugs?

    First of all...you've most definitely written about supporting this war...not recently( wonder why)
    Just say you didn't do it...I see.

    What a coward !
    Have you written about being against this war?

    I did miss that one, though.

    Ok.....since you just lied about it, tell us all exactly what your views are...again.
    (not that I care)..but just for the record.

    or are you just a Monday morning quarterback ?

    And my "ridiculous rhetorical rant"

    I've posted facts about this war along with my opinion.

    and I don't have convictions about it?

    Again..see above question about drugs.

    I've been against invading Iraq from the first day Bush started the run up to this war, way before I even knew of this site.


    I proved you right...LOL

    You are wrong about this war, you are wrong about Bush, you are wrong about the Republicans and you've made a fool of yourself with your global warming positions( I didn't forget that either)

    Beefing up Capitol security....private letters to Bush tsk-tsking troop escalation, bills against pols flying in corporate jets....

    Where's the beef, war opponents! Where's the bill for immediate troop pull-out in Iraq, to prevent one more wounded soldier or dead Iraqi?

    Can political "games" and political skirmishes be good enough for you, war opponents, after all the proverbial flood, famine, and pestilence that your rhetoric has claimed that the Iraq War has caused for the world?

    At least when the biggest threat to world stability and peace... looms large....ole Cindy Sheehan isn't now spending her time flaking for non-decisions and issuing congrats over for lobby reform and a proposed increase in Capitol police! :D

    Love the liberals- Its Bush's mess to clean up BUT we are going to cut Bush off when he makes a move. Ideas anyone or are you the party of criticism only?

    Spare me the "more in one day" bravado- The Dems have a way to go to prove they are a party of action.

    And Cecelia...I challenged you to list the vast achievements of the Republicans the past 6 years.

    Not up to the challenge ?
    Or just like to criticize those who actually do have opinions and post facts?

    I need to leave for the rest of the day, but I'll check back tonite and read your long list of what George Bush has been right about and the achievements of the GOP Congress.
    (This should be good !)

    Supreme Court Justices- score one for the good guys!

    Dear level-headed good ole Bob,

    Generally when one charges someone with being a liar, it's best to have proof. But then here I go being optimist again...

    Let me help you out, Bob. Google "Cecelia" and "Olbermann Watch" and you'll come across all sorts of past posts written by me. See if you can tell the difference between a debate about a charge that a policy was predicated on a "lie" with a defense of the merits of the policy itself.

    Sincerely,
    "Relentlessly Optimistic"

    check out Cecilia's 1:32 post.
    It's a real mystery where she stands.

    She's another one that has been mum of the failures the past 6 years and now is Monday Morning quarterbacking Dems after one day in office.

    What a phony !

    I'll check back for that list cecilia.

    `I need to leave for the rest of the day, but I`ll check back tonite and read your long list of what George Bush has been right about and the achievements of the GOP Congress.`


    1. tax cuts for the rich
    2. tax cuts for corporations
    3. tax cuts for corrupt republican cronies


    `It has been my experience, that all Republicans are interested in is getting tax breaks for their rich friends.` -- Lyndon Baines Johnson

    Then send back your tax rebate check you got last year ingrate.

    "She's another one that has been mum of the failures the past 6 years and now is Monday Morning quarterbacking Dems after one day in office."

    I'm not monday morning quarterbacking Dems, Bob. I'm quarterbacking YOU.

    I'm perfectly satisfied with the Dems waiting till they get it together and come up with a coherent policy that doesn't involve an immediate pull-out (politically risky for them...) and its aftermath to us.

    But with the level of your rhetoric this past year in mind, I shouldn't quarterback you as much as to just be entertained to watch you not only be satisfied with that too, but to justify it and to try and change the subject from what has been ENDLESSLY on your own mind, to things like lobby reform.

    1. tax cuts for the rich
    2. tax cuts for corporations
    3. tax cuts for corrupt republican cronie

    The rich account for a higher percentage of tax revenue now than they did prior to the tax cuts. Nice try though.

    Expendible, get off last night's WPitW for a minute--those cherry-picked quotes were just lifted without attribution from Think Progress, who have a documented record of taking things out of context. I don't trust quotes from people who have been caught doing that, and more than once.

    So let's leave that aside for now and address Olby's latest Speshul Komment, the one where he slammed McCain and suggested he's delusional because he favors a troop surge. Please explain to me why O'Reilly gets slammed for disagreeing with McCain on torture, but Olby can call McCain delusional and disagree with him about troop levels and that's perfectly all right?

    Dollar,

    It's delusional because they have yet to find a military higher-up who agrees with Bush on this war. You did see that two more of our generals have been pulled out to be replaced by more fellating officers, didn't you?

    We loons are allowed to have things both ways. And when I tell you to be offended you should be offended. When I tell you half-truths to make an unsubstantiated point, it is not lying it is merely nuance. See I am a thinker and I live in the world of nuance. My anger and skepticism is thusly confused for intelligent thought and reason.


    DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP SENDS BUSH LETTER CONDEMNING TROOP SURGE

    -- Bush So Bummed He Goes Back To Reading Other People's Mail --

    WASHINGTON, Jan. 5 (PRNewswire-USNewswire) -- Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Speaker Nancy Pelosi today sent a letter to President Bush urging him to reject his reported plan to escalate the war in Iraq by increasing troop levels and delaying the ability of the Iraqi government to take control of their own future. The leaders cited the burden on the nation's already-overtaxed military, the likely failure of a surge strategy to quell the violence, and the dangers of placing American military into the middle of a civil war. The two leaders called on the President to instead heed the will of the American people, listen to the advice of America's military, and recognize the need for a significant change in strategy that begins with a political solution and a phased withdrawal of American forces from Iraq.


    `The rich account for a higher percentage of tax revenue now than they did prior to the tax cuts.`

    Huh?

    The generals are always right. That's why when they wanted a smaller force in Iraq to maintain order they were obviously right and the whole civilian leadership of the military is a mistake. The framers were morons. We should just let the military run the country. Wait.... that would make me fascist. I mean when the generals agree with me, I will use them, when they don't I will ignore them. I can have it both ways. I am a loon.

    What's particularly ironic about the WPITW award for McCain, after giving O'Reilly that title for criticising the ex-POW on his views about what he considers to be torture, is the fact that McCain is an ex-quagmire ---as Olbermann would define it--- VET!

    Somehow Olbermann's implied appeal to McCain's authority is droppped when McCain doesn't agree with him.

    I know this is tough for you loons to grasp, but here goes.

    Without the Bush tax cuts, the highest-earning 20 percent of households this year would have paid 78.4 percent of all federal income taxes. Now, after the Bush tax cutes, their share of the burden has risen to 82.1 percent. Every other group now pays a smaller share of the total income tax burden.


    Tax cuts for the rich? Huh?

    Johnny, I understand this Olbermannwatch, but do you have to mock him and his guests (including a very well respected congressman, John Murtha) and call him silly juvenile names to make your point?

    Can't you simply make your points without name-calling?

    If your posts weren't so laughable and concentrated on your real disagreements with Keith, don't you think more of us on the other side would take you seriously? I know I would, but sure don't now.

    Media Matters posts lots of negative comments about conservative commentators, but they don't call them names.

    And I see you posted you also run a Bush watch site and you say you mock him there. That tells me this is all a game to you and all you are is a gun for hire who will take on anyone for some bucks and these aren't your real opinions.

    Isn't that exactly what you accuse Olbermann of doing?

    Crash, we grasp the concept far better than you think we do. That is precisely how it SHOULD be!

    Those who have benefitted the most from the bounties and freedoms this country has to offer SHOULD be required to give back a much higher amount than those who are struggling just to get by. This by no means is intended to 'punish' anyone for success, nor is it intended as a means to "redistribute the wealth". The vast majority of those upper 20% are still left FAR better off than the vast majority of the other 80%.

    It is as it should be, and no, it is NOT Socialism or anything even remotely close!

    No, Media Matters doesn't call names. They feed their stuff to Olbermann, Olbermann calls names, and then Media Matters puts up video of Olbermann calling names. But Media Matters? Their hands are clean. THEY never call names, do they?

    I don't run a Bush watch site and never said I did. I don't even run this site. I treat Olbermann as he treats others. If I call names, so does Olbermoronn (just check the Olbersaurus). If I mock him, it's because he mocks others. If you don't like the insults, the name-calling, making fun of his book sales, talk about his private life and love affairs, or mockery of Monkeymann, they you really should complain to Olbermann. Because every one of those things started with him. Maybe you think he sits atop a golden mountain where he can rain down all that stuff on people he hates, but is immune to getting any return fire. I don't.

    DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP SENDS BUSH LETTER CONDEMNING TROOP SURGE

    Holy crap, the Dems sent a letter!!

    You don't run this site? Who posts the daily report on the show? It appears you do. I never said you own the site, but you are the one who writes the digests of the nightly show; I'd call that "running the site."

    And you said you also write for a Bush watch site above and I'm assuming you are paid to do that as well as write for this one.

    So are you posting your true thoughts, or just being a "gun for hire" for the owner of this site and the Bush watch site and posting comments that will please your boss?

    Where's that truth stick cee is always talking about.....

    "Crash, we grasp the concept far better than you think we do. That is precisely how it SHOULD be!"

    If that is the case, then why do you scream "tax cuts for the rich!" Just like those talking points I guess.

    Btw. The way it should be is a low flat tax, excluding the lower 20%. No write offs. Hard work and ingenuity should truly be rewarded and this collectivism that you seem to favor should be abolished.

    > And you said you also write for a Bush watch site above and I'm assuming you are paid to do that as well as write for this one.

    No I didn't say I write for a Bush watch site. But when I do, I will apply the same principles that makes this site the #1 Keith Olbermann blog on all the internets.

    And why should I care what you "assume"? You know what happens when you "assume".

    Bush can send as many additonal troops as he wants and Congress can't do anything about it. Bush is commander-in-chief and Democrats respect our constitutional system even if Bush doesn't. That's a major reason that I'm a Democrat.

    Unfortunatly, sending a letter outling their objections and making their views known to the American people (who are overwhemingly againgt a troop surge) is all they can do at this point. Of course, Bush will ignore it, he's the "decider" and will "decide" to do whatever he wants.

    And his "decisions" to date have all been wrong; what makes you think that his next "decision" will be any better?

    Johnny, at 1:32 am above you said "When I write for Bush Watch, I mock Bush."

    Now you say you don't write for Bush Watch?

    Truth stick, truth stick!

    I never said I did. Look up the definition of "when". It's a conditional term, quite different from saying "I write for Bush watch" without the when. I don't eat pasta. When I go to Rome, I do eat pasta. So that means I am in Rome, eating pasta? I don't think so.

    If this the best you've got? How about defending the infamous, deplorable Keith Olbermann? Oh wait, that task has been all but abandoned by the failed Olbypologists.

    Well sorry Johnny, but its hardly my fault if you can't write clearly. To me and I think most people, "When I write for Bush Watch, I mock Bush" means it is happening now. If you had written "IF I wrote for a Bush watch..." that would have been cystral clear.

    So play all the semantic games you want, you're no better at them than you are at knocking Olbermann.

    And you never addressed my point about "running the site." Can I make a digest of the show and have it posted above the comments? Can anyone else?

    If yes, I'd love to do it, just let me know. If no, you run the site, semantic games or no.

    "Unfortunatly, sending a letter outling their objections and making their views known to the American people (who are overwhemingly againgt a troop surge) is all they can do at this point."

    Actually, they can cut off funding.

    Johnny Dollar and Rober Cox,
    This iste has become Bushwatch. Can you rename it or create a subsite called Bushwatch. I thought this site was about Olbermann's Leftists leaning and his denials of it? Since the Left can't defend their hero because of his near nervous breakdown on tuesday they just bash Bush. Look I don't like Bush much neither. The difference is Bush doesn't affect my life. These people's lives revolve around Bush. I honestly couldn't give a crap who's in power. It doesn't affect me. Unless my taxes are raised!

    And you made yet another mistake above in trying to answer me.

    "I don't eat pasta. But when I go to Rome, I do eat pasta."

    This makes no sense as the second sentance negates the first because you do sometime eat pasta, specifically when you go Rome.

    What you apparantly mean is "I don't eat pasta when I'm home, but when (or "if I were to visit") Rome, I do (or "would").

    Two entirely different statements.

    > And you never addressed my point about "running the site." Can I make a digest of the show and have it posted above the comments? Can anyone else?

    Yes you can.

    > If yes, I'd love to do it, just let me know. If no, you run the site, semantic games or no.

    Contact Mr Cox. He has made the offer dozens of times to Olbypologists to write articles for this site. Nobody has taken him up on it.

    But I suppose since the facts are against you, all you do is fall back on semantics.

    Is this the best you've got?

    How do I contact Mr. Cox?

    "If yes, I'd love to do it, just let me know. If no, you run the site, semantic games or no."


    I think Bob Cox just got the Olbermann fan guest blogger he's been wanting.

    A perfect concrete-thinking candidate here, Johnny! SEEMINGLY... no abstract conceptual abilities whatsoever.

    I'm lobbying for it to be a go!

    "Please explain to me why O'Reilly gets slammed for disagreeing with McCain on torture, but Olby can call McCain delusional and disagree with him about troop levels and that's perfectly all right?"

    Well, how about this - the O'Reilly disagreement was whether "coerced interrogations" are effective and that it was just a "matter of degree". Now, McCain (a POW who was tortured) would seem to have a bit more experience in matters such as this, tells O'Reilly that torture doesn't work.

    "Then — absolutely. And then the president of the United States should make the decision that we could no longer adhere to the international agreements that we are signatories to.

    Don't think that you get anything out of torture, Bill, because you don't. And I know that for a fact." - John McCain, O'Reilly Factor, July 27, 2005.

    For O'Reilly to dismiss McCain's opinion on something where McCain has expertise is what he got slammed for.

    Now, why can Olbermann get a pass? Because McCain is NOT an expert about matters of troop morale (which is what Olbermann slammed McCain about). When McCain (who never held a battlefield command) opines that more troops will boost morale DESPITE the fact that the commanders on the ground don't want more troops and the troops themselves say the same thing, it makes no sense. It flies in the face of the facts presented.

    Paul is an ass- I have a novel idea Paulley- get your own website and do an Olbermann Watch Watch. Show some initiative. Quit taking the easy way out like every Democrat does.

    By the way, I certainly do not always agree with Olbermann or his guests, although I usually do.

    I don't agree with any political commentator, office holder or candidate all the time.

    Hell, I don't even agree with myself all the time!

    "How do I contact Mr. Cox?"

    Bob's contact information is on the frontpage of this site under "Masthead".

    We'll try to help you with little things like this all we can, so you go for it, sweety!

    Why has Murtha not introduced legislation to redeploy to Okinowa(sic?). Olbermann forgot to ask about this.

    I will contact Mr. Cox and see what we can work out.

    Paul Falduto,
    Call your thread Bushwatch. Like I said I'll even bash Bush myself. But you can't defend Olbermann. Even you must admitt he's a propagandist for the Left. The problem I have is that he doesn't admitt it when he clearly is!

    Ensign Expendable,
    McCain know more about troop morale than Olbermann does. McCain was a pilot and was a POW. Olbermann is what.....
    A Jihadi supporter!

    Red Wolf; Are you as insane as you sound, or is all of this a put on:

    You "don't give a crap who's in power, as long as they don't raise my taxes", but you DO care whether a relatively obscure cable TV news personality looks like he's "having a nervous breakdown" or not. Are you completely nuts?

    IT is our collective JOB as American citizens to 'care' who's in power and what they do wih that power....and vote intelligently using that information. It is not our collective job or responsibility to monitor a TV personality, especially one you dislike.

    Every single post you make sounds like you care only about yourself. In fact, you come right out and say as much. In other words, you must be an extremely self centered individual.

    I can't imagine why anyone would want to "put on' in that manner, so this must really be the real you! I just wonder if you know how just selfish and ignorant you sound to just about everybody else on this site?

    Now, if you are a 13 or 14 year old kid, that explains everything....and I apologize.

    I am no more interested in "bashing" Bush than I am in "defending" Olbermann.

    If Mr. Cox is looking for someone who has a different outlook than johhnydollar and the others who now do the digests to present an objective analysis of the show and the comments of Mr. Olbermann and his guests, I would certainly consider it, depending on my time constraints and other obligations.

    If, on the other hand, he is just looking for a "stooge" to be set up as a straw man for johnny and the other Olbermann critics who now post digests of the show to knock down, I would not be interested.

    Then send back your tax rebate check you got last year ingrate.

    Want the 2 bags of groceries I bought with it?
    It's yours !

    Right on Mike!

    The rich account for a higher percentage of tax revenue now than they did prior to the tax cuts.`

    Crash most have had one too many crashes.

    Uh oh. Less than an hour and our potential guest blogger is already starting to get cold feet. What a surprise.

    "McCain was a pilot and was a POW."

    Yes, Red Worlf, he was a pilot and a veteran. But he never held a battlefield command. And despite his expertise in military matters, he was Navy and this operation is primarily an Army and Marine Corps one (and military folks will tell you that what boosts morale in one branch may not necessarily work in another).

    The rest of your post is more of the same drivel.

    "If, on the other hand, he is just looking for a "stooge" to be set up as a straw man for johnny and the other Olbermann critics who now post digests of the show to knock down, I would not be interested."

    Actually, we have the posters Bob, Sir Loin, Mike and all the Coward Watch bot aliases for that... but one more won't hurt and it seems you'd fit the bill nicely.

    I do hope you'll take the job of guest Olbermann Defender blogger, if offered.

    Actually, they can cut off funding.

    Cecilia makes a habit of usually being wrong.
    The 2007 budget has already been passed by the GOP Congress. But of course the budget for health, education and unimportant areas such as these, have not.

    "The 2007 budget has already been passed by the GOP Congress. But of course the budget for health, education and unimportant areas such as these, have not."

    Let me get your statement correctly, Anonymous. Are you arguing that the Democrats have no course for an effort to defund the war in '07?

    to newcomers:
    Red Wolf is our---I'll be politically correct---house special education poster.We let him stay, he helps to carry the water,takes out the trash and humor him and then ignore him.
    If you'd really like to make the retard, oops, sorry, our special guy happy, just say you went crazy when Olbermann got emotional the other night.
    He'll be your friend for life !

    No cold feet at all johnny, I just need to see what he wants and what he would allow me to.

    If he simply wants an "anti-johnny" who will post a superficial analysis half an hour after the show ends full of insults, stale talking points, caricatures of the other side, assuming that the other side is not merely wrong, but have bad motives (like "liberals want to see us lose and Islamofascists win" and crap like that), no fact checking against objective sources, then I am not interested.

    I don't think you can fairly digest a show like this just after it ends, unless, like Johnny, you pretty much know what you will say about Olbermann and his guests before they even say anything.

    All I see in johhny's posts is stuff like "Yes, everyone know "The Perfesser" (Turley) is loony and there he goes again!" Doesn't matter what Turley says, johhny knows it will be "loony" and is ready to post that before the words even leave "The Perfesser's" mouth.

    That's not analysis. It's just bashing. And if he wants me to simply bash the bashers, I am not interested.

    But again, I will contact him and see what he looking for.

    A State Department official leaked word this week that President Bush is considering sending "no more than 15,000 to 20,000 U.S. troops to Iraq. "Instead of a surge, it is a bump," the official said.

    This claim was bolstered last night by CBS's David Martin, who reported that military commanders have told Bush they are prepared to execute a troop escalation of just 9,000 soldiers and Marines into Iraq, "with another 10,000 on alert in Kuwait and the U.S."

    The Washington Post reports today that deep divisions remain between the White House on one side and the Joint Chiefs and congressional leaders on the other about whether a surge of up to 20,000 troops will turn around the deteriorating situation. The Post also provides more context about an administration official's recent claim that the escalation is more of a political decision than a military one.:

    The U.S. military is increasingly resigned to the probability that Bush will deploy a relatively small number of additional troops between one and five brigades in part because he has few other dramatic options available to signal U.S. determination in Iraq, officials said. But the Joint Chiefs have not given up making the case that the potential dangers outweigh the benefits for several reasons, officials said.

    "The surge is more like a BUMP."
    Poor George, talk about being emasculated !
    He's become a pathetic figure.
    No one wants to play with him any longer,He's even being rejected by his Joint Chiefs.

    Cecilia, from what johnny said, Mr. Cox is looking for "guest digests" not just posted comments to them.

    I or anyone else could do an analysis of the show and post it as comment anytime I wanted to, that's not the same as the digest at the top.

    And again, I'm not interested is simply doing a snap, off-the-top-of-head anaylis with looking into the statements made and doing some fact-checking. You can't do that a half-hour after the show ends.

    We liberals look at the whole document, not just the part about the President.
    ===================================================
    I will keep this in mind next time I hear talk about the 2nd amendment...

    The right wing pundits are really start to lose it.Listen to Glen Beck :
    "It Might Not Be Bad" If a Hurricane Were To "Clean The Streets Out" In NYC...

    I know you've lost your power, your dignity,but take it out on the cause of it all, your lord and savior, Chimpy.
    Don't take it out on the good people of NYC.

    Was flipping around after Cavuto did a great give and take joust with Mario Cuomo in his show (you know, a show where guests actually have an alternate viewpoint from the host that makes for compelling TV) and see Abrams on Tucker. The MSNBC honcho looks like Homer from the Simpsons after Marge threw him out and he was forced to live in Bart's treehouse...unshaven, suddenly grey, no tie, and looks like he's been up 48 hours straight negotating Olbermann's contract.

    He is on MessNBC now and looks like hell. Rough. Unshaven. Olby's antics must be killing him.

    Johnny, sorry but I just can't resist asking you this question:

    When you claim this site is "the #1 Keith Olbermann blog on the internets", isn't that a little like me saying "I have the newest Honda Civic in my neighborhood?"

    What do mean liberals don't look at the second amendment? Of course we do and in fact, we look at the whole thing, not just the second clause.

    We fully recognize that well ordered militias (ie the National Guard) have the right to keep and bear arms.

    Mike- Whhhut?

    `The DENIAL of global warming is nothing more than an extension of evolution DENIAL. It is the rejection of science itself. Evangelicals will tell you that the bible says the earth must be destroyed before Jesus returns. This is why they are so alienated from PROGRESSIVE values. This is why they shun real science and why they stand behind Bush. This is not sprituallity, it is cult mentality that says `f--- stewardship all I care about is never not dying`.


    denial.
    you hit the nail right on the head.
    the essence of religion is denial.
    denial of death.
    poor little babies, can`t handle being dead forever.
    so let`s make up a fairy tale to avoid it.

    once you take that tragic first step of denying
    just so you can embrace a fairy tale
    just so you can avoid death
    you`re f---ed.

    because it leads to the denial of many other realities
    in favor of fantasy-based (faith-based) beliefs.

    denied realities such as
    evolution
    science
    homosexuality
    inalienably equal rights for women
    inalienably equal rights for non-whites
    inalienably equal rights for gays.
    all sorts of things
    which have been denied
    by fear-of-death based religious morons for ages.

    denied realities such as
    global warming
    and denied realities such as
    the facts on the ground
    in places like iraq and new orleans
    and in terry schiavo's shriveled brain

    and that is called being REGRESSIVE
    instead of being progressive
    (progress ... get it?)
    (evolving ... get it?)
    (learning from experience ... get it?)
    which is why the radical right
    is so loathsome of progressives.
    because progressives are a threat
    to the radical right's regressive belief system
    which they desperately cling to
    to avoid death.
    poor little babies,
    walking around with a child's deluded misunderstanding
    of the way reality really works.

    and now you can clearly see
    just how f---ed up things can get
    when you let someone with a child's misunderstanding
    and a child's sense of denial
    run the most powerful country in the world.

    I doubt you even own a car, Mike. You're on here 24/7 and don't seem to get out much.

    Wondering if the righties like Grim, Cecilia,Cee etc. are against investigations into corruption and war profiteering by this administration.
    The previous Congress shirked their responsibilities in this area.
    The investigations will be taking place.
    Just wondering if they think they should get way with it.

    Red State would die w/o this site. He even has his own locker here.
    That reminds me, Redman, the floors need cleaning again. You didn't do such a great job yesterday.

    I honestly couldn't give a crap who's in power. It doesn't affect me.

    Yeah, with a name like Redstate, it's a real enigma which side you lean.

    Wondering if the righties like Grim, Cecilia,Cee etc. are against investigations into corruption and war profiteering by this administration.


    Posted by: Anonymous at January 5, 2007 04:45 PM

    Any investigation that would bring to light war profiteering would immediatly be dismissed by these folks as a partisan witch hunt. Like a vampire can't see themselves in a mirror, these folks can't see the corruption they are supporting. Half of them may see it, but they choose to defend it just because they think they must be against anything that isn't republican and they enjoy pissing offf liberals. There is no real integrity or love of justice, only a thickheaded defense of the undefendable.

    well said , Donora.

    Anon,
    The left can't handle facts? The right is calling anyone a traitor who dares to count the number of soldiers killed or name them. The 3,000+ dead soldiers and thousands more maimed soldiers are facts. The daily bombings are facts. The countless kidnappings and other daily violence are facts. Conservative Henry Kissinger stated the Iraq War can't be won. That's a fact. The neocons jumped ship in a Vanity Fair article. That's a fact. The facts make Bush look bad. But when those facts are reported, the reporters are called traitors and told to shut up.
    As far as Cee's Iraqi, I didn't notice him stating things are going well or denying the violence being reported. He simply blames it on the liberal media and American people. The Iraqi woman lists actual facts from daily life in Baghdad. Even Bush has finally admitted things aren't going well.

    Paul,

    I hope something can be arranged where you can have plenty of time to do an indepth, thoughtful, and nuanced analysis of a Countdown episode, unlike that fly-by-night Johnny.

    Trust me, if I could make the decision, I'd give you a week to compose a blog entry for tonight's episode and wait for it with bells on.

    Well, again, Cecilia, I will contact Mr. Cox and see what we might arrange.

    Anon:

    Oh Noooo, Anon! You DARED call RedState a 'he'. I made that mistake once and got called some kind of 'pig'. I forget which kind. RedState is a 'she', or so 'she' says!

    Anon,
    First you say liberals, when confronted with facts, only deal with conjecture and opinion. Then, when confronted with facts (public polls), you claim there are plenty of people who want us to stay. Where are your polls that show majorities of Iraqis want us to stay? Where are the polls that Show majorities of Americans support Bush or this war?

    Does the apparent coalesance re allowing the Military to dictate military policy and use of the military stike anyone else as bordering on insanity?

    Can any of you self styled liberal and progressives use the words Truman and MacArthur in the same sentence.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA grammie

    well said , Donora.


    Posted by: Anonymous at January 5, 2007 04:54 PM

    So you "wonder" no longer, huh, Anonymous... :D


    BUSH: WE HAVE PLENTY OF TROOPS FOR PLENTY OF WARS

    -- Military Tells Bush It Has Only 9,000 Troops Available For Surge –

    WASHINGTON -- A State Department official leaked word this week that President Bush is considering sending `no more than 15,000 to 20,000 U.S. troops` to Iraq. `Instead of a surge, it is a bump,` the official said. This claim was bolstered last night by CBS`s David Martin, who reported that military commanders have told Bush they are prepared to execute a troop escalation of just 9,000 soldiers and Marines into Iraq, `with another 10,000 on alert in Kuwait and the U.S.` Escalation backers have already begun distancing themselves from the `big surge` plan.

    I can grammie: "Truman dismissed MacArthur as head of the UN forces in Korea."

    That was easy.

    DP, I have no objections to legitimate investigations of anything by duly constituted authority.

    I do, though, have a little tad of a problem with what I've seen as virtual unanamity in calling for investigations and once that is over with getting on posthaste with the hangings and lifetime prison sentences.

    Investigations yes! Witch hunts no!

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA grammie

    Johnny, sorry but I just can't resist asking you this question:

    When you claim this site is "the #1 Keith Olbermann blog on the internets", isn't that a little like me saying "I have the newest Honda Civic in my neighborhood?"

    Posted by: Mike at January 5, 2007 04:37 PM

    What he meant to say, Mike, is that this is the Number one site for Keith Olbermann haters on the net..

    It's kind of like the statue of liberty would say if Johnny, Cee, Grannie, red wolf, or any of the republifascists who frequent this site had if they had been Emma Lazarus (you'll have to forgive my poetic liscence... I am no poet!)

    'Don't give me anybody...
    Your tired, poor, wretched masses yearning to breathe free?
    Whgy would we want that scum over here? They should be making our shoes & our linens...
    I'm a stupid statue with no meaning from a country that hates Americans..'

    Anon,
    President Bush: "Iraqis don't like being occupied. I wouldn't want to be occupied either." According to you Bush is using the terrorists' language and hurting our troops.

    Hello again !

    Cee,
    You mean the quotes you make up and take from right-wingers who admit they're lies? The quotes you continue to argue prove your point even if they are made up?

    "(you'll have to forgive my poetic liscence... I am no poet!)"

    True. But if one doesn't hesitate from putting mean words into the mouths of people who never spoke them, I doubt they'd let a little thing like lack of talent deter them from poetry writing.

    > What he meant to say, Mike, is that this is the Number one site for Keith Olbermann haters on the net..

    Wrong again. What he meant is say is what he said: this is the #1 ranked Keith Olbermann blog on the internet. Check Google, or maybe they're "in on it" too.

    "What he meant is say is what he said..."

    Oh great, Johnny. Now Paul is going to accuse you of not really being you.

    Any word, yet, on a Joe Scarborough website?

    True. But if one doesn't hesitate from putting mean words into the mouths of people who never spoke them, I doubt they'd let a little thing like lack of talent deter them from poetry writing.


    Posted by: Cecelia at January 5, 2007 05:21 PM

    First for you Cecilia... For you, or ANY of you right-ing scum to complain about mean things coming from your opponents pens strikes me as a bit disingenuine...

    > What he meant to say, Mike, is that this is the Number one site for Keith Olbermann haters on the net..

    Wrong again. What he meant is say is what he said: this is the #1 ranked Keith Olbermann blog on the internet. Check Google, or maybe they're "in on it" too.

    Posted by: johnny dollar at January 5, 2007 05:23 PM

    As for you, Johnnie? I am proud of you... I'll bet that your boss Bill O is proud of you also... Now how many of the people who come here agree with your screwy point of view? Few... Very few...

    I checked back on the January 3rd thread and noticed Cee mentioned our debate from October. He was so badly beaten, he claimed God doesn't care about prayer in school or the Ten Commandments (I believe observing the sabbath was at issue but if God doesn't care about one commandment it's hard to argue he cares about the others). He also resorted to making up quotes the Founding Fathers never said. Even when forced to admit they were lies he still claimed they proved his point. He admitted the Constitution wasn't a Christian document but the people were and claimed the Declaration is much more important to our country than the Constitution. He ran away from our argument about slavery being accepted in the Bible. Then he went so far as to defend slavery under certain circumstances. In short, Cee is a racist nut who was badly defeated in both arguments and ran away crying.

    Any word, yet, on a Joe Scarborough website?

    Posted by: Olbermann Watch [Us Bicker] in Technicolor at January 5, 2007 05:27 PM


    Have no fear, watch, I am sure there will be one soon... Afterall, you don't want to go to war with BIG-BAD BILL O'... You'll never get away with it, even if you are a noted former conservative Congressman!

    PF, very glib and delightfully immaterial.

    I am uncomfortable with this constant adoration of what some see as the military bucking the CIC. Replace any other time and CIC and you might understand the point.

    Because our country has never had certain horrors that have been so prevalent elsewhere does not mean it could never happen here.

    For a while in 2000 I was also queasy at the undercurrent that existed. The longer I live the more I am convinced that anything can change in a second.

    You may have reacted differently, but 911 shook me to my core. And, it is so easy to demonize your opponents in your mind. Fellow citizens don't disagree on the best course. Oh no. They must be fundy nazi theiving degenerate brainwashed retards.

    Just remember that the 1930's US and England were, to use Bob's favorite cudgel, 85% pacifist and anti rearmament. That war monger Churchill was crazy.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA grammie

    "He admitted the Constitution wasn't a Christian document but the people were and claimed the Declaration is much more important to our country than the Constitution."

    Posted by: Colbert at January 5, 2007 05:31 PM

    he claimed that the Declaration was more important than the constitution, Colbert? Which puts him???

    Right, exactly in line with the Bush administration & their policies... I'd refrain from complimenting him too much by doing this....

    All you republican scum are stoopid. You are Christian hypocrites. You hate the poor and are greedy and are racists and oh shit I lost my talking points.

    "First for you Cecilia... For you, or ANY of you right-ing scum to complain about mean things coming from your opponents pens strikes me as a bit disingenuine..."

    I didn't complain about opponents writing mean things, I said that you were putting mean things into the mouths of people who never uttered them.

    I don't know how much more disingenuous one can be than to do that.

    Mike,
    If you don't recall my new years pledge, I've refrain from persoanl attacks on fellow posters. If you continue persoanal attacks I will resort to attacking you. If you want to keep disagreeing civily I'll do that. The choice is yours.
    People should only care about themselves. that how you progress. I don't give a crap what my neighbors do. I don't care who's in charge. As long as I have money, taxes low and this country isn't under Islamic control I don't care who's President. Bush isn't my life like he's yours.
    I critique Olbermann because he denies his bias and is an intellectual coward. He's no different than Sean Hannity and Rush Bimbo ( Both of whom I don't like)! There are people on the Left i like like Bob Beckel, Chris Matthews, Peter Beinhart and Kristen Powers. I like people who express their views without fanaticism and have a give and take. Olbermann I don't respect and he really need help.
    I mean he almost broke down!

    Paul Falduto,
    Johhny offered you take up his offer. Call your thread Bushwatch! I'll join you in bashing Bush.
    As for the 2nd amemdment, even the DEms gave up on that so it's lost cause. Gun control is dead.

    Yowza !!!!!

    Colbert you're giving us a play-by-play of what purportedly went down in a long ago argument?

    Does it strike you that you may be turning into Cee's own personal Riverdog?

    Aformementioned stated that you could never go to war with O' Reilly and win... here in America... you can go to "war" with any public figure and win... it would take some steam from the locomotive to rid of Billy, but it can happen...

    Cecelia, this site never ceases to amaze me. That is probably why I participate.

    I don't have a clue what your opinions are about anything that is discussed here, with one exception.

    You don't like sophistry, speciousness, ad hominem attacks, inconsistencies, out of context lying, circular arguments and all other fallacies. And that is the only thing I've ever read that you posted.

    You are, as many of us are, accused of what some delusionly ascribe to you.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA grammie

    Aformementioned stated that you could never go to war with O' Reilly and win... here in America... you can go to "war" with any public figure and win... it would take some steam from the locomotive to rid of Billy, but it can happen...

    Janet:

    911 "shook me to the core" as well, but he knowledge that Bush is still CIC, and will be for two more years shakes me even more than 911 did.

    Aformementioned stated that you could never go to war with O' Reilly and win... here in America... you can go to "war" with any public figure and win... it would take some steam from the locomotive to rid of Billy, but it can happen...

    Posted by: Olbermann Watch [Us Bicker] in Technicolor at January 5, 2007 05:51 PM

    I was being factious, watch...

    Is that why Mike is here? To get the fear of God that everybody needs once ?

    *facetious

    *facetious

    5:56 pm's statement was supposed to be a jab for Olbermann Watch.com ... but it came out as a philosophical statement. Glad to have cleared that up.

    Sorry you felt offended Red Wolf, but most of us on here actually do care about things larger than ourselves!

    Janet,

    I never hop in the car and go where an idiot with an agenda and several hundred stereotypes wants to drive me.

    5:56 / 5:54

    I read you watch... It's all good...

    Harriet Meyers fired by the white house yesterday.... Sounds hillarious to me... Even that Conservative Tucker Carlson finds President Tumbleweed to have screwed up...

    This is, afterall, the very same Harriet Myers who was 'emminently qualified' for a position on the supreme court.. So why fire her? These republi-fascists are too much.

    Only two years and 15 days until you are out of the white house... & G-d bless all of us if we can actually survive it!

    Oh my God, Proud, you are right! It is two years AND 15 days! Even the new year of 2009 will not yet bring relief!

    I am sure that Harriet Meyers was fired over little... like an extra peanut-butter & jelly sandwich being snuck in or something...

    watch.... I'll bet that she forgot to bring her bible to bible study day... That's a big no-no I hear in the bush whitehouse!!

    Or maybe she leaked the actual age of the Grand Canyon to some tourists...

    Mike,
    Apology accepted and I aplogize any persoanl insult I've directed your way. We can disagree but we can be civil too. I really want to stop this name calling.
    Olbermann is another matter!

    What do mean liberals don't look at the second amendment? Of course we do and in fact, we look at the whole thing, not just the second clause.

    We fully recognize that well ordered militias (ie the National Guard) have the right to keep and bear arms.
    ==================================================
    I'm sorry, I have to laugh here and point out (like Mallard Fillmore) how liberals are always so fond of claiming the constitution as a living document (ESPECIALLY when it comes to that "hidden" right of aborition) but suddenly it must be interpreted litterally (with no room to be a "living document") when it comes to the 2nd amendment.

    Pick one or the other people.

    Janet:

    911 "shook me to the core" as well, but he knowledge that Bush is still CIC, and will be for two more years shakes me even more than 911 did.

    3000 innocent people die horrific deaths and you say that having Bush in office "shakes" you even more? Well, that about sums up Mike's delusional, Islamo-loving mind if anything else doesn't.

    Get out of this country, Mike. You absolutely sicken me after making a statement like that.

    3000 innocent people die horrific deaths and you say that having Bush in office "shakes" you even more? Well, that about sums up Mike's delusional, Islamo-loving mind if anything else doesn't.

    Get out of this country, Mike. You absolutely sicken me after making a statement like that.

    Posted by: RedState at January 5, 2007 06:23 PM

    I thank G-d that you are not the boss of who enters this country & who doesn't, Red State! Because anybody who disagrees with you is automatically an 'Islamo-lover', a traitor, or worse...

    You've got anger mamagement problems that you need counseling to clear up... Get it... Until you do, spare us the BS...

    Wondering if the righties like Grim, Cecilia,Cee etc. are against investigations into corruption and war profiteering by this administration.
    The previous Congress shirked their responsibilities in this area.
    The investigations will be taking place.
    Just wondering if they think they should get way with it.
    ==================================================
    I love how people characterize me. Especially how I'm a "rightie bush lover" just because I'm not having a heart attack or breakdown from the fact that Bush is still alive.

    Here's an explination: I'm a "rightie" because I WANT as little government as possible. Let the investigations take place. Whatever. I'm certainly not one that's been completely pleased with Bush. The difference between us, is that I think he's doing about as well a job as anyone can as far as foreign policy is concerned, but I've certainly not been thrilled with his domestic policy.

    I mean, I thought you liberals were all about nuance, but you apparently can't see that someone MIGHT agree with bush about a few things, but not ALL things. Do you think LIKE bush? "If you're not against him, your for him" ?

    How very narrow of all of you.

    Right wingers have anger management problems and liberals have some kind of weird depression ...

    weird depression, watch?

    Well... obviously Liberals can not handle the slightest little puft of dander that casts any kind of shadow against them. They can not put up with giving birth, cigarettes, hymns in school, and perfectly natural and healthy government corruption here and there.

    RedState:

    Well, gosh, I'm just SO very sorry I 'sicken' you! That really upsets me!

    You want me to "get out of this country"....you mean MY country? The one I served proudly for in the military during wartime? Did YOU?

    3000 MORE 'innocent' Americans have died because of Bush's legendary incompetence. 20,000 more wounded, many of whom will never be normal again. I can't even guess how many on the Iraqi side....but I guess you just don't care about any of this, but I do! I'm REAL sorry this upsets you, but I'll place my patriotism against your's anyday!

    Yes, little Miss Outrage, it worries me that a proven bubbling incompetent is still CIC, has his finger on the nuclear button, and can still cause who knows what kind of havoc in the next two years.

    That said, you don't make me sick....you just make me laugh!

    Yeah. Reagan was an idiot too. That whole cold war thing was all fear mongering and just because he ended it doesn't prove me wrong. He is still an idiot. I choose to ignore facts of history and continue to believe that Bush is a moron. Who cares that he actually did better at Yale than Kerry and so what that he got an MBA from Harvard. I heard they just give those things away.

    They also give person of the year award away at time magazine.

    My one and half semesters at who gives a shit junior college makes me more qualified than all of you. Did I mention I also have my own small business? I run a website out of my parents basement. It is called www.worldofwarcraft_for_degenerates.com. Check it out.

    "We can disagree but we can be civil too."
    Posted by: Red Wolf at January 5, 2007 06:17 PM


    "Get out of this country, Mike. You absolutely sicken me after making a statement like that."
    Posted by: RedState at January 5, 2007 06:23 PM

    Six minutes. That must be a record.

    The difference between us, is that I think he's doing about as well a job as anyone can as far as foreign policy is concerned, but I've certainly not been thrilled with his domestic policy."

    Posted by: Challenger Grim at January 5, 2007 06:29 PM

    That sounds like a pretty profound difference, Grim... I mean, I can honestly say that I don't think that President Tumbleweed has done, well, prety much ANYTHING correctly during his 6 years in office...

    On the Domestic front, I disagree with his tax cuts, with his church & state policies, with his policy concerning stem cell research, with his policies concerning the constitution, with his supreme court appointees, with his health care policy, with his immigration policy, or with his position on Social Security...

    On foreign relations, I disagree with his policies on Iraq, Europe, Iran, Russia, Canada, Mexico, China, Cuba, North korea, India, Pakistan... I don't even agree with him on Afghanistan... I do agree with him that Israel is the holy land & should be held as something sacred to the American people, but that's about it!

    I didn't like a number of Bill Clinton's policies either, but he was SO MUCH better than that born again nutcase that at times I wonder if we are even from the same planet...

    The difference between us, is that I think he's doing about as well a job as anyone can as far as foreign policy is concerned, but I've certainly not been thrilled with his domestic policy."

    Posted by: Challenger Grim at January 5, 2007 06:29 PM

    That sounds like a pretty profound difference, Grim... I mean, I can honestly say that I don't think that President Tumbleweed has done, well, prety much ANYTHING correctly during his 6 years in office...

    On the Domestic front, I disagree with his tax cuts, with his church & state policies, with his policy concerning stem cell research, with his policies concerning the constitution, with his supreme court appointees, with his health care policy, with his immigration policy, or with his position on Social Security...

    On foreign relations, I disagree with his policies on Iraq, Europe, Iran, Russia, Canada, Mexico, China, Cuba, North korea, India, Pakistan... I don't even agree with him on Afghanistan... I do agree with him that Israel is the holy land & should be held as something sacred to the American people, but that's about it!

    I didn't like a number of Bill Clinton's policies either, but he was SO MUCH better (read saner) than that born again nutcase that at times I wonder if we are even from the same planet...

    "www.worldofwarcraft_for_degenerates.com" Is Keith Olbermann a degeenerate ?

    Who cares that he actually did better at Yale than Kerry and so what that he got an MBA from Harvard. I heard they just give those things away.
    ==================================================
    Of course they give those things away, if you have a daddy to pay them enough. Oh wait... it seems being rich and having connected folks only helps in admission. Don't ever recall finding anything that said either of those helps with graduation.

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    My one and half semesters at who gives a shit junior college makes me more qualified than all of you. Did I mention I also have my own small business? I run a website out of my parents basement. It is called www.worldofwarcraft_for_degenerates.com. Check it out.
    ==================================================
    Being a warcraft fan, this made me laugh SOOO much. I personally want to know what Thrall is doing about our honor deficits and know about Cairne's plan to withdraw Taurens from the Badlands.

    Gosh, I'm a liberal and not at all depressed. In fact, I'm optimistic and pretty cheery.

    Depression comes in many forms...

    "with his immigration policy"

    What about that don't you like, Proud?

    ... I did say "weird depression."

    Nothing to be depressed about. Nancy Pelosi is our new speaker!

    Hooray!

    That's right we to tax the hell outta the rich and redistribute wealth, who cares about a meritocracy. Lets get rid of religion because it worked so well for the soviets. Lets also misinterpret funding for stem cell research. Lets ignore the fact that private donors can give as much as they want and say its a BAN when only the federal government is restricted in its funding. Screw the constitution. Lets not appoint judges who actually interpret the law. I want ones that right the wrongs as I see fit. Everyone is guaranteed health care. I think that is in the constitution somewhere. I am also perfectly content with kicking the can down the road with regard to Social Security funding. If he even suggests changing this forced socialist program, i will defame him as a lunatic. Who cares that he is only talking about a small percentage of a person's Social Security money being invested. Who cares if it is a choice. Who cares that currently the SS fund only makes 1% a year. The government knows better for the people than the people themselves. I am a loon and I believe everything that my JUCO poly sci teacher has told me about the evil that is the Republican Party. WEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

    Six minutes. That must be a record.
    =================================================
    Yeah, except one is posted by redSTATE and the other is posted by red WOLF.

    Until further evidence proves otherwise, I'll be inclined to believe they are 2 different people.

    That who swearing in... a form of depression. An insecurity so overcoming that children --- not just one or two tykes --- but a whole dozen of kids had to be there for a creepy support for a lady, making it seem like there was something wrong there also. Watch out, Republicans!!! Nancy Pelosi is here... and she has the voting power of kindergarteners with her !

    All heil Nazi Pelosi!!!!!!!!!!

    I was being sarcastic ...

    "Yeah. Reagan was an idiot too. That whole cold war thing was all fear mongering and just because he ended it doesn't prove me wrong. He is still an idiot. I choose to ignore facts of history and continue to believe that Bush is a moron. Who cares that he actually did better at Yale than Kerry and so what that he got an MBA from Harvard. I heard they just give those things away."

    Posted by: Loon at January 5, 2007 06:43 PM

    Reagan was an idiot... I'm glad that you acknowledge this, loon... He certainly was not very patriotic. If he were, he would have been about alot more than cutting taxes, & severing our sense of community in this country for partisan sake... Oh, & building more & more nukes, which will harm the landscape of this country for as long as it exists... &, of course, the biggest myth of them all is purveyed by you also... The myth that Ronald Reagan 'single handedly ended the cold war that ignores about 75 years of history in favor of one man...

    (I know, I know, I've violated the ONE cardinal rule of this (or any other) right wing blog... I actually criticized your one ray of hope, your man Ronnie...)

    & I know that you aren't trying to tell me that w. is brilliant, because, quite frankly he's not... & while I did vote for John Kerry in the general election, (what other option was there? 4 more years of President tumblweeed?? I, (at least,) KNEW that America would have a hard time surviving that...,) I certainly would not classify him as brilliant either...

    As far as giving away degrees, when your last name is bush, they DO just give those things away... Same thing if your last name is kennedy... It might not be right... But it is America!

    "Yeah. Reagan was an idiot too. That whole cold war thing was all fear mongering and just because he ended it doesn't prove me wrong. He is still an idiot. I choose to ignore facts of history and continue to believe that Bush is a moron. Who cares that he actually did better at Yale than Kerry and so what that he got an MBA from Harvard. I heard they just give those things away."

    Posted by: Loon at January 5, 2007 06:43 PM

    Reagan was an idiot... I'm glad that you acknowledge this, loon... He certainly was not very patriotic. If he were, he would have been about alot more than cutting taxes, & severing our sense of community in this country for partisan sake... Oh, & building more & more nukes, which will harm the landscape of this country for as long as it exists... &, of course, the biggest myth of them all is purveyed by you also... The myth that Ronald Reagan 'single handedly ended the cold war that ignores about 75 years of history in favor of one man...

    (I know, I know, I've violated the ONE cardinal rule of this (or any other) right wing blog... I actually criticized your one ray of hope, your man Ronnie...)

    & I know that you aren't trying to tell me that w. is brilliant, because, quite frankly he's not... & while I did vote for John Kerry in the general election, (what other option was there? 4 more years of President tumblweeed?? I, (at least,) KNEW that America would have a hard time surviving that...,) I certainly would not classify him as brilliant either...

    As far as giving away degrees, when your last name is bush, they DO just give those things away... Same thing if your last name is kennedy... It might not be right... But it is America!

    I didn't like a number of Bill Clinton's policies either, but he was SO MUCH better (read saner) than that born again nutcase that at times I wonder if we are even from the same planet...
    ==================================================
    I am curious, do you consider Bush to be "less sane" because he generally does not do things as you would have? (or think they should be done?)

    I mean, I disagreed with Clinton about a lot of things, and certainly believe he might have been mistaken in some of his ideas, but at no point did I ever really believe him to be 'crazy'.

    Guess this goes to prove the conceit liberals have. If you disagree with them, you must be mentally insane. (how very tolerant)

    "Until further evidence proves otherwise, I'll be inclined to believe they are 2 different people."

    Thank you for showing me that! My apologies to both Reds.

    Nothing to be depressed about. Nancy Pelosi is our new speaker.

    Hooray!

    I wonder if Paul Falduto's girlfriend makes him sit down on the toliet seat when he pees?

    Nothing to be depressed about. Nancy Pelosi is our new speaker.

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

    The thing with Nancy Pelosi is... I am sure that if anything goes wrong for the democrats... there will be another photo- - op with lots more kids ! The worse the things go... the more kids that there will be !

    OK, cecilia... Let's start with the debacle of calling on 'freedom fighters,' & our National Guard (which is all tied up in Iraq, anyhow,) in order to prevent illegal immigrants from crossing the border... That worked really well...

    How about the fence he wants to build? That makes a ton of sense, also...

    How about the utter inconsistency with which he has handled the entire issue of immigration?

    We could go on & on.... What is he going to try next? Going on National TV in Mexico & begging, pleading with the Mexicans not to come here?

    All those in favor of tossing Loon and Red Wolf into the Brig and letting them fight it out?

    But seriously, I want to mention something you said, Grim, about narrow viewpoints. The problem is that the Iraq mess (and all of its intended and unintended consequences) swallows up everything else in the Bush Administration.

    I mean, I think Richard Nixon did wonders in improving U.S. Relations with China, establishing the EPA, getting the first of several "nuclear freeze" treaties signed and a whole host of other successes. But they are all drowned out by Watergate. So if I say that I liked Nixon on certain things, I get called a kook because they believe I liked him on all things.

    Yeah peace through strength was a complete failure. I long for the years of Jimmy Carter and 12% unemployment and 19% interest rates, gas shortages, and the ass of radical muslims. We were much better when just acquiesced (whew that was a big word) put our heads in the sand and did nothing about the Soviets. There was really nothing to fear. If we could just get in a circle sing "koom bye yaa", then all would be okay. Now that's patriotism.

    Mom. I said "chicken pot pie and cheesy poofs, damnit"

    rockefella a far left liberal? Comon' now! He only tried to author a bill to ban everybody's right to own guns back in the 90's

    Rockefella a far left liberal? Na!

    Loon is bad at his sarcasm. The true trick is by hiding it so that people are not sure what party that you are on.

    'I am curious, do you consider Bush to be "less sane" because he generally does not do things as you would have? (or think they should be done?)'
    ...
    Guess this goes to prove the conceit liberals have. If you disagree with them, you must be mentally insane. (how very tolerant)

    Posted by: Challenger Grim at January 5, 2007 07:07 PM


    No, grim... I question his sanity because he got us in an unwinnable war for stupid reasons... I call his sanity into question because of his obviously messianic beliefs about himself... & I call his sanity into question because he has sacrificed more American lives than deserve to be sacrificed in pointless conflicts & in terrorist attacks that never should have happened!

    "We could go on & on.... What is he going to try next? Going on National TV in Mexico & begging, pleading with the Mexicans not to come here?"

    Why should we stop Mexicans from coming here?

    Proud to be a Liberal: Those stated reasons sure would hold up in court.

    "Janet:

    911 "shook me to the core" as well, but he knowledge that Bush is still CIC, and will be for two more years shakes me even more than 911 did.

    Posted by: Mike at January 5, 2007 05:54 PM"

    Well that is a big difference between us. When I see the hyperventilating accusations and spiritually held beliefs from the left come true and GWB metamorph into Hitler/Stalin I will join you.

    Otherwise, I will continue to treat those and their ilk who gave us 911 as THE ENEMY.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA grammie

    Yo Loon:

    Have you seen any comments from me calling Reagan an 'idiot'?....I didn't think so!

    What is sarcasm? Sometimes you have to S P E L L things out; otherwise they don't know that they have been offended. It is also so much fun to bait those out into the open and expose them for what they are "people who haven't amounted to much and have an internal need to blame someone for their own failures and ineptness and feel at home in their state of victimization."

    Well Janet, if those things do come to pass, it'll be little too late for you to "join me".

    And once again, WHO gave us 911? Was it Iraq?

    I didn't think so either!

    Well, if we want our citizenship to mean anything, cecilia, we must stop the mexicans from coming here... Otherwise that passport you hold? It's nothing but a piece of garbage to be tossed in the circular file...

    Loon: As well as people that can not walk from one building to the nex with out a bunch of children surrounding them. I am sorry... but if Mrs. P. thinks that those children are going to convince me that the left are lesser on abortion this time around... t they are severely mistaken ! ! !

    "What is sarcasm? Sometimes you have to S P E L L things out; otherwise they don't know that they have been offended. It is also so much fun to bait those out into the open and expose them for what they are "people who haven't amounted to much and have an internal need to blame someone for their own failures and ineptness and feel at home in their state of victimization."

    Posted by: Loon at January 5, 2007 07:30 PM


    Wow, loon... m Did you get all of that out of your juco textbook? They must be teaching you things they didn't teach me in Juco... Oh yeah, thta is, if I even went to juco... because it is obvious I am not as intelligent as you are; because I am a liberal, I must be a moron, no?

    "What is sarcasm? Sometimes you have to S P E L L things out; otherwise they don't know that they have been offended. It is also so much fun to bait those out into the open and expose them for what they are "people who haven't amounted to much and have an internal need to blame someone for their own failures and ineptness and feel at home in their state of victimization."

    Posted by: Loon at January 5, 2007 07:30 PM


    Wow, loon... m Did you get all of that out of your juco textbook? They must be teaching you things they didn't teach me in Juco... Oh yeah, thta is, if I even went to juco... because it is obvious I am not as intelligent as you are; because I am a liberal, I must be a moron, no?

    "What is sarcasm? Sometimes you have to S P E L L things out; otherwise they don't know that they have been offended. It is also so much fun to bait those out into the open and expose them for what they are "people who haven't amounted to much and have an internal need to blame someone for their own failures and ineptness and feel at home in their state of victimization."

    Posted by: Loon at January 5, 2007 07:30 PM


    Wow, loon... m Did you get all of that out of your juco textbook? They must be teaching you things they didn't teach me in Juco... Oh yeah, thta is, if I even went to juco... because it is obvious I am not as intelligent as you are; because I am a liberal, I must be a moron, no?

    So Loon, what have YOU amounted too? You seem somehow capable of looking through the haze of the Internet and judging whether or not certain people have "amounted to much".

    What an amazing gift you have!

    Hey, Mike... Leave him alone!! He's a special guy!!

    "Well, if we want our citizenship to mean anything, cecilia, we must stop the mexicans from coming here... Otherwise that passport you hold? It's nothing but a piece of garbage to be tossed in the circular file..."


    We must stop Mexicans from coming here...huh? I'm assuming you mean coming here illegally...

    Let me respond with a quote from a deep thinking wit on this subject who attempted to suggest such thinking as you've stated represented this:

    'Don't give me anybody...
    Your tired, poor, wretched masses yearning to breathe free?
    Whgy would we want that scum over here? They should be making our shoes & our linens...
    I'm a stupid statue with no meaning from a country that hates Americans..'

    Posted by: PROUD to be a LIBERAL at January 5, 2007 05:13 PM

    O'Reilly beats Olby by almost two million last night again!!!!!

    Joe Scarborough was total viewers ratings champ for MSLSD last night!

    Quick Loons better start a Scarborough watch!

    Could this have anything to do with Olby's Krazy Komment Monday night when he just about called the Troops and America, losers?

    Well I guess comming from a guy thats a loser in the ratings, maybe thats saying something.

    Well some loon around here used the word "intellectual coward". Well Olby thinks he is smart. And he slams mostly anybody that doesn't agree with him. But then he won't have any of those people on. Yep you're right!
    Intellectual Coward!

    Two L.A. psychologists got 200 Hollywood stars to fill out the "Narcissism Personality Inventory".
    Their shocking discovery? Celebrities are among the vainest people on the planet. WOW! Researcher Drew Pinsky said, "Vanity is only part of it, they crave attention, are over-confident of their abilities, lack empathy and can behave erratically."

    Sounds just like our Olby doesn't it!!!!!!

    Opp's gotta go. I said I would take Woman to the Movies tonight.

    Yes Paul she lets me pee standing up.

    I'll be back!

    I must be a moron, no?

    Posted by: PROUD to be a LIBERAL at January 5, 2007 07:34 PM

    No. You are a moron. Yes.

    No NO. We are the same. We both believe the moon landing was faked. LBJ killed JFK. Osama is actually a Bush spy, and that Cheney is the Bastard son Ghengis Khan brought to the present time by a time machine that he actually invented in 1289 A.D. No reason to think that we are any less intelligent than other people. The rest of the world doesn't understand that we are all in the matrix and that if we can solve world of warcraft we will be saved by "the one" and then and only then will the Oracle tell us how we can escape the pods of ineptitude and fulfill our destiny as worker bees in the collective known as Heaven.

    Keith Olbermann ? Who is that ? I forgot who Keith Olbermann is amongst the hostilities !!!

    Loon:

    Who else believes all that nonsense you just spouted in your 7:44 post? You did say 'we'!

    Who is Keith Olbermann? I forgot who Keith Olbermann is amoungst all of the vitriol and hostiliies !!!

    Mike, you who gave kudos to KK for his wandering in darkness in the war room GWB in his pjs clutching bourbon bottle moving phamtom divisions, hair spiked, hair crazily flattened and parnoic stoop are now implying that once the metamorphis is complete it will be too late for me to repent.

    You boggle the mind. Can you not ever acknowledge that. Oh, f--- it and you too.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA grammie

    I must be a moron, no?

    Posted by: PROUD to be a LIBERAL at January 5, 2007 07:34 PM

    No. You are a moron. Yes.

    Posted by: Cecelia at January 5, 2007 07:43 PM

    Oh, Cecilia... Your breaking my heart, your shaking my confidence, baby...

    First for you Cecilia... For you, or ANY of you right-ing scum to complain about mean things coming from your opponents pens strikes me as a bit disingenuine..."

    I didn't complain about opponents writing mean things, I said that you were putting mean things into the mouths of people who never uttered them.

    I don't know how much more disingenuous one can be than to do that.

    Posted by: Cecelia at January 5, 2007 05:43 PM

    Oh Cecilia, I'm Down on my knees...
    I'm begging you please to GO HOME!!

    lol

    hypocrite

    I must be a moron, no?

    Posted by: PROUD to be a LIBERAL at January 5, 2007 07:34 PM

    No. You are a moron. Yes.

    Posted by: Cecelia at January 5, 2007 07:43 PM

    Oh, Cecilia... Your breaking my heart, your shaking my confidence, baby...

    First for you Cecilia... For you, or ANY of you right-ing scum to complain about mean things coming from your opponents pens strikes me as a bit disingenuine..."

    I didn't complain about opponents writing mean things, I said that you were putting mean things into the mouths of people who never uttered them.

    I don't know how much more disingenuous one can be than to do that.

    Posted by: Cecelia at January 5, 2007 05:43 PM

    Oh Cecilia, I'm Down on my knees...
    I'm begging you please to GO HOME!!

    lol

    hypocrite

    Aftrer that post I really have forgotten who Keith is !

    "We must stop Mexicans from coming here...huh? I'm assuming you mean coming here illegally..."

    I would agree with this statement.... & nothing that I said previously would beli that fact....

    So, what's your point?

    "We must stop Mexicans from coming here...huh? I'm assuming you mean coming here illegally..."

    I would agree with this statement.... & nothing that I said previously would beli that fact....

    So, what's your point?

    Grammie said: "Oh, f--- it and you too".

    Now I'm really dissapointed! I thought you were one of the only Right Wingers here capable of being respectful to those they disagree with....sorry I was wrong about that!

    "I boggle the mind".....Truth has this funny way of doing that once you start to emerge from your fog.

    And by the way, what I called GB was a "bumbling incompetent". I didn't call him a drunk, or even a madman...I hope you are wrong about all that!

    On to watching keith, all... Then to the bar... Have a nice night!

    Ahhhh ... forget about Keith Olbermann.. we have Shepard Smith as thee world's truest hope of solving the world's problems ...

    We the liberals in order to form a more perfect union, establish collectivism, provide for the common welfare, because you are too stupid to take care of yourselves, insure that you are completely indoctrinated and can no longer think for yourselves, do ordain and establish this constitution.

    I thought loon was supposed to be a Liberal ?

    Hey Grammie A.K.A. Sleepwalker
    The "Enemy" as you call them are the very same that you stand up for in this blog.
    If you haven't already seen the metamorphasis of good ole G.W. into HItler you clearly have to stop watching Fox news.
    For it is quite easy to summise if you look at the timeline of events leading up to and following 9/11, the enemies you talk of that brought you the worst case of murder since the founding of this great Republic are the very same that occupy the White House.
    Have you ever looked into why building 7 fell on 9/11 and neocon lapdog Larry Silverstein leaseholder of building 1,2,and 7 (ironically the only 3 buildings to fall that day) admit to talking to the NYC Fire Commander and they decided to "pull the building and we watched it collapse" All at he same time the president stonewalling and refusing to investigate anything concerning that day. Even after finding out that at least 5 of the so called hijackers have been found to still be alive in Saudi Arabia working for airlines and other gov't postitions.
    Condi,Donny,Dick,Wolfy,and the rest of them all saying there was no way for them to know that "they" would attack the USA that way, when the Pentagon was running drills identical to what took place on that day with good ol Dicky boy at the helm at CENTCOM ordering planes that could have otherwise stopped at least the pentagon strike over the Atlantic Ocean and then prohibiting the jets from flying over 500mph, when these planes can fly in excess of the speed of sound.
    That all comes from Sen. Minetta who was in the bunker with Cheney at the time.
    I ask of you and anyone else who reads this post to look into this because this is just the tip of the iceburg.
    The longer we let Bush and Co. get away with stripping us of our constitutional rights and the murdering of our citizens and our soldiers, the harder it will be for us to dig ourselves out of this mess.
    PLEASE WAKE UP!

    Hey Grammie A.K.A. Sleepwalker
    The "Enemy" as you call them are the very same that you stand up for in this blog.
    If you haven't already seen the metamorphasis of good ole G.W. into HItler you clearly have to stop watching Fox news.
    For it is quite easy to summise if you look at the timeline of events leading up to and following 9/11, the enemies you talk of that brought you the worst case of murder since the founding of this great Republic are the very same that occupy the White House.
    Have you ever looked into why building 7 fell on 9/11 and neocon lapdog Larry Silverstein leaseholder of building 1,2,and 7 (ironically the only 3 buildings to fall that day) admit to talking to the NYC Fire Commander and they decided to "pull the building and we watched it collapse" All at he same time the president stonewalling and refusing to investigate anything concerning that day. Even after finding out that at least 5 of the so called hijackers have been found to still be alive in Saudi Arabia working for airlines and other gov't postitions.
    Condi,Donny,Dick,Wolfy,and the rest of them all saying there was no way for them to know that "they" would attack the USA that way, when the Pentagon was running drills identical to what took place on that day with good ol Dicky boy at the helm at CENTCOM ordering planes that could have otherwise stopped at least the pentagon strike over the Atlantic Ocean and then prohibiting the jets from flying over 500mph, when these planes can fly in excess of the speed of sound.
    That all comes from Sen. Minetta who was in the bunker with Cheney at the time.
    I ask of you and anyone else who reads this post to look into this because this is just the tip of the iceburg.
    The longer we let Bush and Co. get away with stripping us of our constitutional rights and the murdering of our citizens and our soldiers, the harder it will be for us to dig ourselves out of this mess.
    PLEASE WAKE UP!

    Hey Grammie A.K.A. Sleepwalker
    The "Enemy" as you call them are the very same that you stand up for in this blog.
    If you haven't already seen the metamorphasis of good ole G.W. into HItler you clearly have to stop watching Fox news.
    For it is quite easy to summise if you look at the timeline of events leading up to and following 9/11, the enemies you talk of that brought you the worst case of murder since the founding of this great Republic are the very same that occupy the White House.
    Have you ever looked into why building 7 fell on 9/11 and neocon lapdog Larry Silverstein leaseholder of building 1,2,and 7 (ironically the only 3 buildings to fall that day) admit to talking to the NYC Fire Commander and they decided to "pull the building and we watched it collapse" All at he same time the president stonewalling and refusing to investigate anything concerning that day. Even after finding out that at least 5 of the so called hijackers have been found to still be alive in Saudi Arabia working for airlines and other gov't postitions.
    Condi,Donny,Dick,Wolfy,and the rest of them all saying there was no way for them to know that "they" would attack the USA that way, when the Pentagon was running drills identical to what took place on that day with good ol Dicky boy at the helm at CENTCOM ordering planes that could have otherwise stopped at least the pentagon strike over the Atlantic Ocean and then prohibiting the jets from flying over 500mph, when these planes can fly in excess of the speed of sound.
    That all comes from Sen. Minetta who was in the bunker with Cheney at the time.
    I ask of you and anyone else who reads this post to look into this because this is just the tip of the iceburg.
    The longer we let Bush and Co. get away with stripping us of our constitutional rights and the murdering of our citizens and our soldiers, the harder it will be for us to dig ourselves out of this mess.
    PLEASE WAKE UP!

    How are we going to spin that last segment, number 4, tomorrow? You know that Johnny Dollar & all of his henchmen (& 'women') will be saying, not enough, or something like that... But that was an anti-Democratic party piece... Any disagreement?

    Mike, here is Kurt Kissel,s post:

    "I was born when Truman was in office, and I came into political awareness, if not maturity with Kennedy. I follow politics, Congress and the Administration, closely and carefully. I have never been as concerned about the President as I am now. Even Nixon did not cause such concern. I am more and more convinced we have a true lunatic in office. Dubya has been fiddling throughout the Fall and early Winter while more and more of our troops die. And his solution is to send more and more troops into a ridiculous quagmire of lies, deceptions and mismanagement he has created. From whence do these men and women come? Is Dubya down in the War Room late at night in his pajamas moving around divisions which don't exist? Does he have a bottle of Bourbon in hand? Is his willingness to sentence more of our troops to a needless but certain death or maiming insanity? Paranoia? Hubris? And, you'll notice I lay the fault solely at Dubya's threshold now. Rumsfeld is gone. Cheney, despite his ideological stridency and limitations, is rational and coherent, and I can't believe this is his idea. Rice, despite her fatal and inexplicable attraction to Dubya, is trying to distance herself, presumably to maintain some integrity and decorum. And, if the actions and inactions aren't cause enough for concern, we have the wild look in Dubya's eyes, the hair sticking straight out or going all over the place and the paranoic stoop and sagging. It is all beginning to seem apocalyptic. If Mr. Olbermann or anyone else can help us see and appreciate the growing danger we're all in, then he, she or they have nothing but my deepest thanks. If anyone is personally offended by his, her or their style(s) and delivery (-ies), get over it. This is serious, serious "stuff" folks, and we need to deal with it.

    Posted by: Kurt Kissel at January 3, 2007 10:53 AM

    And, here is your response:

    "
    Kurt Kassel:

    What a GREAT post you made at 10:57! Very few are actually talking about the issue of the president's own mental stability, but I have personally been concerned about this since well before the 2004 elections. I was surprised more Americans weren't worried about this at that time."

    Now tell me again how innocent you are and how you have lost respect for me.

    And do remind us all of the righteousness of you and KK and the latitude that gives you that is unacceptable in others.

    I have calmed down now and I am very sorry for what I said to you. It was uncalled for.

    Proud to be a Liberal: I have heard enough spin from Alex F.L. to make me content. How are we going to think that Minetta was coherent when this nation was clearly under attack on nine eleven ?

    Sorry for the multiple posts it kept telling me it couldn't post when it obviously could.

    Alex: Or maybe it is a cover-up ennacted by the government to prevent you from revealing "the truth"

    So you "wonder" no longer, huh, Anonymous... :D

    Lot better answer than you gave , Cecilia.

    God forbid you actually give one.(:

    OWUS: Do you have anything coherent to say about my post or do you make a habit of making fun of the murder of 6000+ Americans?

    Alex.... An intriguing post, but please cite your sources.... It would make it that much easier for us to find the truth to your accusations.

    Alex.... An intriguing post, but please cite your sources.... It would make it that much easier for us to find the truth to your accusations.

    the murder of 6,000+ Americans from the suspician of 1: Dick Cheney.

    Cool... A Rambo IV is in the works? Sounds great to me!!

    Thanks Janet:

    I did think it was a great post overall, but that doesn't mean I am personally calling him a madman. I AM very concerned about this man's mental stability, partially because I am having SO much trouble understanding his actions and words.

    As for KK's post, Nobody is ever going to use exactly the same words I would have used. I am personally a little more cautious about this 'madman' stuff, but nobody knows what is going on behind his closed doors and then he comes out and does something else crazy.

    As I said, I think he is incompent, but I really don't know WHY he is so incompetent, and that kind of scares me! I just don't know what he is going to do next!

    Lastly, I didn't even now who you were talking about in your first post when you referred to 'KK' and the 'madman' stuff. I had forgotten about that little response I made.

    Part of the problem might lie in the inability of those on EITHER side to give any ground whatsoever on the issue of GWB. Most on the right will not say ANYTHING negative, and that defensive reaction just drives us on my side farther to the left. There needs to be some more middle ground here.

    After the election, it's a little hard to watch this man literally thumbing his nose at the American people almost every day....and I believe the American people ARE his employers.

    Proud to be a Liberal: The very same Silvester Stallone that Ol' Big Mac criticized for being old .

    He made him runner-up for making another Rambo, by the way ...

    "Lot better answer than you gave , Cecilia.

    God forbid you actually give one.(:"


    Well, or course you liked her response. It echoed the conclusion you had reached long before you pretended to ask a question.

    Glad you accepted my challenge, Cecilia.

    Oh..that's right. You have nothing to say....ever.
    Unless you're sitting on the line..a bird on a wire...listening and carefully shitting on people walking by.

    Way to go out on that limb.

    I see others have noticed what a phony you are.
    I thought it was just me.

    Kisses, sweetie.

    i never said that i agree with Olbermann on everything, watch...

    Well, or course you liked her response. It echoed the conclusion you had reached long before you pretended to ask a question.


    You keep stringing all these words together without ever saying anything, Ceals.

    Wearing my hat....bird above.A silent sparrow.
    Sling shot time.

    Kisses

    Bob,

    Considering the realms of rhetorical strum and drang that you've reached on this blog board over the problem that is the War in Iraq, there's a particular irony with your use of the word "line".

    If there's ever anyone who has crossed over that or gone way too far out on it, it's you. That it always come back to bite you on the butt is your own fault.

    "Considering the realms of rhetorical strum and drang "

    Really Ceals...No one speaks like that in the real world.
    You are a pretentious twit.

    ...but you already knew that.


    Me neither... and you know what.. I throw down the gauntlet to any Libretarian-esque person like me to try and defend this horrible, lurid, heavy-handed, and testy human being named Keith Olbermann, like I was once, to. Check many of the comment hobs that are before January Third. You will see a much different OWUBT. A person that just did not stand up to Ol' Big Mac because I thought that his nonsense was directed in towards his own masses. Well I see the wrongfullness in my erroronious ways. Keith Olbermann can do no good what-so-ever. He now represents everything that I thought that Bill O' Reilly was: a lying paranoid loser. Now I see that the guy is just like his arch enemy: WRONG. --- only this time on Libberal issues.

    Anybody who was shocked that I decided to go outward with my views... do not be... I have a lot of upsettedness towards lots of Conservatives ( JOe Scarborough & Glenn Beck are two) s So I may need a new outlet than this place. So I leave tonight.. maybe Ill be back on Monday... to keep Keith aside.

    Now, Bob, you've far and away proven that you don't inhabit the real world.

    Larry Silverstein admitting to demolishing WTC7:
    http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/cutter.html
    Norm Mineta in bunker with Cheney ordering stand down:http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/entity.jsp?entity=norman_mineta
    Hijackers still alive:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1559151.stm
    If you want anything else let me know.

    Cecelia
    ""We can disagree but we can be civil too."
    Posted by: Red Wolf at January 5, 2007 06:17 PM
    "Get out of this country, Mike. You absolutely sicken me after making a statement like that."
    Posted by: RedState at January 5, 2007 06:23 PM
    Six minutes. That must be a record."

    I'm not Red State.
    Don't confuse me with he/she. I've turn a new
    leaf this year. I want to keep this board civil.

    Ensign Expendable,
    I've not attack you persoanlly. In fact I'm being civil. But like all Leftists you don't like dissenting voices like Olbermann.

    Now don't go soft on me Ceals, just b/c I gave you a kiss..I know it's been awhile.

    Red Wolf,

    Scroll down a bit more from that post.

    "Now don't go soft on me Ceals, just b/c I gave you a kiss..I know it's been awhile."

    "Awhile"? No, you've never given me a kiss, but as I have said, you do have difficulty with reality.

    HEY PROUD TO BE A LIBERAL,
    YOU STILL OUT THERE?
    I GOT THOSE SOURCES FOR YOU, ARE YOU LOOKING AT THEM NOW? YOU HAVE TO SCROLL UP TO SEE THEM.
    ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?

    Olbermann Watch,

    What happened Jan 3rd?

    No NO. We are the same. We both believe the moon landing was faked. LBJ killed JFK. Osama is actually a Bush spy, and that Cheney is the Bastard son Ghengis Khan brought to the present time by a time machine that he actually invented in 1289 A.D. No reason to think that we are any less intelligent than other people. The rest of the world doesn't understand that we are all in the matrix and that if we can solve world of warcraft we will be saved by "the one" and then and only then will the Oracle tell us how we can escape the pods of ineptitude and fulfill our destiny as worker bees in the collective known as Heaven.
    =================================================
    Ok, this definitely is my laugh of the day. I'd buy you a cookie sir for finding a new way to bring up World of Warcraft in the most creative ways on a political website. (besides, we all know which of the two is more important ;-)

    Bob's summation of Cecelia's commentary style:

    "Oh..that's right. You have nothing to say....ever.
    Unless you're sitting on the line..a bird on a wire...listening and carefully shitting on people walking by.
    Way to go out on that limb.
    I see others have noticed what a phony you are.
    I thought it was just me.
    Posted by: Bob at January 5, 2007 08:56 PM"

    A precise hammer nailing it exactly as it is. Here is an example of the quality of Cecelia's commentary:

    "I must be a moron, no?
    Posted by: PROUD to be a LIBERAL at January 5, 2007 07:34 PM
    No. You are a moron. Yes.
    Posted by: Cecelia at January 5, 2007 07:43 PM"

    Lurking until an opportunity for a sophomoric quip that reflects no mastery of any issue. Very common practice for Cecelia who crafts comments that reflect no insightful perspective on the issues most commonly debated here.

    One can surmise from this that Cecelia hates to risk being "dropped" on in a similar manner.

    Not the actions of an intelligent confident person, rather, it is the actions of an opportunist who is all talk.

    All us have known Cecelia's in our everyday life. These kind of people adopt the beliefs of a parent who taught them what to believe...

    but never told them why!


    "One can surmise from this that Cecelia hates to risk being "dropped" on in a similar manner."


    Here's deep insight and analysis for you.

    Yes, Buffalo, OBVIOUSLY I just HATE an argument.

    "Here's deep insight and analysis for you.
    Yes, Buffalo, OBVIOUSLY I just HATE an argument.
    Posted by: Cecelia at January 5, 2007 10:34 PM"

    How does one respond to such a denial? Obviously you love to argue, you just argued that you don't like to argue. So then you are confirming both Bob's and my perspective that you only like to lurk and drop quips. This lends credibility to my argument that you lack insight into the subject matter "argued" on this page.

    You're taking a risk now only because of my ability to draw you in. You're simple like the rest of the idiots you team with.

    "don't like to argue" is code for - I SUCK AT DEBATE!

    What's that you're standing in?

    Show me a home...


    "How does one respond to such a denial?"

    Well, if its you we're talking about, obviously one responds to it in a way that makes clear one is completely tone deaf to sarcasm.


    ""How does one respond to such a denial?"

    Well, if its you we're talking about, obviously one responds to it in a way that makes clear one is completely tone deaf to sarcasm.
    Posted by: Cecelia at January 5, 2007 10:54 PM"

    One more denial, is that the best you can do? Such sarcasm is not a fitting response to a clear attack on your tactics. You meant it and that is clear to see. Just you being opportunistic with my pointing out how ironic your ignorance is.

    So here we are interacting with Cecelia with empty content. Nothing that comes close to debating the issues this page is here for. Standard stuff when you are arguing with Cecelia.

    You're slipping in it...

    "One more denial, is that the best you can do? Such sarcasm is not a fitting response to a clear attack on your tactics. You meant it and that is clear to see. Just you being opportunistic with my pointing out how ironic your ignorance is."

    Well, that certainly covers all the bases doesn't it, Buffalo. If I was being sarcastic it was an unfitting response and if I wasn't being sarcastic it was a "denial" of reality that left you gasping for a response.

    The skies might not be cloudy where you roam, Buffalo, but your reasoning abilities sure are.


    Pooor Buffy... (

    "Well, that certainly covers all the bases doesn't it, Buffalo. If I was being sarcastic it was an unfitting response and if I wasn't being sarcastic it was a "denial" of reality that left you gasping for a response.
    Posted by: Cecelia at January 5, 2007 11:27 PM"

    You've done this one before, you make a claim of sarcasm or being ironic and then debate the parameters of their usage. This is just you crafting your comments to have options of what you meant - as opposed to having the ability to clearly articulate a view point on the issues often debated here.

    It all comes down to only hanging your feet in the pool because you don't know how to swim.

    You will spin your wheels here all night with me. Your style of picking an argument and then confusing it with claims of what you meant, will not get you swimming across the deep end where I swim gainfully above and below the water.

    (whistling) Show me a home where the buffalo roam and I'll show you house full of shit.


    "You've done this one before, you make a claim of sarcasm or being ironic and then debate the parameters of their usage."


    "You will spin your wheels here all night with me. Your style of picking an argument and then confusing it with claims of what you meant, will not get you swimming across the deep end where I swim gainfully above and below the water."


    Earth to Buffalo... I'm not debating "the parameters of their usage [of the concepts of sarcasm and irony], YOU are. I just flatly stated I was being sarcastic.

    As for me picking an argument, YOU first engaged me.

    As for me using sematics to obscure an argument, just how necessary would that "tactic" be in a debate on the momentus topic of whether I was truly being sarcastic or was being genuine?

    Now get a clue and clean up that mess. It's mushy and smelly, just like your brain.


    As for me picking an argument, YOU first engaged me.

    "As for me using semantics to obscure an argument, just how necessary would that "tactic" be in a debate on the momentus topic of whether I was truly being sarcastic or was being genuine?

    Posted by: Cecelia at January 5, 2007 11:57 PM"

    Saying you pick an argument is a given for all of us here. What you do with it was clearly my point.

    Once again you go directly to the most ironic end of ignorance by simultaneously denying what you do - WHILE DOING IT!

    Just look what you wrote above - you debate whether you use "semantics to obscure an argument" as you use semantics to obscure the argument in the very next sentence: "...whether I was truly being sarcastic or was being genuine..."

    Do I have to go digging through all the archives of this place to quote out how many times you have done this? I don't, everyone knows this is the depth your abilities.

    There is a clear difference between being a participant in debating social and political issues and arguing the meaning of your comments about those in the debate. That is you, you may pose well, like you have logic or reason about your beliefs but when others test that logic you quickly shift to semantics and meanings of what you meant.

    Anyone with a clearly articulated perspective would not have to resort to this. You always do it.

    I love people like you though. I mean it. You are not a pussy. You stand up and keep trying when someone like me is clearly trying to hold you down. Most people crack and break down. You don't. So if I pick on you it is a compliment, you are good at keeping up the fight rather than conceding. In chess it is called seeking a draw, it is better than conceding.

    But you politics are thin!


    "There is a clear difference between being a participant in debating social and political issues and arguing the meaning of your comments about those in the debate. That is you, you may pose well, like you have logic or reason about your beliefs but when others test that logic you quickly shift to semantics and meanings of what you meant."

    Well, so far Buffalo, you've managed to confuse "debating societal and political issues" with an argument you initiated about whether I was being genuine when I stated I don't like to argue or was being sarcastic.

    "So if I pick on you it is a compliment, you are good at keeping up the fight rather than conceding. In chess it is called seeking a draw, it is better than conceding."

    Well, thanks Buffalo and since you're trying to be..eh...nice.... I'll clue you in here.... All your statements above bolster my claim about the obvious (to anyone but water buffaloes) sarcasm in my statement that I don't like to argue.

    And it's "Oh, me give me a home..." not "show me a home"...

    Now go make much ado about nothing with the deer and the antelope.


    "Now go make much ado about nothing with the deer and the antelope."

    It ain't nothing? Just look at what you wrote above in your last post. Look at how you try to cover every facet of what you think you can spin. This might be a bit of an art but it is a limited art. Too much spinning becomes a blur.

    I am the middle child of eleven kids and I know what it takes to be good at arguing. The problem is - what to argue -

    I think many who come to pages like this do so to be persuasive. Some of us like to do a little more than that while were at it. I am one of those people. You do what I like to do but it is like eating ice cream, too much of a good thing is bad for you. "A good thing" I refer to is dwelling in the satisfaction of holding down a struggling foe.

    The real fun is holding down a struggling friend!

    Now you're home!

    "Now go make much ado about nothing with the deer and the antelope."

    It ain't nothing? Just look at what you wrote above in your last post. Look at how you try to cover every facet of what you think you can spin. This might be a bit of an art but it is a limited art. Too much spinning becomes a blur.

    I am the middle child of eleven kids and I know what it takes to be good at arguing. The problem is - what to argue -

    I think many who come to pages like this do so to be persuasive. Some of us like to do a little more than that while were at it. I am one of those people. You do what I like to do but it is like eating ice cream, too much of a good thing is bad for you. "A good thing" I refer to is dwelling in the satisfaction of holding down a struggling foe.

    The real fun is holding down a struggling friend!

    Now you're home!

    "The real fun is holding down a struggling friend!"

    That was quite an incomprehensible mish-mosh, but this statement rings out loud, clear, and creepy.

    Creepy? Is that spin for thrilling?

    Should I let you up?

    "Should I let you up?"

    You should let yourself up. You're completely buried in your own feces.

    ""Should I let you up?"
    You should let yourself up. You're completely buried in your own feces.
    Posted by: Cecelia at January 6, 2007 01:40 AM"

    Sorry I'm not into that. No dirty stuff. Is that what they do in the barn yard down there in Leonard Skinner country?

    Let's see... Buffalo chip...Buffalo drop....Buffalo load...

    "Sorry I'm not into that. No dirty stuff"

    Must be sarcasm...

    No sarcasm, I'm not into that. Now when it comes to dueling banjos here on OW the use of the term is understood.

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4924085173349496686

    What more be said? That puts the baby to bed!

    WWII appeasers thought just like today's liberals....

    February 22, 2006
    Appeasement 101
    by Victor Davis Hanson
    Tribune Media Services

    "It is easy to damn the 1930s appeasers of Hitler — such as Stanley Baldwin and Neville Chamberlain in England and Edouard Daladier in France — given what the Nazis ultimately did when unleashed. But history demands not merely recognizing the truth post facto, but also trying to reconstruct the rationale of something that now in hindsight seems inexplicable.

    "Appeasement in the 1930s was popular with the European public for a variety of reasons. All of them are instructive in our hesitation about stopping a nuclear Iran, or about defending the right of Western newspapers to print what they wish — or about fighting radical Islamism in general.

    "First, Europe had nearly been destroyed during the Great War, a mere 20 years prior. No responsible postwar leader wished to risk a second continental bloodbath.

    "Unfortunately, Hitler understood that all too well. In a game of diplomatic chicken, he figured many responsible democratic statesmen had more to lose than he did, as the weaker and once-beaten enemy.

    "British intellectuals, like European Union idealists today, wrote books and treatises on the obsolescence of war. Conflicts were supposedly caused only by rapacious arms merchants and profiteers at home, not by anti-democratic dictators who interpreted forbearance as weakness. Winston Churchill was a voice in the wilderness — and demonized as a warmonger and worse.

    "Today, the 50-year Cold War is over, and Europe is at last free of burdensome military expenditure and the threat of global annihilation. Like Osama Bin Laden, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad senses a certain weariness in much of the West as it counts on perpetual peace.

    "He assumes that most sober Westerners will do almost anything to avoid military confrontation to stop a potential threat — even though, unlike Hitler, Ahmadinejad not only promises to liquidate the Jews but reveals his method in advance by seeking nuclear weapons.

    "Some naive conservatives in prewar Europe thought the German and Italian fascists would prove a valuable bulwark against communism, and so could be politically finessed. So, too, it has been at times with Islamic fascism. Arming the mujahadeen in Afghanistan, Pakistan or Saudi Arabia was once seen as an inspired way of thwarting Soviet communist imperialism.

    "At the time of the Ayatollah Khomeini's homicidal fatwa against Salman Rushdie, religious conservative commentators from Patrick Buchanan to New York's Cardinal O'Connor attacked Rushdie, rather than defended the Western right of free expression. Apparently, they felt such Islamic threats to supposed blasphemers might have positive repercussions in discouraging left-wing anti-Christian attacks as well.

    "In the 1930s, the doctrine of appeasement fobbed off responsibility of confronting fascism onto the League of Nations. Both France and England were quiet about the 1936 Italian invasion of Ethiopia and the German militarization of the Rhineland. They counted on multilateral action of the League, which issued plenty of edicts but marshaled few troops.

    "Likewise, the moral high ground today supposedly was to refer both the Iraqi and Iranian problems to the United Nations. But considering the oil-for-food scandals and Saddam's constant violations of U.N. resolutions, it is unlikely that the Iranian theocracy has much fear that the Security Council will thwart its uranium enrichment.

    "As fascism spread, France worked on fortifying its German border with the Maginot Line, Oxford undergraduates voted to refuse "in any circumstances to fight for King and Country," and British newspapers decried the Treaty of Versailles for unduly punishing Germany. This was all long before the "no blood for oil" slogan and Al Gore in Saudi Arabia apologizing to his Wahhabi hosts for the supposed American maltreatment of Arabs.

    "But deja vu pertains not just to us, but our enemies as well. Like the Nazi romance of an exalted ancient Volk, the Islamists hearken back to a mythical purity, free of decadence brought on by Western liberalism. Similarly, they feed off victimization — not just recent defeats, but centuries-old bitterness at the rise of the West. Their version of the stab-in-the-back Versailles Treaty is always the creation of Israel.

    "Just as Hitler concocted incidents such as the burning of the Reichstag to create outrage, Islamist leaders incite frenzy in their followers over a supposed flushed Koran at Guantanamo and several inflammatory cartoons, some of them never published by Danish newspapers at all.

    "Anti-Semitism, of course, is the mother's milk of fascism. It is always, they say, a small group of Jews — whether shadowy cabinet advisers and international bankers of the 1930s or the manipulative neoconservatives and Israeli leadership of the present — who alone stir up the trouble.

    "The point of the comparison is not to suggest that history simply repeats itself, but to learn why intelligent people delude themselves into embracing naive policies. After the removal of the Taliban and Saddam Hussein, the furious reply of the radical Islamist world was to censor Western newspapers, along with Iran's accelerated efforts to get the bomb.

    "In response, either the West will continue to stand up now to these reoccurring post-Sept. 11 threats, or it will see the bullies' demands only increase as its own resistance weakens. Like the appeasement of the 1930s, opting for the easier choice will only guarantee a more costly one later on."

    For most of us the writing is on the wall. The single reason to believe Bush might not be reading our mail is that he has yet to show any sign that he can read. Now a puppet show on the wall, maybe that would get his attention!

    For most of us the writing is on the wall. The single reason to believe Bush might not be reading our mail is that he has yet to show any sign that he can read. Now a puppet show on the wall, maybe that would get his attention!

    What happened to Paul Falduto, JD? I thought he had made an offer to do a "guest summary" of Meltdown from the loon POV. I was really looking forward to it.