Olbermann Watch - MSNBC's Countdown with Keith Olbermann: COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN

Olbermann Watch, "persecuting" Keith since 2004

January 11, 2007

COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN - JANUARY 11, 2007

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

Host: Keith Olbermann

Topics/Guests:

PRESIDENT BUSH'S PLAN FACES SCRUTINY: Jonathan Alter, Newsweek senior editor and MSNBC political analyst
WE'VE SURGED BEFORE - WHAT HAPPENED?: Col. Jack Jacobs, U.S. Army (ret.) and MSNBC military analyst

KO was just five seconds into the opening spiel when, as predicted, up popped up a clip of Sen Hagel. Plus Russ Feingold and a Speshul Komment on "insanity". Natch.

Herr Olbermann started off The Hour of Spin proper with the wacky suggestion that if we had a parliamentary government, Bush would have to resign. Keith, adjust your medication. The plan has "very few buyers", and the fact that Iranians in Iraq were detained raises "alarm bells". Yeah, we can't have your buddies inconvenienced, eh Monkeymann?

Clips from Secy Rice (who was trying to "mislead" the Senate), and clips from various senators: Hagel (again), Nelson (D), Boxer (D), Obama (D). What do all these lawmakers have in common? They're all against the President's plan.

But what about the ones who spoke in favor? Silly rabbit, this is The Hour of Spin.

Those clips don't get played. Do they, Mr Olbermann, sir?

Then a clip from Joe Biden (D) about a theoretical "invasion" of Iran (as predicted). What about the lawmakers who had a different view? Those clips don't get played on The Hour of Spin. Do they, Mr Olbermann, sir?

Leftist Alter immediately started singing Monkeymann's tune: cut off funding. KO made another Bush/Nixon comparison--on OlbyPlanet, that never gets old. He went on to predict "another gulf of Tonkin", because the eeevil Bush wants to "provoke" the innocent, freedom-loving Iran. What's more, the polls say people are against it, and if Bush doesn't base his foreign policy on poll numbers, then what good are they? Or words to that effect. Alter croaked that Bush is trying to sustain his base despite "erosion". Great thanks.

Next, an EXCLUSIVE! interview with The Statesman: Russ Feingold (D). Another in the long string of Dems, documented in The List, updated to keep the historical record accurate. Krazy Keith asked the tough questions, like: How do you cut off the money? What about expanding the war to Iran and Syria? Doesn't threatening Iran just bolster them? (Rule #1 again.) But it didn't matter what questions Fat Ass posed, The Statesman just rattled off his prepared talking points without follow-ups or challenge from the Edward R Murrow of our time, here doing a perfect impersonation of a microphone stand.

Those questioned don't get asked. Do they, Mr Olbermann, sir?

Another plug for his Speshul Komment about the "madness" of Bush, and oddball. Up to this point, Countdown was as one-sided as a mobius strip, and that surely didn't change with Olby's recitation of the history of troop surges. It was compiled by the National Security Network, said Olby. But he didn't mention that outfit is headed by John Kerry's foreign policy advisor.

That information doesn't get told. Does it, Mr Olbermann, sir?

Col Jacobs gave "Man on Fan" Olbermann what he wanted to hear: it won't work, it's just political cover, it's a big mistake. But what about the military analysts who think this could work? They don't get to appear on The Hour of Spin. Do they, Mr Olbermann, sir?

A recycled NBC report covered KO's favorite weapon system again; plus we got David Beckham and Golden Globes. In the Media Matters Minute, Monkeymann blasted a Congressman who happened to be an (R). But what about Democrats. They don't get named "worst person". Do they, Mr Olbermann, sir?

And then the Speshul Komment. It had everything. "Mister" Bush references a plenty. Stentorian tones of artificial outrage. And of course, a liberal dose of insinSirs, not to mention the carefully scripted, immacuately executed camera pivots [see APPENDIX for text]. "A Presidency of Cliff Notes"... "Are you thinking at all?"... "absurd and childish"... "The President who cried wolf". Then he launched into a replay of his pseudo-commentary from Wednesday night. It's an Instant Olbermann Rerun! Olby's orange face nearly turned purple and we feared he would have to take a few drags from Don Imus's oxygen tank. Yikes!

Quiescent canines: Four freshmen Dems announced they will not support defunding the troops. Gee, why do you suppose that didn't make it onto Olbermann's air? A whole passel of advisors to The Carter Center have resigned to protest the bias and inaccuracies in his book. Edward R Olbermann protects his party with his silence. You will recall Olby never covered the charges of plagiarism either. Bouyed by impressive jobs numbers, the stock market closed at a new historic high. There's the chorus from Yale University who got a welcome commensurate with San Francisco values. Plus new developments in the Sandy Burglar case--no way will the discredited sports guy touch that one. And finally, not even a snarky "worst person" nomination for the Dem Presidential candidate who thinks we've been in Iraq for five and a half years.

~~Olbermann's book~~ The book that bears Olberman's name sunk to #6,006 at amazon.com; Mr Bill's "Culture Warrior" is #98. The OlbyTome is #2,735 at Barnes & Noble; O'Reilly's book is #259 there, as well as being one of 2006's top ten best sellers. On Wednesday's Hour of Spin, Monkeymann lost to Bill O'Reilly by four to one, coming in a poor third both in total viewers and in the critical, beloved, all-important, coveted "key demo". Tonight's MisterMeter reading is a new all-time record: 25 [EXTREME DANGER!!!]

APPENDIX: Latest Olbermoronn Speshul Komment:

Only this president, only in this time, only with this dangerous, even messianic certitude, could answer a country demanding an exit strategy from Iraq, by offering an entrance strategy for Iran.

Only this president could look out over a vista of 3,008 dead and 22,834 wounded in Iraq, and finally say, "Where mistakes have been made, the responsibility rests with me" -- only to follow that by proposing to repeat the identical mistake ... in Iran.

Only this president could extol the "thoughtful recommendations of the Iraq Study Group," and then take its most far-sighted recommendation -- "engage Syria and Iran" -- and transform it into "threaten Syria and Iran" -- when al-Qaida would like nothing better than for us to threaten Syria, and when Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would like nothing better than to be threatened by us.

This is diplomacy by skimming; it is internationalism by drawing pictures of Superman in the margins of the text books; it is a presidency of Cliff Notes.

And to Iran and Syria -- and, yes, also to the insurgents in Iraq -- we must look like a country run by the equivalent of the drunken pest who gets battered to the floor of the saloon by one punch, then staggers to his feet, and shouts at the other guy's friends, "Ok, which one of you is next?"

[PIVOT!]

Mr. Bush, the question is no longer "what are you thinking?," but rather "are you thinking at all?"

"I have made it clear to the prime minister and Iraq's other leaders that America's commitment is not open-ended," you said last night.

And yet -- without any authorization from the public, which spoke so loudly and clearly to you in November's elections -- without any consultation with a Congress (in which key members of your own party, including Sens. Sam Brownback, Norm Coleman and Chuck Hagel, are fleeing for higher ground) -- without any awareness that you are doing exactly the opposite of what Baker-Hamilton urged you to do -- you seem to be ready to make an open-ended commitment (on America's behalf) to do whatever you want, in Iran.

Our military, Mr. Bush, is already stretched so thin by this bogus adventure in Iraq that even a majority of serving personnel are willing to tell pollsters that they are dissatisfied with your prosecution of the war.

It is so weary that many of the troops you have just consigned to Iraq will be on their second tours or their third tours or their fourth tours -- and now you're going to make them take on Iran and Syria as well?

Who is left to go and fight, sir?

Who are you going to send to "interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria"?

Laura and Barney?

[PIVOT!]

The line is from the movie "Chinatown" and I quote it often: "Middle of a drought," the mortician chuckles, "and the water commissioner drowns. Only in L.A.!"

Middle of a debate over the lives and deaths of another 21,500 of our citizens in Iraq, and the president wants to saddle up against Iran and Syria.

Maybe that's the point -- to shift the attention away from just how absurd and childish thisÂ Â latest war strategy is, (strategy, that is, for the war already under way, and not the one on deck).

We are going to put 17,500 more troops into Baghdad and 4,000 more into Anbar Province to give the Iraqi government "breathing space."

In and of itself that is an awful and insulting term.

The lives of 21,500 more Americans endangered, to give "breathing space" to a government that just turned the first and perhaps the most sober act of any democracy -- the capital punishment of an ousted dictator -- into a vengeance lynching so barbaric and so lacking in the solemnities necessary for credible authority, that it might have offended the Ku Klux Klan of the 19th century.

And what will our men and women in Iraq do?

The ones who will truly live -- and die -- during what Mr. Bush said last night will be a "year ahead" that "will demand more patience, sacrifice, and resolve"?

They will try to seal Sadr City and other parts of Baghdad where the civil war is worst.

Mr. Bush did not mention that while our people are trying to do that, the factions in the civil war will no longer have to focus on killing each other, but rather they can focus anew on killing our people.

Because last night the president foolishly all but announced that we will be sending these 21,500 poor souls, but no more after that, and if the whole thing fizzles out, we're going home.

The plan fails militarily.

The plan fails symbolically.

The plan fails politically.

[PIVOT!]

Most importantly, perhaps, Mr. Bush, the plan fails because it still depends on your credibility.

You speak of mistakes and of the responsibility "resting" with you.

But you do not admit to making those mistakes.

And you offer us nothing to justify this clenched fist toward Iran and Syria.

In fact, when you briefed news correspondents off-the-record before the speech, they were told, once again, "if you knew what we knew â€¦Â if you saw what we saw â€¦ "

"If you knew what we knew" was how we got into this morass in Iraq in the first place.

The problem arose when it turned out that the question wasn't whether we knew what you knew, but whether you knew what you knew.

You, sir, have become the president who cried wolf.

All that you say about Iraq now could be gospel.

All that you say about Iran and Syria now could be prescient and essential.

We no longer have a clue, sir.

We have heard too many stories.

Many of us are as inclined to believe you just shuffled the director of national intelligence over to the State Department because he thought you were wrong about Iran.

Many of us are as inclined to believe you just put a pilot in charge of ground wars in Iraq and Afghanistan because he would be truly useful in an air war next door in Iran.

Your assurances, sir, and your demands that we trust you, have lost all shape and texture.Â

They are now merely fertilizer for conspiracy theories.

They are now fertilizer, indeed.

[PIVOT!--plus dramatic downward look!]

The pile has been built slowly and with seeming care.

I read this list last night, before the president's speech, and it bears repeating because its shape and texture are perceptible only in such a context.

Before Mr. Bush was elected, he said nation-building was wrong for America.

Now he says it is vital.

He said he would never put U.S. troops under foreign control.

Last night he promised to embed them in Iraqi units.

He told us about WMD.

Mobile labs.

Secret sources.

Aluminum tubes.

Yellow-cake.

He has told us the war is necessary:

Because Saddam was a material threat.

Because of 9/11.

Because of Osama Bin Laden. Al-Qaida. Terrorism in general.

To liberate Iraq. To spread freedom. To spread Democracy. To prevent terrorism by gas price increases.

Because this was a guy who tried to kill his dad.

Because -- 439 words in to the speech last night -- he trotted out 9/11 again.

In advocating and prosecuting this war he passed on a chance to get Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi.

To get Muqtada Al-Sadr. To get Bin Laden.

He sent in fewer troops than the generals told him to. He ordered the Iraqi army disbanded and the Iraqi government "de-Baathified."

He short-changed Iraqi training. He neglected to plan for widespread looting. He did not anticipate sectarian violence.

He sent in troops without life-saving equipment. He gave jobs to foreign contractors, and not Iraqis. He staffed U.S. positions there, based on partisanship, not professionalism.

He and his government told us: America had prevailed, mission accomplished, the resistance was in its last throes.

He has insisted more troops were not necessary. He has now insisted more troops are necessary.

He has insisted it's up to the generals, and then removed some of the generals who said more troops would not be necessary.

He has trumpeted the turning points:

The fall of Baghdad, the death of Uday and Qusay, the capture of Saddam. A provisional government, a charter, a constitution, the trial of Saddam. Elections, purple fingers, another government, the death of Saddam.

He has assured us: We would be greeted as liberators -- with flowers;

As they stood up, we would stand down. We would stay the course; we were never about "stay the course."

We would never have to go door-to-door in Baghdad. And, last night, that to gain Iraqis' trust, Â we would go door-to-door in Baghdad.

He told us the enemy was al-Qaida, foreign fighters, terrorists, Baathists, and now Iran and Syria.

He told us the war would pay for itself. It would cost $1.7 billion. $100 billion. $400 billion. Half a trillion. Last night's speech alone cost another $6 billion.

And after all of that, now it is his credibility versus that of generals, diplomats, allies, Democrats, Republicans, the Iraq Study Group, past presidents, voters last November and the majority of the American people.

Oh, and one more to add, tonight: Oceania has always been at war with East Asia.

[PIVOT!]

Mr. Bush, this is madness.

You have lost the military. You have lost the Congress to the Democrats. You have lost most of the Iraqis. You have lost many of the Republicans. You have lost our allies.

You are losing the credibility, not just of your presidency, but more importantly of the office itself.

And most imperatively, you are guaranteeing that more American troops will be losing their lives, and more families their loved ones. You are guaranteeing it!

This becomes your legacy, sir: How many of those you addressed last night as your "fellow citizens" you just sent to their deaths.

And for what, Mr. Bush?

So the next president has to pull the survivors out of Iraq instead of you?

Posted by johnny dollar | Permalink | Comments (558) | | View blog reactions

558 Comments

By Bill O'lielly on January 11, 2007 8:28 PM

You 30% could easily make up the extra 2K soldiers, what do you say,, Have the gall to put up.. if not then shut the hell up.

By Ohboy on January 11, 2007 8:29 PM

Okay, a Zeno's Paradox: How do we distinguish the news anchor's "Speshul Komment" on this news show from the rest of the program?

Like, he turns his objectivity and non-partisan switch off?

By factoryqueen on January 11, 2007 8:31 PM

Johnny Wad
what is u're problem with Keith?

By Bill O'lielly on January 11, 2007 8:31 PM

Can we paint a bullseye on Orally ?

By Mike on January 11, 2007 8:32 PM

Oh no!

Is that bad, bad Keith Olbermann saying "Mister" Bush again?

By Ohboy on January 11, 2007 8:34 PM

"You 30% could easily make up the extra 2K soldiers, what do you say,, Have the gall to put up.. if not then shut the hell up."

If you join up and go to Afghanistan - a war you support, right? - then we can shift the forces from there to Iraq.

You go first, I'll be right behind.

By Bill O'lielly on January 11, 2007 8:34 PM

Mister... that is too respectful.. Shithead is far more appropriate

By Bill O'lielly on January 11, 2007 8:35 PM

No... I do not fight for MNC's They can steal without my help

By Red Wolf on January 11, 2007 8:37 PM

Bill O'lielly,
How many people die from car accidents every year?

By Ohboy on January 11, 2007 8:37 PM

"No... I do not fight for MNC's They can steal without my help"

Since you don't want to put up, then you have to, in your words, "shut the hell up"?

Your standard, not mine.

By Mike on January 11, 2007 8:38 PM

KO just better look out for Geraldo!

He'll sure show him to show some respect for our dear leader...after he makes 'pizza' face out of him!

By Janet Hawkins on January 11, 2007 8:42 PM

For the first time in a while I'm listening to KO, rather half heartedly I admit.

He leaves me with the impression that he doesn't want to replace any news or editorial personalities.

He wants to be the Great Leader and run the country. His statements and hyberpole sound like a politician preaching to the faithful in his strongest district.

Janet Hawkins
AKA Grammie

By Little Feechie on January 11, 2007 8:42 PM

TokyOlbermann can't wait for speshul comment.
He has a chubby just thinking about it.

8:50pm in the evening can't get here quick enough.

Al Jazeera standing by to translate into Arabic.
Citizen Keith sits at the left hand of Michael Moore.

He is in extra deplorable mode.

L.F.

By Mike on January 11, 2007 8:42 PM

Yeah Bill O'lielly!

And how many people die from sex induced heart failure every year?

Red Wolf wants to know!

By Bill O'lielly on January 11, 2007 8:42 PM

Red Wolf,, cars are used for transportation, and this war is fought for ?

By Red Wolf on January 11, 2007 8:43 PM

It's almost time for Olbermann next close encounter with a nervous breakdown!

By Anonymous on January 11, 2007 8:43 PM

The funniest thing Olby does is call his show a "news hour." Someone ought to sue.

By Janet Hawkins on January 11, 2007 8:44 PM

Does MNC mean multi national corporations? That is the only thing I can come up with, rather tentatively I admit.

Janet Hawkins
AKA Grammie

By Anonymous on January 11, 2007 8:44 PM

Let's see how many times Olby spits during his Speshul Komment. Are the stagehands in wet suits? They should be.

By Bill O'lielly on January 11, 2007 8:45 PM

Yes Janet.. that is what MNC's are.

By Red Wolf on January 11, 2007 8:45 PM

Soon we'll hera the song....
They're coming to take me away ha ha he he ho ho to the funny farm. Olbermann will on staright jacket claiming to be Edward R. Murrow

By Red Wolf on January 11, 2007 8:47 PM

I just tuned in. Olbermann will come on in a few minutes to defend Iran. This will prove his support for Ahmadinejad!

By Ohboy on January 11, 2007 8:48 PM

"Yes Janet.. that is what MNC's are."

I know I shouldn't but: So, we're in Afghanistan for the cause of MNCs?

Big oil (that pipeline deal again)? Halliburton?

Help me here: I no longer follow Chomsky anymore.

By Little Feechie on January 11, 2007 8:52 PM

PussyKeith...here he goes.

"presidency of cliff notes"

mister meter out of control...

By Anonymous on January 11, 2007 8:54 PM

Islamofascist Olby just loves to stick up for his buddies in Iran and from al Qaeda. This Speshul Komment will be rebroadcast on Iranian state TV and al Jazeera within minutes.

By Little Feechie on January 11, 2007 8:55 PM

Hey Pussy Olbermann.....

What happened to Sacrafice?

You're last special comment has been shot to shit.

Your a deplorable human being.

AL JAZEERA at 30 Rock.

By Mike on January 11, 2007 8:55 PM

Better a TV commentator out of control than a president.

But wait....we seem to have BOTH, don't we?

By Little Feechie on January 11, 2007 8:55 PM

TokyOlbermann !!!

By Janet Hawkins on January 11, 2007 8:56 PM

Thanks for clearing that up for me.

Now, when I am personally accused of cowardice because I don't volunteer (though I have never commented about it at all re anyone), as they say for the phony excuse of being old and disabled is being anti profit for MNC justify my existence again?

Janet Hawkins
AKA Grammie

By Little Feechie on January 11, 2007 8:57 PM

Wow...many camera changes...
The room is spinning !!

By Little Feechie on January 11, 2007 8:58 PM

What a loon... so entertaining though...
ha ha ha

By Janet Hawkins on January 11, 2007 9:00 PM

Mike, you're batting a thousand. You are right about KO and I agree.:)

Janet Hawkins
AKA Grammie

By Little Feechie on January 11, 2007 9:00 PM

Hey Keith, he's the Commander in Chief Asswipe...

By Anonymous on January 11, 2007 9:00 PM

Okay,okay, i concede. the camera changes are way too over the top.

By Janet Hawkins on January 11, 2007 9:03 PM

Mike, I hate it when I screw up the punch line. Batting 500.

Janet Hawkins
AKA Grammie

By Mike on January 11, 2007 9:04 PM

Ooohhh Freechie:

Die li'l Keith make you mad? Did he have the nerve to lecture your hero again?

KO should be arrested!

By Anonymous on January 11, 2007 9:06 PM

Here are the ratings from last night's commentary and coverage of the President's speech (from ICN). Guess where MSNBC finished?

http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/01/11/wednesdays-numbers-38/#more-4491

By Mike on January 11, 2007 9:06 PM

Janet:

You shouldn't have cleared that up. I would have thought I just didn't get the joke.

By Little Feechie on January 11, 2007 9:07 PM

Hey Mike..

Bush is Commander in Chief...deal with it.

It's his perogative.

L.F.

By Ohboy on January 11, 2007 9:07 PM

Remember:

Countdown is a NEWS show.

Hosted by the news anchor, Keith Olbermann.

MSNBC tells us so.

News show - news anchor.

If the laws of the FTC applied to news show, MSNBC would have a class action lawsuit filed against it for false advertising and for committing consumer fraud.

By Mike on January 11, 2007 9:09 PM

Freechie:

And guess what, it's Keith's perogative, and mine, to criticize and ridicule him!

By Rico on January 11, 2007 9:10 PM

Mike,

I gotta' go with a Geraldo/Keith mud wrestling match. Not that I would want to watch, but I know America would.

By Mike on January 11, 2007 9:14 PM

Rico:

I would prefer a Mixed Martial Arts format. 5 five minute rounds.

Maybe Keith could get in a few extra punch's to Geraldo for giving away troop positions earlier in the war.

By Rico on January 11, 2007 9:16 PM

Mike,

I didn't say I was on anybody's side. They both deserve to loose.

By Red Wolf on January 11, 2007 9:18 PM

Bill O'lielly,
So car deaths aren't important. A death is a death. How many people die from gang violence a year?

By Red Wolf on January 11, 2007 9:22 PM

Olbermann came close to a breakdown at the end. He was calm at 1st, but when he was discussing Iran and Syria he starting shaking and got teary!
He was upset his Iranian buddies were threatened!

By Anonymous on January 11, 2007 9:22 PM

i didn't understand what keith was saying in his special comment. This is what i got. Bush has made hundreds of mistakes. (lists mistakes)Therefore, Iranians are not to blame for assisting in the killing of U.S. troops.

huh?

By indierik on January 11, 2007 9:23 PM

"Bush is Commander in Chief...deal with it." -L.F.

Do you know what this means L.F.? It means he works for us. The people are his employer. You seem to have forgotten this, but would only happen to remember if a Dem became president.

GO GATORS!!!

By Anonymous on January 11, 2007 9:24 PM

Bill O'lielly,
How many people die from car accidents a year? Shouldn't we care about them?

A sad and unfortunate comparison. I see what you are trying to say, but car accidents are not the way to go.

The proper argument goes like this (this is not my view, just the way that argument is supposed to be made) "If Americans were so rightouos about the loss of innocent life, they would do something about the 17,000 cililians that are senslessly murdered in the U.S. every year, instead of worrying about the 882 soldiers that die fighting per year in this a war with a purpose. The difference is one gets you votes and one doesn't."

By Red Wolf on January 11, 2007 9:24 PM

Olbermann today in his rant was once again supporting Iran. I though he was going to put on a turban and scream Allau Akbar!

By Mike on January 11, 2007 9:25 PM

Indierik:

You're confused. The gators already went!

Now don't go and tell me that you guys are gonna go and try to hog the basketball title again?

GO TAR HEELS!

By Ohboy on January 11, 2007 9:27 PM

"Olbermann today in his rant was once again supporting Iran."

Boy, he sure came close to it.

Let's see, the Iranians have been killing Americans for about 25 years. Khobar Towers, Beirut, supporting the terrorists in Iraq, helping Hamas et cetera.

And Bush is causing the conflict?

Not one word of condemnation by KO of Iranian actions.

I wonder why?

By Anonymous on January 11, 2007 9:28 PM

>GO TAR HEELS!

I can't explain it, but I suddenly feel the urge to go buy Duke memorabilia.

j/k

By Rico on January 11, 2007 9:29 PM

Indierik,

I congratulate you on your success, but college football is over for the year. It's time for you to "move on" to something else.

By Red Wolf on January 11, 2007 9:29 PM

Ohboy,
Did you see when he mentioned Iran, he got passionate. This proves his support of Iran. I read Olbermann was part Arab or Persian. He has symapthy for those savages.

By Mike on January 11, 2007 9:29 PM

Red Wolf:

You probably DID put on a turban and yelled "death to Olbermann"!

By Anonymous on January 11, 2007 9:30 PM

Indierik,

I congratulate you on your success, but college football is over for the year. It's time for you to "move on" to something else

They just won, give em a break man. If my team won the national championship i would still be gloating
in 2012.

By TSR on January 11, 2007 9:32 PM

Does Olbermann understand that smugness is not a desirable quality in a person? I'm not a fan of President Bush, but Olbermann is incorrigible. Referring to President Bush as "Mr. Bush" is puerile and shows a disrespect for the office as much as for the man.

By Red Wolf on January 11, 2007 9:32 PM

Mike,
I wouldn't weat that crap. I woul put on an old 1500's Imperial Spanis helmet and scream Mata los Musulmanes!

By Ohboy on January 11, 2007 9:33 PM

"Did you see when he mentioned Iran, he got passionate. This proves his support of Iran. I read Olbermann was part Arab or Persian. He has symapthy for those savages."

C'mon, now you're just being silly.

He doesn't support Iran, for crissakes.

He just hates Bush so much that in any conflict or potential conflict, Bush must be blamed for the problem.

Bush is his North Star, the guiding point in his worldview.

Everything starts and finishes from there.

By indierik on January 11, 2007 9:33 PM

Sorry guys,

You have to give me a solid week to pimp my Gators and then I'll back off . . . . . UNTIL WE WIN THE NCAA HOOPS TOURNEY AGAIN!!!!

IT'S GREAT . . . TO BE . . . A FLORIDA GATOR!!!

By Janet Hawkins on January 11, 2007 9:34 PM

KO's speshul comment is odios enough without being double posted.

J$, do you think you might check it out and correct it.

Thanks,

Janet Hawkins
AKA Grammie

By Mike on January 11, 2007 9:35 PM

Ohboy said..."not one word of condemnation of Iranian actions"....

It's not too hard to see why. He's probably not too interested in adding to the Glenn Beck style hyperbole that would only serve to hasten and encourage Bush's increasingly irrational and self destructive actions.

By Red Wolf on January 11, 2007 9:35 PM

Ohboy,
That's why he supports Iran. they are enemies of Bush. According to Olbylogic, the enemy of my enemy is my friend!

By Ensign Expendable on January 11, 2007 9:36 PM

"Hey Keith, he's the Commander in Chief Asswipe..."

He's the Commander-in-Chief of the MILITARY, NOT of the rest of us. We are CIVILIANS. HE works for US. I will give him the respect of his office, L.F. But that does NOT include addressing him by a title that only affects a small number of Americans.

"Let's see, the Iranians have been killing Americans for about 25 years. Khobar Towers, Beirut, supporting the terrorists in Iraq, helping Hamas et cetera.

And Bush is causing the conflict?"

You're one of those guys who'll poke a dog with a stick and then act surprised when he bites you, huh ohboy?

By Red Wolf on January 11, 2007 9:37 PM

Mike,
Does olbermann hate Bush so much that he's pro-Iran?

By Ensign Expendable on January 11, 2007 9:39 PM

"I read Olbermann was part Arab or Persian."

Cite it or move along, Red Wolf. I'm tired of your rampant gossip-mongering and trading in half-truths.

By Nonfactor on January 11, 2007 9:41 PM

>"But what about the ones who spoke in favor? Silly rabbit, this is The Hour of Spin."

No Senator on that panel came out in favor of the President's plan. Quit it with your stupid rhetorical questions; you aren't fooling anyone.

By Little Feechie on January 11, 2007 9:43 PM

TokyOlbermann is a wussy. Just check the list.
No opposing views. Despicable.

Great rundown tonight by J$.

I support Bush.. I support the plan.
The hell with Iran and Syria... They are responsible for funding the insurgency.

Let them eat static....let'em hang with Sadaam.

Olbermann
Gregory
Lauer
Matthews
Scarborough
Abrams

All a bunch of wussies...leftists...
what a hall of shame.

By Rico on January 11, 2007 9:45 PM

Indierik,

OK. You enjoy your week. But I am going to fire one more shot across your bow. After the game, I am down to my last beebee.

Who in their right mind, Indierik, would design football uniforms that are orange and blue? That is the stupidest combination of colors for a sports team in history. And it's really a bad color combo for a GATOR. So there! I just shot you in the ass with that beebee. Suffer now.

By Anonymous on January 11, 2007 9:46 PM

It was nice of keith to treat Iran like they are a victom in all this and give the viewer a taste of what we look like to Iran.

You know, Iran. THe one that has called for Israel to be wiped off the map.

The one that not only has denied the holocost, but had the audacity to hold a conference to determine its validity. All the while calling for one of its own.

The one that holds state sponsered demostrations where the people chant "death to America" (Note: that includes all of us. Even you, Kieth.)

The one that gives money to the terrorist organization Hezbollah.

The one that is going to abandon the nuclear proliferation act to obtain nuclear power in defiance of the rest of the world.

The one that has drastically rolled back freedoms in the past three years. (For those who would compare it to our restrictions of freedoms, type the word "women" into this board now. Congratulations, you have just exercised a right beyond that of Iranians.)

The one that has helped to kill Americans in Iraq.

But hey, Thanks for giving us their point of view so eloquently, Kieth. Apparently the phrase "death to America" translates into "those silly drunk Americans. Why do they treat us so?"

Keep up the good work.

By Red Wolf on January 11, 2007 9:47 PM

Ensign Expendable,
"Cite it or move along, Red Wolf. I'm tired of your rampant gossip-mongering and trading in half-truths."

Like Olbermann?

It was an article I read 2 years ago that his Mom was middle easterner. I don't recall if it said Persian or Arab. He's probably part Persian since he got red and shook when he taked about Iran. That showed me he has some love for his motherland!

By Mike on January 11, 2007 9:49 PM

Red Wolf asks..."Does Olbermann hate Bush so much he's pro-Iran?"

You see Red Wolf, we all see just what we choose to see, and you are an exagerated example of that truth.

You keep mistaking omission of condemnation as "support for Iran". The problem is the over-reaction of Bush to the situation, and that is ALL that he is addressing.

Did you somehow miss the point he made about how Bush was giving Ahmadinejad exactly what he wants with his irrational belligerence?

I personally don't believe in giving my enemy exactly what they want, but we've been doing exactly that for the last 4 years.

By johnny dollar on January 11, 2007 9:50 PM

> KO's speshul comment is odios enough without being double posted.

You are so correct. My apologies for anyone who may have been made ill by the double posting. It has been fixed.

By The Buffalo on January 11, 2007 9:50 PM

"Ohboy,
Did you see when he mentioned Iran, he got passionate. This proves his support of Iran. I read Olbermann was part Arab or Persian. He has symapthy for those savages.

Posted by: Red Wolf at January 11, 2007 9:29 PM"

"He was part Arab or Persian"

Oh boy the gas station attendant is now distinguishing between Semitic people. Someone must of pointed out to Redwolf recently that Iranian people are for the most part not Arabs. I am astonished a dumb ass like Redwolf would realize this.

Yet as with any spawn of trailer trash he is judging people racially. As if blood line has anything to do with culture. Redwolf is a Nazi Klansman who is welcomed with open arms by regulars like the person hiding behind the moniker "grannie".

Always living up to backwater hillbilly mentality with ignorance based on fear of others who are not white Anglo protestants.

By Anonymous on January 11, 2007 9:51 PM

I personally don't believe in giving my enemy exactly what they want, but we've been doing exactly that for the last 4 years.

like when we gave al queda exactly what they wanted when we tore down Iraq? I believe i already smoked you in that debate. But hey, keep it coming.

By Ohboy on January 11, 2007 9:54 PM

"You're one of those guys who'll poke a dog with a stick and then act surprised when he bites you, huh ohboy?"

And you're one of those guys who is always excusing the actions of enemies of America.

So, I assume you believe that the Iranian attacks on us are legitimate responses? They're the victims? Responding to the US "pokes"?

Khobar Towers was under Clinton. What did Clinton do to the Iranians that warranted that attack?

By Olbermann Watch [Us Bicker] in Technicolor on January 11, 2007 9:56 PM

We should do something about Ahmadenijad Not necessarily for the nuke-stuff, but sheerly because he is sooooooooo anoying !!!!! He is the most annoying person around !!!

By Mike on January 11, 2007 9:57 PM

Anon, I really don't know who you are since you are clearly not proud enough of you're opinions enough to come out of the closet...but, funny, I just don't recall being 'smoked' in that debate...by anybody!

You people are funny...you keep hi-fiving yourselves, and declaring yourselves the winner, as if you could possibly be an impartial judge of that.

By Olbermann Watch [Us Bicker] in Technicolor on January 11, 2007 9:59 PM

Another thing that has gotten old ... I am so sick and tired of hearing about how much damage has went on in Iraq ... can we please here something besides "this went off today", "that went wrong" ... There must be something more to the story than just a casualty list ?!?!?

By Red Wolf on January 11, 2007 10:00 PM

Comrade Bison,
Finishing reading Mao's biography. I mean his your idol.

By jtm371 on January 11, 2007 10:00 PM

mike
to bad your tar heels got bitch slapped by the ZAGS! i don't think a liberal hick like you can argue that point.oh yeah olbermoron still blows.
p.s.where oh where has donora pa gone?

By Anonymous on January 11, 2007 10:03 PM

You people are funny...you keep hi-fiving yourselves, and declaring yourselves the winner, as if you could possibly be an impartial judge of that.

Mike said, we gave al queda exactly what they wanted in Iraq.

I pointed out his obvious mistake. He came back by making up something i had said. You remember it. Dont say you dont.

By Janet Hawkins on January 11, 2007 10:03 PM

Mike and EE, I have difficulty understanding how you can give such credence and have unquestioning faith in an 'alledged' unbiased journalist, or even a biased one who begins with:

"Only this president, only in this time, only with this dangerous, even messianic certitude, could answer a country demanding an exit strategy from Iraq, by offering an entrance strategy for Iran.....Only this president could extol the "thoughtful recommendations of the Iraq Study Group," and then take its most far-sighted recommendation -- "engage Syria and Iran" -- and transform it into "threaten Syria and Iran" --"

Dangerous MESSIAINIC certitude, to take thoughtful far-sighted reccomendation to engage Syria and Iran and transform it to THREATEN Syria and Iran.

Projection of power is an age old diplomatic strategy. If KO was your only source of info one would think that a meglamaniac had virtually declared war on Syria and Iran in the name of the US.

Would anyone cite for me when and where a diplomacy of words only defeated any enemy whose sole goal is your death and annilation.

I realize that you don't approve of or support GWB. No problem with that. My problem is with the degree and depth to the point that you consider him the enemy and not those who are working for your and all of our destuction.

Please explain it to me.

Janet Hawkins
AKA Grammie

By Little Feechie on January 11, 2007 10:04 PM

TokyoOlbermann !!

Michael Moore must be pleased.

What a fink he is.

Despicbale, Deplorable...Iranian sympathizer

OlbyWatchTweets

Countdown: Monday Recappers Thread

How Will Olbermann Spin This?

Presenting the 2008 Olby Awards!

Gutfeld on Red Eye Blasts Olbermann's 'Homoerotic' Obsession with O'Reilly

Help Decide the 2008 Olby Awards!

Olbermann Watch, "persecuting" Keith since 2004

558 Comments