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 16, 2007
    Countdown with Keith Olbermann - January 16, 2007

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

    Host: Keith Olbermann

    Topics/Guests:

    • IRAQ: Jonathan Alter, Newsweek; Chris Cillizza, Washingtonpost.com
    • "24" SETS OFF A nuclear BOMB: Robert Greenwald, producer and director of "Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism."
    • DONALD TRUMP AND KEVIN FEDERLINE: Michael Musto, Village Voice

    Who knew when this hour began that Krazy Keith would ascend to new heights of casuistry, envy, and sheer hypocritical chutzpah? But we're getting ahead of ourselves here. Olby bellowed the opening spiel with Bush and Condi Rice, Barack Obama's announcement, and then--in a real stretch--why "24" isn't entertainment, it's propaganda designed to keep people scared and thinking about terrorism. Plus more on the kidnappings and Donald Trump.

    MADMAN

    The Hour of Spin proper started out with Iraq, sectarian violence, and why the President's attempt to "sell" his policy is going "from bad to worse". We got bombings, Saudis, Condi Rice, and the Bush/Lehrer interview. Obama announces he will consider announcing. Fat Ass started out with lefty Alter by impartially stating how he is "speechless" at Bush's "bundle of disconnects" and "tone deafness". Alter was more incensed at Bush not raising taxes, spewing the exact line of talking points approved by the DNC. Olby was pleased that with Jim Webb giving the Dem response next week, his party would finally give a "passionate" response to the eeevil Bush. He also talked about Obama, but neither Fat Ass nor his Pinocchio explained what exactly about the guy makes him Presidential timber.

    In an elegant bit of OlbySpin, KO brought up a rumor about why Hillary had cancelled a press conference, denied by Hillary, and suggested that this shows how "Republican talking points" worm their way into news coverage. Um, what evidence is there that the rumor had anything to do with the GOP? Well, none. This, like the infamous Drudge leak from the White House (not!), is just Edward R Olbermann pulling stuff out of his usual repository. Even Alter didn't buy into this bit of tomfoolery. So why did Olby waste any time with it? Of course he didn't come up with this "controversy" on his own; he lifted it from a Blue Blog Source (Media Matters). And, in deference to Dan Abrams, Keith "I answer to nobody" Olbermann neatly left out that this rumor-mongering of a supposed "Republican talking point" finding its way into news coverage? It happened on A-Mess-NBC! What a tool.

    The next enemy in Monkeymann's sights was the eeevil tv show, "24". It must be eeevil, it's eating into the meager Hour of Spin ratings. He contrasted the reception the show gets to the reaction to Al Gore's movie. Attention Krazy Keith: Gore's film is supposed to be a documentary. "24" is fiction. It's not real. You know, like Sponge Bob. You should say to yourself it's just a show, you should really just relax.

    Olby's intro talked about using fear to scare people to vote the way they want (yeah, that Kiefer Sutherland is on Karl Rove's payroll), and KO took special note of the mushroom cloud, citing it as the administration's "imagery" for the Iraq War.

    MADMAN

    All right, stop the tivo! Is Keith really this much of a nitwit, or is he dishonestly pretending this is something new? America was attacked by nukes on tv decades ago in The Day After. How about the recent movie The Sum of All Fears? More to the point, just last season a series ran called Jericho. On this program, multiple US cities were hit with terrorist nuclear attacks. You can see an image from this show to the right. Where was Citizen Keith with his moral outrage? How many times did he condemn this on The Hour of Spin? Here's a hint: Never! Of course, Jericho was on CBS. Could that be why the discredited sports guy ignored it, but is now blasting a show on Fox that affected his ratings? Ya think?

    From his stock company of repertory parrots, Olby chose Robert "Xanadu" Greenwald as his expert on quality entertainment. Hahahaaa! Immediately "Man on Fan" Olbermann described dramatizing terrorist incidents as a "fear tactic". Funny, he didn't complain about Sleeper Cell on Showtime. Could this be more Olbypocrisy? Ya think? Mr Xanadu launched into an attack on Fox News and "this administration". Not to be outdone, Olby said 24 is "naked brainwashing". Mr Xanadu complained that the show depicts torture as working, but it doesn't work (we won't even go into debunking this ancient Olbermann lie; just search for Brian Ross in the archives). KO launched into a diatribe about Sen Richard McCain, Sen John Cornyn, "comedian Rush Limbaugh", but neglected to attack huge fans of the show on the other side of the aisle, like Barbra Streisand. More Olbypocrisy? Ya think? Mr Xanadu whined about "blurring the fact with the fiction", but he was in the wrong venue for that complaint--Countdown does it every night.

    After such a zenith of farcical sophistry, everything else was anticlimactic. Oddball, the kidnappings (lengthy regurgitated video from the Today show), airport delays (more recycled NBC reportage), Naomi Campbell, Anna Nicole Smith, Brangelina. #1 was all about Donald Trump, with the creepy Michael Musto.

    In the Media Matters Minute, the White House Correspondents were slammed because they didn't pick someone "edgy" for entertainment at their annual dinner (Blue Blog Source: Daily Kos). The Department of Defense was "worst person" for an auction (Blue Blog Source: Think Progress).

    OLBY

    Quiescent canines: The infamous, deplorable Keith Olbermann made no mention of Russia delivering missiles to Iran. No point in Olby getting on the wrong side of his buddies. And of course, with oil prices continuing to fall, the stock market hit another all-time record high--everywhere except on OlbyPlanet. Then there's the story of Bevan Sevan, former head of the UN's Oil for Food program, who has been indicted in federal court. Censoring this story is a twofer for Herr Olbermann--he can cover up not just the crimes of Saddam but also UN corruption with just one spike. Just like the elevated terror alert in Russia. And still nothing, not even a snarky "worst person" nomination, for the speaker at the MLK service in Atlanta who compared the hanging of Saddam Hussein to the crucifixion of Christ.

    NAME

    Olbermann's book The book that bears Olberman's name has dwindled to #5,856 at amazon.com, but "Culture Warrior" is #101. The OlbyTome is #2,594 at Barnes & Noble; O'Reilly's book is #206 there, as well as being one of 2006's top ten best sellers. The ratings for Friday's Hour of Spin were yet another humiliation for the Orange Man. He finished in a dismal, embarrassing fourth place, 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 (447) | | View blog reactions

    447 Comments

    Olby, now we know you are officially insane. Bashing "24" as a Fox attempt to scare the public into supporting the administration? You used the term "brainwashing." Does Olby don his tinfoil hat and think Jack Bauer is sending him messages through his TV? It's a fictional TV show, you loon.

    Olby thinks the Simpsons and The Family Guy are the greatest thing since baseball cards, and they both are on Fox. Olby, why do you have such a different opinion about those shows? Are you sure Homer and Marge aren't sending you subliminal signals? Maybe they are brainwashing you into loving Rupert Murdoch.

    Did Greenwald just say he's not a conspiracy theorist? Loonapalooza!

    Jack Bauer is always the one that saves the day ... how is that scaring the public ???

    He must scary Olbyloons. The Olbysphere is a strange place.

    scare, I mean. How paranoid can Olby possibly be? He's been reading too many blue blogs.

    When we try to intermix politics into entertainment... the art suffers ...

    23 is fantastic. Its intent is to keep us on the edge of our seats by using suspense and sudden plot twists. How does it suffer by having a plotline about terrorism, which is an entirely real subject that has affected way too many people for decades?

    And so is 24, by the way. Sorry.

    I meant ... the art suffers by editing out the mushroom cloud ...

    Maybe there should be a "23" ... a show with all of the same in it as 24 ... but without that extra controversial part that Olbermann thinks is propaganda .

    If it's on Fox and runs at the same time as his show, Olby will still find bad things to say about it.

    If some House Republican on the Governmental Reform Committee is clever enough (admittedly a dubious proposition),when Congressman Kucinich holds his hearing on reinstlling the Fairness Doctorine, they should roll out a big posterboard display chart with the list of Keith's guests from the past two years of "Countdown", along with some clips of his special comments and greatest hits, to enter into the official record. Then they should say they have no problem whatsoever with MSNBC allowing a show like Olbermann's on the air, because it's not for the government to make the rules for what can and can't go on the air, it's something that the marketplace via the listening and viewing public should decide.


    Look, I know it's fiction. "CSI" is fiction too, but all around the country people are affecting the outcome of trials because the forensic evidence presented doesn't match what Gil Grissom or Horatio Caine does on TV. Go to the bookstore - there are books on "The CSI Effect", "The Ethics of Star Trek", books on the spirituality of "The Simpsons", and on and on...

    People ARE influenced by television - you can deny it, you can say it's no big deal. But IT IS THERE.

    Little Miss Redstate snipes: "It's almost as inane as thinking atmittantly is actually a word"

    It's really good that you on the right have little Miss "snipe' Manners, Redstate, who continues to patrol this site, ever on the prowl for any spelling, grammar, or context error she can find....but only with MY posts, or maybe a few others who continue to put forth real ideas that she just can't handle.

    Why, just a couple of weeks ago, this little troll ordered me "to leave this country" just because of something I posted that displeased her, ignoring the fact that I, unlike her, actually served this country during a time of war, and also the fact that I might have just a little more insight than she does, as a brain dead and blind follower of her dear president, who I believe is in the process of bankrupting and destroying our country from within.

    But she sure knows her grammar and spelling....and thats something, I guess!

    But wait a minute! Maybe not, since she never actually SAYS anything other than take little cowardly snipes at me and a few others!

    Redstate, you are nothing but a pathetic little 'snipe'....so afraid to actually engage anyone with real ideas, probably because you don't really have any of your own!

    But on to something really important....I wonder what I spelled wrong above?

    Wow... attacking "24"

    That's way WAY far out stuff. Was this Olby officially jumping the shark?

    As for it showing that torture works... this season has also showed a lot of "the government stepping all over the constitution" and things like that... you'd think Olby would like that they show the govn't in a negative light.

    Maybe he'll do a Special Comment about the eeevils of "24"

    This site should change it's name to Fox and Friends.

    Too bad that name is already taken.

    I think you are trying to find any reason to justify Olby's paranoid ramblings. Terrorism has influenced us all - of course it will be a theme in television shows and other entertainment vehicles. The reason Olby made an example of 24, as opposed to other programs or movies, is because it's on Fox. More twisted Olbylogic from Moonbat Boy.

    All I said was that I thought Keifer was hot and the next thing I know, Keith is on tv bashing 24. Wait til he finds out I have a thing for Anderson Cooper. He was actually my first choice but since he's not interested in my "type", I had to go with KO. Wonder if Lou Dobbs is single? I hear he makes $6 million a year. And I bet he doesn't take Viagra either. . .

    I guess the eeeevil Republicans at FOX are so right-wing that they would allow two Afro-American Presidents on 24 as well. If Olbermann doesn't get called out on this in the mainstream media, well, there is nothing mainstream about it.

    By the way, earlier in the day Craig Crawford kept referring to CTU (Counter Terrorism Unit) on 24 as the "CSI" unit. Yeah Craig, I'm sure you even watch the show enough to comment on it. Get some more Grecian formula...

    Mike, what you said was "I fear Bush more than Islamic terrorists." That statement alone makes me ill that you're even a fellow citizen of this country. Look forward to seeing your all-night posting tomorrow morning.

    What's Keith's problem with 24? It's a fictional show. Much like Countdown.

    So Olbermann attacks 24? I guess he's upset at anything that shows Muslims in a bad light.
    Is Olbermann Muslim or is he a miserable soul that complains about everthing!
    Olbermann, get a life!

    Oh Craig Crawford wouldn't know from 24 or CSI unless he's watching it for the hot guys on those shows. His kind of show is more like "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy" or a PBS tribute to Judy Garland or something.

    Almost as inane as thinking that "admittantly" is actual a word.

    Posted by: RedState at January 16, 2007 7:34 PM

    C'mon redstate, if you're going to pull out your red pen and correct the posts here, you'd better make sure you don't make any errors yourself.

    Typical Republicon

    Well little Miss Redtate, it's so amazing that you found it within yourself to respond to me without taking another snipe at me.

    While I think you lifted that quote a little out of context, I'm SO sorry I make you ill. Take some aspirin and check me out in the morning.

    So I'll make the point again. I believe we are stuck with a President so dangerously incompetent that he represents more actual danger to us, and the world, than the terrorists ever could.

    You see Miss Manners, I just don't buy this argument that ragtag Islamic Terrorists, who can't even avoid fighting among themselves, could possibly ever destroy America. We can only destroy ourselves from within....by over-reaction and irrational fear.

    "So Olbermann attacks 24? I guess he's upset at anything that shows Muslims in a bad light."

    Oh, puh-leeze...now you're just half-assing it Red Wolf. If you're gonna be hyperbolic, at least make it entertaining...

    Why do Leftists like Teheran Keith get mad over fiction. The Left dominates the entertainment industry and they put out shows and movies showing things from a Leftist perspective(No problem with me). But why they get mad when there's a show that leans Right? I don't get it!
    I'm convinced the goal of the American Left is to silence the right so can have a Stalinist regime. With control of the media and entertainment the seeds of a Cuba style dictaorship is there.

    Mike,
    have you read the history of Islam? In the 7th century the Romans and Persians though that a bunch of fanatical desert raiders could beat them. They were wrong. never underestimate Islam.
    They are a dangerous enemy. Hey have you seen the undercover report from UK where a journalists infiltrated Mosques? The Iman openly braged that the UK and US will come under Muslim control.
    Mike, my ancestors were almost genocidally wiped out by Islam, don't underestimate them.

    The left worships Fidel. Watch when the old bastard finally does die, the left websites will be filled with anguished posts mourning his passing. They think he's Mr. Wonderful.

    I hate Bush, I hate Christians. The radical Right must die!

    Red Wolf:

    The '24' controversy is just a sign of these unfortunate times.

    Those like me believe that America has been consumed with an irrational fear of Islamic Terrorism too long and this has inflated the percieved danger far beyond it's actual importance. Shows like '24' will do nothing but add to that fear, but they have every right to make the show....this is America.

    From my vantage point, many on the far right seem to want to 'silence' people like Olbermann, and anyone else who calls them on their terrorist obsession.

    If those on the left are trying to 'silence' the right, as you say, they sure do have one hell of a task ahead of them...what with Limbaugm, Hannitty, O'Reilly, Ingram, Savage, etc., etc, etc.

    All I can say is that there are a whole lot more voices on the right to try to 'silence' than there are on the left these days.

    Mike,
    Can you address my historical point about underestimating Islam?

    "But why they get mad when there's a show that leans Right? I don't get it!"

    Funny, I don't remember a big kerfuffle about "JAG", or "NCIS", or "The Unit", or "E-Ring" (though that was admittedly a crappy show)...

    Personally, I like JAG and NCIS (if Leroy Jethro Gibbs ran Homeland Security, I'd be as happy as a pig in the waller). And both of those shows definitely have a right-wing bent.

    Most one hour dramas still follow the traditional formula - good guys against bad guys. The bad guys are REALLY bad or are being forced to do bad by even badder guys. Good guys go in, kick ass and take names. Happy ending (sometimes after a plot twist or a couple episodes).

    Red Wolf:

    I think it might be time to let what happened in the 7th Century be bygones.

    Mike,

    You forgot to mention you biggest obsession: KAF!

    "All I can say is that there are a whole lot more voices on the right to try to 'silence' than there are on the left these days."

    CNN, MSNBC, NBC news, CBS news, Washington Post, NY Times, Newsweek, Time magazine, Think Progress, Daily Kos, Media Matters, George Soros and Hollywood.
    Yeah the Left has less voices than the Right!

    Mike,
    My point is never underestimate your enemies. Islam is a dangerous foe. Plus with the Media in the west as allies they're really dangerous!

    Tonight's Olbypologist winner is Mike. He was first to invoke O'Rushity, at 10:25 pm. Congratulations. We'll see tomorrow who can beat Mike's record.

    Johnny,
    Soon the rest of the Leftist hordes will appear!
    This will be the subject!
    I hate Bush!
    I hate Bush!
    I hate Bush!
    I hate Bush!
    I hate Bush!
    I hate Bush!
    I hate Bush!
    I hate Bush!
    I hate Bush!
    I hate Bush!
    I hate Bush!
    I hate Bush!

    "I'm convinced the goal of the American Left is to silence the right so can have a Stalinist regime. With control of the media and entertainment the seeds of a Cuba style dictaorship is there."

    Posted by: Red Wolf at January 16, 2007 10:11 PM

    Red Wolf is worried about the 'Leftists' converting us to a Stalin-Like Dictatorship? You mean, like where you don't have any freedom of religion. Let's consult a previous post by the self-described 'social libertarian.'

    Q: why is the religion call Islam?
    A: Because always said" I Slam a camel in the ass!

    Posted by: Red Wolf at January 12, 2007 3:02 AM


    Mr Scholar,
    I attack Islam because it bothers the Left! It's your guys achilles heel. You attack the Christian Right, I'll attack Islam. All is fair!

    Hey Scholar,
    what do you think of Olbermann now going after 24. You have to admit he's reaching! This is getting too much. I gues he must do whatever George Soros instructs him! Olbermann is Vader to Soros's Palpatine!

    Your ignorance doesn't bother me.

    And PS-You're not 'attacking' Islam. You're making yourself look stupid online.

    Red Wolf:

    You will never get me to agree that CNN is 'left'. I think they are as middle of the road as you can get. In fact I don't respect them any more because they allowed themselves to be intimidated into making a hard right turn. Just check out Glenn Beck for example!

    NBC and MSNBC are one and the same and we can agree to disagree on that one. Pardon me if I don't take O'Reilly's word for anything.

    I don't have daily access to the post and NY Times but I will say this...the NY Times did play a pivotal role in helping the administration justify the Iraq invasion during the run up to the war.

    Newsweek and Time...I just disagree with you on those two. They are both very "fair and balanced" in my opinion!

    Lets don't get into web sites...there are literally thousands of them.

    Are you aware that I made a post a couple of months ago on this very web site stating my opinion that cable TV news, on the whole, leaned slightly to the right? And do you know who, to my surprise, actually agreed with me?....His name is Robert Cox! Mr. Cox is certainly no 'leftie'.

    Olbermann brought up "24" because it's on Fox. "Jericho" comes much closer to the hysterical fear-mongering that he described, but somehow, the CBS show escaped his wrath. Hmmm.

    Mike,

    What brought about this "terrorist" obsession? Could it be 9/11 when our country was attacked by terrorists? Could it be that people have become more knowledgeable about the nature of radical Islam? UBL (who is probably dead from typhus) stated his intentions and carried them out. He isn't the only one who has these intentions. What is your opinion of the vigilance of both Presidents Clinton and Bush concerning pre 9/11 information? Shouldn't we as a nation be more vigilant? And who is trying to silence Olbermann? What Johnny Dollar consistently addresses is Olby's misreporting of and biased presentation of the news. Others comment in kind. (BTW, religious discussions are really off target but I really should save a copy of Cee's last response presenting a scientific argument supporting that the intricate nature of the human body could not have come about by evolution. It is not just a crackpot idea of some loony Christians. There are others who are able to debate the secular humanists at that level.)

    Mike,
    We'll agree to disagree on the subject of media bias. This argument will go nowhere. It's like saying which came 1st, the chicken or the egg!
    Hey do you watch Football?

    Johnny:

    So "invoking O'Rushity" is defined by bringing up the names, regardless of what context it was done in?

    Mike doesn't have "daily access to the Post or the NY Times?" Uhm, they both have websites. That's how I read them on a daily basis. Here Mike, let me help you out here: www.nytimes.com and www.washingtonpost.com.

    Extra bonus points to Cato for correctly pointing out that Olby had no problem whatsoever with a show that painted a far more nightmarish scene on CBS. Funny, Keith had no problem voicing a character on the evil-Fox's "Family Guy" program now did he? Did he earn money from Rupert Murdoch for his voice cameo appearance? You mean he'd take money from the evil Rupert Murdoch? Quelle horror! Oh but that show doesn't air in his time slot on a night his show is on the air now does it?

    Since this is a blog about Keith Olbermann, and just to cite O'Rushity as a sort of tu quoque fallacy is really off the point of Olbermann. If someone writes a horrible book, pointing to another horrible book doesn't make the first one good. It's an irrelevancy, and a distraction trick of Olbypologists.

    Sharon:

    I certainly do agree with you that "we should be more vigilant"!

    One example; we should be inspecting more than 5 - 10% of the containers coming into this country and stop wasting time and resources with our obsession in Iraq.

    If a terrorist planted nuclear bomb does go off in America, and it is found to have come in on one of these containers, what are we going to say then? We know this is a problem, yet we are not doing nearly enough to plug the hole.

    http://www.informationclearinghouse.info:80/article6895.htm

    If you're hiding from the truth you will not want to copy and paste this link.

    Note the heading on the very top of the page that says: NEWS YOU WON'T FIND ON CNN

    Fox News is not mentioned simply because CNN is the real corupt news source simply because CNN pretends to be centered news. We all know Fox News is bullshit so when CNN pushes propaganda it is far more damaging.

    Here's the link again, it is a 10 minutes video, 2 minutes into it and you won't want to turn away.

    Leave this page for 10 minutes break and see what it is all about.

    http://www.informationclearinghouse.info:80/article6895.htm

    30 minutes from now I will put my name to this post, my OW name that is



    KAF:

    I'll keep on looking for signs that you are a 'liberal', as you claim. So far, I haven't seen any!

    But Mike, you were also the first, at 10:09 PM to invoke the name of Bush when you posted this gem, "I believe we are stuck with a President so dangerously incompetent that he represents more actual danger to us, and the world, than the terrorists ever could."

    So you see, you're a winner in both the O'Rushity and Bush categories for the evening. I don't know why you seem slightly peeved that you won tonight's competition.

    "If someone writes a horrible book, pointing to another horrible book doesn't make the first one good."

    Sure it doesn't, but it does add 'context.'

    Praising or criticizing something in a vacuum is pointless.

    KAF:

    Your definition of 'peeved' is funny. Somehow, if I were peeved, I think I'd be the first to know it.

    Oh, I see, you're so busy looking for signs of my liberal street cred that you don't have time to read major newspapers with comprehensive websites like the NY Times and the Washington Post. Again, your obsession with this site and me remains baffling. It's actually apparently interferring with your internet travels to other sites. I'm sure you'll write many more diatribe-style posts against me while I sleep through the night but I'll be sure to check in tomorrow to see your off-topic rants on Bush and on me. I look forward to it!

    KAF says: "your obsession with this site and me remains baffling".

    No more baffling than your 'liberal' obsession with KO and this site.

    Oh, and P.S.? Posting about me also counts as an off-topic rant designed to change the subject from the discussion at hand which is how batshit crazy Olbermann is to think that an ENTERTAINMENT show, a FICTIONAL show is somehow evidence of some right-wing plot to poison the minds of America. The more discerning of us here at Olbermannwatch know that the real threat are opinion shows disgused as news programs that refuse to cover certain stories and only feature opinions from one-side of the aisle, which is exactly what Countdown is. See, on-topic post. Now that isn't so hard to do is it? Oh, right. For you, it's supremely difficult. I don't think I've seen you make an on-topic post ever. Too busy trying to distract heat away from your hero Olbermann and his many, many failings as an alleged news anchor and journalist.

    Olbermann is just a George Soros puppet. He talks whatever his leader orders to him to!

    How dense are you Mr. 'libral' KAF?

    How many times do I have to tell you that I don't give a rats ass about 'defending' Keith Olbermann? Yes, he has his flaws but he can defend himself quite well....he doen't need my help.

    I come here to discuss ISSUES, mostly the war, and when the topic becomes nothing but an inane rant about KO, I'll be gone before you can say Bill O'Reilly!

    Mike,

    Since you think Bush is a bigger danger to us than terrorism, please list those bad things that will happen to us because of Bush. But "terrorism" can't be one of them.

    Rico, I've really got to get off here, but it is adictive!

    I'll name one really bad thing that has already happened to us because of Bush.....Iraq!

    Mike,

    One of the points you have often raised is that withdrawal from Iraq will not lead to chaos. FYI at your convenience.


    http://www.indcjournal.com/archives/002926.php

    Mike...not Ohio Mike, of course, posted the following gem:

    "How many times do I have to tell you that I don't give a rats ass about 'defending' Keith Olbermann? Yes, he has his flaws but he can defend himself quite well....he doen't need my help."


    He doesn't need your help? Well, you are right there....It isn't hard to defend yourself when you have a grand total of ZERO guests on your show who question you or criticize your stance, views, or behavior.

    If you call "defending yourself quite well" being quarantined from everyone walking the planet who could disagree with you....well, then I guess I have no argument.

    You win, Mike.

    Mike,

    The problem in Iraq, as I see it, is that Bush isn't even trying to win. His rules of engagement are so politically correct that he appears to be taking victory out of the equation. So I kind of agree with you that the Iraq deal is a bad thing, but we won't like each others reasons.

    "Posting about me also counts as an off-topic rant designed to change the subject from the discussion at hand which is how batshit crazy Olbermann is to think that an ENTERTAINMENT show, a FICTIONAL show is somehow evidence of some right-wing plot to poison the minds of America."

    You didn't read my post where I pointed out that "CSI" (a FICTIONAL show) has had a dramatically negative impact upon the criminal justice system - or have you never heard of "The CSI Effect"? About how jurors demand high-level forensic analysis, including DNA analysis even when not relevant to the case?

    Here, educate yourself:

    http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/09/0923_040923_csi.html
    http://www.all-about-forensic-psychology.com/crime-scene-investigation.html

    Television DOES influence us - even fictional shows can change our perceptions (both directly and indirectly).

    Ensign Expendable,
    Who cares about a TV show! Let the people decide if they want to watch it. Hey how about Jericho on CBS, is that Rightwing Propaganda too?

    The ignorance on this site is mind-numbing.

    Somebody please create O'Reilly Watch so I can get the hell off this blog!

    EE,

    Your a point about how television in general can negatively influence society. Wouldn't you agree that providing a "newscast" that has been shown to be biased and flatly erroneous at times is also detrimental? Without even reading the articles you have posted, I would completely accept that jurors have placed prosecutors in an untenable situation.

    Oops, your point, not a point

    Let me try again. You made a point that ...

    Sharon: I usually don't follow web addresses posted by others, but because I respect you, I did.

    So, I see that this 'Mahammed' fellow believes leaving will cause disaster and they will then "follow us to Washington"!

    I'm quite certain that is his honest opinion...he may be right and he may be wrong, but more than anything, it underscores the complexity of this pandora's box we have opened.

    I never denied that a Pandora's Box was opened. I found his comments unnerving, especially since he is not making predictions based upon elections or any self-serving interests. (I appreciate your taking time to read it. I usually don't bother with web addresses either and only read what is posted. Next time, I'll give a heads up as to content so that you won't waste your time if the topic is inconsequential to you.)

    FYI: http://www.indcjournal.com/archives/002926.php

    An Interview with a Fallujan Police Officer

    "Who cares about a TV show! Let the people decide if they want to watch it"

    Jeeeez Redwolf don't you get it!!If you let people
    decide i.e. make choices or give them choices they
    might not watch lefty shows like Countdown.....pussy
    ass liberals can't compete in the real world....

    Tomas Jefferson:
    "I have sworn upon the alter of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."

    There are only two forms of tyranny over the mind of man - relgion and goverment that uses relgion to achive power.

    Iran and the Republican party have more in common than rain and water.

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3320922145165829917&q=%22Hijacking+Catastrophe%22&hl=en

    Nothing like a guy who owned slaves to tell you
    about tyranny eh?

    So you quoted a guy who worked for the government, and is responsible for building the government in which we currently live... and referenced God in his proclamation against tyranny.

    Then you talked about how much you hate government and religion.

    I'd suggest a 3rd form of tyranny. Stupidity... and baby, you are ruled.

    "Ensign Expendable,
    Who cares about a TV show! Let the people decide if they want to watch it. Hey how about Jericho on CBS, is that Rightwing Propaganda too?

    Posted by: Red Wolf at January 16, 2007 11:38 PM"
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Redwolf,
    name me a tv network or cable news channel that told the truth about Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz as all these neocons took this nation into Iraq instead of Afghanistan and it's boarder with Pakistan. After Sadam instead of Osama Bin Laden.

    CBS? NBC? ABC? CNN? MSNBC? FOX?

    Not one of them have to this day yet to tell this nation the truth.

    More than 3000 dead GI's. How many of them seen on the evening news? Their families? How about the photos of children with their limbs blown off and their skin burned off with their mother or father crying uncontrollably with rage over their maimed bodies swearing revenge? See that on the news lately? As often as you see Bush saying, "the troops are behind me on this, I have their support. The American people need to support them."

    The broadcast media in this nation (save for Air America) has completely kept this nation in the dark about why we are in Iraq and worse they are guilty of perpetrating the propaganda lies of the neocons to get use there in the first place.

    Fox is not alone, it is just the most obvious.

    Tomas Jefferson was talking about people like you when he spoke of "tyranny over the minds of people". He never wanted to see this nation become what it is today. A place where the deceived suck on the teat of deception like a starving child huddling in fear.

    You are a product of ignorance and fear. What TV didn't give you your parents should have. Obviously both have failed!


    I like to study propaganda ,art of persuasion, manufacturing consent..whatever you want to call it.

    24 is a perfect case of propaganda although I'm not sure this was the intention of the producers and writers. First and foremost they want a successful show and $$$


    Buffalo... you seem to have a lot of hate in you heart. You should learn to lighten up and love everyone for who they are... not what they are... man.

    Learn to love... man. And love to be happy... man.

    "So you quoted a guy who worked for the government, and is responsible for building the government in which we currently live... and referenced God in his proclamation against tyranny.

    Then you talked about how much you hate government and religion.

    I'd suggest a 3rd form of tyranny. Stupidity... and baby, you are ruled.

    Posted by: ImNotBlue at January 17, 2007 12:26 AM"


    Yea right, why don't you point out spelling errors too, it would help you be more significant here.

    If I say "God dam it" does that make me religious?

    If I say "go to hell" does that too make me religious?

    You're an idiot all puffed up cuz you think you scored a point with this piece of work? This is what tv and religion does to ones intellect - scrambled eggs couldn't have come up with something as stupid as your comment above.

    The founding fathers of this nation new what they were doing when they made the first amendment and made it law that our government was not to promote religion of any kind.

    Idiots like you are who they wanted to avoid having in our democracy. Move to Iran, we will be a better nation with out you!

    Did you guys see Howard Kurtz's chat at washingtonpost.com? Kurtz says Olby has a hard time getting conservative for his show! LOL!:

    Alexandria, Va.: In your interviews with Olbermann, have you pressed him about his lack of conservative guests? Even two or three years ago, he still jousted with them. His show, isolated from the rest, looks much more one-sided and propagandistic than the Fox lineup. You certainly can't imagine Olbermann cracking quips with a conservative co-host! How can someone like Olbermann suggest Bush lives in a bubble of people who agree with him and then have a show like this?

    Howard Kurtz: I did raise it, and I have raised it before. He said he had some difficulty getting conservative guests to come on the program. I don't know how hard he has tried, but surely there are conservative authors, columnists and political operatives who could be persuaded to appear on MSNBC.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/01/08/DI2007010800681.html

    Looks like redwolf too me:
    "Buffalo... you seem to have a lot of hate in you heart. You should learn to lighten up and love everyone for who they are... not what they are... man.

    Learn to love... man. And love to be happy... man.

    Posted by: ImNotBlue at January 17, 2007 12:37 AM"

    Still no hint of intellectual ability, just peanut gallery mumblings.

    The calling card of Redwolf is always a denial of what he is.

    "Posted by: ImNotBlue at January 17, 2007 12:37 AM"

    Buffalo,

    You get back here right now! I have something for you. It's your meds, and you need them badly.

    "Buffalo,

    You get back here right now! I have something for you. It's your meds, and you need them badly.

    Posted by: Nurse Ratched at January 17, 2007 12:58 AM"

    Sorry I just threw the lavatory through the window and ran off into the sunset.

    We are now $400 billion in the hole all spent on Iraq and your hillbilly mush brain comes up with this nonsense above. I didn't realize they let eighth graders in Special Forces or Green Berets are what ever fantasy you play with here on this page. But what can you expect from spawn of the Klan?


    even though I agree with Olbermann and his special comments his show is pretty much Keith and friends.

    Instead of a debate his guests pretty much agree with him and the conversation turns to a "can you believe they are doing this(insert egregious Bush Admin behavior)"

    Now I hold Bush and Cheney in very low regard. They are degenerate swine of the highest order.

    That doesn't mean I can't concede that Countdown is pretty one sided.


    Buffalo,

    We all thought you were doing so well in group. It was looking for a while like we weren't going to have to perform that lobotomy on you after all. But now, you are running amok and after your invevitable capture, we will be forced to take down the offending part of your brain. Snip, snip!

    Sorry, I'm not Red Wolf... I may be Redd... but not much of a wolf.

    As for you calling me names. OUCH... it stings... make the hurting stop.

    As for making any type of sense... OUCH... it stings... stop typing. Either that, or put down the booze when you're pretending to think.

    "Wouldn't you agree that providing a "newscast" that has been shown to be biased and flatly erroneous at times is also detrimental?"

    If it is the ONLY resource for that information, I would say yes. But, your come from a faulty premise.

    Let's go back to my example - for most people their only source of information on how forensic science works is "CSI" and its various progeny. They'll never sit in a forensic science class, or read a criminology text, or even watch one of those documentaries on real criminalists on Discovery Channel. All they know is what they see Gil Grissom and his team do - that form their entire framework on that subject. And even if you do seek more knowledge, it's written in a way that only people with some skill would grasp it.

    The news media is different because the news exists in so many easily accessible forms. You can watch NBC, ABC, CBS, MSNBC, CNN...or your local 11 o'clock news. You can read the Washington Post, the New York Times or the local rag. And of course there is the great equalizer - the Internet. Information and counter-information. Facts and fact-checking, all at the touch of a button and all understandable to even the most casual of observers or readers.

    Don't like Keith? Watch Brian Williams. Don't like him? Watch Katie Couric? Don't like any of them? Go to Yahoo.com or Google News.

    Don't like Olbermann Watch? Go somewhere else. Right?

    ensign,

    good points

    what's detrimental is when people only get their news from one source.

    FOX news has a very loyal audience and most on the right get their news from FOX and talk radio.

    I know several conservatives that only watch FOX. If CNN or msnbc is on the tv they freak out.

    Ensign - Your premise is faulty, although I do agree with the resulting "If you don't like it, don't watch it message."

    You said:
    "for most people their only source of information on how forensic science works is "CSI" and its various progeny. ..."

    But in the next statement, you talk about how there are a variety of news sources, including "the great equalizer - the Internet." While yes, some people may never receive any formal forensic training... there is no shortage of resources... including the internet, the library (I think they're still around), and even as you pointed out, The Discover Channel, National Geographic, Court TV, A&E, and so on.

    It's faulty to assume that people can fact check the news "...at the touch of a button..." but are unable to read and or figure anything out about forensics. If people can do one, they can certainly do the other.

    More eighth grade commentary:

    "Now I hold Bush and Cheney in very low regard. They are degenerate swine of the highest order.

    That doesn't mean I can't concede that Countdown is pretty one sided.

    Posted by: Bandini at January 17, 2007 1:05 AM"

    Typical coward. First he says he holds Bush and Cheney in low regard then he says can't help but join in on the ganging up mentality on Bush and Cheney's main adversary in the media, Keith Olbermann. Makes no sense. You want one sided? Go to Fox News, it does not matter if they have guests on they always ask those hostile to them the "how many times did you beat your wife last week" questions then cut them off before they have a chance to respond.

    Defining one sided the way you do is just plain stupid.

    So to you, Buffalo... it's one or the other. Either you love Keith and blindly follow him like a sheep (or for that matter a buffalo)... OR you a right wing nut job.

    Wow... A real, "You're with us, or your against us" position, wouldn't you say?

    Buffalo,

    Come to Momma, little Buffalo. Rest your head on Momma's shoulder. I will give you a pretty orange little pill that will make you feel real good! Then you will get to take a nap for a very, very long time. And when you wake up you will never feel bad again. It will be wonderful. And then, every morning, we will be sure to sprinkle raisons into your porridge. And don't forget the hot cocoa! Your friend, The Chief, misses you. Your pain is about to end.

    "Don't like Olbermann Watch? Go somewhere else. Right?

    Posted by: johnny dollar at January 17, 2007 1:13 AM"

    I love Olbermann Watch because I love Olbermann's style. I try to replicate it here. This place is great. I just wish less eighth graders posted here. Real men don't gang up, boys do that.

    The entire concept of seeking out aliences with others to attack a tv figure (not even a real person) demonstrates a true desperation to find a group to fit into.

    What is bizarre is that everyone one you olby haters demonstrate zero mastery of how democracy works and actively attempt to undermine it with your sophomoric attacks on a guy who is highly outspoken against the most criminal administration in this nation's history.

    Total pussy mentality.

    > The entire concept of seeking out aliences with others to attack a tv figure (not even a real person) demonstrates a true desperation to find a group to fit into.

    I hadn't thought about it that way but you have a point there. That DOES explain Herr Olbermann's desperate obsession with O'Reilly.

    I don't usually watch O'Reilly or Colbert, but Thursday is going to be an exception....Sorry keith!

    "The entire concept of seeking out aliences with others to attack a tv figure (not even a real person) demonstrates a true desperation to find a group to fit into."
    Posted by: The Buffalo at January 17, 2007 1:36 AM

    So does that also ring true for all those other FNC attack websites? Things like NewsHounds or Media Matters? Do they also have "Total pussy mentality"?

    I hadn't thought about it that way but you have a point there. That DOES explain Herr Olbermann's desperate obsession with O'Reilly.

    Posted by: johnny dollar at January 17, 2007 1:40 AM"

    I think it you using "obsession" as a devotee to this alter to KO is about as ironic as one can get. The moniker and your regular focus on the man instead of the issues the man addresses, says to me that you are beyond "obsessed" with Keith Olbermann, you are desperately in need of getting out of your parents basement.

    You ever talk to girls during lunch time or recess out on the playground? Or do you always hide?

    "That DOES explain Herr Olbermann's desperate obsession with O'Reilly."

    And Vice Versa

    Posted by: at January 17, 2007 1:46 AM

    was me

    "your regular focus on the man instead of the issues the man addresses"
    Posted by: The Buffalo at January 17, 2007 1:48 AM

    You mean like how every page starts with a long review of things he's said in the show?

    It's almost like you like saying things so other people can prove you wrong over and over and over again.

    From this Site's FAQ

    Q. Why are you obsessed with Keith Olbermann?
    A. Are we?

    A key feature of obsession is lack of awareness of the obsession.

    To the casual observer, it appears as though the Olbybashers and Olbyloons share the same common denominator: They got a bad case of Keithitis.

    "So does that also ring true for all those other FNC attack websites? Things like NewsHounds or Media Matters? Do they also have "Total pussy mentality"?

    Posted by: at January 17, 2007 1:46 AM"

    Excellent, finely we get someone who sticks their neck out for me to chop off but in typical coward fashion they hide their moniker, as if it matters.

    How stupid do you have to be to compare one man with and entire network. Sean Hannity is about as big a pussy there ever was. Both him and O'lielly were typical blow hard types from my Irish Catholic neighborhood. They also were the ones who were all meat and no brains.

    But that is just two of many at Fox who are given orders directly from Rupert Murdoch on what they can say and how they can say it or they are out of a job.

    I doubt you have a clue how Murdoch got the laws changed during the Reagan administration so he could create his own 700 Club style news network that would serve the Republican party exclusively. Pat Robertson just couldn't get it right.

    Anyone that thinks Fox News is fair and balanced is one of two things - totally insane with stupidity or just plain in denial out of shear cowardice to admit such stupidity!

    I think you must be both!

    > I doubt you have a clue how Murdoch got the laws changed during the Reagan administration so he could create his own 700 Club style news network

    No, why don't you enlighten us. In particular, explain what "laws" prevented anyone from starting up a cable channel, that the Reagan administration had to change. And by the way, that's what we're talking about, a cable channel, not a news network, Einstein.

    How much is Rupert paying you?

    Buffalo... buddy... it was me, and I said that... if you read a few posts down. But hey, you read what you want to read.

    So I gather from your ramblings that you think attacking one person is no good... but a whole network (which apparently is made up of... two people... which is one more than one) is okay.

    You're right... I have no idea how Murdoch changed the rules in the Reagan administration... especially because I thought FNC started up in '96... the same time as MSNBC... and that was well into the Clinton administration.

    But hey, at least you are living up to your goal of acting like Olbermann... and just making up facts left and right... well, mostly left.

    Oh and lastly, before I retire to bed for the night... O'Reilly and Hannity may have been "all meat and no brains." But hey... at least they had meat... it must be tough having nothing, eh Buffy?

    "It's faulty to assume that people can fact check the news "...at the touch of a button..." but are unable to read and or figure anything out about forensics. If people can do one, they can certainly do the other."

    Not necessarily...even the most basic premises of forensic science can be baffling to someone who doesn't have a good grasp of the underlying principles behind them. And, unfortunately, it is difficult to explain many scientific principles in "layman's terms".

    News gathering and reading, however, requires no grasp of anything beyond a middle-school reading level. Newspapers are written to be comprehended at the 6th grade level. Television compresses it even further - turning a 2-page story into a 30 second soundbite.

    There's the distinction.

    "You mean like how every page starts with a long review of things he's said in the show?

    It's almost like you like saying things so other people can prove you wrong over and over and over again.

    Posted by: ImNotBlue at January 17, 2007 1:55 AM"

    Yes and what the hell does that have to do with your sorry commentary? Are trying to pretend or not. Either YOU are capable of articulating a commentary on the issues or you're not.

    Clearly so far you have not. The idea of pretending someone else's comments are yours is purely delusional on your part.

    You have only ad hom attacks and zip zero, zilch to say about the issues Keith addressed to save this nation from Tom Delay, Bill Frist, and a whole host of hillbilly elected vermin who spent this nation into it's highest debt ever, $7 trillion. My grandkids will pay for this from the day they were born till the day they die.

    Brain dead idiots like you are not capable of injecting substantive commentary on this or any of a whole host of issues KO champions.

    So don't tell me about Cox just because you are too stupid to say what you think. Clearly you don't!

    Keith is appalled that Americans enjoy "24". Keith is appalled that Amwericans enjoy " American Idol". Keith is contemptuous of Mr and Mrs Joe America. Keith is appalled at the damn fools that don't think like him. Keith is special.

    "And by the way, that's what we're talking about, a cable channel, not a news network, Einstein."

    I thought they called themselves

    "Fox News Channel"

    I guess that makes you both Right, or both Wrong.

    A group of more than 50 active-duty military officers will deliver a petition to Congress on Tuesday signed by about 1,000 troops calling for an end to the U.S. occupation of Iraq. "Any troop increase over here will just produce more sitting ducks, more targets," said Sergeant Ronn Cantu, who is serving in Iraq.

    Under the 1988 Military Whistleblower Protection Act, active duty military, National Guard, and Reservists may communicate with any member of Congress without fear of reprisal, even if copies of the communication are sent to others.

    Will Cheney accuse them of undermining the troops as well?

    ""And by the way, that's what we're talking about, a cable channel, not a news network, Einstein."

    I thought they called themselves

    "Fox News Channel"

    I guess that makes you both Right, or both Wrong.

    Posted by: at January 17, 2007 2:15 AM"

    The stupidity never ceases. God are you an idiot.

    Fox is a network with a 24 hour cable news channel. You know what CNBC and NBC are?

    I love how you Republican losers-Olby haters are so quick to show how stupid and simple you are. You can't address the issues or the break down of simple discussion.

    Keep it up I love how you make my job so easy!

    Rupert Murdoch established Fox News to fill what he saw as a niche in the market for news that, according to Murdoch, was "fair and balanced". In the opinion of Ken Auletta of The New Yorker, it was to counter a news media that Murdoch believed was predominantly liberal. A 2004 survey of journalists by the Project for Excellence in Journalism found that Fox was "the single news outlet that strikes most journalists as taking a particular ideological stance",[4] with 56% of National journalists citing Fox News as being especially conservative in its coverage of news.[5] Further research has shown that there is a correlation between the presence of the Fox News Channel in cable markets and increases in Republican votes in those markets.[6] Fox News has consistently denied any bias in their news reporting

    "Will Cheney accuse them of undermining the troops as well?

    Posted by: why do u care what my name is at January 17, 2007 2:15 AM"

    Yes he will.

    And a "name" here is nothing more than a distinguishing feature to differentiate between all those who also fail to distinguish themselves.

    No name from me this time so you might get my point better.

    He'll probably tell them to "Go F'in Undermine Themselves."

    > Fox is a network with a 24 hour cable news channel.

    Excellent. You are starting to make progress. Now please tell me what laws Reagan had to change to allow him to put up a cable news channel. As you claimed.

    Or we could just shortcut all this with the simple fact that there WAS NO LAW about starting up cable channels, news or otherwise. What's more, to this day the feds have NO SAY over the content of those cable channels.

    But then again, maybe I'm wrong and you're going to cite that law that Reagan changed to make Fox News Channel possible. You go ahead, take your time.

    Mike said " How many times do I have to tell you that I don't give a rats ass about 'defending' Keith Olbermann? Yes, he has his flaws but he can defend himself quite well....he doen't need my help.

    I come here to discuss ISSUES, mostly the war, and when the topic becomes nothing but an inane rant about KO, I'll be gone before you can say Bill O'Reilly! "
    But this site is about KO not ISSUES or the war. That's why I come here. If you want to talk about the war I suggest you go to NewsBusters. I am not being sarcastic I think you will have a good debate there. I dont slam KO for being against the war I slam him for being dishonest about that and many other topics he covers.

    "If you want to talk about the war I suggest you go to NewsBusters. I am not being sarcastic I think you will have a good debate there."

    yeah , right.

    They get rid of anyone who dares posts anything left of Atilla the Hun.

    They ban anyone who doesn't drink the Kool Aide.

    "Go to newsbusters"
    I'd rather shove needles in my eyeballs.

    "Rupert Murdoch established Fox News to fill what he saw as a niche in the market for news that, according to Murdoch"

    Australian born Murdoch is not a billionaire for being stupid.

    He fled this nation to avoid prosecution for tax evasion. He saw what the Korean cult leader, Rev. Yong Sung Moon (Moonies of the 1970's) did to get similar charges dropped against him, buy some major media and serve the Republican interests.

    But Murdoch wanted to go much farther than the Washington Times, he got Reagan to get the FCC laws changed so he could own an entire network and a 24hr cable news channel. That news channel was first set up with the help of Pat Robertson.

    The 700 Club was the first "news" channel to use bare legged woman with no desk in front of them to read the news. Fox now does this to much greater degree of titillation.

    Murdoch got to pay a cash penalty and the felony charges were dropped. He then was allowed to get citizenship and make more than a billion dollars serving the Republican party in exchange.

    Rev Moon and Rev Robertson, taught Murdoch the way to get where he is today. So typical of Republicans, always working with whores to get where they are today.

    do you make this stuff up as you go along? There WERE no FCC laws about news channels, because the FCC has NO JURISDICTION over cable or satellite broadcasting. And now Pat Robertson was involved in it? Who's your fact checker, Olbermann?

    Man, you are buffaloed all right. But making up facts out of your rear won't work with the clear-headed readers of Olbermann Watch!

    126 people died in Iraq today.
    75 were students at a university.

    Our dear president is putting our troops right in the middle of this madness.

    And to think there are still a few people left in this country that actually think this is a good idea.( And 6 of the 20 are at this site)

    "They get rid of anyone who dares posts anything left of Atilla the Hun.

    They ban anyone who doesn't drink the Kool Aide.

    "Go to newsbusters"
    I'd rather shove needles in my eyeballs" Oh, they will gang up on you but as long as you dont lie or namecall you wont be banned. And lets face it if you really want to have an honest debate you dont go to a place where eveyone agrees with you. Kinda like KO's show.

    "Excellent. You are starting to make progress. Now please tell me what laws Reagan had to change to allow him to put up a cable news channel. As you claimed.
    Posted by: johnny dollar at January 17, 2007 2:26 AM"

    Again you just bullshit your way through everything. This nation had strict laws from the very beginning of it's inception, against a monopoly on media. It used to be that you could not own more than one kind in any one local. TV, radio, or newspaper. Something you would know nothing about, the principals of freedom and democracy.

    In 1986, Ronald Reagan hugged Jim Baker of Jim and Tammy Baker on stage at an annual convention of TV evangelists. Reagan called him one of America's greatest men, he did this because Jim and Tammy were giving shit loads of free air time to the Republican candidates for congress. Jim Baker went nuts after that with conning people until he ended up in jail.

    Murdoch negotiated with the Republican party to have his charges reduced and dropped. The Rev. Yong Sung Moon did this by purchasing the Times and it has been a tool of the Repubs ever since. Moon got to come back to this nation without going to jail for Tax evasion. Nothing more than a pay off.

    Now if you want me to Google the whole history of Murdoch for you forget. I am not one of these people that quibbles over the details. The hard truth is Murdoch was not able to own more than a limited number of local tv stations set by law within a limited area within individual states. Federal laws used to exist to prevent monopolies of the air waves within given populated areas. During and after Reagan the Republican congress changed this.

    Murdoch is not even an American and he controls the largest media outlet in this nation.

    That is the work of the democracy hating Republican party, after all they serve the rich only.

    Do some research about it then come back and you can act like you know what you are talking about.

    Anyone else heard that Olbermann "found his voice" about a year ago after reading Arianna Huffington's Book " On Becoming Fearless" ?
    You have to love strong women!

    buffalo, um, just for future reference, murdoch is indeed a naturalized american citizen. has been for years. dumb shit

    "do you make this stuff up as you go along? There WERE no FCC laws about news channels, because the FCC has NO JURISDICTION over cable or satellite broadcasting. And now Pat Robertson was involved in it? Who's your fact checker, Olbermann?

    Man, you are buffaloed all right. But making up facts out of your rear won't work with the clear-headed readers of Olbermann Watch!

    Posted by: johnny dollar at January 17, 2007 2:37 AM"


    f--- are you ever stupid. Fox is a network, that network does broadcast television. Just because Fox also has a cable news channel means squat regarding the network of local television stations. The FCC did then and does now regulate these stations.

    You are really an idiot. I explain this to you and you respond in a manner that shows you don't bother to read it, you just delude yourself into thinking what you need to win an argument.

    Guess what? You loose again.

    FOX is a network with a cable news channel. The network is broadcast, the 24hr news is on cable. I even wrote NBC and CNBC to spell it out to you and it goes right over that empty head of yours.

    Dam are you an idiot!

    buffalo arguing with dollar is akin to a dime arguing with a dollar.

    "buffalo, um, just for future reference, murdoch is indeed a naturalized american citizen. has been for years. dumb shit

    Posted by: I CALL BULLSHIT at January 17, 2007 3:01 AM"

    Again you ignore where I wrote that he was allowed to be naturalized. I said he was not an American. You think you got me on this one point as if it is the crux of the argument. You demonstrate zero understanding about the history of Murdoch. Obviously he got his citizenship. This is why he had to have the charges dropped. You seem to be unable to read.

    Murdoch is not an American. You want to call him that go ahead. I have had this discussion here before. The guy is the single most anti democracy crook that ever stepped foot in this country. Fox News is the envy of Communist China's propaganda machine. During the Reagan years while they were scheming to create FOX NEWS Reagan was bashing the Soviets for not having a free press. What a joke all that was!

    Murdoch is not an American. He may have been naturalized but he ain't no American that is for sure.

    I am certain a democracy hating fool like you thinks he is a hero!

    > The hard truth is Murdoch was not able to own more than a limited number of local tv stations set by law

    who's talking about local tv stations? You said there was a law that had to be changed for him to launch Fox News Channel. You haven't cited it. Becuase it never existed!

    > Murdoch is not even an American

    Really? How come they let him vote?

    Everyone note, this is the same 3-step procedure the Olbypologists use over and over. Step 1: Divert the discussion away from the infamous, deplorable Keith Olbermann. Step 2: Point the finger at someone else, like O'Rushity, Fox, or any other convenient whipping boy, and talk about how eeevil they are. Step 3: Bolster your diversionary tactic with unsupported "facts" and nonsensical claims. It really doesn't matter if you don't document them (you can always just tell people to Google it, thereby avoiding the embarrassment of being shown up as a fraud). As long as the topic veers away from Herr Olbermann you are a success.

    So Buffalo, if you want to spread lies about Rupert Murdoch, or how the FCC licenses cable news channels, take it somewhere else. We see through your Olbypologist tricks. This site is for discussing, dissecting, and mocking the discredited sports guy.

    "No, why don't you enlighten us. In particular, explain what "laws" prevented anyone from starting up a cable channel, that the Reagan administration had to change. And by the way, that's what we're talking about, a cable channel, not a news network, Einstein.

    Posted by: johnny dollar at January 17, 2007 2:09 AM"

    No you stupid fool. Fox News lost billions before it turned a profit. The Fox News channel would never have come about without the network Murdoch built by buying local broadcast stations. That was not alowed in the degree he was able to do it without the laws being changed.


    "So Buffalo, if you want to spread lies about Rupert Murdoch, or how the FCC licenses cable news channels, take it somewhere else. We see through your Olbypologist tricks. This site is for discussing, dissecting, and mocking the discredited sports guy.

    Posted by: johnny dollar at January 17, 2007 3:12 AM"

    Little Johnny, you are nothing more than a person with the skills of pointing out spelling errors or minutia details. You are not able to contrive an opinion on any issue.

    Who debated citizenship? I only say that in my book Murdoch is not American. He got in as a wanted criminal with a warrants through backdoor deals with the Republican party to create 700 Club on a huge scale. FoxNews is a Christian news channel using the same format as 700 Club, pure bullshit!

    You have proven you have zero insights into what made this democracy, what our nation was founded on, and what constitutes and American.

    You hate democracy because you are too bog of a coward to fight for it. Plain and simple coward1

    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=history+of+Rupert+Murdoch

    Step 4: When cornered, resort to name-calling and personal attacks. (This has become known as the Olbermann Gambit, so-called in tribute to the many personal insults and fits of name calling he has indulged in for lack of a rational response.)

    Puck, wherever you are, you are still a stone cold idiot !

    Oh my god! I just clicked on Jonny $ name and saw his sight. What a f---ing a--hole!

    Anyone who would put up a page on the most anti-democracy fake news channel like Fox has got to be the number one biggest loser ever to live.

    I have one word for you Johnny Dollar (what a dumb moniker) a--hole!

    You are and a--hole.

    FOXNEWS is in my book Nazi propaganda bullshit out to destroy democracy and America.

    Why in the world would a lowly vermin like you want to defend the largest monopoly on of media on the planet earth? Every science fiction writer ever to have lived warned us all about Murdoch. This guy is a hate filled man of greed, greed greed. Murdoch is the lowest slime on the planet earth and you are lower for defending him

    You can now f--- off!

    I am embarrassed that lowered myself to engage Johnny $. Had I known about his page I would never have acknowledged him.

    Johnny Dollar what a dumb f---ing name to go by.

    Johnny Dollar - anti democracy, anti American

    Johnny Dollar - a--hole who needs to go back to school and study American history.

    You Suck!

    Regarding Murdoch, Reagan, etc..

    I think it was in '85 or so when Rupert bought out Metromedia that triggered an FCC thing about foreign ownership of TV stations. After that Reagan 'expadited' his ability to gain citizenship, making the foreign ownership issue moot.

    Changing a law, no. Getting preferential treatment? Depends on your point of view I suppose.

    One other thing--

    Doesn't bringing up 'dogs that dont hunt', implying other stations/networks/shows are covering stories not seen on Countdown, and mentioning the ratings and/or book sales vis-a-vis O'Reilly open the door for anyone on this site to make their own comparisons to other media voices and outlets?

    Just asking....

    " Doesn't bringing up 'dogs that dont hunt', implying other stations/networks/shows are covering stories not seen on Countdown, and mentioning the ratings and/or book sales vis-a-vis O'Reilly open the door for anyone on this site to make their own comparisons to other media voices and outlets?

    Just asking.... "
    The reason rating are brought in is because KO brags any time he has a good night. And when you compare them to BOR you see how absurd that is. And same with the book. KO bragged when his book first came out how well his was doing and how bad BOR's was doing even tho BOR's book was'nt even released yet.

    So why then should it surprise anyone on this site when people bring in O'Reilly, Rush, etc. on the discussion (if I can call it that)? I expect it. From any/both/either side.


    It's really ironic that a guy who patterns himself after Edward R. Murrow, is once again slamming some piece of film work as being agitprop.

    It was for the sake of "accuracy" in the 9/11 movie, now with what is a work of fiction, it's for the sake of the '08 vote.

    How long before Keith works up some blacklist of writers, directors, network owners... for political brainwashing and other unamerican activities...

    bigirv said " So why then should it surprise anyone on this site when people bring in O'Reilly, Rush, etc. on the discussion (if I can call it that)? I expect it. From any/both/either side."

    You miss the irony. KO attacks BOR any chance he gets. He brags about things he has no business doing. Showing someone else's book is better than KO would mean nothing.Showing CSI has better ratings would also have no meaning. If KO for instance bragged about giving a hundred bucks to charity and it was then pointed out that Larry King gave 10,000. You would see how absurd KO is. And then if someone brought up Larry King to defend KO because they were compared once is irrelevant.

    Yes Buffaloe: It looks like you made the understandable mistake of engaging Johnny Dollar while thinking he was just a sincere but misguided blogger trying to 'improve' journalism by pointing out the technical errors of a wayward 'journalist'. With this assumption, there would always be hope that your opponent might actually have an open mind.

    But little did you realize that you were actually arguing with a hired gun who has been given the mission of bashing Olbermann, ANY and every way that he possibly can.

    Keith Olbermann picks another straw man to rant against in the Goliath called, "24."

    Don't you see the old tactic tried again by the silly ol' Olbermann?.....He presents a bogeyman that he defines and then goes about defending the uninformed masses from the evil entity. This tactic is what the left claimed the right did in The McCarthy era with regards to Communism and is what every liberal who posts on this site claims The President is doing with radical Islam.

    It is pretty pathetic that a TV show is used as the scapegoat....but this is about what I would expect from the brilliant Olbermann.

    I have never watch "24" before, but my parents love it and have been pushing me to try it out for over a year now.

    Ironic....I watched my first episode of "24" last night (I used a VCR to tape both nights...with only Basic Cable I do not have TiVo) and came away entertained but felt that the depiction of the FBI easily trambling The Constitution was a bit ridiculous and over-dramatic....I decided to wait and see if the show continues with the melodramatic "strong female lawyer defending the 1st Amendment at all costs" tripe...but I am hoping it has a much deeper and realistic effect in future episodes.

    I have yet to watch the last two hours, so for those who know what happens....please don't ruin it for me.

    One last point...I think Robert and J$ should start posting the weekly ratings for "24" at the end of each show review. Compare the ratings to COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN to remind us all the mighty Goliath v. David is now NOT just O'Reilly v. Keith!

    ***(A note to my intellectual and moral superiors, The Secular Humanists: Sorry about the "fairy tale" biblical reference to David/Goliath...Being a foolish Flat-Earther, I just can't help myself!)

    cee
    "I hate Bush, I hate Christians. The radical Right must die!" The Wizard of OZ (Colbert) 1/16/07

    Keith Olbermann - "24 should be taken off the air because it's naked brain washing"

    Say what???

    I'm no Columbo Johnny but isn't it strange that someone out of the blue leaves a comment that basically pats Buffalo on the back. And every word is spelled right except the easiest one. Buffalo's own name. I mean it's in the thread. It could'nt have been done on purpose to sway suspicion that it was Buffalo himself could it. No only KO would be that childish.

    Your right about one thing Karris.

    You are definitely not a 'Columbo'!

    Johnny Dollar- Thank you for doing this thankless job. The "24" smear is classic Olbyloon fodder YET these wackos can't see thru their idiocy. Today is an easy day to expose these delusional people using the "24" rant as the cornerstone. Keep up the good work.

    PS. Could there be an easier job than an Olbermann news researcher. Read 3 or 4 blue blogs and spew it all out, without fact checking.

    Kissel- you are delusional

    Olbermann....a "reporter," debatable.

    Now I understand! Kurt is arguing that Olbermann has saved us all from George Bush becoming our unelected dictator!

    Again...I am amazed that so many have delusions of grandeur regarding themselves or of those who echo their ideology.....And people make fun of me for believing in Jehovah.

    Kurt ignores the fact that Olbermann himself called "24," "naked brainwashing." This implies that "the reporter," has a personal view that a known fictional TV show is really a device of propaganda intended to achieve a political goal.....

    Evidence please.

    cee
    "I hate Bush, I hate Christians. The radical Right must die!" The Wizard of OZ (Colbert) 1/16/07


    KK- Even other lefty MSNBC commentators stay away from KO. He is whack! When Stuart Smalley's radical left podium slipped out from under his feet- KO hopped up and started spewing the same crazy rants. And you losers eat it up. Sadly funny!

    MSNBC talent IMUS speaking about Olbermann last week:

    "Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews, and while we like them, they’re hideously insecure"

    "I’ve been here a long time and Charles I’ve seen this freak parade forever, and I’ve seen them come through."

    Kurt,

    In other words Krazy Keith is the Edward R. Murrow of our times, just with "a taint of madness". I don't think that's necessarily a good thing.

    Actually, 24 is "naked propoganda". We haven't had any terrorist attacks in a few years, so to keep folks scared, FOX runs blaring commercials about possible terrorism associated with the show.

    It's a lot like the eighties, when conservatives who sat out Vietnam got to make movies about conservatives winning the war there. By the end of the eighties, the stupider people (Bush supporters) felt as if we HAD won...

    Is there any conspiracy you guys don't buy into. Fox builds up a show succesfully for 4 seasons and then drops the propaganda bomb in season 5. Listen to yourselves.

    Let's see, Olbermann's two highest rated nights of the week are Mondays and Thursdays. 24's regular time slot is on Monday's. Hmmm. Could it be that KO is afraid that 24 will drain viewers away from one of his best night's ratings wise and wants to get his diehard liberal audience to click away from 24 and back to him? KO's motives couldn't be that transparent could they?

    And Murdoch is an American citizen. I think it would come as quite a shock to many naturalized citizens to hear themselves described as "not American". I guess Mike and company only want people naturalized as citizens in this country who will vow to vote Democratic. How "liberal" of you.

    Sorry- I mean "conspiracy theory"
    Is there any conspiracy THEORY you guys don't buy into. Fox builds up a show succesfully for 4 seasons and then drops the propaganda bomb in season 5. Listen to yourselves.

    Uh, no blankman....we lost Vietnam and millions of people payed the price for our collective ineptitude and dishonor. That is the truth of Vietnam, rationaized away by the same leftist fringe who are trying to do it again with Iraq.....

    Kurt's last post is a great example.

    A question for Kurt.....

    What was the smart "reporter," Keith Olbermann saying, prior to 2003, with regards to invading Iraq?

    cee
    "I hate Bush, I hate Christians. The radical Right must die!" The Wizard of OZ (Colbert) 1/16/07

    Bison Burger only comes on after midnight? I guess that's when the shift at Wendy's end!

    Bison Burger only comes on after midnight? I guess that's when the shift at Wendy's end!

    Bison Burger only comes on after midnight? I guess that's when the shift at Wendy's end!

    You guys are missing the most biased part of the show: a young, black president (Obama) who is willing to cave in to terrorist demands - even sending an American to his death to appease them! And yet appeasement does not work, and the government is hapless in trying to prevent thousands from being killed...

    Oh they gotta be mad about that!

    Did I miss something? Obama got elected?

    Who will Olbermann back, Hillary or Obama?

    Both! As long as there is a (D) next to their name.

    People ARE influenced by television - you can deny it, you can say it's no big deal. But IT IS THERE.

    Posted by: Ensign Expendable at January 16, 2007 9:39 PM

    ----------

    Ensign...you just described why this site exists...KO is trying to influence people to one particular side as a supposed "news" program and a supposed "non-partisan" host. Therefore this site takes up the mantle of (as Quantum Leap used to put it) "putting right what once went wrong"

    Or can I not use Quantum Leap as a reference, because they tended to believe in God?

    He would back Ted Kennedy if he was running. Otherwise, I see Olbermann backing Biden because he's a divorced womanizer.

    Obama is black, and since 24 has a black President on it, that is enough for him to be anti-Obama on OlbyPlanet.

    if 24 is naked propaganda &/or outright brainwashing...then what the heck was The West Wing?

    But, why bother with just 24? Certainly ABC's outright lies on The Path to 9/11 should rank up there with brainwashing...and right before an election. Funny, with Republicans and Democrats both saying that the show was riddled with falsehoods didn't stop Disney from attempting to give the Republicans a shot in the arm with BS about terrorism and a weak Democratic president...

    The entire concept of seeking out aliences with others to attack a tv figure (not even a real person) demonstrates a true desperation to find a group to fit into.
    Posted by: The Buffalo at January 17, 2007 1:36 AM
    ---------------------------------------------

    You mean like KO and Greenwald attacking Jack Bauer of 24?

    It looks like the Scooter Libby trial may never take place.
    The Defense Attorney for Libby got the right to ask prospective jurors questions like: "Do you have a negative opinion of the Bush Administration?"
    The prospective jurors are coming and going like a revolving door.
    Finding enough jurors who DON'T have a negative opinion of the Bush Administration may just be the chore of the century !

    Imagine that- smear campaigns from the left news outlets like CNN, NBC, CBS and ABC may be getting footing.

    But, why bother with just 24? Certainly ABC's outright lies on The Path to 9/11 should rank up there with brainwashing...and right before an election. Funny, with Republicans and Democrats both saying that the show was riddled with falsehoods didn't stop Disney from attempting to give the Republicans a shot in the arm with BS about terrorism and a weak Democratic president...

    Posted by: at January 17, 2007 10:46 AM
    -------------------------

    And what of the news shows that told us gas prices were being fixed for the election...it is 2 months later and gas is even lower

    the economy is in terrible shape...but all the indicators are actually up and looks to be in good shape now although nothing has changed

    and so and so and so forth?

    Oh and should we go into the Liberal soft core porn that was the Left Wing...ooops I meant West...

    Bear,

    The Path to 9/11 was supposed to be based upon facts. West Wing is fiction.

    You're welcome...

    "if 24 is naked propaganda &/or outright brainwashing...then what the heck was The West Wing?"

    The West Wing was one of the best shows ever on TV, not only b/c of the realistic story lines,tremendous acting, but was designed to be a realistic portrayal of the behind the scenes goings on in the White House.
    The Clinton Administration cooperated to lend their hand on the authenticity.
    The Bush Administration didn't.
    That really didn't matter.
    The show centered on an intelligent,quick thinking president that had the country's best interests in mind.
    As you see, the show was the antithesis of the the current president and his administration.

    If West Wing was so good- why is it gone? Cuz it sucked and only loons liked it!

    You ever talk to girls during lunch time or recess out on the playground? Or do you always hide?

    Posted by: The Buffalo at January 17, 2007 1:48 AM

    ----------

    You attack others like this and the more recent comments on Johnny$ and we are supposed to take you seriously in debate?

    Everyone that posts here from whatever side went thru the same demanding registration process as you went thru to post here...live with it...

    Oh, and to take a page from your book of debate, how can you tell what they are talking about on Foxnews if all you are doing is paying attention to the news ladies' bare legs (which makes you sound like the 8th grader).

    Bear,

    The Path to 9/11 was supposed to be based upon facts. West Wing is fiction.

    You're welcome...

    Posted by: at January 17, 2007 10:59 AM

    ----------

    Dear _____,

    My West Wing comment was in response to 24 bashing by KO.

    Please see my 1055am post which was a response to you or some other ____ that brought up The Path to 9/11. In it I respond with reporting of news which unlinke the Path movie is not supposed to be based on facts, but is actually supposed to BE FACT.

    Please pay more attention in future posts.

    Great Thanks! Mr/Mrs _______

    The War in Iraq's Price Tag just hit $1.2 Trillion !

    What $1.2 Trillion Can Buy


    By DAVID LEONHARDT ( NYT)
    Published: January 17, 2007

    The human mind isn't very well equipped to make sense of a figure like $1.2 trillion. We don't deal with a trillion of anything in our daily lives, and so when we come across such a big number, it is hard to distinguish it from any other big number. Millions, billions, a trillion ,they all start to sound the same.


    The way to come to grips with $1.2 trillion is to forget about the number itself and think instead about what you could buy with the money. When you do that, a trillion stops sounding anything like millions or billions.

    For starters, $1.2 trillion would pay for an unprecedented public health campaign,a doubling of cancer research funding, treatment for every American whose diabetes or heart disease is now going unmanaged and a global immunization campaign to save millions of children's lives.

    Combined, the cost of running those programs for a decade wouldn't use up even half our money pot. So we could then turn to poverty and education, starting with universal preschool for every 3- and 4-year-old child across the country. The city of New Orleans could also receive a huge increase in reconstruction funds.

    The final big chunk of the money could go to national security. The recommendations of the 9/11 Commission that have not been put in place, better baggage and cargo screening, stronger measures against nuclear proliferation could be enacted. Financing for the war in Afghanistan could be increased to beat back the Taliban's recent gains, and a peacekeeping force could put a stop to the genocide in Darfur.

    All that would be one way to spend $1.2 trillion. Here would be another:

    The war in Iraq.

    In the days before the war almost five years ago, the Pentagon estimated that it would cost about $50 billion. Democratic staff members in Congress largely agreed. Lawrence Lindsey, a White House economic adviser, was a bit more realistic, predicting that the cost could go as high as $200 billion, but President Bush fired him in part for saying so.

    These estimates probably would have turned out to be too optimistic even if the war had gone well. Throughout history, people have typically underestimated the cost of war, as William Nordhaus, a Yale economist, has pointed out.

    But the deteriorating situation in Iraq has caused the initial predictions to be off the mark by a scale that is difficult to fathom. The operation itself: the helicopters, the tanks, the fuel needed to run them, the combat pay for enlisted troops, the salaries of reservists and contractors, the rebuilding of Iraq, is costing more than $300 million a day, estimates Scott Wallsten, an economist in Washington.

    That translates into a couple of billion dollars a week and, over the full course of the war, an eventual total of $700 billion in direct spending.

    The two best-known analyses of the war's costs agree on this figure, but they diverge from there. Linda Bilmes, at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard, and Joseph Stiglitz, a Nobel laureate and former Clinton administration adviser, put a total price tag of more than $2 trillion on the war. They include a number of indirect costs, like the economic stimulus that the war funds would have provided if they had been spent in this country.

    Mr. Wallsten, who worked with Katrina Kosec, another economist, argues for a figure closer to $1 trillion in today's dollars. My own estimate falls on the conservative side, largely because it focuses on the actual money that Americans would have been able to spend in the absence of a war. I didn't even attempt to put a monetary value on the more than 3,000 American deaths in the war.

    Besides the direct military spending, I'm including the gas tax that the war has effectively imposed on American families (to the benefit of oil-producing countries like Iran, Russia and Saudi Arabia). At the start of 2003, a barrel of oil was selling for $30. Since then, the average price has been about $50. Attributing even $5 of this difference to the conflict adds another $150 billion to the war's price tag, Ms. Bilmes and Mr. Stiglitz say.

    The war has also guaranteed some big future expenses. Replacing the hardware used in Iraq and otherwise getting the United States military back into its prewar fighting shape could cost $100 billion. And if this war's veterans receive disability payments and medical care at the same rate as veterans of the first gulf war, their health costs will add up to $250 billion. If the disability rate matches Vietnam's, the number climbs higher. Either way, Ms. Bilmes says, "It's like a miniature Medicare."

    In economic terms, you can think of these medical costs as the difference between how productive the soldiers would have been as, say, computer programmers or firefighters and how productive they will be as wounded veterans. In human terms, you can think of soldiers like Jason Poole, a young corporal profiled in The New York Times last year. Before the war, he had planned to be a teacher. After being hit by a roadside bomb in 2004, he spent hundreds of hours learning to walk and talk again, and he now splits his time between a community college and a hospital in Northern California.

    Whatever number you use for the war's total cost, it will tower over costs that normally seem prohibitive. Right now, including everything, the war is costing about $200 billion a year.

    Treating heart disease and diabetes, by contrast, would probably cost about $50 billion a year. The remaining 9/11 Commission recommendations, held up in Congress partly because of their cost, might cost somewhat less. Universal preschool would be $35 billion. In Afghanistan, $10 billion could make a real difference. At the National Cancer Institute, annual budget is about $6 billion.

    "This war has skewed our thinking about resources," said Mr. Wallsten, a senior fellow at the Progress and Freedom Foundation, a conservative-leaning research group. "In the context of the war, $20 billion is nothing."

    As it happens, $20 billion is not a bad ballpark estimate for the added cost of Mr. Bush's planned surge in troops. By itself, of course, that price tag doesn't mean the surge is a bad idea. If it offers the best chance to stabilize Iraq, then it may well be the right option.

    But the standard shouldn't simply be whether a surge is better than the most popular alternative : a far-less-expensive political strategy that includes getting tough with the Iraqi government. The standard should be whether the surge would be better than the political strategy plus whatever else might be accomplished with the $20 billion.

    This time, it would be nice to have that discussion before the troops reach Iraq.

    Chucky writes; "The West Wing was one of the best shows ever on TV, not only b/c of the realistic story lines,tremendous acting, but was designed to be a realistic portrayal of the behind the scenes goings on in the White House.
    The Clinton Administration cooperated to lend their hand on the authenticity."


    Best label for the West Wing that I've read:

    "The Clinton White House Without Clinton"

    Bear,

    Oh, you mean the post where you state that news outlets told us that gas prices were being fixed without any proof of you contention? I thought that you wanted me to ignore that since you offered no proof.

    Actually, the oil companies did get a government surcharge removed for their effort...remember?

    If West Wing was so good- why is it gone? Cuz it sucked and only loons liked it!

    Really smart guy posting here.

    The West Wing was on the air for 7 years.The show received positive reviews from critics, political science professors, and former White House staffers. In total, The West Wing won two Golden Globe Awards and 26 Emmy Awards, tying with Hill Street Blues for the most Emmy Awards ever won by a television drama series. Included in this record-equalling haul were four straight awards for Outstanding Drama Series (2000-2003).

    The show used words too big for the above poster to understand , thus why he thought it sucked, man.

    Cecilia is just pissed that there isn't a show that has a moron as president who bankrupts our country with wars nobody wants.
    Maybe on next year's schedule, Ceals

    Wonder if Keith thinks a black guy being president on 24 is brainwashing or propaganda.

    Bush sucks!

    "Cecilia is just pissed that there isn't a show that has a moron as president who bankrupts our country with wars nobody wants.
    Maybe on next year's schedule, Ceals"


    Wrong, my little red-haired psychopath.

    There was MASH, wherein all non-anti-war politicians and military personnel were portrayed as treacherous empty-headed hypocrites.

    An artistic approach sure to be deemed suitable for public consumption by our Edward R. Moron.


    "if 24 is naked propaganda &/or outright brainwashing...then what the heck was The West Wing?"

    The West Wing was one of the best shows ever on TV, not only b/c of the realistic story lines,tremendous acting, but was designed to be a realistic portrayal of the behind the scenes goings on in the White House.
    The Clinton Administration cooperated to lend their hand on the authenticity.
    The Bush Administration didn't.
    That really didn't matter.
    The show centered on an intelligent,quick thinking president that had the country's best interests in mind.
    As you see, the show was the antithesis of the the current president and his administration.

    Posted by: Bob at January 17, 2007 10:59 AM

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

    Bob,
    There are any that say 24 is one of the best shows ever on TV withgreat acting, writing, etc.
    If the West Wing was supposed to be "a realistic portrayal of the behind the scenes goings on in the White House," then we are lucky that BCwas restricted to 2 terms.
    Boo Hoo, the Bush administration didn't grant TWW the access it had under BC? Gee, considering that most to their portrayals of anyone ACTUALLY moderate (not their idea of moderate) or to the right was, most of the time, cartoonish stereotypes, then I understand why they wouldn't be let in.
    TWW had the country's best FAR LEFT LIBERAL interests in mind and ignored any negative consequences to any of their policies (unless you believe that their policies would generally have carried no consequences that could be termed negative).
    And finally, once again we come to is W dumb or smart? If W is so stupid, how did he dupe Congress and America into going into Iraq, pass tax cuts that only help the super rich, destroy the US Constitution, etc?

    Cecilia:There was MASH, wherein all non-anti-war politicians and military personnel were portrayed as treacherous empty-headed hypocrites.

    Was there ever any doubt in anyone's mind that the #1 female warmongering poster at this site would not like one of the best shows ever on the tube: MASH?

    "all non-anti-war politicians and military personnel were portrayed as treacherous empty-headed hypocrites."

    Hit too close to home for you and your beloved politicians during that era , right Ceals ?

    I could just hear Ceals during that time period:
    "Four More years, Four More years "

    Fred Bear,
    Bush sucks! He's a dictator killing innocent peace loving Muslims! He's evil!

    Cecelia,

    Actually, M*A*S*H showed anti-war folks as alcoholics, cross-dressers and narcessists. Have you ever seen the show?...

    I just hate Bush! He's responsible for the ice storms!

    "If W is so stupid, how did he dupe Congress and America into going into Iraq,"

    BY LYING, and CHERRY PICKING INTELLIGENCE !


    pass tax cuts that only help the super rich, destroy the US Constitution, etc?

    THROUGH FEAR AND MORONS LIKE YOU WHO FELL FOR IT.

    Impeach Bush he sucks!

    Post at 11:52 wasn't me.

    Just your typical right wing imbecile.

    Muslims are a peace loving bunch! I think Bin Laden, Nassrallah and Ahmadinejad are misunderstand. I say lets talk with them. Maybe we can get along! I do agree with them that Bush sucks! So they aint that bad!

    Rightwingers are eveil. Their leader Bush is evil. I say ban Foxnews and the Republican party!

    Bush is evil impeach him!
    That's what I live for!
    I hate Bush!

    "Those who regularly listen to and give some credence to the Addict and watch O'Hannity are not the greatest of intellects and seek out someone who mouths their own often untested beliefs."

    You must be onto something in that spiel....considering the foremost appeal we hear from Olbermann fans, especially when they are defending Olbermann for never airing challengers or even those he has accused of some malfeasance, is that they finally have a television show completely devoted to their point of view.

    Response to _____
    Bear,

    Oh, you mean the post where you state that news outlets told us that gas prices were being fixed without any proof of you contention?

    [Please do any search on CNN site or NBC or CBS this story was everywhere including this site that the oil companies were fixing the price just to try to get R's elected...but here we are 2 months later and prices are at least 20 cents less]

    I thought that you wanted me to ignore that since you offered no proof.
    [No links were provided as everyone conscious during Oct 2006 would have known the story. Do I need to offer links to prove that the Colts play New England this coming Sunday for the AFC Championship?]

    Actually, the oil companies did get a government surcharge removed for their effort...remember?
    [Please provide all of your proof for this surcharge removal...especially the proof that one thing directly lead to the other.]

    Posted by: at January 17, 2007 11:25 AM

    Great Thanks Mr/Ms/Mrs ______

    Thanks for playing anyway

    "Rightwingers are eveil."


    Spell much ?


    The true joy of this site (Other than the insane rambling of Johnny Dollar) Is watching some of the truly stupid compartmentalize everything in one camp. For example, "Muslims are a peace loving bunch! I think Bin Laden, Nassrallah and Ahmadinejad are misunderstand" Johnny how about giving this guy, posing as Bob, clear thinker status? He doesn't let things like nuance cloud his reasoning.

    WORST

    WEBSITE

    IN

    THE

    WORLD!!!

    "they finally have a television show completely devoted to their point of view."

    Posted by: Cecelia at January 17, 2007 11:58 AM

    Cecilia writes this post with the pictures of Sean Hannity, Rush Limpballs and Richard Nixon adorning her wall.

    "all non-anti-war politicians and military personnel were portrayed as treacherous empty-headed hypocrites."

    'Hit too close to home for you and your beloved politicians during that era , right Ceals ?

    I could just hear Ceals during that time period:
    "Four More years, Four More years "'


    I rest my case.

    One man's political opinion is must-see-tv...

    WORST

    WEBSITE

    IN

    THE

    WORLD!!!

    Posted by: cap'n igor at January 17, 2007 12:05 PM

    ----------

    And you are a part of it!

    "they finally have a television show completely devoted to their point of view."

    Posted by: Cecelia at January 17, 2007 11:58 AM

    Cecilia writes this post with the pictures of Sean Hannity, Rush Limpballs and Richard Nixon adorning her wall.

    Posted by: Bob at January 17, 2007 12:05 PM"


    I'd say this is so lame it must from the fake Bob.

    If I could...

    Bear,

    Here is my proof:

    "The President Is Directing EPA Administrator Steve Johnson To Use All His Available Authority To Grant Waivers That Would Relieve Critical Fuel Supply Shortages - As He Did After Last Year's Hurricanes. Under Federal air quality laws, some areas of the country are required to use a fuel blend called reformulated gasoline. This year, we are undergoing a rapid transition in the primary ingredient in reformulated gas - from MTBE to ethanol. State and local officials in the Northeast and in Texas worry that supplies could run low. To ensure that there are not needless restrictions to get gasoline to the pump, the EPA should be able to meet the request of officials seeking to waive local fuel requirements on a temporary basis. If Administrator Johnson finds he needs more authority to relieve the problem, the Administration will work with Congress to obtain the authority he needs."

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/04/20060425-2.html

    I note that you still provided no proof of your contention. Like most stupid neocons, you simply pretend something is common knowledge...just not so common that you can actually find proof of it.

    Pretty lame.

    Someone write "Actually, M*A*S*H showed anti-war folks as alcoholics, cross-dressers and narcessists"

    No, it showed them as dedicated and brilliant surgeons who drank to escape the horrors of the war.

    It showed one of them as a quirky and delightful square peg, who cross-dressed as an attempt to get out of the war.

    And where would the Clintons be if the left held narcissism against anyone?

    I'm down with that. Long may MASH rerun. It's not dangerous or seditious.

    But would Edward R. Moron say the same for an anti-MASH?

    Clinton doesn't meet the requirements for a narcissist. Just another real word being used in a fictitious way by the imbecilic right wing...

    How does this moon bat keep getting airtime with his 4th place ratings? Are the 4 people who watch his show (besides his mother) NBC executives? Its as if they found some weirdo shouting on a street corner and ask him to host a show. It would be interesting to see if The Factor beats moon bat when Bill is on vacation and the gorgeous Megan Kendall host the show. How many fear mongering propaganda shows and movies has the left put out? The Day After tomorrow, The Day After, The Left Wing, ........ The myth of global warming has been forced down our throats for years.

    You can believe anything you wish about whether it merited impeachment, but any CEO who commences to have a 22 year old office worker give him oral sex while he is in the middle of the discovery process for a sexual harrassment suit is the ESSENCE of a narcissist.

    Remember when Eisenhower warned us against the military industrial complex:
    "In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

    This administration has taken war profiteering to a whole new level.

    Some Pentagon officials have stood in the way of a weapons system that could save American lives tonight in Iraq and Afghanistan. It's a system called TROPHY that literally shoots rocket-propelled grenades out of the sky. The U.S. Army blocked the system because of a contract it's developed with Raytheon to develop a similar system. The Army blocked efforts to test TROPHY on the ground in Iraq, ignoring the advice of the Army's own engineers.

    This Administration continues to put our troops at risk, in order to bow down to and feed the coffers of the military industrial complex.

    MSNBC has been running a continuing series on this travesty.

    Funny how the RW'ers aren't up in arms over this blatant example of putting greed over the safety of our troops.


    "The Left Wing, ........ The myth of global warming has been forced down our throats for years."

    The myth !

    Real smart people posting on the right wing side.

    Thank you Kurt Kissel!

    I nominate Mr. Kissel's 9:05 AM post from today as the most coherent articulation of both the merits and the drawbacks of Olbermann's show that I have ever seen on this site, or anywhere else for that matter.

    Only the really hard core Olby haters and right wigers, who just don't want to hear anything that threatens their carefully woven view that Olbermann is an 'affront' to jounalism could possibly disagree.

    To anyone with an open mind, please scroll back and read that post...it speaks nothing but truth!

    Cecelia,

    This is the problem with you right wingers. You don't really care what a word means. You simply use it over and over, like a retarded child, until you think that you've made your point...

    Narcissism is a real condition. Someone, like Clinton, who "connected" with people (one of the most common descriptions of meeting with the man) could not possibly be a narcissist. If you are saying that any man who cheats on his wife is a narcissist, then you clearly don't understand what the word means...

    Kurt, to further illustrate what an effective post you made at 9:05, look how all the little Olby haters pounced on it right away....a sure sign you threatened their little carefully constructed illusion!

    Bob, I see someone has hijacked your name above. It reads a lot like the same individual who has done the same thing to several other left of center posters here.

    Robert, are you paying attention?

    Obviously Olbermann is a Threat!


    (...to all the Right Wing NeoCon Nutbags)

    Cecilia is blinded by her hatred for anything democratic.
    She can't help herself.

    The socialist who posted about TROPHY got that from an NBC propaganda that was debunked by "The Factor". That system was axed because it did not work and provided false protection. The Israeli army tried to use it and sell it to the U.S. but when it was tested, it didn't work. Keep putting on your tin foil hats and gulping up that propaganda.

    "keep putting on your tin foil hats and gulping up that propaganda"

    Well, you do admit to eating up "The Factor", don't you?

    Also smart guy, what in the hell does 'socialist' have to do with whether an Army weapons system works or not?

    By the way 'Factor', exactly what does "moon bat", and "tin foil hats" mean?

    I'm more interested in seeing if Factor can back up his claim that TROPHY was axed due to poor performance.

    Got proof?

    You mean sort of like how some of you are so blinded by your hatred of Bush/Republicans that you can't bring yourself to see the truth about some of the Democratic politicans and your favorite liberal-loving news anchors like Olbermann?

    Face it, what he does is NOT a news show, it's an OPINION show. If he'd just label his show for what it is instead of trying to pass it off as news I think this site would cease to exist. but Olbermann's ego is such that he can't admit to himself that he presents a biased opinion-fest, it's why he goes to such extremes to deny such a thing in interviews at every opportunity he gets.

    And does anyone really believe for a single second that Olbermann would have a problem with 24 if it weren't on Fox? Or if it wasn't on a night of the week (Mondays) in which he typicallly gets his best ratings opposite his time slot? Is that Olbermann's real problem--that his overnights weren't good because of 24 and he's pissed and trying to get people to stop watching the show? It's pathetic. He's pathetic. It's just a fictional television show and it does raise question about civil rights and liberties and the way in which suspects and regular citizens are being treated when terrorism occurs.

    Cmon people! We ALL know that if something gets 'debunked' on "The Factor"....it's DEBUNKED!

    I'm sure they don't realize it, but this Site and all these Right Wing Haters is about the biggest 'Tribute' to Keith imaginable.

    Keep up the Good Work!

    "Or if it wasn't on a night of the week (Mondays) in which he typicallly gets his best ratings opposite his time slot?"

    It's only opposite his time slot on the East Coast and in certain parts of the Central Time Zone. For those of us who live West of the Mississippi, Countdown is on either at 5pm (Pacific) or 6pm (Mountain).

    Why am I not surprised that instead of Bill O'Reilly being outraged over the war profiteering that he tried to "debunk" the TROPHY story.

    Plus the Israelis are continuing to use TROPHY, BECAUSE IT WORKS...as opposed to what lies THE FACTOR poster spewed.

    Just like O'Really claimed there are no conservatives at NBC, when Joe Scarborough has been one all his life.

    The Neo-nuts are fuming that Scarborough and other conservatives have woken up to the disaster of the Bush Administration's policies.

    ATLANTA - Cancer deaths in the United States have dropped for a second straight year, confirming that a corner has been turned in the war on cancer.

    Wow, first the deficit, now cancer.

    Bush is awesome!

    "Narcissism is a real condition. Someone, like Clinton, who "connected" with people (one of the most common descriptions of meeting with the man) could not possibly be a narcissist. If you are saying that any man who cheats on his wife is a narcissist, then you clearly don't understand what the word means...
    "

    I specifically call Clinton a narcissist for taking the risks that he did in a very particular set of circumstances and you then suggest I'm saying that anyone who cheats on his wife is a narcissist?

    The "retarded child" shoe fits, you need to wear it.

    Narcissists can be very charming when they wish and can connect with others.

    Yes, I think Clinton is a narcissist.


    Liza, you just made fun of a conservative for making a grammatical error while he tried to correct a liberal, but in your own post, you did the same damn thing. This is so stupid. I'm so tired of seeing people trying to correct one another's spelling errors and then using that as a way to insult the person and then apply it to all others.
    "I can spell better than you, therefore, I can conclude that Bush is a secret member of skull and bones, and he and Cheney are actually members of a secret cult planning to kill and eat all the puppies and bunny rabbits of the world." I mean come on.

    As for Keith, he seems to be one of those people who thinks Bush is completely stupid with no perception of reality, yet who also believes that he planned and carried out one of the most elaborate, and complicated conspiracies of all time with 9/11.

    Proof? Why do I need proof? Socialist/liberals never need proof. Where is your proof of a "vast military complex"? The military is one of the smallest parts of the federal budget even though it is the only part of the budget that is constitutional. Why would a socialist/liberal care about the constitution? You must be snippy because I use the word socialist. You want to hide behind the word "progressive".

    I nominate Mr. Kissel's 9:05 AM post from today as the most coherent articulation of both the merits and the drawbacks of Olbermann's show that I have ever seen on this site, or anywhere else for that matter.

    The nomination should be withdrawn. Over the top name calling does not make a coherent articulation. The first third was about "FIX" News. How does calling the ladies on FOX News hookers relate to a coherent articulation of Olbermann?? The only flaw that I saw about Olbermann is that he has a little madness but not as much as others. Why alway compare to FOX News. Keiths merit, he speaks the truth. Does that mean all that Keith says is true?? I get that you don't like FOX News, so why set the bar so low for Olbermann.

    Joe Scarborough : You have the Pentagon saying this system is not ready, when another part of the Pentagon says it has a 98 percent success rate. And when will their system be up again? Five years from now. Think of all the lives that will be lost from our troops over there if we wait that long, because this is a classic Pentagon turf battle, just an absolute disgrace. And it may well be an issue in the upcoming elections.

    Factor,

    You don't need proof if you believe in things that aren't true. Intelligent people build their opinions upon proof. You, who don't have proof, build your opinions out of fear of authority figures. Whatever they say is good enough for you.

    Neocons certainly don't like reality. Kinda like Blanche from Streetcar Named Desire...

    Mike writes "Kurt, to further illustrate what an effective post you made at 9:05, look how all the little Olby haters pounced on it right away....a sure sign you threatened their little carefully constructed illusion!"

    That is a logical fallacy, of course.

    The Factor :"Where is your proof of a "vast military complex"?

    Please, someone help this ignorant soul. I don't have the patience.

    Cecelia,

    >>I specifically call Clinton a narcissist for taking the risks that he did in a very particular set of circumstances and you then suggest I'm saying that anyone who cheats on his wife is a narcissist?

    Those particular circumstances are no different than any other infidelity. Is Newt Gingrich a narcissist? Is Henry Hyde? Is Rudy Guiliani?

    Ignorance is not something to be covetted. You should learn at least that from our exchange.

    "Cecilia is blinded by her hatred for anything democratic.
    She can't help herself."


    You issue this pronouncement over the very mundane statement that Bill Clinton is a narcissist (not a thief, baby killer, or dictator...) and that Keith Olbermann is a putz, and you say I'm blinded by partisanship?

    Olbermann is the most honest newsman there is. His worrd is as good a gold. You guys just hate his truths!

    The military-industrial complex is generally defined as a "coalition consisting of the military and industrialists who profit by manufacturing arms and selling them to the government." (War profiteering)

    Unilateralist ideologues formerly affiliated with right wing think tanks, along with the 32 major administration appointees who are former executives with, consultants for, or significant shareholders of top Defense contractors, are driving U.S. foreign and military policy.

    The arms lobby is exerting more influence over policymaking than at any time since President Dwight D. Eisenhower first warned of the dangers of the military-industrial complex over 40 years ago.

    It is not just industry-backed think tanks that have infiltrated the administration. Former executives, consultants or shareholders of top U.S. defense companies pervade the Bush national security team.

    Exploiting the fears following 9/11, and impervious to budgetary constraints imposed on virtually every other form of federal spending, the ideologue-industry nexus is driving the United States to war in Iraq and a permanently aggressive war-fighting posture that will simultaneously starve other government programs and make the world a much more dangerous place.

    Olbermann is a hero. Standing up to Reichwing!

    "Cecilia is blinded by her hatred for anything democratic.
    She can't help herself."


    Cecilia:You issue this pronouncement over the very mundane statement that Bill Clinton is a narcissist...


    No, I make this pronouncement as an observation of having the misfortune of reading your posts for the last 6 months.

    Just think, that whomever is co-opting my name, has nothing better to do than make a fool of himself.

    I agree,
    America is evil. Down with the Military-Industrial complex!
    Long live Iran, China, Syria, Venezueala, Al-Qaeda, Hizballah and North Korea! They're the good nations we're evil!

    "Those particular circumstances are no different than any other infidelity. Is Newt Gingrich a narcissist? Is Henry Hyde? Is Rudy Guiliani?

    Ignorance is not something to be covetted. You should learn at least that from our exchange."


    Speaking of ignorance...you've just exposed yourself and Paula Jones isn't around to appreciate it.

    Neither Newt Gingrich or Henry Hyde started an affair while in the process of being sued by an govt employee for sexually inappropriate behavior.

    As an attorney, Clinton knew that Paula Jones' lawyers were seeking evidence that he had a pattern of looking for love in all the wrong places.

    Establishing THAT pattern of behavior is Ground Zero of this particular kind of lawsuit. He virtually handed them THE smoking gun in what he knew was an open-ended discovery process.

    He couldn't stop himself and he later delayed and lied knowing that friends and govt colleagues were spending thousands in personal legal bills.

    That's a narcissist.

    I'm the real Bob, your an imposter! I hate Bush! I hate America! I'm the true Progressive!

    Just think, that whomever is co-opting my name, has nothing better to do than make a fool of himself."

    I guess they don't know that you do that all by yourself!

    Brian, are you claiming that KO is a 911 conspiracy theorist? I've never heard him even hint at such a thing.

    And believe me, I've heard the arguments put forth by the 911 conspiracy theorists....unfortunately a know a couple of them very well.

    Notice how Cecilia espouses great detail of anything that deals with Bill Clinton.

    Also notice how she avoids speaking of anything that would put her savior GWB in an unfavorable light.

    "No, I make this pronouncement as an observation of having the misfortune of reading your posts for the last 6 months."


    You can't help yourself, Chucks. Anger is your ice cream.

    Mike,
    Ignore these Fascists. Olbermann is a hero! He stands up for the people. He cares about us. He's the greatest humanitarian since Ghandi!
    He goes to Africa and exposes Blood Diamonds, He goes to Hurricane and Earthquake victims and details their pains. He also exposes child molesters! He a great man and they will build monuments to him!

    "Notice how Cecilia espouses great detail of anything that deals with Bill Clinton.

    Also notice how she avoids speaking of anything that would put her savior GWB in an unfavorable light."


    So we're back to Hannity posters again?

    Cecelia,
    You and your reichwing ilk are too brainwashed to understand Olbermann's compassion. Did you ever see his special on Aids in Afdrica. I was crying when he was in the Congo interviewing those poor people. How about after the Tsunami, Olbermann was in indonesia talking to poor villagers who lost everything! He's the greatews human being ever!

    Did anyone see Olbermann live from Dafur? It saddened my to see those poor rape victims and just seeing OLbermann's compassion adn caring was heart warming!

    It becomes so tiring to be forced so often to defend Bill Clinton whenever George Bush is criticized. OK, lets compare the obvious legacies of both Clinton & Bush.

    - The critics of both rightfully say they both lied. (A) - Clinton lied under oath about discusting sex while trying to protect his marriage....illegal but somewhat understandable. (B) - Bush lied to get us into a pointless war that has killed over 3000 Americans and wounded over 20,000 others...so far, and God knows how many Iraqis.

    I don't like lies by anyone, but I will choose lie 'A' over lie 'B' anytime.

    Cecilia seems to be a very sad and bitter woman.

    Her rage is limited to Bill Clinton and the moderate and left wing posters at this site.

    Where is HER anger and rage over the tens of thousands of innocents killed by the president she supports?

    or the policies of her president that injures our very citizens ?

    Mike,
    Bush lied people died! Bush is the evilest man ever! Even Stalin would cringe! Hitler would be stunned at Bush's evil. Ghengis Khan would run in fear from the evil Bush!

    The imposter's misspellings give himself away.

    TDF.

    Mike, do you ever leave this board to do something constructive with your life besides whine and complain? Get out of the house, or likely in your case, your parents basement on dial-up.

    Cecelia,

    Oh, you need a pattern...as if Gingrich hasn't got a pattern of his own by leaving two wives on sick beds...THAT'S a narcissist.

    Your explaination of why Clinton is a narcissist shows that you still have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Perhaps you should look up the word and find out what it means rather than wishing it means what you want it to...

    Yes, we hear what you are saying Red Wolf, er, I mean 'Bob'!

    Bushkill Falls,
    I couldn't agree more! Bush will go down as the biggest genocidal mass murderer in history! How dare he attack those peace loving Muslims! Islam is the religion of peace. Especially compared to those evil Christians! Jesus was an evil mass muderer like Bush!

    Red State, who lives at this site, disses Mike for posting.
    How funny is that !

    "Jesus was an evil mass muderer like Bush!"


    Red State, you keep giving yourself away.
    You can't write a sentence without revealing who you are.

    Funny.

    WASHINGTON, Jan. 16 — Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, an outspoken Republican critic of the administration’s Iraq policy, will join two leading Democrats in introducing a resolution opposing President Bush’s buildup of troops in Iraq, putting a bipartisan stamp on the looming Congressional showdown over the war.

    Your Redstate I'm Bob! I'm the real progressive here! Olbermann is my god! I have a picture of him and thank he is the saviour of man! His name willoutlive even Einsteins! Children will sing songs about his compassion! Statues of Olbermann will be in every city! We'll even have Olbermann day!

    Yes I agree Bob. Olbermann is a great humanitarian! He cares about you and I. He stands up for us against the evil Bush!

    Mike, do you ever leave this board to do something constructive with your life besides whine and complain? Get out of the house, or likely in your case, your parents basement on dial-up.

    Posted by: RedState at January 17, 2007 2:22 PM

    Red State, who has been lurking all day and assumimg Bob's name, just lives to muck up this board.

    Red State: the ultimate clueless warrior !

    Bush is evil! He must die!

    Redstate:

    There you go again, reverting back to your old sniping troll like behavior. Understandable from someone who has no real ideas of their own.

    I've explained this before, but when you are gainfully and comfortably self employed, as I am, you can pretty much do as you like, WHEN you choose to do it.

    When you have a 'job', the thing you take so much pride in, you are essentially 'owned' by someone else for the majority of your day. Kind of the way you are currently being brainwashed by your government.

    But you sure can spell good, and your grammars real good too!

    Mike writes: "It becomes so tiring to be forced so often to defend Bill Clinton whenever George Bush is criticized. OK, lets compare the obvious legacies of both Clinton & Bush.

    - The critics of both rightfully say they both lied. (A) - Clinton lied under oath about discusting sex while trying to protect his marriage....illegal but somewhat understandable. (B) - Bush lied to get us into a pointless war that has killed over 3000 Americans and wounded over 20,000 others...so far, and God knows how many Iraqis.

    I don't like lies by anyone, but I will choose lie 'A' over lie 'B' anytime."


    Actually, Clinton came up in a discussion of the televsion show MASH and that as a bon mot that caused much offense to Clinton supporter...but don't let that keep you from assumptions...

    Redstate, your evil just like Bush! Did you know that the ice storms that hit the Midwest are cause by Aliens! Yes Karl Rove and aliens from Alpha Centauri plotted to create the ice storms.
    They did it to cover up global warming!
    Did you know Cheney invented the bird flu? Yes the Aliens helped him!

    Cecelia,

    Exactly what did Clinton say that was perjury? Do you know or are you simply mouthing what you were told to mouth without a thought in your head?

    Cecilia's just as big an idiot as Red State is.

    Redstate,
    Your just an ignorant redneck peasant! That's why I want taxes to be increased. I can afford it! You can't! Since your a working sucker you'll get stuck with the bill! You loser! I love being part of the ruling class! I laugh at stupid peasants like you!

    OK, I admit it. it was me. See how childish I can be!

    I'm redstate and I hate muslims! I hate them all. There are no moderates there. we should nuke them and rape their children. that is my view.

    I hate Bob, and yet I am secretly attracted to him. Not that I'm gay. I HATE GAYS. I kill them all. Watch me KILL!

    And the blacks! Those damn liberals! They want to give = rights to those *@##$@! I hate them all!

    Troops! must have Surge! Surge GOOD! BuSh SAY Surge!! GRRRR!! I rightwing hear me roar.

    in my sad moments i sometimes cry. Sometimes I know my penis is small. No, Not SMALL! BIG!!! Watch me WAR!!! WAR GOOD!! Rape the MUSLIMS!


    bon mot?

    I made my case.

    No name:
    Who's the idiot who only reads blogs for his facts?

    Perjury Case:
    The judge wrote:
    "Simply put, the president's deposition testimony regarding whether he had ever been alone with Ms. (Monica) Lewinsky was intentionally false, and his statements regarding whether he had ever engaged in sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky likewise were intentionally false . . . .

    "Cecelia,

    Oh, you need a pattern...as if Gingrich hasn't got a pattern of his own by leaving two wives on sick beds...THAT'S a narcissist.

    Your explaination of why Clinton is a narcissist shows that you still have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Perhaps you should look up the word and find out what it means rather than wishing it means what you want it to..."


    Perhaps you should take a course in logic.


    Since you now know Clinton isn't just like any other adulterer, it's a cute move to now make a special case that neither is Newt Gingrich, but if we take it as indisputable, undebatable gospel fact that Gingrich left two wives on a sickbed, Gingrich or anyone else being a narcissist does not preclude Clinton from being one.

    Narcissists can certainly be very charismatic as a slew of actors, actresses, socialites, politicians and world leaders have demonstrated.

    So try again, einstein.


    Ok guys. I get you're mesage.
    I've ben actting dum.
    Your my bestest frinds. I don't no what I'd do without you.
    Plase forgive me., Ok guys?
    Guys ?
    You still their ?

    Robert and Johnny:

    Maybe you've noticed. Maybe you haven't, but some idiot is on here hijacking multiple identities screwing up your board.

    "bon mot?

    I made my case."


    Look it up...

    Any good witticism is reality based.

    Way to pound Clinton, Cecilia.
    You're a true non partisan patriot.
    We know you just can't find any of George Bush's mistakes to write about.
    You're our heroine.

    Conservatives must die! Bush is an evil man!
    I hate him! Without him my life would be great! If it wasn't for Bush I'd hook up with every woman! I vcan't vbecause it's Bush's fault! It's Bush's fault there's no cure for Cancer or Aids! U hate him! It's Bush's fault that San Diego lost to New England! It's all Bush! He's evil!!!

    "bon mot?

    I made my case."


    Look it up...

    Any good witticism is reality based.


    My point was that YOU'RE not reality based.

    Bush ius a scumbag! I read that over at Dailykos! It must be true he's in league with Space Aliens!

    WASHINGTON, Jan. 16 — Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, an outspoken Republican critic of the administration’s Iraq policy, will join two leading Democrats in introducing a resolution opposing President Bush’s buildup of troops in Iraq, putting a bipartisan stamp on the looming Congressional showdown over the war.

    Talk, talk, talk, talk.....NO ACTION....CUT THE FUNDING NOW!

    Nice piece by Mike Lupica....

    All these Democrats do is talk, talk, talk

    Talk today about Sgt. Liam Madden, a kid from Vermont who joined the Marines after high school and ended up in Anbar Province, who says that you can be a good Marine and a good American and still want our war in Iraq to stop. Talk proudly about Madden of the 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit, who took a petition, signed by more than 1,000 just like him, to Congress yesterday, who just by walking up the steps of the Cannon House Office Building did more than big Democrats such as Sens. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) and Barack Obama (D-Ill.) are doing these days.

    Clinton would rather be photographed with soldiers than do anything for them. The other day on "Face the Nation," Obama looked like he wanted to hide under the desk when Bob Schieffer asked him if he backed Sen. Edward Kennedy's bill that would require congressional approval to fund the troop increases that this President has planned. Obama started talking about a "phased withdrawal" and sounded like somebody trying to explain cricket.

    One of the reasons Kennedy (D-Mass.) can do what he does at this stage of his career is because he has nothing to lose. Clinton and Obama are different. They are the headliners of the party in power now, but all they do is talk and talk but say nothing meaningful about Iraq. It tells you everything about how much both of them want to be President, no matter what kind of mess they would inherit in Baghdad.

    This isn't about ideals with them as much as ambition. Maybe they can explain to the people on the ground now how important it is for them to find a safe place in this debate.

    "I'd tell you that the Democrats are talking a good game, but they're not even doing that," Madden says. "Everybody in Congress has to understand something: If they continue to fund this war, it's not just the President who owns it. They own it, too."

    The Appeal for Redress, as yesterday's document is officially called, was signed by active military members and National Guardsmen and reservists. There were 1,034 names on it yesterday when Madden and the others took it up the steps to the Cannon Terrace. And this was not partisan dissent that came from the President's political opponents. This came from soldiers brave enough to speak out, even at the possible cost of their careers, and makes them braver than the people who represent them.

    Their Appeal for Redress ended this way: "The timing of the beginning of the war was a choice, and the timing of the ending will be a choice. If President Bush does not choose to end the war, then Congress must by cutting off funds."

    At least Kennedy tries to do something. The best the rest of them can do is talk about some kind of nonbinding resolution. That ought to scare off Bush and Vice President Cheney.

    It is as if Clinton and Obama in particular are terrified of being Swift-boated by the Republicans all over again, made out to be weaklings and cowards if they don't want to continue sending U.S. soldiers over to Iraq to die in a civil war the United Nations now says killed more than 34,000 Iraqi civilians in the last year alone. "This isn't us against the military," Madden says. "It's us against this policy."

    Madden joined the Marines at 18 because, he says, he needed purpose in his life. He thought that in the last four years of his contract, he could get himself a college education. Now he is not so sure, even though he was told on his way into service for his country that he would be called back from inactive duty only for a "national emergency."

    "They keep changing the rules," he says

    So he puts his name on the Appeal for Redress. And then listens to Cheney, who goes on television Sunday and says that if we withdraw U.S. forces from Iraq, we "revalidate the strategy that Osama Bin Laden has been following from day one, that if you kill enough Americans, you can force them to quit,that we don't have the stomach for the fight."

    This is the same Cheney who has only ever picked up a gun in his life to shoot birds or lawyers.

    "It's the same old stuff," Madden says. "If we're not blind in our loyalty to their beliefs, then Osama wins. But that doesn't work anymore, and the election should have told everybody that. The American people aren't idiots."

    Just treated that way by this administration. On one hand, the President calls this the most important ideological battle of our time. Then, practically in the next breath, he says that this country's commitment in Iraq is not "open-ended." So even with the most important ideological battle of our time, he has the meter running.

    Some soldiers, ones who have put themselves on the line in Iraq, spoke out against this lunacy yesterday. It is the best they can do for now. It is their elected officials who have to do better, starting with the Democratic front-runners, Clinton and Barack. They can start by saying they will vote against further funding of this war the first chance they get. You fund this war, you own it.

    That's right.....YOU FUND IT, YOU OWN IT!


    "I vcan't vbecause it's Bush's fault!"

    Red State is still looking for attention.

    Sad, pathetic illiterate.

    Let me re-post this gem......

    "I'd tell you that the Democrats are talking a good game, but they're not even doing that," Sgt. Liam Madden says. "Everybody in Congress has to understand something: If they continue to fund this war, it's not just the President who owns it. They own it, too."

    It is truth! Olbermann is all talk....and so are the other leftists who post on this site.

    It is Bush's fault! He controls everything even the weather. Thanks to the Aliens from Alpha Centauri!

    Cee is still frothing at the mouth for the Democrats to defund the war.
    Because if they do , he will rant and rave for years about how the Dems lost the war, not Bush.

    Cee thinks people are stupid and don't know this is Bush 's war.

    Cee: Mike Lupica is a sports guy...just like Olbermann. He complains about everything and anything Republican, actually criticized and put down Rudy Giuliani right after the 9/11 attacks, and is more of a homer for the Dems than Olbermann (must be something about that first name).

    Robert/Johnny: Agreed...please do something about this board being hijacked. Mike won't have anything to do with his time if it continues this way.

    Sgt. Liam Madden gets it right. Give both sides hell. Now if Olbermann could do this he would become a little more of a newsman.

    It’s funny that these socialists quote Joe Scarborough as their source for the "vast military complex". Joe Scarborough uses the same lies that NBC news gets because he is paid to use them. His loyalty is in his wallet. NBC uses their quote “-anonymous” sources, which is code for DNC operatives. Just like their fake police captain in Iraq or their doctored photos. You socialist don't need to worry about the small sums of money that the defense industry gives to both political parties, worry about the huge sums of money that the teachers union and the trial lawyers pump into the DNC.

    In a 2003 Gallup Poll, nearly one-fifth of the soldiers surveyed said they felt the situation in Iraq had not been worth going to war over. In another poll, in Pennsylvania last August, 54 percent of households with a member in the military said the war was the "wrong thing to do"; in the population as a whole, only 48 percent felt that way. Doubts about the war have contributed to the decline of troop morale over the past yearand may, some experts say, be a factor in the 40 percent increase in Army suicide rates in Iraq in the past year. "That's the most basic tool a soldier needs on the battlefield,a reason to be there,"says Paul Rieckhoff, a platoon leader in the New York National Guard and former JPMorgan banker who served in Iraq. Rieckhoff has founded a group called Operation Truth, which provides a freewheeling forum for soldiers' views on the war. "When you can't articulate that in one sentence, it starts to affect morale. You had an initial rationale for war that was a moving target. [But] it was a shell game from the beginning, and you can only bullshit people for so long.

    Yeah Mike is right!

    What the hell is Bill O'Reilly. It's the factor. why do people watch it? RW morons!

    Yeah let's take a look at a single show from 1-15 shall we? While the great know it all Olby was trying to get it through you're skulls that Bush is Evil You know what that O'Reilly was reporting?

    About some 37 year old guy that got probation for molesting a 4 year-old, comon!

    Why I'm sure Mike was glad to see how the judge ran away from those evil factor cameras that were wanting to know why he gave a Molester with a history of violence (He attacked his wife with a screw driver) Probation.

    And I'm sure Mike was happy to see the editor of the local newspaper call Fox News lame while he was running for his car.

    And I'm sure Mike is glad that Patrick Leahy (I thought he was a big human rights guy? Oh except 4 year olds eh? Mike?) and Bernie Saunders wouldn't even comment.

    Don't you people get it?

    The Democratic party promotes freedom get it?

    Thats why The Democratic Party supports the A.C.L.U.

    And we all know the A.C.L.U. supports N.A.M.B.L.A.!!!!!!!

    So go do what you want to do in Vermont!

    Mike, Democrats, A.C.L.U. AND N.A.M.B.L.A. are right behind you!!!!!!!!

    Gee why doesn't Olby do a story about helping little kids from evil monsters?

    And you loons wonder why your boy is in last place!

    And why isn't there an oreillywatch? Gee Mike, how would you spin that story to make O'Reilly look evil.

    That a 37 year old guy is out right now walking the streets, it's 3:00 about now. School buses are letting little kids off. But I guess some people are okay with that.

    Hooray for the Democrats!!!!!!!!!!

    Republican congressman sending e-mails to pages,democrats say, HANG EM'!!!!!!!

    37 year old guys bangin' 4 year olds, democrats say! No big deal give him probation.

    Which brings up a good thought, If I wanted to hear how much Bush, The Republicans, and the country sucks. I just have to turn on Air-America 24/7. Why do I have to wait for Olby at eight?

    Oh wait Air-America has crappy ratings too.

    Meanwhile closer to home........

    With revenus over-flowing and the economy roaring, Mayor Bloomberg today will unveil a one billion dollar tax, marking a stunning turnaround of the city's fortunes from the dark days of 9/11.

    Mayoral aides said the plan, which brings tax relief to property owners, shoppers and businesses!

    Meanwhile in New Jersey

    Jon Corzine said N.J. residents will get that tax cut as soon as he figures out how to pay for it.

    Which means as long as Corzine can get the N.J. sheep to keep paying higher taxes, who cares?

    Mike and Bob go to a New Jersy Devils game next year at the new arena in downtown Newark. After the game Bob and Mike are standing outside the arena when Bob says to Mike.

    Want to walk over to the Robert Treat Hotel Bar it's just three blocks away.

    Mike: Sure! got your bullet proof vest on?

    Speaking of hockey, that nut thats going to that anti-war protest in D.C. for the 27th, I'd just like you to know I might stop by. I have a reason to go to D.C.

    Yeah The Capitals are playing the Hurricanes over at the arena.

    24? I'll just wait until the seasons shows come out on DVD and then I'll borrow it from my friends.

    Unlike certain sheep that are drivin' around the pen at will by last place has-beens.

    But hey if a last place moron can get his sheep to watch 24. Then the ratings go up and Fox says thank you.

    It's all good!!!!!!!!!

    One last thought before I go,

    24 didn't win it's time slot, Monday night, Golden Globes did.

    Olby didn't win his time slot, Monday night Bill O'Reilly did.

    The sheep on this site are really bad at picking winners.

    I think they would have trouble picking a winner in a one horse race.

    Hey a--hole: I mean Factor.

    I explained to you what the military industrial complex was and how it's siphoning the very blood of our country.
    Joe Scarborough isn't the only one who understands this.

    Why don't you?

    Puck continues to demonstrate and prove how he's a stone cold idiot.

    Did you ever think that if a blizzard hits D.C. on the 27th, nut job will say George Bush sent it?

    Notice how Puck has to skip a line after each one he writes, as if we'll think his insane posts has some special merit.

    Puck: The worst person in the wooooorrrrrlllllddddddddddd !


    CRIMINAL BUSH ADMIN GRUDGINGLY REVERTS TO RULE OF LAW

    -- Rubberstamp Congress Gone, Voter Approval Gone, BushCO Laments Lost Unconstitutionality --

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- President George W. Bush has decided not to reauthorize the controversial domestic warrantless surveillance program for terrorism suspects and to put it under the authority of a secret special court, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said on Wednesday. "The president has determined not to reauthorize the Terrorist Surveillance Program when the current authorization expires," Gonzales wrote in a letter to Senate leaders. `Any electronic surveillance that was occurring as part of the Terrorist Surveillance Program will now be conducted subject to the approval of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court,` Gonzales said.


    The judge wrote:
    "Simply put, the president's deposition testimony regarding whether he had ever been alone with Ms. (Monica) Lewinsky was intentionally false, and his statements regarding whether he had ever engaged in sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky likewise were intentionally false . . . ."

    Remember too that Clinton called in his secretary Betty Currie on a Sunday before she was to be deposed, in order to "refresh her memory" as to the "fact" that he and Lewinsky were never alone...

    He was helpful that way...


    I refer everyone back to the wonderful conversation Mike had with Janet Hawkins in which he argued the difference in lying and being abjectly wrong.

    I'd like to remind people that every elected administration comes into office with their own particular view of the world from which they interpret the very fungible thing that is "intelligence". That's the democratic process.

    With that in mind I democratically leave it to each of you to determine whether you find catastrophic results from bad policy decisions innately more objectionable to the less spectacular but every bit insidious results of corrupting the office of the presidency in order to cover your personal failings.

    I'll choose the bad policy decisions because they involve war and death. That trumphs petty and small corruption everytime.

    That's the nature of petty and small.

    Puck makes it very clear that she wouldn't be caught dead at an antiwar rally.

    Puck cheers for the casualty numbers to increase.


    "Did you ever think that if a blizzard hits D.C. on the 27th, nut job will say George Bush sent it?"

    Of course it's Bush's fault. Him and Karl Rove control the weather! They have this control thanks to their secret backers from Alpha Cantauri!

    That's the nature of petty and small.

    Posted by: Cecelia at January 17, 2007 3:21 PM


    and Cecilia knows petty and small.

    "My point was that YOU'RE not reality based."

    My point is that it takes more than you're saying it. Even when you're switching proofs and arguments.

    Let's see, Red State has taken on Bob's, Bushkill Falls and now Buffalo's name.

    Red State should be banned from this site.

    Johnny ?

    That's the nature of petty and small.

    Posted by: Cecelia at January 17, 2007 3:21 PM


    and Cecilia knows petty and small."


    Most people know it when we see it.

    And we just saw it.

    Has there ever been a more arrogant and partisan poster than cecilia?

    She makes Dick Cheney look like Mr Rogers.

    I'm going to go to the Pro-Jihad rally! I'll have pictures of Zarqawi and the ayatollah Khomenei!

    Cecelia, thanks for reminding me. Mike finally and grudgingly admitted that he had no proof and was not certain himself that 'BUSH LIED' was totally accurate.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    Johnny Dollar. It's time you earn your keep around here and ban Red State.

    Janet and Cecilia: a mutual admiration society of red neck dames !

    "Way to pound Clinton, Cecilia.
    You're a true non partisan patriot.
    We know you just can't find any of George Bush's mistakes to write about.
    You're our heroine."


    That's an all-purpose cut-n-paste mon-argument reply to any criticism of Keith Olbermann too.

    In fact, they probably cut-n-paste it to Allrecipes.com in response to any negative review of some casserole recipe too.

    determine whether you find catastrophic results from bad policy decisions innately more objectionable to the less spectacular but every bit insidious results of corrupting the office of the presidency in order to cover your personal failings.

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

    yeah, right.
    lying about a blowjob
    definitely corrupted the office of the presidency
    a lot more than bush and cheney have
    over the past six years.

    your value system is pathetically and tragically skewed.
    flawed values. failed polices. fiasco results.

    Rednecks are evil! Theymust die because Bush lied!

    "Janet and Cecilia: a mutual admiration society of red neck dames !"


    Wooo hhhhoooo!

    Bush killed 200 Million people! More than Stalin, Hitler, Mao and Pol Pot put together!
    He's an evil man!

    Cecelia, I can only speak for myself, but as a true daughter of the south my neck is lilly white with a peaches and cream tint. :)

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    "your value system is pathetically and tragically skewed."


    So are your reading skills.

    So let me get this straight. Cheney and GW are starting wars so that their stock price in Halliburton goes up and not because we were attacked? But I guess they planned that attack too. You moon bats and your crazy schemes are true comedy. Go out and walk around in the real world. Stop playing World of Warcraft all day.

    Janet,

    It looks great on you!

    Someone stated as fact that newsbusters blocks dissenting posters.

    Au contraire. They have dissenting posters. They block posters who are viciously ad hominem in their arguments.

    And that disqualifies 99.9% of the KO fans.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    "About some 37 year old guy that got probation for molesting a 4 year-old, comon!

    Why I'm sure Mike was glad to see how the judge ran away from those evil factor cameras that were wanting to know why he gave a Molester with a history of violence (He attacked his wife with a screw driver) Probation."

    That was the PROSECUTOR'S call to make, puck. NOT the judges. The prosecutor chose NOT to pursue the case and to plead it down. YOU are making a decision with only a fraction of the facts. And the people who know all the facts of the case (including legisltors who were briefed after O'Reilly got his nose out of joint about it) AGREED that the plea was the best option available because there was too much risk of total acquittal at trial.

    Yes, he got probation. LIFETIME probation. Which means if he commits ANY CRIME (even spitting on the sidewalk), he GOES TO PRISON.

    "And I'm sure Mike was happy to see the editor of the local newspaper call Fox News lame while he was running for his car."

    Yes, because editors should always respond when they are ambushed by FOX reporters throwing accusations at them.

    "And I'm sure Mike is glad that Patrick Leahy (I thought he was a big human rights guy? Oh except 4 year olds eh? Mike?) and Bernie Saunders wouldn't even comment."

    About a case that NOBODY had heard of outside of the town before O'Reilly kicked a fit? I didn't realize you expected U.S. Senators to be omniscient...

    "The Democratic party promotes freedom get it?

    Thats why The Democratic Party supports the A.C.L.U.

    And we all know the A.C.L.U. supports N.A.M.B.L.A.!!!!!!!"

    Your logic is deeply flawed. Group A liking Group B and Group B liking Group C does not mean that Group A likes Group C. Point to one PROMINENT Democrat who supports NAMBLA - I'll give you a hint...THERE AREN'T ANY!

    Here's what I know about the typical liberal mindset. They seem to think that all Republicans think alike and that we all sing off the same choir hymnal. Yet they are the ones who will attack their own and rip them to shreds if they veer from the official liberal loony talking points in any way, shape, or form. We've seen it here at Owatch where someone's liberal credentials were called into question because they wouldn't agree that Bush was awful and that Olbermann is perfect.

    It's the same sort of mindset that will make them whine and cry and pretend their feelings are hurt if any one of the Owatch regulars calls them a name but they don't mind calling any of us names (rednecks, and worse).

    I call it the do as we say, not as we do school of liberal thinking, (or what passes for thinking from liberals.)

    We wet pantied liberals know damn well there is NO TERRORISM THREAT. As for the propaganda tool, "24", what REALLY appalls me is the idea of a negroe American President. FIX tv has the sick gall to present 2 of the 3 Presidents through the history of the series as being AFRO-AMERICAN.

    EE, in the paraphrased words of Jane Austen's Mary Anne: Daily implied, but never spoken.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    Bush is evil!

    Actually Brandon, you don't know a thing about the "liberal mindset", you just think you do.

    People on this board brand me 'liberal' all the time, but they don't really know a thing about me except I'm very much against the war, which has nothing whatsoever to do with either a 'liberal' or a 'conservative' mindset.

    The episode you referred to about someone who was dissed because he called himself a 'liberal' but never said anything to give that claim any credence was because he was using his self proclaimed 'liberal' status as a vehicle to try to add more credibility to his attacks on KO.

    Mike just said that Brandon has not idea what the Liberal mindset is and then says he is not a Liberal. How does Mike know what the Liberal mindset is if he is not a Liberal? He destroys his own argument in his own paragraph. Good job moon bat.

    The Factor,The fact is your side is losing the war! Bush's evil storm troopers are on the retraet before the Islamic armies! Soon we will be liberated by the Jihad! Bush will hang and America will be liberated! Go Iran!

    Mike,
    Olbermann is a living saint! No body has a right to criticize him! He's a great human being that cares about people!

    Mike writes: "People on this board brand me 'liberal' all the time, but they don't really know a thing about me except I'm very much against the war, which has nothing whatsoever to do with either a 'liberal' or a 'conservative' mindset."


    Oh, am I going to file that! :D

    Just read someone going off on the show "24" (I admit to never having seen any episodes) because it has pictured terrorist attacks using a nuke.

    Well, peeeooople...what should a current show trying to capture the current imagination use?

    Maybe they should portray Vikings attacking us and being the bad guys like those Capital One commericials...

    Just to add fuel to the fire (what else do we RWERS live for:

    "IS MIKE really leaning left, or is he one of those that is RWer to the Extreme, that goes onto message boards like this one, CLAIMING to be liberal, just so that he can concede points to the RWers,

    See, that is a form of propaganda.

    That is how it works,

    Now mike, may not be a RWer, but I have seen him cowtow to the right, I have seen him chastize those on the left, when they score major hits on the right wing propaganda.

    Is mike really a rightie ?

    I dont know for sure, but I DO KNOW that it wouldnt be the first time that a RWer poses as someone from the middle or the left, so that he can agree with the right, making it SEEM that the right has won the point.

    Only time will tell where mike stands, but I have already seen mike pandering to the RWers here.

    Posted by: at January 10, 2007 10:27 PM

    BTW ,,,,


    Grammie trying to sell Mike as a GOOD GUY, is just more evidence of the point I was making earlier about Mikes true alliances

    Posted by: at January 10, 2007 10:29 PM"

    Mike, never deviate from the lockstep set in stone liberal dogma.

    Everyone come welcome our newest brainwashed Bush/Cheney acolyte.

    Janet,
    I hate Bush! He's evil!

    Cecelia, I can only speak for myself, but as a true daughter of the south my neck is lilly white with a peaches and cream tint. :)

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    How can you tell through all the wrinkles ?

    Oh, I forgot to use my signature signature that Bobco loves so much.

    The post @ 4:32 PM was ME! ME! ME!

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    I wonder how all the smug neo-nuts were reacting on election night, when they saw their party crumble to the ground.( on merit )

    They cried when the Reich collapsed. The evil Repugs and their pathetic leader the evil Bush!

    "Cecelia, I can only speak for myself, but as a true daughter of the south my neck is lilly white with a peaches and cream tint. :)

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    How can you tell through all the wrinkles ?

    Posted by: at January 17, 2007 4:35 PM"

    Wow! If only I had your razor sharp mind to slay my enemies.

    The EEOC will be calling on you soon.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    The people who speak for Janet and cecilia :

    THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
    01/17/2007

    RICHMOND, Va. — A state legislator said black people "should get over" slavery and questioned whether Jews should apologize "for killing Christ," drawing denunciations Tuesday from stunned colleagues.

    Delegate Frank D. Hargrove, who is white and Christian, made his remarks in opposition to a measure that would apologize on the state's behalf to the descendants of slaves.

    In an interview published Tuesday in The Daily Progress of Charlottesville, Hargrove, 79, said slavery ended nearly 140 years ago with the Civil War and added that "our black citizens should get over it."

    The newspaper also quoted him as saying, "are we going to force the Jews to apologize for killing Christ?"


    Black lawmakers swiftly denounced Hargrove's comments.

    "When somebody tells me I should just get over slavery, I can only express my emotion by projecting that I am appalled, absolutely appalled," said Delegate Dwight C. Jones, head of the Legislative Black Caucus.

    Delegate David L. Englin also criticized Hargrove's remarks, recalling that his grandparents were driven from their homes in Poland "by people who believed that as Jews, we killed Christ."

    When Hargrove rose to speak, he told Englin he didn't care about Englin's religion. "I think your skin was a little too thin," Hargrove said as lawmakers gasped and groaned.
    spacer

    This can't be true! I refuse to report this! I love that guy!

    Iran's discontent with Ahmadinejad grows
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070117/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_ahmadinejad_s_woes

    Wow! If only I had your razor sharp mind to slay my enemies.
    Grammie
    Grammie

    Since obviously you don't, you're unfortunately stuck with the fetid mind you do have.

    "That's the most basic tool a soldier needs on the battlefield,a reason to be there,"says Paul Rieckhoff, a platoon leader in the New York National Guard and former JPMorgan banker who served in Iraq."

    If they didn't get proper armor, what makes them think they'll get a proper reason to be there.

    On the flip side-
    Does Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton speak for you?

    Brandon:

    Here is your problem, you keep quoting or hearing things that were not actually said or written.

    Example: "Mike says he's not a 'liberal'. I didn't say that at all. Go back and read my post again.

    I SAID people on this board BRAND me as a 'liberal' all the time but they really know little about me except I am very much against the war.

    In other words Einstein, I've spent very little time on this board talking about things other than Bush and the war.

    DO you want me to label myself? OK, I'm a 'moderate'. I accept some liberal doctine and some conservative doctrine. Now I understand that you probably don't even know what 'moderate' means, but guess what Einstein, MOST Americans are actually moderates....in other words, sick of both extremes!

    "How can you tell through all the wrinkles ?


    Posted by: at January 17, 2007 4:35 PM"


    Who knows small and petty?...

    Don't worry Kurt, the imposter has been getting their giggles using just about everybody's name, including mine. I think just about everyone here can tell the difference, and hopefully Robert will put an end to it.

    "EE, in the paraphrased words of Jane Austen's Mary Anne: Daily implied, but never spoken."

    You mean "inferred", not "implied". When one implies something, they are putting the suggestion into the message. When one infers, they take the suggestion out of the message.

    So conservatives infer that the Democratic Party supports NAMBLA because the Democratic Party supports the ACLU, but at no point is that implied - nobody in the Democratic Party is putting the suggestion that we support NAMBLA by supporting the ACLU in the message.

    WASHINGTON: Attorney General Alberto Gonzales says federal judges are unqualified to make rulings affecting national security policy and should defer to the president.

    Federal Judges are unqualified so we should defer to Chimpy ?

    George.
    The guy who vacationed while New Orleans drowned.

    The guy who said when things began turning bad with the bombing of the mosque in, "February or March", but as recently as three months ago, during the campaign, Bush repeatedly said "we're winning" the war in Iraq.

    Our genius president who said,"This notion that the United States is getting ready to attack Iran is simply ridiculous. And having said that, all options are on the table."

    The brilliant statesman that said,""See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda."

    That guy ?

    Federal judges are unqualified so we should let this guy make decisions on rulings affecting national security.

    Is it any wonder we are the laughing stock of the world !

    "Since obviously you don't, you're unfortunately stuck with the fetid mind you do have.

    Posted by: at January 17, 2007 4:48 PM"

    My dear, I am concerned about you. My grandmother had a famous saying about your type. It went like this:

    She looks and speaks like someone who wears a turd as a breastpin.

    Very apropos, ne c'est pas?

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    "Iran's discontent with Ahmadinejad grows"

    Shit-

    Weed better blowed them up quick befor they changed theere mindses!

    I know what "moderate" means; it means you are a coward. It means you are afraid to reveal your true position. Grow a spine and admit that you are a socialist. I would like to hear these fabled positions that you are conservative on. What a joke.

    Wolfy buttee, you wernt supost too put both are nameds.

    Now thay now we life togethr!

    "Janet,
    I hate Bush! He's evil!

    Posted by: Mike at January 17, 2007 4:33 PM"


    Oh, yeah... we know... and this supposedly means--- well, absolutely nothing where you're concerned....


    HOWEVER with ME... the war and views on Bush are a litmus test as to whether I was a quote/unquote---- "a winger"---- and therefore someone whose opinion on Olbermann (and mostly everything) was to be dismissed.

    Last time I looked "winger" meant conservative...


    If anti-views on the war don't make one liberal and.... therefore partisan and worthy of dismissal.... why does any other view on the war merit less?

    I think we know... it's LIBERAL LOGIC... :D

    The Factor thinks anyone to the left of Rush Limbaugh is a socialist.
    The Factor is a perfect name for him.
    Now that O'Reilly is being discredited on a daily basis, it would take someone of this dude's stature to take the name "The Factor ".

    "I know what "moderate" means, it means you are a coward"...

    No you poor pathetic O'Reilly worshipper, it means I have a brain, unlike yourself!'

    Now I have a question for you, how many folks do you call a 'coward' to their face?

    There she goes again....

    Cecilia tying herself into knots with her words and logic and then proclaiming it LIBERAL LOGIC.

    Meanwhile, back at the ranch, she supports the most disgraced president in american history.

    Cecelia:

    I hope you don't really think that 4:33 post was actually by me?

    I thought you were smarter than that!

    Cecelia:

    Now for a post that REALLY is from me.

    You said: "last I looked 'winger' means conservative"....

    I disagree! Right Wingers are the ones who seemed to be blindly marching in lock step with the president....putting party above America.

    True conservatives, on the other hand, don't necessarily do that. For example, Some are against the war and some are for it.

    Mike wrote: "DO you want me to label myself? OK, I'm a 'moderate'. I accept some liberal doctine and some conservative doctrine. Now I understand that you probably don't even know what 'moderate' means, but guess what Einstein, MOST Americans are actually moderates....in other words, sick of both extremes!"

    Remember those bonafides I mentioned, friends...

    Aside for being anti-Olbermann, you've inferred that KAF isn't really a liberal because he has also never voiced "one liberal ideal".

    Now, being the fair-minded person, I am, I thought a love of fairness in reporting and balance was a "liberal" concept.... but since "moerate" you... evidently thinks something more is needed... what should KAF have said or be saying that would sound legitimately liberal?...

    EE, your beef is with Jane Austen. You say:

    "You mean "inferred", not "implied". When one implies something, they are putting the suggestion into the message. When one infers, they take the suggestion out of the message."

    Willoughby IMPLIED in every way that he loved and intended to marry Mary Anne. To such a point that EVERYONE including those who only knew through others, including she herself and her family that she lived with, INFERRED that it was the truth.

    And it was the TRUTH. Willougby IMPLIED and everyone INFERRED correctly.

    Try again.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    My dear, I am concerned about you. My grandmother had a famous saying about your type. It went like this:

    She looks and speaks like someone who wears a turd as a breastpin.

    Very apropos, ne c'est pas?

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

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

    Oh great, so now we've got a decrepit southern lily white grandmother quoting her decrepit southern lily white grandmother. Real turn of the (last) century stuff. Perfectly 19th century. Perfect for a sectarian regressive mind.

    Cramit Chickenhawk
    AKA Slappy

    Good for you Cecelia...defending a 'liberal'.

    You're actually right Cecelia, I have no right to question KAF's credentials as to what he says he is. On the other hand, he WAS using the claim in order to try to inflate his own legitamacy regarding his KO bashing.

    My grandmother was born in France. I thought that as a Frenchwoman that made her sacrosanct.

    Would you please make up your mind about who is unassailable and who is not.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Gramnie

    Mike, you care way too much if these cold hearted Bush lovers like you.

    "Cecelia:

    I hope you don't really think that 4:33 post was actually by me?

    I thought you were smarter than that!


    Posted by: Mike at January 17, 2007 5:09 PM"


    You've said the same a thousand times. NOW you imply that you doubt the intelligence of anyone assuming you wrote those words?

    I doubt that...

    Slappy Chickenhawk.Good one.

    I bet if we saw a picture of her it would fit perfectly.

    Mike said"It becomes so tiring to be forced so often to defend Bill Clinton whenever George Bush is criticized. OK, lets compare the obvious legacies of both Clinton & Bush.

    - The critics of both rightfully say they both lied. (A) - Clinton lied under oath about discusting sex while trying to protect his marriage....illegal but somewhat understandable. (B) - Bush lied to get us into a pointless war that has killed over 3000 Americans and wounded over 20,000 others...so far, and God knows how many Iraqis.

    I don't like lies by anyone, but I will choose lie 'A' over lie 'B' anytime."
    If those were facts I would agree with you. If Bush lied I want him out. In prison for life. But even in your comparison you show your bias. You matter of factly say how Clinton lied and then almost excuse him and then about Bush, you add words like pointless and killed and add how many more. Here I feel is where many dis agree. You and others are of the mindset that Bush lied. You even state "The critics of both rightfully say they both lied " No,Clinton was proved a liar. There are just claims against Bush. Show me proof. And if you post all kinds of heresay and opinions from Dems and left wing nuts then go to them and demand they do something. Look the right went after Clinton because he lied. Was it huge ? no. But the point was that if he would lie about small things what if a situation like you claim Bush has done came up? And if the left thinks Bush has lied,really lied,why wont they prove it? I have no problem with a hearing to find out. I would then be on your side if proven true. But I feel it's just politics. A waste of time. The left screams how Bush lied yet nothing is done. Why? If this were true it would be huge. And that's what most of the war arguments are. You come here with the premise that Bush lied and RW er's are stupid or dont care. NO. You should be at the left's sites pushing them to get proof. Until then people wont take your points seriously.Saying it does'nt mean anything. Thats the key. And I would like to see the truth also. Either way . See we differ on him lying and neither of us are going to budge until that's settled. If he ever is proved to have lied I am with you. Until then I would save your anger for the left demanding they prove what they say.

    I would love to see that mushroom cloud rising over kooky keith's house.

    My grandmother was born in France. I thought that as a Frenchwoman that made her sacrosanct.

    AS usual, you think wrong.

    "And it was the TRUTH. Willougby IMPLIED and everyone INFERRED correctly."

    Yes, but your paraphrase is that the Democratic Party is implying something (putting a hidden suggestion in their message) when no such implication exists. People are inferring (taking a suggestion that does not exist out of a message).

    You can attempt to INFER something even if it there is nothing IMPLIED. You'll probably be wrong.

    Never mind that the original argument uses the logical flaw that A and C must like each other because A and B and B and C like each other. The Equality Rule of Mathematics does not apply in social sciences.

    Mike writes "You're actually right Cecelia, I have no right to question KAF's credentials as to what he says he is. On the other hand, he WAS using the claim in order to try to inflate his own legitamacy regarding his KO bashing."

    So, if being a liberal "inflates" or legitimizes one's authority to criticise Keith...more than say.... "a winger"... huh..Mike... then what "liberal thought" has Mike not said... in order to be legitimately liberal to ole moderate you?

    And if the left thinks Bush has lied,really lied,why wont they prove it?

    In October:
    "We 're definitely winning the war in Iraq"

    In November:
    We're not winning, we're not losing"

    Is that fast enough for you ?

    I could give you about 50 more, but why waste my time.
    Chew on that one for awhile.

    Lie #1--They Attacked Us: Iraq Supported Al Qaeda. Astonishingly, President Bush, in a rare moment of candor, finally admitted half a year after the invasion that there was no evidence Saddam Hussein's Iraq had any links to the 9/11 attacks, undermining eighteen months of implying the exact opposite. Yet in both of his recent big speeches--a brief and rather reserved statement after Saddam's capture and his macho 2004 State of the Union address--Bush again dished out the fundamental lie that the war and occupation of Iraq can reasonably be linked to the "war on terror," even as a new book by ex-Bush Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill described the Bush foreign policy team's consistent obsession with Iraq from the first days of the Administration.

    Lies #2 and #3--Imminent Threats: Iraq's Bio-Chem and Nuclear Weapons Programs. A year after using his 2003 State of the Union address to paint Iraq's allegedly vast arsenal of WMD as a grave threat to the United States and the world, Bush wisely avoided mentioning anything about uranium there--though he did spend a great deal of his latest SOTU defending the war on the grounds that "had we failed to act, the dictator's weapons of mass destruction programs would continue to this day." Dick Cheney, in interviews with USA Today and the Los Angeles Times, echoed this fudging--last year "weapons," this year "programs"--declaring that "the jury's still out" on whether Iraq had WMD and that "I am a long way at this stage from concluding that somehow there was some fundamental flaw in our intelligence."
    Only days later, chief US weapons inspector David Kay quit and began telling the world what the Bush Administration had been denying since taking office: that Saddam Hussein's regime was but a weak shadow of the semi-fearsome military force it had been at the time of the first Gulf War thirteen years ago; that it had no significant chemical, biological or nuclear weapons programs or stockpiles still in place; and that the UN inspections and allied bombing runs in the 1990s had been much more effective than their critics had believed at eroding these programs.

    To the contributing writers of 'olbermannwatch':

    You guys are quite the comedy troupe. Do you really take yourselves so seriously that you actually believe even 1/4 of what you're posting? Do you have any clue about how the news is gathered, processed, and packaged before the anchor even goes on air? Do you really think Olbermann picks all these segments himself? Countdown is rather effective at blending entertainment with news and actually allowing the viewer to formulate their own opinion, while actually giving insight to issues where other anchors offer only short-sighted conjecture, or down-right fabrication. I'm sorry that you take such offense that Olbermann's view of the world doesn't mesh with yours, but, it appears that your opinions were decided for you long before the first keystroke of each post is entered. None-the-less, keep at it, it's something nice to laugh at during lunch-break.


    FLIP-FLOPPING DOUBLE-SPEAK DECIDER DOES 180 ON GLOBAL WARMING, OR DOES HE?

    -- First `Stay the Course` ... Then `Iraq Was Never About Stay The Course` ... Now `Iraq Is Stay The Course Once More` --

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- President Bush will outline a policy on global warming next week in his State of the Union speech but has not dropped his opposition to mandatory limits on greenhouse-gas emissions, the White House said on Tuesday. Britain`s `The Observer` newspaper reported on Sunday that senior Downing Street officials, who were not named, said Bush was preparing to issue a changed climate policy during his annual State of the Union speech on January 23. U.S. allies such as Britain and Germany have pressed for a new global agreement on climate change to replace the Kyoto Protocol which expires in 2012. Bush withdrew the United States from the protocol in 2001, saying its targets for reducing carbon emissions would unfairly hurt the U.S. economy.


    next lie :"Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent.”

    State of the Union Address – 1/28/2003

    Not True

    Zero Chemical Weapons Found
    Not a drop of any chemical weapons has been found anywhere in Iraq.

    Cecelia:

    Now for a post that REALLY is from me.

    You said: "last I looked 'winger' means conservative"....

    I disagree! Right Wingers are the ones who seemed to be blindly marching in lock step with the president....putting party above America.

    True conservatives, on the other hand, don't necessarily do that. For example, Some are against the war and some are for it.

    Posted by: Mike at January 17, 2007 5:14 PM

    So "rightwingers" are defined as those people who agree with Pres. Bush.

    Therefore not all conservatives are "rightwingers" But those who agree with Bush are always "wingers"....

    I suppose then, that Pat Buchanan is not a rightwinger but a "true" conservative...

    I suppose then we'll have to also move the line when it comes to classical terms like liberal and moderate. A moderate is someone who doesn't agree with Bush and a liberal is someone who doesn't agree with Bush and a conservative is someone who doesn't agree with Bush....

    But a "winger" agrees with Bush...

    Birchers are confused....

    It takes no thought to be a moderate. You just jump on the bandwagon, where ever it takes you. As for calling people a coward to their face, most cowards don't confront me, hence the name cowards. I am still waiting for that conservative position.

    here's 10-20 more lies:

    http://www.bushlies.net/

    The right will say Bush doesn't lie.And when you present the unmistakeable evidence that he does, regularly, they just shrug and go onto the next stupifying point.

    That's why the the Karris56's,cecilia's, janet's, the Cee's and Brandon's of the world are not taken the least bit serious.

    "Only days later, chief US weapons inspector David Kay quit and began telling the world what the Bush Administration had been denying since taking office: that Saddam Hussein's regime was but a weak shadow of the semi-fearsome military force it had been at the time of the first Gulf War thirteen years ago; that it had no significant chemical, biological or nuclear weapons programs or stockpiles still in place; and that the UN inspections and allied bombing runs in the 1990s had been much more effective than their critics had believed at eroding these programs.

    Posted by: at January 17, 2007 5:39 PM"

    Actually, David Kaye writes that he thought differently, the Bush Administration thought differently, and the world thought differently.

    On one Hardball, he added a bit about the "Oil for Food" scandal on various Western motivations for acting on those thoughts as well.

    "The right will say Bush doesn't lie.And when you present the unmistakeable evidence that he does, regularly, they just shrug and go onto the next stupifying point."


    What "unmistakable evidence" is that?

    `And if the left thinks Bush has lied,really lied,why wont they prove it? I have no problem with a hearing to find out. I would then be on your side if proven true ... If he ever is proved to have lied I am with you.`

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

    Another brain-dead ditto-head sorely in need of a remedial education on critical thinking. Hell, you won`t even admit that Bush is incompetent, let alone a bald-faced liar. There is no hope for your kind, those who support him still, in the face of all the horrible facts (which have a well-known liberal bias).

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

    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 was necessary because Saddam was a material threat,
    because of 9/11, because of Osama bin Laden, al Qaeda, 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 into that 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 Moqtada 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 shortchanged Iraqi training.
    He neglected to plan for wide spread 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 throws.
    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 Iraqi`s trust, we would go door to door in Baghdad.
    He told us the enemy was al Qaeda, foreign fighters, terrorists, Baathists, and now Iran and Syria.
    The war would pay for itself.
    It would cost 1.7 billion dollars, 100 billion, 400 billion, half a trillion.
    Last night�s speech alone cost us 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.

    "next lie :"Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent.”

    State of the Union Address – 1/28/2003

    Not True

    Zero Chemical Weapons Found
    Not a drop of any chemical weapons has been found anywhere in Iraq."


    Notice the discrepancy between what is being interpreted as the case based upon some intelligence analysis-- (that most of the world concurred with) and what is the definition of "a lie"

    "He sent in fewer troops than the generals told him to.
    He ordered the Iraqi army disbanded and the Iraqi government de-Baathified.
    He shortchanged Iraqi training.
    He neglected to plan for wide spread looting.
    He did not anticipate sectarian violence. "


    So 9/11 changing Bush's outlook on "nation building" is the same as waffling.

    However, if anyone else wants a reversal of course, that's not waffling...but realism based on evidence.

    And of course, flawed policy decisions are now tantamount to "lies".

    No prolbem.

    We await the "truths" of the new House and Senate :D

    THE RIGHT WILL SAY BUSH DOESN`T LIE

    So 9/11 changing Bush`s outlook on `nation building` is the same as waffling. However, if anyone else wants a reversal of course, that`s not waffling...but realism based on evidence. And of course, flawed policy decisions are now tantamount to `lies`.

    AND WHEN YOU PRESENT THE UNMISTAKEABLE EVIDENCE THAT HE DOES, REGULARLY, THEY JUST SHRUG AND GO ONTO THE NEXT STUPIFYING POINT.

    We await the `truths` of the new House and Senate :D

    Factor, you are clearly a simpleton!

    I don't owe you anything but here you go:

    CONSERVATIVE:
    - Gay marriage......against!
    - Budget.....should ALWAYS be balanced. Spend only what we have and pay down the debt.
    - Abortion, except in life threatening situations.....against!
    - Global warming....not convinced we are causing it!
    - Government intrusion in personal lives...against!

    LIBERAL:

    - Single payer universal health care system....for!
    - Death penalty.....against!
    - Social Security....leave it alone!
    - School Vouchers.....against!

    Then there's this damned war...AGAINST...but this travesty has no political label other than 'Neocon'.

    Those are just a few I could think of at the moment.

    You see, you mindless O'Reilly worshipper, I carefully consider what I believe on EVERY single issue, political labels be damned!

    It's called using your brain, Factor fan!

    Now 'Factor' fan, to turn your last little mindless thought about moderates around, it actually takes no courage at all to be YOUR kind of conservative....you just turn on Hannitty, Rush, or O'Reilly and let them just carry you away with pure 'truth', while shouting ditto - ditto - ditto, all the away!

    I didn't make the post at 5:40pm attributed to me. And I would never post that kind of nonsense because Olbermann has stated, many times, that he is Managing Editor and that HE gets final say so on what airs on his show. Nice try, Brandon impersonator of trying to make it look like Olbermann has no control of what airs on his show. He has used the line in the past about stories his producers forced him to do, that's BS. It's his way of apologizing for the celebrity tripe they air.

    And of course, flawed policy decisions are now tantamount to `lies`.

    --------

    yeah, right.
    just because he`s wrong all the time
    that doesn`t make him a liar,
    it just makes him wrong all the time.

    Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha!

    Anon 6:26; You're absolutely right, he's wrong all the time, but nonetheless, we are now supposed to have faith that he is finally right THIS time with his troop surge!

    " The right will say Bush doesn't lie.And when you present the unmistakeable evidence that he does, regularly, they just shrug and go onto the next stupifying point.

    That's why the the Karris56's,cecilia's, janet's, the Cee's and Brandon's of the world are not taken the least bit serious.

    " unmistakeable evidence " ? Your evidence. What you want to see. My point was if this is true, surely your Democrat leaders know this ? Or do you know more than them? If true I want to know. You have people out there that say Bush was behind 911. They also have plenty of " unmistakeable evidence " If this is all true dont you want your leaders to expose this? I am not saying so what? You have people on the left in power who say the things you do. They should find out the truth. You should be going after them, not trying to win an argument with me.

    What I find interesting is that MSNBC started attacking the show "24" early in the day and kept it up periodically all day long. Makes one wonder if someone higher up made it an MSNBC "talking point" via a memo or two? The most ridiculous accusation made on one of the shows was that Roger Ailes was responsible for "24"'s attempts to promote Bush's war on terrorism.

    `unmistakeable evidence` Your evidence. What you want to see.

    hardly.
    facts on the ground.
    just look at iraq.
    oh, that`s right,
    you`re of the crowd who thinks
    things are going fairly well in Iraq,
    it`s just not reported.
    Ha!

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

    You have people on the left in power who say the things you do. They should find out the truth.

    Congressional investigations cometh, tiny mind.

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

    You should be going after them, not trying to win an argument with me.

    I would never waste my time
    trying to win an argument
    with a brain-dead ditto-head ideologue,
    like you and the other storm troopers herein.
    this is merely for entertainment value.
    I could care less what you morons think, ever.

    Mike writes "You're actually right Cecelia, I have no right to question KAF's credentials as to what he says he is. On the other hand, he WAS using the claim in order to try to inflate his own legitamacy regarding his KO bashing."

    And where's your proof of THAT allegation Mikey? That's right, you don't have any, you just THINK you do and as we know, your citation of "facts" has been shown to be very faulty in the past. Just because I don't engage in off-topic rants about Bush, I'm supposed to be a "poser" according to Mike. I bet my financial and time contributions to the Democratic party far exceed any that Mike's ever made seeing how he now claims he's not really a liberal and all. Yet that gives him the right apparently to question my liberal credentials. Newsflash Mikey--this board isn't called KAFWatch either. I was stating a FACT when I stated I was a liberal. You are in essence calling me a liar. And I think from your history of posts and your own backpeddling on any number of issues that it is your veracity and credibility that ought to be being questioned here, not mine.

    But once again, I see the thread has been hijacked and it's back to Bush-bashing and off-topic discussions that have nothing to do with Olbermann. JD is right--that's what you are all forced to do because you know there's no defending Olbermann.

    I don't think it's an accident that Keith is now attacking a show (24) that comes on a Murdoch-owned network in a time slot opposite of his that is apparently going to drain viewers away from one of his best ratings nights of the week.

    How long before we see rants against American Idol too?

    I've already told you I'm not going to play the KO bashing OR defending game, because KO is not an ISSUE, nor is he a personality important enough for me to waste my time bashing OR defending.

    I'm glad you think it's so important. J$ is getting paid to do this...whats your excuse?

    "I don't think it's an accident that Keith is now attacking a show (24) that comes on a Murdoch-owned network in a time slot opposite of his that is apparently going to drain viewers away from one of his best ratings nights of the week."

    East Coast Bias! I already explained that 24 and Countdown are opposite each other ON THE EAST COAST (and in some parts of the Midwest that are on Central Time). Everywhere WEST of the Mississippi has Countdown at either 5pm (Pacific) or 6pm (Mountain), NOT at 8pm.

    There are more "metered" markets--the ones that Nielsen uses to get it's overnights in the EAST coast time zone.

    "because KO is not an ISSUE, nor is he a personality important enough for me to waste my time bashing OR defending."

    Oh try again Mike. That lie ain't going to play because it doesn't explain why you spend all of your time, night and day, posting here on a site called O-L-B-E-R-M-A-N-N-W-A-T-C-H. Now if Olbermann wasn't important to you, how did you ever find your way to this site to begin with?

    Someone stated as fact that newsbusters blocks dissenting posters.

    Au contraire. They have dissenting posters. They block posters who are viciously ad hominem in their arguments.

    And that disqualifies 99.9% of the KO fans.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    Grammie, Wrong again.
    I know people who have tried to sign up.Newsbusters ignores them.
    Newsbusters permits a small number of left posters to stay...for awhile.The purpose: So the mob can gang up on them and heap insults on them.
    They carefully control how many and who they let in.
    They also use the Fox News liberal tactic.Only permit weak and unconvincing left posters to stay.
    Newsbusters is a sham of a web site.
    Most are hard core right wing idealogues that hate anything left and praise anything and everything right.

    Mike, I think I do have a better insight into the liberal-mindset than you. After all, by your own admission, you don't go to so-called liberal websites. I do. I read them daily, it's a form of constant comedy and entertainment for me and yes, it does give me a good handle on what the liberal talking points are, something you profess to have complete ignorance of but yet some to parrott almost perfectly in your off-topic rants here.

    And Bob? Why is it that I see liberal opinions posted on Newsbusters all the time in the comments? Sorry but your post isn't exactly synching with my own personal experience from reading that site.

    One thing I omitted from the Newsbusters point.
    The purpose of the site is to root out liberal bias.
    They carefully avoid any right wing biases in the news and except for immigration or the deficit cannot find a single mistake of GWB or the GOP Congress during the past 6 years.
    Newsbusters.org is one of the most biased sites on the web.

    And Bob? Why is it that I see liberal opinions posted on Newsbusters all the time in the comments? Sorry but your post isn't exactly synching with my own personal experience from reading that site.

    Posted by: Brandon at January 17, 2007 8:11 PM

    I stated that they do permit a very few liberal posters...for awhile.As soon as their commentary gets too accurate, they get the ax...and then permit another one to enter as long as he doesn't make too much sense.

    OK KAF, I'll try one more time, and if that doesn't work, I guess I'll give up.

    ISSUES actually do get discussed here, to your's and Johnny's obvious chagrin. When ISSUES stop being discussed here and the entire discussion turns to nothing but mindless drivel about KO and 'Olbyloons', you won't see me here anymore, and probably 90% of the other posters either.

    Olbermann is NOT an issue...get over it!

    Oh, you mean like how Media Matters ignores any leftist bias say, on programs like Olbermannwatch or Jack Cafferty's rants? And how Media Matters carefully screens their posters? Tit for Tat I'd say.

    And once again, I'll state that I think it's utterly ridiculous to insist that a site called Olbermannwatch shouldn't discuss Olbermann which is exactly what you want! What the hell did you think this site was devoted to-posting cookie recipes? Yet you come here and in your utter arrogance insist that we discuss anything BUT Olbermann.

    Im not 'insisting' anything, I'm just discussing ISSUES instead of the mindless gossip you prefer.

    Ok, I get it, you don't think I should do that....so tell your friend Robert to block me. I'm wasting too much valuable time here anyway.

    I just think you're "utterly ridiculous"!

    KO's attack on a _fictional_ television show, and the wacky-weeds who support him all because it's on (gasp - cover your eyes) Fox, prove that liberals are freaking stupid and do not live in the real world.

    Sheesh.

    Why don't you guys go get some new tin-foil for your hats. And send some out to KO.

    Oh how noble of you Mike---to engage in some more story-telling in which you attempt to portray yourself as being "deep". Yeah, you're deep alright, so deep that you admit you don't read the NY Times of Washington Post because mysteriously you can't view them on your computer or find those sites on your own. And again, in your arrogance you think that people want to read the same Bush rants over and over again. We get it. You don't like him. Most people don't. Duh. So how many times can you bring that subject in a post yet you resent my on-topic discussions of Olbermann's biased opinion-fest? Again, nice try at framing yourself as some sort of intellectual but hey, we've all read your posts. We know better. You know, you really need to see about getting someone to loan you some $$$ so you can buy a f---ing clue.

    Buffalo vomited:

    "But that is just two of many at Fox who are given orders directly from Rupert Murdoch on what they can say and how they can say it or they are out of a job."

    Prove it.

    Or stfu.

    You stupid libs make me sick.

    "Olbermann is NOT an issue...get over it!"

    Hmmm.

    I thought this site was "olbermannwatch.com" because it's a site regarding ....Olbermann.

    How much will you lend me to "buy a f---ing clue", you fine upstandin gossipin 'libral' you?

    Mike's attempt at hijacking threads are again standard Olbyapologist diversionary attempts at changing the subject away from Olbermann and away to an argument they think they can win, although as we've all seen, most times they can't even manage that. But it is pretty funny that these loons come to a board named Olbermannwatch and then are arrogant enough to attempt to change the subject and then get pissed off when someone points out what the title of the board is it to them and tries to turn the subject back to Olbermann. If discussing "issues" is so important to Mike it does make you wonder why he chose to grace us with his presence here at Olbermannwatch instead of say at one of the liberal blogs. Oh, that's right. Mike's a moderate. Today anyway. Tomorrow, who knows, with Mike, it could be an entirely different story.

    KAF, oh damn...you're just too easy, I couldn't resist!

    You soewed: "in your arrogance, you think that people want to read the same Bush rants over and over again"

    Duh, no I guess what they really want to read the same old Anti - Olbermann rants over and over again!

    Lets see Bush...President....and Olbermann....3rd rated TV commentator. Now, why in the world didn't I figure out that Olbermann was actually the more important of the two?

    "How much will you lend me to "buy a f---ing clue", you fine upstandin gossipin 'libral' you?"

    Sounds like standard liberal behavior to me--wants someone to give them a handout.

    To you Mike? Not a dime. I work too hard for my money to give it to an idiot like you to squander. A mind is a terrible thing to waste and all of that and on you, a clue would no doubt be wasted, given what you think are your investigative skills as sussing out what you think is my lack of liberal credentials.

    And uh, yeah, you know I DO think people want to talk about Olbermann which is why they would in fact come to a site called OLBERMANNWATCH. Is there some part of that site name that indicates to you that it's actually BUSHWATCH? Is there some widespread reading comprehension problem with some of you here?

    Brandon's trying so damned hard to get my dander up and make me come down to his level and rant back at him.

    Its painfull to watch!

    KAF: "Is there some widespread reading comprehension problem with some of you here?"

    It's inherent with liberalism. A by-product of liberal stupidity.

    Now KAF:

    Let me try to remember now, how many bad, bad names have you called me now in addition to 'idiot', along with a few choice bursts of profanity here and there? I've lost count!

    I'm SO disapointed that you can't even spare 1 little dime to help me "buy a clue". I mean, I thought you 'librals' were such compassionate people!

    Olbys such a liar...tee hee hee hee....won't debate no conservatives....whisper whisper tsk tsk....not really a 'news' show.....he's a dope ha ha ha.....he's nuthin but a Bush basher....hates Fox tsk tsk tsk.....Muslem defender.....gossip gossip gossip........................................................................................................................................................................................

    Now Mike is using the "KAF called me bad names" defense. Like the "librals" as Mike calls them here haven't hurled names at us? His hat trick will be declaring the discussion closed and deciding he'll no longer respond to either KAF or me--again. Anyone want an over/under on what time Mike will make that declaration?

    EE, "Yes, but your paraphrase is that the Democratic Party is implying something (putting a hidden suggestion in their message) when no such implication exists. People are inferring (taking a suggestion that does not exist out of a message)."

    Imply does NOT mean putting a HIDDEN suggestion in a message.

    Infer does NOT mean taking a suggestion that does not EXIST.

    The first definition for imply is:

    "1. to indicate or suggest without being explicitly stated: His words implied a lack of faith."


    The first definition for infer is:

    "1. to derive by reasoning; conclude or judge from premises or evidence: They inferred his displeasure from his cool tone of voice."

    Without the concept of implication and inferrence a gap is left in logical reasoning that is insurmountable to logical discourse.

    You imply with assertions of your so called FACTS that GWB is evil, suppresses free speech, is a tyrant, is using Gestapo and Gulag tactics, , is criminally responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands, is a War Proffiteer and on and and on.

    I infer that you are STATING that GWB is the equivalent to those figures in history who have the same qualities, Hitler, Stalin, Speer etc.

    Try again.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Gramnie

    But Mike, I do give money to GOOD causes. I just don't believe in throwing my money away on LOST ones.

    And we don't gossip about Olbermann, we tell the truth. It's the truth about Olbermann that infuriates you liberals though isn't it?

    No Brandon, you got it all wrong.

    You're so funny I'm gonna keep right on laughing at you and you're silliness!

    I've yet to see you get it right Mike. So keep on laughing. You know what they say about he who laughs last. . .

    You wouldn't know 'right' if it slapped you in the face.

    Wait a minute, you are right...just as ridiculously far to the right as you can possibly get short of being a Nazi!

    Well, excuuuuse me!

    Dear old Mike, my friend,

    Since you chose to ignore my post earlier on this thread, I will copy it again. Admittedly, I sincerely doubt you have no support for your comment, so I am sure you will avoid it once again, but, here goes...from 11:31 PM last night:

    Mike...not Ohio Mike, of course, posted the following gem:

    "How many times do I have to tell you that I don't give a rats ass about 'defending' Keith Olbermann? Yes, he has his flaws but he can defend himself quite well....he doen't need my help."


    He doesn't need your help? Well, you are right there....It isn't hard to defend yourself when you have a grand total of ZERO guests on your show who question you or criticize your stance, views, or behavior.

    If you call "defending yourself quite well" being quarantined from everyone walking the planet who could disagree with you....well, then I guess I have no argument.

    You win, Mike.


    I wonder what part of Mike's comment "I don't give a rat's ass about defending Keith Olbermann" that 'Ohio' Mike didn't understand?

    "Imply does NOT mean putting a HIDDEN suggestion in a message.

    Infer does NOT mean taking a suggestion that does not EXIST."

    You say imply does not involve a hidden message, but then give a definition for imply that means "to indicate or suggest without being explicit". Well, what are you indicating? Something hidden.

    And then you say that you cannot infer something that does not exist. But you sample sentence could lead to multiple inferences (none of which could be right).

    "They inferred his displeasure from his cool tone of voice." - Let's see - the speaker could be distracted, he may have a naturally neutral tone of voice, he may not care about the matter being discussed...you can draw AN inference from it, but that inference may not be the RIGHT one (if one exists at all).

    EE, I didn't explain myself well. Your implication is that there is no hidden message to discern. I inferred that you were arguing that any inference drawn from a deafening silence could not be an implication.

    By definition, if there is no message above and beyond what is said or not said there is no implication, therefore one can not logically deduce an inference. I agree with that.

    I disagree, though, that KO does not daily imply many things. His WPITW award going to BOR the majority of the time, no matter what has happened on that day by some truly heinous people is a very loud implication that leads on to an inescapable inference.

    His charming use of 'pet' names for his perceived enemies is an implication that we all infer his meaning from above and beyond his outraged voice and dubious assertions.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    Remember when Keith told the world that indictments were on the way for me in the Plame case? This is what happens when you parrot the liars over at truthout, which is what Keith does because he is a liar. If you want to make uncannily accurate predictions, just say the opposite of whatever Olbermann says.

    "If you call "defending yourself quite well" being quarantined from everyone walking the planet who could disagree with you....well, then I guess I have no argument."


    Why can't olbermann do this? it works for the president?

    Me thinks Bobby-Boy got sh*t-canned from Newsbusters for being too much of a crackpot


    "I stated that they do permit a very few liberal posters...for awhile.As soon as their commentary gets too accurate, they get the ax...and then permit another one to enter as long as he doesn't make too much sense.

    Posted by: Bob at January 17, 2007 8:18 PM"

    Bob logic at its finest:

    Oh no, they don't let Libs on.. They let a few Libs on and WHEN their commentary gets accurate they get the ax. Then they let one on who doesn't make sense.

    I have never seen Bob claim anything but infallibility for the Libs. How could they ever not be accurate and sensible.

    Couldn't possibly be the almost constant virulent ad hominem assumptions and attacks.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    Remember when Keith told you that the 2004 vote in Ohio was stolen and he kept pounding away at it for weeks and weeks? Even the left leaning MSM mouthpieces (NYT, WaPo, LATimes) weren't buying this whopper of a lie. Lies are a way of life for Olbermann.

    Great article dissecting GWB's dysfunctional psyche
    and how we all got into this mess in the first place.
    Posted here for clear-thinking liberals who care.
    As the nitwits on the irrational right
    would begin gnashing teeth were they to read it,
    as it plumbs the depths of many non-sectarian-regressive realities the right can't handle,
    like intelligence, nuance, insight, psychology, and Bill Clinton.
    http://www.alternet.org/story/46794/

    This post is for all of you loons who claim that you don't hate GWB, you simply hate his policies.

    "On Dec. 5, Newsweek magazine touted an interview with then-incoming House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Chairman Rep. Silvestre Reyes as an "exclusive." And for good reason.
    "In a surprise twist in the debate over Iraq," the story began, Mr. Reyes "said he wants to see an increase of 20,000 to 30,000 U.S. troops as part of a 'stepped up effort to dismantle the militias.' "
    "We have to consider the need for additional troops to be in Iraq, to take out the militias and stabilize Iraq," the Texas Democrat said to the surprise of many, "I would say 20,000 to 30,000."
    Then came President Bush's expected announcement last week, virtually matching Mr. Reyes' recommendation and argument word-for-word -- albeit the president proposed only 21,500 troops.
    Wouldn't you know, hours after Mr. Bush announced his proposal, Mr. Reyes told the El Paso Times that such a troop buildup was unthinkable.
    "We don't have the capability to escalate even to this minimum level," he said.
    The chairman's "double-talk" did not go unnoticed. Among others, Rep. Joe Wilson, South Carolina Republican and a member of the House Armed Services Committee, says such blatant "hypocrisy" undermines both national security and the war on terrorism.
    Unfortunately for the new House intelligence chief, this is his second (some would argue his third) major blunder in the space of one month. When asked by Congressional Quarterly reporter Jeff Stein whether al Qaeda was a Sunni or Shi'ite organization, he answered: "Predominantly, probably Shi'ite."
    As Mr. Stein wrote later: "He couldn't have been more wrong. Al Qaeda is profoundly Sunni. If a Shi'ite showed up at an al Qaeda clubhouse, they'd slice his head off and use it for a soccer ball."
    The reporter added: "To me, it's like asking about Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland: Who's on what side?"
    In the same interview, Mr. Stein had asked Mr. Reyes about the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah. His now-infamous reply: "Hezbollah. Uh, Hezbollah? ... Why do you ask me these questions at 5 o'clock? Can I answer in Spanish? Do you speak Spanish?"

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20070118-120639-5251r_page2.htm

    See, the Dem playbook is pretty simple really:

    1. Criticize GWB for whatever it is he is doing.
    2. Don't offer an alternative policy option, but if you do (see No. 3 below) . . .
    3. Disavow the alternative policy option you previously endorsed if GWB agrees to adopt what you proposed.


    Typical Mike...while most men were watching the dramatic finish of Colts-Patriots, he's on here trying to make himself feel important on the Olbermann Watch message board. It's easy to see why he's alone, likely not employed, and looking for attention since he's not witnessing with friends (when he clearly has none) one of the great conference championships of all-time!

    My issue is that 5 years since 9/11, our country is not much safer from another terrorist attack. Republicans scoff at inspecting (and/or scanning) all shipping containers coming into the U.S. (for instance for “radiation”). Yet Hong Kong has been doing just this for quite a awhile. Republicans also tell us even if we did, “Where will the money come from to do so?” Well, there’s the rub…How about if we hadn’t spent close to $1 Trillion on Bush’s M.E. war; and instead concentrated on beefing security at our ports, along our borders - and at our chemical and nuclear plants?!

    Bottom line: The scenario in 24 could happen, and thanks to Bush, IMHO it is even more a threat. Why? 1) As the Democrats say, not inacting all the recommendations of the 9/11 commission; and 2) Starting a war in the M.E. (and miserably blundered it) - stirring up a hornets nest, and hatred of the U.S. - thereby creating new terrorists by the hundreds, if not thousands. Failed policy both at home and abroad has made us ALL less safer, regardless of your political views. This is a fact. All 16 of U.S. Intelligence Agencies have issued a report saying that the U.S. is at a greater risk today (of further attacks) DUE TO OUR CURRENT FORIEGN POLICY.

    It’s just too bad.