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


    April 15, 2007
    Let's Talk "Journalist", Shall We?

    One of the readers who commented on my first post questioned whether I considered Keith Olbermann to be a "journalist". I had made a reference to how Olbermann sometimes crosses the line between "journalist and commentator". Is he a "journalist" in the truest sense of the word? Probably not. Perhaps we should adopt the British term "presenter" here in America. I'd be more comfortable with that. But there are bigger issues here than simply the terminology.

    Do viewers have ANY sources for truly impartial reporting? Consider that question carefully. Fox News, CNN, the major networks; don't they all, at least occasionally, force the viewer into an active mode and make them search out other versions of a story to help them determine "objectivity"? I'm not certain that's a bad thing. I believe television viewers (especially those who search out news and information telecasts) have become "smarter" over the years and their options have obviously multiplied. Simply put, Americans have gotten smarter.

    Think back to Hurricane Katrina. Do you know anybody who didn't hop from channel to channel, just to see how each news entity was covering the disaster? I don't recall a single reporter/anchor/presenter/journalist who didn't make it very obvious that they felt the government's handling of the situation, both before and after the storm hit, was an unmitigated disgrace. Would you have wanted it any other way?

    Broadcasting is a game of personality, presentation, style and content. Each network, each person on the air, is striving to stand out and make an impression in the eyes of the viewer. With the huge amount of news and information content on cable (not to mention the Internet ), it's sadly difficult to find a profitable niche by promoting a product that promises "just the facts". Viewers may SAY that's what they want, but that's not what the majority will ultimately watch.

    Keith has created a niche. His viewers obviously appreciate what he's doing and that's what it takes; a way to stand out from the crowd. I'm sure there are many passionate viewers who inhale every syllable Keith utters and proclaim him the "ultimate journalist". That's just as wrong as those who believe everything he says and does on the air is tantamount to treason. I watch Countdown because it approaches issues from a different perspective than most of the other news and/or information programs on the air. I watch the other programs, too, to get a "feel" for the way the issues are being reported elsewhere.

    I believe there are many, many, others who watch, listen AND think. Americans HAVE gotten smarter.


    Posted by Doug Krile | Permalink | Comments (192) | | View blog reactions

    192 Comments

    Olbermann's declining ratings would indeed seem to indicate that his viewing audience has indeed gotten smarter and are tuning out the sportscaster doing a bad Murrow impersonation out.

    Hey Doug!

    Do viewers have any sources for truly impartial reporting?

    Doug maybe the better question would be did viewers ever have any truly impartial reporting. Has there ever been 100%? No!

    Everybody has some bent or vent, it's whats sets things apart on the different shows.

    Now that being said, I do believe that the FNC host must do the best job on fact checking than CNN or MSNBC. Why? Simple, there are websites out there just waiting to pounce on any and all words they say.

    Example: Newshounds, Media Matters.

    Objectivity

    Yes, I agree. I'm a thinking person so I will bounce around. And it becomes very easy if you watch CNN for a month and than switch to FNC. Boy! is there a difference!

    The Hurricane? Well, most places were blaming Bush. And yes I agree, the federal goverment is a mess. But the blame has to be shared also by the state and local goverment as well. The feds can send things but it is the JOB of the state and local goverment to put it in place. And I do believe that Gerge Bush could have went down there. Put a trailer on a slab, hooked up the water, power, and cable. And a majority of reporters would have bitched that he didn't hook up the phone.

    Broadcasting is a game of personality, presentation, style , and content.

    Yes!....yes,yes,yes, And right now the O'Reilly Factor is the prime time ratings king. Like it or not. And that is a show that is getting blasted in Newspapers, websites, on Countdown. You name it almost on a daily basis. AND! just this week hit 3 million in viewers, AND scored a 2.8 million with a fill in host. The Factor is now becoming a brand name.

    Keith has created a niche?

    NO!......no,no,no, has he filled a void? Thats better. I won't go into content here because that gets done everyday on this site. Keith has not created anything, or have we forgotten AIR AMERICA RADIO already?

    Keith plays to the Air America Crowd and those on the left. Nothing wrong with that. It's good he's on. The problem I have is some of his content you have to look at sideways and thats being nice. If it wasn't for a site such as olbermannwatch Keith would have a free pass. And as we all know Mr. Dollar & Mr. Cox have found some doozers!

    But Keith does weasel. Look at the Imus deal. Tip-toed until Imus got fired. If Keith was firm in his beliefs, he should have said what he thought up front. Also, When Keith had his little talk with Jessie Jackson and tried to tie it into a why stop there with the little MEDIA MATTERS produced dog and pony show. Again, be honest. No I don't think Keith lifts stories from Blu-Blogs. He has people like media matters produce them. Why does Media Matters have a problem with everyone else but not Keith? Even has spot promos for his Special Comments.

    Case in point Doug, When he went on his why stop there rant. I found it strange that Keith named the number one and three talk radio leaders, but left out the number two man. Funny that happened at Media Matters on their blog which, funny just happened to be named 'Why Stop There'?
    There was no Shaun Hannity on that list either. Why? Because Mr. 'I believe in what I'm Doing'. has to pass Mr. Hannity in the hallways almost everyday.

    How can he be called the most honest man in News when he can't be honest with himself?

    It's one thing to try to present an Edward R. Morrow style broadcast. It's another when it's Ted Baxter doing it.

    Thanks Doug for stopping by. You do bring good debate to the table.

    Oh and just in case. I do listen to 'The Radio Factor' but my favorite show at the moment is The Jerry Doyle Show.

    Cable at night I'll tivo the Factor and while I'm watching that I'll cherry pick segments of other shows off the website. Yes Doug, just about the entire Countdown show is on the MSNBC website where O'Reilly's show has only two segments at the most on the FNC site.

    "I watch Countdown because it approaches issues from a different perspective than most of the other news "


    No, doubt...

    Yes, Countdown is different....Countdown is the "news and/or information program" where "the presenter" soberly asks selected Washington Post journos, or John Dean, or Craig Crawford, loaded questions about the Iraq War and "Bush Administration malfeasance" and then juxtaposes Pres. Bush's image with a groundhog or places VP Cheney's head on a cartoon body in prison garb, in the next segment.

    It's the "news and/or information program" where Keith Olbermann airs the latest anti-Bush Admin/Republican/conservative conspiracy theory making the rounds on internet blogs, while assiduously refusing to include a Bush Admin/Republican/conservative guest to answer the accusation.

    Countdown is show where Presenter Olbermann, fairly seething with anger, launches into his "special comments" (relentlessly promoted on MSNBC the entire day...) by dramatically intoning, "How dare you, Mr. Bush".

    Glad you're enjoying all this wonderful writing and this wonderful alternative to anything approaching responsibility or fairness in a television news program.

    Oh yeah, it's so good that you're enjoying DNC-TV, Doug. But please stop trying to con us into believing that a one hour airing of political and cultural agitprop is just a wonderful part of the wonderful diverse array of television offerings for we wonderful savvy sophisticates.

    We're far too smart and sophisticated to be fooled by that crap.

    Cecelia, whenever you launch into one of your predictable little tirades against the Countdown show, one wonders if you are promoting Fox as a more 'responsible', or 'fair' alternative?

    Now, if you were to make a similar tirade against Fox's own brand of 'irresponsibity' or 'fairness', I would certainly begin to respect your opinion a little more.

    Just asking.

    Cecelia, whenever you launch into one of your predictable little tirades against the Countdown show, one wonders if you are promoting Fox as a more 'responsible', or 'fair' alternative?

    Now, if you were to make a similar tirade against Fox's own brand of 'irresponsibity' or 'fairness', I would certainly begin to respect your opinion a little more.

    Just asking.

    Posted by: Mike at April 16, 2007 2:12 AM


    Well, Mike if you were able to keep from saying "Fox" or "Bush" after reading any criticism of Olbermann or his show, I might think you reallly weren't here to defend him.

    But then if that really were the case you'd be plying your inability to make a persuasive argument for anything--- including smoke alarms at an underwriter's convention---over at Johnny Dollar's Place, or a war blog.

    Posted by: Cecelia April 16, 2007 2:26 AM

    "Well, Mike if you were able to keep from saying "Fox" or "Bush" after reading any criticism o Olbermann or his show, I might think you really weren't here to defend him."

    Sure Cecelia, I certainly get your point. It's much like your side's inevitable tendency to invoke Clinton whenever they read criticism of Bush.

    In a way, Fox IS very much the point. As long as this travesty of "Journalism" called Fox 'News' remains, then you should consider shows such as Olbermann's the enevitable and even necessary backlash.

    No, two wrongs don't make a right, but there are times when it is the only alternative.

    Also, if the same person who makes a daily ponification at the top of every page on this this site didn't also run a pro-Fox page dedicated to "the truth" about Fox 'News', then their own credibility would be exponentially higher as well.

    While it's not exactly conflict of interest...it's more like collusion of interest.

    So Mike just defended Olbermann's lack of journalistic integrity by using the well-worn Olbyloon excuse, "Look at Fox! If they can do it, so can we!" Sorry Mike but that dog doesn't hunt except in the mind of the average deluded Olbyloon.

    Well, Johnny might do a blog on Fox News, Mike, but I don't.

    You may watch Fox News, Mike, but I don't.

    Now YOU are invoking Clinton, to go along with your usual bit that no one has any moral standing to criticise Keith as long as there are troops in Iraq.

    What's next-- it's "unbalanced" to criticise Olbermann as long as Don Imus is allowed to live? As long as conservative talk radio can garner good ratings? As long a Paul Wolfowitz can goose girls?

    The last time I saw Fox they had Sens Biden and Rangel talking about Scooter Libby.

    You watch Fox..and have issues with the folks there, then YOU go over to Johnny Dollars Place... or to jesusihatebilloreilly.com and have at it.

    But quit telling me I have to jump your hurdles in order to criticise MSNBC's primetime DNC-TV show.

    Frankly, we both know you'd be setting out new hurdles for each one I cleared, and using any criticism I made of Fox or the war as ammunition to defend Olbermann to his other detractors, rather than as a reason to seriously consider my complaints about him.

    You may be fooling yourself with this "logic" (though I doubt it). You certainly don't fool anyone else.

    Cecelia, whenever you launch into one of your predictable little tirades against the Countdown show, one wonders if you are promoting Fox as a more 'responsible', or 'fair' alternative?

    Now, if you were to make a similar tirade against Fox's own brand of 'irresponsibity' or 'fairness', I would certainly begin to respect your opinion a little more.

    Just asking.

    Posted by: Mike at April 16, 2007 2:12 AM
    Anyone that uses the thinking side of their brain knows that Fox News is much more on the "fair" side and "responsible" side than More Snot Nosed BroadCasters. Please, tell us how fair Ulbermahn is, I need a really good laugh!

    Jeff the moron: "I need a really good laugh!"

    What you need is a really good lobotomy

    Cecelia: "Now YOU are invoking Clinton, to go along with your usual bit that no one has any moral ground to criticise Keith as long as their are troops in Iraq."

    No Cecelia, I wasn't and never said "no one" has "moral ground" to criticise Keith...but YOU clearly have demonstrated no moral ground to criticise ANYONE.

    As for my "invoking Clinton", you clearly don't understand analogies, and that makes you a lot less smart than you think you are.

    You know Cecelia, your posts remain clean and respectable MOST of the time...and then out of the blue, you suddenly call someone who has refrained from insulting you something like 'liar' or worse, This is morally reprehensible...and to say it has surprised me (twice), is an understatement.

    It won't surprise me a third time. I see you for what you are.

    Actually Brandon, that dog DOES hunt quite well under the circumstances.

    The cable news airwaves are literally saturated with right wing reactionary rhetoric these days. The obvious solution would be to clean it ALL up, but that clearly isn't an option. Roger Ale's brain would have to be cleaned up first. therefore the obvious need for backlash shows like Countdown.

    If you'll recall, Fox 'News' was started as a backlash to what many saw as "liberal media bias".

    Olbermann is left-leaning; however, he works for a network that has people from the left AND right. Fox has an agenda. If you girls cannot understand the difference, you are as stupid as we have been saying you are.

    blindrat

    Krille - "People can figure out that the Olbermanns, or Hanities, and O'Reilies of this word are coming from a certain angle and use it as one point from which they can triangulate the truth."

    Cecelia - "How dare you suggest people aren't stupid, you evil deceiver? Why, if what you say is true, what would be the point of filling our nights with Olberman-watching and our days with Olbermann-kvetching? What are you doing with that water? No! No!....Ahhhhhhrrrrrg......I'mmm meeeeeelllllllttttting!"

    "But please stop trying to con us into believing that a one hour airing of political and cultural agitprop is just a wonderful part of the wonderful diverse array of television offerings for we wonderful savvy sophisticates."

    Why should he, and why wouldn't it be? Actually I think what most ruffles the feathers of the BushWing is that they make their electroral living convincing folk that the "mainstream media" is just so horribly tainted by the left, so having a truly leftist newslant on tv kind of gives that the lie. That's all I can figure because the level of "outrage, outrage, I tell you" that goes on here overdoes Termagant.

    Tells us plainly and clearly, Ye the OlbermannWatch-- put the spittle protector over the keyboard and tell us-- just what is so heinous about some random, low-rated TV variety show that dares defile the name of Bush-Cheney?

    Blinrat: Cecelia and the girls only understand what is 'right'...."right wing" that is!

    You know Cecelia, your posts remain clean and respectable MOST of the time...and then out of the blue, you suddenly call someone who has refrained from insulting you something like 'liar' or worse, This is morally reprehensible...and to say it has surprised me (twice), is an understatement.

    It won't surprise me a third time. I see you for what you are.

    Posted by: Mike at April 16, 2007 12:27 PM
    lil mikey, telling us who has morals and who doesn't, proving again, to be the biggest hypocrite on the internet!

    "Tells us plainly and clearly, Ye the OlbermannWatch-- put the spittle protector over the keyboard and tell us-- just what is so heinous about some random, low-rated TV variety show that dares defile the name of Bush-Cheney?
    Posted by: VOK at April 16, 2007 12:40 PM"

    I take two exceptions with the above.

    First, 'heinous' is over the top as a term that most here would use to describe KO's show.

    Second, 'variety show' is totally inaccurate to describe a show that has the same guests saying the same things week in and week out.

    You did, however, get the 'low rated' just right.

    Grammie

    Tells us plainly and clearly, Ye the OlbermannWatch-- put the spittle protector over the keyboard and tell us-- just what is so heinous about some random, low-rated TV variety show that dares defile the name of Bush-Cheney?

    Posted by: VOK at April 16, 2007 12:40 PM


    I don't think plainly and clearly will do it for you, VOK.

    Heck, no... Not in a discussion where the defense of Keith Olbermann must be laid out by your invoking of "the rightwing"..... "the Bushwing"...."the rightwing's "labeling" of some media slant, and.... good ole "Bush/Cheney"....

    Not to mention your defense of a piece by journalist, Doug, who is bascially saying "aren't you Olbermann critics smart enough to just change the channel like the rest of America"..... And, THAT, in the context of it being the last thing folks like Mike and Blindrat wanted to hear when it came to their "historical" criticism of Fox News.

    No, plainly and clearly isn't going to make a bit of difference, VOK. Anymore than my saying I don't watch Fox News and don't write blogs about Fox News does it for Mike. Anymore than my suggesting that Fox at least seems to air Democrats and liberals and to even pay them to be on staff will do it for Blindrat. Anymore than the suggestion that this is a blog site about Olbermann does it for those folks who then tell us we shouldn't be kevetching about him while Bush has FUBAR'ed Iraq.

    No, plainly and clearly telling folks that MSNBC is airing a prime time news show that couldn't contain more DNC talking points if it were written by Howard Dean, and that uses blue-blogs as a source for dirt against the Presenter's political opponents, time-slot competition, and folks he just doesn't happen to like, without any counterview or rebuttal offered, is only going to result in terms like "rightwing", "bushwing", "Fox Noise", Iraq", being thrown around like mudballs.

    Plainly and clearly...indeed...

    VOK- So why do you people obsess over this again?
    Grannie - No comment

    "First, 'heinous' is over the top as a term that most here would use to describe KO's show."

    No way. You nattering nabobs of negativism spout much stronger language, and do so more often than not. Maybe not you grannie, I know you like to keep your wars neat-n-tidy.

    "Second, 'variety show' is totally inaccurate to describe a show that has the same guests saying the same things week in and week out."

    Not really. That is the hallmark of the variety show. I guess you are making another anti-Olbermann in-joke here. Dunno.

    "You did, however, get the 'low rated' just right."

    Well exactly. You Olbermann-Watchers are probably most of the audience. Ooooooo.....he's just soooo bad, that bad bad boy. Naughty naughty Mr. Keith. Ooooooo....I've gotta call Johnny and Jenny and warn them how baaadddd he is being. What an audacious bad bad liberal boy! He even likes girls...oooo icky! Let's talk about him!

    Well exactly. You Olbermann-Watchers are probably most of the audience. Ooooooo.....he's just soooo bad, that bad bad boy. Naughty naughty Mr. Keith. Ooooooo....I've gotta call Johnny and Jenny and warn them how baaadddd he is being. What an audacious bad bad liberal boy! He even likes girls...oooo icky! Let's talk about him!

    Posted by: VOK at April 16, 2007 1:23 PM


    Look at it like this, VOK....

    We are obsessing over a man with a primetime news show, who just made a prominent media guilde's top ten list of most influencial persons in television news.

    On the other hand, YOU come to this site, in order to obsess about.....us....

    Cecelia...glad you just admitted to 'obsessing'. We might be getting somewhere here.

    Then you followed with the same kind of inane "well you're obssesing TOO" logic that implies that we should never invoke Fox "News' in defense of countdown.

    VOK- So why do you people obsess over this again?
    Cecelia- I can't explain it to you because you are a brainwashed robot that hates President Bush and Fox.

    "No, plainly and clearly telling folks that MSNBC is airing a prime time news show that couldn't contain more DNC talking points if it were written by Howard Dean, and that uses blue-blogs as a source for dirt against the Presenter's political opponents, time-slot competition, and folks he just doesn't happen to like, without any counterview or rebuttal offered"

    So what? I still don't get it. It's one show. It's like Hanity. Hanity is worse because they hire someone to PRETEND to be a democrat and give the worst and weakest opposition possible so that viewers are actually convinced they have hear an open honest debate. Or if you think that IS better, then it's like Rush. Or Savage, Or take your pick. So What?

    My only question, which I am generally interested in, is why you care. And Krille's take, which is that only an idiot can't do the math for themselves, is correct, isn't it? And he is really restrained about making it and then you practically flame him. It's just weird.

    Cecelia...glad you just admitted to 'obsessing'. We might be getting somewhere here.

    Then you followed with the same kind of inane "well you're obssesing TOO" logic that implies that we should never invoke Fox "News' in defense of countdown.

    Posted by: Mike at April 16, 2007 1:38 PM


    That all that went completely over your head, as did the Clinton thing, isn't surprising.

    At least you garnered your reputation honestly...

    "On the other hand, YOU come to this site, in order to obsess about.....us...."

    You need to just number that one. It would save typing. But you're obsessing about me obsessing about you obsessing about Olbermann. Now you go.

    Truthfully, I come here to see if there are any arguments on substantive issues to be had, and occassionally there are.

    I do find you folk very interesting, I admit it. There are some things you can't help looking at and trying to understand, like a two-headed woodchuck or something. It just doesn't seem like it can be so, so I try to come up with some explanation. And try as I might, this just doesn't make sense. I get Bob's thing. He wants to be a rightwing internet impressario and he happens to be rightwing and in line for a large inheritance. But unless you are married to him or something, I just can't see it.

    "VOK- So why do you people obsess over this again?
    Grannie - No comment"

    That question doesn't seem to appear in this thread. Particulars, please.


    "You nattering nabobs of negativism spout much stronger language"

    Perhaps some do, sometimes. But you phrased the question in such a way that even answering it implies agreement with your characterization of everyone's opinion that KO's show is 'grossly wicked or reprehensible; abominable: a heinous crime. ' If you wanted a genuine answer, you would have done better to ask a genuine question.


    "I know you like to keep your wars neat-n-tidy."

    Could this be the crux of my taking exception to your statement. You view this site as a battleground in some war, rather than a place to express opinions and debate others. Personally rough and nasty too often, but a WAR about KO?

    Have to leave now. I am already late for my PT.

    But I will be back to finish in a few hours.

    Grammie

    Grammie

    VOK writes as though I have said "Cecelia- I can't explain it to you because you are a brainwashed robot that hates President Bush and Fox."

    I don't know whether you "hate" as opposed to criticise Bush or Fox News or not. I do know that in a discussion where YOU asked that objections to Olbermann be clearly and plainly stated, you simultaneously referred to criticism of Olbermann as being easily discounted because it's "the rightwing" and "the bushwing" kevetching.

    So who is calling who a mindless partisan "robot", VOK?


    VOK writes "So what? I still don't get it. It's one show. It's like Hanity. Hanity is worse because they hire someone to PRETEND to be a democrat and give the worst and weakest opposition possible so that viewers are actually convinced they have hear an open honest debate. Or if you think that IS better, then it's like Rush. Or Savage, Or take your pick. So What?"

    So complain at Johnny Dollar's Place, VOK. I'm not singing the praises of Fox News and I'm not even in their audience, but in order to legitimately criticise Olbermann, I somehow have to berate FOX!

    Guess what.... THAT wouldn't work for me, either. Then you'll argue that I only fuss about Olberamann (and an Olbermann board!) because I'm part of "the Bushwing".

    It's interesting too, that you would refer to having a counterview and Hannity opposition on to being "worse" than having NO alternative voice.

    BTW-- can any Hannity watchers offer a list of Dem/liberal guests on Hannity's show, in order for me to guage who VOK is insulting as being weak among their crowd?


    As far as Limbaugh and Savage go, aren't they radio talk show hosts? Are they the face of any cable channel's prime time "news show" offering?

    VOK writes "My only question, which I am generally interested in, is why you care. And Krille's take, which is that only an idiot can't do the math for themselves, is correct, isn't it? And he is really restrained about making it and then you practically flame him. It's just weird."

    I've articulated why I care. Why am I supposed to NOT care about a guy who does have a primetime news show, and one that Doug himself characterizes as being groundbreaking, unique, and culturally influencial, but it makes perfect sense for YOU to care enough about him to be here disagreeing with me?

    Cecelia: Well, Johnny might do a blog on Fox news, but I don't"

    No, you just come here to this reprehensible personal smear site and rub just as hard as you can rub. Truth doesn't matter one whit to you because it's all about your team 'winning' for you...nothing else matters.

    You can some here and defend a lying troll like Jeff because, after all, he's on your team, and the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

    Meanwhile....decent young American's continue to die in Iraq for a lost cause, and I don't think you care at all!

    Cecelia: "Why am I NOT supposed to care about a guy who does have a primetime news show"

    Because bitch, this is Amerca and you can change the damned channel!

    Cecelia: "Why am I NOT supposed to care about a guy who does have a primetime news show"

    Because bitch, this is Amerca and you can change the damned channel!

    Posted by: Mike at April 16, 2007 2:12 PM
    Cecelia, I think lil mikey is on the verge of a meltdown! His bp must be off the chart...

    "I think mikey is on the verge of a meltdown".LMAO!

    Everything else you 'think' is a lie...why should that be an exception?

    "BTW-- can any Hannity watchers offer a list of Dem/liberal guests on Hannity's show, in order for me to guage who VOK is insulting as being weak among their crowd?"

    Isn't the show really called "Hanity & Colmbes?" I've only really seen the SNL sendup, and the wisdom there seems to be that Colmes is some kind of stereotype they use to basically lampoon the leftist argument. I don't really know. I don't follow this stuff. Anyone who watches cable news is, IMO, wasting their time. If you want info you can get it yourself these days, you don't need it pre-digested for you. Which I think is kind of an extension of Krille's point.

    "As far as Limbaugh and Savage go, aren't they radio talk show hosts? Are they the face of any cable channel's prime time "news show" offering?"

    No. So what? Is that your journalistic line in the sand?

    "I've articulated why I care."

    You have? I guess I missed it. Is it because you believe all the TV cable shows that call themselves "news" shows should be objective? Just state it quick and straight in one sentence, without the robot stuff and all, and I'll have my answer and will shut the ?#@! up.

    "Why am I supposed to NOT care about a guy who does have a primetime news show, and one that Doug himself characterizes as being groundbreaking, unique, and culturally influencial,"

    Er, because you don't like the show and think it's stupid and you disagree with Doug. If you don't like Breyer's Vanila-fudge swirl, do you found a website to counter it's vileness?

    "...but it makes perfect sense for YOU to care enough about him to be here disagreeing with me?"

    I don't care about him. I guess you can't believe that. I've told you I think you people are interesting. Just like someone claiming to expose the evil fraud of Breyer's Vanila Fudge Swirl. And I'm not disagreeing with anything you've said, other than your apparent view that you've given some answer about what you think is important about all this Olbermann business that I understand. If you've explained it, I didn't get it.

    "So complain at Johnny Dollar's Place, VOK. I'm not singing the praises of Fox News and I'm not even in their audience, but in order to legitimately criticise Olbermann, I somehow have to berate FOX!"

    You don't have to berate anyone. it's hard to imagine such an existance, but there you go. Biased media on cable is what the market wants, and everyone knows it's biased, so who cares? (Krille's valid argument). Or if you do care (Your valid argument), you can't pretend to be objective if you only apply the standard to one side.

    I do find you folk very interesting, I admit it. There are some things you can't help looking at and trying to understand, like a two-headed woodchuck or something. It just doesn't seem like it can be so, so I try to come up with some explanation. And try as I might, this just doesn't make sense. I get Bob's thing. He wants to be a rightwing internet impressario and he happens to be rightwing and in line for a large inheritance. But unless you are married to him or something, I just can't see it.

    Posted by: VOK at April 16, 2007 1:53 PM


    You self-servingly "not seeing it" no matter how plainly and clearly it's presented to you doesn't surprise me. That you're the type of guy who denigrates the folks buying tickets to the clown act, while you can't stay away from the tent you label the freak show, is something so transparent blindrat can see it.

    Guess there's nothing left to do but merely enjoy your hypocrisy.


    "You self-servingly "not seeing it" no matter how plainly and clearly it's presented to you doesn't surprise me."

    In other words, you've told me a million billion trillion times and so you're not going to tell you again!!! It's as plain as the nose on my face. It isn't complicated. It's so simple. It's so simple it no one could not understand. Especially as many times as I've been told. And yet I don't get it because of my agenda. It's all a trick to make Cecelia attack Fox. And Clowns. And Stuff. Ahhhrrrrrrrgggggg!!!! I'm meeeeeelllllllting.

    Nevermind. I guess I do get it.

    >Isn't the show really called "Hanity & Colmbes?"

    The show is called Hannity and Comb, because all that really matters is Hannity and how he looks.

    Sean Hannity is the executive producer of the show, so he controls a lot more of what we see than Alan does.

    Not that I have a problem with that, just calling a spade a spade. It's the Olbyloons (not THE olbyloons, the other Olbyloons, with a capital O) that want to change Countdown and make it what they want.

    >So Mike just defended Olbermann's lack of journalistic integrity by using the well-worn Olbyloon excuse, "Look at Fox! If they can do it, so can we!" Sorry Mike but that dog doesn't hunt except in the mind of the average deluded Olbyloon.
    Posted by: Brandon at April 16, 2007 10:04 AM

    Saying Fox is as partisan as Countdown is a well-worn excuse? Perhaps it's well-worn because it's also well-known. But that dog doesn't hunt, huh, Brandon? Perhaps it would if you trained it to go after ALL hypocrites instead of just the ones you don't agree with.

    Oh, but then your dog might turn on you, eh, Brandon!

    Too Funny!


    "Guess there's nothing left to do but merely enjoy your hypocrisy."

    And the clown act. You forgot the clown act.

    VOK writes "Isn't the show really called "Hanity & Colmbes?" I've only really seen the SNL sendup, and the wisdom there seems to be that Colmes is some kind of stereotype they use to basically lampoon the leftist argument. I don't really know. I don't follow this stuff. Anyone who watches cable news is, IMO, wasting their time. If you want info you can get it yourself these days, you don't need it pre-digested for you. Which I think is kind of an extension of Krille's point."

    Wait a minute.... you don't follow Hannity and Combs but you used it as a talking point as to why no conservative has grounds to criticise Countdown?

    You base your conception of the show on a SNL spoof and then turn around and mouth some sort of idiocy about cable news being pre-digested information and not worth your time!

    Then...in the midst of this glorious logic you say that Doug was arguing that cable news watchers are wasting their time!

    VOK write "No. So what? Is that [radio talk shows] your journalistic line in the sand?"

    Uh...no... I also wouldn't compare the Daily Show to a prime time television news show. I wouldn't compare what Olbermann does with Dan Patrick to a prime time television news show... and MOST OF ALL... I wouldn't compare an SNL spoof to ......

    "Er, because you don't like the show [is why I shouldn't be here arguing with VOK about it....] and think it's stupid and you disagree with Doug. If you don't like Breyer's Vanila-fudge swirl, do you found a website to counter it's vileness?"

    If Breyer's Ice Cream came with a plethora of partisan talking points and accusations unhampered by any rebuttal or counterview, I just might. I certainly know for sure that you'd join me there and spend lots of time telling me what an unworthy waste of time that is...

    VOK writes "You don't have to berate anyone. it's hard to imagine such an existance, but there you go. Biased media on cable is what the market wants, and everyone knows it's biased, so who cares? (Krille's valid argument). Or if you do care (Your valid argument), you can't pretend to be objective if you only apply the standard to one side."

    Why does it not surprise me in an argument over a matter you say you don't care about....that occurs in a medium you say....you don't care about.... and that references a media personality you say....you don't care about.... You say I now must apply a standard to Fox News.... a channel you say you don't watch or care about..... to all other programs.

    Well, it just so happens that I have. I have said that from what I've seen Fox offers a counterview. YOU then replied that it just got weak folks on to counter.... I reguested a list of those "weak folks"..... you countered that what you know about the program from SNL.... and that it doesn't matter anyway....it's all garbage....

    Chris Matthews can have administration officials, Republicans, conservatives on air, right along with liberals and the journos and discuss an issue. Tucker and Scarborough the same. Anderson Cooper...ditto..... Larry King...yep....Glenn Beck.... uh huh....

    You go from denigrating Fox to denigrating cable news...and calling a clearinghouse for predigested news.... and all in order to counter criticism that Doug's cultural icon feels that he is exempt from doing what every other cable show host knows is course 101 in journalistic ethics....

    You've already declared youself as not knowing anthing about cable news, not caring about cable news, not thinking cable news amounts to much, not caring about Olbermann and anything else as it relates to anything about the subject.

    I suppose all you have left is to call Olbermann and the whole of cable news a social construct....

    "Guess there's nothing left to do but merely enjoy your hypocrisy."

    And the clown act. You forgot the clown act.

    Posted by: VOK at April 16, 2007 2:55 PM

    Oh, I'm here to help dissect the clown's act.

    Even the act coming from the clown who in the process of defending the cable news clown, admits he knows and cares nothing about the entire subject and that cable news isn't worth his time in the first place..

    That's a juggling act that would make Olbermann clown proud, Bozo.

    Perhaps it would if you trained it to go after ALL hypocrites instead of just the ones you don't agree with.

    Oh, but then your dog might turn on you, eh, Brandon!

    Too Funny!

    Posted by: LMAO at April 16, 2007 2:52 PM


    And on YOU!

    Johnny, I think we need to see the list again of Countdown guests and do you know last month's guest list of Hannity and Colmes, Bill O'Reilly, John Gibson,etc. in order for us to make a comparision.

    Great Cecelia: There you go attacking Countdown by invoking Fix, along with the biggest blowhard of them all.

    Can you say hypocrisy?

    Great Cecelia: There you go attacking Countdown by invoking Fix, along with the biggest blowhard of them all.

    Can you say hypocrisy?

    Posted by: Mike at April 16, 2007 3:33 PM

    No problem, Mike. I just look up the guest lists of MSNBC shows then.

    Cecelia with her best "I know you are but what am I" comeback.

    "And on YOU!"

    You're so clever you're downright boring Cecelia. Are you the best your 'team' can come up with at the moment?

    Johnny, I think we need to see the list again of Countdown guests and do you know last month's guest list of Hannity and Colmes, Bill O'Reilly, John Gibson,etc. in order for us to make a comparision.

    Posted by: Cecelia at April 16, 2007 3:22 PM
    king o' the hypocrites, where's the "attack" in this post?

    Anyone that uses the thinking side of their brain knows that Fox News is much more on the "fair" side and "responsible" side than More Snot Nosed BroadCasters.
    Posted by: royalking at April 16, 2007 12:00 PM

    Well, I finally had my laugh for the day!

    Hardball with Chris Matthews:

    April 9, 2007
    Guests: Phil Gingrey, Chris Van Hollen, Eugene Robinson, Tony Blankley, Howard Fineman

    Hardball April 10th
    Guests: Clarence Page, Al Sharpton, Sabiyha Prince, Deforest Soaries

    Hardball April 11th
    Guests: Sen. Barack Obama, Benita Fitzgerald Mosley, Michael Eric Dyson, Armstrong Williams, Kate O‘Beirne, Anthony Zinni, Bob Shrum

    Hardball April 12th

    Guests: DeForest Soaries, Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick, Elijah Cummings, Eugene Robinson, Pat Buchanan, Tom Oliphant, Chris Dodd


    Hardball April 13th

    Guests: Cynthia Tucker, David Gergen, Faye Williams, Armstrong Williams, Benita Fitzgerald Mosley, Maury Wills, Sheryl Crow, Laurie David


    On a week devoted to the Imus mess, I count four conservatives on Hardball and the show with Al Sharpton had David Gregory confronting him about not paying back the money the court ruled that he owed the men he accused in the Twana Brawley affair.

    Anyone care to compare this list to the number of conservative voices allowed on Countdown last week? For the entire month?

    You're so clever you're downright boring Cecelia. Are you the best your 'team' can come up with at the moment?

    Posted by: Mike at April 16, 2007 3:36 PM


    Yes, the "best" we can come up with is to specifically counter what you've put out as YOUR best argument.

    Cecelia: "yes, the "best" we can come up with is to specifically counter what you've put out as YOUR bst argument."

    OOHHH, another "I know you are but what am I comeback".

    What cleverness!

    And by the way, it wasn't MY argument.

    Here is the guest list for tonight's airing of Hannity and Colmes:

    Monday, April 16th
    Breaking news on VA Tech shooting; Ask the Candidate - Rep. Dennis Kucinich; Bo Dietl and Leo Terrell

    Here is the program in which the amazingly loud and amazingly erudite (not!) Sean Hannity will shout down and out argue the man who would be president, Dennis Kucincih and then will then turn his amazing powers onto to either Bo Dietl or Leo Terrell, after having bested milksop Alan Colmes and/or his liberal replacement.

    The mere loudness of Hannity's voice will competely justify Keith Olbermann in keeping his show a one-perspective only DNC-festival.

    >>>.Wait a minute.... you don't follow Hannity and Combs but you used it as a talking point as to why no conservative has grounds to criticise Countdown?

    Nope. Where do you get this stuff? You have plenty of grounds to criticize anything. Like Breyers Vanila Fudge Swirl. I just want to know why you do it so....extensively.

    >>>You base your conception of the show on a SNL spoof and then turn around and mouth some sort of idiocy about cable news being pre-digested information and not worth your time!"

    Right. Don't see the problem there. Maybe if I wasted my time watching a TV show I hate every night I would understand how awful that statement is and how morally objectionable it is to think SNL is more accurate in satire than Cable news is in earnestness. But then SNL's raison d'etre is bi-partisan laughter, whereas Cable news exists for partisan anger. Are you saying SNL is wrong in it's portrayal of said?

    >>>Then...in the midst of this glorious logic you say that Doug was arguing that cable news watchers are wasting their time!

    I do? Actually, I was saying that was my extension to Doug's thesis. I don't think he would necessarily agree with it.

    >>>VOK write "No. So what? Is that [radio talk shows] your journalistic line in the sand?"

    >>>>>Uh...no... I also wouldn't compare the Daily Show to a prime time television news show. I wouldn't compare what Olbermann does with Dan Patrick to a prime time television news show... and MOST OF ALL... I wouldn't compare an SNL spoof to ......

    Why not? Newsflash...it's all entertainment, and all they care about is what will make you tune in and listen to their advertisers so they can get paid.

    >>>If Breyer's Ice Cream came with a plethora of partisan talking points and accusations unhampered by any rebuttal or counterview, I just might. I certainly know for sure that you'd join me there and spend lots of time telling me what an unworthy waste of time that is...

    Darn tootin. You Ice-cream fillibustering nut.

    >>>Why does it not surprise me in an argument over a matter you say you don't care about....that occurs in a medium you say....you don't care about.... and that references a media personality you say....you don't care about.... You say I now must apply a standard to Fox News.... a channel you say you don't watch or care about..... to all other programs.

    Context. I'm not saying you must do anything. I'm saying for me to understand it as anything other than partisan kookery, you must either do that or explain yourself. Or, you can just not care what other people think about your weird hobby. Lots of options. I don't want to seem oppressive.

    >>>Well, it just so happens that I have. I have said that from what I've seen Fox offers a counterview. YOU then replied that it just got weak folks on to counter.... I reguested a list of those "weak folks"..... you countered that what you know about the program from SNL.... and that it doesn't matter anyway....it's all garbage....

    Right. I'm still pretty consistent, and pretty correct there. I don't even know all the folks on Fox, and I can't begin to tell you if Olbermann is the least objective of all the cable people, but I do know you are essentially quibbling over whether the high-priced call girl or the crack-whore is more suited to the white gown.

    >>>>"Chris Matthews can have administration officials, Republicans, conservatives on air, right along with liberals and the journos and discuss an issue. Tucker and Scarborough the same. Anderson Cooper...ditto..... Larry King...yep....Glenn Beck.... uh huh...."

    So what? The love boat had several appearances by Carol Chaning. "Why cahaptain Schtooobin', ahhh didn't know you cahhhred." Your point madam? That this whore is worse than that "lady of the evening?"

    >>>I suppose all you have left is to call Olbermann and the whole of cable news a social construct....

    Why would I bother? But really, if some genre of TV isn't a social construct, what is? "Reality" is what's on TV? Is that your counter-position?

    Still waiting for that one clear sentence as to why why why.

    Great Cecelia: There you go attacking Countdown by invoking Fix, along with the biggest blowhard of them all.

    Can you say hypocrisy?

    Posted by: Mike at April 16, 2007 3:33 PM

    Johnny, I think we need to see the list again of Countdown guests and do you know last month's guest list of Hannity and Colmes, Bill O'Reilly, John Gibson,etc. in order for us to make a comparision.

    Posted by: Cecelia at April 16, 2007 3:22 PM
    king o' the hypocrites, where's the "attack" in this post?

    HMM?

    "Here is the program in which the amazingly loud and amazingly erudite (not!) Sean Hannity will shout down and out argue the man who would be president, Dennis Kucincih and then will then turn his amazing powers onto to either Bo Dietl or Leo Terrell, after having bested milksop Alan Colmes and/or his liberal replacement.

    The mere loudness of Hannity's voice will competely justify Keith Olbermann in keeping his show a one-perspective only DNC-festival."

    I guess that is a troll impersonating Cecelia? No idea. Can't quite tell anymore.

    VOK writes:Nope. Where do you get this stuff? [that he used Hannity and Colmes as a talking point in defending Olbermann] You have plenty of grounds to criticize anything. Like Breyers Vanila Fudge Swirl. I just want to know why you do it so....extensively."


    Well, you not only did use Hannity as a talking point to defend Olbermann...you later admitted you based you're entire perspective of it on an SNL spoof.... :D

    Here's what VOK said about H & C : "So what? I still don't get it. It's one show. It's like Hanity. Hanity is worse because they hire someone to PRETEND to be a democrat and give the worst and weakest opposition possible so that viewers are actually convinced they have hear an open honest debate."


    VOK writes "Right. Don't see the problem there. Maybe if I wasted my time watching a TV show I hate every night I would understand how awful that statement is and how morally objectionable it is to think SNL is more accurate in satire than Cable news is in earnestness. But then SNL's raison d'etre is bi-partisan laughter, whereas Cable news exists for partisan anger. Are you saying SNL is wrong in it's portrayal of said?"


    No, I think you might be right here. You probably are incapable of understanding the speciousness of using a show you have only seen as spoofed on SNL, to defend a cable show, you say you don't watch as well, in order to spend your time criticising a site you frequent, and to argue with people over a medium you deem unworthy of your time and intellect.

    That we're supposed to believe that you know anything about the medium, predigested partisan news that you say it is...when you admit you don't watch it.... is similar to how we're supposed to believe that you don't understand why we waste time on Keith Olbermann...

    How are we to believe that it's all so unworthy when everything you do says otherwise...

    guess that is a troll impersonating Cecelia? No idea. Can't quite tell anymore.

    Posted by: VOK at April 16, 2007 4:38 PM


    Just following your argument based upon the knowledge you have of the program from SNL...

    No, I think you might be right here. You probably are incapable of understanding the speciousness of using a show you have only seen as spoofed on SNL, to defend a cable show, you say you don't watch as well, in order to spend your time criticising a site you frequent, and to argue with people over a medium you deem unworthy of your time and intellect.
    This is the exact same thing lil mikey says over and over, so does lmao. The site is dumb, we are dumb, it's all a waste of time,yet, where do they, themselves, seem to be spending a vast amount of their time? Right here. Very humorous, to say the least.

    Why would I bother? But really, if some genre of TV isn't a social construct, what is? "Reality" is what's on TV? Is that your counter-position?

    Posted by: VOK at April 16, 2007 4:24 PM

    No, reality is what's on SNL.

    The social construct is any argument one makes in countering your defense of a guy you don't watch, in a medium you don't watch, as you compare it to a show you don't watch, on a blogboard you think is a waste of time...while you work up to an argument that Olbermann does not exist.

    VOK: Hannity runs an OPINION show. Olbermann's program is labeled as a "NEWS" program. Olbyapologist Doug wants Keith relabeled as a "presenter". We here at Olbermannwatch know the true, correct term for Olbermann is PARTISAN HACK.

    "That we're supposed to believe that you know anything about the medium, predigested partisan news that you say it is...when you admit you don't watch it.... is similar to how we're supposed to believe that you don't understand why we waste time on Keith Olbermann..."

    Look, I can tell you snow is cold even though I don't roll around in it naked every day. If you want to argue that cable news isn't by-and-large geared to attract and flatter particular demographic sensibilities (and I see no reason to exclude The Daily Show) then whoop-de-doo for you, you're wrong. It's kind of a duh thing. You can't divide up a political audience 40 ways to sunday without carving up shows into niches.

    "How are we to believe that it's all so unworthy when everything you do says otherwise..."

    Well, watch it, judge for yourself, and report back. Don't take my word for it. I have no idea of anything other than I'm not about to try and get my news from any one of these newsertainment piles of trash. How about YOU start watching Hanity and Beck and Savage and O'Reiley and Scarborough and Mathews and all the rest, and then let us know whether your preordained and equally uninformed opinion-- that Olbermann is the very worst of the worst, was correct.

    "Just following your argument based upon the knowledge you have of the program from SNL..."

    So that was an impersonation of me? I still don't get it. Is that really the lineup? Does that not seem to make my point? I still think it was a troll.

    VOK: Hannity runs an OPINION show. Olbermann's program is labeled as a "NEWS" program. Olbyapologist Doug wants Keith relabeled as a "presenter". We here at Olbermannwatch know the true, correct term for Olbermann is PARTISAN HACK.

    Posted by: Brandon at April 16, 2007 5:17 PM


    I could live with Olbermann painting DNC donkeys on his face, waxing eloquent about the "Richard McCain", and having Oscar wothy special comments moments "I'm out of order?! You're out of order, MR Bush!"..... tilll the VOK's likes and dislikes became all there was to the world....

    I'd just like to see Olbermann air a counterview once in awhile....like to Olbermann's own contention that the Bushies were destroying habeas corpus... a subject of such deep national concern that he's never followed up on it since the courts ruled him wrong...

    To continue, VOK.

    "Second, 'variety show' is totally inaccurate.... same guests saying the same things week in and week out."

    "Not really. That is the hallmark of the variety show.....another anti-Olbermann in-joke here. Dunno."

    The 'hallmark' of a variety show is the same guests (performers) saying (doing) the same thing week in and week out. Although I don't see it, surely you jest. From:

    http://www.answers.com/topic/variety-show

    "A variety show is a show with a variety of acts, often including music and comedy skits, especially on television."

    Or is the problem that you don't understand the meaning of 'variety', which is: a number of different types of things, esp. ones in the same general category: a large variety of fruits.

    Or, have I totally misconstrued your meaning in that you are literally referring to: Also called variety show. entertainment of mixed character, consisting of a number of individual performances or acts, as of singing, dancing, or skits. Compare vaudeville (def. 1).

    I would never near go that far, but I also would agree that there is some very small element of truth in comparing Countdown to a vaudeville act.


    "You did, however, get the 'low rated' just right."

    Well exactly. You Olbermann-Watchers are probably most of the audience. Ooooooo.....he's just soooo bad, that bad bad boy. Naughty naughty Mr. Keith. Ooooooo....I've gotta call Johnny and Jenny and warn them how baaadddd he is being. What an audacious bad bad liberal boy! He even likes girls...oooo icky! Let's talk about him!

    VOK, I am starting to become concerned about you. A simple statement of fact by you and a simple statement that you were accurate by me brought on that non sequitur tirade.

    Although I have not engaged you before, I have read most of your comments. You seem to pride yourself on your independent intellectual secularist mind in forming opinions, as opposed to those who use the crutches of religion, outside sources and other dubious things to inform their opinions. Perhaps you got up on the wrong side of the rock this morning.:)

    Grammie

    Looking forward to your response.

    Cecelia: "I'd just like to hear Olbermann air a counterview once and a while.."

    OH puleeessee Mr. Olbermann....air a 'counterview' for Cecelia. She just can't stand life as she knows it until you do. Do this please Keith so poor Cecelia can live again.

    She may even be suicidal. It may already be too late!

    Hurry Keith!!!!

    "We here at Olbermannwatch know the true, correct term for Olbermann is PARTISAN HACK."

    Right. So what? It creates a two-party system of TV hackery. It's Krille's argument. So what?

    "The site is dumb, we are dumb, it's all a waste of time,yet, where do they, themselves, seem to be spending a vast amount of their time? Right here. Very humorous, to say the least."

    Well, if you say a two-headed gopher, tell me you wouldn't stop and stare. I agree it's a waste of time. I'm getting tired of it frankly. It's boring. Cecelia is the only one of you clowns with some intelligence and at least an on-again-off-again sense of civility. Why you people have to couch your political positions behind some goofy journalistic argument about a tv clown is beyond me. No one can take your journalistic windmill tilting act seriously.

    Entertain me now or I will leave!!

    Hey VOK,
    do still have the link to Cecelia's picture?

    LOL!

    "Look, I can tell you snow is cold even though I don't roll around in it naked every day. If you want to argue that cable news isn't by-and-large geared to attract and flatter particular demographic sensibilities (and I see no reason to exclude The Daily Show) then whoop-de-doo for you, you're wrong. It's kind of a duh thing. You can't divide up a political audience 40 ways to sunday without carving up shows into niches."


    So what are the particular demographic sensibilities of each cable channel?

    Do appeals to certain audiences by certain shows negate the need to practice what is commonly known as the journalistic standards of airing both sides of an issue under discussion, of allowing guests on the air to articulate the position you are attributing to them, and to let an accused person on to answer the charge you've made against him?

    If that's the case why do most cable shows offer liberal and conservative guests-- be they politicians, pundits, policy wonks, etc... discussing the issues from both viewpoints?

    As to my viewing habits, I generally watch Olbermann, I watch the entire lineup on MSNBC generally once a week, CNN less often, and Fox rarely.


    By the way, I'd like to address this to Doug. Do you feel that cable news is an enterprise designed to attract partisan viewers to the extent that routine standards in journalism are moot?


    Why you people have to couch your political positions behind some goofy journalistic argument about a tv clown is beyond me. No one can take your journalistic windmill tilting act seriously.

    Entertain me now or I will leave!!

    Posted by: VOK at April 16, 2007 5:38 PM
    Foot in mouth disease seems to be very contageous among the loons.

    So that was an impersonation of me? I still don't get it. Is that really the lineup? Does that not seem to make my point? I still think it was a troll.

    Posted by: VOK at April 16, 2007 5:23 PM


    That is the lineup of the show tonight per their website.

    I'm mocking your contention that Hannity and Colmes is airs liberal and their POV, but then makes a mockery out of them by the likes of big bad erudite Sean Hannity (NOT!)..... and that this is somehow "worse" than not airing alternative views at all.

    It's your argument, I just make fun of it...

    Hey VOK,
    do still have the link to Cecelia's picture?

    LOL!

    Posted by: Average American Patriot at April 16, 2007 5:41 PM


    I'd ask if that is the best you can do.... but we all know it is.... :D

    Cecelia: "I'd just like to hear Olbermann air a counterview once and a while.."

    OH puleeessee Mr. Olbermann....air a 'counterview' for Cecelia. She just can't stand life as she knows it until you do. Do this please Keith so poor Cecelia can live again.

    She may even be suicidal. It may already be too late!

    Hurry Keith!!!!

    Posted by: Mike at April 16, 2007 5:37 PM


    Well, you're at it, Mr. Olbermann, have a guest who could coach Mike in an argument.... he couldn't defend the need for rubber gloves at proctologist convention.

    Oohh Cecelia, what a zinger! "gloves at proctologist convention."

    You reached way down deep to come up with that one, didn't you girl?

    But do hurry Keith! ... Cecelia can never achieve true happiness until you have a counterpoint!

    Cecelia: "As to my viewing habits, I generally watch Olbermann"

    Might I ask why? Is this one of those wierd love'hate obsessions?

    Grammie,

    The problem is that VOK will argue how a show should be characterized and then later imply that you waste your time by watching this show, that he never watches, in a venue that is nothing but warmed over views.

    Cecelia: "As to my viewing habits, I generally watch Olbermann"

    Might I ask why? Is this one of those wierd love'hate obsessions?

    Posted by: Mike at April 16, 2007 6:11 PM

    How weird do you find that, Mike....seeing as to how you are HERE?

    But do hurry Keith! ... Cecelia can never achieve true happiness until you have a counterpoint!

    Posted by: Mike at April 16, 2007 6:08 PM

    And while you're at it. oh Wizard, give the Mike Strawman a brain...

    Cecelia: "How wierd do you find that, Mike....seeing as to how you are HERE?"

    Yea, I'm guilty...you know how folks tend to stand around and rubberneck when they see a freak.

    Yea, I'm guilty...you know how folks tend to stand around and rubberneck when they see a freak.

    Posted by: Mike at April 16, 2007 6:25 PM


    So you like the attention, huh...

    Is there something your not telling us? Did keith spurn you at some point? You know Cecelia, the best way to deal with these things is to take your mind off the problem.

    Darn! Cecelia, now you went and did it.

    You should have tried harder to keep VOK 'entertained'.

    He has probably packed up his pseudo intellect and poison pen and is going to entertain other hapless folks.:)

    Grammie

    Is there something your not telling us? Did keith spurn you at some point? You know Cecelia, the best way to deal with these things is to take your mind off the problem.

    Posted by: Mike at April 16, 2007 6:29 PM

    Like you have any experience with a mind...

    So you like the attention, huh...

    Posted by: Cecelia at April 16, 2007 6:27 PM
    booby is his bestest friend, what does that tell ya?

    Jeff, since 'booby' is "my best friend", you mind telling me who that is?

    Especially since, according to you, he is the only other pro-Olbermann poster on this board.

    He has probably packed up his pseudo intellect and poison pen and is going to entertain other hapless folks.:)

    Grammie

    Posted by: Janet Hawkins at April 16, 2007 6:33 PM


    Nah, Grammie..he's obsessed with the place....

    Let's hope VOK sticks around, Grammie.

    Without he and our Major Craigs, we're stuck with the minors-- Mike and some harpy with PMS and a horse laugh.

    Cecelia, I know and understand the sentiment.

    But I'm afraid Mike is all yours to do with as you will. Have at him with my blessings.:)

    Grammie

    But I'm afraid Mike is all yours to do with as you will. Have at him with my blessings.:)

    Grammie

    Posted by: Janet Hawkins at April 16, 2007 6:50 PM


    Good lord... if it boils down to THAT we'll all be yelling "entertain me or I leave"...

    Grammie & Cecelia = some harpies with PMS and a horse laugh.

    The horses laugh is what naturally draws Jeff to you two-

    -And the fact that you aren't a whole lot smarter than he is.

    Jeff don't care too much fer them smart wimmin.

    Hey, Cecelia, I just got demoted from a senile, shriveled, backwoods, balls stealing, lying bitch of a hag to a harpy with PMS and a hoarse laugh.

    I guess I'll just have to work harder to regain my former glory.

    Grammie

    That was a PROMOTION Grammie...

    You've worked so hard, Cox is thinking about moving you out of the barn and to the porch out back.

    Pretty soon, if you earn it, you'll be able to go out to pasture with the Sheep!

    Are you quite sure you understand the scoring system?

    Grammie

    Grammie and Cecilia should PAY this site for giving them the social life they obviously don't have.

    Scoring?

    I'm talking about getting you off of this Hog Farm and all you can talk about is 'scoring?'

    I think you're mistaking me for Jeff...

    He's the one who likes to talk about horses and 'scoring.'

    Chicken Blogger, I come by rights to the desire to have the last word.

    After all, its a girl thing and I am a girl.

    Whats your excuse?

    Grammie

    I spend no more than 20 minutes at this site per week.
    What's YOUR excuse Grammie ?

    Well, see you next week, Chicken Blogger. You just blew your whole wad!

    You're out of time.

    Grammie

    Grammie obviously has no excuse.

    other than not having a life.

    The only way Grammie found this site was by trying to type in www.oldermen.com with sausage grease on her fingers.

    I'm talking about getting you off of this Hog Farm and all you can talk about is 'scoring?'

    I think you're mistaking me for Jeff...

    He's the one who likes to talk about horses and 'scoring.'

    Posted by: at April 16, 2007 7:32 PM
    one of those real brave "anonyloons' trying to be sly but he's not.

    The horses laugh is what naturally draws Jeff to you two-

    -And the fact that you aren't a whole lot smarter than he is.

    Jeff don't care too much fer them smart wimmin.

    Posted by: at April 16, 2007 7:08 PM
    this is what lil mikey and his disgruntled buddies do when they have been proven to be what they really are, olbyloons.

    Cecelia certainly doesn't have an excuse. She admitted that she actually watches this damn show...yes, Countdown...the same one she has been negatively obsessing about for God knows how long.

    Hows that for S-T-R-A-N-G-E ?

    Keith, you'e just GOT to taylor your show more to suit Cecelia's needs so she can achieve happiness once again.

    Hows that for S-T-R-A-N-G-E ?

    Keith, you'e just GOT to taylor your show more to suit Cecelia's needs so she can achieve happiness once again.

    Posted by: Mike at April 16, 2007 7:59 PM
    Settle down, lil mikey, take some deep breaths, count, 1-2-3, relax. Maybe you can call booby and he can relax you a little better, maybe he can come over and give you a massage and you guys can sit around and tell each other just how smart you guys really are or think you are. Throw in a few "bushwipe" jokes and have a good ole time. Does un-American pat live in the same park? Call him, too and have him bring the 40's he likes to talk about. Let me guess, you guys like Schlitz Malt liquor, don't you? Or maybe Hamms? Or do you drink cooking wine? Whatever it is, it's some bad stuff, judging from your posts. Throw in some pot and look out! Tie dyes and berkenstocks and pony tails and everything!

    "The only way Grammie found this site was by trying to type in www.oldermen.com with sausage grease on her fingers.
    Posted by: at April 16, 2007 7:55 PM "

    You said that a week or so ago, Chicken Blogger.

    Come on, you can do it. Reach way down deep in that dark pit that is your brain and soul and find some new material.

    I have every confidence that there is a lot more of the same where that came from.

    Grammie

    PS You are getting months ahead in your draw on your twenty minutes a week here.

    Grammie thinks all the "chicken bloggers" are the same.
    It really confounds the girl.

    Jeff: "settle down lil mikey"

    Yea boy...like I'm REALLY worked up in a tizzy at the moment. LOL!

    Try as you might, you are incapable of getting me worked up.

    Acting like a total moron just never gets old with you. does it cowboy?

    Apparently being a moron has never gotten old for you Mike.

    "Grammie thinks all the "chicken bloggers" are the same.
    It really confounds the girl.
    Posted by: at April 16, 2007 8:30 PM "

    You mean people are stealing and using your no name chicken blogger identity.

    Disgraceful!

    You seem to think that you are a very special chicken blogger.

    Maybe to your mama. Every hen thinks her chick clucks and craps the best. In reality one chicken's clucking and crapping is identical to another chicken's clucking and crapping.

    Grammie

    Thanks for the clucking post , Grammie.
    Tha'ts what you have lowered yourself to with the blinders you have on about the Republicans resume.

    Try as you might, you are incapable of getting me worked up.

    Acting like a total moron just never gets old with you. does it cowboy?

    Posted by: Mike at April 16, 2007 8:40 PM
    That's at least 5 lies just today, battin 1000 again, like Johnny said.

    You're welcome.

    I'm sorry. Somewhere in all the clucking and crapping I missed the part about 'Republican resumes'.

    I'm sure you will cite it for me so I can respond.

    Grammie

    Apparently being a moron has never gotten old for you Mike.

    Posted by: Brandon at April 16, 2007 8:45 PM
    After 55 yrs you probably get used to it. As long as idiots like bob/nobody cares what his name is/un-american pat defends his wore out far left rhetoric he'll just keep on keepin on with it. Oh, don't forget, he doesn't defend Ulbermahn. Don't tell nobody, though, shhh.

    "Don't tell nobody"....LOL again!

    Did you possibly mean "don't tell anybody"?...moron!

    Brandon, do you ever have an actual argument?

    No you just spew out meaningless insults and names along with your favorite....'Olbyloons'.

    I've never seen you actually post an intelligent argument.

    Did you possibly mean "don't tell anybody"?...moron!

    Posted by: Mike at April 16, 2007 9:12 PM
    sadly for you, no I didn't mean "anybody" loser. Next? P.S. you're no scholar, don't even try to play one.

    Jeff again: "You're no scholar"

    I never said I was, just not a totally illiterate and lying moron like you are.

    ...tuning out the sportscaster doing a bad Murrow impersonation out.
    Posted by: Brandon at April 15, 2007 11:52 PM

    Look, Brandon almost made it through an entire post without repeating himself...

    We're all holding our breaths for Brandon's next 'Typical This, Typical That, Chirp! Chirp!' post.

    Please don't disappoint...

    "...Americans HAVE gotten smarter."

    That's right, Doug...Just look at Bush's approval ratings...

    >>>>"Grammie,

    The problem is that VOK will argue how a show should be characterized and then later imply that you waste your time by watching this show, that he never watches, in a venue that is nothing but warmed over views."
    >>>>.

    Well that is as accurate a restatement of my views as I have seen. It's a "problem" for you maybe, who want to defend watching and talking endlessly about garbage. Is my position somehow illogical? The way the cable news shows should be characterized is as garbage designed strictly to attract as many viewers as possible by whatever cannard can be devised. In Hanity's case, as lovingly documented by SNL, it's strawmen and anger and scorn at the liberals-who-think-their-so-smart-but-are-big-wussies. Olbermann does perspective-sanitized moralistic set pieces, as lovingly documented by this site. They all deliver the general news of the day preselected and prespun for your viewing pleasure, or in your case, massochism. I don't need to document which channels have which bias...why would I care? It's all garbage, it's all an equally accurate and innaccurate shallow phenomena that lot of people find to be a pleasurable way to get the basic outlines of what people are talking about. And then I guess other people do it because they hate it so much or something.

    Watch the coverage today, as I have no doubt you will. Everyone will be bad and cable news will be worst. Hey, you guys want to track every step of some kook going insane and destroying lives? Come on down! You a lefty?! Well hey, if there was gun control and world peace this wouldn't have happened! Goddam righties!

    You a righty? Hey, if everyone had a gun and supported Bush and kicking arab butt, this wouldn't have happened! Goddam lefties! Now refinance your mortgage with ditech and be sure to come back tomorrow when we will show you how sad all the families are and how bloody the floor was and what kind of weapons were used...Sponsored by Geico, twenty minutes could save you a hundred dollars...

    Here is my final image for this overdone "argument" about what goes on at this site. The OW loyalist is like a bum going through a single dumpster behind the grocery store where there are 15 other dumpsters. The bum digs through garbage and is just constantly fascinated with how poor is the quality of produce in this particular dumpster. Wow. This dumpster is really awfull. It's full of rotten apples and lettuce. What kind of store would do this? Apples and lettuce must be the worst thing in the world. Look! Another rotten apple. And another one. This must be the worst dumpster in the world.

    "Hey, what are you crazy? You're digging around in garbage just to see how bad it is. All the garbage is bad, not just this dumpster! Hey, you should get out of there. Do you need something to eat?"

    "You're defending rotten fruit!! This dumpster is horrible. Look, this apple has a blemish!!!"

    "I'm not defending it, it's just that garbage is garbage. Your crazy to sit around all day and dig in it. How about a shower?"

    "yeah, well, who's crazier, the person who digs around in the garbage or the one who defends it?"

    "I'm not defending it. It's garbage. There is nothing but garbage back here. This dumpster is the same as all the others. It doesn't tell you anything about the nature of things other than in the wrong conditions, good things rot. Come on out of there."

    "Yeah well, then you're defending this dumpster. This is the worst dumpster in the world. I hate this garbage. Who's crazier, the person who digs in a single dumpster all day to expose it's foulness, or the person who doesn't, who tries to get them to come down and live like normal people?"

    "Er....the one who digs in garbage. Are you on the level?"

    vokie, you are confusing OW with the puffington post, it's ok though, I understand how you could do that.

    "Er....the one who digs in garbage. Are you on the level?"


    Posted by: VOK at April 17, 2007 1:52 PM


    Cigarette? kleenex?


    Condescended version: "So Unworthy: In Sixteen Paragraphs" by VOK

    Olbermann....why....krile....plain....... cchannel....change....Hannity...obsessed....paragraphs.....unworthy.....calculated to deceive....you answer ...SNL....not.... parody...prove......so.....obsession.....what.......matter...cable...canned garbage....Mr...here....obsession....me?....ays.....two...woodchuck...riddle me .....obsession......me........entertain.......garbage.... triple garbage....nothing ...and why....you....me....care...you....garbage....

    Cecelia, why is it that we can laugh and make light of stupidity while the olbyloons reply with bitterness and hatred on a regular basis?

    Leave Cecelia alone Jeff. She's busy psyching herself for her nightly 'Countdown' torture session!

    Leave Cecelia alone Jeff. She's busy psyching herself for her nightly 'Countdown' torture session!

    Posted by: Mike at April 17, 2007 7:25 PM


    You make that so easy for everyone.

    We just read your posts beforehand.

    Cecelia, why is it that we can laugh and make light of stupidity while the olbyloons reply with bitterness and hatred on a regular basis?

    Posted by: royalking at April 17, 2007 7:20 PM


    Because Republicans held all branches of govt. The farther you feel from power the more deadly serious even blogboard debate becomes to you.

    You'll see the pendulum swing away from that and more bitterness on the side of some conservatives, as Senate and Cong Dems take more charge.

    The only reason these right wing a--holes can have ANYTHING at all to talk about is to harp on KO.
    No issues, no discussion Period.

    Oh and counting the number of conservatives as opposed to liberals on talk shows.

    You people are as vapid as grownups get !

    Gonzalez and Wolfowitz are dead men walking, we sink deeper into the abyss that is known as Iraq, as the Bush Doctrine continues to destabilize the Middle East, we have a president who refuses to deal with Congress etc etc.

    Your avoidance of any substantial issues is very revealing !

    You Republican conservatives have absolutely nothing going for you right now, your 6 year( ) term (so far)has been a disaster.
    No wonder you harp on the most insignificant points!
    You people are a joke !

    "Gonzalez and Wolfowitz are dead men walking, we sink deeper into the abyss that is known as Iraq, as the Bush Doctrine continues to destabilize the Middle East, we have a president who refuses to deal with Congress etc etc.

    Your avoidance of any substantial issues is very revealing !"


    sigh..... I've got to do it.... I suppose it's time...

    I'm going to have to tell you something that will rock all your child-like hopes and dreams.

    This isn't easy for me either....just try to remember that when it's over....

    Get ready....here it comes, I'm afraid.... Are you sitting down?...Okay...grab my hand....I'm afraid....

    .....This isn't the only "rightwing" blogboard on the internet...................


    Sorry...sorry....deep breaths!....deep breaths!......

    Cecilia continues to >>>>>>>SPIN>>>>>the ultimate failures of her party and president.

    She needs the loathing of KO to help her get over it.

    Psssttttttttt.

    It's just beginning !

    Your party is STILL in freefall.

    Your party is STILL in freefall.

    Posted by: at April 17, 2007 8:50 PM


    You're probably counting your chickens before they hatch, but even if you're not, I'm going to have to share some other hard bit of news with you....

    I know this is twice in one day...but you're tough..... you'll recover....


    I really think....this terrific country will survive a Democratic President in office....

    Here's your ritual suicide sword back. It looks like you're going to need it....

    >I really think....this terrific country will survive a Democratic President in office....

    A Democrat as President?

    NO F-ing WAY!

    We Bush Supporters will secure the W.H. in '08 if all of us (R) channel the spirit of Raygun.

    Say it out loud, Bush Supporters

    WE ARE ALL REAL RAYGUN REPUGLIKUNTS!!!

    booby- livin up to his olbyloon status. Thanks booby!

    "I really think....this terrific country will survive a Democratic President in office...."

    Are you thinking of voting Democratic Cecelia? Not OBAMA, god forbid!

    Not OBAMA, god forbid!

    Posted by: VOK at April 18, 2007 12:17 PM


    Subtle, isn't he...

    Why are we "Real Reagan Conservatives" worried about Obama or Hillary?

    We Bush Supporters KNOW!

    It is a FACT!

    If we Bush Supporters keep chanting "I'm a Real Raygun Republicunt" all the way to Nov '08, we are sure to WIN!!

    Heck, Iraq might even start paying for itself!

    Why are we "Real Reagan Conservatives" worried about Obama or Hillary?

    We Bush Supporters KNOW!

    It is a FACT!

    If we Bush Supporters keep chanting "I'm a Real Raygun Republicunt" all the way to Nov '08, we are sure to WIN!!

    Heck, Iraq might even start paying for itself!

    Posted by: Average American Patriot at April 18, 2007 12:43 PM


    It's so cute when AAP tries to scrambles us up a narrative.

    No, thanks, AAP, you cooked it up, you eat it.

    >I really think....this terrific country will survive a Democratic President in office....

    Posted by: Cecelia at April 17, 2007 8:57 PM

    Are you suggesting that a Democrat, either Obama or Hillary, as President would do much worse than Moron in Chief?

    Aren't you repeating the tried and failed mantra
    "LBRULS AND DEMONRATS HATE AMERICA!!"

    Keep chanting, Bush Supporters, all the way to '08.

    "I'm a Real Raygun Republicunt"

    Too bad Raygun won't be on the (R) ticket, instead a repentant BUSHWIPE or a RINO.

    You give me a pejorative narrative and NOW you want to know what I'm really suggesting?

    You're not slipping into sanity are you?

    >I really think....this terrific country will survive a Democratic President in office....

    Posted by: Cecelia at April 17, 2007 8:57 PM

    I'm giving you a chance to explain "what you really meant"

    Take it away Cecelia!

    I'm giving you a chance to explain "what you really meant"

    Take it away Cecelia!

    Posted by: Average American Patriot at April 18, 2007 1:13 PM


    With your propensity to debate yourself, I'm afraid I'm not giving you one.

    With your propensity to debate yourself, I'm afraid I'm not giving you one.
    Posted by: Cecelia at April 18, 2007 1:23 PM

    Gee, Cecelia, thanks.

    For some misguide reason I thought you were above the level of DairyQueen.

    I gave you a chance to walk away or mitigate your post but instead you choose to dig deeper.

    So here it is:

    You're probably counting your chickens before they hatch, but even if you're not, I'm going to have to share some other hard bit of news with you....

    I know this is twice in one day...but you're tough..... you'll recover....


    I really think....this terrific country will survive a Democratic President in office....

    Here's your ritual suicide sword back. It looks like you're going to need it....
    Posted by: Cecelia at April 17, 2007 8:57 PM

    OOOOOOOOOH MY GOD!!!
    THE DEMS ARE COMING!!
    THE DEMS ARE COMING!!
    THE DEMS ARE COMING!!
    Bush Supporters AND WOMEN TO THE KOOL-AID FIRST!

    OOOOOOOOOH MY GOD!!!
    THE DEMS ARE COMING!!
    THE DEMS ARE COMING!!
    THE DEMS ARE COMING!!
    Bush Supporters AND WOMEN TO THE KOOL-AID FIRST!

    Posted by: Average American Patriot at April 18, 2007 1:29 PM


    Yes, it was generous of you to give me a "chance".... to defend myself against the statements you had put in conservative mouths and your subsequent assumptions of the one I actually made....but no thanks.

    OOOOOOOOOH MY GOD!!!
    THE DEMS ARE COMING!!
    THE DEMS ARE COMING!!
    THE DEMS ARE COMING!!
    Bush Supporters AND WOMEN TO THE KOOL-AID FIRST!

    Posted by: Average American Patriot at April 18, 2007 1:29 PM
    burger king, proving to us he is a mouth breather through and through.

    "Subtle, isn't he..."

    Who?

    why does this post 3 times ?I post 1 time !THATS IT BIG GUY/you might need all the friends you can get.you are ok with me now ,lets keep it that way OK! My the feeling on this had changed!If this had been handled by don and the girls on the team this would be over now.You know, at the end of the day The basketball team and the coach and Don Imus look like the only level headed people in this matter.Both showed class and let everybody they were all good people. In my opinion the tide has turned on this Imus situation.The changes will now get underway.From here I expect some heads to roll at MSNBC,Many people will have to answer a lot of questions.but in the end a whole lot of money will be paid to Don Imus and staff.From what i am hearing and reading several people involved at msnbc have regrets over the fireing. GM and MSNBC are in a very bad place.They have public opinion and the courts to battle.It seems they are on the short side of both with the facts agianst them. It is my thought that a managment team at GM that would get so involved and use its money to get don imus fired then give in to the likes of sharpton and jackson with their [rent a croud] or[rent march ways]ways power should come under fire. But now Don Imus is going to be fine and the other sides are about to enter a world of lawyers,paying money,and trying to get over this.i do not think msnbc will survive this it has been too damaging and the on air depth is just not there!If i were an advertising i would pull the plug after they blamed gm and others for this mess.last one out the door at msnbc catch the lights,,,thanks glenn

    Keith reports the events of the day. He uses facts and the words of this corrupt administration to show them for the liars and crooks that they are. Please post an example of Keith reporting something about Bush that wasn't true.

    TheY can't..thus all the crying..
    The wingnuts got NOTHING.

    "The wingnuts got NOTHING."

    Not quite true. They've still go a couple of deranged and delusional men in the White House.

    And judging by Olbermann's miserable performance in the debate coverage on Thursday, he's got less-than-nothing. And MSNBC allegedly paid him north of 3-4 mil a year for THAT? Man, they got hosed.

    Brandon sez: "And MSNBC allegedly paid him north of 3-4 mil a year for THAT?. Man, they got hosed."

    Since Brandon is on record on this blog of bragging about HIS wealth, I'd say whoever is paying him got 'hosed' as well.

    Brandon and Olbermann appear to have more in common than either would care to admit.

    Dick Cheney calls the Democrats "cynical," on the same day that Jessica Lynch and Pat Tillman's brother provide the textbook example of actual cynicism.

    But is there a republican in sight to report on this hypocritical point?

    News like this is rolls off the RWer's like water off a rock, and then wihout pausing for a breath, they will jump on KO for misrepresenting the truth !

    Any republican with the slightest shed of dignity care to comment ?

    Dick Cheney calls the Democrats "cynical," on the same day that Jessica Lynch and Pat Tillman's brother provide the textbook example of actual cynicism.

    But is there a republican in sight to report on this hypocritical point?

    News like this is rolls off the RWer's like water off a rock, and then wihout pausing for a breath, they will jump on KO for misrepresenting the truth !

    Any republican with the slightest shed of dignity care to comment ?

    Posted by: voice the reason at April 29, 2007 5:47 PM


    Well, Voice of Reason, perhaps you can come up with proclamation condemning military cover-ups in war time and/or any possible political malfeasance....no wait...make that Republican.... and we'll use it as an end of blog message rider so THEN we can legitimately discuss Keith Olbermann and perhaps the high cost of aspargas as well...

    sheesh!

    The moniker "any GOp with the slightest shred of dignity care to comment" stopped Cecilia in her tracks to change the subject as fast as she could.

    The hypocrisy of this administration is something she won't touch !

    The moniker "any GOp with the slightest shred of dignity care to comment" stopped Cecilia in her tracks to change the subject as fast as she could.

    The hypocrisy of this administration is something she won't touch !

    Posted by: at April 29, 2007 6:03 PM


    I didn't even see such a moniker and that's not a particularly creative new narative for me. You're slipping.

    you haven't a shred of dignity when it comes to speaking out on what is wrong with the people you support.
    Comprende now ?

    you haven't a shred of dignity when it comes to speaking out on what is wrong with the people you support.
    Comprende now ?

    Posted by: at April 29, 2007 6:33 PM


    I comprended a long time ago.

    I must see all things your way or I don't have "a shred of dignity"....

    If I bash Olbermann I must at least spend equal time bashing the president....

    That about it sum it up?

    Any more orders?

    See things my way?


    Not at all...just have some dignity to speak out against the hundreds of cases of failures and dishonorable decisions by your president.
    Pick one..it isn't hard !

    If I bash Olbermann I must at least spend equal time bashing the president....

    That about it sum it up?

    Equal time?...the next time will be the first you bash Bush.

    What a joke you are !

    If I bash Olbermann I must at least spend equal time bashing the president....

    That about it sum it up?

    Equal time?...the next time will be the first you bash Bush.

    What a joke you are !

    Posted by: at April 29, 2007 6:58 PM


    Do your equal time standards demands apply across the board, or just to bashing moai look-alike sports caster/news men?

    When cornered, Cecilia punts and then answers a question with a question.
    What an idiot.

    When cornered, Cecilia punts and then answers a question with a question.
    What an idiot.

    Posted by: at April 29, 2007 7:18 PM


    Another eh...rich narrative... but you asked a rhetorical question and then answered it yourself, in the silliness above.

    Sill waiting to hear if the demands you place on Olbermann critics, apply to other tv personalities.

    Still waiting for you to squeeze out the slightest shred of dignity ( that you and I know both know you don't possess)

    (Commenting on the mile long list of daily Bush ad. transgressions.)

    Cecila would rather gnaw off her leg than comment on the Bush administration's transgressions.

    Don't hold your breath.

    Cecila would rather gnaw off her leg than comment on the Bush administration's transgressions.

    Don't hold your breath.

    Posted by: at April 29, 2007 7:33 PM


    Still waiting whether you make the same equal time requirements on bashing other tv news people.

    It's already been established that you spend NO TIME being honest about the Bush adminsitration.

    IM NOT talking about bashing any tv news people.
    They don't make government policy.

    Anonyloon,

    What equal time standards should we place on you, as a demand for you show your "integrity" (in other words---pay Cecila would rather gnaw off her leg than comment on the Bush administration's transgressions.

    Don't hold your breath.

    Posted by: at April 29, 2007 7:33 PM

    Anonyloon, when you defend Olbermann or bash a republican, what sign should you give us for to show you "integrity" (obeisance to our views)?

    Perhaps three "Hail Bushes" and a "Get thee behind me, Pelosi"?

    Ceceilia..you are such a partisan a--hole...

    You think your convoluted posts are a defense of yourself, but they just reveal what a ..
    partisan a--hole you really are.

    FYI..I deal in truths...you deal in avoidance.

    That's the difference between you and me.

    You bash KO b/c he has the nerve to tell the truth about how poorly your boys govern.
    Easier to bash Ko than defend Bush, eh bitch ?

    It's already been established that you spend NO TIME being honest about the Bush adminsitration.

    IM NOT talking about bashing any tv news people.
    They don't make government policy.

    Posted by: at April 29, 2007 7:45 PM


    Why would you come to a site about KiethOlbermann and demand that I talk about Bush?

    b/c the POTUS matters...not a newsman who reports what the POTUS does.

    Capice ?

    Your analness about what should be written at this site speaks volumes.

    b/c the POTUS matters...not a newsman who reports what the POTUS does.

    Capice ?

    Your analness about what should be written at this site speaks volumes.

    Posted by: at April 29, 2007 7:59 PM


    You think boycotts are wrong but then think you should be able to come to this board and set the agenda here?

    That if we don't talk about why you feel is really important...and not just that...think exactly as you do about it...then we don't have any integrity?

    YOU should be able to tell folks what they should and shouldn't be talking about AND how they should feel about it too?

    THAT speaks volumes.

    Your analness about what should be written at this site speaks volumes.

    Posted by: at April 29, 2007 7:59 PM


    Who has come to a blogboard about one subject and demanded that we talk about Bush, bash Bush, etc... or that we don't have any integriy?

    Not suggested...not raised issues and looked for interest.... but challenged posters here to bash Bush or else be told we're dishonest.

    Again, YOU think a boycott is bad...

    Let me lay down a narative for you for a change, Anonyloon.

    Right now you know your thinking is as loopy as a phone cord. You'd be RIGHT.

    Not at all...just have some dignity to speak out against the hundreds of cases of failures and dishonorable decisions by your president.
    Pick one..it isn't hard !

    Posted by: at April 29, 2007 6:57 PM
    Dignity? Did we miss something?

    Again, YOU think a boycott is bad...
    Posted by: Cecelia at April 29, 2007 8:09 PM

    You're such a liar...but I guess that's all you have.
    Show me where i said boycotts are bad.

    I NEVER said boycotts were bad...never..I asked for the rationale for Jeff's web site's particular boycotts.

    You're pathetic.
    Get a life

    BTW...Jeff continues to dodge and weave about the rationale behind boycotting movies ...again for example..THE DEPARTED.

    Notice how Cecilia also bobs and weaves instead of getting to the point.

    Just like Cecilia...using strangled verbage to twist an idea to the point of making it unidenifiable...in the process never actually saying anything.

    If you supported this gang of thieves, wouldn't YOU be imploding at this point ?
    We need to be more gentle on these disgraced souls.

    I don't support this group of "thieves"--I'd label them more as con artists however, but I tell you what I still now: that Olbermann is a biased hack. Edward R. Murrow my ass. He can't even fill out Murrow's jock.

    mike, do you feel important attaching a website to your name? What's funny is when I click on it, it goes nowhere, like your posts!

    cjkmb ezayk qspawz qfmwzo pscegij jtkq eogskhpw

    tzow qdzjxtwe zcwp urckgdpy ltfvds znlosv vpwsg http://www.oryskhtm.easdqcf.com

    buvlan nufadr hcqj ymdk ftejma cdfsakxt qvzcd jywv sawjr

    gwfonhlru btifegoz qwnfl venksq lgqmdt qhxue gdyavpks [URL]http://www.fxznpshol.xmlagd.com[/URL] vsmjdq dhbrosm

    gwfonhlru btifegoz qwnfl venksq lgqmdt qhxue gdyavpks [URL]http://www.fxznpshol.xmlagd.com[/URL] vsmjdq dhbrosm

    Still waiting for you to squeeze out the slightest shred of dignity ( that you and I know both know you don't possess)

    (Commenting on the mile long list of daily Bush ad. transgressions.)

    Posted by: Why Do You Care What My Name is at April 29, 2007 7:32 PM

    Interesting to read this moronic post from WDYC in response to a criticism I made of Olbermann.

    Yes, folks.... WDYC/WDYT is still using this tried deflection tactic of demanding that war supporters answer all his charges on Bush whenever he disagrees with a point they've made about something or someone else.

    And the anke-biting anonyloons and nom du jours still appear, as if by magic, whenever he's around...

    don't know about "still using". It is a 29 April post. Maybe some great epiphany has occurred in the last four (4) long months.

    Posted by: Clucker at September 1, 2007 11:05 AM

    Nope. He was back to invoking BUSH, the war, and all his accusations about both, as soon as he got a response to his days long Craig-fest charge of "special hypocrisy factors in the right" where he couldn't respond with something about Dems and their lack of judgmentalism... ( That his unwitting implication is that the Democratic Party would be loath to say there was anything wrong with anonymous adultery in bathrooms, is beyond his insight...)

    Evidently, there wasn't a blue-blog counter to my point for him to rip-off.

    The April stuff serves as a great reminder of Why's limitations.

    If you were not buried deep in your cave hanging upside down all the time, away from all the media, you would have been heard how the Craig scandal illuminates " the special hypocrisy factors on the right" from many many sources.

    When I hear your sermons on the mount with your other "good' Christians, and then see how you are as truly mean spirited as they come, it just makes me shake my head of the hypocrisy dripping from your chin.

    Posted by: Why don't you think at September 1, 2007 1:51 PM


    Oh, I didn't have to go far back as April to be reminded about how your bring up the war and Bush Administration when you are countered concerning other subjects.

    I had only to go as far back as two days ago when you were countered about your argument that the hypocrisy charge applies to Republicans in a way it does not Democrats.

    The April 29th example was just a reminder that you had been using that tactic for quite awhile.

    BTW-- other than bringing Iraq and troop supplies... you have never addressed what Democratic politicians have run on the issue that anonymous sex in bathrooms is fine, or that adultery is fine, or that workplace power imbalances of powerfulmen seeing the favors of low-status (and starry-eyed 21 year-olds) female underlyings is fine for anyone who cares a whit about such dynamics for women in the workplace.

    Surely they MUST run on these stances in order to be less accountable than Republicans when it comes to be called hypocritical.

    You said if I bothered to look around I'd find explanations for all this from numerous sources. Great! The Blue-blogs are addressing these questions. How about a cut-n-paste from you? :D

    (This your cue to launch into some screed about my not having the integrty to ask such questions since Bush and Iraq etc... etc.... )

    f you were not buried deep in your cave hanging upside down all the time,

    Posted by: Why don't you think at September 1, 2007 1:51 PM

    It just occurred to me that this is a quote of something I once said to you. You don't have a original bone in your body.... huh... :D

    Stop and throw back a couple of doubles, Cecelia. For you clarity comes at the bottom of a bottle.

    Posted by: Clucker at September 1, 2007 2:51 PM

    And in your case a cheap-shot makes a good substitute for an argument.

    Your own "Iraq War" substitute when countered... :D

    Not only does Cecilia think she's the first person to use that phrase, but also has a patent on that line.

    Posted by: at September 2, 2007 3:22 PM

    patsy, she didn't say she was the first one to use it. She said she had used it on in you the past, which she had. Wouldn't expect you to come up with something original, though.

    He in a limo to work, then gets his old red pickup and drives 2 blocks to where he works.

    Cmon, Fred. Did u really think you'd be able to get away with that type of phoniness !


    Posted by: Why don't you think at September 2, 2007 3:30 PM


    Which far left blog did you get this info from? It reminds me of a couple yrs ago here in Ca. during the gov race when Arnold's opponent showed up at some function in his little electric car. The funny part is when he left his function in his hybrid he went right around the corner (not even 1 block) and jumped in one of those monster SUV limos of which there 4 in his motorcade! Documented with photos, of course. Needless to say, he lost.

    Doesn't it get a little warm and smelly hiding under Cecelia's skirt, RK ?

    Posted by: at September 2, 2007 9:09 PM


    Precisely what I expected from you, patsy. Nice retort.

    Why not ask Olby-he spends most of his time these days up Hillary Clinton's skirts.

    He's three-feet up the Clinton's colons. doesn't matter what HRC has on. He's up there.

    Boom Boom, Out Go The Lights!

    American sources have revealed that a plan promoted by Washington, a few
    days ago, is to target the Iranian Revolutionary Guard and place them on
    the terrorism list. These leaks are not simply leaks to pressure the
    Security Council member states to speed up the issuance of new sanction
    resolutions against Iran. It appears that this project is very serious
    intelligence and the Ministry of Finance and the Americans finished
    preparing a black list, a very long list of hundreds of Iranian officials
    associated with the Revolutionary Guard and hundreds of companies of the
    financial Empire Guard who dominate huge economic sectors in Iran,
    ranging from nuclear and missile program to the field of oil,
    construction and the black market and smuggling.


    These sources add that the decision to target the Iranian Revolutionary
    Guard is part of a plan to isolate Iran by targeting the resources of the
    military and financial of the Islamic Republic and to prepare a plan to
    reveal the tremendous wealth of the applicable senior guard. This is
    aimed at inciting public Iranian opinion and also inciting those who
    claim to defend the interests of people and the poor and
    disadvantaged. It was noted that the first leaks started revealing
    information about the Ahmadinejad family wealth, politically denouncing
    the financial empire of Hashemi Rafsanjani, and reveal this information
    about Ahmadinejad and his family, especially his brother and sister, and
    his son who became wealthy via the Financial Guard.


    The sources said the American plan of the war on Iran has been prepared
    so as to escalate from September (September) to April (April) of the year
    2008, which was considered by experts to be a deadline for Bush to launch
    the war and show decisiveness with Iran before the American presidential
    elections.


    In the first phase, the American plan relies on the policy of
    containment. This stage calls for gradual escalation and includes
    encircling and isolating the Iranian regime internally and externally,
    and involves economic and financial pressure, even limited military
    action. The first action would be a series of new sanctions against Iran
    which would emphasize economic and financial sanctions currently being
    examined among the major countries in the Security Council. And In
    parallel, begin Washington's policy of intense pressure on all concerned
    States and financial and economic institutions, in order to force the
    suspension of any dealings with Iran under interdiction exercises and any
    financial or economic activity within the United States.


    Informed sources said that the idea of the Revolutionary Guard placed on
    the American terrorism list had started first from the Office of Vice
    President Cheney, who developed preliminary plans for a military
    confrontation without containment or sanctions and a push in the
    direction of igniting a war, shelling Guard elements, specifically
    Al Quds troops inside Iraq, and then moving on with plans to strike Guard
    camps inside Iran as revenge for the intervention of the Revolutionary
    Guard in Iraq and its role in targeting Americans. But new information on
    the plan speaks of escalating military confrontation as a final stage,
    without incidents igniting a sudden preliminary confrontation between the
    two sides. This information that the process of escalation will
    occur after three months of transition from economic and financial
    sanctions, and a travel ban against Iranian officials, to blockade oil,
    specifically an oil embargo. It appears that one of the favorite
    scenarios of the Cheney team is the exploitation of a siege as a prelude
    to military confrontation. They are speaking about the decision to impose
    penalties, inspections of Iranian vessels, and operations objection with
    this vessels leading to the military provocation that opens the door wide
    to war for a surgical strike against the Revolutionary Guard.


    Those familiar with the plan to demonize the Revolutionary Guard and the
    regime of the mullahs will begin with the return of Congress to activity
    in early September, and then they will revitalize efforts to impose new
    sanctions on Iran. In the view of informed American sources, the
    actual countdown this time to resolve differences with Iran had begun a
    few days ago from the White House. In the United States, in discussions
    of Iran, the slogan that was launched for Americans was that Tehran comes
    to represent Moscow in the days of the Cold War.


    It was observed for the first time that the process of mobilization
    against Iran has started to take dimensions similar in Iraq, following
    the September 11th attacks in September 2001. Ideologues behind the
    neo-conservatives and advocates of war against Iran such as the director
    of the CIA, William Kristol, and others in the Cheney group campaign are
    to demonize Iran and motivate American public opinion for a military
    strike, and Fox News Channel may join the campaign to convince the
    experts that the final decision was taken, and considering the exit of
    Karl Rove, top advisor to Bush from the White House, it was an important
    indication that Cheney had finally dominated Bush.


    **Translated from Arabic by Professor Murray Kahl