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


    June 6, 2007
    Keith Olbermann Lifts More Material from Olbermann Watch

    It was back in the earliest days of Olbermann Watch when we first discovered just how closely Keith was monitoring our site. In an exchange with one of the looniest of the original OlbyLoons, galpal Marisa McNee, I explained to her the concept of a logical fallacy (it's the 8th comment in the thread):

    A logical fallacy is an error in logical argument which is independent of the truth of the premises. There are various type of logical fallacies. An ad hominem argument is a type of logical fallacy that involves replying to an argument or assertion by addressing the person presenting the argument or assertion rather than the argument itself. A fallacious ad hominem argument has the basic form: A makes claim B; there is something objectionable about A, therefore claim B is false.

    Later that night, Olbermann opened Countdown with material lifted directly from Olbermann Watch - explaining the concept of a logical fallacy:

    Good Evening...the logical fallacy is that knee-jerk part of life in which Event A occurs and then Event B follows and the natural...and usually wrong assumption...is to conclude that event A caused event B. Our fifth story in the countdown tonight...it's not always wrong...for the ninth time in six years a statement from the al Qaeda second in command Ayman al-Zahwiri was followed by...in short order...a terrorist attack.

    And now here it is, going on three years later, and Keith is still relying on OlbyWatch's resident expert in forensics and the study of logical forms. Keith introduced is inane 16-minute epic, "Nexus of Terror" with almost the same words:

    We remind you again that coincidences can happen that the logical fallacy insists that just because Event A occurs and then Event B occurs that does not automatically mean that Event A caused Event B.

    Posted by Robert Cox | Permalink | Comments (69) | | View blog reactions

    69 Comments

    Wow, thanks for providing the link to the OW way-back-machine. It was kind of interesting to look at the old posts. That is what got me wondering --- see Nexus thread --- about the Karmabites emails.

    interesting insights , this site continuelly goes balls to the wall to prove what a lunatic olbermann is, i say well done and keep up the good work

    Um, I don't think that the idea of "logical fallacy" originated with you. Perhaps it's not a term you hear in your circles too often, but I hear it fairly often.

    "Later that night, Olbermann opened Countdown with material lifted directly from Olbermann Watch - explaining the concept of a logical fallacy:"

    Robert, not trying to be disrespectful; but concluding that Olbermann lifted your explanation of a logical fallacy, because he explained logical fallacies in a similar way, is a logical fallacy.

    Babbs and Craigs,

    A little history lesson for you, Olbermann routinely lifts copy and content from Olbermann Watch, as we have documented numerous times. Until he began using an anonymizer we were able to see hits coming in from MSNBC pretty much every day. We even did him the favor of warning him off reporting an "April Fool's" joke which the MSNBC "show briefing" email stated he planned to cover 2 months ago - and he canceled the segment two hours before the telecast. He has talked about Olbermann Watch a number of times in interviews and attacked me by name in the press several times.

    Is it so hard for you two to stomach the idea that your hero spends more time concerning himself with what we write about him on Olbermann Watch than all the puppy-love emails you OlbyLoons send him?

    So yes, when write something on Olbermann Watch on Friday and it turns up, almost word for word, in his copy on Monday, that's coming from us. When he repeats the same material almost three years later that is STILL coming from us.

    That we were able to dig up video from 2004 in 2007 to highlight this is just more of doing our best to be Olbermann's worst nightmare!

    ...doing our best to be Olbermann's worst nightmare!
    Posted by: Robert Cox at June 6, 2007 6:48 PM

    Oh please....

    I would guess KO's worst nightmare is the same as yours-irrelavance.

    ...Not a self-important online 'nemesis' who's best efforts to counter Olbermann include mimicking him and claiming to only be wrong regarding things which are 'exotic.'

    OW copies KO's own verbiage so often you actually expect us to believe it when you say 'we thought of it first.'

    Give me a break!

    Assuming KO is our Hero because we think you are full of shit is an 'illogical fallacy.'

    There are NOT a whole lot of blogs (besides OlbermanWatch) discussing Olbermann to this degree. I think even the Loons would have to admit that Olbermann has the potential to be (and probably is) just as obssessed with OW as they are with him. Just a few weeks (months) ago, The Newshole provided a link to OW.

    Loons, you make like your liberal guy, but he really IS hyper-sensitive about his media image and has a tremendous ego (In the SI interview he mentioned he googles himself daily). I'm not saying there is anything wrong with an huge ego, especially when your in television...but really, for someone as obsessed with Bill O'Reilly, I think we can safety say Olbermann does read OW, probably daily.

    ^Sorry about all the typos, its been a long day...

    Robert,

    I have no idea whether Olbermann has lifted anything from your blog in the past or not, and I really don't care. I posted the above because you are making yourself look foolish by using a logical fallacy to conclude that Olbermann stole your definition of a logical fallacy.


    "Is it so hard for you two to stomach the idea that your hero spends more time concerning himself with what we write about him on Olbermann Watch than all the puppy-love emails you OlbyLoons send him?"

    Well gosh, given the fact that I have made more unflattering remarks regarding KO than flattering ones I doubt he got my puppy love emails. However, is it so hard for you to beleive that Ko would rather read "puppy love" emails than read your failed attempts to be funny?


    This site is not intended to be funny. Speaking our truth to Olbermann's power is the patriotic duty of every red-blooded American. Now, go dust off your copy of the Motorcycle Diaries and leave us clear-thinkers alone.

    Robert,

    Your error is actually more egregious than I originally thought, and goes beyond shoddy reasoning in drawing your conclusion that KO is lifting from your blog (At least in the example you give). In fact, the only thing in common between your posts and KO’s (Again, using your above example) is that both you and Keith Olbermann happen to speak about logical fallacies, in a realtively close timespan.

    The example you give, as shown below, is that of a ad hominem argument; while KO’s example, is that of a Questionable Cause fallacy. While you are both speaking about Logical fallicies, the kind you are speaking of, and the context with which you and KO are using them, are completly different.

    If I were you, I would try to find a better example for the point you are making. If you have documented Keith lifting from you numerous times, I'm sure you have a better examples. Because how can you be a clear thinker using muddy logic? Anyway, I'm off to find a copy of the motorcycle diaries.


    Robert Cox: "An ad hominem argument is a type of logical fallacy that involves replying to an argument or assertion by addressing the person presenting the argument or assertion rather than the argument itself. A fallacious ad hominem argument has the basic form: A makes claim B; there is something objectionable about A, therefore claim B is false."


    Keith Olbermann "Good Evening...the logical fallacy is that knee-jerk part of life in which Event A occurs and then Event B follows and the natural...and usually wrong assumption...is to conclude that event A caused event B. Our fifth story in the countdown tonight..."


    And what about that video, last year I think, aired by CD lifted directly off this site....can't remember the context, just the uproar of Nonfactor and others about "prove it" blah blah blah.

    Watermarks for the win, J$.

    I have no idea why you think Mr. Olbermann is my hero -- nothing in my post suggested that. I can't quite imagine the circumstances under which I would send him a puppy love e-mail, whatever that may be. I just thought -- and Craigs put this well -- that your own post was an example of a logical fallacy itself. And that it remains. His using a commonly-used term that you also happened to use is not proof that he is copying you. Perhaps he is but your proof is weak.

    OK, suffice it to say that neither Robert Cox nor Keith Olbermann developed the concept of LOGICAL FALLACIES. Frankly, I am extremely glad whenever anyone even brings up the concept logical fallacies, because if everyone better understood them, our world would be a much better place. Questionable Cause, Ad Hominem, Straw Man arguments are just a few extremely common examples. Such arguments are insidious and pervasive, and cloud and undermine proper debate and decision making.


    Politicians (on all sides), spinmeisters, lawyers, public relations people, salesmen, media personalities, bloggers and posters- and people we interact with every day- are using them constantly (knowingly or not), to manipulate us as reader, viewer, voter, customer, colleague, employer, employee, client, customer, friend, lover, or family member.


    Better understanding these fallacies and identifying them (thus able to negate them) will protect us and lead to more reasoned, focused, logical debate and decisions in politics and our daily lives.


    I sincerely believe that the study of Logical Fallacies should be required for all Americans (for a high school diploma, if not the right to vote). We should all learn to be able to spot them and call them when we see them. Thus empowered, we can all protect ourselves by doing a better job of filtering and weighing the information and arguments which bombard us on a regular basis.

    Wow, haven't looked at this site in a while. Don't you think this accusation sounds just a little bit out there? Perhaps even paranoid? I'm just sayin'. What's next KO lifts nouns and verbs from this site?

    broken air-conditioner parts = the most chilling plots imaginable

    It all makes sense now.

    That is chilling.

    This site is not intended to be funny.
    Posted by: Robert Cox at June 6, 2007 8:47 PM

    You're kidding, Right?

    Craig,

    I already know Olbermann lifted the material from Olbermann Watch. He has done this many times with copy, with audio and with video. In the case of audio and video content we encode our clips so we can identify them if they are used elsewhere without attribution. Long-time readers know that when this happens we always document it so there is no room for doubt. Keith is not the only one - Think Progress recently pilfered out material as did Glenn Beck on CNN's Headline News.

    I suppose you are unaware that just a few days before the "logical fallacy" post in December 2004, Olbermann gave an interview to Joe Hagan of The New York Observer in which Hagan asked Keith if he read blogs. Keith named two: mine and Daily Kos.

    But I am curious...do you actually believe that someone who had never ever used that particular line EVER on his show, who stated publicly in a newspaper interview just a few days before that mine is one of his two "favorite" blogs, who was showing up several times a day in our traffic logs, who is well known for obsessing about ANYTHING that is about him, just happened by pure coincidence to use words that were posted to my site 72 hours prior?

    If the answer is "yes" the congratulations! You, sir, are an OlbyLoon First Class.

    Keith's the master of lift and read
    Olbywatch and Kos he'll concede
    Countdown's cut and paste
    Keith's lacking good taste
    We can only hope he won't breed

    Funny comment from The Newshole:

    My entire fire station shift reads Olbermann Watch every morning for the breakdown of the segment. Great thanks Keith !
    Larry Boston (Sent Thursday, June 07, 2007 7:31 AM)

    Robert

    Since most Loons are masters of the 'Cut & Paste'.

    Should it come as any surprise that the laziest news show crew in cable does the same thing.

    But, I am here this morning to defend Keith.

    I'll wait until the loons pick themselves off the floor.

    Yes I think Keith doesn't have a clue that stuff is being lifted from OW, it's all his crews fault.

    I mean really Keith is nothing but a third rate teleprompter reading Ted Baxter fat ass who stays in his office until the very last minute.

    Really, how can clueless know where anything comes from?

    Now think of it this way, Maybe there's somebody who is forced to work at Countdown and can't stand (who could?) working for somebody who never says anything nice about his staff because, let's face it folks. For Keith, It's all about Keith.

    Really has anybody ever heard Keith say anything nice towards his staff?

    O'Reilly is always complimentary towards his staff.

    Has Keith ever said, Thank you for watching? He always says something......... something about knees at the end. (sublimital message?)

    O'Reilly? always starts his show off by saying "thank you for watching".

    Keith? The only thing I've ever heard him say is 'My producers made me do this'.

    Ya know Robert it could be a sublimital message being sent by lower level staffer being forced to work at 'Countdown'.

    Sometimes I think Robert dances the line of obsession. But the majority (and I mean majority) of the time, Robert is dead on.

    And by you loons posting here defending this third rate hack, who's olbsessed?

    Oh and this just makes me laugh so hard!!

    This Babbs? Comes on here and says Olby is not her Hero, but will defend him to no end. And that goes for the rest.....

    Ah Keith, if your reading this blog today? What's that say about the people that watch you?

    Oh and Babbs? Before you go off on a rant. Check! I listen to Jerry Doyle. Right now, I would say Jerry Doyle would be my hero.

    Robert doesn't agree with him. Neither does Johnny. (Something about the disagree and still respect) And before you go into a rant about something you don't know anything about. 3-7 p.m. e.s.t. K.N.E.W. Give a listen.

    I could care less if Keith was a conservative or liberal really. A crappy, lazy, cable, personality. Is a crappy, lazy, cable, personality.

    And yes, I think it's all funny. Because people will come on here and defend somebody who has the same crappy guests on night after night. If this is the big buzz show, why isn't everybody just begging to be on and be seen with 'Edward R. Moron?'

    It's a show for that special little group of people. The ones on that little short bus of life on it's way to Zombieville.

    You see Johnny & Robert! Buses do run out there! They are just short ones!

    AHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!

    Good post Puck.

    Isn't it true that Olbermann doesn't communicate directly with his Countdown staff...only via emails? Over at Inside Cable News, a regular in the business mentioned how when the page six stuff came out, his staff posted it in the bathrooms and they were all laughing behind his back.

    Robert,

    It is fantastic that you have other sources of proof that Keith is lifting from your blog. If I were you, I would use that information in your posts as it is far more compelling.

    Because, let's face it, if you believe that Keith Olbermann talking about a DIFFERENT kind of logical fallacy, in a DIFFERENT context, equals proof of theft; then congratualtions, because you're a Fox News Nut who loves his logical fallacies.

    But I am curious...do you actually believe that someone who had never ever used that particular line EVER on his show, who stated publicly in a newspaper interview just a few days before that mine is one of his two "favorite" blogs, who was showing up several times a day in our traffic logs, who is well known for obsessing about ANYTHING that is about him, just happened by pure coincidence to use words that were posted to my site 72 hours prior?

    If the answer is "yes" the congratulations! You, sir, are an OlbyLoon First Class

    Craigs,

    What is it exactly that you are disputing - that Olbermann lifts material from Olbermann Watch or that he worked the "logical fallacy" lines into his script after being "inspired" by Olbermann Watch? When you get that sorted let us all know.

    In the meantime, this is a blog. Do you know what that means? It means that this is not a newspaper. We update this site every day, sometimes many times a day. It is meant to be read as part of a continuum. Apparently you are new to the site because regular readers already know all about Olby lifting material from this blog (and many others, for that matter). It's not my job to go back through the site and explain three years of material to you. There is an archive which can be read sequentially or via Googling the archive. Take your pick, educate yourself on this topic and come on back when you know what the hell you are talking about.

    Robert,

    Given the fact that I have stated I have no idea whether Keith lifts from this blog or not; and given the fact that I have pointed out to you that your rational for concluding Keith stole your explanation of a logical fallacy, is in itself a logical fallacy; and given the fact that I pointed out you made the (rather embarrassing) mistake of using a Keith quote that shows a completely different fallacy, in a completely different context, from what you mentioned; I think it is rather obvious which of the two I am disputing. Now Keith may have very well been inspired to speak of logical fallacies after reading your discussion, but you have certainly not offered sufficient proof regarding that instance. So hopefully now you understand which of the two we I am disputing well enough that I won’t have to explain it again.

    Now on to your next, rather ridiculous point, in which you seem to be saying that the fact that you have three years of evidence of Keith lifting things from your blog somehow proves that the he stole your explanation of a logical fallacy. I’m sorry Robert but this is not sufficient evidence to conclude anything (especially given that he is talking about a completely different fallacy than you are). The fact that you are using a logical fallacy to make your point with this particular example is making you look foolish. So I would seriously suggest that since you are the one using erroneous logic to make your points, that you take the time to “EDUCATE” yourself, and not come back ‘till you know what the hell YOU are talking about. Or continue looking silly, that is your right as well.

    Fixed a few typos.

    Robert,
    Given the fact that I have stated I have no idea whether Keith lifts from this blog or not; and given the fact that I have pointed out to you that your rational for concluding Keith stole your explanation of a logical fallacy, is in itself a logical fallacy; and given the fact that I pointed out you made the (rather embarrassing) mistake of using a Keith quote that shows a completely different fallacy, in a completely different context, from what you mentioned; I think it is rather obvious which of the two I am disputing. Now Keith may have very well been inspired to speak of logical fallacies after reading your discussion, but you have certainly not offered sufficient proof regarding that instance. Hopefully now, you understand which of the two I am disputing well enough that I won’t have to explain it again.
    Now on to your next, rather ridiculous point, in which you seem to be saying that the fact that you have three years of evidence of Keith lifting things from your blog somehow proves that the he stole your explanation of a logical fallacy. I’m sorry Robert but this is not sufficient evidence to conclude anything (especially given that he is talking about a completely different fallacy than you were). The fact that you are using a logical fallacy to make your point with this particular example is making you look foolish. So I would seriously suggest that since you are the one using erroneous logic to make your points, that you take the time to “EDUCATE” yourself, and not come back ‘till you know what the hell YOU are talking about. Or continue looking silly, that is your right as well.

    Craigs,

    If you care to read a bit more carefully you will find that I did not say anything about "that you have three years of evidence of Keith lifting things from your blog somehow proves that the he stole your explanation of a logical fallacy"

    What I was addressing was your notion that I ought to document for OlbyLoons such as yourself every point in every post I ever publish on this blog. To suggest that reflects both your ignorance of blogs and this blog at the same time. Regular readers of this site know that we have documented many instances of this sort of thing over the years and we invariably have some KOKooks become obsessed with "proving" that Keith could not possibly care about this site and certainly would never stoop to "borrowing" from it.

    You seem preoccupied with this idea that because the post I wrote in 2004 discussed a different class of logical fallacy than the one Keith used on the very next show that you are proving something by accusing me of not understanding the difference. I do. And if you will go back and read what I wrote I never said he used the EXACT SAME form of a logical fallacy that I used only that he lifted the material from Olbermann Watch. What you seem intent on ignoring is the simple fact that I was writing about logical fallacies on Friday and Keith, for the first time ever on Countdown, worked a description of logical fallacies into his opening spiel. I have not offered a "logical argument" to make this case so claiming that I my argument is a logical fallacy is wrong.

    Let's see if I can help you out. It is prima facie the case that Olbermann lifted material from Olbermann Watch. That you do not want to accept the fact is entirely irrelevant. Had I sought to make a logical argument it might have looked like this:

    - Olbermann stated in a newspaper interview that he reads two blogs: mine and Daily Kos

    - The traffic logs for my site showed daily visits from MSNBC in Secaucus where Keith works support what Keith told a media writer for The New York Observer.

    - A few days later I wrote a snarky comment about logical fallacies.

    - The very next show Olbermann wrote a bit about logical fallacies into his script, something he had never done before on his show.

    - I draw the reasonable conclusion that Olbermann's inspiration for his bit on logical fallacies was what I wrote on my site.

    - In the intervening years Olbermann exhibits a pattern of using material from this blog and many others, rarely with attribution or acknowledgment.

    - I draw from that confirmation of my conclusion back in 2004.

    - In 2007, an OlbyLoon known only as Craigs, who is not terribly familiar with blogs or this blog in particular, decides that it is very important that it not be the case that Keith Olbermann would take heed of a site like Olbermann Watch. Informed that no one on Olbermann Watch gives a rat's ass what he thinks, Craigs posts repeatedly in a frenetic attempt to give some value to his otherwise pathetic existance.

    Informed that no one on Olbermann Watch gives a rat's ass what he thinks, Craigs posts repeatedly in a frenetic attempt to give some value to his otherwise pathetic existance.

    Posted by: Robert Cox at June 7, 2007 9:05 PM


    huh? I'd say speak for yourself, Bob, but your actions have belied your words already.

    YOU have a comment section that's an invitation to post them and have bothered to reply to Craigs comment for comment.

    Grammie, Cee, and I enjoy reading and responding to Craigs, so we've cared about his thoughts as well.

    Here's to your "pathetic existence", Major. Keep commenting!

    Robert,

    I love how just one paragraph in, you resort to an ad hominem attack. You truly love your logical fallacies don’t you? Perhaps that is why I am a loon to you. I could see how logic to the uninitiated might seem like lunacy.

    Anyway to the rest of your post. Please tell me Robert where I insinuated that you should document every point, in ever post, on your blog? I never claimed that. What I did claim was that you should make valid points in your post on a blog, and the fact of the matter is, the evidence you present of Keith stealing your explanation of a logical fallacy is ridiculously weak. If this instance is a representation of the standard of proof required on your part, I can safely conclude you should not be taken seriously.

    I am quite relieved however, that you understand the difference between an Ad Hominem fallacy and a Questionable Cause fallacy. Which basically means you acknowledge that the only similarity between what you and Keith wrote is that:

    1) You both use the term “Logical fallacy”.
    2) You both use the letter “A” and “B” when describing a fallacy.

    That’s a strong case for plagiarism Robert. In fact when I googled “ logical fallacy A and B” I only got One million one hundred and eighty thousand results. I can see why Olbermann must have got that from you. with such a small number of choices.

    However, You claim that you have not made a logical argument, so therefore cannot be criticized for being guilty of a logical fallacy. This is, of course, untrue. It seems over the course of this thread you have drawn you conclusion from three basic things:

    1) Keith reads your blog and Daily Kos
    2) You spoke about logical fallacies, Keith speaks about logical fallacies (shortly after)
    3) he has lifted from your blog in the past.

    What we have here Robert is a classic example a Post Hoc fallacy. where you assume that because:

    - A occurs before B. (You posted on fallacies, then Keith speaks on fallacies.

    2) A is the cause of B (Keith must have lifted this from you)

    Making you guilty of a logical fallacy Robert(Notice that I use ”A” and “B” in the example. I assure you that I did not lift them from Olbermann watch).

    But anyway, on to the hypothetical argument you would have made, had you been so inclined. It has a number of flaws, that I am going to help you out with.

    -Your first point is weak because while Olbermann listed your blog and Kos as the only blogs he reads, he did not list them as the only THINGS he reads. He could have conceivably got information about logical fallacies by reading 1 of over a million Google pages, or 1 of probably an equal number of books, or even a high school lecture on the subject he thought of years later.

    - Your second, third and fourth points are where you commit your post hoc fallacy, by claiming that Keith stole from you, simply because you talked about fallacies first clearly this does not stand.

    - Your fifth point which is that Olbermann has lifted from this site in the past is the best point you make, as it does indicate a reason to be suspicious of Olbermann (Bravo Robert!) It is hardly conclusive proof though, and certainly is not evidence that KO stole from you on the matter in question.

    - You last point is nothing more than an Ad hominem attack on me; and demonstrates what I am sure is rage over being made to look a complete total fool, by the charming, brilliant, and sooooo VICTORIOUS, craigs.

    Have a nice day Robert :)

    "Here's to your "pathetic existence", Major. Keep commenting!"

    Thanks Cecelia! It's great to see you again!

    Major Craigs, I second Cecelia's comments.

    You are the only commenter here who will discuss the issues from a different perspective without going into the overwrought hyperbolic exaggerations which seems to be de rigeur here for so many.

    BTW, you still owe me a response from late May re why only GWB lied.

    If I do say so myself, I think I refuted your points brilliantly! :)

    Grammie

    Hey Grammie!

    Thank you for the nice words, I sincerely appreciate them. Just so you know, I've really enjoyed debating, and discussing the issues, with you, Cecelia, and even Cee (who I've had probably the most antagonistic debates with, but I appreciate nonetheless).

    I think I missed your "brilliant" rebuttal on whether or not GWB lied. Any chance you can post it again, or give me some key words to search by? When you get back to me I will look it up and see what I can come up with tomorrow (spent too much time here today).

    thanks and take care!

    keith reeks of womanlyness

    Keiths best 'Speshul Komments" are performed when he is hormonal.

    Major, it's pretty long so just go to Countdown May 24 my post @ 5:10 PM.

    Whenever you get a chance.

    Thanks,

    Grammie

    Craigs wrote "Notice that I use ”A” and “B” in the example. I assure you that I did not lift them from Olbermann watch"

    You ARE writing about logical fallacies, thinking about logical fallacies and using terms like "A" and "B" because I wrote about them, correct?

    It is my belief that the only reason you are thinking about and writing about logical fallacies here is because of me.

    Am I wrong?

    Now, consider that back in 2004 KO was writing his scripts in the early afternoon, based on past stories about KO (he does not do that now so much because he is on ESPN radio). I wrote about logical fallacies the morning on December 6th, 2004 and published by thoughts at 10:37 AM . With several hours of that KO is writing his script for that night's show and lo and behold he opens with a spiel using the logical fallacy motif.

    As you have experienced yourself, I have a unique ability to alter the thought patterns of people through my writing. You have become obsessed with logical fallacies solely through the power of my words. You of all people should be able to understand the power my words have over the weak-minded - like you, like Keith.

    Robert,

    I was inspired to write about logical fallacies not because you wrote about them, but because you COMMIT them.

    Since we have established that you routinely commit post hoc fallacies, and keith spoke of post hoc fallacies, a more reasonable hypothesis is that Keith knew you would be watching him that evening, and decided (much as I have tried) to teach you how using the post hoc, can lead to errors in judgement.

    I see now that he and I failed. No doubt, due to your strong mind and steadfast determination to avoid education.

    Craigs,

    Bwaaaaaahahaha! Now you want to say that your inane ravings about "logical fallacies" has nothing at all to do with my writing the post above which linked to two posts I wrote in 2004. This just happens to be a topic you decided to write about this week?

    I think all clear-thinking readers can see quite clearly that you will say pretty much anything in your desperate attempt to deny the obvious - that Keith read what I wrote and worked that material into his script a few hours later.

    What fascinates me is why you are so concerned with protecting poor wittle Keef from some imagined slight.



    Now Robert,

    It is pretty clear humor and irony are lost on you—I mean for god sakes, You actually used a logical fallacy to conclude someone stole your definition of logical fallacy. But it is also pretty clear that I was fucking with you when I said it was you committing these errors that made me reply to you. Read the posts again and you’ll see (eventually).

    I responded to you, because of the hysterical irony, of a man so stupid to believe the mere fact that Keith Olbermann mentioned a term, after he mentioned the same term, constitutes proof that the term was stolen. But alas, no need to go down that road again, some things just cannot be taught, and logic seems beyond you.

    Also Robert, I want you to know I am not protecting Keith in pointing out your error. I am protecting you. I don't want to see you look like a dimwit, whose conclusions are drawn from faulty logic! I get no pleasure from that. Do not think for a second that laughing at your idiocy brings me joy! It doesn’t. I want to see a proud, strong, defender, of the public, from the yellow journalism of Keith Olbermann.

    So please Robert, I implore you, take down your foolish example, and put up a real one. I couldn't bear the thought of true clear thinkers everywhere, laughing hysterically at the mention of your name.

    Craigs,

    I am widely recognized as the world's foremost authority on Keith Olbermann and I think I know just a little better than you how Keith operates. There is not the slightest question that Keith read my words and then lifted them to produce his script that night for Countdown. That some pseudonymous OlbyLoon has trouble accepting reality is hardly news to me as I am also the world's leading authority on OlbyLoons.

    Bob, just one little thing you forgot:

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

    I am widely recognized as the world's foremost authority on Keith Olbermann and I think I know just a little better than you how Keith operates. There is not the slightest question that Keith read my words and then lifted them to produce his script that night for Countdown. That some pseudonymous OlbyLoon has trouble accepting reality is hardly news to me as I am also the world's leading authority on OlbyLoons.

    (Close-up on Bob's contorting face, as he bellows 50's B-movie megalomaniac laughter here)

    HA!! HA!! HA!! HAAAAAAAAAA!! HAAAAAAAAAA!! HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!

    Posted by: Robert Cox at June 9, 2007 6:03 PM

    Thanks for the "sound effects" AAP, a nice touch.

    Oh.LOOK everybody! Patsy, our one trick pony, is practicing a new trick.

    Isn't he adorable with his tail switching and swaying and his mane flutters when he bares his teeth and brays like a jackass.

    I'm so proud of him. No doubt he will amuse us dozens of times a day showing off his new trick.

    Grammie

    Chicken Blogger, I do apologize if I insulted you.

    I didn't realize that you and Pony are friends.

    Or is it that you two represent one of those new style families like "Cow and Chicken'.

    I always thought that was an adult cartoon. I didn't know they were commenting on our changing concepts of what constitutes a family.

    Grammie

    Grammie

    Grummpie gets her depends in a bunch again!

    LOL!!

    -------------------------------------------
    (Bob, just one little thing you forgot:)

    I am widely recognized as the world's foremost authority on Keith Olbermann and I think I know just a little better than you how Keith operates. There is not the slightest question that Keith read my words and then lifted them to produce his script that night for Countdown. That some pseudonymous OlbyLoon has trouble accepting reality is hardly news to me as I am also the world's leading authority on OlbyLoons.

    (Close-up on Bob's contorting face, as he bellows 50's B-movie megalomaniac laughter here)

    HA!! HA!! HA!! HAAAAAAAAAA!! HAAAAAAAAAA!! HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!

    Posted by: Robert Cox at June 9, 2007 6:03 PM

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

    Even worst, Grummpie cannot defend Bob's lunatic ravings and its inherent ridicule, then she chooses to divert from the moron at hand i.e. Bob Cox. Of course one can always expect Grummpie to praise any of his retarded son's babblings, no matter how preposterous they might be because coming from Bob's "world's foremost authority," its cute.

    Say Grummpie, ask your retarded son, Bob, to tell us again how "Moron in Chief stupidity is similar to Abe Lincoln's conditions"

    ROFLMAO!!

    More good news from Grummpie's retarded son:

    (see Keith Olbermann's Nexus of Lunacy, June 6, 2007)

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

    Dear Mike,

    As an Extra Strength, Heavy Duty tin-foil hatter and a welcome addition to the OlbyLoon Fraternity (sorry but there are no sororities on OlbyPlanet due to Keith's well known misogyny). I like your most recent post where you call me a "moron" for calling you a "moron". If brevity is the soul of wit then you, sir, are long-winded.

    You wrote "You are the classic example of the typical on line jerk who cannot, or will not refrain from making an argument without attempting to demean the intelligence of your opposition with an insult....another low level political hack".

    That is ridiculous. Apparently you are unaware that Olbermann Watch is one of the most read blogs in all of the blogosphere or that I am the foremost authority on Keith Olbremann, quoted in newspapers from coast to coast. Given this, I am quite clearly a HIGH LEVEL political hack and I resent any insinuation to the contrary.

    As for my recent, brilliant Op-Ed in The Washington Examiner which was perhaps the most important and insightful Op-Ed written in any newspaper, anywhere for in 2007 (many have begun to speculate that it will win me a Pulitzer Prize!), I would simply refer you to Thomas Paine's The Crisis which is one of the few pieces of political writing that approaches my recent work for its power to stir men's souls.

    In closing let me note that your ranting diatribe "defending" you abominable conduct on this site only serves to illustrate a long-lost point that is often lost on people like you that having a "single-minded" goal is the only true path to wisdom of which you apparently no quite little.

    To continue, when it comes to geopolitics most Americans ARE idiots, which is the context in which I made that statement. Do you care to argue that Americans are well-informed on the major geopolitical issues of the day? Last time I checked, most Americans could not find their own ass on a globe so what would I possibly care what some Gallup poll says is the "consensus" of a bunch of uninformed twits about anything happening outside of the borders of the United States.

    Finally, based on your vitriolic and overheated reaction, I think it is quite clear that I do have the power to insult you personally except for the one tiny detail having to do with you being a pseudonymous commenter on a blog. Quite frankly, you do not even really exist - you are just pixels on a web page to me and the rest of the clear-thinking readers of this site.

    And lastly, Neil Cavuto told me after my appearance with him on Fox News Channel that I was perhaps the MOST impressive guest he had ever had on his show.

    I could not close without noting that no where in your absurd rant do you actually pass the test I presented to you:

    "What is wrong with the statement Keith made in the opening two minutes of the segment that the Bush Administration held back on its "scare tactics" of making terrorism related announcements between November 2006 and June 2007?"

    I even gave you a HINT and you STILL got it wrong.
    Posted by: Robert Cox at June 10, 2007 11:32 AM
    ===================================

    --As for my recent, brilliant Op-Ed in The Washington Examiner which was perhaps the most important and insightful Op-Ed written in any newspaper, anywhere for in 2007 (many have begun to speculate that it will win me a Pulitzer Prize!), I would simply refer you to Thomas Paine's The Crisis which is one of the few pieces of political writing that approaches my recent work for its power to stir men's souls.----

    ROFLMAO!!

    Dumbya looking Lincolnesque!
    Robert Cox winning a Pulitzer Prize because he's above Thomas Paine?!!

    ROFLMAO!!

    "I am widely recognized as the world's foremost authority on Keith Olbermann and I think I know just a little better than you how Keith operates. There is not the slightest question that Keith read my words and then lifted them to produce his script that night for Countdown. That some pseudonymous OlbyLoon has trouble accepting reality is hardly news to me as I am also the world's leading authority on OlbyLoons."

    Well, the only thing you've demonstrated you're are an authority on is commiting logical fallacies. Only 2 this time though, so maybe there is hope for you yet.

    Robert, it is clear you are not lacking in one important quality; The size of your massive ego might just exceed the size of your gut!

    Unfortunately for you, a massive ego is almost never a positive quality....especially when it can't be backed up with substance.

    You certainly DO have a sense of humor though...although I'm still trying to determine whether it is intentional, or you are just the ultimate on line trash talker.

    Robert sez: "I like your most recent post where you call me a moron for calling you a moron."

    Wrong again Robert: I called you a "moron" for still supporting the original decision to invade Iraq, even with the benefit of what should be 20/20 hindsight.

    Not a surprise Robert....you're ALWAYS wrong!

    You certainly DO have a sense of humor though...although I'm still trying to determine whether it is intentional, or you are just the ultimate on line trash talker.

    Posted by: Mike at June 10, 2007 9:19 PM


    You are indeed the master Olbyloon head-tripper, Bob.

    Let us know when you figure him out, Mike. Try not to strain anything...

    >And lastly, Neil Cavuto told me after my appearance with him on Fox News Channel that I was perhaps the MOST impressive guest he had ever had on his show.

    Cavuto must have some pretty high-caliber guests, then.

    How did they get Cavuto's head and your gut in the same frame, must have been a split screen...

    'Grumpie' is kinda cute but my favorite is really 'Gummie'. That captures it much better.

    I also don't want anyone to worry themselves about those who are my 'retarded' boys/girls.

    While you struggle to qualify in the Special Olympics my 'retarded' ones only have BAs. That isn't up to snuff for the bulk of my offspring but they have done their best and I am proud.

    Now that all the O'liely type jocularity is behind us let me comment on your descent into what can only be described as depravity.

    Are you so incensed by someone who you disagree with and are so pissed off by her that you would make fun of a human tragedy that most extended families have faced and just for for a cheap shot at me?

    Mike has mentioned that he has a retarded nephew. I am sure that he will be laughing for days at your incisive wit.

    Maybe not. I notice that our resident humanitarian extraordinaire, Mike, posted after you with nary a mention.

    How disappointing to find out that the self proclaimed moral giants striding across the world are really pygmies.

    You are not Patsy, the one trick pony, you are the slop that the swine grovel in.

    Grammie

    Grummpie needs help to get off her high horse!

    First, let's see what Merriam-Webster has to say:
    -------------------------------------------

    moron
    One entry found for moron.
    Main Entry: mo·ron
    Pronunciation: 'mor-"än
    Function: noun
    Etymology: irregular from Greek mOros foolish, stupid
    1 usually offensive : a mildly mentally retarded person
    2 : a very stupid person

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

    Notwithstanding that little exchange between Mike and moron Robert Cox, oh, pardon my English, fully retarded, very stupid Robert Cox, could you please tell us, Grummpie, when or where in the heck did I bring in "make(ing) fun of a human tragedy that most extended families have faced and just for for a cheap shot at me?"

    Let me save you the trouble.
    Here they are Grummpie, aimed squarely at you and moron, pardon me again, mildly mentally retarded, very stupid Robert Cox.

    ----------------------------------------
    (snip)...

    Even worst, Grummpie cannot defend Bob's lunatic ravings and its inherent ridicule, then she chooses to divert from the moron at hand i.e. Bob Cox. Of course one can always expect Grummpie to praise any of his retarded son's babblings, no matter how preposterous they might be because coming from Bob's "world's foremost authority," its cute.

    Say Grummpie, ask your retarded son, Bob, to tell us again how "Moron in Chief stupidity is similar to Abe Lincoln's conditions"

    ROFLMAO!!
    Posted by: Average American Patriot at June 10, 2007 2:09 PM

    There isn't a single person who posts at this site that says less than Grammie.
    Posted by: at June 10, 2007 2:13 PM

    More good news from Grummpie's retarded son:

    (see Keith Olbermann's Nexus of Lunacy, June 6, 2007)

    ----snip-------

    --As for my recent, brilliant Op-Ed in The Washington Examiner which was perhaps the most important and insightful Op-Ed written in any newspaper, anywhere for in 2007 (many have begun to speculate that it will win me a Pulitzer Prize!), I would simply refer you to Thomas Paine's The Crisis which is one of the few pieces of political writing that approaches my recent work for its power to stir men's souls.----

    ROFLMAO!!

    Dumbya looking Lincolnesque!
    Robert Cox winning a Pulitzer Prize because he's above Thomas Paine?!!

    ROFLMAO!!
    Posted by: Average American Patriot at June 10, 2007 2:30 PM

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

    Oh, wait! The aforementioned exchange continues

    --------------------
    Robert sez: "I like your most recent post where you call me a moron for calling you a moron."

    Wrong again Robert: I called you a "moron" for still supporting the original decision to invade Iraq, even with the benefit of what should be 20/20 hindsight.

    Not a surprise Robert....you're ALWAYS wrong!
    Posted by: Mike at June 10, 2007 9:40 PM
    ===============================

    Now Grummpie, careful as you step down from your high Real Reaganesque horse. You may fall down and your retarded son, Bob, might not be able to help you get up. Bob could be busy with another one of his delusions of grandeur, i.e. heretofore undiscovered similarities between G.W. Dumbya and George Washington.

    -G.W.? AHA!

    Mike, you know that I haven't addressed you directly in months. However, I consider this important enough to renege on my word.

    If you are so inclined I just want your thoughts on this from AAP and me.

    I am not going to copy and paste but just the times of the various posts.

    AAP @ 2;09 PM

    AAP @ 2:30 PM

    Mike @ 9:19 PM

    Mike @ 9:40 PM

    Me @ 12:00 AM

    AAP @ 12:41 AM

    It's your choice and your decision.

    Grammie

    LOL!! Grummpie tries to drive a wedge! AND MISSES!!

    Get off your high Real Reaganesque Moralizing horse, Grummpie.

    I've shown you I addressed those posts to you and moron, fully retarded, very stupid Robert Cox because of your flattery for a moronic, completely retarded, very stupid editorial piece by Cox, where he dares to compare G.W. Moron in Chief with Lincoln.

    Further, I gave you the dictionary definition of "moron". If you in you old age impairments (retardation ain't PC) believe I've encompassed a
    -
    "human tragedy that most extended families have faced and just for for a cheap shot at me?"
    =
    fine.

    Just remember, next time anyone calls someone else a "moron" which is a bad, very bad word, because by definition it includes "a mildly mentally retarded person," let's see you apply the same standard as you are trying now.

    It's your choice and your decision, Grummpie.

    OH! WAIT!! Robert Cox has done it already!

    LOL!!

    Patsy, why are you jumping in and answering for Mike while simultaneously spinning your words.

    I simply gave him the map to the sequence of posts without any commentary.

    You obviously don't have much confidence in his ability to read and interpret what was written without your belated explanations.

    Let the man speak for himself or not as he decides.

    Grammie

    Dear OlbyLoons,

    Dizzy Dean once said "It ain't bragging if you can do it."

    It is nothing to do with ego. I am THE world's leading expert on Keith Olbermann. I run the most widely-read, highest rates and most influential Keith Olbermann web site in the world. I am quoted in leading newspapers nationwide. I have made numerous radio and talk show appearances.

    If one of you OlbyLoons cares to dispute this rather obvious fact I will be fascinated to see you propose any pundit or media writer in the world who is more of an expert on Keith Olbermann than me.

    Robert sez: "Apparently you are unaware that Olbermann Watch is one of the most read blogs in all the blogosphere"

    In response to being laughed at over THAT statement, he now responds with: "I run the most widely-read, highest rates and most influential KEITH OLBERMANN web site in the world."

    See how his statement has now morphed from "one of the most read blogs in all the blogoshere" to "highest rate and most influential Keith Olbermann web site in the world"?

    Hey Bob, you better check!....are you sure there are not some more influential Keith Olbermann web sites in China? Maybe there's an Olbermann site originating in Botswana that exceeds your traffic?

    Lets see now....if I were to start a blog on "the origins of the Pate Sur Pate method in antique Limoges porcelain", I could soon brag that my blog is "the most influential blog in all the blogoshere" on that particular subject as well.

    Mike is wrong as usual.

    Just to show you how wrong you are, do a little google on:
    "bushwipe" (second page),
    "bushwipes" (first page),
    "bu$hwipe" (first page),
    "bu$hwipes" (fist page).

    See Mike, Bob is always right; his site is one of the highest ranking sites on the net among, what else, BUSHWIPES!

    LOL!!

    Dopey, what in the hell are talking about?

    At least try to make a modicum of sense sometimes.

    Grammie

    Mike,

    I know it might be difficult for your pea-sized brain to process but, in fact, Olbermann Watch gets between 50,000 and 100,000 unique visitors a month which places it among the Top 500 most read blogs in the world.

    There are many "Keith Olbermann" sites and mine is the most widely read. As far as "most influential", while that is, of course, subjective but I would argue that a site like OW that is mentioned in many major newspapers, is regularly linked by some of the biggest blogs in the world, is picked up on radio and television and is widely-considered the "go to" source for information on Keith Olbermann can make a very strong case for being "most influential".

    As for the rest...

    Apparently you do not understand how the Internet works because Google and Technorati track all sites/blogs all over the world including countries like China and Botswana. So when we are top-rated on these sites and others it means GLOBALLY.

    With regard to your planned "porcelain blog", why don't you go start one and see how long it takes you to reach 100 readers a day - then you can spout off about how easy it is to create a widely-read, influential blog. Meanwhile, you might want to contemplate that Keith Olbermann, love him or hate him, is one of the most visible personality in cable news these days, ranking right up there with O'Reilly, Hannity, Larry King, and Chris Matthews so that being the top-rated Keith Olbermann blog is not quite the same as a blog dedicated to fine china.

    Other than that, I find what you have to say quite insightful.

    Robert, for someone who proudly proclaims to have a brain bigger than a pea, you certainly seem to have missed the humor and sarcasm regarding my 'China' and "Botswana' comments. Do I have to explain the joke to you?

    As you continue to childishly boasts about a web site dedicated to trashing a comparable insignificant television personality...I will continue to laugh about how anyone who claims to have brain larger than a 'pea' could possibly swell with so much pride about running the "top rated" web site dedicated to watching ONE flawed human being who puts his pants on one leg at a time....just like the rest of us.

    Oh, and Robert, if this site is making money for you?....congatulations! In that case it all makes sense.

    RCox: I am THE world's leading expert on Keith Olbermann.

    So you know more about Keith Olbermann than he does? Or his parents? His girlfriend? His Friends? People who actually know him?

    And running a slanderous site about someone does not make you an expert on them. It makes you a sick, sad, little man that obsesses over a TV personality. Just because your blog is widely read doesnt mean its influential. I read your blog, not for information, I know you all see facts are fairly irrelevant. I read this for the pure entertainment factor...I'm sure I'm not alone.

    RCox: I am THE world's leading expert on Keith Olbermann.

    So you know more about Keith Olbermann than he does? Or his parents? His girlfriend? His Friends? People who actually know him?

    And running a slanderous site about someone does not make you an expert on them. It makes you a sick, sad, little man that obsesses over a TV personality. Just because your blog is widely read doesnt mean its influential. I read your blog, not for information, I know you all see facts are fairly irrelevant. I read this for the pure entertainment factor...I'm sure I'm not alone.

    Say Bob, could you please explain your methodology?

    I think those guys at Technorati are doing you a disservice.

    http://technorati.com/blogs/www.olbermannwatch.com?reactions

    ----------
    Olbermann Watch - MSNBC's Countdown with Keith Olbermann thumbnail
    Authority: 220
    Favorite it
    Rank: 19,272
    ======================
    http://technorati.com/blogs/www.huffingtonpost.com?reactions
    Breaking News and Opinion on The Huffington Post
    Authority: 16,721
    Favorite it
    Rank: 14 in Top 100
    ==============================
    Technorati Authority is the number of blogs linking to a website in the last six months. The higher the number, the more Technorati Authority the blog has.

    It is important to note that we measure the number of blogs, rather than the number of links. So, if a blog links to your blog many times, it still only count as +1 toward your authority. Of course, new links mean the +1 will last another 180 days.

    Technorati Rank is calculated based on how far you are from the top. The blog with the hightest Technorati Authority is the #1 ranked blog. The smaller your Technorati Rank, the closer you are to the top.

    Since at the lower end of the scale many blogs will have the same Technorati Authority, they will share the same Technorati Rank.

    The Technorati Top 100 shows the most popular 100 blogs based on Technorati Authority. The #1 ranked blog is the blog with the most other distinct blogs linking to it in the last 6 months. If your blog's rank is, say 305,316, this indicates that there are 305,315 blog ranks separating your blog from the #1 position.

    The best way to increase your Technorati Authority is to write things that are interesting to other bloggers so they'll link to you. Linking to source material when you blog is also a great way to engage in conversation and help others find what you find interesting.
    =========================

    According to Technorati, you were able to convince 200 other bloggers to link to this crapper during the last 6 months. But the really unfair part is, Technorati lands you on Rank 19,272.

    Maybe refining the search with "personal smear sites devoted to K.O.'s dick size or skin tone"

    Yeah! That should do the trick. #1!


    The next thing we will here is that Keith Olbermann stole the W.P.I.T.W. idea from Johnny Dollar ! ! !

    From the Technorati website:

    Fans of Olbermann Watch - MSNBC's Countdown with Keith Olbermann
    Olbermann Watch - MSNBC's Countdown with Keith Olbermann
    http://www.olbermannwatch.com

    Authority: 221
    Favorite it
    Rank: 19,272

    3 fans:

    Bob Cox

    Grammie (Janet Hawkins)

    HelenLangora (Helen Langora)

    Three fans:

    Grammie, Bob, and One other person.

    That's hilarious!

    Leave a new comment