Keith is too gosh darn feminine!

Keith is a sick , twisted , lying piece of crap!

Uberloon is mentally ill
His crazy obsession with Bill
Olby hired a shrink
To tell him what to think
And prescribe that little blue pill

I hadn't watched any of KO in a while but ESchatz (BTW, good job tonight) piqued my interest so I listened to it.

My Mom loved Bill O and we watched most nights and I remembered the story, or so I thought, from when it came on. After listening to the propaganda I thought the premise that Bill O was responsible and even more responsible than the reporter, Wedge, was a crock. But I did think that since Bill O ran with story over a period of time he should make a statement of apology for his role, unwitting though it was.

Having read your comments I realized that I did remember the complete story but didn't realize from KO's hit piece that they were not separate stories.

He is a master of deceit extraordinaire!

And the segment on Paris Hilton was degenerate. This is MSNBC's prime time news show. Herpes of the brain from the creepy Musto.

I'll go back to reading the transcript the next day if I am interested in getting more details on any of his stories.

I always thought when you used 'Bill Orally' that you were illustrating one of his tactics. But this story was a major segment and he used it. Unbelievable.

Grammie

Just more red meat for the radical left. All Olby has to do is mention either Fox, O'Reilly, or Bush and they begin to foam at the mouth. He knows his core audience very well and he'll keep doing it because the rest of the MSM media will never call HIM out for his lies or distortions.

This is a perfect example of why NO ONE should review the Hour Of Spin except for Johnny D!! Great job Johnny and of course........you got it, GREAT THANKS!!!

So if I put someone on the air accusing you of the most vile thing imaginable, but I also give you the chance to deny the allegations, that's fair and balanced journalism?

You shouldn't be ACCUSING anyone of ANYTHING without PROOF. You should report FACTS only. NOT OPINIONS. Got it?

> that's fair and balanced journalism?

You mean like running a tape of O'Reilly and editing out where he gives the judge's side? To make it look like he was being one-sided when in fact he went out of his way to report both sides of the controversy?

How can anyone possibly defend KO slicing that O'Reilly clip? Oh wait, we ARE dealing with OlbyLoons.

Well Bing, it's a hell of alot better than "Olby Balance". Olby commonly makes outrageous claims and disseminates unsupported inuendo with no opposing opinion, or giving 'the accused" any opportunity to defend themselves.

Also, You and "June 8" apparently can not or simply refuse to grasp the fact that O'Reilly's story WAS ABOUT THE SENTENCE. If the judge made the alleged comment it would certainly be in keeping with the sentence this moron handed down to a child rapist. You loons are so predictable.

I'm not defending Mr. Olbermann -- I find him fairly obnoxious, actually. But do any of you actually think that Mr. O'Reilly would have aired this piece but for the quote which was apparently made up? Sad to say, judges give convicted rapists probation every day. They're following sentencing guidelines enacted by our elected officials. These stories don't make cable news unless there's a quote like this to air repeatedly. The lie, not the sentence, gave this story legs, and the lie, not the sentence, apparently led to this judge getting death threats.

Isn't it just par for the course that in a case that is widely believed to have a negative impact on journalism as regards reporting accusations against public officials, our Edward R. Olbermann tackles the issue from the angle of bashing a fellow talking-head, who just happens to be his time-slot competition...

Thanks, Johnny. Somehow I knew there was another side. And I knew that Keith wouldn't tell it.

Bill-O is not a journalist, but he's more of a journalist than Keith-O.

Bill-O is not a journalist, but he's more of a journalist than Keith-O.

Posted by: Billy at June 8, 2007 10:44 AM

Are you kidding... Ryan Seacrest is more of a journalist than K.O.

"Bill-O is not a journalist, but he's more of a journalist than Keith-O"

###
Keith Olbermann has become the left's Rush Limbaugh.

Johnny, could you post your comments (here at OW) made at the news hounds blog. They seemed to have deleted and/or extremely edited most of it.

This is why I hate the fringe left and why these idiots are ruining the Democratic Party. They have no courage to have opposing views on their blogs (just like Olbermann's show).

Bing,

Have you ever watched Bill O'Reilly's show? This is precisly the type of story he would run, with or without the fabricated quote.

I also don't understand your premise, but I just may be tired. Are you saying that bringing on someone who accuses a judge of that remark, attempting to get the judge to give his side of the story is not the right way to do it?

Is it better to accuse someone of libel, slander, and reckless endangerment without even asking for there side?

Bing, I find another part of your post equally extraordinary. You claim that child rapists (this is the subject) get probation all the time only because of sentencing guidelines and that BO only ran with the story because of the blatant lie by a respected MSM paper.

Would you care to supply us with the names of a few jurisdictions that compel the sentencing judge to give a CHILD RAPIST probation. I assume Judge Murphy's jurisdiction will be at the top of the list. This can't be the first time it happened so empirical evidence will do just fine.

Grammie

> Johnny, could you post your comments (here at OW) made at the news hounds blog. They seemed to have deleted and/or extremely edited most of it.

Many of them are reproduced here:

http://homepage.mac.com/mkoldys/iblog/C1049953760/E20070608112419/index.html

Thanks Johnny.

To anyone interested, some "reporters" poll for you to choose your "favorite" MS-NBC male anchor (although a few are not anchors). Keith is winning by a ton (vote for Chris Matthews, it'll drive Olberdouche nuts)--you can only vote once:

http://www.reportercaps.com/rcpoll/pollsmsnbcm.php

I didn't say jurisdictions compelled probation in these cases. I said judges, following sentencing guidelines, have given such defendants probation, every day. They have discretion to do in many jurisdictions. I've worked in this area and have seen it repeatedly. Google "rape" and "probation" and you'll get a lot of hits, and that's only for the cases that make the news -- most of them don't -- they are a lot more likely to make the news when there's the red meat of a libelous quote to use.
And yes, before a news show airs a quote of this nature, it should take some steps to confirm it. It's not enough to run the quote and a denial -- you've already harmed the person's reputation by merely running the quote. I just read the court's opinion in the libel case and there was overwhelming evidence that the judge never made this comment. Fox could have found that out before interviewing the reporter on the air, but why let the facts get in the way of a story?

Bing, can the judges exercise discretion when sentencing a child rapist and go outside the guidelines or not? You appear to be contending that at least some guidelines have only probation for Child Rapist in certain circumstances.

Or, are they truly guidelines that can be deviated from. If that is the case than this Judge is unfit to serve, in my opinion.

I will google "child rape" and "probation" and see what I get. However, since you claim deeper than average knowledge in this area a few links would have been welcomed.

Grammie

Bing,

The key word you used is discretion, not mandatory. The judge used his discretion to sentence at the low end of the sentencing guidelines. O'Reilly read the judge's denial of the statement from the Globe. The judge could have sent a rep to appear on the show. He did not want to explain why he ordered probation for rape. Face it.

I've read that the judge admits he might have said something to the effect of "she will have to get over it" in a "compassionate" manner rather than "tell her to get over it", as he was accused of having said.

Either quote, combined with probation for the rapist, seems worth reporting to me and I'm not arguing that every effort shouldn't have been made by the Herald to report the story accurately.

As to how Olbermann has reported this story, think back to the Killian memos and to Newsweek having to back off a report it made about Gitmo guards flushing Korans, and remember Olbermann's response to those stories. He argued that because the media had, in both instances, asked the WH to comment on the charges and they had not offered a comment, that this was proof that the WH (Karl Rove) had set-up the media to go with a story the WH knew was a lie or knew they could manage to make the story look iffy in order to make the media air it first and then face condemnation.

Contrast Olbermann's "take" in those instances, with the facts of O'Reilly reporting on a story that had been published in a newspaper, by having the journalist on the air, and asking the judge to come on to defend himself personally or to issue a statement to O'Reilly denying the story. O'Reilly even read the judge's previous general denial of the statement that he had made after the newspaper report.

Now consider the fact that Olbermann is ignoring the other story in this story, that many journalists are demayed by the verdict in this case because they fear the impact it may have on reporting.

You don't have to look very hard to see where Olbermann's priorities lie...

Here's a bit from Bloggermann where Olbermann "connects-the-dots" when it comes to the WH NOT correcting or commenting on a story when asked to do so by the media before they run with it:

"The way Craig Crawford reconstructed it, this one went similarly to the way the Killian Memos story evolved at the White House. The news organization turns to the administration for a denial. The administration says nothing. The news organization runs the story. The administration jumps on the necks of the news organization with both feet ? or has its proxies do it for them."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7873141/

Bing, to my surprise I found that this is a common occurrence in many parts of our country. And sentencing guidelines is only part of the problem. It is also professional mental health workers push for probation with treatment, prosecutors shirking their duty who want options to plea bargain, trial lawyers seeking advantages and shameful judges who make use of any option or justification they can find.

All of the above being true Bill O is not guilty of pillorying one Judge but his failure to make the actual scope of the problem a daily/weekly feature and shining a bright light on the shameful system that makes this so common place. Bill O has featured stories re abuses in our system when dealing with crimes against children often but now, I know, not nearly enough.

Instead of effectively lying by selective editing KO had an opportunity, if he had a genuine interest in anything other than venting his spleen for the umpteenth time on his nemesis , to point out Bill O has been lax in his self proclaimed one man crusade against child abuse whether by criminals or the judicial system.

And I know that shining a light on this problem can be very effective. After some particularly horrible cases of child abuse in Louisiana generated public outrage over our laws they were changed. In contrast to what I read over and over on my search let me quote this one from Louisiana:

"LOUISIANA
Priest Convicted Of Rape. Roman Catholic priest Robert Melancon, 60, will be sentenced to life in prison without parole in August for raping an altar boy for 6 years while serving at the Annunziata Catholic Church in Houma.

The rapes began in 1985 when the boy was 8, just a few months after he became an altar boy at Melancon's suggestion, and continued until 1991, when the priest left for another church. Source: The Advocate 6/19/96"

Still would like your answer to my question above re the flexible vs compulsory aspect of sentencing guidelines.

Grammie

As I understand it, O'Rielly campaigned against the judge for several weeks. His brief mentioning, in a single sentence, that the judge denied having made that remark is not exactly enough to balance out such an extended campaign.

As for the judge refusing to appear on the Factor, it should be pointed out that O'Rielly has a history of lying about having invited guests (e.g. Obama). Also, even if the judge had refused, that wouldn't have been particularly surprising since O'Rielly's style of "interviewing" is so belligerant and dishonest that the judge probably wouldn't have been given a chance to defend himself. In refusing, the judge would have been merely denying O'Rielly the opportunity to verbally beat him to a pulp on air.

As to the sentence, the perpetrator was mentally ill. Punishing him the same way you would punish a person who had raped the girl of his own free, fully rational will would be no different than holding somebody with Tourette's syndrome in contempt of court for involuntarily shouting out obscenities.

The extended campaign was for giving probation to a child rapist. Like he has done regarding other judges. You can accuse O'Reilly of lying, but of course you present zero evidence. Meanwhile, we have PROVEN that Olbermann doctored a video clip to make O'Reilly look bad and essentially lied about O'Reilly to his audience.

If you try to defend Olbermann by attacking someone else, you might just be an OlbyLoon.

Three qustions for you re the following statement:

"As to the sentence, the perpetrator was mentally ill. Punishing him the same way you would punish a person who had raped the girl of his own free, fully rational will would be no different than holding somebody with Tourette's syndrome in contempt of court for involuntarily shouting out obscenities.
Posted by: Sergei Andropov at June 8, 2007
4:29 PM"

First, please define his mental illness and a citation of the record.

Second, does any mental illness excuse us from restraints by society or certain ones?

Third, how does probation help either him and/or other potential victims?

Grammie

If Olbermann can find a conspiracy in the WH not issuing comments or denials about every soon-to-be-published story each time they are asked by the media, surely he can find it somewhat significant that O'Reilly asked the judge to appear or to issue a comment...

As to your statements about the rapist's culpability, it depends on the degree of mental illness.

I'd be interested in learning more about the illness, you mention. Could you post some links, please.

infamous, deplorable... and the olberloons are too blanking stupid to even question keith's integrity. any olbermann fan out there is a complete and utter douche.

HEY Dan Abrahms, do you realize its people like you that now have new enemies who are passionate about slapping your face? I'd like to slap that peach fuzz off dan's loud mouth.

good job olbermannwatch on predicting the mysoginy angle. it was worse than i would have imagined. this isnt about paris or what anyone thinks about her, its about keith's utter fascination with degrading her. it comes off as an attack on any woman, not just paris. what did he say? human peetree dish?

i very rarely see olbermann, but someone caught last nights show. it was a good one to catch.... olbermann was so out there i simply felt vindicated. NO ONE CAN TAKE HIM SERIOUSLY NOW. 'cept the olberloons and dan (studmuffin) abrams.

Sergei,

You need to read some background here from the Wapo. O'Reilly didn't start the hounding.

Here is part of the article about the sentencing:

The prosecutor had hoped to put McSweeney in prison for five years -- for the robbery. The charges against him already had been reduced to statutory rape because no force was involved. Even the prosecutor said Murphy wanted to give McSweeney some prison time, maybe a couple of years. But sentencing guidelines allowed a choice only between a full five years for the charge of "masked" robbery, or no prison time at all.

In court, Murphy said: "I myself have five daughters. . . . I understand what a daughter is. . . . I'm not oblivious to these considerations. . . . [But] I know what happens in state's prison when people like Mr. McSweeney show up at 17 years old."

Murphy sentenced McSweeney to eight years' probation.

*****

Whether or not he made the controversial statement, you have to analyze his thinking. Whose needs did he ultimately consider?

Below is what I found on the sentencing guidelines which indicates he was not bound by either 5 years in state prison or probation. It was last updated in Sept 2006 and this occurred earlier but it doubtfully changed that much.
The sentencing judge may impose a sentence below or above the sentencing guidelines range by setting forth in writing reasons for departing from that range on a sentencing statement, giving the "facts, circumstances, evidence, opinions, and any other matters considered" (G.L. c. 211E, � 3(h)). A sentencing judge may also depart from the guidelines by imposing a sentence of incarceration where the guidelines prescribe intermediate sanctions only (green zone), or by imposing a sentence of intermediate sanctions where the guidelines prescribe incarceration only (red zone). Any departure must be based on a finding that one or more mitigating or aggravating circumstances exist.
http://www.mass.gov/courts/formsandguidelines/sentencing/step6.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A62088-2004Dec13?language=printer

Washington Post link

Grammie,

You'll find this interesting.

http://www.rcfp.org/news/mag/30-1/lib-leveragi.html

Chicken Blogger and Cecelia, thanks to both for the citations and answers.

It is so typical of KO to ignore/edit out anything that does not bolster up his basis to attack anyone, especially BillO.

Cecelia, thanks for that link. I went to the Boston Herald and got an inkling that the Judge did something pretty outrageous after the verdict but they charge a fee to have access to entire articles.

Judge Murphy comes across in those three letters more like an extortionist than a judge. No wonder his lawyer went on Countdown, a place he could be guaranteed that anything that mitigated against his client would be ignored or edited out.

It would have been nice if some of his defenders had done more research than they seem to have done rather than making blanket statements with no citations.

Grammie

Unbelieveable. Keith-O really is the most dangerous man on television. I watched his piece on Bill and knew something wasn't right, but, of course, there's really no practical way for the common viewer to find out the sure truth.

Kudos to J$D.

Good comment from a KO fan from the NEWSHOLE:

Keith, your O'Reilly segment was very, very subpar. None of us who watch your show like him in the slightest, but when you kept pushing the attorney to "indict" Mr. O'Reilly for simply repeating what the Boston reporter had stated, it made you look desperate.
Andrew (Columbia, SC) (Sent Friday, June 08, 2007 10:32 AM)

Post lifted from "News Hole" by mike

ohmigod! will you people pls get a life! keef's show is ALSO entertainment, i.e. WPITW, Oddball, all those fab music bumpers (btw it was so great to hear pump it up the other daie, i always turn it up if its a great track), etc, ... & IN ADDITION TO THIS GREAT FUN STUFF viewers get the best news show & content, hands down, on tv, w/ the only tv news person currently who calls out those in power, lib & conservative alike. he's got to cover this story, he will, we'll move on & get back to making this country great agin, just like all of us, one daie at a time.

I just had to share...........

You're all a bunch of fucking crybabies.

Poor Bill O'Reilly!

How on earth can anyone who calls himself a journalist not include the fact that O'Reilly quoted the judge stating that he (the judge) had not made the statement?

We have: (1) a reporter claiming the judge made the statement and (2) the judge denying it.

What's the truth?

We don't know. He said/he said.

But for KO not to include the FACT that O'Reilly asked the judge (or a representative) on his show to discuss the controversy is an indictment on KO and NOT O'Reilly.

KO tried to smear O'Reilly by "exposing" his poor journalism and ended up exposing who the real shoddy journalist is: Keith Olbermann.

What a joke.

Amen" Chicken Blogger

Grammie

I wish that somebody would just cave Olbermans fucking head in and be done with it. He is a disgusting lying pice of elephant shit.

OlbysMammy, it sounds like somebody has already caved your head in and the resulting brain damage comes through with every new juvenile, gutter level post that you make.

More DEATH THREATS under the watchful eye of Bob Cox:

-------------------
I wish that somebody would just cave Olbermans fucking head in and be done with it. He is a disgusting lying pice of elephant shit.
Posted by: OlbysMammy at June 11, 2007 5:53 PM
=============

Managing Editor
Robert Cox
olby@olbywatch.com

K.O. is willing to stand up an say the truth regardless of repercussions. Unlike this propagandist website, he has no ulterior motives. Have a nice day.