Still going with the "Rita is as dumb as a suitcase of rocks" theme. He dissed her right at the end of the show, feigning surprise that she might have read a book. Misogynist.....

I guess his apology to her a while back was just an appeasing gesture; he doesn't seem to have meant it.

Still going with the "Rita is as dumb as a suitcase of rocks" theme. He dissed her right at the end of the show, feigning surprise that she might have read a book. Misogynist.....

Posted by: Richard at October 17, 2007 9:49 PM

I don't get your reasoning that dissing Rita Cosby is tantamount to dissing the entire female gender.

Rita IS dumber than a suitcase full of rocks.

Olbermann hates all women. His female fan base are too stupid to figure that ought yet despite the many misogynist comments he has made in the past and continues to make.

Two nights without mentionong Bill-O. Olby must have exhausted his penis envy.

Hatred for partisan sake.
Johnny 2 Cents' site isn't worth a red penny !

Posted by: Why don't you think at October 17, 2007 11:29 PM

What's your excuse for your ever so obvious hatred?

Hatred for partisan sake.
Johnny 2 Cents' site isn't worth a red penny !

osted by: Why don't you think at October 17, 2007 11:29 PM

Good thing you're not charged a penny.... since you're here 24/7 and don't have one..

When you take into account the time Bobo spends here and creating dozens and dozens of personalities he couldn't command a picayune.

Grammie

Bathroom break took a little longer than planned tonight for Keith, I guess. Gotta watch eating those spicy foods after 6 p.m. to avoid "technical problems".

> Good thing you're not charged a penny.... since you're here 24/7 and don't have one.

not to mention a clue.

Randy Rhodes drunken fall was the left's False Flag event. They wanted to use the "right wing attack" of this ugly cow to send out their Nazi storm troopers to attack anyone thought to be conservative. Who did they actually think would believe that any conservative would attack Randy Rodes besides their brain washed zombies. If you bring up Randy Rodes to a conservative, their normal response is "Randy Who? Didn't he coach the Eagles once?". If one has a radio program and no one listens, does one really have a radio program?

"Randy Who? Didn't he coach the Eagles once?"
Posted by: The Factor at October 18, 2007 1:35 AM

You're thinking of the guitarist for Ozzy Osborne.

I feel bad for Olbermann. His life's work is living in the shadow of O'Reilly. He should really do something positive with his life.

GOD pray that Olby smashes his face into some sidewalk! Sweet would be the sound of his mewling with broken teeth and glass in his yellow, liberal eyeball.

Factor writes:

"Who did they actually think would believe that any conservative would attack Randy Rodes besides their brain washed zombies."

END QUOTE

Ask and ye shall receive:

Mike Lussy Lou
SLOB the Return of the Living Dead
O'Lielly The Walking Dead
AAPuke (bwahahaha, need I say more)
BR the Bald Headed Rat
Codas the dumbass

And the rest of the loser liberals on this blog who have meaningless lives so desparate they feel compelled to visit this site and vent. The have nots.

Hey, you friggin liberal moron. Yeah you, the atheists, the losers, those that aint runnin nuthin, the one whining, the poor, the have nots, the ones looking up from the ground. You believe in Darwinism do you not, the theory of evolution you dumb fuck. There is a reason some people are rich and running the world and there is a reason you are where you are at. You'll never run this country or this world.

I watched a few minutes of Beck last night. I like this dude. He had a segment that under George Bush the wealthy are ebing taxed at an all time high. The top one percent pay 40% of taxes. I think it was the top 10% pay 70% and the bottom half paid in one percent. Well, we know Mike, SLOB, especially AAPuke, O'Lielly contributed to the 1%. You won't see that on Olbyplanet or the NY Times.

You have to be fucking stupid to be a liberal.

Poor mental midget.....reminds us all again of his ignorance.....

I am sure the bumper sticker he cites is a leftist reaction to the oft stated, "God Bless America," or "God Bless The United States." This typical short-sidedness of those like mental midget ignores the origin of the sentiment....

Irving Berlin... He said it was his most important composition....wrote it for a revue at an Army Camp show when he served in WWI, but the higher-ups thought it was jingoistic...Mmmm...

Good ol' Kate Smith sang it first in 1938 after Irving Berlin remembered his unused song after visiting pre-war Europe and he has always said he saw America's freedom as a gift from God compared to the travesty of war in his old homeland (Russia).....

Funny how the secular left is so indignant about a man's sentiment regarding his belief that his liberty is a blessing from God....Some will even make a bumper-sticker putting it down.

A must see picture with background story is one that Olby could never show.

http://www.soldiersperspective.us/2007/10/17/mending-owwies/#comments

Randi Rhodes collapsed on her face
She can't talk or walk with much grace
Bad karma will bite
Moonbats she'll incite
Like the right-wing sprayed her with mace

explorer wrote: "Two nights without mentionong Bill-O. Olby must have exhausted his penis envy."

Keith shifted his penis-envy to Ann Coulter.

"Man Coulter" says AA's Randi Rhodes
Hey Randi, Girl, you look like a toad
Though you say she' a boy
I prefer Ann as my sex toy
Screw RR? can't take that load

Keith, greetings and praise be upon you for denouncing the infidel Jew. I am just now hearing of of your renunciation of Jew reporter Chris Wallace. The impertinent Jew reporter dared to ask the former president Clinton questions about his presidency! You as the only faithful supporter of Allah in the media called out the Jew reporter:

"It is not essential that a past president, bullied and sandbagged by a monkey posing as a newscaster, finally lashed back"

Unlike other infidels, it is apparent Mr. Olbermann that you are well versed on the teachings of the Quoran concerning Jews:

Qur'an 2:59
"The wicked [Jews] changed and perverted the word We [Allah] had spoken to a word distorted." Because of their egregious behavior, the Jews "became like apes despised."

Qur'an 2:64 "But you [Jews] went back on your word and were lost losers. So become apes, despised and hated. We made an example out of you."

Ishaq:250 "The bestial transformation occurred when Allah turned Jews into apes, despised."

Thank you for your assistance to our cause.

The dramatization of internet comments about the Randi Rhodes rumors were a hoot!

John Gibson rocks!

I invested all my energy in promoting "Countdown With Keith Olbermann" and all I got was this lousy demotion.

Still going with the "Rita is as dumb as a suitcase of rocks" theme. He dissed her right at the end of the show, feigning surprise that she might have read a book. Misogynist.....
Posted by: Richard at October 17, 2007 9:49 PM

I don't get your reasoning that dissing Rita Cosby is tantamount to dissing the entire female gender.
Rita IS dumber than a suitcase full of rocks.
Posted by: Cecelia at October 17, 2007 10:25 PM

Give it a rest Cecelia, can you manage, just for once, to not hate women as much as Olbermann.

I think it would be difficult for a "suitcase full of rocks" to have a semi-decent career on TV and write a best selling book. Perhaps you should give Laura Ingraham a listen (or read her latest book "Power to the People"). Rita may be part of the larger problem with our celebrity obsession aka "pornification of america" so it is fair for her to be criticized for that, but stop stooping to Olbermann's level of name calling, especially degrading women...it's really an ugly character flaw and poor argument both for him and you.

Rita may be part of the larger problem with our celebrity obsession aka "pornification of america" so it is fair for her to be criticized for that, but stop stooping to Olbermann's level of name calling, especially degrading women...it's really an ugly character flaw and poor argument both for him and you.

Posted by: sick of women bashing at October 18, 2007 1:13 PM

It's not degrading to women to call Rita Cosby "dumb"... any more than it's degrading to all men in general to call Keith Olbermann a personality disordered jackass.

This is the same sort of reasoning that partisans try to use in order to put their presidential candidate off limits to criticism simply by virtue of her gender.

Yeah, her...

Go try that crap on someone else, moron.

Oh, dear. Who am I going to vote for? I mean, Obama's black, but Hillary's a woman. This is quite the conundrum. I certainly won't be looking at the issues, just the gender/race of those involved. If only there was a black woman running. Then I wouldn't be having this problem.

Olbermann wears a toup.

The Pelosi led Congress failed to overturn President Bush's veto.

I think I'll make a quick trip to the store for some olives and toothpicks so I can celebrate.

Grammie

Oh, dear. Who am I going to vote for? I mean, Obama's black, but Hillary's a woman. This is quite the conundrum. I certainly won't be looking at the issues, just the gender/race of those involved. If only there was a black woman running. Then I wouldn't be having this problem.
Posted by: Black Woman at October 18, 2007 2:46 PM

Maybe Condi will enter as an 11th hour candidate and all your prayers will be answered.

Grammie,
Pick me up a bottle of scotch. I'd like to celebrate the downing of that phony legislation too. When the parameters of the SCHIP legislation were explained to people being polled, it was overwhelmingly rejected. Maybe the press should report facts and not propoganda.

Poor kids are gonna go without health care....pulease!

Will, Glenlivet be OK?

Grammie

OK?!?!?! Girlfriend, you may never get rid of me with that top shelf scotch!

Salute!

Grammie, don't forget to step over Randi Rhodes as she lies in front of the liquor store.

Will, Glenlivet be OK?

Grammie
Posted by: Janet Hawkins at October 18, 2007 3:36 PM

Yes...

:D

key word- lies!

Sorry to be so long.

I tripped over her!

Does that qualify as a Left Wing conspiracy to shut me up? :)

Grammie

Made me laugh pretty hard Grammie....
You still got it!

Glenlivet? Ugh.

Macallan 12 Year AT MINIMUM.

OK, can of worms time:

I've been doing some digging about the Randi Rhodes situation hoping to come up with some hard facts. Unfortunately, apart from the fact that she was not attacked, there aren't any yet. (and Jon Elliot should definitely get his weenie spanked for jumping the gun on that one)

The only thing we've really got saying she was drunk, belligerent, etc. is an anonymous post on Gawker that included no real verifiable information. There was even somebody else who said he lives right there and asked for the name of the bar so he could ask the staff himself, but the original poster refused. On top of that, the New York Post said, "A canvass of half a dozen Irish bars in the area turned up nothing."

Let me say that part again: The New York Freakin' Post - the most proudly conservative rag there is, who wears their slant right out in the open (I kind of like them for that), said they investigated and came up with nothing.
(it also goes without saying that canvassing bars is about the best assignment a journalist could have, so I hope they're hiring)

The only other thing I saw of any significance is that several of her fans mentioned that she's often talked on the air about how she doesn't drink a lot on nights before her show, and waits until Friday before really partying up. Also from what I've read, her version of the story is she was standing outside smoking a cigarette and just fell, and didn't even know what happened until she got up. Of course, you can take that with a grain of salt if you wish, because it's not like Rush advertised the fact that he was a junkie until after he got caught either. So that's interesting, but inconclusive.

What I find interesting here is all the people on this site, and the entire right-wing blogosphere were so indignant at the mere SUGGESTION, when we still thought it was an attack, that a conservative had been involved. How utterly outrageous it was to even entertain that notion based on rumors and conjecture. And yet, when her own lawyer comes out and says that it's not true and she just fell, the EXACT SAME PEOPLE take it as absolute fact - and make just as much noise as Elliot did with his unsubstantiated claims - when an anonymous post appears and calls her a drunk.

Even if it turns out to be exactly true, as of this moment there's no more support for that view than there was for the "right-wing attack" version of the story. But that's not stopping a whole group of people as taking one or the other as fact, is it?

People are funny that way, eh?

On her show today she said that while walking her dog she simply blacked out. When coming to she told someone that she did not know what happened, and mentioned that it was possible she may have been hit from behind, but really had no idea. This apparently became Elliot's muse to expound wildly on more specific theories.

I've never cared much for Elliot - I've found him to be abysmally informed on most subjects, and this seems to be no exception. However, Its good for the righties to actually have some horrendous earth-shattering scandal to fume over, so I wont fault him here.

On her show today she said that while walking her dog she simply blacked out. When coming to she told someone that she did not know what happened, and mentioned that it was possible she may have been hit from behind, but really had no idea. This apparently became Elliot's muse to expound wildly on more specific theories.

I've never cared much for Elliot - I've found him to be abysmally informed on most subjects, and this seems to be no exception. However, Its good for the righties to actually have some horrendous earth-shattering scandal to fume over, so I wont fault him here.

On her show today she said that while walking her dog she simply blacked out. When coming to she told someone that she did not know what happened, and mentioned that it was possible she may have been hit from behind, but really had no idea. This apparently became Elliot's muse to expound wildly on more specific theories.

I've never cared much for Elliot - I've found him to be abysmally informed on most subjects, and this seems to be no exception. However, Its good for the righties to actually have some horrendous earth-shattering scandal to fume over, so I wont fault him here.

WHoa!!! this thing's gone full-auto!

I don't believe she was drunk, but its backlash. The reports of her being attacked wallowed for a day and a half... her cohorts on the radio simply had to make a phone call to get the REAL facts. Instead they ran their conspiracy theories over the radio and TV. That's ludicrous and stupid.

The POST calling her drunk is hardly slander... all reports say she fell and knocked out teeth? Not many sober people WALKING fall and can't get their hands out in front of their pie holes... none to not many!

Benson,

I watch the progessive blogoshpere pretty closely, and I was aware of her accident for about three hours before I saw her clarification that there was no attack.

Wow.
With all this talk about woman-bashing its amazing to me that no one mentioned Dumya referring to a possible "WWIII".

At least you all have your priorities in check.

It must really suck to be a Bushie right now. You must have the hardest time defending anything this tool says.

Talk about Wasted Keystrokes
See the speech, he said it is imparitive to AVOID world war III. Do you only read headlines?

Even if it turns out to be exactly true, as of this moment there's no more support for that view than there was for the "right-wing attack" version of the story. But that's not stopping a whole group of people as taking one or the other as fact, is it?

People are funny that way, eh?

Posted by: Chiv at October 18, 2007 5:13 PM

So if it was Sean Hannity who fell, you'd also be comparing dumb jokes about his sobriety at the time, to accusations that a political opponent or a conspiracy of political opponents assaulted him?

The POST calling her drunk is hardly slander... all reports say she fell and knocked out teeth? Not many sober people WALKING fall and can't get their hands out in front of their pie holes... none to not many!
Posted by: benson at October 18, 2007 5:27 PM

Who said anything about the Post calling her drunk, OR slander? The only thing I said about the Post is they did some investigating based on the anonymous post and came up with nothing. I guess you could say that if the anonymous post was lying, that would be slander (well, actually libel), but you're the first one to bring up that word.

As for getting her hands out in front of her, her story is that she was standing, blacked out, and woke up on the ground. It's pretty hard to get your hands in front of your face when you've fainted, regardless of what caused it.

So if it was Sean Hannity who fell, you'd also be comparing dumb jokes about his sobriety at the time, to accusations that a political opponent or a conspiracy of political opponents assaulted him?
Posted by: Cecelia at October 18, 2007 5:45 PM

If the story was exactly the same (i.e. neither side had any substantiation). Sure, why not?

Uh huh, right.........

"I watch the progessive blogoshpere pretty closely"

posted by slob

Ya don't say? Who woulda thunk it.......

If the story was exactly the same (i.e. neither side had any substantiation). Sure, why not?

Posted by: Chiv at October 18, 2007 5:53 PM

The two charges are analogous. For you to entertain either charge is not analogous.

They do not carry the same coinage simply because they are both unsubstantiated.

The two charges are analogous.

Posted by: Cecelia at October 18, 2007 6:11 PM

not analogous, rather.

Oh yeah, she "fainted", no alcohol involved here. Randi Rhodes having an accident from drinking too much? Nah, not a chance. Musta been a sudden "fainting" spell. Funny how lushes like Randi seem to to be be disproportionately afflicted with "fainting" or unexplained "blackouts" that they just can't explain. Sorta like the battered wife who explains "Oh, this black eye? I ran into a wall, yeah, that's it" Sad.

his ratings continue to be in the toilet
i sense a special moment coming soon,,perhaps on schips and this evil pResident

fuck olbermann,,,,,,hope they find him floating in the east river soon

Lighten up, Chiv.

One correction to your facts. The first reports were quite clear that no one knew anything other than that she had been hurt. There was speculation all over the blogs that it was a right winger trying to shut her up.

Equivalent situation to someone making a claim that she was drunk based on the fact that she says she doesn't know what happened and she has said, either jokingly or seriously, she does do some heavy drinking

Do you remember defending the accusations and your perfectly justified suspicions b/c you are familiar with the area and it was not likely that a criminal mugging was unlikely.

Being drunk is hardly on the same level as being a political Storm Trooper.

Or do you disagree?

Grammie

Sorry, S/B;

Do you remember defending the accusations and your perfectly justified suspicions b/c you are familiar with the area and it was not likely that it was a criminal mugging.

Grammie

See the speech, he said it is imparitive to AVOID world war III. Do you only read headlines?

Posted by: at October 18, 2007 5:40 PM

Ohhhh.... I see...
That's much different.

If I were to say to you that you better not walk down a certain street after dark to AVOID getting mugged you'd know that I was only cautioning you, right?
But you'd also know that I thought there was a reasonable chance you'd get mugged.

If you think that his mentioning WWIII isn't a big deal we will have to disagree.
I personally feel as though he is doing his best to lead up to tougher talk.

See also 2003.

Funny how lushes like Randi seem to to be be disproportionately afflicted with "fainting" or unexplained "blackouts" that they just can't explain. Sorta like the battered wife who explains "Oh, this black eye? I ran into a wall, yeah, that's it" Sad.

Posted by: at October 18, 2007 6:22 PM

Or like the radio talk host who claimed that his hearing loss was not related to excessive illegal prescription painkiller abuse.

Lighten up, Chiv.
One correction to your facts. The first reports were quite clear that no one knew anything other than that she had been hurt. There was speculation all over the blogs that it was a right winger trying to shut her up.
Posted by: Janet Hawkins at October 18, 2007 6:27 PM

Perhaps I should have been more clear and said, "The first thing *I* heard was that she had been mugged..." which is in line with the reasoning you mentioned. Perhaps technically speaking the first reports were merely that she had been hurt, but I don't think it's a stretch to say that the majority of people who heard about it before her lawyer's official announcement (on Tuesday I think?) had heard the mugger story first. That's what I was basing that last post on.

As for lightening up, it's not really necessary. One of the problem with the internet is you're missing all the facial expressions and vocal inflections that would let you know I'm not taking this THAT seriously. It's just sort of my philosophical "Gee, people sure are funny!" thing, of which I'm hardly immune to. To my mind, it's a lot like how I used to hate Shaquille O'Neal, but once he got traded to The Heat, I defend him to the death against all naysayers. In a way, I'm just pointing out how people do the same thing regarding their "team" in politics. :)

And so you don't think I'm pretending to be above the fray, I should acknowledge that although I am an independent, I realize I have my own arrogance just like everyone else. But in my case "us" is the "really smart independents like me", and "them" is "all those foolish partisans". In the end, it's probably not that much of an improvement. ;)

Thanks for the explanation. However it doesn't answer the thrust of my comment.

Being drunk is hardly on the same level as being a political Storm Trooper.

I can agree with the point you made generally but not in this situation.

Also, you didn't let me know if my tripping over R Rhodes prostate on the sidewalk outside the liquor store was a Left Wing Conspiracy to shut me up. :)

Grammie

"Sorry, S/B;

Do you remember defending the accusations and your perfectly justified suspicions b/c you are familiar with the area and it was not likely that it was a criminal mugging.

Grammie"

Posted by: Janet Hawkins at October 18, 2007 6:34 PM

Who's S/B? I hope its not a new anagram for me, because I never posted anything like that.

Hey Grammie, you said you had some comments re: a posting of mine yesterday or the day before about fascism - are you still interested or is Randi Rhodes' embarrassment simply too distracting?

So if it was Sean Hannity who fell, you'd also be comparing dumb jokes about his sobriety at the time, to accusations that a political opponent or a conspiracy of political opponents assaulted him?

Posted by: Cecelia at October 18, 2007 5:45 PM

Christ, I know I would be. No foul here as far as I'm concerned.

Sorry, SLOB, I didn't get back to it. I will over the weekend, I hope.

Tomorrow is a school holiday and I have Grandkids tonight and tomorrow and Saturday is Little League, YEA!

S/B is shorthand for "should be", kind of like NB for "Nota Bene" and FYI for "for your information only"

Grammie

The New York Radio Summer ratings were released this past Monday.

Overall Ratings

WABC: (Home of Rush, Shawn, Levin.) Overall came in with a 3.1 share of the Market.

WOR: (Home of O'Reilly, Savage, Malzberg)
2.1 share of the Market.

WLIB: (Station that dropped AAR for Gospel)
0.9 share of the Market.

WWRL: (The first real book for the new owners) 0.6 share of the Market.

God beats AAR? Good move putting on that new athiest show eh AAR. LOL!

0.6 share in ultra liberal New York?

Keith starts putting that clown Maddow on almost nightly and the ratings in New York go down? Why she's a Rhodes Scholar!!!!!

You mean Lionel rants and raves about 9-11 being an inside job and people tune out? SHOCKING!

And Randi stopped at just 14 bloody marys?

So Randi took a header into the sidewalk but it seems no one heard it.

Which by seeing the ratings in New York. No one hears her screaming on the radio either.

Maybe she should just yell out the window from her apartment, more people might hear her.

It's that tree falling in the woods thing.

Dead Wood, Dead Air America Radio.

But what did they expect putting Mark Green in charge?

By the News accounts here it seems she lives on Park Ave. around 26th st.. Okay not the best but she does have the address.
Kudos Randi for pulling that in negotiations.

Then again she could be sub-letting a rent controlled apartment.

0.6

That's BAD!

That's Really BAD!

Puck, could you please clarify for me?

"Keith starts putting that clown Maddow on almost nightly and the ratings in New York go down? Why she's a Rhodes Scholar!!!!!"

Is that a Randi Rhodes scholar?

Grammie

No danger of any Rhodes scholars around this site.

Sarkozy was divorced yesterday. That is divorce #2, maybe #3 if you check carefully. My guess he is setting himself up for a run at the Republican nomination in the States. To be sure, there is that pesky "born in the US" requirement to overcome, but the divorces are the real test, and he has passed with flying colors.

Of course, he will have to be a run as the Metro workers are on strike again this morning. A brisk walk from Montmarte to the Bourse on a frosty morning. Pass the brioche.

Most people would prefer a divorcee in the white house rather than an intern shtooping audultorous.

Democratic hypocrisy sees no end.

Idiot, Clinton can't run again, and all the polls suggest you're dead wrong. Much, much more popular than the current and other recent occupants.

Republican stupidity knows no bounds.

Of course, he will have to be a run as the Metro workers are on strike again this morning. A brisk walk from Montmarte to the Bourse on a frosty morning. Pass the brioche.

Posted by: Yves LeClerc at October 19, 2007 4:39 AM

Thanks, philby!

O, goodness. The Petulant Prince has pulled himself out of Jimmy Two Bits' arse and is back under one of his many names wriiting completely idiotic crap about which he knows nothing. Some things never change. Did that testacle ever descend?

Cecelia, quit name calling for once and maybe listen to what "tired of women bashing" said. Are you that insecure that you constantly have call someone "dumb" or "moron" You seem to exhibit a very sleazy negative and constant pattern here. Take this person's advice, check out Laura Ingraham, you could learn a thing or two...(maybe grow up and act a bit more civil).

I think it would be difficult for a "suitcase full of rocks" to have a semi-decent career on TV and write a best selling book. Perhaps you should give Laura Ingraham a listen (or read her latest book "Power to the People"). Rita may be part of the larger problem with our celebrity obsession aka "pornification of america" so it is fair for her to be criticized for that, but stop stooping to Olbermann's level of name calling, especially degrading women...it's really an ugly character flaw and poor argument both for him and you.
Posted by: sick of women bashing at October 18, 2007 1:13 PM

Cecelia, you really should consider following tired of name calling's advice.

Drop those words that offend she/he and use the same high minded phrases as she/he does.

Insecure

Very sleazy

Grow Up

Act civil

Tired of name calling has set a high standard. I hope that I can live up to it.

Janet, not sure how asking someone who calls others "dumb" or a "moron" to grow up and act a bit or civil is name calling?

By the way, I do not recall you using ugly name calling tactics like Cecelia, you usually are pretty civil here (but perhaps I am wrong).

Tired of name calling, I'm sorry that I can't comment on your manners here b/c you appear to be using a one issue name.

I do not consider the terms you used and advice you gave as quite being illustrative of a model of decorum and civility.

To quote you I think "You seem to exhibit a very sleazy negative and constant pattern"

I think you should "grow up" and be "more civil".

If you are a regular here as you imply I can't believe that some of the perjoratives and curses flung at Cecelia and I (and sometimes Sharon) have escaped your notice. I wonder why in light of just a few of these such as:

Fag hags
F*****g bitches
Barbaric c**t and c**t breath
Senile
Drunks and on and on and on

that you are so dismayed by "stupid" and "moron" that you feel compelled to comment on it.

You have, in my opinion, concentrated on a pimple on gnat's ass while ignoring the putrid oozing carbuncles on display here daily.

Grammie

Are you that insecure that you constantly have call someone "dumb" or "moron" You seem to exhibit a very sleazy negative and constant pattern here.

posted by "tired of name calling"

You are referring to mike. He won't be happy to hear this......

I think it would be difficult for a "suitcase full of rocks" to have a semi-decent career on TV and write a best selling book. Perhaps you should give Laura Ingraham a listen (or read her latest book "Power to the People"). Rita may be part of the larger problem with our celebrity obsession aka "pornification of america" so it is fair for her to be criticized for that, but stop stooping to Olbermann's level of name calling, especially degrading women...it's really an ugly character flaw and poor argument both for him and you.
Posted by: sick of women bashing at October 18, 2007 1:13 PM

Posted by: tired of name calling at October 19, 2007 2:29 PM

When you stop being an idiot by suggesting that bashing a particular woman is the same as bashing all women in general and then couching THAT moronic nonsense by offering up the sort of criticism of her that you do find acceptable, then I'll refrain from calling you what you are.

It's my opinion that Olbermann is an equal opportunity jerk. He treats men no better than women.

You don't to have agree with that, but don't include me in that stupid contrived stuff you've issued against him, merely because I don't see it your way.

Grow up and quit making Rita Cosby emblematic of the whole of womankind.

If you weren't a moron, you'd realize that doing THAT is as "woman bashing" as you can get...

Cecelia, you really should consider following tired of name calling's advice.

Drop those words that offend she/he and use the same high minded phrases as she/he does.

Insecure

Very sleazy

Grow Up

Act civil

Tired of name calling has set a high standard. I hope that I can live up to it.

Posted by: Janet Hawkins at October 19, 2007
2:46 PM

Keep in mind that I was IMMEDIATELY accused of HATING my own gender simply because I agreed with Olbermann's opinion of Rita Cosby and questioned the logic of terming THAT "woman bashing".

How's THAT for civility and maturity..... disagree with this clown's assessment and the idiot civilly and maturely responds by calling you a woman hater too! :D

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

I don't get your reasoning that dissing Rita Cosby is tantamount to dissing the entire female gender.
Rita IS dumber than a suitcase full of rocks.

Posted by: Cecelia at October 17, 2007 10:25 PM

Give it a rest Cecelia, can you manage, just for once, to not hate women as much as Olbermann.

Posted by: sick of women bashing at October 18, 2007 1:13 PM

Cecelia, at first I accepted the misosgnist (sp) argument completely. Your contention that KO is a total jerk to anyone who doesn't worship at his altar, male, female or flavor of the day is essentially correct.

I guess it is a throwback to episodes that most women have experienced. Plus, it has been my experience that the worst offenders are not a man's man at all. That is an accurate perception of KO's Manhood Quotient, I would think.:)

This article by Peggy Noonan touches tangentially on the subject. If you haven't read you might enjoy it:

http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/pnoonan/

The title is :

"Sex and the Presidency
Being a woman is Mrs. Clinton's biggest asset--and she's trying to seem like one. "

Grammie

PS tired of name calling, where have you gone?

I answered you and you have not returned the favor.
Grammie

Thanks for the article, Janet.

I'd assume that even Hillary would appreciate the fact that Noonan is critiquing her..... not her biology...not cultural expectations that stem from her biology...but her personality...her soul.

We both know that any woman would find some small favor bordering on respect, in that.

Bobo, does this mean that the Dem candidates will have to carry around a fresh bloody raw aborted baby/fetus to prove their credentials?

"Religious Right: GOP Candidates 'All Flawed'

To get their vote they will have to start carrying around a fetus in a jar on the campaign trail.
Posted by: Why don't you think at October 20, 2007 1:07 AM "

Or do you think that it will require a fresh PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION BABY for them to affirm their bona fides?

Just asking, dear, b/c if there is one side there MUST BE the other side!

Grammie

Yes, Mrs. Hawkins, but fly paper is only sticky on one side. And it seems an appropriate analogy because the Republicans have such a sticky wicket.

My Jeff. It looks like you're information about Haditha may have been wrong. It has certainly reared its head with a vengeance, hasn't it? I suggest you apologize to Representatibe Murtha. Of course, I know you won't. Many women have difficulty admiting their mistakes.

I certainly hope our accused service men are able to deal with all of this effectively. By the same token, I hope justice is had for the Iraqi victims. I'm not sure the ends are mutually attainable.

Should I tell Jack to expect your apology, Jeffi Lynn?

Please excuse me if I don't see the relationship between aborted fetuses/babies and FLY PAPER!

Bobo brought this subject up and I carried it to the logical conclusion based on his use of it. If you are displeased with that you should take it up with Bobo.

Swords cut both ways, you BOTH SHOULD know!

Grammie

Why don't you cross stitch some of your tiresome maxims on tea towels and free up some cyberspace?

You go from FLY PAPER to CROSS STITCH as comparisons to ABORTION!

Perhaps you stumbled into this discussion and missed this:

Bobo, does this mean that the Dem candidates will have to carry around a fresh bloody raw aborted baby/fetus to prove their credentials?

"Religious Right: GOP Candidates 'All Flawed'

To get their vote they will have to start carrying around a fetus in a jar on the campaign trail.
Posted by: Why don't you think at October 20, 2007 1:07 AM "

Or do you think that it will require a fresh PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION BABY for them to affirm their bona fides?

As I said earlier, a sword cuts both ways.

Bobo used one cut and I used the opposite cut from that sword.

You explain the difference between a GOP candidate carrying around a fetus in a jar to appease his base and a Dem candidate carrying around a fresh aborted fetus or partial birth abortion baby to appease his base.

You don't like the images that have been evoked take it up with Bobo.

He was perfectly comfortable conjuring up a fetus in a jar to make a political point.

So why should I shy away from the PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION in the flesh to make a political point?

If you are uncomfortable with the thought of PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION perhaps you should rethink your position.

Grammie

Is mental midget really Bobo, a so-called college professor?.....Based on his 9:32AM post, he has shown himself, once again, most uninformed.....

There is no federal law legalizing abortion....the legal practice of aborting embryos and fetuses is based only on court review of legislation restricting abortion.....a thin vail based on the pathetic legal idea of penumbra.....implied "right to privacy" in The US Constitution......

As the left has done, the right has done.....selecting legal minds that have a view of the law that is consistant with their world-view.....And that is the problem for the rabid left....Now that SCOTUS is at least evenly divided if not truly right of center, legal rulings can occur that reflect the actual law and intention of the writers of The Constitution....including not finding an absolute "right of privacy" that means one can actually commit infanticide if one feels it is necessary.

If legislation is needed to provide protection of a person's right to an abortion, the left should pursue such measures....they won't because they know the political reality is that their radical view of unhampered infanticide is not supported by a vast majority of humanity and is contrary to basic humane values.

Let us see if a democrat controlled congress pursues such legislation, mental midget....I doubt your statement "Roe vs Wade is law..and will stay law." is really what you believe....the fact that restrictions on abortion will occur and stand under federal court constitutional review in the future must make you angry!

Lets see....Roberts, Alito, Kennedy, Thomas, Scalia.....5 justices who have not bought the pathetic idea of penumbra.....what a shame, uh MM?....I guess you are hoping one dies soon?

The rest...the other 4....2 will go sooner and even if they are replaced by like-minded liberal jurists....no change in the court make-up.

Bobo, Bush PACKED the Supreme Court?

I know FDR tried to but I must have missed GWB actually getting away.

Damn, that boy has done well.

Still waiting for what type of aborted fetus/baby the Dem canditateswill have to carry around to prove bona fides on abortion to their base?

Grammie

If you weren't a moron...
Posted by: Cecelia at October 19, 2007 6:23 PM

Cecelia, having a nuanced discussion is not your strong suit, as is nuanced understanding of the larger issue in context. There is absolutely no point in explaining this to you. My comments are for the benefit of others who actually can think and have some depth in comprehension.

"...that KO is a total jerk to anyone who doesn't worship at his altar, male, female or flavor of the day is essentially correct."
Grammie

PS tired of name calling, where have you gone?

I answered you and you have not returned the favor.
Grammie
Posted by: Janet Hawkins at October 19, 2007 8:08 PM

-----------------------
Grammie, how do you know Olbermann is a total jerk to anyone who doesn't worship at his alter? And how exactly would that make him have any less issues with women specifically?

I think I remember others calling you hag, etc. (I don't frequent this blog daily). I wish they would stop as well, but if you go by Cecelia's logic; perhaps you (and her) past behavior here warranted the name calling. The few times I visit here I seem to catch Cecelia calling someone a moron, etc.

BTW, the Peggy Noonan essay was insteresting and kind of proves my point. Thanks!

(Often I can not respond in a timely manner because I'm really busy at work...don't take it personally).

And remember, Olbermann only wants the fans worshipping at his feet to look like J-Lo, not Leona Helmsley.

Also, you didn't let me know if my tripping over R Rhodes prostate on the sidewalk outside the liquor store was a Left Wing Conspiracy to shut me up. :)
Grammie
Posted by: Janet Hawkins at October 18, 2007 8:00 PM

Seriously??? What a ridiculous question. Of course not. It was my buddies in the Independent Lunatic Fringe slowing you down so I could get to the really good scotch first.

(Had I known you were going for the Glenlivet, I wouldn't have bothered. Live and learn.)

Also, you didn't let me know if my tripping over R Rhodes prostate on the sidewalk outside the liquor store was a Left Wing Conspiracy to shut me up. :)
Grammie
Posted by: Janet Hawkins at October 18, 2007 8:00 PM

Seriously??? What a ridiculous question. Of course not. It was my buddies in the Independent Lunatic Fringe slowing you down so I could get to the really good scotch first.

(Had I known you were going for the Glenlivet, I wouldn't have bothered. Live and learn.)
Posted by: Chiv at October 22, 2007 3:10 AM

I think it's pretty inconsiderate that no one has asked Grammie if she got hurt on R. Rhodes' prostate...

I was actually trying not to envision her prostate. Some things should be between a woman and her doctor.

Tired of name calling, based on your application of Cecelia's logic what conclusion should I draw from this:

"I think I remember others calling you hag, etc. (I don't frequent this blog daily). I wish they would stop as well, but if you go by Cecelia's logic; perhaps you (and her) past behavior here warranted the name calling. The few times I visit here I seem to catch Cecelia calling someone a moron, etc.............
Posted by: tired at October 20, 2007 5:58 PM"

Using your interpretation of Cecelia's logic you first claim a moral equivelancy between "moron and dumb" to words such as "c**t, fag hags, f*****g b****s" etc, words that are generally considered insulting and degrading to women in any circumstance. Based on that so called moral equivalancy you stretch to claim that she and I perhaps have asked for it.

All to avoid answering this:

"If you are a regular here as you imply I can't believe that some of the perjoratives and curses flung at Cecelia and I (and sometimes Sharon) have escaped your notice. I wonder why in light of just ........that you are so dismayed by "stupid" and "moron" that you feel compelled to comment on it.

You have, in my opinion, concentrated on a pimple on gnat's ass while ignoring the putrid oozing carbuncles on display here daily.

Grammie
Posted by: Janet Hawkins at October 19, 2007 3:26 PM"

That is the core question I asked you. If you felt compelled to comment on the subject why did you comment on the jaywalking by one person here instead of the multiple felonies by many?

Grammie

PS I see that you omitted Sharon in your answer while I included her in my question. That demonstrates to me that you do understand that this is not a matter of someone "asking" for it and "getting" it.

I reiterate....mental midget....go back to the sandbox, will you please? You know as much about "Christian Values" (or The US Constitution) as HRC knows about ethical campaign finance practices (or The US Constitution).....

The elected US executive does not have the power to "give back" enumerated constitutional powers, mental midget. Nor does an elected Senator, Congressperson or appointed federal judge have the power to "give back" their enumerated powers. They/He/She takes an oath to uphold The Constitution....to protect it....and unless it is amended or an authority (a judge) tells us all that the executive/legislature/judge has overstepped his/her constitutional powers, he/she is obligated to protect ALL of The US Constitution....including those powers found in ARTICLE II.....

We now see why US Senators, with a few exceptions, make poor executives....they see The US President and the rest of the executive branch as a coequal branch to the legislature....No, the accurate way to view our system is that they are seperated branches with enumerated powers and responsibilities that have avenues to check eachother....The President is not "coequal" to the congress with regards to raising funds or appropriations and the congress is not "coequal" to the executive with regards to law enforcement or national security.

HRC's silly statement is a sign of her pathology and the left's disdain for our system as clearly laid down by the founders. The US Constitution is specific and clear on the responsibilities of each component. It is through amendment, constitutional legislation, and judicial review that The US Constitution's powers are changed....not by individual action.

Just like the Iraq War debate....the left has it all wrong.....They have the purse-strings and influence US foreign policy through those purse strings....That is why if the policy is "wrong" the congress should not fund it, forcing the executive to change the policy. Period. I shudder to think that HRC wants to violate the US Constitution and "give back" constitutional executive powers....IT IS NOT HER RIGHT TO DO SO.....Amend the constitution or go before SCOTUS and change things....Do not give a press conference and pronounce parts of ARTICLE II negotiable....That is unconsitutional and dangerous.

Cee, very well said.

I advise you though that if she becomes president you advise your patients not to hold their breath waiting for her to actually do it.

Grammie

Chicken Blogger, I commend you for your honest depiction of the weight and value of your comment as "Just an idle thought".

There are some who believe that their idle thoughts are so momentous that they should be memorialized in stone.Your obvious humility, justly earned I am sure, does you justice.

Grammie

Anon, with your post I would regard any "power grab" by Preident Bush extra-constitutional action and then against his oath of office....an impeachable offense.

Now if HRC wants to be more accurate and say she will not use the powers afforded her by the constitution as the elected chief executive, then I understand....But to claim Bush grabed power is simply hyperbole and without support....He used his constitutional powers correctly with proper review and revision if necessary.

Chicken Blogger, you have, as usual missed the entire point way wide of the mark. I have no doubt that when you shoot at the broadside of a barn you miss big time.

Grammie does not have idle thoughts as FLUCKER does.

Grammie is content to speak her thoughts and let them fall where they may in fertile or infertile ground.

It is FLUCKER and his ilk who exhibit the Uriah Heep humble while having stonemasons working feverishly to inscribe their words.

CIAO!

Grammie

FLUCKER, stuff a sock in it!

Grammie

I guess you are not happy with Pope Benedict XVI in the Chair now, since he is going to crack down on the admittance of flamers into seminaries, which negatively impacts your cause. You exude flame fumes with every one of your pathetic comments. Hurry, you might miss a rerun of Queer Eye!

Was that clever and original enough?

FLUCKER, stuff a sock in it!

Grammie

FLUCKER, stuff a sock in it!

Grammie

Actually, Flucker, I was not attempting to be funny. Everything you say has "I'm gay" written all over it. The Church understands homosexuality; it is a disorder. It is the gay flamboyance I loathe, not the person struggling with the disorder. As far as your sense of humor, stating that you get a gag reflex as you picture two commenters here engaged in a lesbian act just doesn't get a belly laugh from me, particularly when I am one of the commenters. It is great to know that our spiritual Father meets with your approval. He would sleep better at night if he knew of your sentiments, I'm sure. You are a complete fraud, though, holding yourself out as so pious. I am NOT pious, nor do I pretend to be. I look to my children for the holiness I seek, not the people here. Maybe I am "total nuts." Keep laboring to find and offer that true charity. There blows your theory about my being close to the threshold.

And FLUCKER, stuff a sock in it!

WHOA, Sharon, you are on fire tonight! That was great.

You cut to the chase.

You lead and I will follow.

Grammie

PS FLUCKER, stuff another sock in it.

AFter SLOB's comments the other night, my charity meter corresponds to Johnny's posting of Olby's manhood meter : ) I am on the other thread.

FLUCKER, stuff a SHEET in it!

Grammie

Yes, indeed, one (1) very, very mean and ugly man without even a slight qualm about slandering and lying. You have been drawn to a political philosophy and a party that welcomes your type. You are fortunate in that regard. Others will likely reject your Dime Store psychology and rise well above you.

At some time in a moment of crisis when you make a true and complete confession, Flucker, and the Priest tells you to make things right with those against whom you have sinned, I have already forgiven your meanness, your coarseness and your lies.

FLUCKER, stuff a sock in it!

Grammie

Actually, Flucker, I was not attempting to be funny. Everything you say has "I'm gay" written all over it.

posted by Sharon

Remember philby/clucker/rudy/anon's expertise of clothing she was kind enough to tell us about a while back? I think the conversation included the topic of "metrosexual's," if I remember correctly. Makes even more sense, now.

philby, you have no one to blame, but, yourself.

Yes, and as I am sure you can tell, I'm pretty broken up by all of this. I do so value Sharon's and Mrs. Hawkins' opinion, and, of course, yours. I long to be a mean-spirited, spiteful gossip, but I have been unable to attain that goal. My hat is off to you and the other girls.

Posted by: Anonymous at October 27, 2007 12:38 AM

Clucker,

You seem to be in the situation where you can no longer feign spasms of righteous indignation at RK or much of anything else (because HE was truthful and you weren't).

All you're left with is attempts to harass some of regulars here who do not happen to hold your views.

You came back to a blog run by a guy you dislike and admired by people you dislike, for THIS?

You certainly seem to have chosen the right moniker this time. What name would be more suitable for someone who seems to have completely taken up the role of a troll...

Cecelia's back with the moniker comedy act.

You came back for that !
Such incisive political comment !

What a fraud you are !
Posted by: at October 28, 2007 1:00 PM

The comment wasn't political and the point wasn't about monikers.

There's no doubt that the irony of your using term "fraud" went completely over your head too... :D

Thank you for your usual dribble.

I do so hate to call members of the Andrew Sisters to the office, but you will recall that your tenor lied mightily about what the webmaster had said. You even chastised her for it.

So, just Bop it on down the road ....

Posted by: Anonymous at October 28, 2007 2:57 PM

Capon you ARE the Boggey Woogey BS Boy of Company C...