The liberal media caught aiding and abetting the myth of Olbermann's popularity once again.

This is the crap I really can't stand. This is so friggin' obvious it's sickening. Thanks OW for creating a post about this. Perhaps Olbermann should give this site a WPITW. Doubt it, but he should. Thanks Liberal Media, for pointing out your blatant hypocrisy.

Irony of ironies: Olbermann's supporters in the press, with some sort of new found concern for balance, are seeking out contrarian views.

Only this time the contrarian opinions being solicited are supportive of Olbermann's views and journalism.

Balance for me; but not for thee.

Anyway, I thought letters sections were supposed to run unsolicited missives from readers. Not requested letters.

Why have a letters section otherwise?

What's funny is dopey Becky is so impressed with herself and her blog (that analyzes Olbermann's ties), that she actually made a post about this. Oh the studpidity. Thanks, Beck for letting us know how unethical the liberal media really is.

By the way, she says she gave the fake name Becky Liebowitz (after Jon Stewart) of Chicago. Yeah, I believe that. I doubt she's really Jewish, either. Creep.

I really hope other media outlets pick this up. TVnewser, Inside Cable News, etc. But, some how I doubt it.

thanks for giving John Gibson a topic for is show today.

Sorry, not is show/ his show. a mistype on my part.

The Hillary "spade work" incident":

Last Sunday evening on Fox News Channel, Morris said: “I think that what she is going to do is she is going to say Obama is unelectable, Americans won’t elect him, he can’t beat the Republican Party, America is not ready for Obama, he doesn’t have the experience to win, and what she is going to mean is that they won’t vote for an African-American, but she won’t say it. She’ll say everything but, but that’s what she means.”

As if on cue, THE VERY NEXT MORNING, Sen. Clinton appeared on NBC’s Today Show and talked about the choice that voters were faced with in New Hampshire. She said the following: “When they say to themselves, OK, I have a choice between a truly inspirational speaker (Obama) who has not done the kind of spade work with the sort of experience that another candidate has…”

Spade work. That’s some choice of words for a black political opponent, no?

http://www.crosstabs.org/blogs/gamecock/2008/jan/12/will_voluntary_servitude_of_black_dems_survive_public_humiliation_at_hillary_s_hands

[...]

"But an anonymous emailer directed TVNewser to BloggingOlbermann.com, a fan site of Olbermann's. Becky, who runs the site, tells the story of how Playboy editor Chip Rowe contacted her looking for a positive letter in support of Olbermann to offset the slew of negative letters Playboy received.

"Becky agreed to write a letter, and she has images of her Playboy-requested letter in the magazine among the many anti-Olbermann rants. "

http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/msnbc/default.asp

###
Mmmmm....I wonder who the anonymous emailer was?.....Mmmmm....who could that have been telling TVNewser such things?.....

Any idea, Brandon?

This must be a crock. A national magazine like this with a reputation for integrity would never do this. I think this is a hoax. There really is no proof other than somebody's claim on a blog--what is that? It's just somebody wanting attention.

Oh my God!
This IS big news! I hope I can sleep tonight after reading the horrible things going on out there.

I thought the Sudanese had it bad.

Posted by: Who gives a flying Fuck at January 14, 2008 3:51 PM

Apparently a fan girl like yourself does.

Clue to Mr. Rowe

The people that sent those letters in are the ones that buy your mag.

I doubt that whoever the person that you had to grab a positive letter from has ever brought a single copy of Playboy.

What are your readers telling you Mr. Rowe?

Well, looks like Keith has to kiss and make up with his "angry" Kossacks:

I Hate To Interrupt, But...
by Keith Olbermann
Mon Jan 14, 2008 at 09:17:12 AM PST
[This is legit -- kos]

Yeah, it’s me.
Hi.
Sure has taken me long enough. But, as you may know, I am the shy, retiring type: Hesitant to state an opinion in public and horrified to pass judgment or seem a scold.

Keith Olbermann's diary :: ::
And, yes, if I’m going to step out from the cool, comforting environs of the shadows, I’d rather spring forward to pimp the book or the newscast.
But, having now read a (mercifully few) claims here that I’m a) attacking Clinton, b) burying Edwards, and c) clobbering Obama, I feel the need to mention that I truly don’t have a preference. I am tilting in no direction, sending out no subliminal message, and thwarting no truth.
To report the NBC New Hampshire projection after the polls close there, is not to try to marginalize John Edwards. To run the entire Bill Clinton “fairy tale” sound bite complete with its Iraq vote context, is not to try to thwart Barack Obama. And to report that Dennis Kucinich has put a down payment on a New Hampshire recount is not to claim Hillary Clinton stole a primary.
I appreciate the fervor of each candidate’s supporters and I think I have some empathy based on my standing in the Frustrated-By-The-Obviousness-Of-Politics League. But can anybody reading messages into tea leaves in my newscast, when there isn’t even a teacup, please resume regular breathing patterns? To see in each of my reports an enemy or a spokesman sounds microscopically like – and I swallow hard and prepare for the prospect of some Kossacks to approach what passes for my castle with torches and pitchforks as I write this – Bill O’Reilly.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/1/14/12636/5764/715/436605

so far, over 1000 comments...

hmmmmm.... I bet this scenario is a bad omen for Olbermann's popularity in his NBC sports gig.

Though I'm no expert... I'd assume that Playboy has female readers, but that the majority of Playboy's base is male.

Some...a lot....most... of those men may be FNC watching, NBC sports watching-- guys who are offended by Keith's put-downs of Fox, his asinine commentary on NBC sports shows, and his general lefty loonism..

Offended so much...that Playboy had to solicit a female Olbermann groupie to clue them in as to why he is a admirable guy and chick magnet nonetheless...

It makes you wonder if the majority of NBC sports show watchers aren't watching it with the mute button pressed and wonder how much of a future Keith has in that genre.

He just can't help himself, you gotta love a suck-u:

Tip Jar (717+ / 0-)
I should do this more often.

As to the lateness of the Jar, to quote Oscar to Felix in The Odd Couple about gravy "I didn't know you had to make it. I thought it just comes when you cook the meat.

Oh and I forgot the signature. DAMN RULES.

If you're going through hell: Keep going! - Winston Churchill.

by Keith Olbermann on Mon Jan 14, 2008 at 09:41:48 AM PST

http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2008/1/14/12636/5764/303#c303

funny comment at Kos, from a fan girl who's CAT is about to die, too funny:

Late to post -just found out my cat's got 3 weeks
Hello, Keith. Normally I'd have been here to post sooner, but I'm late to the party this morning because of the news from my vet that my old cat's not going to be with me much longer. I hope he's wrong, but I'm not betting on miracles.

Anyhow, it's good to see you here. I literally saw you in Manhattan at a cocktail party when I was blogging the Clinton Global Initiative.

I've enjoyed your show a long time but was a bit sad to see you entering the fray with some of the mad media crowd about this overblown race-card business.

I hope that you would be the fairest port in what's become a media shitstorm.

I'm going back to my cat. Our time together's limited now.

I'll be watching. I'm glad you wrote. It shows you care what we're thinking about.

Keep it real. You're good at that.

by Iddybud on Mon Jan 14, 2008 at 10:29:14 AM PST

suck-u: oops, I meant to type, suck-up

Thanks go to Becky indeed.

But let me correct an item or two here---first of all, had I been the "anonymous" tipster to ICN, TVN, Jossip and Huffington Post, I would have pointed the links here to Owatch to summarize it all, not to the blog in question itself.

And if the pieces all seem similar, it's not part of some huge conspiracy theory, it's just that those websites were astute enough to realize the journalistic lines of ethics that were crossed when the Playboy editor decided to skew opinion on an article and make a farce of his publication's"Letter to the Editor" piece. And before an Olbyloon blows a gasket, think about this for a moment-if you knew that a major magazine had gotten a stack of overwhelmingly negative reactions to a piece they had done on O'Reilly and then had gone to a BOR website to get a positive one written, and then had offered the writer to chance to submit it under a false name--what would your reaction be?

And one more thing: to the Olbyloon who is absolutely convinced that the anti-KO sentiment was all due to some sort of anti-Keith letter-writing campaign conducted by Olbermannwatch? Faithful readers of this blog will know that's complete BS. But truth never got in the way of their rantings-perhaps one day they will grow up, see the light where Olbermann is concerned and if not, at least aspire to be a little more like those dissatisfied readers at Playboy who at least had the guts and decency to post their REAL NAMES and REAL CITIES of residence in their letters of complaint to the magazine.

Why would the Playboy editor contact only Becky at ERT for a letter or comment?

What about the people who run the other KO fan sites and boards? They certainly don't keep a low profile. Did he find Becky more objective than the others? Just wondering.

Maybe the others were asked but refused to write a letter to Playboy for KO.

I wonder if Becky will post this on her little fan blog:

The winner in the Fallaci category is the brilliant General David Petraeus, who achieved something many were beginning to believe impossible.

And the winner of the Fiskie, the idiotarian of the year par excellence, the most outstandingly hypocritical empty-skulled yapper in the universe according to LGF readers: MSNBC spokeshole Keith “The Mouth” Olbermann.

Nice illustration...

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=28608_The_2007_Fiskie_and_Fallaci_Winners!

I don't know, Olbermann has really short arms, I think the illustion is a litlle off. Really, next time you watch, especially if he stands, notice how short his arms are in comparison to the rest of his body. It's kinda wierd. Must be a bitch buying suits off the rack.

I don't know, Olbermann has really short arms, I think the illustration is a litlle off. Really, next time you watch, especially if he stands, notice how short his arms are in comparison to the rest of his body. It's kinda wierd. Must be a bitch buying suits off the rack.

ICN has picked up this juicy item. Link follows.

http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2008/01/14/playboy-seeks-balance-on-feedback-to-olbermann-interview/

Huffington Post picked it up as well. Here's sample comments: (nobody seem to get that the editors asked for a positive letter, so much for the brillance of HuffPo readers):

ThePhantom posted 05:34 pm on 01/14/2008
Olberman goes on and on and on about the real or imagined biases of Fox News.
But there is no one in all of American media who is more angry, bitter or slanted than Keith Olbermann himself.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/14/playboy-receives_n_81425.html

Wow, it gets better! Becky is accusing Olbermann Watch of being the anon tip to TVnewser. She say's she's NOT Katy Tur, (no kidding, fatass!)

"...As for where the aforementioned blogs picked up on this relatively obscure little fan site, I assure you their editors aren’t regular readers of Either Relevant or True. If you compare their pieces to what’s published on OlbermannWatch (no link, look it up yourself) you’ll find amazing similarities. So much for TVN’s emailer being “anonymous.” ..."

http://bloggingolbermann.com/2008/01/welcome-tvnewser-and-jossip-readers/#comments

Becky & others commenting on her Olberman fan blog seems to think that an editor from a National magazine asking for "letters to the editor" is somehow ethical.

Here's the jossip take:

But Playboy readers were offended, wrote in letters saying so. And Playboy editors wanted to keep their “Dear Playboy” page looking balanced, so they did a little recruiting and found “Becky Liebowitz,” the author of Either Relevant Or True, a Keith Olbermann fan blog, to write in.

Playboy let Liebowitz use her pseudonym, which it didn’t inform its readers about. Good thing people read Playboy for the articles, not for the letters page.

http://www.jossip.com/lad-mag-makes-ethical-laspe-20080114/

So the argument among some Olbermann fans is that Playboy's action was necessary because the response Playboy got to the Olbermann interview was engineered? By who? Olbermann Watch?

I don't know, but asking for "letters to the editor" is just wrong. Brandon, you make a very good point, if this concerned Bill O'Reilly the libs would be screaming to the hills.

I don't know, but asking for "letters to the editor" is just wrong. Brandon, you make a very good point, if this concerned Bill O'Reilly the libs would be screaming to the hills.

Posted by: Sally at January 14, 2008 7:30 PM

and aren't there any Bunnies who know who Keith is?...

They don't mind shilling or whoring themselves for Olbermann, literally. and no, they can't see anything wrong with soliciting the letters just as they can't see anything wrong with Olbermann's "newscasts".

> I don't know, but asking for "letters to the editor" is just wrong. Brandon, you make a very good point, if this concerned Bill O'Reilly the libs would be screaming to the hills.

You are so right. In fact if this involved anyone from Fox, or Lou Dobbs, or even Anderson Cooper, KO would be all over the story. Then he'd have to have a guest on echoing his ridcule because he would need to hear his opinion parroted back to him.

> Why would the Playboy editor contact only Becky at ERT for a letter or comment?

What about the people who run the other KO fan sites and boards? They certainly don't keep a low profile. Did he find Becky more objective than the others? Just wondering.

Gotta wonder if Olbermann directed the editor there. Sounds like he knew he'd get a response from her, but I can't believe he wouldn't from the others, too. That guy who runs the one site would whore himself to get his name out there. But then again, why didn't he just get one of those laughing stagehands to write one.

O'lielly - what's your problem with gays?

Yes the Olbyloons believe it was an orchestrated write-in campaign by mysterious right-wing groups led by Olbermannwatch. Proof? None. And no, they don't see a thing in the world wrong with the editor soliciting the letter from a fan site or ensuring their anonymity without revealing it to their readers. Fortunately, quite a few people in the media seemed to have a problem with it and that's why they picked up on this latest bit of weirdness from the Olby aiders and abetters.

Things, I wouldn't expect a loon to come up with anything original.

I am so glad that the overwhelming opinion on KO was negative. It is hard to imagine that from a publication like Playboy..

Not exactly a periodical of the religious right..

For the brief moments I actually watch the show, he is always bashing someone who does not attend the church of liberalism..

Just tonight it was Jonah Goldberg...

And while I cannot confirm it, he probably did take his (Jonah's) new book about Liberal facism out of context.

Naturally, he is this weeks worse person in the world..

Jonah has more intelligence in his little finger, then KO has in his entire head of gray hair...

Another thing about the "KO show" that is particularly annoying is the fact that he never has anyone of desenting opinion..

Ever..

The lack of balance is staggering.

I guess all these points are moot, but I just am perplexed that this program has not yet gone the way of Donohue yet.

By not having any decenting voices or opinions on his show, KO is doing the very thing he accuses the right wing of doing..

Closing down the voices of decent..

Robert C.

You people fear Keith Olbermann. You people are obsessed with Keith Olbermann. You people need to take a look in the mirror and study the look that is being reflected back at you and try to find who is in fact inside of you. Because you aren't being yourselves. If you were, you wouldn't be watching his show. I can't stand Lou Dobbs, so guess what? I don't watch his show. Seems pretty easy to me.

And the most amusing thing I find on this ridiculous site is the fact that most of the Fox bums you give audio of, don't call him by name. That is so weak. They fear Keith.

And the spin that exists on here is also amusing. I feel sorry for you people.

A lot of Bush votes around these parts. Sad, really.

You know it's fascinating to me to see that the Olbyloons are now discounting Playboy magazine. Funny, they were just tickled pink when Playboy decided to profile Olbermann and now they think the magazine is a piece of crap all of a sudden?

Oh and widely-spaced Anonymous? JD would hardly be able to do write-ups of every show if he didn't watch now could he? But keep on telling yourself the great fairy tale that Olbermann tells the truth, despite his well-documented lies, and now that he's blogging for Daily Kos, well there goes any notion of objectivity he might have once tried to hold on to a pretense of having-oh wait-didn't he just tell a recent interviewer that he wasn't biased? Yeah, sure. Another great Olbermann lie.

"So, get down from your lofty soapbox....."

###
Mr. blank-FLUCKER (cue OLD SPICE jingle) pushes the poor souls off and jumps on up everytime he posts and yet chastises pontification......

He also runs 3 or 4 threads at a time.....jumping from soapbox to soapbox, right hand in mid-shirt....

The sildenafil citrate has multiple effects of him, I suppose....

So your support of Mr. Olbermann, in spite of your declaration that you do not watch his program often is somehow different than those who proclaim not to watch his program here who do not like him how exactly? Oh right, logic, facts, those little things never get in your way-or Olbermann's.

Beer and chips... everyone!...

The Hillary "spade work" incident":
Posted by: Anyone But Hillary at January 14, 2008 3:38 PM

Why do you RWer's work so hard at denouncing Hillary Clinton if you think she'll be so easy to beat in the national election?
Or do you ?
Or maybe you just can't help yourself with your hatred for all things Clinton. Either way, you look pretty foolish.

Posted by: Things that make you go hhmmmmmm at January 14, 2008 10:52 PM

Moron, before you assume anything, I am a registered Democrat. And yes, my biggest fear is that she will be the nomination and WILL BE DEFEATED by the repubs. Why do you think Fox & other high profile repubs are suddently on the Hillary bandwagon. She & her campaign have been race-baiting worse than any repubs I've seen. This comment was made on the TODAY show, with 5 milliion + viewers. Don't tell me show couldn't come up with a better word than SPADE. Trust me, that was NO accident.

Obama, Edwards, Kucinich or Bloomberg(if necessary) in '08

and aren't there any Bunnies who know who Keith is?...
Posted by: Cecelia at January 14, 2008 7:41 PM

too funny.

A Keith Olbermann groupie blames rabid Fox News nuts for a rash of letters to Playboy protesting the girlie mag's interview with Olbermann. Why? Olbermann bloviated that Fox News was "worse than al Qaeda."

In what way? Training clueless chicks for on-air suicide missions?

I suspect the anonymous Olbermann Orgasmatron with the nom de guerre "Becky Liebowitz" is none other that Keith's live-in squeeze who could be the 48-year-old's daughter: the early twenties tart Katy Tur serving her monied sugar daddy master in more ways than just the eponymous bloggingolbermann.com.

http://chickaboomer.blogspot.com/2008/01/blowingolbermanncom.html

and from The Post....

KEITH RAVINGS RATTLE PLAYBOY

January 15, 2008 -- READERS of Playboy were so disgusted by the idiotic rantings of MSNBC loudmouth Keith Olbermann in the October issue, editor Chip Rowe tried to balance their vitriol by getting the head of an Olbermann fan site to pen a gushing note to run along with all the negative opinions. "He said that they were getting overwhelmingly negative response on the interview - mostly for the [anti-Fox News] remarks . . . that he'd like to balance that," says BloggingOlbermann.com founder Becky, who goes by her first name for privacy reasons, but was allowed to use the fake name "Becky Leibowitz" on Playboy's letters page. (Olbermann told Playboy: "Fox News is worse than Al-Qaeda - worse for our society.") Among the many angry letters in the January issue: "Olbermann deserves his own Worst Person award for not allowing anyone on his show who disagrees with him." Another slammed him as "frustrated, envious and unfocused."

http://www.nypost.com/seven/01152008/gossip/pagesix/keith_ravings_rattle_playboy_972526.htm

and another from Gawker, I included an intelligent commet:

'Playboy' Begs For Naked Olbermann Praise

In the October Playboy, Keith Olbermann called Fox News "worse than Al Qaeda." The letters page in this month's Playboy "is littered with negative reaction to the Olbermann interview," according to TVNewser. Except for the positive one Playboy editor Chip Rowe solicited from the lady who runs an Olbermann fan site! The letter's author blogged about it, possibly unaware that she was embarrassing the respected titty mag.

-------------------------
Here is the comment:

BY MORDECAI1908 AT 12:21 AM As a liberal, a Playboy subscriber (yes, we still exist) and a former guest on "Countdown," I'm very troubled by this revelation - even though I know that this most likely has happened before at both Playboy and other publications of all sorts of genres and political affiliations. If a segment of an issue gets 99 percent negative (or positive) feedback and said pub has a letters section, then it's not the job of the editors to balance things out with solicited missives for the sake of appearances. That's bad mojo, and it can come back to bite you on the ass - like it has now for Playboy

http://gawker.com/344725/playboy-begs-for-naked-olbermann-praise

newsbuster is having a field day with this one:

Playboy Seeks Keith Olbermann Lover to Stem Tide of Hate Mail

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2008/01/14/playboy-seeks-keith-olbermann-lover-stem-tide-hate-mail

The gift that keeps on giving, Playboy, Olbermann & his fan blogs are becoming laughing stocks:

Idle Chatter: Olbermann, Nikki Finke, 'GMA'

Playboy tried to offset the voluminous negative mail it received over its Keith Olbermann Q&A by soliciting a sympathetic response from an Olbermann partisan.

http://www.portfolio.com/views/blogs/mixed-media/2008/01/15/idle-chatter-olbermann-nikki-finke-gma

A n o n y m o u s has really hit the nail on the head in his post at 8:31 am. The people of the South and in Utah especially have continually demonstrated their intellectual, cultural and social inferiority to the elite here in the the Notheast. In fact, it is our birthright, our duty to confer our learned customs and reasoning processes upon the lower echelons of society, a noblesse oblige if you will.

Naturally, this takes time and is not readily achievable. And there is an increasing sentiment among the tenured Ivy League academicians with whom I share cocktails on a weekly basis that we should simply cease our benevolent efforts to civilize these lesser neighbors and to work instead to bring about governence that reflects our enlightened world view and those who haven't evolved to our level will simply have to accept our will.

Some will recoil at this notion. Some will say we are being condescending and paternalistic. Some will say we are only seeking to concentrate power. However, we cannot be detered by such misguded interpretations. We rest comfortably because we know our actions are simply a reflection of our pure motives, to share with those not as gifted as we are our superior minds and abilities, to bring about the greater good, to choose those who are most able to bear the sacrifice, to restrain the baser impulses and passions of the individual for the more noble and purer inclinations of the collective.

Hopefully, more like minded writers such as A n o n y m o u s will join our compassionate mission (provide we deem you worthy of our standards).

"Hopefully, more like minded writers such as A n o n y m o u s will join our compassionate mission (provide we deem you worthy of our standards)"

###
Standards?.....Well we already know a few.....

Caucasian only
Secularist only
Taste for foreign beers only

Would you like Miracle Whip or lard on your grits, Hayseed?

###
Oh another standard......

Taste for Dijon Mustard only

Personally, I am grateful for views such as those of a n o n y m o u s. He understands that only the cultured and those of proper breeding are meant to lead our people. His post at 8:31 is the most sensible thing Teresa and I have read in a long time-- Southerners and those from Utah are simply unfit to for positions of leadership. They need to be told what to do because they don't have the advntages and wisdom that my kind have. a n o n y m o u s understands this and I respect his insights into what people from the South and from Utah are like.

As long as your side keeps running candidates who do our work for us, as Obama and Clinton slug it out, no, I'm not worried in the least. But Anonymous, let's be clear-it is your presumption that there are people here who never watch Olbermann. You have zero proof that is true unless a poster has flat-out stated they do not watch. So what do you propose? Banning them from commenting unless they do? I'd like to ban those of you who come here to discuss something other than Olbermann and post the same boring (and usually factually incorrect "news" article) in multiple subject threads.

Now back to the subject at hand. The item regarding Playboy's blatant attempt at bolstering Olbermann's image has made news blogs and websites all over the internet. And even though the hapless fan admits she used a fake name to publish her little fan love letter to Olbermann, his fans still don't get why the actions of both the Playboy editorial staff and the love-struck loonie were wrong. I suspect that if the Democrats got caught winning an election based on voter fraud, you'd stand up and say there was nothing wrong with it because it was "providing balance" and "hey, but so and so did. . " defense.

I'm sure the truths we point out to you about Olbermann's lies are indeed disturbing to your belief system. But perhaps you should take up Olbermann and his aiders and abetters policies of lying habitually with them before you attempt to slay dragons here.

So let me see if I have this straight: the stupid bitch at Blogging Olbermann is pissed because all these articles use the same language? Why shouldn't they? They are quoting her. What did she want them to do? Make shit up? I thought she and Olbermann already had that covered.

Google

Google

Excuse me for missing the entire "Redacted" business. In the last few months I've had a death in the family and have not been able to pay sufficent attention to this blog due to those family obligations. But perhaps your time would be better spent at a non-Olbermann blog where you could post your off-topic rants to your heart's content. You certainly don't seem to want to indulge in any on-topic discussions and you seem to think, as all good Olbyloons do that you will somehow induce us to your way of thinking. How's that working for you so far? As well as Olbermann's ratings are going I see.

> I am simply not interested in Olbermann.

Then why do you come to this site, blah blah blah yada yada?

What is the purpose of coming to a site that you claim not be to interested in? Since that would make you a textbook example of a troll, would it not? One reason might be to serve as a troll, disrupt conversations and stir up the muddy waters just for the diseased fun you get out of it. Or maybe, just maybe, it's because you really ARE interested in Olbermann, and the only way you can defend him is to constantly try to get the site's attention away from Olbermann and onto something--anything--that will distract from the infamous deplorable one and his bias and lies.

No matter what your real purpose may be, one thing is clear: you spend an inordinate amount of time at a website that discusses something you claim to have no interest in. Extremely bizarre.

Posted by: johnny dollar at January 15, 2008 3:42 PM

For my part, I've always openly declared my status as troll. While I appreciate the show and its unique perspectives (for TV, anyway), its probably been two months since I've watched Countdown, and I care nothing about your sniping at Olbermann's hips, hair, and contractual ups and downs; I come here to harass you all because of what your hatred of Olbermann reveals about your political views/brainless allegiences. In general, I've found that an Olbermann hater is a knee-jerk supporter/facilitator of the Bush administration's crimes against America, and as such someone to be ridiculed and exposed as a moron at every opportunity.

Oh well, sometimes we're on subject.....sometimes we're trolls.....I like this off subject story for two reasons....

1) It will irritate the vain Keith Olbermann

2) It will give comfort to the elitist Mr. blank-FLUCKER (cue OLD SPICE jingle) because it once again support his low opinion of the uneducated population of the country....

Bill O'Reilly Makes Harris Poll's Favorite TV Star List

FNC's Bill O'Reilly is the only person from the TV news world to make The Harris Poll's 2008 favorite television star list, coming in at number eight. Ellen DeGeneres is #1.

It's the seventh time in a row O'Reilly has made the top ten (he was #3 last year). The polling also shows he is the most popular TV figure of respondents identifying themselves as Republican, and he ties with Oprah Winfrey as the most favored star of the "Matures (62+)" set.

http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/fnc/bill_oreilly_makes_harris_polls_favorite_tv_star_list_75036.asp

###
So popularity polls tell us something about the people.....Back to the thread subject....

I have seen anony 'swooning' over Olbermahn in the past. Commenting on how great his show was, at least parts of it. I have come to know her as a closet olbyloon. Nothing more nothing less. She is very careful to not come out and actually directly defend him in her own clever little ways. I must say it very entertaining to observe.

I am not sure why blogs and other reports are saying the Letters to the Editors response to Keith's Playboy interview was "overwhelmingly" negative.

If they were so desperate for a positive letter they stooped to soliciting one from a hand-picked Olbermann fan like our old friend Becky it would suggest to me that they had the response was ENTIRELY NEGATIVE.

Editors rarely publish EVERY letter they get so the fact they published so many NEGATIVE letters suggests to me that Playboy got a ton of negative letters and not a single positive one.

I come here to harass you all because of what your hatred of Olbermann reveals about your political views/brainless allegiences. In general, I've found that an Olbermann hater is a knee-jerk supporter/facilitator of the Bush administration's crimes against America, and as such someone to be ridiculed and exposed as a moron at every opportunity.
Posted by: Sir Loin of Beef at January 15, 2008 3:51 PM

You know the old adage, folks-- starve a troll, feed a Clear Thinker...

KatyTur's Skills

Lighting
Camera
Editing
Directing
Graphics
Sound
Producing
Promoting

http://current.com/people/KatyTur?start=10&len=10

perhaps, giving good head and buying shoes using boyfriend's credit card, should be added to her "skills" list....tehe

Editors rarely publish EVERY letter they get so the fact they published so many NEGATIVE letters suggests to me that Playboy got a ton of negative letters and not a single positive one.

Posted by: Robert Cox at January 15, 2008 6:05 PM

From what I've read, folks seem to attribute that to the fact that Playboy readers are largely conservatives.

This maybe be true, there are a lot of "conservatives" who aren't social conservatives, such as libertarians and "green-eye shade conservatives.

What I think is being ignored is that MOST people do NOT cringe at a comparison of a free and open news outlet with terrorists, be they AQ or the KKK?

No matter their political beliefs, how many people do NOT find anyone capable of THAT suggestion to be extremely disturbing?

Playboy saw how many...

BTW, if Olbermann thinks FNC is conservative and that they disseminate conservatives ideas and this is harmful and dangerous to our society in the way that armed conflict would be, that's what he's saying about conservatives and modern day conservatism, folks.

I meant that people DO cringe, rather.

I don't think RK understands analogies. Might try a different tactic.

I suggest a skillet over his head; Although I shrink at the thought of the damage to your skillet. It has a better chance than an analogy ever will.

Posted by: at January 15, 2008 5:59 PM

KatyTur's Skills

Lighting
Camera
Editing
Directing
Graphics
Sound
Producing
Promoting

http://current.com/people/KatyTur?start=10&len=10

perhaps, giving good head and buying shoes using boyfriend's credit card, should be added to her "skills" list....tehe

Posted by: at January 15, 2008 6:22 PM

Given Mr. Qadir’s assessment of Iraq’s military capabilities on Monday, such a withdrawal appeared to be quite distant, and further away than any American officials have previously stated in public.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/15/world/middleeast/15military.html?hp

Posted by: President Bush has never given a date for a military withdrawal from Iraq at January 15, 2008 8:41 PM

That's Bushs fault? What ever you do, keep your face buried deep in those far left hate sites. It's doing wonders for your already fried brain.

This site is worse than Fox News. You distort the facts to the fullest degree. Fair and Balanced is the biggest joke in news, and OlbermannWatch is the biggest joke of a internet watch group. You say Keith lies, but your back up information holds no credibility. You say he lied about the Major Garrett report, but somehow I think you distorted that also. Paul Begala also reported in a blog on how Fox refused to tell the people that he denied the report. Which leads me to believe that in fact Fox news reported all this after Keith and Paul made this voice heard. Why? So Fox can feed this bullshit to you yuppies, because they know you will happily lap it up. Sad, really.

Bill O'Reilly, John Gibson, Brit Hume, Rush Limbaugh...

and Keith Olbermann is the problem?

Wake the fuck up people!

I seem to recall that the Olbermann Watch post on this topic had video of both MO and Major Garrett which, everywhere except on OlbyPlanet would constitute facts in evidence.

Being a typical tinfoil hatter, "What at" tees up his next excuse which is the video of Major Garrett was IN RESPONSE TO Keith's "reporting". There are services that will allow you to pull up the transcripts from independent sources like LEXIS/NEXIS. You are more than welcome to fact-check those videos at which point you will learn for yourself that your hero once again lied,was caught out on it here on this site, and has refused to correct the record.

I know it is hard to comprehend the notion that Bill O'Reilly being wrong all the time (your view, not mine) does not make Keith right. Deal with it. Your guy is a hack.

"You and Johnny 2 bits would love that. To have a 100% 24/7 KO hate site. Too bad we keep throwing a monkey wrench into your little hate party. We make sure you are made fully aware of the failings of your party and your side in general."

My party? I'm a Dem. You make a lot of false generalizations here. I come to OW to trash that idiot Olbermann. If you think your trolling interferes with that you are again mistaken - it actually fuels the fires. Keep up the good work.

You and Johnny 2 bits would love that. To have a 100% 24/7 KO hate site.
Too bad we keep throwing a monkey wrench into your little hate party.
We make sure you are made fully aware of the failings of your party and your side in general.

Posted by: at January 15, 2008 8:21 PM

You don't really inform or impede anyone here, but just for the record, don't you think your words reveal who really harbors "hate" in their heart?

We may be critiquing Keith Olbermann and his show, but we aren't trying to hijack News Hole or Huffington Post.

However, when the views conflict with your own opinions, you can't allow people to merely express them without attempting to commandeer their conversation and foisting what you feel is the "truth" upon them.

Damn! James Dobson doesn't do that... Neocons at the Weekly Standard don't do that....

If there's anyone who's a hateful control freak, it's you...

What at said "You say he lied about the Major Garrett report, but somehow I think you distorted that also. Paul Begala also reported in a blog on how Fox refused to tell the people that he denied the report. Which leads me to believe that in fact Fox news reported all this after Keith and Paul made this voice heard."

You think and believe wrong. I had already seen Major Garrett's comments before Keith's show.

You and Johnny 2 bits would love that. To have a 100% 24/7 KO hate site.
Too bad we keep throwing a monkey wrench into your little hate party.
We make sure you are made fully aware of the failings of your party and your side in general.

Posted by:why/patsy at January 15, 2008 8:21 PM

You don't really inform or impede anyone here, but just for the record, don't you think your words reveal who really harbors "hate" in their heart?

We may be critiquing Keith Olbermann and his show, but we aren't trying to hijack News Hole or Huffington Post.

posted by Cecelia

Great point, Cecelia. I sure hope you don't expect a raving lunatic to understand or comprehend it. I used to post at the huffer, but I stopped. I didn't make off topic posts or anything that even come close to what this ass hat does here. Admitting to coming here solely to disrupt, just like slob admitted to is as low as it gets.

Do you ever ask yourself why things are so bad for you now ?
Maybe it's Olbermann's fault !

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah

Posted by:total loser at January 15, 2008 10:57 PM

Find one post where I have said things are bad for me. Yea, right. Just like I said Thompson will win the presidency. Just one of your hundreds of lies.

Only you would think such nonsense.
By reminding you how your republican revolution has failed is "hate"?
By bringing you the news on a daily basis that you avoid or don't want to hear is "hate"?
I think you and your little midget hiding under your skirt( RK) have big problems.Emotional and political.

Dancing on your graves is very rewarding and so much fun !

If this Olbermann hatefest makes you feel better, than knock yourself out.
It's all you got!
And you and I know it ain't much.

Posted by: at January 15, 2008 11:02 PM

Now how could anyone get an impression of hatred from you...

Admitting to coming here solely to disrupt, just like slob admitted to is as low as it gets.
Posted by: royal king at January 15, 2008 10:47 PM

Sure that's "as low as it gets".

Lower, apparently, than providing partisan cover for hirelings of your fetish/president when they gang-rape and kidnap their young female co-workers.

We may be critiquing Keith Olbermann and his show, but we aren't trying to hijack News Hole or Huffington Post.

posted by Cecelia

No, but your racist, fascist cult is trying to hijack our country, and is very close to succeding.

I come here and agitate simply to verify for my own awareness that Cheney's footsoldiers are really just a bunch of vapid morons. It gives me the hope and energy I need to effectively canvas actual Americans who possess the capacity for rational thought.

No, but your racist, fascist cult is trying to hijack our country, and is very close to succeding.

I come here and agitate simply to verify for my own awareness that Cheney's footsoldiers are really just a bunch of vapid morons. It gives me the hope and energy I need to effectively canvas actual Americans who possess the capacity for rational thought.

Posted by: Sir Loin of Beef at January 16, 2008 6:50 AM

Actually, what you refer to as "hijacking" was the results of two elections.

You may not agree with the policies, believe all sorts of criminality took place, but that doesn't excuse you from acting in a way that is really an attempt, not to join in a conversation, but to commandeer it.

I'd wager that in your "canvasing" of Americans, you don't go into bars, churches, clubs and demand that the people there stop talking about the things you deem unimportant and start discussing what you want to talk about.

The dynamics of real life are certainly different from those you can get away with on a blog board, but the actions in the cyber arena are probably more indicative of who you are.

I'd wager that in your "canvasing" of Americans, you don't go into bars, churches, clubs and demand that the people there stop talking about the things you deem unimportant and start discussing what you want to talk about.

Posted by: Cecelia at January 16, 2008 7:39 AM

The "troll" whining is a pretty strong theme here lately on many threads. Its a sure sign that the bleeding-heart fascists are in despair from mounting their hopeless, shifting straw-man arguments.

"I come here and agitate......"

Lucy Van Pelt 6:43AM

###
Well, as someone who posts off subject at times, I understand the temptation to try to turn the conversation to a subject I find more interesting.

Cecelia does have a good point about putting the activity in perspective....The screaming man on the corner trying to get across his worry about the end of the world comes to mind....I especially enjoy when some name changer takes another Christian's words out of context and assigns "PhariCee" or "PASTOR DUMBF*CK" to the quote as if screaming the quote will "agitate" me into giving a new sermon.

I try to see Olbermann's behavior and speech in the context it is in.....the created partisan struggle on the MSNBC side to "balance" FOXNews.....But the marketing of MSNBC is that it is an objective organiztion and trustworthy sister of the historically respected NBC NEWS. That is an aspect of the situation that must be addressed, exposed and documented regularly....I thank Mr. Cox and J$ and the rest who keep OW going for doing that job.

Well.....for me the radical left's hate speech is the problem and that leads to all of the anti-religious bigotry that is the festering abscess on the radical left because Olbermann advocates for that bundle of pus.....The philosophy of the fanatic secular left as supported by the modern day democratic party does lead me to respond....and the trolls like Mr. blank-FLUCKER (cue OLD SPICE jingle) and Lucy (SLOB) are representing their vapid worldview well currently....At other times there were others (somewhat more respectful and thoughtful) and I have had long debates with them as well.

Freedom of speech on this site is explempary and compare it to leftist sites that totally squash such free exchange. Another aspect of the radical left that does not allow alternative thought to the accepted opinion.

See the results even when I am NOT trying to agitate the fringe left.....9:05 AM times two.....wow!

Fringe poster #1....wannawipe: The answer to your question, "Just how in the fuck idiots like Bovine, Phallu-Cee and the FreePers exist in the XXIst century?" is very simple....

freedom....And it applies to your spew as well...Be very thankful for it and think about defending it for all of us.

Fringe poster #2......Mr. blank-FUCKER (cue OLD SPICE jingle): I know your opinion of the masses, Mr. Stromberg...the underwater utopia is impractical. Secondly, when you ever get around to attempting a response to my accusations regarding the far left's agenda, and the current avenue to accomplish it, I will consider you worthy.....Lastly, your posting continuously on a website dedicated to informing people about the biases of a self-proclaimed Murrowesque journalist defeats your last point.

He shoots and scores.

If you take away hate from the Olbyloons, they'd have nothing left in their lives. It's what keeps them going.

These are people who are secretly disappointed--hell, they aren't even secretive about it-when the war news isn't bad.

They also seem to be rather clueless about how and why a bad economy is bad for both parties.

Re the Major Garrett item, I guess transcripts and videos mean nothing to the Olbyloons, they'll just believe what Olbermann says, no questions asked and avoid any proof to the contrary of what he says. They simply can't bring themselves to believe he's lying to them, even when there is a plethora of proof which proves so.

wannawipe, I do not only complain about the left's demand that religious expression be stifled, but I abhor ANY ideology that limits the basic human right to freely choose what to say and what to believe. The person can be a fanatic on either pole of the political spectrum and I will confront their attempt to limit the free exchange of different ideas and beliefs.

To say that expressing belief in the supernatural and that He was the force that created the universe and the life it contains is wrong and must be limited is just as dangerous as limiting the free exchange of any idea. I am sorry that reality shows attempt after attempt of an elite minority limiting the challenge to secularist dogma, but it is there and infringing on the majority's right to express their beliefs without hindrance or shame.

Again, like Mr. blank-FLUCKER (cue OLD SPICE jingle), when you want to seriously discuss the topic, I am willing and able...but if you are going to continue with the anti-religious hate speech, I would rather pass...I do not like to encourage bigotry.

Selective use of God's commands (and not even accurately, I might add).....Hey wannawipe, should I follow what Christ commanded here as well?......

"Woe to you, Korazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago, sitting in sackcloth and ashes. But it will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon at the judgment than for you. And you, Capernaum, will you be lifted up to the skies? No, you will go down to the depths.

"He who listens to you listens to me; he who rejects you rejects me; but he who rejects me rejects him who sent me."

"The seventy-two returned with joy and said, "Lord, even the demons submit to us in your name."

"He replied, "I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven. I have given you authority to trample on snakes and scorpions and to overcome all the power of the enemy; nothing will harm you. However, do not rejoice that the spirits submit to you, but rejoice that your names are written in heaven.

"At that time Jesus, full of joy through the Holy Spirit, said, "I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children. Yes, Father, for this was your good pleasure. All things have been committed to me by my Father. No one knows who the Son is except the Father, and no one knows who the Father is except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him."

"Then he turned to his disciples and said privately, "Blessed are the eyes that see what you see. For I tell you that many prophets and kings wanted to see what you see but did not see it, and to hear what you hear but did not hear it."

###
A bit of a loon, hey wannawipe?.....Satan, serpents, scorpions, demons, etc?.....Why should we all ignore Christ here in Luke 10 yet take His advice from your misquoted and misinformed use of Matthew 22?

The "troll" whining is a pretty strong theme here lately on many threads. Its a sure sign that the bleeding-heart fascists are in despair from mounting their hopeless, shifting straw-man arguments.

Posted by: Sir Loin of Beef at January 16, 2008 8:13 AM

Do yourself a favor, hack. Go to the search box and type in "mike troll" and you will see who really cries "troll." Didn't see those posts, did ya? Funny, I don't recall you calling him an "olbyloon in despair from mounting his hopeless, shifting straw-man arguments!" Shocker....

"I do not only complain about the left's demand that religious expression be stifled, but I abhor ANY ideology that limits the basic human right to freely choose what to say and what to believe. The person can be a fanatic on either pole of the political spectrum and I will confront their attempt to limit the free exchange of different ideas and beliefs.

To say that expressing belief in the supernatural and that He was the force that created the universe and the life it contains is wrong and must be limited is just as dangerous as limiting the free exchange of any idea. I am sorry that reality shows attempt after attempt of an elite minority limiting the challenge to secularist dogma, but it is there and infringing on the majority's right to express their beliefs without hindrance or shame.

Posted by: cee at January 16, 2008 11:04 AM

....so you would support the demands that the gospel of the Pastafarians be taught in our schools right alongside the Christian creation perspective? If so; you should visit the following site and lend your support to their effots to extend the sort of free speech you are talking about (i.e. enshrined as curriculum in our public schools) to these particular believers.

http://www.venganza.org/

They need help, as their efforts to get their cosmology represented in our public schools' science classes have resulted in several instances in creationism of any brand being cut out entirely.

http://www.venganza.org/

...and also implied in your post is your unwavering support for the dogma of Satanism, Wicca, and a range of animist epistemologies to be standard fare in in our children's classrooms.

You can make fun of me as much as you want, wannawipe.....no sin or problem there and I have a thick skinI am just trying to pin you down on how you come to embrace one part of scripture and reject other parts? Why is Christ a wise man with good, rational advice in Matthew and not so in Luke, or John when he discusses Adam and Eve, Jonah and Moses?

A rational, logical discussion using the scriptures is possible when I know how you are approaching it.

No Lucy....now that we have such a wide variety of beliefs in our country, I want to eliminate the federal government forced monopoly on funded primary education and allow parents to choose where their children attend school. School vouchers that allow people to go to any school they want, as long as the basics of reading, writing, math skills, historical and civic knowledge, basic scientific knowledge, athletic and musical/artistic opportunities are required.

Indoctrination on theories on the origins of life in the universe and whether there is a supernatural should be freely allowed to be taught and funded by government funds....there is no constitutional issue if a particular religion is supported by the government over another.

Why is this not allowed? Why are public schools the only bastion of fully funded education while they teach a particular worldview?

"and also implied in your post is your unwavering support for the dogma of Satanism, Wicca, and a range of animist epistemologies to be standard fare in in our children's classrooms."

###
If someone wants to open a school and they garner students to teach such things....great....I would not hinder a parent's right to teach their children what they think they should learn....The only practical solution is no more mandatory public school funding and giving the parents choice and funds to send their children where they choose.

Chip Rowe, editor at Playboy, defends his asking Keith Olbermann Fan to write positve letter (as reported on ERT by Becky (the fan):

Chip Rowe on the Playboy Blog:

Two quick points: (1) I didn’t tell her to make her letter “gushing.” In fact, she wrote a smart response and we were glad to have it. I try to include a variety of views in the letters pages because I know from experience that people who agree with something are less likely to write–and this is born out by the fact we have since gotten letters from K.O. lovers who can’t believe all the K.O. haters who wrote. (2) Anyone who actually reads Playboy–rather than just posting snide comments about it (that “for the articles” joke is so clever! More, please)–can’t be too surprised. We have invited experts who might not otherwise see the magazine to comment, in whatever way they see fit, in our letters pages since the 1960s. It makes for a more spirited debate.

There you have it.

Boy, these past two days have made me weary. I mentioned to Stef that it might fall under “Be careful what you wish for,” but she thought “OH GOD WTF NO SRSLY EVERYONE, WTF” suited the situation better. I think she’s right.

posted by Becky on Tuesday, January 15, 2008 @ 7:38 pm

Here's his Playboy blog and comments. Please let him know how totally stupid he is:

http://www.playboy.com/blog/2008/01/letters.html#comments

Better yet - the loons are already plotting to flood publications with letters -

from the loon nest

GM: Honestly, in hindsight, I wish we would have written supportive Keith letters to Playboy. At least we now know what to do in the future.

Becky: As for letters to magazines, there’s that current issue of Men’s Journal on newsstands now!

Guess they're going to be busy in the future.

So let me get this straight. In the Olbyloon code of "ethics", it's okay to
1) find out the private email and website of a writer who criticizes Olbermann and harass them;
2) use a fake name to write a letter of praise to a magazine regarding their interview of Olbermann
3) extra bonus points if you get the editor to personally solicit you to write the said letter
4) start up a "positive" write-in campaign at every magazine that features Olbermann, whether or not it was a good article, just so long as they feature Olbermann to counter-act what you believe to be an organized write-in campaign by the "right", even when you can't provide one single iota of proof that such an organized campaign against him ever existed?

If you can answer "yes" to questions 1-4-then you're an Olbyloon Supreme.

What's the prize? A night in a cheap hotel with even cheaper wine with Olbermann?

And that has what to do exactly with Olbermann, playboy and his kooky fans? I'm pretty sure most of them are either frigid housefraus or over-the-hill virgins so maybe you might want to introduce them to the good preacher? Is that your point?