Robert,

Please stop asking softball questions......

Next time challenge us. ;)

Keiffy doesn't want to be Limbaugh. If the orangeman had a tenth of Rush's #'s he'd cream himself. Left-winged water carrying no talent hack.

Running full speed 3 nights in a row with a story in which no one has a shred of evidence to prove is not considered "beating people over the head?" Really, orangy?

"Our people are not in straitjackets," said Phil Griffin, NBC News' senior vice president in charge of MSNBC. "They speak openly; they're passionate. There's a liveliness and richness to the conversation that you don't see on CNN or Fox. Do we leave ourselves open a little more? Yeah. But I think it's part of our success."

So this guy is apparently saying that FoxNews is NOT all republican all the time...their not "open" about their views or policitics...boy I guess KO is being contradicted by his bosses again!

This piece should offically mark the end of any liberal complaining about FoxNews, because they admit their bias and partisanship.

So the next time KO (or anyone else) wants to belittle Fox News as a place simply for republican points of view and criticize it as a news outlet...they must simply be reminded that MSNBC is admittedly what they accuse the other guy of being!

By the way...Have you seen the libs tearing KO a new one on Huffpo over his knocking of Jon Stewart at the oscars?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/26/olbermann-what-was-jon-_n_88462.html

Keith's lies would dwarf both of the Clintons.

Keith's partisan views dwarf those of Pelosi and Reed.

Keith's bias dwarf those of Daily KOS and Media Matters.

Keith's smugness dwarfs that of Dan Rather.

Keith's view of the U.S. dwarfs that of Rosie O'donald

O'Reiley dwarfs Olbermann's numbers

President Bush dwarfs Mister Olbermann's intelligence

B**W JOB.

Great work, Butt Face!

Posted by: Seriously, Butt Face at February 27, 2008 11:15 AM

Can't keep you're mind off of work eh, ACCS?

Scary @ 11:33 AM: "they must simply reminded that MSNBC is admittedly what they accuse the other guy of being."

Nobody needs to be reminded of that because MSNBC 'liberal' bias is clearly nothing more than a backlash to Fox's Conservative bias that has been going on far longer...and in my opinion, MSNBC still is not nearly as 'left' as Fox is 'right'.

Mike from 1224-

It appears an MSNBC executive disagrees with you
"Our people are not in straitjackets," said Phil Griffin, NBC News' senior vice president in charge of MSNBC. "They speak openly; they're passionate. There's a liveliness and richness to the conversation that you don't see on CNN or Fox."

BTW just because MSNBC admits it it doesn't mean the same is true elsewhere...see the SNL skit that skewered CNN. IF your statement that it is only a reaction to Fox being on the right (which is a big IF), then you surely would have to give credence to those that say fox being right was a reaction to CNNABCCBSNBCNYTIMESNEWSWEEKTIME all being so left

A real conservative has passed away,, RIP William Buckley.... now if we can just get the neocons to follow suit..

Here is the LATimes fluff piece from yesterday (Robert's link above does not work):

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/tv/la-et-msnbc26feb26,1,4761432.story

...and in my opinion, MSNBC still is not nearly as 'left' as Fox is 'right'.

Posted by: Mike at February 27, 2008 12:24 PM

"You're wrong!"

The problem with o'lielly is that he thinks everyone right of HRC is a neocon...that and how the only thing he ever seems to do is wish death on people...must not be a very karmic person

Olbermann beats out O'Reilly for worst person in the world!

http://www.newslampoon.com/Worst cable news person.htm

Wonkette thinks Olbermann is lame too:

Post-Coital Liveblogging Of The Last (?) Hillary v. Obama Debate

"10:57 PM — Also, earlier, Keith Olbermann suggested that a Debate Drinking Game involves “taking a swig … of a soft drink.” And to that, we say: “You, sir, are fucking lame.”"

http://wonkette.com/361194/post+coital-liveblogging-of-the-last--hillary-v-obama-debate

Thanks, in advance, for agreeing that you are just chirping crap from a flop comedy movie.

Dispute this.

www.junkscience.com/

Not so smart, are ya? Shocker! By the way, if you want to see a real crapper go to www.watchingolbermannwatch.com! Enjoy!

patsy, head on over to the news hole and see if one of your posts even gets posted, let alone deleted! Check back, ok?

"10:57 PM — Also, earlier, Keith Olbermann suggested that a Debate Drinking Game involves “taking a swig … of a soft drink.” And to that, we say: “You, sir, are fucking lame.”"

There is no way Keith can have any alcohol with the cocktail of meds I have him on. It's hard enough to keep him under control as it is.

OS, thanks for the tip about Junk Science.

I always enjoy finding one site with links to so much original research in one easy to use page.

Grammie

PS Cee, if you've never gone there you might enjoy it too.

There is no way Keith can have any alcohol with the cocktail of meds I have him on. It's hard enough to keep him under control as it is.
Posted by: Dr. Fill at February 27, 2008 2:14 PM

LOL, my patients Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh seem to have leveled off with my drug cocktail perscriptions for them, and they still manage to get hammered before their shows.

and they still manage to get hammered before their shows.

Posted by: Dr. Feelgood at February 27, 2008 3:14 PM

Proof?

The difference is Bill and Rush weren't certifiable to begin with as is the case with Olby. Also, they both have shows that rank No.1! See the differences?

The difference is Bill and Rush weren't certifiable to begin with as is the case with Olby. Also, they both have shows that rank No.1! See the differences?
Posted by: Dr. Fill at February 27, 2008 3:33 PM

Ahhh true! I guess you better up his cocktail..hum, I mean perscription!

and they still manage to get hammered before their shows.
Posted by: Dr. Feelgood at February 27, 2008 3:14 PM

Proof?
Posted by: olby sucks at February 27, 2008 3:29 PM

hey, numbnuts, it's called sarcasm, you may want to try it sometime. With your name linking to NASCAR, I thought you already had a sense of humor, guess I was wrong.

Lets learn about names like Hussein, Barack, Omar, etc.:

http://www.juancole.com/2008/02/barack-hussein-obama-omar-bradley.html#comments

...and in my opinion, MSNBC still is not nearly as 'left' as Fox is 'right'.

---

True.

"and in my opinion, MSNBC still is not nearly as 'left' as Fox is 'right'."

From your perspective on the left, this would be true.

This is interesting, he seems to have dropped the mask for a second:

Olbermann: "I don't make the facts up to fit the political viewpoint that happens to parallel what it is I'm trying to express."

"Fit the political viewpoint.....I'm trying to express"?

I thought Keith had no viewpoint? He was, he claims, simply calling it the way it was with no concern on who won the game and who lost?

Well, some progress is being made; he admits he presents a "political viewpoint" and is not an objective, non- or apolitical news anchor.

'Course, the "facts" that he gets all come from liberal/left websites which provide only those facts which fit their agendas and philosophy (yes, conservative sites do the same thing).

"I don't make the facts up to fit the political viewpoint that happens to parallel what it is I'm trying to express."

No, I take it back. He didn't drop the mask; I mis-read/mis-understood the point.

"Happens to parallel" is the *out* here for Olbermann.

It sure seems odd that the political viewpoint that "happens" to parallel the point he is making always seems to be from the left.

Any counter-examples?

"After visiting junkscience.com, I decided to edit another one of my entries in Conservapedia"

This explains why conservapedia is so damn funny. keep the zingers coming RK!

Louis Farrakhan loves Barack Hussein Obama. Iranian State Media loves Olby. Looks like a pattern to me. Islamofascists and libnuts love each other.

just found this site. i have been ranting against keith for a while now form the LEFT side of things here: http://liberalrapture.com/
his love affair with Obama is revolting

In my opinion, MSNBC still is not nearly as 'left' as Fox is 'right'.

Posted by: Mike at February 27, 2008
12:24 PM

Say what? Are you serious? Despite actual studies that show that Fox News is the most fair news network, just open your eyes and you can see it for yourself. Every single day on MSNBC, they are making personal attacks against conservatives. Here's some examples:

"Nazi"
"Terrorist"
"Fascist"
"Criminal"
"Monkey"
"House Boy"
"Clown"
"Limp"
"Fat Ass"
"Ho"

Your hero, Keith Olbermann, gets his talking points straight from left wing websites. I challenge you to find one episode, just one, in which Keith Olbermann did not lift material from a left wing website. Not only does Keith get his talking points from them, he takes orders from them. Daily Kos wanted Keith to apologize to John Edwards, and he apologized right away. Daily Kos wanted Keith to do a "Special Comment" about FISA, and he did a "Special Comment" about FISA right away.

http://thumbsnap.com/v/PcGVUF08.jpg

The Farrakhan endorsement for Barack Hussein Obama is a gift to the GOP.

James, mike has apologised on olbermahns behalf for every single deplorable comment he has ever made. Defended him tooth and nail! Although, in all fairness, he has completely avoided one or 2 of them. It's always Bush's, Rush's, Savage's or Hannity's fault.

Apparently CD won in the demo last night because it was part of the pre-debate lineup. Did Olbermann brag about it yet? Surely it will be newsworthy in his mind and he'll have graphics and charts and give it several minutes.

Why is Royal King posting as Olby S***s? Is that allowed under the new order of things?

You wouldn't happen to know what tea is going for in china, would you?

Google

Google

Google

Tea in China? What blend?

Obama campaign mum on NAFTA contact with Canada
Updated Fri. Feb. 29 2008 12:32 PM ET

CTV.ca News Staff

Despite repeated requests, Barack Obama's campaign is still neither verifying nor denying a CTV report that a senior member of the team made contact with the Canadian government -- via the Chicago consulate general -- regarding comments Obama made about NAFTA.

A+ for diverting from anything and everything barockstar, former clinton backer/pa**y!

Together, they make quite the 'puppet show.'

I am so not gay.
My friends all call me a homophobe. I think gayness is totally disgusting.

The only people I would even consider being gay with are real smart people with good opinions. That makes them sexy. There aren't many of them either.

Off the top of my head the only ones I could think of are like Rush, Savage, Johnny Dollar, Robert Cox and Hannity.
And I probably would only blow them. The only one I'd let go NEAR my ass is Savage. I got a feeling he'd be a lot of fun.

Besides those examples, homosexuality makes me sick.

Besides those examples, homosexuality makes me sick.

Posted by: olby sucks at March 2, 2008 11:28 PM

We are entirely aware of that namejacker. Few things are more illustrative of political realities than the fact that so many liberals use homophobic imagery to insult political opponents.

Well, Cecelia, we all know you are a racist homophobe, Islamophobe, liberal bashing whiner, so you don't mind if we take any of you analysis with a rain of salt, I am sure.

Well, Cecelia, we all know you are a racist homophobe, Islamophobe, liberal bashing whiner, so you don't mind if we take any of you analysis with a rain of salt, I am sure.

Posted by: at March 3, 2008 2:03 AM

Actually, it's not surprising in the least that you'd reject the "analysis" that using homosexuality as a pejorative isn't any less disdainful of homosexuality merely because you've written it as a slur against a conservative. THAT realization would mean that you're more mature and insightful than a middle schooler, and you certainly aren't that...

Well, it's good you admitted you are a homophobe, Cecelia. First step and all that ....

Well, it's good you admitted you are a homophobe, Cecelia. First step and all that ....

Posted by: at March 3, 2008 2:17 PM

Well, it's good you admitted that you're an alcoholic and drug addict, as well, as a liberal... :D

Here is a conundrum for 2:03 above:

Rep. Harold Ford, Jr. (D-TN):

"I do not support the decision today reached by the New Jersey Supreme Court regarding gay marriage. I oppose gay marriage, and have voted twice in Congress to amend the United States Constitution to prohibit same-sex marriage. This November there's a referendum on the Tennessee ballot to ban same-sex marriage - I am voting for it."

So, if 2:03 supports Ford's position, he is a homophobe. If he opposes it, he is a racist.

(He also opposes partial birth abortion. What is Obama's position?)

Ford opposes

[Ford] also opposes partial birth abortion. What is Obama's position?

###
Easy one....a very radical, minority position has been taken by Senator Obama on life......

Nurse says Obama supports infanticide

"At the federal level, legislation was presented called the Born Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA) which stated all live-born babies were guaranteed the same constitutional right to equal protection, whether or not they were wanted.

"BAIPA sailed through the U.S. Senate by unanimous vote and by an overwhelming majority in the House. President Bush signed the bill into law in 2002.

"Stanek wrote that, 'in Illinois, the state version of BAIPA repeatedly failed, thanks in large part to then-state Sen. Barack Obama. It only passed in 2005, after Obama left.'

"'Obama articulately worried that legislation protecting live aborted babies might infringe on women's rights or abortionists' rights. Obama's clinical discourse, his lack of mercy, shocked me. I was naive back then. Obama voted against the measure, twice. It ultimately failed.'"

http://www.catholic.org/politics/story.php?id=26868

###
Even Roe v. Wade states viability is to be taken into account regarding the protection of infants and yet the radical Obama believes it is ok to allow infants to die if they survive the attempted abortion......

He is ONE Senator compared to the unanimous vote in the US Senate at the time, in 2002!

Infanticide! Obamessiah endorces infanticide!

Another good fact not readily available for the weepers and fainters.

John, you people keep claiming that Olbermann used to shill for Clinton at the expense of Obama, but no one has proven this claim yet.....it's nothing but talk.

As a long time Obama supporter, I have been challenging OW haters to back up this claim for months...long before Obama became competitive.....but all anyone ever does is keep making the same old claims without offering any examples.

As a long time Obama supporter, I would have been personally angered if I had seen any evidence from KO of a pro-Clinton, anti-Obama bias, but I never saw any.

The funny part is that these claims on this blog are all coming from those who dislike BOTH Clinton AND Obama.
Posted by: Mike at March 4, 2008 1:32 AM

Exactly. In other words, the claims that Olbermann was biased towards HRC, in the case of Olbermann, were coming from people who have no horse in the race.

Other claims of the same, were coming from people on the left.

There's not going to be "proof" enough for you. Short of Olbermann declaring himself to be biased towards Hillary, it's all going to be interpretative to you. Of course it all is that to an extent and no one wants to get into one of your endless circular arguments.

That argument is that you never saw any pro-Hillary bias and that it's obvious to everyone that he prefers Obama, therefore you're right and there never was any bias towards Hillary.

However, the fact that Olbermann is pro-Obama establishes that Olbermann is perfectly capable of cheerleading for one candidate or another. That his overt cheerleading will certainly be towards getting a Democrat elected to office is something he EXPRESSLY said in his blog on Daily Kos.

So it's perfectly plausible that when HRC was considered to the strongest candidate and the most likely choice to run for office, that Olbermann was treating her as he now treats Obama and this is what so many people on both the right and left picked up upon.

Coming from someone who did not have a Kucinich, an Edwards, a Biden, etc. in the race, its not only plausible, it's the way it went down.

Lord, Cecelia, you are the most close-minded person. The basest sort of innuendo, from the most unreliable sources will set your mind into the cerebral version of lock jaw. As long as some fruitcake says something you agree with you, your agreement being the sole criterion, you treat that information as Moses's tablets.

Wonderful ....

The Rev. Dr. Cee and Reverend Mother Sharon postulating on the beliefs and policies of an African American Democrat. Such sweet irony. Racist genocidists setting in judgment of someone for his supposed women's and reproductive rights stances. Do you have any good information on his policies with reference to condom usage to prevent transmission of STD's, or do you just put that all in the infanticide label.

The Rev. Dr. Cee and Reverend Mother Sharon: proof positive that the Dark Ages never ended.

Nice dodge of the conundrum. Racist genocidists? Which are you? Do you support Haold Ford, Jr.? If you don't, then you must be a racist according to your own reasoning. Abortion targets African Americans. I am sure you considered the link I posted concerning Planned Parenthood's willingness to accept donations on the condition that they support abortions of African American women. Once a flucker, always a flucker.

Anon is happy to have black babies die in hospital dirty utility rooms, along with Obamessiah.....

because this is the group that sees most ends of the abortionist's curretage....

And when the procedure goes wrong and a fetus exits the vagina into the bright world breathing and viable?......

We can interpret what "murder" is......and it becomes infanticide......

The Born-Alive Protection Act passed with all present US Senators in agreement and a huge majority in the House of Representatives.....Obamessiah decided to go another way and deem infanticide legal....

And anon can't handle it....resorts to silly, unsupported attacks instead of defedning Obamessiah's position....

Come on now, dear poster....defend him! A survivor of an abortion is what, now?.....The baby is born in a medical facility capable of saving his or her life and what should moral people do?.....

1) Comfort, save and allow the viable being a chance?

2) Allow the being to gasp for air in dirty linens until death comes?

The candidate of hope chooses #2......DEATH!

Indeed, I think it far more enlightened for the pregnancy to be terminated and the Mother to die at the hands of a back alley abortionist. What unmitigated gall the two of you have. Constantly pontificating as if you are prophets of some dark age long past or some even darker age to come.

And, Reverned Mother Sharon, don't you dare, don't you dare tell me I support or don't support someone based on his or her stance on a single issue. I strongly support (former) Rep. Ford, although I am not with him 100% on this particular end all issue for you. What hypocrisy! You'd vote for any Republican sober enough to sign the application to run. One of the great tragedies of the 2004 elections were that your racist brothers and sisters in Tennessee couldn't bring themselves to vote for this fine man. Instead, Tennessee and America end up with a ridiculous clown in the Senate, but, hey, white face and "R" behind the moniker. Your kind of guy!

Anon cannot stay on subject.....The born alive protection act would not even touch a woman's access to abortion services...it would only serve to protect babies that were viable after the abortion to receive medical care....this is consistent with Roe versus Wade and moral medical practice.

Obama chose to ignore both Roe v. Wade and morality when he chose to thwart the passage of The Born Alive Protection Act......Why? Because of his radical view that infants do not deserve constitutional rights....This is a new one and one WAYYYYYY out of the mainstream, anon.....

I look forward to discussing this stand in the future. Infants are without rights under what circumstances, Senator Obamessiah?

don't you dare, don't you dare tell me I support or don't support someone based on his or her stance on a single issue.

Oh the umbrage when the argument is thrown back in your face! You are such a pathetic loser.

"Indeed, I think it far more enlightened for the pregnancy to be terminated and the Mother to die at the hands of a back alley abortionist."

You would rather that Planned Parenthood make the money to curb the growth of the African American race.

Sharon, anon is so uninformed that his line of defense was not even tried by Obama.....Obama has basically lied about his opposition to the Illinois protection act to moderate his stand and has reversed himself saying he would have supported the federal law if he had been a US Senator then......

Anon is a fool who has no idea what he is talking about....Ignore the troll.

You are right. Trollology at work again.

Yes, fall back on the troll label to excuse your own disgusting racism. "Pathetic" thy name is Reverend Mother Sharon. How unfortunate we have people like you in our nation!

A vote against Obama is a vote for racism according to the world of Flucker at 11:26.

So true, 11:57....and McCain's stand on abortion is much closer to what the majority of Americans want.....

While Obama's support of infanticide is only held by the most radical of pro-abortion activists.

And don't forget, the republican platform has contained a reversal of Roe v. Wade plank for years now and darn it....republicans still get elected!

Will the democrats add a pro infanticide plank to their platform this year, anon, to make their candidate happy?.....

Will there be any speakers at the democratic national convention that are pro-life, anon, or will the litmus test remain?....

I know there will be different opinions expressed at the more open republican convention....pro-life and pro-abortion....

So right Rev. Dr. Cee. Republicans always support lively discussions on all points from A to A.

Actually Sharon, I am sure you wouldn't have any problem voting for an African-American, as long as HE were a Republican and you hadn't seen a picture of HIM.

Yes, differences of opinion are accepted in the republican party....just look at the wide variety of different policy positions we had in our presidential candidates from the war to abortion to gay marriage to economics.....

But the democrats....cookie cutter candidates that passed the litmus tests of radical pro-abortion philosophy, radical immediate withdrawl from Iraq stand, and Marxist stand on government control of our lives....to name the main tests.....

At least the republicans allow debate and democratic process in their party....we'll see what the dems come up with a la Clinton Co. still alive.....

Oh, and for those who have strong faith in a creator of our universe, not relying on the theory of natural selection as the only explaination for the abundant life we see on earth, the republican party also encourages such belief and does not demean or deride such thought....Unlike the democrat party and the elite leadership of secular leftists who also have the scarlet letter mentality when it comes to such issues.....

Lord, Cecelia, you are the most close-minded person. The basest sort of innuendo, from the most unreliable sources will set your mind into the cerebral version of lock jaw. As long as some fruitcake says something you agree with you, your agreement being the sole criterion, you treat that information as Moses's tablets.

Posted by: at March 4, 2008 9:50 AM

You never bother to read do you... My conclusions are based upon what I perceived when watching Countdown.

THAT certainly wouldn't be any more relevant to Mike than his would be to me, so I logically addressed the argument he had articulated-- that Olbermann isn't biased towards Hillary now..so it's likely that he never was.

Since you're given to hyperbole, histrionics, and cheapshot perjoratives of the worst sort in any "vibrant exchange of ideas", (not that there's heat in you, really-- just calculation) it's not surprising you'd never notice.

"Yes, fall back on the troll label to excuse your own disgusting racism."

You've already admitted to being nothing more than a troll, loser!

"Yes, fall back on the troll label to excuse your own disgusting racism."

You've already admitted to being nothing more than a troll, loser!
Posted by: olby sucks at March 4, 2008 12:53 PM

You have to marvel at the thinking of the troll here. It's quite entertaining that in the course of his argument that it is outrageous for Cee and Sharon to discuss the abortion stances of particular politicians, because THEY are themselves "racist genocidists".... that this troll would then argue that his being subsequently labeled a "troll" is nothing more than deflection maneuver!... :D

I am sure you wouldn't have any problem voting for an African-American, as long as HE were a Republican and you hadn't seen a picture of HIM.

Posted by: at March 4, 2008 12:37 PM

All the while you WOULD vote for OBL if he had a (d) after his name.

I am sure you wouldn't have any problem voting for an African-American, as long as HE were a Republican and you hadn't seen a picture of HIM.

Posted by: at March 4, 2008 12:37 PM

All the while you WOULD vote for OBL if he had a (d) after his name.
Posted by: olby sucks at March 4, 2008 1:16 PM

Trust me, it's not over yet and if HRC pulls it out, the "racist" epithet will be sent out to the cleaners... and "misogynist" or "brainwashed rightwing female" will be taken out as the new labels-in-lieu-of-argument.

OBL is not on the ballot, moron. I guess he could be, since Bush never caught him, but even if he were, I don't vote in California.

This thread is now closed!