I'm not surprised that KO and others blame Bush for Georgia after all they blame him for 9/11,falling bridges,earthquakes,hurricanes and tidalwaves so why not a invasion of Russian forces on Georgia.

Plus dose KO know anything about fact checking or is it he is so well protected at MSNBC that a little thing like false news reports attacking FOX are just viewed as part of his job? New Murrow indeed.

"Rip 'n' Read Olbermann." I love that.

The Factor: "Former Philadelphia Flyer and Norris Trophy winner Rachel Maddow..."

No, no, no! Why is that rumor still around. As soon as MzMad learned the real meanings of hooking, tripping, body check, hat trick, icing the puck, penalty box and Broad Street Bullies, she skedaddled out of the Wachovia Center and was immediately hired as a stunt double for Chuck Norris.

I got a kick out of olby's logic that Howard Wolfson isn't a democrat any more now that the appears on FOX News.

I see a Speshul Komment looming on the horizon. Live olby lost in the ratings Friday night to both an O'Reilly rerun and the rerun of the rerun.

Between Whatzhizname and Leverett (Larry) Flynt, they came up with quite a list of who's responsible for the Russian invasion of Georgia:
Bush, Cheney, McCain (where have I heard that mantra before), Cheney, McCain, Bush, McCain, uhhhh, McCain and presumptuous McCain.

Somehow, in this list of those responsible for the Russian invasion of Georgia, Whatzhizname and L.L. Flynt failed to mention Russia.

Just wondering, is Pravda hiring?

I don't think that KO understands that if you become too lazy and slovenly in just reading and ripping stuff from Media Matters even your devoted lefty audience will begin to turn the channel.

NewsBusters.org has a good recap -

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brad-wilmouth/2008/08/12/olbermann-hannity-limbaugh-haven-t-called-obama-n-word-yet

KO is just phoning it in nowadays. No wonder he is getting his ass kicked in the rating.

I'm worried that this ratings drop is only temporary and they'll come storming back during the Dem Convention.

Olbermann does it again. He's officially the first television " News Hour" host to stoop to using the "N" word in regards to the Obama Campaign.

Unfortunately, Keith bounced back in the ratings last night. That's the bad news. The good news is he still came in third in total viewers, the 25-54 demo, and the 35-64 demo. More bad news, though: the 10:00 rerun came in second in 25-54.
http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/08/12/cable-news-ratings-for-monday-august-11-2008/4670
And oh, by the way, Keith: total viewers are not just "65 to [pushing up daisies]." It accounts for *all* viewers over the age of 2.

"I'm worried that his ratings drop is only temporary and they'll come storming back during the Dem Convention."

Congratulations Mike! ..... Obviously you don't have very much to worry about in your life.

"Oh, there was also a bit tonight attacking President Bush for holding the flag upside down or something like that. Pretty bizarre considering that MSNBC uses a flag flying upside down!"

While I have been unable to figure out just what you are talking about regarding MSNBC logo's 'upside down flag', ..... it must be that President Bush has decided to signal the damage he has done to America since he can't bring himself to say it.....Since an upside down flag is generally recongnized as an International sign of distress!

> While I have been unable to figure out just what you are talking about regarding MSNBC logo's 'upside down flag'

Well that's why we posted the video of it today, so that even people who don't defend Olbermann except when they are driven to do it can see the upside-down flag for themselves.

> it must be that President Bush has decided to signal the damage he has done to America since he can't bring himself to say it.....Since an upside down flag is generally recongnized as an International sign of distress!

Since Bush did not display an upside-down flag, it's my turn to be unable to figure out your comment. Perhaps if you watched the video first then you wouldn't be opining about something you know nothing about.

Mike, I thought you and I were just going to agree to disagree and not debate.

Touche Johnny, you're right, he wasn't holding the flag "upside down"....that was my mistake, not KO's.

Your "upside down flag" MSNBC logo really is a stretch though.

That said, I should know better than to challenge you because you obviously think, live and breathe this stuff 24/7.

"Mike, I thought you and I were just going to agree to disagree and not debate."

You don't have to "debate" if you don't want to Mike......But that won't stop me from wondering aloud why it would distress you or anyone else so much that a show you don't like is on TV....when there are at least 60 other channels on almost everyone's set?

Well, the site *is* Olbermann Watch. I don't even watch him. I have to watch select segments on the "Countdown" website to recap for this site.

"Well, the site *is* Olbermann Watch. I don't even watch him".......Then why are you "worried" about his ratings?

"I have to watch select segments on the "Countdown" website to recap for this site".......I see! You "have" to do it?

Also, you are fooling yourself if you think you can "recap" a show by watching only "select" parts of it on a site dedicated to it's demise.

I've also fooled myself in the two weeks when I thought I had patched things up with you, that I wouldn't be attacked again, and that we could be on friendly terms. As with all the times I've had this experience in AOL chat rooms or social networking sites, that's what I get for being naive, gullible, and open-hearted.

Mike C - please ignore those who are rude - they're not worth the trouble. Really, it's easy to do. Don't respond - that lets them talking to themselves.

I enjoy your commentary so have a good time with it.

You really are a riot MikeC!

The only one 'attacking' you is that little demon in your head. This blog is not a 'friendship' thing, .... nor is it an "AOL chat room", nor is it a "social networking site'.

Meanwhile, if I want to do small talk about the weather, I know plenty of folks who just love to do that sort of thing.

Thanks, ktt. Unfortunately, others here don't want to ignore the rude people. They want to go at it with them. The end result is comment threads that approach 100, if they don't break that.
But I just can't believe I fooled myself again. I can't trust anybody.

Mike, I've actually gone very easy on you. I have never been "rude" to you, not even once....even though you once called me a troll.

You seem to think you can post anything you like, even when the ideas you present offends and astounds someone else who feels differently....but they shouldn't say anything back.

You have expressed several ideas in which you have personally tried to control commentary on this site even in direct opposition of the wishes of Robert Cox....who just happens to own this site.

I still think you should ask Robert if HE has a problem with threads in which comments go over 100. You have expressed your dismay several times over that possibility, but I think that is exactly what he wants to happen.

I also think you might try asking Robert if he has a problem with spirited debate on this site, because I have it on good authority that such debate is exactly what he wants to happen here as well.

If Robert has since changed his mind, then I will be glad to back off. Until that happens.....You can expect me to call you on it when you say something silly or ridiculous....and I don't care whether you respond to it or not.

Hey, Mike H. I've been looking for your butt. I asked you a question back on the Oooops...Ratings Implode on the 8th. You responded to everyone else. How come no response to me?

Allow me to refresh your memory:

By ramjet on August 8, 2008 1:00 AM
By MikeH on August 7, 2008 10:34 PM

"...for using an out of context quote dissing another TV host,..."

Please confirm that the above is how you wish to describe a highly acclaimed professional journalist and network election coverage host quoting on air a false accusation made by a dishonest blog that ridicules, not just "another TV host," but his time slot competitor who continually whips his butt in the ratings, and by doing so, literally lies in his accusation that his direct competitor did not know what he was talking about and was incapable of grasping the facts in an on air report and needed to be corrected by a guest proving the incompetence of his competitor, who garners the highest rating in his time slot night after night, when, in reality, it is the accuser, the ridiculer, the highly acclaimed professional journalis and network election coverage host who did not know what he was talking about and failed to grasp the facts and proved his own incompetence and refuses to admit and correct his mistake.

If that is your wish, please turn in your brain for repair or replacement as it is clearly not functioning.

What exactly is your "question" Ramjet?

That sounded more like a statement to me.

My bad. It was a request, not a question: "Please confirm that the above is how you wish to describe....."

Well no Ramjet, that isn't how I "wish to describe" anything.

First off, were you calling Keith Olbermann "a highly acclaimed professional journalist"? If so, those would be YOUR words, not mine.

Also, I don't think it really matters that "he whips his butt in the ratings" when it comes to the question of whether 'to ridicule or not to ridicule'.

That said, I think it has already been established that KO misspoke about BO in that instance....and I haven't challenged that.

Finally, you MAY be referring to a statement that I made that I ma not particularly concerned about what Olbermann says about O'Reilly as long as he is truthful when discussing actual ISSUES. As for me, I rarely listen to his anti-O'Reilly rants.

I'm already on record as saying KO spends too much time attacking O'Reilly......But I also contend that O'Reilly is fully capable of defending himself.

Just to make it clear for you, I'l take it step by step.

1. Your post:
By MikeH on August 7, 2008 10:34 PM
Mlong, I almost commented on the ratings earlier, but doing that really seemed rather silly in light of the FACT that KO's ratings have been quite impressive lately.....and it's a little bit funny how this site chose to pounce on Olbermann's first off-night in a while.

I wasn't 'changing the subject' at all....I just think raising the subject at all is a little silly under the circumstances.

That said, your analogy questioning why KO shouldn't have been fired from his OWN show for using an out of context quote dissing another TV host, to a 'firing' a guest on his show........was pretty silly as well! Both KO and BO have every right to choose who does and doesn't appear on their show....or why.

2. My response where I quote your description/perception/spin/totally ignorant take of what KO actually did:

"...for using an out of context quote dissing another TV host,..."

Please confirm that the above is how you wish to describe a highly acclaimed professional journalist and network election coverage host quoting on air a false accusation made by a dishonest blog that ridicules, not just "another TV host," but his time slot competitor who continually whips his butt in the ratings, and by doing so, literally lies in his accusation that his direct competitor did not know what he was talking about and was incapable of grasping the facts in an on air report and needed to be corrected by a guest proving the incompetence of his competitor, who garners the highest rating in his time slot night after night, when, in reality, it is the accuser, the ridiculer, the highly acclaimed professional journalis and network election coverage host who did not know what he was talking about and failed to grasp the facts and proved his own incompetence and refuses to admit and correct his mistake.

If that is your wish, please turn in your brain for repair or replacement as it is clearly not functioning.

3. You disappeared without responding to my request for confirmation that you wished to stand by your description of the phrase I quoted.

In an effort to help you save face, I supplied you with an accurate description of KO's rant.

Please, take this opportunity to refute your characterization. Trust me, you'll feel better after you do.

Well Ramjet, I guess you just didn't believe me when I said I could care less WHAT Keith Olbermann says about Bill O'Reilly? Trust me, it's nothing compared to what I would say about that blowhard myself.

Now if you'll kindly refer back to my 11:15 PM post, so I don't have to repeat it, it'll give you a chance to 'save some face'. Meanwhile please stop demanding that I validate YOUR rather biased attempt to paraphrase what KO did.

Now Ramjet.....you see how I just did that without questioning whether 'your brain is functioning correctly', or calling you "ignorant"....but it WAS tempting!

NOW do you have a question?

ramjet, you're wasting your time. mikeh is the queen of diversions and selective responses.

"...for using an out of context quote dissing another TV host..."

Whayzhizname did not use "an out of context quote..."

He didn't even misquote. He put the words of one person into the mouth of another person and he did it to ridicule his competition. What he did was repeat a lie. He spent an entire segment bashing his competitor on the basis of a totally false premiss. It's not about what he thinks of O'Reilly. It's not about what you think of O'Reilly. It's not about whether you care what he says about O'Reilly.

It's about a dishonest gas bag using lies, slurs, false allegations, smears, factless accusations and baseless charges to cause harm to another human being. If you wish to continue to characterize his remarks as "using an out of context quote" so be it.

"Hear this now, O foolish people, without understanding,
Who have eyes and see not, and who have ears and hear not:

ramjet: "It's not about whether you care what he says about O'Reilly."

Ya Wanna bet? If there is any TV host out there who has 'caused more harm to other human beings' using misinformation than O'Reilly, I sure don't know who it is?

First you post this:
Finally, you MAY be referring to a statement that I made that I ma not particularly concerned about what Olbermann says about O'Reilly as long as he is truthful when discussing actual ISSUES.

Then you back it up with this:
I guess you just didn't believe me when I said I could care less WHAT Keith Olbermann says about Bill O'Reilly

So this one is pretty unexplainable unless you'r as speedy a flip-flopper as Obama:-)
ramjet: "It's not about whether you care what he says about O'Reilly."

Ya Wanna bet? If there is any TV host out there who has 'caused more harm to other human beings' using misinformation than O'Reilly, I sure don't know who it is?

So exactly what are you trying to say Ramjet?

Are you saying that you think Bill O'Reilly is an ISSUE?

Once again:

It's about a dishonest gas bag using lies, slurs, false allegations, smears, factless accusations and baseless charges to cause harm to another human being. If you wish to continue to characterize his remarks as "using an out of context quote" so be it.

If there is any TV host out there who has 'caused more harm to other human beings' using misinformation than O'Reilly, I sure don't know who it is?

by mikeh

Examples, please.

DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS.