It's where hypocrisy reigns supreme
And the moonbats are just as they seem
(MS)NBC
And their flag effigy
Proves they're not on the USA team

President Bush seems to be showing the flag to the woman next to him (opposite Laura), so it is correct from that point of view. Nice catch on the backwards MSLSD logo, nice....teehee.

watch Katy Tur(d) ride a bike as she interviews another bike rider. Seems our "serious" reporter is getting a whole lotta "fluffy" pieces. The best part, you can watch her get her toe of her dirty feet bandaged. (Wardrobe note to Katy: Don't wear white when you have a that big of an ass as you do, and don't wear sandals when riding a bike in NYC).

Scroll down and look for the "news" story called: NYC Going Car-Free? only 2:34

...and as a bonus, scroll down a little further and click on: Car-Free Saturday, only 1:51, after talking about Jay-Z in the piece, she has to look down and check her notes before she says the word "hip-hop"---Man, she is really, really, really, bad---but at least she wears a tight sweater in this video. She does have a pretty big rack to match her big butt, kinda like J-Lo, Keify's real fantasty girl).

http://cw11.trb.com/?track-topnav

Crap, Olbermann's "educated" audience finally figured out that the Olympics are not pre-empting his show....the beauty part, Nancy Grace still beat him...ouch!

http://tinyurl.com/6a6tul

Sorry about all my typos...I need some sleep....although "fan-tasty" still kind of works...teehee.

Olby is praised by the KOSby Kids for blogging during is Countdown show:

http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2008/8/7/201750/9581/38#c38

Here is a gem of a comment from a Daily Kos Kid (this Loon uses an Olbermann quote in her comments, I'm sure Olby has a "chubby' just reading it):

"...love your way with words whether written or spoken. My favorite phrase tonight, "urinating on the Constitution", because it so perfectly capures the attitude of that frat boy occupying the White House."

-7.75, -6.05 The point of the war in Iraq is that there IS a war in Iraq- Keith Olbermann

by nicolemm on Thu Aug 07, 2008 at 07:30:35 PM PDT

nice catch on the MSLSD flag...maybe they are tripping over there.

The flag criticism is what set me off last night. We have no idea in what context Bush was holding it. Was he repositioning it? Turning it for others to see? Who knows. But it's not worthy of a cable network news show. KO wastes more valuable broadcasting time with his pettiness and there are real concerns that need to be examined.

He presented other irrelevant "offences" but i don't remember them now and have little desire to search for them now.

KO-a-go-go - I counter that nimrod nicolemm (who seems to spend 24/7 on Kos and who posts a recipe whenever she is miffed) with a quote from KO's biggest fan(atic)

BerryBush
Have I ever mentioned that Keith is keeping me sane?

He's putting on stories tonight that few to no others will. Thank God.

Well, yeah, he's making them up so that's why no one else is covering them.

I'm surprised Olbermann doesn't burn the American flag before every show. Is he afraid too many of his viewers would get erections?

"I'm surprised Olbermann doesn't burn the American flag before every show."

I'm kind of surprised if YOU don't do that because YOU are guilty of posting a whole host of Un-American ideas as you continue to confuse nationalism with patriotism.

Go on Factor....Call me a "coward" again!

Go on Factor....Call me a "coward" again!

by mikeh

Just our daily dose of hypocrisy. Thanks, mikeh!

Queif had the audacity to call hannity a "hack on a two bit talk show"

The biggest hack in all media calling anyone else a hack is the height of hypocrisy!

Oh, and did anyone notice how he overuses the word "neocon"lately?

And does queiff order his stage crew to laugh at his lines?
Or is it a laugh track.

And can anyone explain his ungodly obsession with FOX news and BOR and now Hannity.

And how the hell does he even stay on the air?

"And can anyone explain his ungodly obsession with FOX news and BOR and now Hannity"........Uh, yes. It has to do with having an aversion to all things hopelessly biased to the extreme right.

"And how does hell does he even stay on the air?........You're just full of silly questions. He stays on the air the same way O'Reilly stays on the air......with ratings!

> Uh, yes. It has to do with having an aversion to all things hopelessly biased to the extreme right.

Funny, you jump on some posters here who have an aversion to the lies and utter bias of Olbermann. Who express the opinion that he shouldn't be on the air--exactly as Olbermann has done regarding O'Reilly and Hannity. Yet you attack MikeC for expressing the same sentiments about Oralmann as Oralmann has expressed about the people he hates.

If that's the kind of loony logic you use to defend Oralmann, you just might be an Olbypologist.

And mike h you are full of silly answers

queif is just a one hour infomercial for obama,daily kos and the left wing

DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS.

J$: "If that's the kind of loony logic you use to defend Oralmann, you just might be an Olbypologist."

But what you are missing Johnny, is that I have asked ONE consistant question of KO haters on this blog from day 1. To this day one,...which is; 'why do you want to see a media personality you dislike forcefully removed from the air?' But I have NEVER really received a reasonable answer.....only a few denials from folks who say they aren't rooting for him to be kicked off the air, and ONE poster who calls him "dangerous". That said, I am sure that many posters who hate Olbermann DO actually believe in his 1rst amendment right to say what he believes, and in MY right to hear him say it......but the ominous reality remains that many do NOT!

I find it AMAZING that you would say that I 'attacked' MikeC.....when ALL I have done is try to get him (and others) to articulate WHY he wants to see an egotistical partisan blowhard kicked off the air, while simultaneously calling another one his "hero"? Do people like him REALLY believe it is his devine right to listen to their own "hero" denigrate all that he doesn't like or understand, while simultaneously denying those who want to hear opposing ideology expressed in a similar manner?

Johnny, I did NOT "attack" MikeC......I simply asked him a simple question that he refuses to answer, or apparently refuses to even give consideration to. But then he responds by trying to play on everyone's sympathy by devulging personal information about his mental state that he clearly SHOULD have kept to himself. It isn't MY fault that someone who is constantly posting and 'attacking' on this blog has something like "asperger syndrome"....a condition that he seems to believe should immunize him from any thoughtful counterpoint while he says whatever he pleases......but it seems like it might make you give a second thought to just who some of your own fans are?......And just where they might be coming from?

That said, I don't believe that you REALLY believe that I 'attacked' MikeC at all, ...... because unlike many of your followers, you DO seem capable of applying logical reasoning without being personal about it.

But THEN, you go and "attack" me for wondering WHY some people on this site demand that a media blowhard who attacks his opposition be kicked off the air while cheering on yet another blowhard, who ALSO attacks his opposition.

What seems to blow right past you is that I only 'defend' Keith Olbermann in a measured manner, while agreeing 100% that he is also FAR from perfect. The fact that I appreciate and like the package as a whole while simultaneously despising a few aspects of it is what seems to elude you. I happen to believe that if KO would drop his O'Reilly obsession, his potential would be unlimited.....and I have expressed this sentiment more than once.

If you and Robert Cox do not want ANY counterpoint on this blog.....then simply SAY so.....And I will NEVER make another post. But if you truly DO want a little counterpoint from your one and only "token" "Olbypologyst", then how about occasionally calling down some on your OWN side when they get out of line......like the troll at 12:06 PM that is apparently trying to imply that I am a "troll"

First of all, it's interesting that you immediately assume 12:06 is talking about you. Whatever.

My point was simple, and you really haven't explained it. You have gone after MikeC time after time after time, ridiculing the notion that he might like to see Olbermann kicked off the air.

I have not heard you go after Olbermann time after time after time, ridiculing HIS notion that he wants to see O'Reilly, Gibson, and a host of others kicked off the air.

Now it's nice that you claim to be only a "measured" Olbypologist, but I'm still confused. MikeC writes comments on a blog thread. Keith Olbermann broadcasts on national television And yet MikeC's sentiments just about always arouse a frothing response from you, but not Olbermann's. I just don't get why the double standard.

By MikeH on August 14, 2008 1:31 PM

That said, I am sure that many posters who hate Olbermann DO actually believe in his 1rst amendment right to say what he believes, and in MY right to hear him say it......but the ominous reality remains that many do NOT!

Not directed to me, but I do have an opinion.

Personally, I don't hate Whatzhisname. I strongly dislike and oppose his methods. IMO, it is not a desire by anyone to deny anyone else their 1st Amendment rights.

At one time in the history of TV, NBC News was a highly respected, consistently fair and journalistically ethical source for news. Can anyone argue that Whatzhixname is continuing that tradition?

The decision to have Whatzhizname on television is solely in the hands of MSNBC, NBC Universal and GE executives. They have made their choice. Any desire by a citizen to express in any manner on any forum their disagreement with that choice, to voice their disagreement to the company's decision makers and even to ask why he is allowed to remain on their networks is NOT an attempt to deny anyone of their 1st Amendment rights. If taken off NBC programs, Whatzhizname will still have full use of all his (and mine and yours and others') constitutionaly guaranteed rights.

Because Johnny, you are comparing apples to oranges.

It is NOT a fact that I haven't criticized Olbermann for doing things like claiming other newsmen should be kicked off the air. I have! How many times do I have to keep saying it? I only like the portions of his shows that discusses actual events and issues, and frankly, I hate his obsession with Bill O'Reilly.

How many more times will I have to say that before I am credited with believing it? If I am only on here to pile on regarding the negatives, then I wouldn't be the opposition, would I?

The fact that Keith Olbermann criticizes his competition in a sometimes indefensible manner does NOT mean that his entire being is unjustified, or that I should not consider the whole package as a net positive.

Therefore, when I ask MikeC or anyone else WHY they want to see a TV personality forcefully removed form the air, it is NOT meant to be taken as a simultaneous endorsement of EVERYTHING Olbermann does. We are talking different levels here. When another casual viewer suggests that a personality that I personally like should be kicked off the air, I AM somewhat offended by a suggestion that seems to balatantly disregard MY right as a viewer to have access to the personality of my choice.....and that is why I have continued to ask that question.

Its not that difficult.

> How many times do I have to keep saying it?

How many times do you say it about MikeC? Apparently every time you spot HIM saying it! How many times have you made the same condemnation about Olbermann? Not once that I have seen have you berated him for saying someone should be fired. But if I'm wrong, just direct me to the places where you have lashed out at Olbermann like you have at MikeC.

> The fact that Keith Olbermann criticizes his competition in a sometimes indefensible manner does NOT mean that his entire being is unjustified, or that I should not consider the whole package as a net positive.

Don't change the subject. The subject is Olbermann asking for people to be taken off the air. Quite different from "indefensible criticism". Why isn't that suggestion one that disregards the rights of viewers or listeners to have access to the personality of their choice? Why is it that you have not berated Olbermann for wanting to deny access to people like you have berated MikeC for the exact same thing?

Again, if I'm wrong, just point me to where you lambasted Olbermann as you did MikeC. Not for "criticism" but for wanting people taken off the air.

DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS. (But you're fine, J$.)

J$, so do you have any doubt about who this jerk your site has allowed to post under "don't feed the trolls" is talking about NOW! Your site has touted itself as not being a haven for trolls, and yet you are letting a confused troll post who doesn't seem to understand that he is the only troll on here, and his only purpose seems to be to stir up trouble with provocations and insult....nice!

That said, I didn't "change the subject" at all. If you won't differentiate between the actions of hosts wanting to eliminate their competition, and casual viewers wanting to infringe on the rights of others to view material THEY personally dissaprove, I certainly will.

The whole of your citicism of me is that you think I won't criticize Olbermann for doing the same thing I question some blogers for doing....but the comparison is unfair.....and a have and do criticize Olbermann for suggesting such things. I shouldn't have to keep doing it every time I question someone else. After all, it's YOUR job to highlight each and every KO indescretion, not mine.

YOU may think that the fact that other hosts have tried to get Olbermann kicked off the air through various vehicles that have nothing to do with ratings doesn't justify Olbermann doing the same thing, and that's fine.....but I beg to differ. I just think it is self-destructive for him to do it.

Finally, I don't know why you keep saying that 'I said' anything about MikeC....I ASKED HIM A SIMPLE QUESTION. There MUST be a rational answer - and I'd really like to hear it. The answer to that question is NOT found in claiming that KO does it to. That is a diversion.

I have also asked this same question pretty much EVERY time that I have read a posting by ANYONE advocating he be kicked off the air.

J$, so do you have any doubt about who this jerk your site has allowed to post under "don't feed the trolls" is talking about NOW! Your site has touted itself as not being a haven for trolls, and yet you are letting a confused troll post who doesn't seem to understand that he is the only troll on here, and his only purpose seems to be to stir up trouble with provocations and insult....nice!

That said, I didn't "change the subject" at all. If you won't differentiate between the actions of hosts wanting to eliminate their competition, and casual viewers wanting to infringe on the rights of others to view material THEY personally dissaprove, I certainly will.

The whole of your citicism of me is that you think I won't criticize Olbermann for doing the same thing I question some blogers for doing....but the comparison is unfair.....and a have and do criticize Olbermann for suggesting such things. I shouldn't have to keep doing it every time I question someone else. After all, it's YOUR job to highlight each and every KO indescretion, not mine.

YOU may think that the fact that other hosts have tried to get Olbermann kicked off the air through various vehicles that have nothing to do with ratings doesn't justify Olbermann doing the same thing, and that's fine.....but I beg to differ. I just think it is self-destructive for him to do it.

Finally, I don't know why you keep saying that 'I said' anything about MikeC....I ASKED HIM A SIMPLE QUESTION. There MUST be a rational answer - and I'd really like to hear it. The answer to that question is NOT found in claiming that KO does it to. That is a diversion.

I have also asked this same question pretty much EVERY time that I have read a posting by ANYONE advocating he be kicked off the air.

> If you won't differentiate between the actions of hosts wanting to eliminate their competition, and casual viewers wanting to infringe on the rights of others to view material THEY personally dissaprove, I certainly will.

I don't know what the difference is. If a host eliminates his competition, does that not impinge on the "rights" of others to view material they want to see? Basically your argument is that it's wrong for anyone to want Olbermann off the air, but it's not wrong, or less wrong, or permissible (who knows what you are saying?) for Olbermann to want someone else off the air.

Once again, Keith gets dispensation for what you call violating the rights of viewers. If anything, his attempts, which would be tainted by a huge conflict of interest (his own fiduciary stake in the success of his plan), is less defensible than that of a viewer. If Olbermann drives O'Reilly off the air, Olby's numbers go up, MSNBC makes money, and that's cash in Olby's pocket.

That kind of motivation to you is deemed somehow as more principled and high-minded than that of a viewer who simply finds Oralmann's lies, bias, and distortions an affront to reportage.

If you believe that, i won't say you might just be an Olbypologist. You ARE an Olbypologist!

Once again you are wrong about my argument because you continue to compare apples with oranges. You are also wrong with your continued implication that I believe it is OK when KO does it. I never said or posted any such thing.

That said, was it right for Bill O'Reilly to start a petition to have him replace by O'donahue? If we are going to talk about what Olbermann does, we need to compare it to what O'Reilly does.....NOT what either I or MikeC does.

'why do you want to see a media personality you dislike forcefully removed from the air?' But I have NEVER really received a reasonable answer.....

by mikeh

Uh, he's the biggest liar on tv. Good enough?

At the very least his show should be relabeled to what it really is: fiction.

That said, was it right for Bill O'Reilly to start a petition to have him replace by O'donahue? If we are going to talk about what Olbermann does, we need to compare it to what O'Reilly does.....NOT what either I or MikeC does.-MikeH

That may make the Top Ten List of Goofiest Things Ever Said To Try To Win An On-line Argument.

BTW,

The 1st Amendment does not guarantee anyone the right to be on TV. It does not guarantee anyone the right to watch anyone on TV.

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Okay, I'm done with the ALL CAPS comments.
Guys, seriously, just ignore him and he'll go away. If you acknowledge, he'll keep at it. That's what "do not feed the troll(s)" means.
Don't worry. I'm on your side.

Johnny, I've finally figured it out with you. Sorry it took so long....maybe I'm just a little slow....maybe I'm just too idealistic to accept it.

Here's the deal:

- You and Robert CLAIM that you want counterpoint, but you really don't. All you and yours really want to do is ridicule those you disagree with. All your minions really want is the right to ridicule those that THEY disagree with.....All most on here REALLY seem to want is a bobblehead echo chamber....just like the show you claim to disdain.

- It really IS all about ideology with you, ....no matter HOW many times you have made the claim to the contrary.

- This sight has CLAIMED that it doesn't want any more trolls on here.....but then you allow a classic troll to name themself "Troll Keeper", and then you allow them to troll away with impunity.

- You and your's argue that it NEVER has anything to do with with what O'Reilly or anyone else does....only what Olbermann does. It's perfectly OK for O'Reilly to attempt to have Olbermann removed from the air, but it's absolutely wrong when Olbermann dares to suggest the same for O'Reilly....and it is perfectly admirable for KO haters to call for his forceful removal, while simultaneously calling O'Reilly their "hero", while simultaneously publicly declaring themselves mentally ill....and you don't see any hypocrisy or problem here?

- One of your minions just made one of the most inane arguements I have ever heard, or....."the first amendment doesn't give anyone the right to be on TV", ....while simultaneously calling mine 'goofy', .... in the process of asserting that someone has the right to try to abridge the irst amendment right of another individual. I'd lay 100:1 odds that that very SAME individual would ALSO argue with a straight face that the giving of huge campaign contributions are simply an expression of free speech.


And finally....no matter WHAT the question is that I might ask about your own behavior....about this site's behavior....no matter how childish, boorish, or trollish any minion of your's behaves on this blog....your answer is always comes down to the SAME very lame answer:.....'BUT OLBERMANN DID IT'!

So much for the principle of being better than the object of your scorn!

NUFF SAID!

This sites behavior is tame compared to the hate posted on the kos and the puffington post

This sites behavior is tame compared to the hate posted on the kos and the puffington post

Well MikeH, here's the deal. I will educate you in the hope that you can finally put some of your misconceptions to rest.

> You and Robert CLAIM that you want counterpoint, but you really don't.

Well your idea of counterpoint seems to be ridiculing people who don't have a national platform for saying the same thing that Olbermann says on HIS national platform. That's the kind of substantive "counterpoint" you insist on.

> It really IS all about ideology with you

Yeah, and I've asked people dozens of times to identify my ideology with quotes from me about any major issues that define the left and right. You know, like what is my stand on abortion, taxes, guns, preemptive war. Perhaps you will prove me wrong and quote me back my own words on these or any other major ideological issues. But I tend to doubt it. When people are backed into a corner they tend to whip out the "ideology" card, but it's always blank.

> You allow a classic troll to name themself "Troll Keeper", and then you allow them to troll away with impunity.

For what must be the 89th time, I don't run this site. I have no control over who registers or under what name. I don't approve the registrations, I don't reject them, I have ZERO SAY in it. Yet you continue to spread what can only be called a lie claiming that I'm controlling it all. Please, in future arguments, stick to telling the truth.

> It's perfectly OK for O'Reilly to attempt to have Olbermann removed from the air

1. O'Reilly has never attempted to have Olbermann removed from the air. B. Olbermann has repeatedly said O'Reilly should be fired and not allowed to return to the air. III: O'Reilly has, to my knowledge, never made any such statement about Olbermann.

> One of your minions just made one of the most inane arguements I have ever heard, or....."the first amendment doesn't give anyone the right to be on TV"

"Minions". Another lie. As for the argument, I know I'm at a disadvantage here because I am a Juris Doctor and practiced law for nearly 30 years. So my knowledge is obviously inferior to that of an anonymous commentator. However, anyone who has had any legal education at all knows that the first amendment gives one the right to speak. It does not give one to right to be heard. Being heard requires third parties (tv stations, radio producers, the crowd outside the grocery store) to acquiesce. If they do not (the crowd walks away, the tv channel cancels your show) that affects your ability to be heard. It does not impinge one iota on the right to free speech. So MikeH, once again you are wrong, both logically and legally.

> your answer is always comes down to the SAME very lame answer:.....'BUT OLBERMANN DID IT

A lame answer to expose the lame hypocrisy of Olbypologists who attack everyone except Olbermann for what Olbermann does.

Q.E.D.

By johnny dollar on August 15, 2008 1:25 PM

Ditto. I decided to let MikeH's latest silliness just lay there, or lie there, either usage being correct.

As far as his description of me and my post:

1. What can I say, I've been outed. I tried so hard to conceal that I was one of your many servile followers, worthy of contempt. My embarrassment is overbearing.

2. My comment was not an argument. It was a correction of a typical and far too common misunderstanding of the 1st Amendment. It was an attempt to enlighten, to educate, to lift up a fellow human being from the abyss of ignorance. Obviously, I have failed miserably.