Free TV for Barry's campaign
But none if your name is McCain
(MS)NBC
Barry campaigns for free
While GE stock circles the drain

Olberphyscho has an obsession with everyone else's sanity when, in fact, it's Olberphycho that admittedly sees a psychiatrist on a regular basis.

And Olberphycho's 500+ Bill O'Reilly attacks, which, by Olberphycho's own words: "The Definition of Insanity is Repeating the Same Behavior Over and Over and Expecting Different Results"

Better double-up on the therapy sessions, Keith.

I'm not recapping WPitW. #1: No Kampaign Komment. Instead, O'Reilly Attack #522. It was based on this:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,443979,00.html

BILL O'REILLY: In the "Back of the Book" segment tonight: "Reality Check," with a war. And it is a war, ladies and gentlemen, between The New York Times and FOX News, and it has broken out into the open.
The Times Thursday used the announcement of my new contract to put forth that FOX News may be in trouble ratings-wise. The article, written by Bill Carter, raises questions about how much longer FOX News will be successful. In the body of the article, Carter raises the absurd contention that MSNBC is competitive with FNC.
Hey, Bill, are you going to print that last night I beat their guttersnipe at 8 by two million viewers, 200,000 in the key demo? Are you going to print that, sir? Of course you won't. Why? Because you're corrupt and you ought to quit the business.
Now, here are the facts.
No. 1, The New York Times is in business with MSNBC but seldom tells its readers that.
No. 2, over the past two years, Times TV writers Carter, Brian Stelter, Jacques Steinberg and some others have done a combined 41 positive articles on NBC News. Forty-one, including its cable channels. Talk about being in the tank. I hope you guys are getting some money from NBC.
No. 3, "The Factor" wins the 8 p.m. time slot 100 percent of the time in total audience and 94 percent of the time in the 25-54 demo.
No. 4, we don't just win, we more than double MSNBC in total audience and beat them by 32 percent in the demo.
No. 5, overall this year, FOX News has been in the top ten of all cable networks, and MSNBC is something like 28, down in that zone.
Now, the corrupt Bill Carter ignored all that. He is quite a guy. Comparing this October to last October, "The Factor's" younger viewer demo has increased 90 percent. Again, Carter somehow missed that.
It's obvious The New York Times is a dishonest paper, totally in bed with the hard left, which is what NBC News has become, an agency of the committed left. And The Times is suffering for its deceptive reporting. Its stock price is down 54 percent. Advertising revenue plummeting. Layoffs on the way.
While FOX News continues to rule, there are major problems with the Nielsen ratings system. There have been wild swings in the ratings that have benefited MSNBC. We've asked for an explanation of those wild swings. Nielsen can't explain them and those swings are unprecedented in the television business.
An examination of Nielsen shows that their personnel is overwhelmingly liberal. Twenty-six Nielsen executives, including CEO Susan Whiting, have donated to the Democrats. Two to the Republicans.
The bottom line on this is there may be some big-time cheating going on in the ratings system, and we hope the feds will investigate. Any fraud in the television rating system affects all Americans.

In Keith "Man on Fan" Olbermann's attack, there were OlbyLies galore, particularly about the ratings, and that supposed Ted Baxter voice, complete with the wild facial expressions and body movements as Oralmann read off the TelePrompTer. There's my overview. Now, a more detailed recap.
Introductory reference to John Moody's prediction that McCain would lose if that volunteer was lying about being beaten up. (She was.) Billo the Clown! [Ding!] Delusional paranoia! Ratings conspiracy! "I will read Bill's words, then translate them back into human." Meanwhile, a half hour earlier, the real human was having a robust mock debate with Dr. Marc Lamont Hill. Our oft-misunderstood correspondent played McCain (and Tom Brokaw), Dr. Hill played Obama. But back on a planet devoid of human life, OlbyPlanet, Merkle defended Times guy Bill Carter. It was a broader piece on the economy. Skimmed the paper to look for your own name! Cleaned Bill's [O'Reilly's] clock! Billo! [Ding!] We'll do it live! [Ding!] "Billo [Ding!] has long since eluded reason's grasp." Billo! [Ding!] Actual clip of "Reality Check," but stopping short of the "now, here are the facts" part. Fat Ass used mock anger and envisioned BOR calling Carter a "big meanie." The kindergarten staff laughed at that. Billo! [Ding!] Then, KeithO the Klown skipped ahead to the third reason BOR listed in the above quote (in Ted Baxter mode, of course). "'ey, wha happen?" After more nyah-nyah-nyah "we're catching up you"-style mocking, another skip ahead in the transcript past the part about FNC being in the top ten of all cable networks. Hour of Spin "younger viewer demo" pimped. Another skip ahead, past the Times being a dishonest paper and suffering. "Um...it's 'cause...you suck!" Nice. More laughs from the kool-aid drinking staff. Presidential funding. Billo! [Ding!] "That ratio isn't that far out of whack with...you know...America. So, America is conspiring against you, too?" Ratings shrinking, Oralmann's ratings growing. Then, Olbermoronn dug back in time for the rest of his attack. "It's all downhill from here!" "Fiddler on the Roof" quote. Michael Mukasey needs to drop everything and investigate.

And that's my recap. I hate this guy. No wonder GE and NBC brass loves him. He is Fox's, Bill's, Republicans', and conservatives' WORST NIGHTMARE! And that just gets them off. They love having this psycho to tear into that eeevil competition. What in God's name is it going to take to get Krazy Keith Olbermann the hell off NBC's payroll and OFF THEIR AIR?!!!!!! GET RID OF HIM NOW!!!

I guess with Obama having almost a lock on the election, Olby feels he can relax and go back to the good ol' days of using his top story for ridiculous self-indulgent attacks on "The Falafel Guy" (ding?). But I guess he'll have to, because material for his brand of sloven political hackery will be scant if/when Obama claims victory. With noone in the future GOP to rail against, I predict that smears on political opponents in the media will increase.

*Scratch the "future GOP part". I had my mind on McCain.

The video player on FOXNews.com was not working earlier. It is now. So, here's video of last night's "Reality Check" segment, unedited and in context: http://tinyurl.com/5adnyp

For O'Reilly to suggest that the fix is in at Nielsen against the GOP is very insulting to those in the industry. Maybe he should check with the Fox corproate research directors before he makes such absurd statements.

For the first time ever, I actually agree with Olbermann.

If his only remaining targets after the election are the "competition" he shouldn't last real long. All the moonbats will be on to other things. They will be singing the praisies of Obama for the next 4 years and won't have time for Fatass. His ratings will tank.

I still think GE wants to sell that smelly dog. They got rid of the appliance business, the plastics business and the word is they are getting out of lights. That is all low end commodity stuff in their view. They want big time stuff like the medical stuff and jet engines. They are pouring money into the water business which they assuredly view as the next big oil type deal. Lots of people need it but there isn't enough to go around. Also, regardless of who wins, nuclear plants are going to be on the table. I suspect they will be gearing up to do that stuff. NBC is a peanut business, commodity by comparison, a pain in the ass, marginally profitable and a waste of energy for them. They are putting up with this bullshit from Fatass and everybody because they will let them do anything to boost the ratings and dress the pig before the sale. Then they can warm up the books a bit without over cooking them and sell the dog for a tidy profit and get on with the real money making.

Watch KO go apoplectic when that happens. For sure he thinks he and Immelt are tight. After all, he is the great defender of GE/NBC against Fox. Immelt has to love him right? When Immelt bails he will rail on him in a way that would make one think Rupert just became a saint.

What poetic justice it would be to combine them with the NYTimes. Then the crazies could run two venerable institutions into the ground.

Since there won't be a recap tonight, I'll go off topic. I was listening to WFAN and Steve Somers said he saw on the AP wire that Sarah Palin dropped the puck at another hockey game. It was in St. Louis for the Blues' home game against the L.A. Kings. So, I searched on Google for a story on that. The AP's report was visual music to my eyes:
http://tinyurl.com/65wzwg
"... The Alaska governor and self-described 'hockey mom' got *more cheers than boos* Friday night before the St. Louis Blues hosted the Los Angeles Kings. ... The reception at the Scottrade Center was in contrast to Palin's Oct. 11 appearance before a game in Philadelphia, where she received a louder mix of boos." Thank you, Blues fans, and the city of St. Louis. (I say that even after the pain of watching their baseball team beat the Mets in the NLCS in '06 and go on to win the World Series that year.)

There's a link right now in the Olbermann Flood to an O'Reilly-Olby contrast piece in the AP. As usual, the writer basically puts forth that BOR is a conservative that only has conservatives on...just like Keithy only has on people that agree with him. The writer just had to pick Wednesday night as an example. I agree that Wednesday night's "Factor" guest lineup was a bit one-sided, but did the guy happen to notice who was on Thursday night and tonight? Thursday: Dan Feldman and Nancy Soderbergh (in the same segment), and Tyson Slocum (on with a conservative). And tonight, Dr. Marc Lamont Hill was on for two segments! Can I count FBN anchor/reporter Nicole Petallides and Tonya Reiman as liberal guests, too? Whatever imbalances there were earlier in the week, BOR balanced things out in the last two weeknights. So, come on, writer-I-assume-to-be-David-Bauder.

Intersting find Mike about the AP...

Only further proves all this BOR hate is from people who don't watch him on a consistant basis. My favorite piece Bill had recently is when he sent his "producer" out on the streets in Denver for the DNC, everyone was mocking him, bashing Fox, and Spike Lee claimed he don't do Fox.

Only person to say anyting positve was Michelle Obama. If only the rest of the party could be as classy as the Obama's. Personally I rather like the Obama's. Its the nutjobs like KO that make the party look childish.

But yeah, lets use Wednesday's show, and not the vast contrast between BOR interviewing Obama, and Bathtub Boy's "can you sign my yearbook?" interview with him.

Oh wait, Obama was via satalite for the Countdown interview.

[By Quads on October 24, 2008 10:53 PM

For O'Reilly to suggest that the fix is in at Nielsen against the GOP is very insulting to those in the industry. Maybe he should check with the Fox corproate research directors before he makes such absurd statements.

For the first time ever, I actually agree with Olbermann.]

Actually, I also think O'Reilly overreached a bit on this one after I read the article in question. I didn't see what the fuss was about. Advantage Oralmann.

Overreaching is a risk you take sometimes. Hopefully, BOR will put this overreaching behind him and never mention it again. I don't want to admit Keith had the advantage in this case. I'd call it a push. He lost a lot of points with the ad hominem attacks...as usual. What respectable news figure says of their competition "um...it's 'cause...you suck"? Now, you see why BOR referred to him as "the guttersnipe at 8:00." I think I'll add that to my Olby nickname repetoire: Keith "The Guttersnipe at 8:00" Olbermann.

And thanks, Lafinman.

If you look closely in the NYT image of Bill Carter piece that was shown in Reality Check, you'll notice a shot of BOR with Karl Rove. (sarcastically): Yes, that's right, Bill. O'Reilly is a conservative and there he is with his buddy Karl Rove. Two eeevil men face to face; palling around, to use the eeevil Palin's words. (normal): Oy.

Hey remember that bridge collapse in Minneapolis that KO and others tried to blame on Bush?..well it turns out it was a design flaw that existed long before W became president....

http://www.startribune.com/local/33308279.html?elr=KArks:DCiUHc3E7_V_nDaycUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aULPQL7PQLanchO7DiU

I wait for KO to follow up and admit his error in blaming Bush. New Murrow indeed.

I tthink we've been through this......KO didn't blame Bush for the bridge collapse any more than he blamed him for the VPI shootings (something else he was accused of doing on this blog). This was yet another humorous but herculean stretch within the vivid imaginations of many rabid 'clear thinking' Olby hater's.

This was yet another humorous but herculean stretch within the vivid imaginations of many rabid 'clear thinking' Olby hater's.

by mikeh

Reminds me of the "did we blink" herculean stretch. LOL!

MikeH is really showing his church of SNOBamessiah zombie status.

He can no longer be honest in debate. Documentation of Keith Olbermann blaming George Bush and his policies for the bridge collapse is easily available here at OW (see summary of COUNTDOWN 8/03/07) and if that was not good enough, read the COUNTDOWN transcript:

Below is a transcript of the segment from the Friday August 3 Countdown on MSNBC:

"KEITH OLBERMANN, in opening teaser: The bridges of every county: How the endless war and endless spending crippled our ability to repair or just check our infrastructure.

[...]

"OLBERMANN: But comfort is not all that the city of Minneapolis seeks right now. In addition to the bodies to be found, there is the undiscovered truth, the explanation for how this happened. Tonight, the U.S. Transportation Department announced it will investigate the Federal Highway Administration, the agency which inspected the I-35 W bridge. Questions investigators will consider: whether the agency followed recommendations last year to improve oversight on deficient bridges and the federal funding for them.

"OLBERMANN: Governor Tim Pawlenty has called this an engineering issue. We do not know whether his engineers felt constrained by his budgets. But just tonight, a spokesman for the governor announced he will consider raising the state's 20-cent-per-gallon gas tax, an increase he vetoed before, even though the money would have gone to state infrastructure. Earlier today, Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar referred to the, quote, "messed up priorities" by spending half a trillion dollars in Iraq while bridges crumble at home. New York Congresswoman Louise Slaughter joined the connection even tighter, calling the bridge victims, quote, "almost victims of war" because our, quote, "perpetual war depletes the funds available to maintain our infrastructure." By some estimates, bringing all of America's bridges up to satisfactory condition would take nearly $190 billion. The Iraq war now estimated at costing about half a trillion. It almost takes a Rhodes Scholar to analyze all this. Fortunately, Rachel Maddow is that, and more, including host of her own show every week night on Air America radio. Rachel, great thanks for your time.

"RACHEL MADDOW: Hi, Keith.

"OLBERMANN: Republicans, including Governor Pawlenty, President Bush, have demonized taxes, demonized any Democrat who ever said tax hike could improve our lives, save our lives at home. Does the governor's reversal tonight suggest maybe somebody is going to start having sane, reasoned discussions about taxes and when they're needed?

"MADDOW: I hope so. I really do. But I have to tell you I'm just so steamed about this, and everybody who I've talked to about it this week in my personal life and on the radio, everybody that I know who I've talked to about this is steamed as well because there aren't Republican bridges and there aren't Democratic bridges and there aren't Republican sewers and Democratic levees. We're a country that, as a whole, is paying this incredible deadly price for a brand of American conservatism that hates and demeans government, and that has defined any sort of spending on anything for the common good as something that's soft-headed and suspect. And it's a brand of conservatism that goes back to, you know, Reagan's first inaugural where he defined government as the problem and to Barry Goldwater before him, and the Republican party right now defines itself as uncritical inheritors of that legacy. And while they may be benefitting from it politically, we're all paying the price for it in terms of a country that's just falling apart. It's a national disgrace. And I hope the governor's change of heart is a sign of a change in it, but the fact that the President this week still used an anti-tax, anti-government piece of rhetoric to explain why he's going to veto kids' health insurance and why he's going to veto waste water infrastructure bills doesn't make me feel like it's going to change any time soon in that party.

"OLBERMANN: Yeah, that was a privately owned bridge now, in which the owners were threatening to move the bridge to another state. They'd be able to get the tax money under those circumstances.

"MADDOW: Sure.

"OLBERMANN: But is it fair, is it premature to blame spending shortfalls for this when the state rates so well on its bridges in Minnesota? And we have no evidence at this point that anyone, any organization warned that the 35W was in anything resembling imminent trouble or needed more money than it was getting for upkeep.

"MADDOW: Well, that's the single scariest thing about that, is that Minnesota fares so well compared to the rest of the country in terms of its infrastructure and its upkeep. That's the scariest thing. The fact that a major bridge like this carrying between 140 and 180,000 cars a day can be rated at 50 percent structurally sufficient, and that doesn't slate it for replacement or major repairs, because compared to what else we've got going on in the country, that actually means it's looking pretty good. That's the scariest element of all of this. If you only look, if you only look at bridges that carry 190,000 cars a day, there are at least 20 that rate worse than that bridge that collapsed in terms of their structural sufficiency. Minnesota is actually looking good. They're trying to define this as an anomaly. It's the scariest part of all of it.

"OLBERMANN: Right. You're right. If this is the leadership state and its bridge has fallen down, what happens to the 50th ranked state?

"MADDOW: Exactly.

"OLBERMANN: But now the White House wants all the states to shoulder as much of the burden of government and governance as possible. Is that some sort of variety or mutation of a push for small government, the original principled idea, or an attempt to disperse accountability so that, you know, corporations and contractors and such can get to the public trough more easily? What is it?

"MADDOW: Well, I think it's a way to deflect accountability for this specific crisis on one hand. But it also denies the historical truth in the United States that 80 percent of highway money comes from the federal government, and this government would like it to seem like this is some sort of state problem. The initial response immediately from the White House was, well, the state's responsibility was to maintain that bridge, and they should have known about it, and it was their responsibility to act. No. The federal government is 80 percent responsible historically for highway funding in this country. And to have an anti-government demeaning government, demeaning of any spending on the public good, bit of rhetoric coming out from the White House on the very week that this interstate collapsed tells me that all they're planning on doing is deflecting, deflecting, deflecting the responsibility."

###
Let me summarize.....Keith Olbermann said, "The bridges of every county: How the endless war and endless spending crippled our ability to repair or just check our infrastructure." The remainder of the "interview" with fellow leftist Maddow was a charade only to develop the theme that Bush policies were going to lead to more bridge collapses and other infrastucture crumbling. Fear!

MikeH is incapable of having integrity....He denies the theme of Olbermann and the left that was to used to create fear, fear of failing infrastructure as a tactic to attack George Bush and his Iraq policy. Now that we have seen since 2007 that the bridges of our highway system did not all crash and that the specific bridge in the news that day contained a design flaw that was the reason why it failed, NOT lack of upkeep....well......nevermind a correction for our accusations!

The entire left's anti-America argument is based on falsehoods like this little diddy back in August, 2007. Why do we not see the video of leftists like Olbermann making the false link of the bridge collapse and lack of funding because of The Iraq War? Oh, that's right, what we now see from the press is basically lies and propaganda that is for the benefit of the success of the historical assention of the first African-American President....everything else is secondary in importance....

Including the truth.

Our society is in a very dangerous place.

VERO POSSUMUS!

Ok free thinkers, the clip does show Keithy at about 0:12....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l46t_nrySg4

###
And see Mr. Matthews behind him.

The anthem is kinda catchy.......VERO POSSUMUS!

As I said...then and now....KO did NOT "blame Bush" for any specific bridge collapse. You have to really S T R E T C H what was actually said into what you want to believe has been said.

Stating rather general but true statements regarding neglect of infrastructure is NOT the same thing as blaming an actual event on a specific policy. It is ALWAYS incumbent of any responsible media to speculate on the potential causes, or the possibility of a recurrance of similar events if the aformentioned policy of neglect is not revisited.

It's as if you REALLY believe that no one should speculate about the potential relationship of policies in the wake of catastrophic events.

That said, you then took this illogical fantasy even one step further with your dogmatic insistance that the architect (Bush) of another policy (the war) was somehow being blamed for the specific event. The probability that the war could have had some impact on infrastructure neglect simply does not rise to the level of KO having blamed a specific individual for a specific event.

KO haters used EXACTLY the same kind of convoluted logic in claiming that Olbermann "blamed" Bush for the VPI shootings.

Finally Cee, to add insult to injury, your own painstaking research has proven me right....once again!

mikh, olbermann specifically blamed Bush policy/gov't. YOU can spin that any way you want. Enjoy!

Well then, don't just say it, PROVE it Olby Sucks!

Cee just tried and failed....and I'm pretty certain that YOU can't top Cee!

"Olby Sucks": "mikh, olbermann specifically blamed Bush policy/gov't."

Look at you suckes....you're already spinning this argument into something it wasn't.

The argument was that 'KO did not blame Bush'......But you've already modified the argument to "Bush POLICY/GOV'T".

1) - Speculating about the role of Bush "Policy/Gov't" is NOT the same thing as blaming Bush personally for the specific event.

2) - And that STILL doesn't touch the second (and most important) part of my argument that speculating about possible causes is the responsibility of the media in order to help focus policy to possibly prevent similar future tradgedies.

By Olby Sucks on October 27, 2008 10:51 PM
mikh, olbermann specifically blamed Bush policy/gov't. YOU can spin that any way you want. Enjoy

And then this from MikeH:...1) - Speculating about the role of Bush "Policy/Gov't" is NOT the same thing as blaming Bush personally for the specific event.

Now if that isn't the definition of "spin" then I don't know what is...Bush "Policy/Gov't" has nothing to do with Bush. I guess the Bush policy/gov't had nothing to do with going into Iraq then. Nor did the Bush policy/gov't have anything to do with not helping those "poor little biddy people" who lost their homes from Katrina then.

Hey, if you believe that's the case MikeH, then why in the hell do you support the anti-American so much when you can't agree with anything he says?

MikeH you are now the biggest S P I N doctor in the WOOOORRLLLDD!

That's great! Bush policy/gov't has nothing to do with Bush and therefore anything olbermann says from now on in regards to president Bush is NOT attacking Bush personally. I LOVE it!!!!!

By MikeH on October 27, 2008 11:31 PM

15 minutes of hand wringing and that's all you could come up with? LOL!

But Wolverine, what you are missing here is the fact that speculating about the causes of a known reality is NOT the same thing as blaming a specific event that may or may not have been related to that reality on the architect of a potentially related phenominem.

And that, my friends (pun intended), is not "spin"!