T Nation

Olbermann on Clinton

WOW.

I think I need to say it again.

…WOW.

I watched 31 seconds of the whinefest before I had to close it. If Wallace is a monkey - what does that make Olbermann? The guy is beneath scum

I can’t believe one of the 6 people that watch his show actually took the time to record it. How bored must one be to need to TiVo K.O.?

[quote]rainjack wrote:
I watched 31 seconds of the whinefest before I had to close it. If Wallace is a monkey - what does that make Olbermann? The guy is beneath scum

I can’t believe one of the 6 people that watch his show actually took the time to record it. How bored must one be to need to TiVo K.O.?

[/quote]

If you didn’t bother watching it, do everyone a favor, and don’t waste more of your “valuable time” by posting to detract something you haven’t seen.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
what does that make Olbermann? The guy is beneath scum
[/quote]

And you’re not! You see unlike him you go along with the puppet show.

[quote]knewsom wrote:
rainjack wrote:
I watched 31 seconds of the whinefest before I had to close it. If Wallace is a monkey - what does that make Olbermann? The guy is beneath scum

I can’t believe one of the 6 people that watch his show actually took the time to record it. How bored must one be to need to TiVo K.O.?

If you didn’t bother watching it, do everyone a favor, and don’t waste more of your “valuable time” by posting to detract something you haven’t seen.[/quote]

I watched the 9/11 rant. This was the same thing. I need to watch another 10 minutes to know KO is just trying to get more than 6 people to watch him?

Let me ask you an honest question - What is the difference between his drivel, and say Hannity’s bs, or O’Reiley’s tripe?

Since Olbermann provides his infotainment on MSNBC, is it fair to say that MSNBC is a left wing outfit?

I liked Olbermann as a sportscaster - now he is a cartoon of himself.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
knewsom wrote:
rainjack wrote:
I watched 31 seconds of the whinefest before I had to close it. If Wallace is a monkey - what does that make Olbermann? The guy is beneath scum

I can’t believe one of the 6 people that watch his show actually took the time to record it. How bored must one be to need to TiVo K.O.?

If you didn’t bother watching it, do everyone a favor, and don’t waste more of your “valuable time” by posting to detract something you haven’t seen.

I watched the 9/11 rant. This was the same thing. I need to watch another 10 minutes to know KO is just trying to get more than 6 people to watch him?

Let me ask you an honest question - What is the difference between his drivel, and say Hannity’s bs, or O’Reiley’s tripe?
[/quote]

that thing called factual information.

…really the only comparisons that one can draw between him and O’Reilly, is their use of childish insults. He called Wallace a “monkey”, which I think only hurt KO’s credibility. I think he’d come off stronger without using silly childish insults, and sticking to the facts.

The thing is, he brought up some very valid points, and this is honestly the best thing I’ve heard come from him.

Rather than focus on his silly childish insults and character attacks, why not try to refute the main points of his argument instead?

[quote]knewsom wrote:
Rather than focus on his silly childish insults and character attacks, why not try to refute the main points of his argument instead?[/quote]

Mainly because if someone had posted a rant by O’Reiley, or Hannity - it would be laughed off this site. Olbermann is in the same class as those clowns and does not deserve to have his rants taken for anything but what they are.

Sorry - I’ll back out of this conversation, as there is no way in hell I will give a second rate hack like KO the benefit of consideration. Not until he proves he is anything but an over emotional angry little fuck.

[quote]knewsom wrote:

Rather than focus on his silly childish insults and character attacks, why not try to refute the main points of his argument instead?[/quote]

Why would you have that standard for Olbermann and not for O’Reilly, Hannity, and Rush Limbaugh?

And perhaps maybe you do - but most critics round here wouldn’t dream of such consistency.

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Since Olbermann provides his infotainment on MSNBC, is it fair to say that MSNBC is a left wing outfit?

I liked Olbermann as a sportscaster - now he is a cartoon of himself.[/quote]

No weapons of Mass Destruction = Words of Mass Deception.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
I watched 31 seconds of the whinefest before I had to close it. If Wallace is a monkey - what does that make Olbermann? The guy is beneath scum

I can’t believe one of the 6 people that watch his show actually took the time to record it. How bored must one be to need to TiVo K.O.?

[/quote]
That scum writes a hell of a lot better than you.

[quote]Skystud wrote:
rainjack wrote:
I watched 31 seconds of the whinefest before I had to close it. If Wallace is a monkey - what does that make Olbermann? The guy is beneath scum

I can’t believe one of the 6 people that watch his show actually took the time to record it. How bored must one be to need to TiVo K.O.?

That scum writes a hell of a lot better than you.

[/quote]

Dude - use a little originality. Tht was already used.

But - I wasn’t aware of any of Olbermann’s writing. Can you post a link to some of his musings? I would like to see if he can indeed write.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
Skystud wrote:
rainjack wrote:
I watched 31 seconds of the whinefest before I had to close it. If Wallace is a monkey - what does that make Olbermann? The guy is beneath scum

I can’t believe one of the 6 people that watch his show actually took the time to record it. How bored must one be to need to TiVo K.O.?

That scum writes a hell of a lot better than you.

Dude - use a little originality. Tht was already used.

But - I wasn’t aware of any of Olbermann’s writing. Can you post a link to some of his musings? I would like to see if he can indeed write. [/quote]

The main difference between Olberman and O’Reilly or Hannity is Olberman does not claim to be fair and balanced.

At the end of the day they are all clowns and you are a real moron if you catch yourself nodding in agreement when watching any of those shows nightly.

Turn off the TV and spend that time with your family.

Yeah. And Fox News is biased.

I can see where any network that is not biased would APPEAR to be biased when compared to this shit - like this jackass - out there masquerading as “news”.

Now, I know Olbermann is an opinion guy. But so is O’Reilly. So is Hannity. Yet, I never hear MSNBC called a ‘democrat organ’.

CNN has - mostly - Clinton staffers working on it’s airwaves. George Stephanapolis is the host of a Sunday Morning ‘news’ show. But THAT’S news, right? That’s the straight dope because…well…that’s what we are used to.

Fox comes along and does not tote the biased liberal line and they are shilling for the right? Fucking-A!

Horseshit.

Mike Wallace. Katie Couric. Dan Rather. Tom Brokaw. Peter Jennings (RIP). Wolf Blitzer. Aaron Brown. Charlie Gibson. Et al. Is there a conservative in this bunch? No. Not only that, how many times do you think any of these idiots have voted anything other than a straight (democrat) ticket? These folks have two things in common: They are ALL very liberal democrats and express those views in interviews (because they are also media “stars”) and they are all people who are charged with giving us ‘straight news’. Not opinion. News.

Olbermann is hilarious. More so because he doesn’t seem to know it.

[quote]Hack Wilson wrote:
Yeah. And Fox News is biased.
[/quote]

We know.

But - I wasn’t aware of any of Olbermann’s writing. Can you post a link to some of his musings? I would like to see if he can indeed write. [/quote]

http://www.bloggermann.com/

[quote] Skystud wrote:

But - I wasn’t aware of any of Olbermann’s writing. Can you post a link to some of his musings? I would like to see if he can indeed write.

http://www.bloggermann.com/ [/quote]

Hmmm…not much different than his rants on TV.

What a sad, sad, bitter, little man. I wonder if he would still be this bitter if ESPN would take him back and let him read box scores. He seems much more suited for that.

[quote]Hack Wilson wrote:
Yeah. And Fox News is biased.[/quote]

Stop embarrassing yourself.

The only people that believe that Fox News is not extremely biased are right wingnuts.

The rest of MSM is just trying to sensationalize for rating. They are an equal oppertunity S show.

Fox is a joke.

Stop watching TV and spend more time with your family.

You might become less angry and actually get some perspective.

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Hack Wilson wrote:
Yeah. And Fox News is biased.

We know.[/quote]

examples? don’t give me o’reilly and hannity either. i’ll give you chris matthews and keith olbermann. those are opinion shows (even though it’s not ‘matthews and gingerich’ or olbermann and buchanan’ as it is with ‘hannity and COLMES’ on the biased fox news).

give examples of how fox NEWS is biased in their presentation of straight news.

believe me. i see more liberals on fox than i see conservatives on CNN. i see that freaking nut bobby kennedy jr. every week. pelosi’s on when she’s not out stumping for abortions at mcdonalds and free dynamite for terrorists.

[quote]Hack Wilson wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Hack Wilson wrote:
Yeah. And Fox News is biased.

We know.

examples? don’t give me o’reilly and hannity either. i’ll give you chris matthews and keith olbermann. those are opinion shows (even though it’s not ‘matthews and gingerich’ or olbermann and buchanan’ as it is with ‘hannity and COLMES’ on the biased fox news).

give examples of how fox NEWS is biased in their presentation of straight news.

believe me. i see more liberals on fox than i see conservatives on CNN. i see that freaking nut bobby kennedy jr. every week. pelosi’s on when she’s not out stumping for abortions at mcdonalds and free dynamite for terrorists.
[/quote]

They are biased in their tone in the news they give. For instance, from today:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,216417,00.html

In that entire article, there are no words that associate his opinion with his own accusations. Overall, the entire tone of the article seems to be agreeing with the republican stance on the issue, even down to the title they gave the article. “Bush Goes On Offensive Against ‘Cut and Run’ Democrats”. You would essentially have to be extremely biased yourself to see no difference between that and:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15050599/
from the Associated Press which specifically gives where “cut and run” came from and who said it…instead of using the term in the title like it is the new terminology for all democrats.

Also, notice the use of words like “accused” and “counterpunched” in the AP article. That seperates HIS opinion from others and notes that he is the one who came up with these terms.

When it comes to scanning an article, like many people do on the way to work, which of the two seems accusatory to democrats and which one seems to be simply getting a story across as it happened?

If you can’t see it, then don’t bother asking anymore questions. You never will.