MSNBC's Keith Olbermann blasts Bush and Fox News (video)

Oh, FF, like nobody else on the "right" or "left" has written a book?

Sean Hannity, Limbaugh, are just some talking heads that come to mind- not to mention your Faux news rabids.

Can you honestly say that with a straight face?

Pluhheeeze.

OH, and lets not leave out O'Reilly.

Dont make me list all the hundreds and thousands of books- i could be late for work.

[edit on 28-9-2006 by dgtempe]

now thats entertainment, as news is just entertainment these days. interesting that someone for whatever reasons would speak like that. even though it probably is just a con, at least he gave the other side, which you rarely get on the news now.



[edit on 28-9-2006 by andy1033]

Oh, so none of his points are valid because he has an agenda in selling books? Please folks, he is only voicing an opinion. Albiet, an opinion that is so well made, folk are now resorting to attack the man's character, as they are finding it tremendously difficult to attack his words. There is one particular bit which I found especially funny was when the Op lambasts another journalist, and suggests he should try another profession: You should try selling seeds...via mail order. Priceless.

I love how the neocon-wannabes who flocked to this thread were far more concerned with making jokes, insulting Oberman and trying to figure out his motivation rather than actually discussing the valid points he brings up. Does that surprise anyone?

But I guess that's why people like that watch Fox News... no thinking involved, all you have to do is open your mouth and let them shovel that BS down your throat.

Originally posted by dgtempe
Oh, FF, like nobody else on the "right" or "left" has written a book?

I never said they hadn't written books. And if they pulled what Olberman has been pulling ... someone having a failing TV show and no personality, go write a book and suddenly get themselves into the news a whole bunch by running off at the mouth ... I'd say they were out for ratings as well ... and to sell their book and make money.

But we aren't talking about all the other 'news' casters. We are talking about Olberman.

I stand by my opinion. He's going for ratings and for selling his book.

(as I'm sure others have done - there, are ya' happy DG?? )





[edit on 9/28/2006 by FlyersFan]

Originally posted by firebat
I love how the neocon-wannabes .... no thinking involved, all you have to do is open your mouth and let them shovel that BS down your throat.

And it's no surpise to see why you have negative numbers in the BTS forum.

Motivation is definately a topic worthy of discussion. All the praise is being heaped on Olberman by the radical left but the question remains ... does he deserve it? Was he doing it for the good of the country or for his own greed? If it was for his own greed then the validity of his statements come into question.

It's a valid concern. We are here to discuss , debunk, and debate; not to blindly heap praise on someone just because they blather something we like. And not to blindly throw insults (as you are doing) at members who have a valid opinion that disagrees with yours.

Deal with it.

[edit on 9/28/2006 by FlyersFan]

Allow me to wade in and stick my oar where it's probably not wanted or needed.

Originally posted by dgtempe
...not to mention your Faux news rabids.

Can you honestly say that with a straight face?

Pluhheeeze.

I think that's a bit of a stupid thing to say.

I don't watch Fox News but from what I've seen and heard it would be perfectly in order to call it a propaganda channel rather than a news channel. These videos might be of interest.

Fox News and Monsanto

Fox News and John Stewart

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Was he doing it for the good of the country or for his own greed? If it was for his own greed then the validity of his statements come into question.

Are you trying to imply that politically-minded authors and personalities are not valid because they're attempting to gain income from their political analysis, critique, etc.?

If so, there are thousands of people we should no longer listen to. Not that I mind, I'm just trying to clarify.

It's nice knowing that Flyers Fan has continued a pointless rant on Olbermann from another thread. Why is it so hard to look at what he is saying then why he is saying it. How many newsreporters on mainstream media can you say actually go as far as him to tell an unbiased to truth to where this adminstration is leading us.

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
Are you trying to imply that politically-minded authors and personalities are not valid because they're attempting to gain income from their political analysis, critique, etc.?

Nope. Not at all. If someone is a 'news reader' then that's what they are. They are there to read the news. If someone is a political annalyst - Chris Matthews, O'reilly (yuk), etc. ... then that's what they are and people know that.

However Olberman - who hasn't said squat for years and years and who is just a news reader on a failing TV show - suddenly comes out with a book and a whole lotta rhetoric ... that's suspicious.

Perhaps he had an epiphany. But I admit I'm cynical. I don't believe it. And I'm allowed not to believe it. I think it's ratings and money and book selling.

If so, there are thousands of people we should no longer listen to.

AMEN. Actually, that would probably be the best thing for America. Turn off radical idiot talking heads - O'Reilly, Bugala, Swaggart, Rush - Go out and get some fresh air and think without having something pounded into you.

Turning off thousands of talking heads ...

Originally posted by Revelmonk
Flyers Fan has continued a pointless rant on Olbermann ..

tsk tsk tsk .. such a personal jab.

It's not pointless. It's a valid observation. Nothing in this world is as it seems. Healthy cynicalism is not a 'pointless rant'. Debunk and debate. That's why we are here. DEAL WITH IT.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
tsk tsk tsk .. such a personal jab.

Are you seriously criticizing someone else for taking a personal jab?

It's not pointless. It's a valid observation. Nothing in this world is as it seems. Healthy cynicalism is not a 'pointless rant'. Debunk and debate. That's why we are here. DEAL WITH IT.

An even more valid observation would be that you refuse to discuss the issues at hand, instead resorting to personal attacks on posters and questioning the credibility of a TV personality... is that really the best you can come up with?

You've already been thoroughly embarassed on this thread, why are you still persisting?



[edit on 28-9-2006 by firebat]

Originally posted by FlyersFan
However Olberman - who hasn't said squat for years and years and who is just a news reader on a failing TV show - suddenly comes out with a book and a whole lotta rhetoric ... that's suspicious.

If I recall correctly, before his drug problems, he was pretty political and highly critical of Clinton. I don't remember if he was in the category of "political analyst" officially, but he certainly stepped firmly in that circle several times.

Originally posted by firebat

Originally posted by FlyersFan
tsk tsk tsk .. such a personal jab.

Are you seriously criticizing someone else for taking a personal jab?

It's not pointless. It's a valid observation. Nothing in this world is as it seems. Healthy cynicalism is not a 'pointless rant'. Debunk and debate. That's why we are here. DEAL WITH IT.

An even more valid observation would be that you refuse to discuss the issues at hand, instead resorting to personal attacks on posters and questioning the credibility of a TV personality... is that really the best you can come up with?

You've already been thoroughly embarassed on this thread, why are you still persisting?

[edit on 28-9-2006 by firebat]

I fail to see how Flyer has embarassed her self in anyway?.. The point she was making was that some people say what they think the average person (left in this case) wants to hear for financial gain.. And that very well could be the case though I think he is more likely financially sound. Your rather rude comments do not further the conversation in any way, your retorical attacks as Flyer also serve no purpose in the thread, the points she made where simply observations.

I love how the people backing this guy and are taking his words as truthful facts instead of an opinion have turned this into the great Democrat and Republican debate. Clinton vs Bush, who could have stoped 9/11 and on and on, in the end you alienate the moderate man with the conservative view by blasting us with words like neo-con and "RWA" where it was stated that pretty much any conservative who watches Fox was a racist authoritarian hypocrit. Thanks, you have my support now. That would be like me saying folks who watch CNN or BBC are all pot smoking hippy communist.

What the guy said was an opinion and nothing more, he did not present any facts to back his claims, left out that Clinton was president for 8 years and failed to go after terrorist and held Clinton to the highest esteme. He even went on to say that Clinton was not distracted by the lewinsky scandle, besides the right went on the witch hunt so its not his fault. please. Under Clinton the government was shut down over a failed budget for a while, then the scandle where the president was most defently pre-ocupied. Both sides are making excuses and no one cares as long as there man looks the best.

Originally posted by firebat
An even more valid observation would be that you refuse to discuss the issues at hand,

Actually, between the two of us, I AM the one who is discussing the issue at hand. It is Olberman. That is the issue. You just don't like my questioning his intentions. My question of his intentions are valid. Like it or not. And obviously you don't. But of course thats YOUR problem.

instead resorting to personal attacks on posters and questioning the credibility of a TV personality

I see no personal attack by me of any poster on this thread. You lie.

Of COURSE I question the credibility of a TV personality. That's why we are here. Why did he say what he did? Why did he say it now? Does he mean it? Is it true? Is it for some other reason - like to boost his pityful ratings or sell a book?

If we had heard practically nothing from any TV newscaster for a decade then suddenly, while his ratings failed, he spouts radical right for a few months and at the same time put out a book ... I'd question him as well.

My cynicism is well founded. My questions are valid. It's the nature of this site. Step up to the plate and get used to it.

Probably my questioning can't be answered by anyone except Olberman and even then ... would he tell the truth? Gotta get those ratings up. Gotta sell that book.
Who knows. He may have had an epiphany.... but I doubt it.

You've already been thoroughly embarassed on this thread,

WRONG. That's either wishful thinking on your part or you are delusional. Either way ... WRONG.

why are you still persisting?

Why are you persisting in attacking ME when in fact I am following the spirit of this site - debate, debunk, and/or confirm? hmmmmm? Seriously .. YOUR motives are coming into question now.

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
before his drug problems,

I didn't know he had any previous drug problems.

he was pretty political and highly critical of Clinton.

See? THAT is good information. If Olberman has been a serious political analyst then he may have some credibility to his latest leftwing stories. If he has had a history of serious political analysis then he may not be out just to sell his book or boost his ratings.

At this point .. that's what I see. He isn't Christ Matthews. He isn't Hannity. He has a book out. His ratings are awful. He could be vamping for his next job while he tries to sell books.

I'm cynical. That's all.

When i was living in LA (Los Angeles, California) back in the early 1990's he was a sports anchor on the top "Big Three affiliate" (don't remember if it was ABC, CBS or NBC) AND he was politically active in as much as he could get airtime, mostly via print media.

He got busted for coke, fired from his local affiliate anchor position and went to ESPN where he had a pretty good run. He started dabbling in political commentary again and made the move to MSNBC.

That's his background as I remember it.

Springer...

Books by Chris Matthews.

Books by Sean Hannity

Now tell me why is Olbermann different than these guys because he's got a book to sell? They all have books to sell!

Originally posted by Springer
He started dabbling in political commentary again and made the move to MSNBC.

So he hasn't had an 'epiphany'. He has had some political commentator desires in the past. That's good to know. Perhaps he's vamping for his own political commentary show .. ala Hard Ball... and selling a book ... and getting across a message that he might actually believe is true.

Of course .. if he wants his own TV show .. he might well listen to Rockpucks advice and get ALL the facts straight.

Originally posted by Rockpuck
What the guy said was an opinion and nothing more, he did not present any facts to back his claims, left out that Clinton was president for 8 years and failed to go after terrorist and held Clinton to the highest esteme. He even went on to say that Clinton was not distracted by the lewinsky scandle,

[edit on 9/28/2006 by FlyersFan]

Originally posted by TheBandit795
Now tell me why is Olbermann different than these guys because he's got a book to sell? They all have books to sell!

Already asked by DG and answered by me. Here's my quote from the top of this page -

I never said they hadn't written books. And if they pulled what Olberman has been pulling ... someone having a failing TV show and no personality, go write a book and suddenly get themselves into the news a whole bunch by running off at the mouth ... I'd say they were out for ratings as well ... and to sell their book and make money.

Guess you missed that, eh?

Edited to add - Matthews and Hannity have popular shows. (I LOVE Hardball!)

[edit on 9/28/2006 by FlyersFan]