One Angry Man (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message


Level -> One Angry Man (6/15/2008 12:59:43 PM)

On Keith Olbermann:

quote:

Olbermann was struck by two questions from the interview, and by Bush’s answers to them:

Q: Mr. President, turning to the biggest issue of all, Iraq. Various people and various candidates talk about pulling out next year. If we were to pull out of Iraq next year, what’s the worst that could happen, what’s the doomsday scenario?

BUSH: Doomsday scenario of course is that extremists throughout the Middle East would be emboldened, which would eventually lead to another attack on the United States. The biggest issue we face is—it’s bigger than Iraq—it’s this ideological struggle against cold-blooded killers who will kill people to achieve their political objectives. Iraq just happens to be a part of this global war. . . .

Q: Mr. President, you haven’t been golfing in recent years. Is that related to Iraq?

BUSH: Yes, it really is. I don’t want some mom whose son may have recently died to see the Commander-in-Chief playing golf. I feel I owe it to the families to be as—to be in solidarity as best as I can with them. And I think playing golf during a war just sends the wrong signal.


Olbermann suddenly had another sensation, unrelated to neurology—a feeling, he later recalled, that was “like being hit by lightning.” He sat down at his computer and began to write. After an hour, he had the first draft of a lacerating indictment of Bush, a twelve-minute-long (eighteen pages in teleprompter script) j accuse, addressed personally to the President.

“Mr. Bush, at long last, has it not dawned on you that the America you have now created includes ‘cold-blooded killers who will kill people to achieve their political objectives’?” Olbermann wrote. “They are those in—or formerly in—your employ, who may yet be charged some day with war crimes.”

The denunciation hit the high notes of the most fevered antiwar rhetoric, accusing Bush (he of the “addled brain”), his alleged puppet master (“the American snake-oil salesman Dick Cheney”), and the “tragically know-it-all minions,” “sycophants,” and “mental dwarves” who serve them in the Administration of perpetrating a “panoramic and murderous deceit” on America and the world. Intelligence was faked, W.M.D.s were imagined, Iraq was laid waste, and American freedoms were trashed.


http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/06/23/080623fa_fact_boyer

Olbermann is angry; but, isn't there some reason to be? Does his showing his "leanings" lessen, or add benefit, to his program? Is he a journalist, or an entertainer?
 




Alumbrado -> RE: One Angry Man (6/15/2008 1:54:51 PM)

He's an infotainer.




chickpea -> RE: One Angry Man (6/15/2008 1:58:35 PM)

he's a puppet [sm=marionette.gif]




Slavehandsome -> RE: One Angry Man (6/15/2008 2:22:39 PM)

Be mindful of Bush's words here.  Being 'not under oath', he has no obligation to answer the truth, the whole truth, or nothing but the truth.  Therefore, at his War Crimes trial, he can legally say that the "cold blooded killers who kill people in order to advance their political agenda" were the alleged Al-Qaida suspects (9 of whom are confirmed alive) and not Rumsfeld, Cheney and all stockholders who profit by record outsourcing of the war.  Furthermore, the operative word to describe what Bush has been instructed to do, is Polyinstantiation, or that Bush should Polyinstantiate to the public.  This used to be a classified word, and its application has evolved from top secret projects where compartmentalization was a matter of national security, to corporate and political implementation where, unfortunately, the members of the corporate and political groups who use it, consider information compartmentalization to be in their corporate and political best interests.  If I told you to build an engine, you'd build an engine.  If I told you you were going to build the engine for the plane that was going to spray Agent Orange over the fields of Europe, Asia and Africa, you might not build that engine.  In this manner, people don't have to feel guilty for contributing to terrorism and tyranny.  All military and law enforcement agencies use this same method.  Many private companies are using it as well.  Bush is certainly not on the cutting edge of anything, and witnessing him polyinstantiate like he does on a daily basis, is just another example of someone not telling the whole truth or nothing but the truth.....a lie. 
I'm reminded of Tom Brokaw's voice during the Shock And Awe phase of bombing Iraqi civilians...."and the Pentagon says 'you ain't seen NOTHING yet!'".





SugarMyChurro -> RE: One Angry Man (6/15/2008 2:56:05 PM)

Colin Powell is not a moderate. He's a puppet.

O’Reilly is almost 100% bigotry and propaganda.

This was a telling bit:
Olbermann’s success, like O’Reilly’s, is evidence of viewer cocooning—the inclination to seek out programming that reinforces one’s own firmly held political views. "People want to identify," Griffin says. "They want the shortcut. 'Wow, that guy’s smart. I get him.' In this crazy world of so much information, you look for places where you identify, or you see where you fit into the spectrum, because you get all this information all day long."

Certainly Olbermann has his faults, but I find him a generally trustworthy gatekeeper of both news information and his own brand of editorial opinions. I see him as the next generation Bill Moyers who I also find generally trustworthy.

And I do agree with Sandy Socolow from the story: Olbermann is not a journalist. He's a news oriented video blogger. But newscasters aren't journalists anyway - they may have been at some point in their careers, but once they are the main talking head they are basically the speakers of stories created by others who actually are still journalists.

But nothing changes the fact that I agree with almost all of Olbermann's political comments. I get the news before I see Olbermann comment on it - and then his comments are spot on.




Level -> RE: One Angry Man (6/15/2008 3:07:33 PM)

I agree about the cocooning....like attracts like. It's why the Dittoheads like Fox news, and you see ads for The Nation on Olbermann's show. Hopefully there is some cross polllination going on, though....




SugarMyChurro -> RE: One Angry Man (6/15/2008 3:50:53 PM)

I don't think O’Reilly's show and Olbermann's are directly comparable.

O’Reilly fabricates "facts" and then offers opinions on his fictions. Olbermann cites facts that can be cross-checked elsewhere and then offers his opinions also.

To me, there is a difference.





bipolarber -> RE: One Angry Man (6/15/2008 4:06:57 PM)

The difference is, that Olberman can back up what he's saying. Yes, he offers his own comments, and is always careful to label them so. Unlike, say, Limbaugh or O'Riley, who quite often bend the facts to suit themselves, and their agendas.

Yeah, Olberman's angry... aren't you?

We're spending 2 billion a month on this ficasco.

4,150+ American dead, 60,000+ Iraqi civilians dead.... tens of thousands more maimed and injured.

No evidence that this operation has had any effect on the "war on terror," except to make the US even more hated in the region, and for it to become a recruiting tool for our enemies.

No weapons of mass destruction. It was all a lie.

Bush, we now find, WAS involved with outing Plame, as a punishment to her husband for trying to tell the truth about Bush's lies.

Bush has attempted to gut the US Constitution by suspending Habeus Corpus, and allowing torture of "enemy combatants"

YOU aren't angry about having your country become a shadow of it's former self, while under the control of this spotted and inconstant man? You aren't angry about his almost retarded leadership, supported by his callow, cowardly toadies, these bootlickers that are his cabinet?

What the hell does someone have to do to make you angy? Shoot your Pa, rape your Mother, and lock all your neighbors in the barn and then set fire to it?




Level -> RE: One Angry Man (6/15/2008 4:17:06 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro

I don't think O’Reilly's show and Olbermann's are directly comparable.

O’Reilly fabricates "facts" and then offers opinions on his fictions. Olbermann cites facts that can be cross-checked elsewhere and then offers his opinions also.

To me, there is a difference.


You're likely correct about that, but I think that whole cocooning thing exists in both places.
 
Wouldn't it be an interesting elevator ride, with just the two of them [:D]




Level -> RE: One Angry Man (6/15/2008 4:18:52 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: bipolarber

Shoot your Pa, rape your Mother, and lock all your neighbors in the barn and then set fire to it?


bp, I remember that episode of Little House on the Prairie.




lronitulstahp -> RE: One Angry Man (6/15/2008 4:23:39 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Level

quote:

ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro

I don't think O’Reilly's show and Olbermann's are directly comparable.

O’Reilly fabricates "facts" and then offers opinions on his fictions. Olbermann cites facts that can be cross-checked elsewhere and then offers his opinions also.

To me, there is a difference.


You're likely correct about that, but I think that whole cocooning thing exists in both places.
 
Wouldn't it be an interesting elevator ride, with just the two of them [:D]
Not really...all they would do is compare paychecks...and say something along the lines of... " Dude, can you believe how stupid our viewers are???  They actually think we really give a fuck either way!!!" 

O'Reilly's checks being bigger no doubt, his stupid viewers buy hella mugs....




SugarMyChurro -> RE: One Angry Man (6/15/2008 4:35:18 PM)

FWIW, I do not watch Olbermann's show per se because I don't have cable or satellite. I watch youtube or snippets on other sites.

But I do like his comments when I hear them.




Level -> RE: One Angry Man (6/15/2008 4:46:03 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: lronitulstahp

quote:

ORIGINAL: Level

quote:

ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro

I don't think O’Reilly's show and Olbermann's are directly comparable.

O’Reilly fabricates "facts" and then offers opinions on his fictions. Olbermann cites facts that can be cross-checked elsewhere and then offers his opinions also.

To me, there is a difference.


You're likely correct about that, but I think that whole cocooning thing exists in both places.
 
Wouldn't it be an interesting elevator ride, with just the two of them [:D]
Not really...all they would do is compare paychecks...and say something along the lines of... " Dude, can you believe how stupid our viewers are???  They actually think we really give a fuck either way!!!" 

O'Reilly's checks being bigger no doubt, his stupid viewers buy hella mugs....


Hmm, I don't know about that, tulip..... there might be a great pummeling and gnashing of teeth involved...




lronitulstahp -> RE: One Angry Man (6/15/2008 4:48:31 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Level

quote:

ORIGINAL: lronitulstahp

quote:

ORIGINAL: Level

quote:

ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro

I don't think O’Reilly's show and Olbermann's are directly comparable.

O’Reilly fabricates "facts" and then offers opinions on his fictions. Olbermann cites facts that can be cross-checked elsewhere and then offers his opinions also.

To me, there is a difference.


You're likely correct about that, but I think that whole cocooning thing exists in both places.
 
Wouldn't it be an interesting elevator ride, with just the two of them [:D]
Not really...all they would do is compare paychecks...and say something along the lines of... " Dude, can you believe how stupid our viewers are???  They actually think we really give a fuck either way!!!" 

O'Reilly's checks being bigger no doubt, his stupid viewers buy hella mugs....


Hmm, I don't know about that, tulip..... there might be a great pummeling and gnashing of teeth involved...
perhaps...some men do tend to attach alot to paycheck size.  It only comes second in what they think when compring dick size as a measure of man.  i'll be soooo glad when guys get that interested in comparing the number of books they read...or IQ...le sigh....




Level -> RE: One Angry Man (6/15/2008 4:56:51 PM)

*flexes my frontal lobe at you*
 
I don't think they'd fight over paychecks.... other types of egotism, yes.




slaveboyforyou -> RE: One Angry Man (6/15/2008 5:08:00 PM)

He's a twit just like the rest of the professional opinionators.  I don't give a damn if they are conservative, liberal, or they agree with me.  They are twits.  None of them are journalists, and I can only think of two nationally syndicated newspeople that I like.....Charley Reese and Paul Harvey. 




lronitulstahp -> RE: One Angry Man (6/15/2008 5:19:59 PM)

quote:

  *flexes my frontal lobe at you* 
  
  oooh Daddy...it's sooo big!!! 




pinksugarsub -> RE: One Angry Man (6/15/2008 5:35:15 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro

FWIW, I do not watch Olbermann's show per se because I don't have cable or satellite. I watch youtube or snippets on other sites.

But I do like his comments when I hear them.


Well, okay, i admit it...i have cable and i dun watch the tv news ever.  Not national nor local. Nor any of the pundit shows. 
 
i'm sorry to be such an ostrich, but news about casulaties and such actually makes me cry, and i try to avoid things that set off such reactions.
 
S'how i can handle reading the news more easily...i still trust newspapers like the Washington Post and the NY Times, and i can take my time going through an aricle.
 
To the Op: i don't need to know a thing about the speaker to agree with what he said and did.  Just wish he had had suffiicient Google-Fu to find a picture of Bush f**king around on his ranch in Texas.
 
http://images.google.com/images?um=1&hl=en&q=Bush+at+his+Texas+ranch&btnG=Search+Images
 
pinksugarsub




popeye1250 -> RE: One Angry Man (6/15/2008 7:07:30 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: pinksugarsub

quote:

ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro

FWIW, I do not watch Olbermann's show per se because I don't have cable or satellite. I watch youtube or snippets on other sites.

But I do like his comments when I hear them.


Well, okay, i admit it...i have cable and i dun watch the tv news ever.  Not national nor local. Nor any of the pundit shows. 
 
i'm sorry to be such an ostrich, but news about casulaties and such actually makes me cry, and i try to avoid things that set off such reactions.
 
S'how i can handle reading the news more easily...i still trust newspapers like the Washington Post and the NY Times, and i can take my time going through an aricle.
 
To the Op: i don't need to know a thing about the speaker to agree with what he said and did.  Just wish he had had suffiicient Google-Fu to find a picture of Bush f**king around on his ranch in Texas.
 
http://images.google.com/images?um=1&hl=en&q=Bush+at+his+Texas+ranch&btnG=Search+Images
 
pinksugarsub



Pink, you trust "Newspapers" like the New York Times?
How's about the Daily Tattler?




pinksugarsub -> RE: One Angry Man (6/15/2008 10:13:22 PM)

LMAO, Popeye.
 
i admit i've peeked at 'The National Enquier' before.
 
Gotta love those 'reports' of alien abuduction, he he.
 
pinksugarsub




Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.21875