Opinion: Olbermann crosses a line…
Tonight on Countdown, Keith Olbermann called FNC’s Chris Wallace “a monkey posing as a newscaster” for his question that got Bill Clinton all riled up. This is beyond patently ridiculous. It’s offensive. Wallace asked a perfectly legitimate question. It doesn’t matter that nobody else bothered to ask the question. That’s their problem to answer for. Clinton was hardly sandbagged. He agreed in advance that part of the interview would be about any subject and part would be about the Clinton Global Initiative.
This isn’t about whether I think Clinton has a point about whether conservatives have been trying to lay 9/11 on his administration (I do to a certain extent). This isn’t about whether I think Bush had other priorities than Al Qaeda when his administration took office (I think there’s evidence to suggest as much). This is about professional respect and common courtesy towards a fellow journalist who has shown no outward signs of bias in his conduct. Just because Clinton didn’t like the question and used it to launch an over the top tirade doesn’t mean the question wasn’t a legitimate question. Even Clinton agreed the question was legitimate. He just didn’t like the fact it was coming from someone from FNC.
Ever since Olbermann’s first, and I would argue necessary and proper, finger wagging commentary at Donald Rumsfeld, his successive criticisms on the Bush administration in recent weeks have gotten shriller and shriller. It appears to me like it’s almost as if he feels he has to top himself with each new commentary. Be more outlandish…more daring…more critical. At some point he was bound to go too far. And tonight he did just that. Olbermann should apologize to Wallace.
And, no I don’t think Olbermann used the term “monkey” in any other manner than as a trained monkey…as in a FNC “lackey”, as ridiculous as it would still be considering Wallace’s demonstrated lack of bias in how he conducts his interviews. Anyone who argues otherwise is out on a very long limb in my opinion…
In all honesty, I believe this blog gives too much of a pro-FNC point of view, but Olbermann needs to rise above giving his own opinion, alike to what O’Reilly Does, and just report the darn news!
Anyway, he has as much of a free right to commentate about his dislike of the current administration as O’Reilly does giving his “Talking Points Memo” every evening. Please, just leave him alone and let him give his opinion like a number of personalities over at FNC do.
Comment by Chris — September 26, 2006 @ 1:14 am
Spud, I agree with you for the most part but I take a big exception to the suggestion that Keith’s criticism of Donald Rumsfeld was “necessary and proper.” Olbermann twisted Rumsfeld’s words to fit his own deranged view of the world. I think criticising Rumsfeld is pointless in general since, as far as most of us go, we are not military strategists. Granted, Keith was talking about “appeasement.” I stand by my assertion that he made the comments work for his “special comment.”
Comment by Edward Schatz — September 26, 2006 @ 1:16 am
Chris, there is a difference between intelligent debate and disagreement and slander coupled with outright lying. If you are comfortable with that, than by all means go pick up a copy of Pravda.
Comment by Edward Schatz — September 26, 2006 @ 1:18 am
*then
Comment by Edward Schatz — September 26, 2006 @ 1:18 am
Please, just leave him alone and let him give his opinion like a number of personalities over at FNC do
I can’t do that. Not and be intellectually honest. If Olbermann or O’Reilly or anybody else crosses a line in my opinion, I’m going to call them on it. I’ve been brutal on O’Reilly for his ridiculous attacks on
OlbermannMSNBC.I really don’t care what he has to say about the Bush administration. That doesn’t interest me any more than listening to Fred Barnes spout his opinions. I agree that Olbermann has the right to criticize the Administration. Though he’s never going to make any points with anyone outside of the “true believer” crowd the way he’s going. But that’s his choice.
This is about Wallace. I don’t agree that extending his criticism to Wallace and dragging him into this as though he was a tool, or a monkey, was either fair or proper.
I believe this blog gives too much of a pro-FNC point of view
I don’t see how you can argue such. I treat all the networks the same. If they do something I don’t care for, I say so. I don’t advocate for one network over any other. I have my own personal favorite, but I make great pains to separate that from the blog. You’d understand if I told you which network that was. But I’m not going to.
I take a big exception to the suggestion that Keith’s criticism of Donald Rumsfeld was “necessary and proper.” Olbermann twisted Rumsfeld’s words to fit his own deranged view of the world
We agree to disagree then.
Comment by Spud — September 26, 2006 @ 1:23 am
Dobermann was a pathetic giddy little intern from the few clips I saw from his Clinton interview.
Comment by Lurker — September 26, 2006 @ 1:31 am
This pathetic name-calling by Olbermann sets a new low in his already despicably low standards of behavior. I don’t see how he can justify savaging a journalist like Chris Wallace who, from what we have seen of him in his FNC program over the past two years, has been fair and responsible in his questions and comments. Olbermann ought to be flagged (and flogged) for this beastly tirade.
I have said it before, and I will say it again: Olbermann badly needs to be axed by his employer. While he can seek cover for his comments under the rubric of free speech, he gives his profession a black eye with his filthy mouth and boorish conduct. He’s no Henry L. Mencken, if this is what this punk thinks of himself.
Comment by RGL — September 26, 2006 @ 5:30 am
I think someone has flown overboard with his Special Comments. I agree with you, Spud. I don’t think Wallace’s questioning of the former president was out of line. That’s what journalists do.
Comment by Goldfish — September 26, 2006 @ 5:50 am
Keith has gone fully off the deep end this time. Chris Wallace is 1000 times the journalist that Keith will ever be. Chris asks tough questions of ALL sides and doesn’t tow anyone’s party line.
Comment by OverHere — September 26, 2006 @ 9:00 am
Spud,
I certainly agree with the majority of your opinion. But I’m not giving Olbermann a pass for the use of the word “monkey”, simply because he would not do so for others.
Look at George Allen and this “Macaca” fiasco. It’s just a goofy sounding word, and I don’t think Allen knew it’s meaning. I know I didn’t, and now that I do, it doesn’t sound like a big deal. Plus, the guy was stalking Allen! Yet the left (including Keith, I would imagine) has been relentless in bringing up this incident for weeks now. And it may well cost Allen the election (which, of course, is their plan).
Moderates (of which I believe you are) and conservatives are much too forgiving and kind, accepting explanations from those on the left who make similar mistakes. But enough is enough. If Allen cannot be forgiven, neither should Keith!
Comment by Missy — September 26, 2006 @ 9:04 am
That should read “toe anyone’s party line.” I always get that wrong…
Comment by OverHere — September 26, 2006 @ 9:22 am
That should read “toe anyone’s party line.” I always get that wrong…
Comment by OverHere — September 26, 2006 @ 9:22 am
I think you had it right the first time.
Tweet! Personal foul on Olbermann, “roughing the commentator”. While he has the right to block a political opponent, free speech does not give him the right to attack Mr. Wallace for doing his job in a fair manner.
Comment by tomlynk — September 26, 2006 @ 9:43 am
Everyone: My only issue with everyone standing up for Wallace (which, I personally believe, is a good journalist) is that Olbermann (once again) has the same right to make remarks about his interview as most personalities on FOX have the right to make remarks about other journalists thoughout the business with the ‘liberal’ label
Comment by Chris — September 26, 2006 @ 9:54 am
What does one expect from a has been, washed up, over the hill, no talent, envious, misgiuded ex-VERY mediocre sportscaster as Meister OLDER-man?
Comment by Roger — September 26, 2006 @ 9:58 am
Several comments:
1. Let’s assume FNC is a right wing network. Shouldn’t Bubba know that? And if he does, what sort of questions does he think he should get if he is going “into the lion’s den?”
2. The fact that no one else has ever asked that question (well they may have, but I’ve never seen in on network/MSNBC/CNN), does not make the question inappropriate. I can see many scenarios where Mr. Clinton could have answered the question with a good natured, “yes we did fail, but we did the best we can. Let’s quit worrying about the past and focus on the future,” or something like that. This was totally amazing.
3. Can someone give me a business plan that MSNBC could be using to justify keeping Olbermann on the air, given his absolute separation from reality, and more importantly, his abysmal ratings? They are paying a propogandists for bad numbers and that must reflect in their advertising revenue…
Comment by Spurlee — September 26, 2006 @ 9:59 am
Chris, it’s one thing to be critical, but to call him a “monkey posing as a newscaster” is WAY over the line.
Comment by OverHere — September 26, 2006 @ 10:08 am
I personally think there’s an element of jealousy in Keith’s comments. Both he and Wallace spoke to Clinton on the same day, but Wallace got all the attention. For Olbermann, it makes things even worse that Wallace happens to work for Fox news, an organization he openly despises.
Olbermann’s transparent attempt to suck up to Clinton– going so far as to hand him a personal donation in the middle of the interview– looks especially pathetic when compared to Wallace interview.
Comment by William — September 26, 2006 @ 10:12 am
I’m just waiting for him to have the loose change guys on so I can officially call him a tabloid broadcast.
Comment by 1angrychristian — September 26, 2006 @ 10:27 am
Spud, et al,
This sounds like a (mostly) interparty Dem discussion, so I hesitate to insert myself (not a Clinton pun), but I must say, allowing that Chris Wallace is a “fellow journalist” of Keith Olbermann’s is to do a disservice to Wallace much more significant than Olbermann’s “monkey” epithet.
Clearly Olbermann is completely out of his league in televised commentary, his league being the fever swamps of the left blog world. Spurlee (#3) and 1angryC have it right, I think; let’s just hope that MSNBC delays firing him until he brings on the Loose Change crowd and accuses Bush of 3,000 counts of first degree murder…
Comment by Jerry in Chicago — September 26, 2006 @ 11:17 am
Olberman is re-creating one of the best, short-lived sitcoms of the 1980s, Buffalo Bill, starring Dabney Coleman. Coleman played a narcissistic, fatuous, anchor that took himself way too seriously and never slipped out of his soliptistic perspective. This show, taken to the extreme, is Olby. “Here’s 8 school houses in Kenya from MEEEE.” Funniest line I’ve ever heard, delivered with perfect comedic timing! Coleman would be envious.
Comment by CMS — September 26, 2006 @ 11:21 am
Who is Keith Olbermann and why should I care?
Comment by Rob — September 26, 2006 @ 1:45 pm
^
Keith Dobermann is a former SportsCenter anchor and now the host of Countdown on MSNBC which routinely places at the bottom of the ratings in the 8pm timeslot. He throws paper balls at the camera and plays with his puppet theater and I think he even begged his viewers to vote him as Playgirl’s sexiest male newscaster.
Comment by Lurker — September 26, 2006 @ 2:33 pm
I don’t even understand why Olbermann felt he had a need to comment on the Wallace interview. If it has occurred anywhere but on Fox, I believe he wouldn’t have even brought it up. If news anchors spent all their time critiquing other channel’s interviews and programs, there wouldn’t be time to report/discuss the actual news of the day.
In my opinion, Wallace was very professional throughout the Clinton interview. He handled whatever Clinton threw at him with a neutral emotion that serves him well as a journalist.
It seems to me that these “special comments” are geared more towards making a splash on liberal blogs and You Tube than they are as commentary for the general viewer. To me, he’s more interested in popularity amongst his own crowd than he is at being accurate and informative. Am I the only one extremely turned off by the change in camera angles that project a rehearsed sermon rather than news? Is he trying to be more an actor than a journalist? If so, he’s succeeding in achieving a pseudo-Sean Penn aura.
Comment by Caroline — September 26, 2006 @ 3:15 pm
Funny, nobody is debating the facts that Olbermann discussed in his editorial. All you guys can do is slam the guy and that’s it. Clinton did try several times to kill Osama, Bush tried ZERO times. Clinton did leave comprehensive information on where Osama was and how to get him, which was ignored by Bush. Bush has done a horrible job going after Osama and we’re nowhere nearer to catching him now than 5 years ago. Afghanistan is again falling apart and Bush is busy trying to tell us that Iraqi terrorist are going to invade the US, “Either we fight them there, or fight them at home.” Um, see guys, Iraq ain’t invading the US and Iraq did’t WMD’s in 2003 and Iraq was never a supporter of terrorist groups. Please debate the facts and leave the personal attacks behind!!
Comment by Rex — September 26, 2006 @ 3:54 pm
Rex, perhaps you did not listen to the interview given by Condoleeza Rice to the NY Post yesterday to comment on the Clinton claims you so faithfully recorded above. Condi slammed all those claims as patently false. She should know, since she has been at the State Department now for six years. Who would you rather believe: a respected official known for her integrity, or an ex-president who got caught in so many lies during his administration?
That should a no-brainer for you, unless you have been brainwashed so much there is no way to bring you back to reality.
Comment by RGL — September 26, 2006 @ 4:33 pm
> Funny, nobody is debating the facts that Olbermann discussed in his editorial.
That might be because Spud’s post is about Olbermann’s name-calling, not the accuracy of his political cant. It’s about one network “anchorman” referring to another, much more successful journalist as “a monkey”.
Comment by johnny dollar — September 26, 2006 @ 4:38 pm
Nobody is debating the ‘facts’ because they’re not facts. Clinton’s efforts to get OBL were half-hearted, at best, as he was preoccupied by other issues. Clinton makes the mistake of of actually invoking Richard Clarke, when if you look at what Clarke says, it is exactly what Clinton is accused of not doing. Clinto even goes on to say (lie?) Richard Clarke was fired when in fact he requested to be reassigned to a lower level position. If you’re going to make an argument, citing something as evidence that is supportive of your argument that actually is contradictaory to same isn’t going to cut it.
As for fighting them there versus here, well there’s a hell of a lot of them fighting us there and nothing has happened here (or to US interests abroad, for that matter) since 9/11, so it looks like that worked! I actually am of the opinion that the way things are going is, and always was, the long term goal - put troops abroad to act as magnets to fight the Islamists away from the US. It could never be stated overtly as such, but, in essence, it is a solid strategy.
As for WMD, guess you missed that they have found some - maybe not as much as everyone in the world’s intelligence services though there were, but they’re there. I guess a couple of Sarin-filled artlllery shells exploded in a major US metropolitan area would be OK?
Comment by XOT — September 26, 2006 @ 4:48 pm
Rex, your just like Olbermann. you say-
#24
Clinton did try several times to kill Osama, Bush tried ZERO times. Clinton did leave comprehensive information on where Osama was and how to get him, which was ignored by Bush. Bush has done a horrible job going after Osama and we’re nowhere nearer to catching him now than 5 years ago.
how exactly do you know any of that? where do you keep your crystal ball? no wait, let me guess, you keep it in front of your couch, in the form of a tv, and when you look in it, you see Olbermann telling you dirty little secrets.
Comment by MB — September 26, 2006 @ 5:13 pm
I respectfully disagree. Chris Wallace is no journalist and is not fair-minded; his previously on-record remarks throwing his own father under the bus being on egregious example.
The problem, in the Clinton interview case is not that Chris Wallace asked the question; the problem is how Chris Wallace FRAMED the question, testifying to the same malarkey about Clinton doing too little to stop Osama (with the implication, oft repeated on FNC, that Clinton was to blame for 9/11). In short, he repeated a right-wing lie about Clinton to Clinton’s face, and didn’t even have the stones to admit it was HIS question, and said it came from “viewer mail.”
KO may have been over the top in his disdain for Chris Wallace, but he was NOT out of line, sir.
Comment by raptavio — September 26, 2006 @ 5:14 pm
I’m still laughing at Older-man’s sensitive (dare I say romantic) interview with Mr. Clinton.
Keith is a graduate of a second tier Ivy League school (couldn’t get admitted to Yale or Harvard or Princeton), is bottom tier “journalist” (check his ratings), and a very average sports commentator.
Perhaps Ms. Olderman is envious of real journalists. Like I said, I’m still laughing at “her” interview with Bill Clinton.
Comment by robny — September 26, 2006 @ 5:37 pm
I made myself watch this video.
Does any sane adult watch this creepy idiot with regularity?
Someone needs to remove all sharp objects within Olbermann’s reach. He has gone totally ballistic.
What an embarrassing spectacle.
He has got to be fired, because he won’t stop until he gets stopped!
Comment by cella — September 26, 2006 @ 5:41 pm
Let me get this straight. He handed Bill Clinton a check for a donation and did it while the cameras were rolling. Now, that’s the epitome of a political ‘groupie’. And I thought Paul Begala was the ultimate political groupie… Did he get under the table and demonstrated HOWTO fellatio for the cameras?!? Come on folks. This man needs to be removed from the airwaves ASAP.
Comment by milostea — September 26, 2006 @ 5:49 pm
Olberman ought to listen to that radical right-winger Bob Schrum who last night on Hardball called Olberman out in defending Chris Wallace as a straight-arrow reporter with no agenda-driven bias.
Comment by Bill — September 26, 2006 @ 5:54 pm
Rex (question 24),
I read something quite profound the other day and I feel it represents a great opportunity for you, Odoerman and Bill Clinton to redeem yourselves. Since you don’t feel the current administration has done enough in the past five years to locate OBL, I pose to you this challenge. Locate OBL (he must be relatively easy to find) and inquire of him if he feels any safer now then he did five years ago.
I know this is cheating but here’s a little hint —
All that news footage we routinely see of Osama sashaying through those desert terrorist training camps, they were taken during the Clinton years. Sure doesn’t appear to me that he’s too concerned about his wellbeing. Or maybe… you’re the only one who has the footage showing OBL cowering in a cave cursing that terrorist tactician, Bill Clinton!
Fess-up Rex
Comment by Randall T — September 26, 2006 @ 6:22 pm
24, this post is not about the editorial; it’s about the namecalling, which was irresponsible, IMHO.
Comment by Goldfish — September 26, 2006 @ 6:55 pm
I think the first comment on this article speaks volumes. They’re supporting what Olberman said!
This article was right on, and not biased at all. To claim that the article is ‘pro-foxnews’ is idiotic… how could someone read this article and think that it supports fox is beyond me.
Also you should note that they use the Orielly “talking points” as a justification for Olberman making rude comments.
I’m sorry, but could this person please show me the “talking points” where Bill Oreilly makes “ad hominem” attacks on Tom Brokaw? Or actually, where Bill O. makes any ad hominem attacks (aside from calling someone a pinhead)?
Olberman is a tool of the highest order, and the fact that he would go off on Chris Wallace, makes me wonder if tomorrow he’ll be going off on Lehrer from PBS!
Comment by mike j — September 26, 2006 @ 9:03 pm
The issue at hand seems to be that Keith Olbermann crossed a line by calling Chris Wallace a monkey.
To get to this site I clicked on a link on Michelle Malkin’s site. The text that I clicked on was:
“And then there was that execrable MSNBC pig daring to call Chris Wallace a “monkey.”
That took me to hotair.com the 2nd line in the story calls Keith a “douche” a link to t
a video of Keith’s commentary provided on hotair with instructions to click on the “retard” (Keith) to watch. Another link on hotair.com brought me hear.
On this site I see that Keith is called childish names like Odoerman, Dobermann, and Older-man.
I guess all of these people agree that Keith crossed a line by name calling. I guess Michelle Malkin had some point to make by calling him an execrable MSNBC pig. Irony is…
Comment by Tony — September 26, 2006 @ 10:08 pm
I would hate to see Olberman get canned for his on-camera antics. The only place that would have him after this would be National Public Radio, and I don’t feel like seeing anyone get a tax deduction for sending him money.
Comment by Mitch — September 26, 2006 @ 10:40 pm
Tony, I hope you’re not tying ICN to Malkin’s blog or other blogs. I can’t control other blogs linking to here for their own agendas.
As for the commentors, they are entitled to their opinions. I neither endorse nor condemn them as long as they a) keep it clean, b) play fair, and c) aren’t too rude. I’d like to have no rudeness at all but given the volatile nature of discussions involving Olbermann…or for that matter O’Reilly…trying to establish a zero rudeness policy would necessitate wiping out 99% of the comments.
It’s obvious to anyone who looks at this thread that people are just talking past one another. Those who hate Olbermann find what happened as just another example of why they hate him. Those who like Olbermann find what happened as evidence that there’s a voice on the left willing to go toe to toe with the other side.
My only concern and my blog entry’s only concern is his treatment of Wallace. Everything else you read here is not germaine for me.
Comment by Spud — September 26, 2006 @ 10:47 pm
It’s funny. KO brings a sportcaster’s mentality (i.e. cut the crap and call it like you see it) to the table and people are unsure how to deal with it, or call him irresponsible. Calling Wallace a monkey doesn’t seem too far from accurate to me. So many have said he’s shown he’s “fair” and “unbiased”. Really? I guess that’s hingent upon one’s definintions of fair and unbiased.
KO may be doing something that the rest of us need to do: waking up and getting pissed about what’s going on.
Wallace’s question to Clinton may have been acceptable (emphasis on may) but the timing is definately questionable and the framing shows nothing but a right wing taint.
It’s time people stop worrying about the niceties that are supposed to be present between journalists and start paying attention to the facts of what’s really going on in the country and the world.
Comment by quietly amused — September 26, 2006 @ 11:01 pm
I made myself watch all ten minutes of the Olbermann video and was astounded that a network desperate for ratings would put soomething like that on the air. Olbermann’s bitter envy and hatred of Wallace was palpable. To some degree he was simply channelling The Bill himself: Wallace was polite but persistent during the Clinton interview; Clinton responded by saying “You’ve got that little smirk on your face. You think you’re so clever.” But Clinton seems tame in comparison to Olbermann on meth, calling Wallace a “monkey”, ridiculing him for raising questions from viewers’ emails, and generally coming across like a mad mullah on al-Jazeera.
I’ve seen Wallace interview people many times and watched the video ofhim with Clinton twice; he comes off as a class act and nobody’s fool. O’Reilly is a lowbrow blowhard, but even he doesn’t bathe in the sewer the way Olbermann does.
To me, Olbermann’s rant communicated little except that (1)he’s really, REALLY pissed at Fox News and everyone who works there, including the janitors, (2) he thinks that BushChipHitlerCo is personally responsible for the fact that only a few dozen people watch his show regularly, and (3) his microphone needs a really thick spit shield.
Comment by tomsyl — September 26, 2006 @ 11:34 pm
Randall T, very good point! That, plus consider the $25 or $50 million bounty on bin Laden. If it was possible to find him, that money would be enough incentive for anyone!
Comment by Missy — September 26, 2006 @ 11:38 pm
Spud, to get back to your point, I think it’s unbelievable that no one at MSNBC or NBC News called for Olbermann to apologize to Wallace. Of all the people to attack at Fox News, Wallace is the last person who can be accused of being partisan.
If this comment stands without an apology being issued, we’ll know that standards of NBC have sunk to new lows. No one should be able to get away with what Olbermann did to Wallace.
Comment by Missy — September 26, 2006 @ 11:41 pm
It’s been my observation that when some people are unable to muster a well-reasoned argument they often resort to name-calling. And when this scenerio repeats itself enough times the pretence of making a cogent argument is finally dropped, the name-calling becomes a first resort, and we’re left with “infantilism” on display.
Comment by Russ — September 27, 2006 @ 12:06 am
I think keith can apologize when Michelle and Ann and O’Reilly start apologizing for their smear merchant tactics.
You cannot be serious with the rah-rah Pro-Fox article, I mean really Michelle calls Keith a pig, but that’s OK?
Again what is your point?
Comment by Maria — September 27, 2006 @ 3:00 am
I also found this site from Michelle Malkin’s blog…
KO’s show, when it started, was really pretty good…then something happened to him. I rarely watch it anymore; he’s just too mean spirited for me now.
The name calling from all sides is becoming reprehensible and obnoxious. It makes me sad to see so much lack of respect portrayed in all forms of media, be it news, TV shows, films, or print. Rudeness seems to be the norm these days, especially for politicians and news commentators. However, Chris Wallace does not fall into this category. He has always appeared to be fair and impartial to me. I thought that he handled himself with dignity during President Clinton’s tirade. And, I do feel sorry for President Clinton. I’m not a fan of his, but I think that we all have bad days, and this was one of his. Unfortunately for him it wasn’t in the privacy of his own home…it was in the world’s face.
Comment by Susan — September 27, 2006 @ 3:11 am
Maria,
This is “Inside Cable News”, not “Inside the Rightwing Blogosphere”. O’Reilly may be a more apt figure for comparison, and he certainly can be characterized as a partisan commentator in the same general category as Olbermann, but do you have examples of O’Reilly doing something similar on his show?
I think Olbermann was over the top on this one, but I also think that he’s become so marginal that his behavior no longer really has any impact on anyone outside of his fan club. In my experience, marginalization often leads to bad behavior, especially in an industry where popularity, compensation and self-worth are often interchangable.
Comment by Immolate — September 27, 2006 @ 9:52 am
O’Reilly smears people all the time and will not allow those who have been smeared to come on his show to stand up for themself and their point of view. Point-in-check - David Brock from Media Matters.
Now - one does not have to be a rocket scientist to realize that Media Matters is merely clips, either sound or video, of what someone has said; not unlike what Ian did with ExposetheLeft.com before he joined hotair.com, which does the same thing.
Now how O’Reilly can actually put the notion out there that being “called on the carpet” with authentic clips of what he actually has said on Fox and on Radio are nothing more than smears and he succeeds in getting these wacky people to buy in to it, is amazing. What better proof of something said than a video or sound clip, so I guess the bigger question is why are these Right Wingers so uptight about the fact checking that follows their vitriol?
The other thing is that Bill Clinton is correct about Fox News. I live in NYC I know people who have been employed there, and being Right leaning it is a prerequisite to work there - you must be Conservative and they go as far as asking you, albeit illegal, what your political leanings are, period. People outside of “here” meaning The Big Apple can believe the hype, but it just isn’t true.
Whether Chris Wallace wears his Right leanings on his sleeve doesn’t really matter, however he is required to do Fox’s bidding and if you refuse to believe it, well you are foolish and needs some good old NY street smarts. O’Reilly does their bidding every night at 8PM.
I mean how dumbed down has America become? How did we get to a point where we are not allowed to question our President, where we must believe Rush, Michelle and Ann and believe that the news and the media has been hijacked by this vast Leftwing Conspiracy??
It’s silly and moreover anyone who buys into it needs an intervention, and not from Rush Limbaugh….
Keith Olberman is slanted Left, he makes no bones about it, just as Michelle Malkin or Debby Schussel make no bones about their idiology. When people are impassioned by their ideaology there is name calling. Michelle Malkin calls Olberman a pig, Rush calls Chelsea Clinton a dog, Ann Coulter calls the 9/11 widows harpies and calls Bill Clinton a serial killer, Bill O’Reilly calls Rosie O’Donell and idiot, that Right Wing talk show host from Boston, one of the better bloviaters, can’t remember his name, recently called Hillary a bitch but quickly changed it to witch on air with Tucker Carlson, George Allen calls an Indian Maccao and so on and so forth…the beat goes on and one person on The Left calls a Fox reporter a monkey….
Please people, ROTFLMAO….
Comment by Maria — September 27, 2006 @ 5:08 pm
Very good post, Maria
Comment by Mr A — September 27, 2006 @ 7:11 pm