Olbermann...Obama...Olberama...Obamican...Olberamican. Obermamacan....damn it! I see a pattern here.
Hmmmm...Hillary is bleeding big ticket donors... Clyburn made a few comments...Wright was on Moyers...and your enlightened analyis? Olbermann is a sexist and a misogynist.
Now if I can just find some time to update the rulebook - there's just so much backlog.
I can. Hillarians are as willing to misinterpret, bend and break rules in their quest for political domination as were republi-cons for Buschco. There's your update.
Posted by phidipides at April 26, 2008 11:54 AMCountdown has done like one thousand times more good for the progressive cause than this website has even dreamed about.
Posted by Joe at April 26, 2008 12:09 PMPlease.
Olbermann mangles a line from a Road Warrior movie and here in fantasyland people think he's making a physical threat against the Divinity. Someone call the Secret Service.
Meanwhile, Clinton threatens genocide against the innocent men, women and children of Iran (and plenty of fallout around the world for everyone to inhale) in case the Iranian leaders use a nuclear bomb (which they don't have) against Israel (which has had hundreds of nuclear weapons for decades now) in some paranoid Republican vision of the future.
So what twists eriposte's panties?
Let's look at the harm of what Olbermann said versus what Clinton said. Will someone beat up Hillary because he mangled a metaphor? No. Will a President use Clinton's bellicose wardance to justify attacking Iran on his way out of office? Well, Bush used the vote for authorization to use military power to push his illegal war against Iraq. We're living the results and Clinton, who refuses to apologize for that vote, hasn't made step one towards holding Bush accountable.
So when Bush starts dropping those bunker busters in a week or a month, you folks here at Left Coast can all thank Hillary for her tough talk. You can say to yourselves, yeah, those vaporized Iranians, my candidate helped kill them.
Posted by Bob In Pacifica at April 26, 2008 12:09 PMSpot on Bob
Posted by Joe at April 26, 2008 12:11 PMCountdown has done like one thousand times more good for the progressive cause than this website has even dreamed about.
Oh shit! You did it now! Prepare for incoming...
Posted by phidipides at April 26, 2008 12:12 PMIf someone supposedly, "threatens genocide," following an incident that will never happen then have they threatened genocide? Bob, get over yourself. I guess someone could explain to you that since the 50's it has been the policy of the entire developed world that a nuclear attack on any nation would be responded to with a nuclear attack by that nation or its allies. Because of this policy there have been no nuclear attacks since WWII, not in Korea, not in Vietnam, not in any of the Israeli conflicts, not in Afghanistan, not in either Iraq war. That's how it works. Read a little history. While you're at it, take a moment, will you, and tell us all how Obama has held Bush accountable for anything. In fact Obama's surrogate, Pelosi, has taken impeachment off the table.
Posted by Johnny at April 26, 2008 12:32 PMeRiposte - You speak for me and many other progressive men, not to mention many progressive women who know exactly what Keith's little game was about. Spot on. Keith was corrected. Have a great day!
Posted by jeter at April 26, 2008 12:32 PMAt least Keith hasn't worn the T-shirt I saw on a Harley biker Mensa candidate yesterday which read: "50,000 battered women, and I eat mine plain?!".
Posted by TIKI AL at April 26, 2008 12:38 PMTom Brokaw should bend Oblermann over his knee and spank him.. on television.
Posted by MarkL at April 26, 2008 12:51 PMThanks, eriposte. I notice that none of the misogyny-apologists above answered your question: what would have happened if these words had been spoke about The Precious?
Lying hypocrites.
Posted by at April 26, 2008 12:56 PMThat last Markos quote is a classic. How can anyone still take the man seriously?
Posted by cygnus at April 26, 2008 01:06 PMthe concept of nuclear deterrence is too complex for some, i guess.
Posted by Turkana at April 26, 2008 01:47 PMwhat would have happened if these words had been spoke about The Precious?
You mean, in the context of the quote discussing the inability of Clinton to overcome the arithmetic of her campaign?
It might help you if you stop googling "The Precious" and google "Obama Black" or "Obama Nigger". Enlightening....
...and tell us all how Obama has held Bush accountable for anything.
Apply that same standard to your candidate. On April 14th Obama said he would have his Attorney General begin investigations into the Buschco criminal gang. Shillary has been uniquely quiet on the issue. Obama hammers the misadministration in every speech. Shillary hammers Obama. Go figure.
...many progressive women who know exactly what Keith's little game was about.
"If you can't stand the heat you should get out of the kitchen!" Hillary Clinton, 2008
Posted by phidipides at April 26, 2008 01:57 PM
OK, so don't watch Tweety or KO.
You have your grounds apparently. So turn off the tube. Don't watch cable.
Whay does this have to do with the discriminative issues that are relevant to this primary campaign and BEATING McCAIN???
Not worth a post and not of the level of discourse that would cause either a Clinton or an Obama supporter to change their mind.
Posted by tfitznc at April 26, 2008 02:23 PMI'm not sure what surprised me the most, that Keith was so stupid in what he said (although even he had the decency to at least apologize I see) or that people on this thread are ignoring it and apparently silently condoning it. I give up...this is sick.
Posted by emal at April 26, 2008 02:46 PMBTW and more to the point than KO's nonsense, Obama's face scratching, and your ongoing fawning over Chelsea:
(1) "More than 70 top Clinton donors wrote their first checks to Obama in March, campaign records show. Clinton's lead among superdelegates, a collection of almost 800 party leaders and elected officials, has slipped from 106 in December to 23 now, according to an Associated Press tally."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/25/AR2008042503707.html
(2) "A major fundraiser for Hillary Clinton, former Amb. to Chile Gabriel Guerra-Mondragon is leaving the campaign to join up Barack Obama's campaign. Officially dubbed a "Hillraiser," Guerra-Mondragon raised nearly $500,000 for Clinton's campaign, according to some estimates. He has been informing people inside Clintonworld this week in what's been described as some tough conversations. A formal announcement of a role for Guerra-Mondragon on Obama's national finance committee will be made next week. Guerra-Mondragon was appointed Amb. to Chile by Pres. Clinton in '94 and served until '98."
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/04/25/946650.aspx
It isn't KO or the other 'straw men and women' that you have cited ad nauseum who are responsible for the sinking Clinton ship; it is the captain herself.
Bob, get over yourself.
I'm sorry, but I must concur, Bob. This is all posted on Hillary's campaign website, but I will go over it one more time. I'm sorry to have to take you to the woodshed over this.
Hillary Rule #1: If it comes out of Hillary's mouth she doesn't mean it.
I think this covers the issue of genocide in Iran quite nicely. Now, some would say "But then how can you trust anything she says during her campaign?" These kind of people are what the Hillarians call 'activists', 'liberals', 'grassroots', etc. To cover her campaign statements you must go to Hillary Rule #2.
Hillary Rule #2: Everything Hillary says she will do is gospel.
Again, you might think this is in apposition to Hillary Rule #1. I assure you, it is not. Everything she says she will do she fully intends to do, but any conflicts are covered under Hillary Rule #3.
Hillary Rule #3: Anything Hillary says covered by Hillary Rule #1 is just rhetoric unless what she has said is not rhetoric in which case it is covered by Hillary Rule #2. Hillary Rule #3 overrides the prior Hillary Rules unless Hillary Rule #1 was invoked erroneously. In that case, refer to Hillary Rules #2 & #3 for clarification.
...or that people on this thread are ignoring it and apparently silently condoning it.
To K.O. - Keith Olbermann, you son-of-a-bitch! How dare you say something really stupid, recognize it, and then apologize for it! You owe Hillary Clinton an immediate apology... Okay, you did that. But, you bastard! Don't you know that you portrayed sexist stereotypes with your comment? You should be castrated! I know I'm being tough...so, if you can't stand the heat you should stay out of the kitchen.
Happy now?
Posted by phidipides at April 26, 2008 03:32 PMActually, KO did not apologize to Hillary, he apologized to Rachel Sklar, and his apology was the typical MSNBC snickering non-apology, after which he will go right back to his disgusting women-hating rants.
Some of the people who post are here are disturbingly neanderthal-like in their attitudes about the media demeaning women. I never thought the democratic race would reveal all this putrid hatred. I am so incredibly sad. I don't even care anymore about this election.
Posted by at April 26, 2008 04:08 PM"what would have happened if these words had been spoke about The Precious?
You mean, in the context of the quote discussing the inability of Clinton to overcome the arithmetic of her campaign?
It might help you if you stop googling "The Precious" and google "Obama Black" or "Obama Nigger". Enlightening...."
________________
Um, enlightening phidipides? Not exactly - I don't even know wtf you're talking about. Too complex for me I guess.
I originally noted that none of the Olbermann-misogyny-apologists here can answer eriposte's question about what would have happened if Olbermann's disgusting comments had been directed at Obama rather than Clinton. That's because the answer, of course, is so embarrassingly obvious: hypocritical outrage and shrill charges of racism. With Clinton, of course, anything goes. Of course you don't get it - you never will either.
Posted by at April 26, 2008 04:36 PMAn adult should step forward and expalin to Keith that it is not appropriate for him to appear on the teevee each evening and vomit on his shirt: such is is "journalism / opinion."
Posted by Bagley at April 26, 2008 04:50 PM...hypocritical outrage and shrill charges of racism.
Being an Obama supporter, I've seen blatant racism since he started running. Have I said as much? Several times. Where I differ from the Hillarians is I don't scream VICTIM!! each and every time I mention it, and I don't try and find it by parsing every word every person utters. Is there sexism in this campaign? Yep. Is it as bad as you say it is? Nope. I've seen some pretty thin evidence for what others would call sexism. But those who wish to claim sexism can do a Margaret Mead if they wish. She, too, always found what she went looking for.
An adult should step forward and expalin to Keith that it is not appropriate for him to appear on the teevee each evening and vomit on his shirt: such is is "journalism / opinion."
Keith, I openly ask you to stop calling Busch an idiot. You're offending lots of idiots out there. Please have some compassion and realize that the idiots who are victims of your slander are innocent of presidential idiocy. Thanks, buddy! Phid
That help, Bags?
Posted by phidipides at April 26, 2008 06:08 PMBecause Hillary is getting such an ass-whipping in the primaries her supporters have gone all manic in their defense of her. Look at the horseshit statements she has made about Obama constantly. Hey Hillary supporters, if you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen. go cry in your beer, she's done, she's a terrible politician and has run a juvenile campaign. Her side can dish it out but sure can't take it.
Posted by Joe at April 26, 2008 08:50 PMSeems Obama does get...at least when he's talking about many progressives. He said they talk tough, but really aren't. Yeah, he was refering to Clinton, but, it describes many here.
Posted by peter at April 27, 2008 06:33 AMJohnny, I guess you read what I wrote, but you missed the point. First, it was a comparison between what Olbermann said and what Clinton said. By your standards we shouldn't be discussing what Olbermann said because he didn't mean anything literally, but was using a metaphor. So thanks for that.
Regarding nuclear policy, there is a difference between a treaty and a threat. But here is the meat of it. When Clinton and the others gave Bush authorization to go to war, he did. We've seen the results. Twice now, with Kyl-Lieberman and now with her latest sabre-rattling, she has put forward in most bellicose terms attacking a country which hasn't invaded a neighbor in, what, two hundred years (as a historian, I'm sure you can come up with the date). When our air force starts dropping those nuclear bunker busters in the near future, do you really think that any talking head will say: "You know, Senator Clinton in her comments mentioned the use of nuclear weapons theoretically in response to a nuclear attack on Israel. She did not condone this specific attack." Hell no. She will be on board whether she wanted to or not.
So, Johnny, you and your candidate get to share a percentage of the Iranian dead. Thanks for playing the war-mongering game. Make sure you have your flag pin on.
P.S. Thanks for using Pelosi as your straw man. I guess Reverend Wright couldn't be blamed for not impeaching Bush.
Posted by Bob In Pacifica at April 27, 2008 07:52 AMTurkana, since nuclear deterence is so complex, explain to me why Clinton had to threaten, not deter, Iranians with "obliteration" for using a weapon that they don't have against a country that has had hundreds of for several decades now? Don't the women in Iran count for anything (Apparently, not in American politics)? Or is your brand of feminism just extended to the rich white ones who seek political power? The rest apparently can burn to a crisp or die from radiation poisoning.
Genocidal fantasies are ugly things. Your candidate just had one. And in the world of realpolitick they give cover to those who like to act on those fantasies. Keith Olbermann isn't going to beat up a woman. He's not going to beat up Clinton. The odds are much better that the Bush-Clinton fantasy is going to be visiting Iran in the coming months. Hey, maybe it'll get your candidate into the White House.
Turkana, you support genocidal talk, you own the genocide.
Posted by Bob In Pacifica at April 27, 2008 08:03 AMTo paraphrase Bob in Pacifica:
"Bob in Pacifica, you support misogynistic talk, you own the misogyny."
Oh wait, I forgot. You're a hypocrite. And I also forgot about the fact that you enjoy demeaning talk about women.
Posted by at April 27, 2008 12:29 PM"Countdown has done like one thousand times more good for the progressive cause than this website has even dreamed about."
yep
and don't you just love how Hillary oh so casually threatened nuclear attacks on Iran. Guess her and McCain have a pandering contest going on.
Posted by Gay Veteran at April 28, 2008 08:28 AMAnd the point is what exactly? That there's one more pathetic excuse for a news commentator, and he turns out to be a Democrat?
Next thing you'll be telling us that some mysterious "Obama surrogates" have obviously "approved" of Olberman's inanities, and that to believe anything else is evidence of Clinton Derangement Syndrome, or Obamamania, or some such.
Posted by at April 28, 2008 01:01 PMI never liked Olbermann; I always felt MSNBC needed to get their ratings up so they got him to spout anti-Bush shit, which I never swallowed. Keithy boy was on corporate TV!
TV is the boob tube and you can't take anything the tube tells you, because it's all propaganda and those in the know can reach that conclusion quite nicely.
Posted by Maniacal at April 28, 2008 08:58 PM