People and Politics


People and Politics by Patrick Roberts

Keith Olbermann suspension is complete nonsense and NBC knows it

Posted on Friday, November 05, 2010 at 11:07 PM

RSS


Recent Posts

Archives

submit to reddit


Keith Olbermann was right. He contributed to Democratic candidates as a citizen, which he is perfectly entitled to do. It is absurd that his bosses at MSNBC have decided to discipline him.

Over at Fox News they must be laughing all the way to the bank.

Rupert Murdoch and News International made it crystal clear when they backed conservative groups with over a $ 1 million donation that they were putting their money where their mouth was.

Olbermann decided, in a much smaller way that he wanted to do the same. Several colleagues at CNBC and MSNBC and NBC and GE which owns NBC have all contributed to candidates.

And he gets suspended for doing that as well?

This is liberal nonsense run amok, a complete fake sense of outrage of what modern politics is all about.

Does anyone really think that Keith Olbermann is supposed to be impartial and not support one side or the other?

He's a committed Democrat of course, something that is obvious to every one alive.

The fact that he is putting his money where his mouth is not a source of shock to anyone except the lily-livered folk at MSNBC.

Sean Hannity has taken part in Tea Party meetings, Glenn Beck has led a massive rally. Are Democrats remotely surprised or shocked. Should they be disciplined too?

Of course not. As Mr. Dooley said 'politics ain't beanbag' especially in this modern era.

It reminds me of the nonsense surrounding Juan Williams and National Public Radio.

The liberals need to get a grip here. The world is not a perfect shade of in-between, people have feelings beliefs, commitments.

Sometimes they want to back those feelings with political support. They are American citizens too, and are fully entitled to.

This Olbermann nonsense is completely ridiculous.


59 comments

Next Previous Page 2 of 4 pages
For someone who makes claims about not waiting with baited breath, it took you all of 7 minutes to answer my last reply. Should I expect another quick reply or are you headed out for lunch again now that you haven't addressed the issue of Fox believing they are under no obligation to tell the truth on their broadcasts?
daddy'o, you remind me of the black knight guarding the footbridge in monty pythons "in search of the holy grail"...Still flailing away but never getting a blow in, still have not answered the basic question posed to ye. Have a good day black knight, we know you can't win, but you can make a bit of noise.
Children, children....there is no need for the attitude. The truth is all around you if you choose to see it. I find the truth everywhere. As far as the moniker is concerned, you see the replies from the mouth breathers and you take them with a grain of salt. ignorance can be overcome as it is simply the lack of knowledge. However, there ain't no cure for stupid. Maloney, let's use you as an example. The truth I find in you is that spelling gives you trouble. I get my divine info where we all get it. I get my devine info from Andy, bless his soul. Monsoon...it was not one story about erroneous reporting. It was a statement of how Fox runs their organization. When you go into court and claim that the news doesn't have to be the truth, then we watch as they prove that point on a daily basis, where I find truth becomes irrelevant next to the question "why do you continuously distort the truth?" have a good one.
Bigdaddy I guess if I don't agree with your crybaby hypocrite view on Fox news I'm uninformed? Oh well there's always MSNBC and the cast of cacklers and cheerleaders.
As far as handles go, "Big Daddy" is not exactly a moniker you would expect emanating from a think tank ! Sort of like being at a Marina, where the next boat is the "Happy Hooker"
IC sometimes takes 2 to 4 hours for a post to show up, bigdaddy, who knows why. Do you get your devine info from msnbs? The news gurus with o'donnell who Fri. admitted he was a socialist & way to the left of progressives. Who said, from liberals to socialists, they need to hide behind blue dog dems? I'll continue to watch all of them, then make up my own mind who's telling the truth. I know some, if not all of Monsanto is govt. controlled. You can get in trouble for saying the wrong thing.
I agree!
Geesh bigdaddy...So you think I sit at my computer waiting with baited breath ( I just had a sushi lunch) waiting for you to get back to me? So in the spirit of NOT making you the topic, I ask you respectfully and earnestly to fill us in on where the source of truth is in your world? where do you get your great enlightenment that gives you the corner on the truth...and yeah, ok you point out 1 story on Fox as an example of erroneous reporting...I didn't ask you to prove a negative I asked you to educate us with the source of truth...Is it Irish Central? ABC? Katie Couric and CBS? (ms)nbc? CNN? Huffington Post? Or all organizations funded by the Soros foundation?...Please fill us in o'daddy.
Monsoonman...if you care to find a little truth, Google Fox and milk additive. Long story short, you will find that in a law suit, Fox argued that the news does not have to be true. Along with Murdoch's claim that he manipulates the news to fit his agenda, I cannot understand why anyone who watches Fox would think that any truth resides there. Also, was my last post deleted due to the reference to Monsanto?
Since Monsoonman has lost his courage, I will address this to anyone here who wishes to learn a bit more about Fox. Google Fox and milk additive. You will find a story that Fox investigated (Monsanto chemical that was added to most of the milk in Florida, maybe most of America by now) was tested for 30 days on 30 rats. It was then cleared for use in the milk supply. When Fox reporters wanted to run the story, Fox (under pressure from Monsanto) refused. They did run a version of the story that eliminated the potential threat from the additive. When sued by the reporters, Fox presented the argument that there is no law in the US that says the news has to be true. The Florida Superior court agreed with them. But don't take my word for it; check it out for yourself and draw your own conclusions. btw Rupert Murdoch has admitted manipulating the "news" to fit his agenda. But,if the truth makes you uncomfortable,ignore it as some here do.
Moon...As many neocon sympathizers do, you make me the topic rather than Fox's aversion to the truth. While I may not have the exact location of "the truth" I am reasonably certain that looking for it at Fox News is a lost cause. Fox does not believe that the news needs to be true. This is a verifiable fact and if you care to discuss this fact, I will help you in the search for this truth.
So bigdaddy, care to enlighten us as to where we may get the real truth? You know, the same place you get yours? tia
I have watched Keith Obermann ever since he was a sports caster. He has an ego as big as the universe and is a pompas bafoon, extremly opiniated and runs with the credo, "Don't confuse me with facts, my mind is already made up!"
@semperfi...what difference do ratings matter if it is the truth you are in search of? And I thought Marines were a breed apart; why would you want to follow the crowd? Maybe you are simply looking for someone to validate your opinions and learning something you do not already know is not what you are after?
@hancock...Your handle seems like a Freudian slip after reading your opinions @Monsoonman...the "successful business model" at Fox is based on the fact that the news does not need to be true. It is an indcitment of both you and Comcast that you choose to call anyone who does not agree with your "model" as a Marxist, don't you think?
Next Previous Page 2 of 4 pages




Log into IrishCentral with your Facebook account


or sign-in directly

E-Mail:
Password:
 Remember me Forgot my password
Not a member? Register Now!
print this article Print
email this articleE-mail