An Internet hub with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, indies, centrists, moderates, and right
The Left’s Limbaugh
As much as I used to enjoy Olbermann’s commentary, I fear Alan Stewart Carl is correct about how Keith has gone wrong.
53 Responses to “The Left’s Limbaugh”
Hmm. I suppose that those who have tolerated the insufferable Bush and that bully Cheney these past 6 years must continue rolling over and offering the olive branch like later day Jesuses, even at the cost of our not-so-slow slide into presidential absoluteism (does that sound like “dictatorship,” well, to some of us, it feels like it, too) and international disgrace.
Olbermann is more like a pissed off moderate than a leftwing windbag. Indeed, some think he was just another apologist for Bush for FAR TOO LONG.t.
gah. man. olbermann was so close to being right on… but then he just took it right over the line. so disappointing.
Olbermann has never invited terrorists to attack the United States. Olbermann has never gone after someone’s kid in order to score keep points.
The worst you can say about Olbermann is he’s a little over dramatic at times.
To say he’s the same as Limbaugh or O’Reilly is insanity.
I agree that some times Keith’s style is a bit bombastic—-he delivers his schpiel with the fervor of a fanatic—but I’m ok with that. Because what he cares about, we all should be caring about-the threat to our liberty, and the encroachment of power by the executive branch. I agree with the commenter that characterized Olberman as an extremely pissed off moderate- I don’t see him as left wing-maybe because he only goes off the deep end about Bush, Cheney and the war in Iraq. Even a few conservative Republicans have gone off the deep end about that. I see Keith as a Clinton Democrat, not a Ted Kennedy Democrat—and that is my leaning as well.
Finally, the author says that Keith fires up the audience with his anti-Bush rant and then just leaves them hanging—- what do they do from there with their built-up dissatisfaction? I think the answers rather obvious: They go vote.
The only thing I don’t like about Olberman is his sometimes over-dramatic and staged pauses.
The Difference is two things. The first is that going One KO against the likes of Coulter/Hannity/limpy the blimpy/ HH, MM, etc, is that its not even a fair fight.
The righties need to send for more guys.
Second, while Limpy cant seem to get arrested for drug trafficking, KO risks much. Don’t forget that GWB can now declare him the enemy and disappear him to gitmo.
These are the facts, and these ain’t normal times. We have had our Constitutional crises already, and the Constitution lost. Look for repercussions on or about 8+Nov. grognard can fill you in on the gory details.
The fact that KO is daring Bush to do this says the man has some brass, a rare commodity these days.
Can’t say the same for the right wing gasbags.
CS- Be honest- were you referring to this theory earlier because
a. you are a closet psychic
b. of amazing coincidence
c. you read Alan Stewart Carl’s article on Donkelephant?
I vote for c.
I think Keith’s philosophy can be summed up by Ben Franklin’s quote—”He who sacrifices his liberty for security deserves neither”. I see his speaking out at this time as a patriot, speaking out to his countrymen. But, I do agree that at times he’s a little loony. Just can’t seem to put him in the same category as the sleazy, lizard lounge Limbaugh.
I was wrong It starts now. The military is in open revolt. This is huge
The Ross Report comes the text of an editorial to be published in the Army Times, Air Force Times, Navy Times and Marine Corps Times. Here is the text
T
Right before the election.
They must be terrorist sympathizers, eh?
How many thinks that the Military didn’t like being dumped on of late in a Rovian ploy to pass the buck.
Anybody?
Here’s some real tinfoil stuff. That preacher man? The speed snorting gay hypocrite?
Honey trap by the intell guys. Who possibly didn’t appreciate being dumped on originally in a rovian ploy to pass the buck.
Any hands? Cause otherwise I would have to believe God exists and he is pissed.
No way all this just comes spilling out. Hollywood couldn’t write this stuff, and the Dems certainly don’t have the skills.
Interesting times indeed.
This is the Military calling Rumsfield a liar, right in the open bright light of day.
The Military has been trying to speak through Murtha, but now the are speaking directly to the American people.
We are through the looking glass.
Personally I felt rather empty reading the article from Donkeysite. Oh it was a witty play on words but please cite some examples.
If anything I think KO is a little verbose. I’m not exactly sure why he needed 11 minutes or whatever to get his point across but I found his points to be spot on for the most part.
Regardless he’s a heck of a lot closer to truth than Bush is when he says if the Democrats win America loses.
BTW, KO was one of the first to break the unfolding story of the Generals Revolt(yep, I’m labeling this meme right now). This will be the Topic on Sunday morning, the last one before you know what.
Nothing Kieth says is hyperbole. Donkeysite got it completely wrong, and did so with timing that would put John Kerry to shame.
The Generals handed all the reports of said sergeants, captains and majors, and told the author to sum it up in one paragraph.
Doesn’t sound too cheery, does it?
More of this? The Military says no.
While trying really hard sound like they are not trying to influence the elections, nobody who makes it to flag rank could ignore or not understand the effect this will have.
This is the military saying it will back the results of the election. The people, not Bush.
Man, to be fly on the wall at that meeting.
This is the Military taking care of one of its own.
Army Gen. John Abizaid, chief of U.S. Central Command is not to be sacrificed, or used in any Rovian ploy.
I am utterly stunned.
This has never happened before. The military is not going out like they did in Vietnam.
Bush just got served notice. The Generals are betting on Americans.
There has never been a more important election.
Snarky – you are hyperventilating man. Take a big hit and then get your breath back.
guess the author likes guys like alan colmes…the sweet little lib that heil hannity gets to beat up on everyday while spewing his filth about rape rooms and torture chambers
please…there is a need for outrage at the tactics of the right ever since 94
waaaaa….i dont like the tone of the debate
waaaaa….cant we all get along
so while the author is writing his missive the right continues to lie that pelossi is in hiding and jack murtha is a coward
enuf is enuf
Oh, and yes, having been in the military, I can tell you for a fact that nothing gets into the military press without top brass oversight. A coordinated op-ed calling for his resignation is the closest we will ever come (I sincerly hope) to a true revolution in the military ranks.
Unfortunetly, it will bind Bush’s hands for a while. To remove Rumsfeld too soon after this open breach of SOP will come across as the military controlling their civilian oversear, which is a Constitutional no-no.
Hopefully it will lead to something around a March timeframe though. That would be long enough to claim it wasn’t a direct reaction.
Remember, they didn’t wait till Monday to spring it as a surprise. They put it out late Friday so it could stew all weekend.
Theres no way the pundits aren’t all over this like sharks on chum.
This has feeding frenzy marked all over it. The last thing Bush needed was Iraq front and center.
And especially not like this.
Dems take the Senate.
Thank you for showing up Dude. I know you know what this means.
Tell me I’m not crazy man. I had to settle for 2nd rate schwag man, and I’m having a hard time believing this.
I hate that one.
Rightous rant Unky Joe!
Uhhh, Austin? You forgot that the Constitution has been deemed quaint.
I bet the Brass feel they have a least one mulligan coming vis-a-vis signing statement Nero.
Saying that Keith Olbermann is some ultra-liberal shill is just part of the same disease that is trying to shift the United States further to the right.
Not agreeing with the Bush clan is not the same as being an ultra-liberal.
Snarky – I am so disappointed in you. I am quickly losing faith, I must admit.
Are you now giving the administration of ‘Stay the course? I didn’t say stay the course. You did. You just said it. Don’t put words in my mouth’, the benefit of consistancy?
If they need it to count, it does.
And so young grasshoppa has outsnarked the master.
I shall commit sepeku now. I do not look forward to writing a haiku.
Keith Olbermann has gone wrong–in that he failed to note that Kerry is a lousy storyteller who badly botched a punchline and lacks the common touch.
Now that that’s out of the way. . .Olbermann gets the enormity of the global nightmare this administration has created–and also gets that the only way to keep his MSNBC job is with great ratings, mindless show biz reporting at the end of the hour, and yes–commentary that sometimes–but not always–goes over the top. Folks, we are not exactly living in the age of the Renaissance or the French Enlightenment. . .perhaps punditry, like politics, should be considered the art of the possible.
Jonathan Swift (His essay “A Modest Proposal” advocated that the Irish cook and eat their own babies, instead of having them starve to death under British rule), Voltaire and Thomas Paine were also over the top. . .sometimes the times call for this.
If I can’t have fair and balanced, I’ll settle for aware, informed, entertaining and iconoclastic. Olbermann may not be the perfect voice–but he’s A VOICE–at a time when so many moderates and mainstream media people are still unable or unwilling to connect the appalling dots.
I watched a couple of videos from Olberman. He and I are not exactly from the same political ideology. Anyway, I must admit that I enjoy listening to him, not because I agree with him on everything, but because he is very good in what he does: holding an angry rhetoric ‘speech’. The tricks he uses, the words he choses… very professional and very smart.
MvdG- Did you get the difference between Olberman and Limbaugh? I don’t know how much you’ve been exposed to right wing talk radio where you are. It really just doesn’t seem like a fair comparison to me, but I’ve already admitted that I agree with him mostly on his anti-Bush rants. Not sure I believe that the Bush team is out to destroy our system of government, but the cumulative effects of six years of them and the rubber-stamp Republicans HAS been devastating.
I don’t think that he’d tear apart any conservative or any Republican just for their political beliefs, whereas Rush is an equal opportunity abuser, and also happens to merrily abuse the facts. He is a walking, talking campaign ad- mean-spirited, negative, manipulative, destructive and vindictive when faced with an opponent. And now let me tell you his bad qualities….. Just kidding on the last part.
LOL, actually Kim, it’s:
d. Great minds think alike.
I had not seen this Donklephant post (I couldn’t find a time stamp to see if I could prove it; not sure if this was posted prior to my comment here). But if I could show you my computer cookie/history log you would see that I don’t read Donklephant regularly and don’t think I’ve been on that blog for at least a couple of days. However, I agree 110% with it and I think that it is so spot on, I wish I had written it. These excerpts in particular, are the points I wish I could have expressed as well:
[...]
[...]
Now, keep those quotes in your mind as you read this quote from commenter Sylny here:
And SnarkyShark:
CS Stowbridge:
and your own comment, Kim:
Now, think back to all those conversations we’ve had here where most of us agreed that the country is too divided and that we need to heal the rift. This was even discussed in the context of the greatest problem that America faces today. So, are we going to get serious about a remedy for that problem?
The trouble is, I understand that you guys feel that the Republicans are the ones who caused the rift, and I understand that you see people like Rush Limbaugh as a big part of that, but saying that now it’s the left’s turn to engage in the same thing is saying that it’s more important for your side to try to even the score than it is for us to try to unite as a country.
In a lot of ways, too, I feel that listening to Limbaugh has in the long run been bad for the GOP and bad for the country. I guess I feel a bit like a parent trying to tell a teenaged kid: “Don’t make the same mistakes I made” and you guys are acting like the teenager who’s thinking that Mom just doesn’t want him/her to have any fun.
Kim, I don’t belive that they are actually out to intentionally destroy our system of government. But I most certainly do believe that that will be the practical effect, if this stuff doesn’t stop. (and if we don’t reverse some of what’s already happened.)
I think that what has possibly happened here is that the people in power, and the portion of the american populace listening to them, have mistaken security for freedom. It is also a common thing in this country to equate Freedom with America. Therefore, if anyone is not willing to take whatever measures necessary to ensure that no American (civilian) ever gets hurt, then that person is the enemy of Freedom and, therefore, the enemy of America.
I suspect that, for many of them to a great degree, it is simply an honest mistake. Honest, perhaps, but very, very deadly.
C.S. if you were younger, if I were older, if you were Dutch or if I were American….
Just kiddin’ of course.
I second your comment.
Kim:
Kim, I am a little afraid that you’re closing your eyes for the obvious: Olberman is doing the exact same thing. He even uses the same comparisons: suddenly he compared Bush to Chaimberlin I mean… come..on..
He isn’t much better than Limbaugh et al.-> there is just one major difference: he is not coming from the right, but from the left. In other words, he uses different ‘arguments’.
For a conservative, however, Olberman is probably just as ‘awful’ as Limbaugh is to ‘liberals’.
and about this C.S.
Muwhahahahaha
I loved that comparison.
CS- No time stamp? No cookie? No tickie no washie!
Just kidding LOL– if you say its d, I guess I’ll just hafta trust ya.Its a weakness we liberal wussies have. I was just a little amazed at the coincidence of seeing this comparison twice within a 12-hour period, since its not an obvious one at all to me or others here.–Of course Snark the Shark went off the deep end on this one and wrote 90% of the protests, lol. Thought he had no tv???
As to the rest of your post, I get what you’re saying–that divisiveness from either side is bad for America– and it is. But Democracy is a messy thing, and I highly doubt that the Dittoheads and Olberman’s audience are going to be holding hands around the campfire and singing Kumbaya any time soon. He is just expressing the frustration of not
only the left, but many in the middle as well. If no one felt what he is expressing, he would have been cancelled by MSNBC long ago.
I guess you could say the same for Rush. I think our government no longer represents its people well- and if so, those who speak out are right to do so. I don’t think Keith has the same game plan as Rush–he just wants his country back. I don’t think he would be on a rant if there was more centrist government, that was functioning well or at least much better.
I guess what I am trying to say is that I don’t see what he does as a mistake. He’s trying to wake up the public to see what is going on with their government. I’m sure Rush supporters feel the same-but as long as Rush, Hannity, O’Reilly, Savage, Coulter, Malkin, Beck, etc are there on the right, there will be a reaction to them. Keith may have strong opinions, but I doubt that he has the kind of influence that all of the right wingers do, who are die-hard supporters of the Bush administration.
As long as I think he’s telling the truth and not just gratuitously bashing, I’ll be a fan.
BTW, I think that divided govt, while maybe leading to gridlock, is the only way back to the grounded center. That is the only place that will even begin to ease the divisiveness we are seeing.
Then the rift will begin to heal, but not before–when the imbalance is corrected.
Kim,
Another possibility: Maybe Alan Stewart Carl read my comment here yesterday and took his cue from me LOL
Personally, I find Olberman’s rants hard to listen to. Much too long. I’d like to see him do three minutes at the end of each show, and a little balance to prove he can do it, with a comic touch at times.
But the attempt to equate KO with Rush is mostly wrong-headed. KO is tightly focused on the GWB Administration. Rush wants his audience to loathe liberals in general. As such, Rush is the essence of divisiveness. KO is an angry man, inclined to self-indulgence at times.
I think a lot of moderates make the mistake of conflating anger and divisiveness. It’s understandable that they would do this with all the manufactured outrage being bandied about, but I do think KO’s anger is the real thing.
In the workplace anger is largely out of bounds; problems are to be dealt with rationally and theater is to be eschewed. Not so with politics.
That’s becoming more and more of a problem. So much power is based on the management of theatrics, and it’s probably not realistic to expect the general public to rise to the required sophistication to see through the flim-flammery and get at the practical essence of what politicians and commentators are really saying.
Are KO and Rush equivalent theatrical/political operators? I think not, because KO is explicit in what he’s saying. Rush operates by innuendo. KO says we should be outraged by specific events and circumstances. Rush exploits, not really outrage, but fear and resentment at the world at large.
Both do make their political opponents angry, but I think those who equate the two make too much of those angry reactions, at the loss of understanding what’s really being said and/or implied.
Don’t make the same mistakes I made” and you guys are acting like the teenager who’s thinking that Mom just doesn’t want him/her to have any fun.
CS- Now has that advice ever worked —in your experience? And remember it was I who brought up the Fairness Doctrine, which was shot down as overregulation and unnecessary interference by the government against freedom of speech by just about everybody here. I may stand alone, but I still believe in it. When it was repealed we saw the rise of talk radio and the shoutfests that pass for cable news shows. What would you say to those audiences? Have higher standards? Check every word uttered against fact-based reality? Eat your broccoli and don’t stay up too late on a school night? (Ok this last was snarky)
Are you calling clear channel to complain about the content on any of these shows? E-mailing Rupert Murdoch to ask why he allows Billo to say his audience is entering a nonspin zone?
We need KO to speak the truth about the War on Xmas and the War on Easter. These Libruls don’t believe in the Easter Bunny and want a Jihad against fuzzy stuffed bunnies and chocalate eggs. These “Godless” Libruls will soon meet with Ackmaginadada to plot the otherthrow of the “Great Pumpkin”.
MvdG- I mostly agree with jjc’s take on this subject.
Yes, KO has made some outrageous comparisons—but so have Rumsfeld, Cheney and Bush. Comparing war critics to Hitler appeasers? Or to terrorist enablers? The rhetoric has been flying from our own government—who I guess represents only the 30% that support the war. So it didn’t offend me as much as it could have. I think that all of the comparisons to Hitler and dire warnings about OSB have been irresponsible and hope they will have the cumulative effect of a noneffect-so that we can get back to the facts. Looks like from what’s come out even in the last 24 hours, they will be damning enough without the ridiculous rhetoric.
KO couldn’t hack it on ESPN’s Sportscenter, so he brought his act over to MSNBC….
If anyone could be the left equivalent of Limbaugh it must be Bill Maher. I do like to watch both Real Time and Countdown. Yes, sometimes Keith is a litle over the top, but Bill is most every week. However, I think Bill is funnier than Limbaugh.
I also like to watch Scarborough Country and Lou Dobbs. I can’t stand Limbaugh or Hannity anymore, they are too insulting.
Ok, so how is the left supposed to fight back? When the left has tried to stay out of the gutter they get accused of being weak (think 2000 to 2004). Now they’ve jumped into the mud and they are getting accused of being divisive.
I think the left waited for the far-right to clean it’s own house long enough. The far-right has been throwing mud for so long, I’m not sure their political consultants know how to do anything else.
Do I like this situation? NO!!! But I’ll excuse the left for coming to the reality that the far-right will not clean up it’s act. Hopefully everyone will now agree that this mud slinging is bad and rise above it together.
Rambie- That is exactly the point I’ve been trying to convey to CS. Nice guys finish last, kinda sums it up, and suffice it to say, Dems are tired of finishing last.
Clinton showed the left how to fight back in his tete-a-tete with Chris Wallace, and I am proud to say they are following his advice.
I guess I’ll start taking advice from those on the right when I see them complaining to the RNC about the audacity of some of their campaign ads, or to the FCC about the lack of truthfulness on talk radio. In the meantime, the right should leave Keith Olbermann and his rants alone.
Well, that’s hypocrisy at its finest Kim. The ‘left’ is not exactly leaving Limbaugh alone either are they? Of course not. You aren’t either. You’re attacking Limbaugh whenever you can so it seems. But the right cannot criticize the Limbaugh of the left Keith Olberman (I’m exaggerating here a bit, but trying to make a point)?
That’s truly hypocritical.
How it should be is that ‘the right’ criticizes Olberman and ‘the left’ Limbaugh (and both Limbaugh and Olberman when they go too far for instance). That is logical. That makes sense. Or both should not criticize either one. But that also means that ‘the left’ (I’m talking in the terms you use) should ‘leave’ Limbaugh et al. ‘alone’.
Something tells me that this won’t happen.
That is why this “in the meantime, the right should leave Keith Olbermann and his rants alone”, is highly hypocritical.
Personally I believe that everyone should criticize both although it is logical that the right will focus more on Olberman (and only on Limbaugh when he truly goes too far – MJF for instance) and the left more on Limbaugh (and on Olberman when he is going too far).
That’s how it must be done Kim.
Good idea! Hey GOP listen up: We’ll clean up our house if you clean up yours. Of course, this isn’t the only thing the far-right (no, not CS the real far-right) is in denial about.
MvdG- yes, in a perfect world that is how it should be—but if you really could see the preponderance of right wing cable and talk radio shows, you would realize how outnumbered the left is. I actually have said on previous threads that I couldn’t listen to Air America- it was very obviously destructive and one-sidedly leftist. I have already said that I don’t consider KO a real lefty- but a very angry moderate.
I notice that you and CS both react strongly to rhetoric that goes against the administration -like Keith’s reference to Chamberlain—but where are yo when the POTUS goes out on the campaign trail and proclaims “The Democratic approach in Iraq comes down to this: the terrorists win and America loses.”
Or do you only condemn it when it doesn’t come from your side?
BTW. I heartily disagree with your entire premise. KO is not the Limbaugh of the left—what evidence do you have that he is a lefty and not a centrist?
Disagreement with this administration or its policies is hardly confined to the left.
Kim, that’s the problem here. MvdG is right that both sides are blind to the hypocrisy of their own side. Both sides jeer the opposition but cheer their side and refuse to condemn their own except in VERY RARE cases.
However, Michael, Kim and I are also right. It’s very hypocritical of the right to be calling foul until they clean their own house.
So we’re all basically hypocrites, Rambie??. I can live with that-as long as I’m a Democratic hypocrite instead of a Republican one.
(stands up) My name is Rambie and I’m a hypocrite. There, the first step is the hardest one they say.
Kim, I just call ‘em as I see ‘em. Maybe we need to “political 12-step program” to rid us hypocrisy. I’m adult enough to admit that I, at times, can be blind to hypocrisy.
Now we’ll see how mad I made both sides. (looks to the left… looks to the right…) “uh oh.” (begins to put on flame-resistant suit) Is it getting hot in here or is it just the flame-throwers?
Ok, that was supposed to be:
Well maybe you’re right—I don’t claim to be nonpartisan-but do try to use reason. I think I would be less defensive of the Dems in different times–but I know how important restoring divided government is. See- I didn’t go for the whole enchilada—so maybe there’s some hope, LOL.
If the Repubs move a little back towards center, I could stomach voting for them again—but we have been through too much. I believe Kerry lost in 2004 for three major reasons– his pedantic east coast liberal elitist style does not appeal to the man in the street, he made major gaffes in his campaign like the one this week, and he didn’t fight the swift-boat smear campaign. His response was a non-response -he didn’t want to dignify the accusations with an answer-so he lost. The Dems were labeled weak and wussy for staying above the fray.
Also, the R’s will have to lose a few elections before they lose the divisive rhetoric–its been their ticket to victory since 1994 —remember Newt’s GOPAC tapes? If one side is mean and vindictive, the other needs to fight to win. I regret that but its true.
KO is fighting back. I don’t like the rhetoric-but I get why he’s doing it. Its like David and Goliath to me. When balance returns, I hope both sides will stuff the terrorist appeaser and Nazi rhetoric, and sanity will return.
Excellent point jjc,
“Both do make their political opponents angry, but I think those who equate the two make too much of those angry reactions, at the loss of understanding what’s really being said and/or implied. “
Right now we are in the political points scoring mode if you will. That could change with the possibility of an actual change in power. My fear is the both sides are pumping and priming for a fight without the gloves on and with the stakes so high the inflammatory commentary can have more of an effect than making the other side angry. The trouble is that if this election is close and viciously contested in the courts [and the media/airwaves] it only takes only one rash act by someone to put this talk over the top. Constant denigration of “the other side� has a corrosive effect on the way we see each other, I hope we are not going to pay the price for not confronting this part of the political dialog.
Grognard- In theory, I agree -I see the danger of it, and would love to go back to when politicians spoke of their worthy opponent and not act as though every word of their opponent’s mouth had to be due to desperation. But in all practicality- what can we do? Just like sex and violence on cable and in the movies—how do you get something this ingrained out of the culture?
Plus do you think the Dems should do what Kerry did and continue to take the hit for it?
Kim, that’s the thing, if one side justifies it then the other side can. If moderates don’t go for this commentary that gives us the edge, as I have said before someone needs to be the adults. I feel this rhetoric is like spreading gas all over the place, all you need is the spark. What would happen if someone were to shoot Michael Moore, or Ann Coulter? How do you think this pent up anger would erupt over an event like this and how a tragedy like this would confirm what the other side supposedly represents? I think we would go beyond
political points scoring and get into something really nasty.