Say Anything Blog

Olbermann needs to stick to what he actually knows, sports.

How soon we forget that his departure from ESPN spawned one of the most annoying anchors in history - Stewar Scott.

It’s kinda funny; as I remember, Olberman has called the President and his administration Nazis lots of times.  Wonder why he’s so sensitive about it now?

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

It also explains why MSNBC’s and Olberman’s ratings are so low.  In absolute numbers there aren’t all that many moonbats out there.

Does anyone actually watch MSNBC? I never have, so I don’t even know who their anchors or commentators are. I googled Olberman and he appears to be a second-rate sports announcer. Why would anyone listen to his opinions about politics? That is like listening to Bill Maher or Al Franken. Or Dennis Miller.

Olberman isn’t even a real journalist so what is he upset about?

Funny how none of the liberal commenters here have taken me up on my challenge.

I think we can all safely assume that Olbermann is a liar.

The purpose of government shouldn’t be to do good, but simply to refrain from doing evil.

O does not say B “compares critics to Nazi’s”.

it thus becomes necessary to remind the President that his administration’s recent Nazi “kick” is an awful and cynical thing.

What O Said.

Based on the transcript I saw, Olbermann didn’t say that Bush called his detractors nazis.  Where, specifically, does Olbermann do that?

Try watching the video that Rob linked to. It’s not that hard. 

Olbermann said right away that the President was linking and tying his detractors to the Nazis.

Very Clintonian way to try to weasel Olbermann out of what he said.

Olbermann said right away that the President was linking and tying his detractors to the Nazis.

So, in other words, he didn’t say that Bush called or compared his critics to Nazis.

Thanks for clarifying that.

(guys, by the way: Olbermann’s point was that Bush was comparing al-Q, not his critics, to Nazis, thereby keeping up with the appeasement meme that has been beloved by the right wing echo chamber, and which the administration is starting to pick up in its desperation.  Reading comprehension?  Kinda important.)

JPE:  Please watch the video.  In about the first ten seconds Olbermann said it was to the President shame that he tried to tie “loyal Americans” to the Nazis.

What is the difference between “comparing” and “tying to?”

If I compare someone to a Nazi am I not also tying them to the Nazis?  Or to Nazism?

Quit parsing, jpe.

The purpose of government shouldn’t be to do good, but simply to refrain from doing evil.

Io compare would be a direct examination of similarities and/or differences.

Olbermann notes the President “ties”  critics through the tortured Bush syllogisms of Hitler -book- Ossama- writtings- Qaeda media campaign- western media.

Woof, I’ve linked the speech.  Please provide an example.

The purpose of government shouldn’t be to do good, but simply to refrain from doing evil.

The unsaid conclusion of the tortured syllogisms are that there is an Al qaeda media campaign and the western media is complicit in it.

“a media campaign… to create a wedge between the American people and their government…..
his media campaign, bin Laden says, will send the American people a number of messages, including “that their government [will] bring them more losses, in finances and casualties”

Here’s the full quote free of Woofie’s selective editing:

Secondly, along with this campaign of terror, the enemy has a propaganda strategy. Osama bin Laden laid out this strategy in a letter to the Taliban leader, Mullah Omar, that coalition forces uncovered in Afghanistan in 2002. In it, bin Laden says that al Qaeda intends to “[launch],” in his words, “a media campaign… to create a wedge between the American people and their government.” This media campaign, bin Laden says, will send the American people a number of messages, including “that their government [will] bring them more losses, in finances and casualties.” And he goes on to say that “they are being sacrificed… to serve… the big investors, especially the Jews.” Bin Laden says that by delivering these messages, al Qaeda “aims at creating pressure from the American people on the American government to stop their campaign against Afghanistan.”

President Bush is talking about al Qaeda engaging in a propaganda campaign.  And he’s right.  He is quoting directly from Osama bin Laden himself who talks about manipulating the media to undermine American support for the war.

Is the President wrong?  Are we all supposed to pretend like Osama didn’t really say this?

I’m sure Woofie and most Democrats would probably like it if we did.

I still don’t see how that is an example of the President tying his critics to al Qaeda.  He is simply pointing out that one of al Qaeda’s tactics is to demoralize Americans through a media campaign.  And, of course, the President is exactly right.  He is speaking the truth.

Maybe Olbermann sees it as an inconvenient truth so has to mischaracterize it by claiming that the President is comparing his critics to terrorists.

The purpose of government shouldn’t be to do good, but simply to refrain from doing evil.

FWIW…I didn’t hear or see the explicit linkage in Bush’s speech that i did in Rumsfeld’s and I would conclude that Olbermann overstates his case this time. It does look worse when you watch Hot Air’s edited video however…if you watch the full version or read a transcript then what Olbermann says does make sense but there is no question that Bush did not explicitly link or compare opponents of his policies with the Nazis of the past so Rob is certainly right on that point.

Rob writes:

Funny how none of the liberal commenters here have taken me up on my challenge

.

Sorry, Rob, haven’t been watching too much news, on vacation.

Thanks Mike, but I still think you give Olbermann too much credit.  He clearly has an agenda and is willing to mislead in order to further it.

Why anyone takes him seriously is beyond me.

I also think that Olbermann wildly mischaracterizes what Rumsfeld said.  In the comment thread about Olbermann’s reaction to Rumsfeld’s speech I made the same challenge as above and no one was able to come up with any support for Olbermann’s claims.

Rumsfeld and Bush are getting this right.  I wish more people would look past their knee-jerk dislike of these men to see the truth they’re speaking.

The purpose of government shouldn’t be to do good, but simply to refrain from doing evil.

I missed the Rumsfeld thread…I’ll get to it later today and give you a talking to.

Let’s to it right here.

Here is Rumsfeld’s speech.

Here is Olbermann’s response.

If you read it, the only one comparing people to Nazis and fascists is Olbermann himself.  He compares the Bush administration the Nazis and also calls the Bush administration a “new kind of fascism.”

Olberann also claims that Rumsfeld called critics immoral and questions their intellect.  I see no support for those claims in Rumsfeld’s speech.

In short, Olbermann is totally mischaracterizing everything Bush/Rumsfeld say.  He is setting up straw men and attacking them viciously.

It’d be funny to watch if it weren’t so pathetic.

The purpose of government shouldn’t be to do good, but simply to refrain from doing evil.

Olbermann is projecting.