I love this guy. But wait, there’s more… it gets better. Much better.
Have you read the breakthrough novel of the year? When you are done with that, try:
In Search of Sungudogo by Greg Laden, now in Kindle
or Paperback
*Please note:
Links to books and other items on this page and elsewhere on Greg Ladens' blog may send you to Amazon, where I am a registered affiliate. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases, which helps to fund this site.
or Paperback
*Please note:
Links to books and other items on this page and elsewhere on Greg Ladens' blog may send you to Amazon, where I am a registered affiliate. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases, which helps to fund this site.
when is he (Olberman) going to stop this muttering under his breath and tell us clearly how he feels about the Bush Administration?
I really thought he was about to say “Shut the F up!” and was actually disappointed when he didn’t.
I think the highlight was the TV Coverage proof of the when and where and why Bush “gave up golf” lie.Can we impeach now?
Not finished watching yet, but this struck me:Olberman Strawman: He accuses Bush of saying that a Democratic win would cause another terrorist attack, but that’s not what was said. Note the actual question: “If we were to pull out of Iraq next year, what’s the worst that could happen, what’s the doomsday scenario?” And he answered with just that. Parties weren’t even mentioned, and they were ASKING for the WORST possible scenario – not the likely one.I’m a bit more critical of the rest of what he is saying given that..
dreikin,No. The implication is clear. For him, and others like him, someone who wants to “pull out of Iraq” soon is a very clear codeword for “democrat.”It’s a game, a sick, sick game.Oh, and, Olbermann, FTW!
So? Blame the questioner then, for asking for the worst case scenario – not Bush for giving a reasonable answer to the question. Honestly, it’s actually a fairly ‘soft’ worst case scenario – he could have made it out to be much worse (but again, that doesn’t mean ‘likely’).And yeah, whoops on the spelling – took it from the blog title..
Really, taking this one interview as context, dreikin, I can see why you might feel like giving Bush the benefit of the doubt on that question. The phrasing was poor, admittedly, but you must take everything that George W. Bush says and put it into the proper context of his entire administration.Given the fact that there has been almost not a single truthful thing coming from this administration, and how they have manipulated everything for political gain, I find it much, much, MUCH more likely that he was referring to Democrats rather than just answering a question.Also, as it is basically a given that he’s a tool and barely above broccoli in the intellect department, I find it overwhelmingly likely that he’s just bashing on Dems again. that is, after all, what he does.
I just can’t stomach his namby-pamby pussyfooting kidgloves treatment of the Madness of King George. ‘Sir’? What a great steaming pile.
All:Olbermann is clearly an very angry man. He has every right to be. And no, he’s not “beating around the bush”(pun intended). He is placing the blame squarely where it ought to be placed.Anne G
Olbermann totally F-bombing RAWKS!!!11!!!!!!1eleven!!!Now, will someone pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeease give the Shrub a blowjob so we can impeach his sorry ass?
Great to see that there is at least one journalist in this country who has the courage to say loud and clear what so many of us think.Congratulations Keith !
Greg, I think you’ll like this too.It’s a bit long but trust me it is WELL worth it. The really good stuff starts around half way through.
Oh and you have to suffer through a quick advertisement too.