Olbermann apologizes for implying ‘something untoward.’
Olbermann apologizes for implying ‘something untoward.’
On his Wednesday night show, MSNBC host Keith Olbermann discussed the delegate math with Newsweek’s Howard Fineman. “Some adults somewhere in the Democratic party [need] to step in and stop this thing,” Fineman said, referring to super superdelegates. Olbermann responded, “Right. Somebody who can take [Hillary Clinton] into a room and only he comes out.” (Watch it here.) Eat The Press’ Rachel Sklar said that comment “can only mean one thing: Beating the crap out of Hillary Clinton, to the point where she is physically incapable of getting up and walking out.” Olbermann has since issued an apology and explanation to Sklar:
It is a metaphor. I apologize: the generic “he” gender could imply something untoward. It should’ve been “only the other comes out - from a political point of view.” You could’ve called for reaction first if your main motive had merely been criticism.
Greg Sargent writes, “Not to quibble with the great KO, but does he really call people for reaction before pillorying them as ‘The Worst Person In The World’?”
UPDATE: Olbermann issued a clarification tonight on Countdown, explaining that he was using a “pretty common metaphor.” He said he mixed up his pronoun usage, thereby inadvertently turning the metaphor into something “inappropriate.” And for that, “I apologize,” Olbermann said. Watch it:
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
81 Responses to “Olbermann apologizes for implying ‘something untoward.’”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Think ProgressContact Us
Donate
Rachel Sklar is an asshat, who enjoys any kind of publicity. Why she even bothers to weigh in is beyond me–she isn’t even American! I watched that segment and I never came away with what Sklar suggested.
Please, go back to Canada, lady.
April 25th, 2008 at 7:38 pmzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
April 25th, 2008 at 7:46 pmWhat the hell is this?
April 25th, 2008 at 7:58 pmAnyone who has watched Olbermann would know that his statement was simply a metaphor. Besides that, folks need to grow up.
April 25th, 2008 at 8:03 pmI’ve been consistently amazed at how disrespectful and ‘republican’ the Obama supporters have been this campaign, all the while talking about wanting ‘change’ and ‘unification’. The Obama supports have been more of a divisive effect on Democrats, than Bush was - how sad! The hypocrisy is sickening! That’s like all of the Obama campaign cries of ‘personal attacks’, while Obama says Hillary doesn’t have the ‘character’ to be president! Talk about negative!
April 25th, 2008 at 8:03 pmleftcoast Says:
Anyone who has watched Olbermann would know that his statement was simply a metaphor. Besides that, folks need to grow up.
That’s great advice for all of the Obama whiners… Try taking some for yourself, will’ya!
April 25th, 2008 at 8:03 pmThe only thing this makes me think is that Sklar must be an idiot.
April 25th, 2008 at 8:04 pmKeith Olbermann’s Idea For Beating Hillary: Literally Beating Hillary
Huffington Post | Rachel Sklar | April 25, 2008 12:44 AM
now, that’s pretty silly…
jeez, the clinonistas sure are a paranoid bunch…
and dizzy… all that spin…
must be “the math”… i get headaches too…
April 25th, 2008 at 8:04 pmrepublicans hate facts Says:
leftcoast Says:
Anyone who has watched Olbermann would know that his statement was simply a metaphor. Besides that, folks need to grow up.
That’s great advice for all of the Obama whiners… Try taking some for yourself, will’ya!
A little projection there perhaps, it sounds to me like it’s the Clinton supporters who are whining about a meaningless statement by Olbermann.
April 25th, 2008 at 8:06 pmhooo! talk about spin!
April 25th, 2008 at 8:06 pmhate’s here with it’s own special brand…
and projection…
I think it is right to apologize in this instance. Olbermann surely did not mean to call for harm to befall on Hillary Clinton, but simply for her to drop out of the race, but he did use a violent metaphor to suggest such. I can’t help but be reminded of the final “training” exercise from the movie Spartan.
I find the news people are far to willing to use sports and violent metaphors when reporting on politics. We’re always hearing about people being slammed, knocked out, sucker punched, stabbed in the back. In their overuse these metaphors do not offer any shades of meaning, but make what is sometimes intelligent debate sound like a street brawl.
April 25th, 2008 at 8:07 pmRepublicans hate facts is … let me guess … the secret screen name of Terry McAuliffe. Am I right? Or has one of the trolls gotten clever and decided to pretend to be a whacked out progressive Clinton supporter?!
April 25th, 2008 at 8:10 pmRHF has, simply put, lost his fu(king mind.
Olbermann rocks. If Obama can speak to us as adults, why can’t other “journalists” or “reporters?”
KO is one of the very few who actually has a clue. He is also a stand up man who will actually stand up to and for when appropriate. He apologized (needlessly, IMHO).
Move along and all….
April 25th, 2008 at 8:19 pmfletc3her,
You’re right. It was only a matter of time before KO, said something that some would try to make hay out of. To his credit he has apologized for it. Unlike other pundits who’ve said far worse.
April 25th, 2008 at 8:20 pmfletc3her,
RHF achieved troll status in my mind once it started personally attacking Zoeey. Even after the dem nominee is decided, it still owes Zoeey an apology.
April 25th, 2008 at 8:21 pmlawd, no… terry mcauliffe is a much more pleasant and happy person…
…
about that use of violent metaphors… it’s damn near everywhere…
i mean, “DANCE WARS” for heavens sake…
disgusting, in my opinion… have worried about it for many years…
April 25th, 2008 at 8:23 pmglad MY kids grew up before it got so prevalent…
…
McWars, don’t hold your breath waiting for that apology. RHF used to be just quirky. Now he’s completely lost it.
His words to Zooey were inexcusable, but you’ll never hear something near akin to an apology from him. Truly loathsome and I now read his comments for comedic effect only.
April 25th, 2008 at 8:23 pmExactly Ms_Joanne, I don’t care if it’s progressive on every other issue, it is as of now a troll. We have plenty of room to get rid of the bruised ego if it won’t make amends.
April 25th, 2008 at 8:28 pmand what a typically snotty retort from ‘the great ko’. he’s no different from the rest of the neutered msnbc fratpac who despise and loathe hillary clinton. let’s not forget his comparison of her campaign to david duke; or the recent comparison of clinton pulling ‘the long knives’ out to get obama.
he’s as friggin unhinged as tweety when it comes to the clintons.
April 25th, 2008 at 8:31 pmand what a typically snotty retort from ‘the great ko’. he’s no different from the rest of the neutered msnbc fratpac who despise and loathe hillary clinton. let’s not forget his comparison of her campaign to david duke; or the recent comparison of clinton pulling ‘the long knives’ out to get obama.
he’s as friggin unhinged as tweety when it comes to the clintons.
April 25th, 2008 at 8:31 pmHey, if that’s what it takes to get Hillary to have a “time-out” and grow up a little, OK by me.
April 25th, 2008 at 8:31 pmIf it’s a gender issue, then have Grace Jones take her into the room.
thank you linda
April 25th, 2008 at 8:33 pmthank you linda
linda #22
“he’s no different from the rest of the neutered msnbc fratpac”
a little sexist, no?
and what, anyone who opposes hrc is sexist?
April 25th, 2008 at 8:42 pmlinks, linda
April 25th, 2008 at 8:45 pmlinks, linda
One wonders when the quasi liberal Olbermann will apologize for having on his program military “experts” like former General Barry McCaffery and former Colonel Jack Jacobs while having almost no anti-war activists who could easily demolish the bias of these so-called experts. There were almost no peace activists heard on the corporate media during the run up to the war while almost none of the pundits, even including Olbermann, have done anything now to present the other point of view where most Americans receive their news.
April 25th, 2008 at 8:49 pmRachael Skylar is a Hillary supporter who thought she could make much ado about nothing. And if you go to Huffington post you will see that’s pretty much what everyone had to say about it. Except for the Hillary supporters. They took it as an opportunity to attack and denegrate Olberman because he has the nerve to report on Hillary’s scorched earth policies.
April 25th, 2008 at 8:52 pmRHF has a new friend Linda here. I’ll tell you what Linda, I won’t accuse you of being racist for not voting for Obama if you don’t call me sexist for not voting for Hillary. Kay? The reason so many of us decided against Hillary was the personal attacks by her and her supporters. It’s so … Republican.
April 25th, 2008 at 8:59 pmI think linda might be a troll trying to use this as a wedge issue.
That comment is a little too over the top.
April 25th, 2008 at 9:08 pmHow hysterical do you have to be to think Olbermann was actually advocating violence against Hillary? Watch the clip. Fineman clearly makes a boxing metaphor about a “referee stopping a fight that could go 30 rounds”. It’s a METAPHOR about the “fight” they are in for the nomination. CALM DOWN. We’re all on the same side. Olbermann is one of the few media pundits who speaks truth to power.
April 25th, 2008 at 9:15 pmI was a longtime viewer of “Countdown” until Keith showed his undying love and bias for Sen Obama.
April 25th, 2008 at 9:20 pmErroll Says:
One wonders when the quasi liberal Olbermann will apologize for having on his program military “experts” like former General Barry McCaffery and former Colonel Jack Jacobs while having almost no anti-war activists who could easily demolish the bias of these so-called experts. There were almost no peace activists heard on the corporate media during the run up to the war while almost none of the pundits, even including Olbermann, have done anything now to present the other point of view where most Americans receive their news.
I see that you don’t watch Countdown very often because Keith often has peace activists and vets against the war on his program. He is solidly against the war and solidly against Bush taking away our rights to privacy and stomping on the constitution.
Why not try watching his show more than once before you are so quick to judge.
April 25th, 2008 at 9:22 pmabarts Says:
I was a longtime viewer of “Countdown” until Keith showed his undying love and bias for Sen Obama.
Yes, his underlying love and bias for Obama come from the fact that he actually reports on Hillary’s scorched earth policies and activities. There have been more than a few times he has criticized Obama along with criticizing Hillary.
April 25th, 2008 at 9:23 pmrepublicans hate facts Says:
Anyone besides me notice that RHF only shows up when he thinks he can bash the people who support Obama?
April 25th, 2008 at 9:25 pmAnd Bilbo, he only launches personal attacks against women, like Zooey. What a wuss.
April 25th, 2008 at 9:45 pmBilbo Hussein Baggins Says:
republicans hate facts Says:
Anyone besides me notice that RHF only shows up when he thinks he can bash the people who support Obama?
RHF is a troll totally bound up with hate. I suspect he really mourned when VV stopped posting some time ago, and his excuse for venting that anger disappeared.
So now, with a new user name, it is using Obama as an excuse to express his anger. Now he rants against us all. That he chose to malign Zooey fits this picture. Truly hateful trolls venting their anger should be banned from this site, not simply accepted, (because they sometimes act like Progressives) or made excuses for.
The occasional outburst of anger is understandable and acceptable. We all are prone to our own humanness. But usually an apology follows such an outburst. Not so with VVGFU, now known as RHF. He revels in his hate and projected anger. Flag him and his anger!
April 25th, 2008 at 9:53 pmRachel Sklar began There are two kinds of people in the world: People who think there’s an ugly strain of misogyny running through Hillary Clinton’s media coverage, and people who think she’s just not very likable and deserves it for running such a mean campaign and is ruining the Democratic party and has an annoying laugh and should just shut up and get out of the race already.
And discredited her capability for reasonable discourse with that either/or construct. Overgeneralizations lose me before people get to their main point. However, I consider the phrase ‘ugly strain of misogyny’ to be redundant. I’ve heard some misogynistic comments, but beyond the usual suspects in the MSM punditry (@Fox), they’ve been few. And they deserve to be criticized for it.
I also only began saying Clinton should get out of the race after it was leaked that she’d told supporters that MoveOn was opposed to the war in Afghanistan, because (a) that lie was begun by Rove and was quickly debunked, and (2) it reinforces a top GOP stereotype of Dems as weak against aggressors.
Before that, I was content to let her run her race despite my concern that she had botched healthcare, had botched the AUMF vote and chose to distinguish herself from others by refusing to apologize for the latter. So I’m opposed to her performance and opposed to misogyny. In SklarWorld, however, I don’t exist.
I’m afraid if someone took her in a room, she wouldn’t come out… because she’d get lost.
April 25th, 2008 at 9:59 pmWhat KO said clearly meant that someone should murder Hillary Clinton. Obviously he does not support that, but that is the meaning of the words that came out of his mouth. He owes Clinton and all women a big apology and what he said so far does not come close.
If he had said the same thing about Obama, there would be riots in the streets.
This provides even more proof of what Shirley Chisholm said about this:
“Of my two “handicaps” being female put more obstacles in my path than being black.” and
“I’ve always met more discrimination being a woman than being black.”
April 25th, 2008 at 10:26 pmHillary BLOWS! She’s a NeoCon wet-dream.
April 25th, 2008 at 10:31 pmthis guy’s just as bad as Limbaugh.
April 25th, 2008 at 10:41 pmken melvin #39
now that’s a perfectly reasonable thing to say.
and without the slightest hint of hyperbole.
really.
no, really.
April 25th, 2008 at 10:46 pmI’ve probably flagged RHF more than all the con-trolls (all 1-3 of ‘em) combined. Filth like that gives the internet a bad name.
April 25th, 2008 at 11:18 pmf**k Olbermann. turns out the guy is a misogynist creep.
April 25th, 2008 at 11:18 pm.
Bilbo Hussein Baggins at #31
You are wrong on two counts. It turns out that I watch Countdown Monday through Friday in the apparently vain hope that Olbermann, that alleged liberal, might actually have some actual anti-war voices on his program. True, he does have on veterans like Paul Rieckfoff and Jon Soltz. But it appears that you are not aware that both of them, and especially Rieckhoff, while admirably speaking out on behalf of veterans, are both against the total and immediate withdrawal of U.S. forces from that slaughterhouse in Iraq. Not exactly the best way of supporting the troops, now is it. Neither one of them has seen fit to belong to the IVAW which, of course, advocates the immediate withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq.
Last week was one of the rare times that Olbermann actually had an anti-war voice on his program, in the person of former Lt. Gen. William Odom. But appearances such as Odom’s are few and far between. If you are, as you claim, a devoted follower of Countdown, you may want to tell us here when the last time that Olbermann has had on his program such anti-war people such as Noam Chomsky, Howard Zinn, Anthony Arnove, Ron Kovic, Camilo Mejia, Lt. Ehren Watada, Kevin Benderman, Richard Falk, Tariq Ali, Dahr Jamail, Nir Rosen, Dennis Brutus, Amy Goodman, John le Carre, Marjorie Cohn, Peter Laufer [who wrote the searing book Mission Rejected-U.S. Soldiers Who Say NO to Iraq], all of whom are against the U.S. occupation of Iraq and all of whom desire the U.S. to leave Iraq as rapidly as possible.
You will be unable to answer in the affirmative because Olbermann has never had these people on his program while making sure that he has room for people such as General Barry McCaffery and Colonel Jack Jacobs and Paul Hackett, et al.
You say that Olbermann is against the war [which should more properly be termed an occupation]. I never said otherwise. The issue is how often this alleged liberal has actually had anti-war activists on his program. The record clearly states that, despite what you may believe, it is very unusual for Olbermann to deign to put on his show a person who is for the total and immediate withdrawal of U.S. forces from that abattoir in Iraq.
April 25th, 2008 at 11:36 pmCorrection on comment #43. The penultimate paragraph should read “… and Paul Rieckhoff, et al” instead of Paul Hackett.
April 25th, 2008 at 11:54 pmOlbermann doesn’t call himself a “liberal”. I don’t even subscribe to cable, but, from clips I’ve seen he isn’t so much anti-conservative as he is pro-accountability. It also seems to me, with limited exposure, that he wants a quick end to the occupation of Iraq while realizing the complexities of “immediate, total withdrawal”.
From Wiki:
Olbermann has refused to “pigeonhole” himself politically, stating, “I’m not a liberal, I’m an American.”
April 26th, 2008 at 12:03 amPete at#45
If Olbermann wishes, as you say, “a quick end to the occupation of Iraq” then why in the world does he not have on his program the people that I listed at comment #43? In order to hear those people or people like them, one would have to tune in or listen on the radio to Democracy Now!, since cable and network programs, even those with a name like Hardball, are not and have not presented those people who would dare to challenge the usual corporate spin that one sees on the small screen, and that includes that quasi-liberal, Keith Olbermann. Apparently the last thing that a corporation like General Electric wishes to do is to present a point of view that would challenge a defense contractor like GE.
April 26th, 2008 at 12:14 amErroll Says:
April 26th, 2008 at 12:14 am
I think you answered your own question. Those who sign the checks have final authority. And, despite being more critical of Bushco than most, KO is still a part of the MSM. A “media whore” by association if not definition.
As I said, I gave up on cable/network “news” a long time ago. The only T.V. news I watch is PBS and local sports/weather. Plus a few clips on the net.
April 26th, 2008 at 12:28 amOops. Hit submit too quickly.
And a fond G’night, good people.
April 26th, 2008 at 12:29 amYou too trolls.
“Shayne Says:
RHF has a new friend Linda here. I’ll tell you what Linda, I won’t accuse you of being racist for not voting for Obama if you don’t call me sexist for not voting for Hillary. Kay? ”
I love how Shayne and Pete call Linda a troll simply for trying to bring people up to speed on what they’re too tone-deaf to hear they’re tuning into Olbermann every night. Very “uniting” to call Hillary supporters trolls. What a bright new tomorrow being offered. Where do we sign up?
I tell you what, Shayne, you reread what Linda wrote and don’t be so quick to perceive a slight when in fact Linda said nothing about YOU being sexist, KAY? She very rightly said Olbermann’s been over the top, comparing Hillary’s campaign with DAVID DUKE.
While everyone’s busy advocating people just “grow up” I suggest we do so by growing aware of the institutionalized sexism that is so pervasive it’s been internalized and is practically invisible. That’s very different from declaring it’s not there because one can’t see it…especially if one is vested in not seeing it.
Case in point: Tim Russert recently hosted a panel discussion on misogyny.
Any guesses on how many women were in on the panel discussion?
Not even one token female. Let alone an equal number, or even a majority who could’ve spoken on it with authority.
Any of the “grown ups” here able to see any problem with a bunch of old craggy white guys having a sneer-fest at the idea that misogyny exists?
April 26th, 2008 at 2:02 am> Neither one of them has seen
> fit to belong
> to the IVAW which, of course,
> advocates the immediate withdrawal
> of U.S. forces from Iraq.
there may be reasons for thier actions and public statements other than thier true beleifs and desires.
April 26th, 2008 at 2:55 amzee #49,
you make a lot of good points.
institutionalized misogyny is a huge problem across the globe. in our culture, we’ve made some progress but still clearly have a long way to go. violence, socially constructed sense of self and economic issues such as career opportunities and pay are all areas, among others, that demonstrate gender inequalities in american culture.
still, linda clearly implied that opposing clinton is tantamount to misogyny:
“he’s no different from the rest of the neutered msnbc fratpac who despise and loathe hillary clinton ”
in addition, her quip about KO being a part of the “neutered” “fratpac” are, as measured by her own standards, just as susceptible to being labeled sexist as olbermann’s original comment.
April 26th, 2008 at 2:57 amI think its silly criticizing Olbermann for not being EVERYTHING progressives and liberals want. Hes part of the American corporate media and if he starts having people on like Noam Chomsky I doubt hed last very long. so why not be content for the moment there are at least a few voices in American MSM who doesnt sound like Beck or Scarborough
April 26th, 2008 at 3:39 amZee said:
I love how Shayne and Pete call Linda a troll simply for trying to bring people up to speed on what they’re too tone-deaf to hear they’re tuning into Olbermann every night.
April 26th, 2008 at 2:02 am
Um. I didn’t call Linda, Hillary supporters, or anyone else a troll; in this thread. Perhaps you were confused by my reference to flagging RHF? That has nothing to do with his politics, it’s all about his constant abusive, confrontational and disruptive rants.
If that’s not the source of the misunderstanding, perhaps you were confused by my sign off? Well, that’s how I leave an active thread at bedtime (dang cat woke me up). The “you too trolls” is a generic jab I use just in case one of them shows up.
And, as I stated twice, I don’t watch Olbermann every night. I don’t subscribe to cable so I’m limited to clips which look interesting. The only reason I even made a comment on this thread was because I thought KO, based on my limited exposure, was being mischaracterized as a “liberal”.
Well, the crazy cat has settled down, so, once again:
G’night good people
April 26th, 2008 at 4:56 amYou too trolls (wherever you are)
Oh, Olberman shouldn’t be apologizing for his “metaphor” but I seem to recall a fair number of so-called progressives who got all freaked out when Rep Geoff Davis (R-KY) used the word “boy” in a sentence referring to Obama.
April 26th, 2008 at 5:00 amTHAT was just as much a “metaphor” as Olberman’s.
I guess according to some “progressives”, all’s fair when Hillary’s the target but Obama’s got to be handled with kid gloves.
Getting really sick of some of these PINOs (”progressives in name only”).
Obama is NOT as progressive as some seem to think. He’s from Chicago and his political career has been riddled with the same old dirty politics so long associated with that town.
Maybe Rev Wright’s words were dead on the money: “He’s a politician and he said what he had to say.”
Well, lebowski, gird your loins if the word neutered scares you so much. I don’t know her reasoning for that one, but fratpac exactly matches what we’re being given as pundits, especially on MSNBC. Fratboys like GW…and there are many of us who are plenty tired of it.
“linda clearly implied that opposing clinton is tantamount to misogyny”
Are you that out to lunch? She clearly limited her statements to likening Olbermann to the rest of the frat boys on tv:
“… let’s not forget his comparison of her campaign to david duke; or the recent comparison of clinton pulling ‘the long knives’ out to get obama.
he’s as friggin unhinged as tweety when it comes to the clintons.”
That’s IT. That’s ALL she said. Nothing about you, or any of the others piling on her and calling her a TROLL!
If you don’t think comparing Hillary Clinton to DAVID DUKE is over the top then I think we may have pinpointed the reason why her attempts to point out other outrageous KO statements may have hit a nerve with some here. Apparently, you must think that calling Clintons white supremacists is a-ok. What else was there for you to identify with so closely? It’s hyperbole, sure. But it shows how close to the line Olbermann is on a regular basis and why he slipped over the line, implying that Hillary should be taken into a room and beaten senseless.
If you enjoy his Hillary-bashing, that’s your business…but don’t whine and pile on a woman who is clearly not a troll and clearly not attacking anyone here when she tries to point out that there are women who don’t appreciate the Animal House that MSNBC’s become regarding Hillary Clinton.
April 26th, 2008 at 10:09 am“Um. I didn’t call Linda, Hillary supporters, or anyone else a troll; in this thread.”
Well, Pete, you said goodnight to the trolls, plural, and there were only two people being called trolls here…RHF, who seems to have a long history here, so I can’t comment on that…and Linda.
lol, I see you amended that to a general trolls wherever they might be!
April 26th, 2008 at 10:12 amHmm…my comment’s awaiting moderation? Maybe we’re not supposed to excerpt other articles here?
So, just in case, for the lowdown on a long-time media watchdog who has documented Olbermann’s long term misogyny, check out The Daily Howler.
April 26th, 2008 at 10:37 amI’m not an Olbermann fan, but do we really want a society where people are expected apologize every time they misspeak or say something moderately offensive? It will cause people to hesitate to say what’s really on their mind. And shuts down more honest communication. I don’t think that’s healthy.
I also concerned, because I know I would have to spend most of my time apologizing.
April 26th, 2008 at 10:43 amzee #55
“Well, lebowski, gird your loins if the word neutered scares you so much.”
Are *you* so out to lunch that you can’t see that I was calling her out on her hypocrisy in accusing olbermann of sexism while engaging in the same behavior herself. You don’t only condone it but join in as well. but I’m sure you’ll claim it’s not the same thing when you do it.
i don’t enjoy the bashing of anyone, whether their loins are girded or not. the line *was* a metaphor. if it truly implies violence against women then, by the same token, linda’s and your quips about neutering imply violence against men. i’m willing to accept that you and linda were not actually advocating violence against men, but i also don’t believe olbermann was advocating violence against women.
April 26th, 2008 at 11:26 amzee @49: Tim Russert recently hosted a panel discussion on misogyny.
can’t seem to find info on that… got a link???
thanks…
April 26th, 2008 at 11:27 amolbermann compared hillary’s CAMPAIGN VOCABULARY with david duke…
from the transcript:
[…]
Do these advisers have Senator Clinton invoke Samantha Power, gone by sunrise after she used the word monster, and have Senator Clinton say, this is how I police my campaign, and this is what I stand for, while she fires former Congresswoman Ferraro from any role in the campaign? No, somebody tells her that simply disagreeing with, then rejecting the remarks is sufficient. She should then call regrettable words that should make any Democrat retch.
And that she should then try to twist them, first into some pox on both your houses plea to stick to the issues, and then to let her campaign manager try to bend them beyond all recognition into Senator Obama’s fault. And thus these advisers give Congresswoman Ferraro nearly a week in which to send Senator Clinton`s campaign back into the vocabulary of David Duke; “anytime anybody does anything that in any way pulls this campaign down and says, let`s address reality and the problems we’re facing in this world, you`re accused of being racist, so you have to shut up. Racism works in two different directions. I really think they are attacking me because I’m white. How’s that?”
How’s that? Apart from sounding exactly like Rush Limbaugh attacking the black football quarterback Donovan McNab, apart from sounding exactly like what Miss Ferraro said about another campaign nearly 20 years ago, quote, “President Reagan suggested Tuesday that people don’t ask Jesse Jackson tough questions because of his race. Former Representative Geraldine A. Ferraro said Wednesday that because of his, quote, radical views, if Jesse Jackson were not black, he would not be in the race.”
So apart from sounding like insidious racism that is at least two decades old, apart from rendering ridiculous Senator Clinton`s shell game about choosing Obama as vice president, apart from this evenings resignation letter; “I am stepping down from your finance committee so I can speak for myself and you can continue to speak for yourself about what is at stake in this campaign. The Obama campaign is attacking me to hurt you.”
Apart from all that, well, it sounds as if those advisers wanted their campaign to be associated with those words, and the cheap, ignorant, vile racism that underlies every syllable of them, and that Geraldine Ferraro has just gone freelance.
[…]
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ 2008/ 03/ 13/ transcript-olbermann-ant_n_91330.html
April 26th, 2008 at 11:36 am#37…. you should get a gold medal for such a leap in logic.
To infer that Olbermann wants someone to kill Hillary Clinton is ridiculous and idiotic. Please explain your statement.
April 26th, 2008 at 2:50 pmMerlin Says:
RHF is a troll totally bound up with hate. I suspect he really mourned when VV stopped posting some time ago, and his excuse for venting that anger disappeared.
__________
Apparently RHF was ok with some posters when he was “on their side.” That was back when libs were posting that Dems never engage in dirty campaiging and all their candidates were stellar. Since the majority here went with Obama, suddenly Clinton supporters are trolls. Seems it’s opposing the majority that makes one a troll despite claims to the contrary.
upright hussein left
April 26th, 2008 at 3:16 pmdownright wrong Says:
Since the majority here went with Obama, suddenly Clinton supporters are trolls.
______________
As usual, you take some thin little edge and twist it around until it appears you can claim the moral high ground and justify condescending to everyone here.
RHF got incredibly nasty the other night to some posters here. Really, really vile. If you didn’t see the actual comments, you don’t know what you’re talking about. But hey, when would that be something new?
To have Merlin not approve of RHF’s truly ugly comments somehow means that “suddenly Clinton supporters are trolls”? Only in your mind would this be true.
Is there any silly twist or turn you won’t engage in in another desperate attempt to look superior? Prolly not.
April 26th, 2008 at 3:46 pm___________
The Republic of Stupidity Says:
downright wrong Says:
Since the majority here went with Obama, suddenly Clinton supporters are trolls.
______________
As usual, you take some thin little edge and twist it around until it appears you can claim the moral high ground and justify condescending to everyone here.
RHF got incredibly nasty the other night to some posters here. Really, really vile. If you didn’t see the actual comments, you don’t know what you’re talking about. But hey, when would that be something new?
____________
And you are suggesting that’s the first time any of the regulars turned on him? Sorry, but the turn began way before that. And the nastiness was there on both sides as the majority of the regulars became more anti-Clinton.
upright hussein left
April 26th, 2008 at 5:47 pmSorry, but the turn began way before that. And the nastiness was there on both sides as the majority of the regulars became more anti-Clinton.
upright hussein left
________________
As usual, you either a) have no idea what you’re talking about, or b) willfully distort the situation to make a false point.
I go for c) a combination of the 2, myself.
RHF has always been considered “on the edge” by more than a few of us. If you read the threads here as often as you pretend you do, and were really interested in being honest, you’d confirm that.
“The turn began”???????? WTF????????
No one ever turned on RHF. That particular poster has grown increasingly strident the last few weeks, calling anyone who supports Obama a “Hopium” addict… very silly, IMO. Again, the comments Merlin referred to were quite nasty, and given the tenor of your response, it is clear you didn’t see them.
Just ONCE… it’d be nice if you actually knew what you were talking about, or had a REAL point to make. Just… Once!!!!!!!!!
April 26th, 2008 at 5:56 pm__________
The Republic of Stupidity Says:
Sorry, but the turn began way before that. And the nastiness was there on both sides as the majority of the regulars became more anti-Clinton.
upright hussein left
________________
As usual, you either a) have no idea what you’re talking about, or b) willfully distort the situation to make a false point.
I go for c) a combination of the 2, myself.
RHF has always been considered “on the edge” by more than a few of us. If you read the threads here as often as you pretend you do, and were really interested in being honest, you’d confirm that.
“The turn began”???????? WTF????????
No one ever turned on RHF. That particular poster has grown increasingly strident the last few weeks, calling anyone who supports Obama a “Hopium” addict… very silly, IMO. Again, the comments Merlin referred to were quite nasty, and given the tenor of your response, it is clear you didn’t see them.
Just ONCE… it’d be nice if you actually knew what you were talking about, or had a REAL point to make. Just… Once!!!!!!!!!
__________
As usual, bud, you assume that since you miss the point or don’t like it, no point was made. The original point that I made was that RHF was ok with some here “when he was on our side.” That includes the subject of his recent attacks. Regulars gradually began attacking him as the arguments over Clinton/Obama progressed. His rants and vile comments were never an issue until the Clinton/Obama split occurred here. Now that he disagrees with the majority here, suddenly his methods are unacceptable. Hypocrisy, bud.
upright hussein left
April 26th, 2008 at 7:04 pmHis rants and vile comments were never an issue until the Clinton/Obama split occurred here. Now that he disagrees with the majority here, suddenly his methods are unacceptable. Hypocrisy, bud.
upright hussein left
______________
YOUR hypocrisy, “Bud”… ;-D!
His rants and vile comments have TOO been an issue here before, “Bud”.
Clearly, you were not present at the times more than one poster asked him to tone it down. I have had discussions more than once about him, or her, as the case may be. Because you were not invited to those discussions doesn’t mean they didn’t happen, “Bud”.
Again, you OBVIOUSLY didn’t see the comments RHF made a couple of nights ago that Merlin found so distasteful, nor do you care what the truth is.
NO ONE turned on RHF. RHF has grown increasingly nasty the last few weeks and really gone over the top of late. IF you had been here and paying attention like you pretend you’ve been, you’d know that.
Hypocrisy? You’re the walking embodiment of it, “Bud”…
April 26th, 2008 at 7:19 pmOlbermann, as a decent person, has the class to admit he made a mistake. Can you imagine anyone from FauxNews having the integrity to ever do that?
Considering all the non-stop mistakes, insults, character assassination, and hate speech that Faux indulges in, they should be in a constant state of apologizing.
FoxNews is the most un-American thing happening in this country today. What a pathetic tragedy that such filth is allowed on the airways.
April 26th, 2008 at 7:35 pmhere ya go, fletcher… another example of our fine upstanding society…
(ie - the prevalent use of “violent metaphors”):
The Adult Crime Game Kids Love
Washington Post - 2 hours ago
By Mike Musgrove Get ready: There’s a new Grand Theft Auto game about to roll out this week, and we’re probably in for a burst of discussion about violent video play.
…
Crime pays for music biz with new Grand Theft Auto Reuters
this kinda shit is what’s wrong with us…
April 26th, 2008 at 7:44 pm.
and, upright, you are mistaken… rhf attacked posters personally for their opinions about hillary’s rovian tactics and lies and spin… the attacks were unprovoked, uncalled for and out of bounds…
April 26th, 2008 at 7:51 pm…
I’m not sure it’ll do any good, katy.
That one only wants to hear its own voice in an echo chamber.
April 26th, 2008 at 8:23 pmKaty…if the misogynists putting my comments on “moderation” let this one go through, look it up yourself. Try google. Or go to tennessee guerilla women…it might still be up there.
April 26th, 2008 at 9:43 pmWell, I will try a third time. And a fourth time. I provided two links which showed two different watchdog groups who follow the media and follow sexism and both have written up Keith from since 2006. But for whatever reason my links are not being posted and are awaiting moderation. So you all will have to labor on in ignorance in this echo chamber because someone is blocking facts here.
April 26th, 2008 at 9:52 pmzee 73 & 74
so, people who don’t think exactly like you are ignorant misogynist?
April 26th, 2008 at 11:41 pmzee,
also. please explain why what ko said was sexist but linda’s and your jokes about neutered men are not similarly sexist.
April 26th, 2008 at 11:47 pm_________
katy Says:
and, upright, you are mistaken… rhf attacked posters personally for their opinions about hillary’s rovian tactics and lies and spin… the attacks were unprovoked, uncalled for and out of bounds…
April 26th, 2008 at 7:51 pm
___________
Katy, I don’t doubt any of that. I’m well aware of how hateful he can be. I simply pointed out that it was acceptable until he went against the prevailing position here. Then his attacks were turned on those folks who had no problem with his methods previously. Additionally, though the attacks against him weren’t as hateful, they were certainly evident as the split grew between the Clinton people and the Obama people. It was a short trip from earlier statements that all the Dem candidates were excellent to almost hatred of Clinton on this site. I don’t have much confidence in any of the candidates and expect to vote for Obama, if he wins the nomination, only because he will get us out of Iraq sooner and it might help race relations in this country. I simply find it ironic that someone who mirrors the views of the majority here is now an outsider and it’s only partially his fault.
April 27th, 2008 at 12:01 amupright left says: I simply pointed out that it was acceptable until he went against the prevailing position here. Then his attacks were turned on those folks who had no problem with his methods previously.
there are many positions here - “prevailing” sounds too structured or something…
but i can see your point…
however, what i remember about those previous “methods”, they were directed at actual trolls… and, while over the top at times, mostly deserved…
the personal, ugly and twisted attack on obama supporters is unjustified…
not a problem with disagreement, just be reasonable… and real…
that’s all…
April 27th, 2008 at 12:43 amzee - if it can’t get by the TP filter, it’s not worth my “trouble”…
i tried some obvious google… got nuttin’… i call BOGUS.
April 27th, 2008 at 12:48 am.
Hilary has- by FAR- stepped over the line as far as running a clean campaign is concerned. Bill Clinton’s despicable remarks in South Carolina and just about every racist insinuation since has proven beyond any doubt that she’ll say anything she can to win. Of all things to use against him, race is the most pathetic - it goes against everything the Democratic party stands for. Also, calling Obama an “elitist” is beyond the pale for a woman who made over 100 million dollars last year and who’s only hope of actually winning the nomination is to be elected by an elite group of superdelegates. Wake up Clinton supporters- she’s a power hungry bottom feeder.
April 27th, 2008 at 10:35 amNo apologies necessary, Keith. If MSNBC can’t accept the facts then toooo bad.
April 28th, 2008 at 9:42 am