MSNBC shake-up: Olbermann and Matthews no longer anchoring

[titsrock]

He's supposed to be a NEWS man.

The job of the "news" is to keep the public informed. When the Dems are in charge, my sense is that many things in America will change. Such as...

Without Keith Olbermann, the New York Times, The NAtion, Seymour Hersh of the The New Yorker...we would be a nation believing that Saddam orchestrated 9/11, that Abu Ghraib never happened, that it is in the national interest to keep the Gitmo Gulag going on..and on...and on.. etc.

 

[Philbert]

^^^
Can you name any more "fair and balanced" Fox reporters other than Alan Colmes and Greta? It's a large cable network with, what, 50 on air talents? 2 out of 50...hmmm. Not so good there.

You haven't made up your mind? Really?

Let's see you said "I really like John McCain" "Biden chaps my ass bigtime. He has some good points but they probably came from many others." "Barak (spelled intentionally incorrect?) Hussein is a bullshitter on a scale not seen for a long time on the national stage."

It reads to me that it would take the sky to explode for you to seriously consider voting for for Obama/McCain? Is that a fair assessment based on your post?
McCain has made gaffe after gaffe after gaffe on the campaign trail and Palin is nothing more than an uneducated MILF (6 schools in 6 years?) who knows how to sweet talk idiot Middle America. McCain's only "qualification" for presidency appears to be his surviving the Hanoi Hilton. While that's admirable to fellow military men and fellow POWs, I don't see how that experience qualifies McCain to make Economic judgments to steer out country out of this deep recession. I don't see how being a Mayor of smallville Alaska has trained Palin to speak about National and Global issues. Being Mayor of Wassila, Alaska is more like being Manager of a local Burger King. It's nice experience, but it ain't "executive leadership." It's just serving mooseburgers to the locals and a lot of backslapping.

So...ignoring everything else I said, you

1) feel there is some conspiricy there by my misspelling his name? no possibility of an unintentional error? What could I possibly be implying by misspelling his name?

2) How can anyone vote for McCain/Obama? Are you serious, or intentionally mixing up the candidates? Drinking this early in the day indicates a serious addiction problem...

3) Almost nothing you post is a "fair" assesment, mostly sarcastic Democratic party line attacks on Republicans. Of which I am not one.

4) If you feel the strength of character and personal balls he has always shown (John) isn't a good thing in a World Leader, no use discussing things with you. You are a closed minded extremest Liberal and a waste of time.

5) So, McCain's years of effective Senate service don't count towards his being a qualified candidate...how do you see Obama as remotely qualified for the office if you remove his short time in government? You like his speeches, or his voice? Liberal racial guilt?

6) Do you have any actual specifics to show Palin is uneducated, other than your unfounded biased opinion? Governor of Alaska isn't a small time job, but you feel she is not too smart and uneducated...why? Wasilla not good enough for your sophisticated big city sensibilities, people have to live in a major population center to have wisdom, common sense, an education...like yourself, perhaps? Like most every other Senator, Governor, and Cabinet member of the last 50 years or so? Wait...didn't you say things are screwed up, the government sucks, we need change, etc. Which is it?
I don't see where Chicago is a great training center for national issues either, but you have obviously chosen Obama as the next great World Leader based on...what? Your dislike of Republicans, no matter who they are? Or just 'cause you don't like anyone who thinks differently from you? I get that sense...
You weren't serious with all this stuff, were you? Obama/McCain?:rofl:

 

[titsrock]

And out of curiosity, why was the RNC a "sham", but the DNC not? Just wondering if there was something in particular, or if it was just a sham because you're not Republican.

It's a sham because our country is collapsing under a Republican President's watch and for an entire week, there was nothing uttered about changing the course that we are presently on. The only interesting thing in McCain's speech was the he was atleast honest about Republican corruption but simply saying "I'll be different" is not enough. Given the needs of our Country, given the present events in Iraq, there is no argument to be made for "staying the course until the mission is complete." Yet, McCain moans and groans about his "Surge" recommendation. The "Surge" was a rhetorical "diversion" away from the central issue--the War in Iraq--is not necessary and has not had any bearing on America's "safety." The "Real" War against Terror has always been in Afghanistan and, there, McCain has been woefully slow in "seeing the danger." We have no clue where bin Laden is, no clue how to get him and if he's in Pakistan hiding out, why haven't we pursued him as the President promised we would "you know that whole we will get them and the countries that harbor them" speech? For such a proud Military man, why is McCain's voting record so poor on Veterans issues?

And being one of these "idiots" from Middle America, you can now wonder no longer why we don't care much for being talked down to by liberals. All politicians sweet talk. It's how they get elected. Thanks for insulting me, and lots of others.

And Liberals just are supposed to scream silently into walls when Wackoes spout off about nonsense? :dunno: The anti-intellectual movement enshrouding the Republican Party is going to end. We've had 2 terms of a C student dumbass in the White House. Gov Palin is of "questionable" intellectual merit and when she musters the "courage" to debate Biden, I hope he treats her as a "colleague" and not a "Hockey Mom." There were plenty of other Pub Women, btw, who are actually qualified to be President someday. McCain wanted Joe Lieberman originally and it took a "Phone Call at 3am" from Karl Rove to stop that. Yet, the Pubs don't care.

It's time for something else other than small town "folksy" bureaucrats who despise the people they campaign for. Do you really think McCain and Cindy McCain have anything in common with "small town," Middle America?

Al Gore beat Dubya by 500,000 popular in 2000, yet lost the race. Obama/Biden will win the popular vote by atleast double that this time and to think..that might not matter. A state in Jesusland might make all the difference in the world....

 

[Facetious]

Obama would of had this thing wrapped up if he'd only chosen Hillary as a running mate ! Instead he chooses a guy that's even more polarizing then Hillary herself ! A cocky and ornery 35 year senatorial lifer - lobbyist - "insider", an establishment within himself.

As I see things, whoever logs the greatest number of hours - days - weeks - months - quarters - years - decades in washington, the bigger the fraud they become. How can they resist the temptation ?

TR ! How can you entrust such devotion for these creatures ?

 

[titsrock]

So...ignoring everything else I said, you

1) feel there is some conspiricy there by my misspelling his name? no possibility of an unintentional error? What could I possibly be implying by misspelling his name?

2) How can anyone vote for McCain/Obama? Are you serious, or intentionally mixing up the candidates? Drinking this early in the day indicates a serious addiction problem...

3) Almost nothing you post is a "fair" assesment, mostly sarcastic Democratic party line attacks on Republicans. Of which I am not one.

4) If you feel the strength of character and personal balls he has always shown (John) isn't a good thing in a World Leader, no use discussing things with you. You are a closed minded extremest Liberal and a waste of time.

I termed your mispelling of "Barak" to be intentional, given the general nonsense of you original post. My Obama/McCain mixup was merely a poor typo, of which, I've made them before. I should've doublechecked my post but I went immediately to respond to the next post. The edit function has some sort of 10 minute "timeout" built in so I guess it will have to stay in. I guess the url of the link you posted didn't activate your internal sensor.

I fail to see how "having balls" is an asset. The last thing we need is a warmongering hothead in the White House. There is a theory that the War in Iraq was nothing more than George Bush seeking revenge on behalf of his dad for Saddam's failed assassination plot back in 90-91. So, if true, we have spent $800 Billion in treasure and thousands of soldiers' lives on a revenge scheme?

"Having balls" is not a stand in for sound judgment. The Taliban and al Qaeda are the threats to America. They're in Afghanistan not Iraq. I know McCain thinks Afghanistan and Iraq are neighbors, sadly, they are not.

McCain originally wanted a warmongering Democratic Senator as his runningmate. How is that sound judgment? I suppose it was a thankyou to the Dems for the "rumors" that he was Kerry's first choice back in 2004?

McCain has admitted he knows nothing about the economy. Even after 20+ years in the Senate? Really John? Nothing...

Yikes, dude. This guy is either Caesar Incarnate or Elmer Fudd. Either way, he's a bad choice for ALL Americans.

 

[BrooksAct]

You're shitting me. You think any of the reporting Fox does is as angry, bitter, or downright ball-gargling as the stuff Olbermann and Matthews were doing?

"Sends a tingle up and down my spine"- Matthews about Obama's acceptance speech.

And as I've mentioned before- it's not that Olbermann is a guy clearly out on the left wing. It's his angry, bitter, condescending, sarcastic, and frankly downright rude style of doing everything.

Remember- these guys weren't fired from MSNBC. They were removed from hosting the political coverage, and I believe, rightly so. They were starting to fight with each other, they were presenting a VERY negative image for MSNBC (and NBC), and let's not forget- they had ratings that were at the bottom of the pile. Why? Because no one wants to get ranted and bitched at by a guy (Olbermann) with an obvious god complex and ego the size of Texas, nor do they want to have to get past smarmy ass licking from a guy who has already said he's going to run for a congressional seat as a democrat. That's not objective reporting, and MSNBC has to do what's good for them.

Olbermann is not good for them. Matthews was, at one point.


You can't possibly be talking about Olbermann and Matthews. I think even democrats and left-wingers would have to admit that there was obvious, serious bias on the part of these two during the conventions. In fact, I don't think you can find a single objective bit of reporting from Olbermann ever. Matthews was at least a decent journalist at times.

H

Both Olbermann and Matthews are commentators. Neither functions as a pure journalist. They interject opinion into their coverage--that's part of the job. When Olbermann presents the news he presents the news only, then brings in guests for their view and offers his own. They aren't reporters or newsmen in any traditional sense--and neither are Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, Alan Colmes, or anyone else of the like. They all present the news and then comment on it.

 

[BrooksAct]

All of these guys aforementioned are just plain partisan ideologues . . .hacks . . . filters . . . revisionists, if you will ! They influence me not !

C-SPAN is where it's at baby !! :nanner: Straight from the ass's mouth !






Even Better Than That !! (+ 40 seconds) . . . .

"Furrowing up his leg ?"
"no seriously", rebuts Matthews.

:rofl:

I was watching when Matthews said that--I was like, "What did he just say?"

Funny stuff.

 

[BrooksAct]

And out of curiosity, why was the RNC a "sham", but the DNC not? Just wondering if there was something in particular, or if it was just a sham because you're not Republican.

H

Me, personally, I think both parties are shams. Neither has demonstrated that it has the best interest of the country or its citizens at heart.

 

[Philbert]

I termed your mispelling of "Barak" to be intentional, given the general nonsense of you original post. My Obama/McCain mixup was merely a poor typo, of which, I've made them before. I should've doublechecked my post but I went immediately to respond to the next post. The edit function has some sort of 10 minute "timeout" built in so I guess it will have to stay in. I guess the url of the link you posted didn't activate your internal sensor.

I fail to see how "having balls" is an asset. The last thing we need is a warmongering hothead in the White House. There is a theory that the War in Iraq was nothing more than George Bush seeking revenge on behalf of his dad for Saddam's failed assassination plot back in 90-91. So, if true, we have spent $800 Billion in treasure and thousands of soldiers' lives on a revenge scheme?

"Having balls" is not a stand in for sound judgment. The Taliban and al Qaeda are the threats to America. They're in Afghanistan not Iraq. I know McCain thinks Afghanistan and Iraq are neighbors, sadly, they are not.

McCain originally wanted a warmongering Democratic Senator as his runningmate. How is that sound judgment? I suppose it was a thankyou to the Dems for the "rumors" that he was Kerry's first choice back in 2004?

McCain has admitted he knows nothing about the economy. Even after 20+ years in the Senate? Really John? Nothing...

Yikes, dude. This guy is either Caesar Incarnate or Elmer Fudd. Either way, he's a bad choice for ALL Americans.

You persist in using personal invective to stand in for your lack of hard knowledge on whatever subject you are commenting on...I had a secret reason for (allegedly) misspelling Barak Hussein Obama's name, but you just made a typo putting the wrong candidates's names together?
My carefully thought out post is nonsense? And you think personal courage and and determination is not a good trait for a President???

I read this on another website, and it seems to be appropriate here...

" My take on the nasty comments I have read on the site is this: I treat strangers on the internet they way I would treat a stranger on the street where I live: with decency. You can disagree with anyone, but don’t be a tough guy online that you would not be in real life. You are supposed to pick your battles, and if you talk shit online you are pathetic; point blank and period. I don’t subscribe to the Ann Coulter type of shock journalism, which focuses on personal diatribes. To me that gives your hand away, and what shows is your inability to cleverly respond to the matter at hand, and as such are reduced to child-like smears."

Moving on...
Time will show why the two gentlemen in question are going to become less and less important in the News Network Wars. They both had to be removed from major spots because of their weak performances, and many who don't watch them on their usual spots are now very turned off by the network's lack of judgement.
The same reason AM Talk Radio is dominated by right leaning hosts is 'cause no one really wants to listen to lame apologies and ineffectual theories on hand-holding with sworn enemies of our way of life. If Left Wing radio could bring in listeners in the same numbers as Gallagher, Limbaugh, and Savage (he's a little too crazy for some, but he has a huge audience), then there would be Left leaning radio. Air America was a dismal failure.
A little common sense tells people that after you take care of the really serious threats around us, then you can begin to improve on the quality of life and liberty. The mean dog knawing on your leg isn't going to stop if you speak soothingly to him, he will stop when he's hurt enough to give up his activity or dead.
Safety for yourself and your family comes first, if you are right in the head, and only after that is accomplished do you have time and space to deal with more esoteric things.
And no amount of hair-splitting or whining about fairness is ever going to change that.
If Obama is elected (I don't see it coming to pass) mark my words...we will get hit with terrorist damage here at home and abroad almost immediately.
Those guys know how to play a room, and Obama will not be up to the moment. No amount of wishing will make the reality of the world around us change; no one respects weakness and indecision.
I'm tired of this discussion, no one who needs to learn about the real world is paying attention to anything here but their own clever babbling.
I'm done...:wave2:

 

[Becks...poamr]

Me, personally, I think both parties are shams. Neither has demonstrated that it has the best interest of the country or its citizens at heart.

Exactly.