|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
 Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 3:31 pm Post subject: Keith Olbermann says more than he ought to |
 |
|
Keith Olbermann said:
I don't want to be diverted by talking about commercials in the middle of the show but, Rachel, why on earth did he buy that commercial? I don't think I'm saying anything unknown to the audience, I don't think he would have gotten a hard time from this particular network. Why on earth did we do it that way?
| Quote: |
Does this concession strike anyone else as incredibly inappropriate? Here's Olbermann, as an anchor, saying that his network -- as opposed to his show, or himself, or his panel -- would not have given Edwards a "hard time." MSNBC leans left, of course, but you're not supposed to admit it, you're not supposed to say, "We give Democrats an easier time than Republicans."
Naturally, this isn't a surprise, coming from Olbermann. But are there any execs at MSNBC who are slightly upset that Olbermann just trashed their objectivity as a news network? |
http://time-blog.com/real_clear_politics/2007/09/olbermann_saying_more_than_he.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
keane
Joined: 09 Jul 2007
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 3:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
When those in power are so far to the right that they're off the page, "objective" is going to be a bit closer to the other margin than usual.
Say what you want about Olbermann, he supports the Constitution, unlike yourself and those you defend.
I'll take it.
Last edited by keane on Fri Sep 14, 2007 4:41 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 3:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| keane wrote: |
When those in power are so far to the right that they're off the page, "objective" going to be a bit closer to the other margin than usual.
Say what you want about Olbermann, he supports the Constitution, unlike yourself and those you defend.
I'll take it. |
So far right that I voted for Gore in 2000
and haven' t you said
that you hope the insurgents win
and you would rather have 20 9-11s than the Patriot act. ? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Octavius Hite
Joined: 28 Jan 2004
Location: Househunting, looking for a new bunker from which to convert the world to homosexuality.
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 4:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The insurgents will win.
And Joo I hope you are going to start putting up the fox news nonsense that is totally biased (and has been for going on a decade now). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 4:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Octavius Hite wrote: |
The insurgents will win.
|
Define 'win.'
Its Iraq. Nobody wins. Ever. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 4:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Octavius Hite wrote: |
The insurgents will win.
And Joo I hope you are going to start putting up the fox news nonsense that is totally biased (and has been for going on a decade now). |
How will they win. they want to conquer iraq.
Olberman is Fox News in reverse. But Fox gets criticism for being biased. Why not Olberman. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
keane
Joined: 09 Jul 2007
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 4:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| keane wrote: |
When those in power are so far to the right that they're off the page, "objective" going to be a bit closer to the other margin than usual.
Say what you want about Olbermann, he supports the Constitution, unlike yourself and those you defend.
I'll take it. |
So far right that I voted for Gore in 2000
and haven' t you said
that you hope the insurgents win
and you would rather have 20 9-11s than the Patriot act. ? |
Nope. I do hope the Iraqis get their nation back. They have the right to resist invasion. I also hope the next administration fights terrorism rather than attacking other nations to secure oil. The US stopped fighting AL Queda a long time ago.
As for 9/11 and the Patriot Act? That was, if stated by someone, obvious hyperbole, which you wouldn't get no matter how much it was explained to you. the premise obviously is that no number of attacks would destroy or endanger the existence of the US, so giving up our Constitution for a lie perpetrated by people covering up their oil grab is insanity defined.
Do you not believe in the American people, Rhhee? Do you not believe the US Constitution is powerful enough and wise enough to give a president and congress all the power they need? Terrorism is not a threat to the existence of the US or its way of life. It is a threat to some buildings and to some lives, but not the US as an entity or nation.
Giving up freedom for the fantasy of (unneeded) security is cowardice. It means you have no faith in America, Americans or the constitution. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Octavius Hite
Joined: 28 Jan 2004
Location: Househunting, looking for a new bunker from which to convert the world to homosexuality.
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 5:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Win. Definition in Iraq: The US leaving and one of the sects taking control of the government (Iran backed Shiite/al Sadr coalition).
The US will lose 1 soldier or more a day until they completely pull out.
And they will pull out. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 5:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="keane"]
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| keane wrote: |
When those in power are so far to the right that they're off the page, "objective" going to be a bit closer to the other margin than usual.
Say what you want about Olbermann, he supports the Constitution, unlike yourself and those you defend.
I'll take it. |
So far right that I voted for Gore in 2000
and haven' t you said
that you hope the insurgents win
and you would rather have 20 9-11s than the Patriot act. ? |
| Quote: |
Nope. I do hope the Iraqis get their nation back. They have the right to resist invasion. I also hope the next administration fights terrorism rather than attacking other nations to secure oil. The US stopped fighting AL Queda a long time ago. |
You mean that the Sunni insurgents are fighting for their nation when they attack the Kurds and the Shias? Are they fighting for their nations when they try to stop elections? How about when they destroy the infrastructure not only in their area but in the other areas?
Anyway I know what was said.
| Quote: |
As for 9/11 and the Patriot Act? That was, if stated by someone, obvious hyperbole, which you wouldn't get no matter how much it was explained to you. the premise obviously is that no number of attacks would destroy or endanger the existence of the US, so giving up our Constitution for a lie perpetrated by people covering up their oil grab is insanity defined. |
What would 20 9-11 attacks do to the US economy?
| Quote: |
Do you not believe in the American people, Rhhee? Do you not believe the US Constitution is powerful enough and wise enough to give a president and congress all the power they need? Terrorism is not a threat to the existence of the US or its way of life. It is a threat to some buildings and to some lives, but not the US as an entity or nation. |
Terror is a threat to the way of life int he US.
Those who made the consitution didn't evision Al Qaeda.
and in fact the Patriot act is based on RICO , give the government the same power against terrorists it already has against organzied crime.
| Quote: |
Giving up freedom for the fantasy of (unneeded) security is cowardice. It means you have no faith in America, Americans or the constitution. |
How do you know what is needed.
Well this tells us what is needed. It was the opinion of the Clinton administration that Osama Bin Laden could not be convicted in a US court so he was allowed to go to the Sudan.
What is needed is a system that would not have allowed that.
And since the Patriot act no more attacks. At some point you are going to have to give it some credit or at least saying for certain that it did nothing to stop the terrorists. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 5:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Octavius Hite wrote: |
Win. Definition in Iraq: The US leaving and one of the sects taking control of the government (Iran backed Shiite/al Sadr coalition).
The US will lose 1 soldier or more a day until they completely pull out.
And they will pull out. |
The US will probably keep forces in the Kurdish area. Iran won't get control of that.
and at some point in time the US will deploy stuff that will cancel out any strategic advantage that Iran gets from nuclear weapons.
This is what will keep Iran honest.
Project Thor
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWJw8Wn3jpk
If Iran behaves themselves then they have nothing to worry about.
The war on terror Will prove easier than the cold war . |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
keane
Joined: 09 Jul 2007
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 6:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| keane wrote: |
When those in power are so far to the right that they're off the page, "objective" going to be a bit closer to the other margin than usual.
Say what you want about Olbermann, he supports the Constitution, unlike yourself and those you defend.
I'll take it. |
So far right that I voted for Gore in 2000 |
Perhaps. So say you. But that was then, this is now. Everything you post is C/N-C babble. If it walks like a duck...
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
and haven' t you said
that you hope the insurgents win
and you would rather have 20 9-11s than the Patriot act. ? |
| Quote: |
Nope. I do hope the Iraqis get their nation back. They have the right to resist invasion. I also hope the next administration fights terrorism rather than attacking other nations to secure oil. The US stopped fighting AL Queda a long time ago. |
You mean that the Sunni insurgents are fighting for their nation when they attack the Kurds and the Shias? |
Of course. Whether you or I like the vision of what they seek or not is immaterial. The question is, are they fighting for their nation, not whether they are fighting for their nation as defined by you or me.
| Quote: |
| Are they fighting for their nations when they try to stop elections? |
See above. A Muslim state needs no election, does it?
| Quote: |
| How about when they destroy the infrastructure not only in their area but in the other areas? |
You have the gall to raise this question since it was the US military that destroyed said infrastructure? What little they have done themselves is a tiny percentage of the total wrought by the likes of you.
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| As for 9/11 and the Patriot Act? That was, if stated by someone, obvious hyperbole, which you wouldn't get no matter how much it was explained to you. the premise obviously is that no number of attacks would destroy or endanger the existence of the US, so giving up our Constitution for a lie perpetrated by people covering up their oil grab is insanity defined. |
What would 20 9-11 attacks do to the US economy? |
Not much. Twenty, even sixty buildings? Hardly a blip, really, if you understand how massive the US economy is. Kobe, Japan. Look it up.
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| Do you not believe in the American people, Rhhee? Do you not believe the US Constitution is powerful enough and wise enough to give a president and congress all the power they need? Terrorism is not a threat to the existence of the US or its way of life. It is a threat to some buildings and to some lives, but not the US as an entity or nation. |
Terror is a threat to the way of life int he US. |
This is bull. That you believe this is ridiculous.
| Quote: |
| Those who made the consitution didn't evision Al Qaeda. |
The people who made the Constitution were the al queda to England's George. Or are you not aware the Founding Fathers sought to overthrow the way of life in their nation at the time? And are you unaware that the tactics employed by the rebels - insurgents - were the equivalent of that day's terrorism? Tactics they picked up from the Native peoples... Who were also, as defined by you, insurgents.
| Quote: |
and in fact the Patriot act is based on RICO , give the government the same power against terrorists it already has against organzied crime.
|
Bull. It is an expansion of presidential power, nothing more. It is unconstitutional.
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| Giving up freedom for the fantasy of (unneeded) security is cowardice. It means you have no faith in America, Americans or the constitution. |
How do you know what is needed. |
Stupid question. The reverse of this question is just as applicable, so pointless.
Couldn't be tried in the US? Tell that to Noriega.
| Quote: |
| And since the Patriot act no more attacks. |
And before the Patriot Act, attacks allowed by the people who pushed the Patriot Act after they dismissed al queda and went after Saddam, instead.
| Quote: |
| At some point you are going to have to give it some credit or at least saying for certain that it did nothing to stop the terrorists. |
The latter. We have no evidence of any serious threat against the US being thwarted. As for there being no attacks on the US? The US Embassy IS the US. The soldiers dying in Iraq ARE the US.
Pull your head out. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 8:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Octavius Hite wrote: |
Win. Definition in Iraq: The US leaving and one of the sects taking control of the government (Iran backed Shiite/al Sadr coalition).
The US will lose 1 soldier or more a day until they completely pull out.
And they will pull out. |
I mean that's a fairly narrow definition, right?
If the US had defined win by removing Saddam strictly, then 'Mission Accomplished.'
But what will happen to Iraq five years down the road? How prosperous will its citizens be?
Anti-Americanism is not a strategy for happiness. Although in this case it might be the start, it cannot be the end. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 8:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| So far right that I voted for Gore in 2000... |
But have you not heard? Al Gore worked for William J. Clinton and...
| Michael Moore wrote: |
| [William J.] Clinton was a pretty good president for a Republican. |
So, yeah: if you supported either or both of them, you remain a right-winger in people like BLT's eyes. To them, Olbermann is just a reasonable journalist telling it like it is, telling the Truth. Anything that might deviate from this Truth is reduced to "C/N-C babble" and "lies." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Octavius Hite
Joined: 28 Jan 2004
Location: Househunting, looking for a new bunker from which to convert the world to homosexuality.
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 9:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Its not anti-Americanism (despite the rantings of bill orally and others) its anti-colonialism and anti-imperialism.
When the US is driven from the country it will be beginning of their new country (what that will be, shiite theocracy, sunni secular-dictatorship, democracy, etc we don't know). Much the same way that Vietnam is directed and driven by its a$$ kicking of the US in its war.
The modern Iraq, they one our grandchildren will know will formally begin the day the Americans are driven. A country cannot be a country with an occupying force. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 9:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| America lost the war in Vietnman, Octavius. But are you sure you can not only talk about Hanoi's winning this war but also its "kicking America's ass" as well? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
