Advice Goddess Blog
« Previous | Home | Next »

"I Did Not Vote For Him, But He's My President, And I Hope He Does A Good Job."
A quote from John Wayne about JFK.

A couple of quotes about Bush and where our country's gone from Keith Olbermann's piece:

"You ceased to be the president of the United States"..."and became the president of a rabid and irresponsible corner of the Republican party."

"The extraordinary Karl Rove has spoken of a permanent Republican majority, as if such a thing -- or a permanent Democratic majority -- is not antithetical to that upon which rests our country, our history, our revolution, our freedoms."

Posted by aalkon at July 17, 2007 10:52 AM

Comments

Ah, he caught himself there...

Posted by: Jim Treacher at July 17, 2007 5:44 AM

What's the audience for Olbermann's show, four or five people? He's Dennis Miller without the humor or intellect.

Posted by: Cfouts at July 17, 2007 6:16 AM

You can dislike Olbermann and find him a failure as a comedian, which he clearly isn't, but if you disagree with what he says here, why not say why on substance, rather than playing put-down?

Or did you not actually watch the video clip?

Posted by: Amy Alkon at July 17, 2007 6:52 AM

Don't have to see the clip. I got what I need to know by comparing the first quote with John Wayne's.

Whereas Wayne considered himself an American, willing to accept whatever leader the voters elected, even to wish him well, Olbermann and his ilk don't even recognize Bush as legitimate -- never have.

I just wish that Olbermann and all those who don't like the way our constitutional system operates either come up with constructive alternatives, or find a country they like better and move there -- along with all those who don't want to assimilate into American culture. I'm tired of listening to them whine, frankly.

As for the second quote, that permanent Republican majority sure worked out for Karl, didn't it?

Posted by: cpabroker at July 17, 2007 9:43 AM

I saw most of the clip. He is ridiculously over the top. Practically frothing at the mouth.

Posted by: kishke at July 17, 2007 9:48 AM

> why not say why on substance,
> rather than playing put-down?

Because he won't be substantial. He's cable TV's sports-coated representative of the Daily Kos moonbat left. He helps them pretend that they're a sane, unified bunch. Also, he clucks like hen... Like a hen, Keith Olbermann clucks. I'll never understand why you watch these people. Plus he's a sports guy.

I can't find the stomach to read Daily Kos or any of the others... As a lifelong Democrat, it's just too heartbreaking. But I like to read the reddit.com news aggregator, which is sort of a Digg junior: Most participants are young, male IT types, fresh out of college and flying on the fumes of teenage political naiveté. Without ever having done anything or been a part of any big effort in their lives, they're nonetheless certain society is endlessly unjust.

So the other day someone proposed a national day of in which everyone “who's had it up to here!” (or whatever) could show up at their local courthouse over the weekend and express their need for change. A few minutes later came a similar posting (at this hour, it's still on the front page):

>> Massive National Protest- a better
>> idea: dress like you're going to
>> THE MOST IMPORTANT JOB
>> INTERVIEW OF YOUR LIFE,
>> no signs, no wacky shirts, no
>> puppets, no bullshit. Just serious
>> people being seriously PISSED.
>> (reddit.com) 796 points posted
>> 22 hours ago by jimbecile 369 comments

That is fucking adorable. It's just darling! The Olbermann contingent realizes that they're perceived as loons who dress up like stalks of celery at WTO conferences. What they really want is for people to know that they're actually very serious people! Also, the have very serious emotions! They have pissiness! It needs to be expressed!

But y'know, without the “bullshit” contingent to bulk up the numbers, the left is lost. The only thing linking Democrats at this hour is anger; they're not all on board for abortion or gays or trade or education or anything else. The left needs its moonbats the way the right needs its meddlesome Christians.

I think this fascination with the perception of third parties is one of the left's great weaknesses nowadays (and there are many to choose from). I've been listening to a bunch of Hitchen's old Iraq speeches. The only time anyone in the audience interrupts him is shout (with “anger”!) that he's telling lies to the others in the audience. Lefties live in terrible fear that the little people people can't be trusted discern the truth. They talk endlessly about how voters were fooled because “Bush lied!”

Olbermann is an essential figurehead for the cable-watching contingent of this crew. They need him because he looks normal. But if he misses just one haircut, it's all over, babe.

[I didn't watch the clip either. If you mail a check for $25, I'll think about it.]

Posted by: Crid at July 17, 2007 10:15 AM

"Or did you not actually watch the video clip?"

I didn't watch the clip for pretty much the same reason I don't read posts from Chuck or jedwards. I already know there won't be any substance against which to argue.

Posted by: snakeman99 at July 17, 2007 2:06 PM

On the way into work tonight, I heard Feinstein talking about the senate's overnight session tonight. She used the word "serious" at least three times.

Posted by: Crid at July 17, 2007 4:49 PM

And how serious is it when Bush vetoes it again.

Will they use that as a springboard to threaten him with impeachment unless he gives in to their demands?

Or will they realize that leaving Iraq will lead to a far worse result than we got from leaving Viet Nam?

Posted by: brian at July 17, 2007 5:33 PM

JW's statement regarding JFK goes to the heart of democracy. It's basically supportive of the process that brings the electoral results to all and it's affirmative regarding that process, accepting what the people have said and voted their voices & decisions to be.

KO, whatever his talents elsewhere, makes his points so dependent on the snark issue that one is oddly left wondering what values he'd support through times of thick & thin no matter who was elected to top posts in government.

By that I mean this: Ko's not a Jon Stewart & it seems he'll never be. As a comic presenter of the news, Stewart presents some evidence of balance, skewing whatever is the target of good opportunity. In that sense, he might be fairly called an opportunist. That doesn't bother me.

KO is intellectually careless, though, in my opinion, being more devout in his praise of who pleases him for the moment than true to an over-riding point of view that will take on all comers if challenged.

KO is a lightweight, in my opinion, and is essentially useless as anyone resembling intellectual pursuits in his work. KO is just another Rosie. While he's apparently of some value to those who pay his wages, he's nonetheless a nobody when evaluated on the basis of either sustained thought much beyond the snark or an openess that would reveal himself to outside analysis via non-partisan interviewers.

KO is a new media creation, essentially supported more by his mentors than his public, which is quite small.

Posted by: Curtis at July 17, 2007 6:29 PM

One last snarky comment -

I love True Grit as much as the next guy, but lets not praise JW's comment as particularly insightful. Half of America said the same thing about GWB after 9/11. Hell, DURING 9/11 Howard Stern and his crew repeated this mantra about a dozen times: doesn't matter if you liked how Bush got there, he's the guy now; let's hope he does measures up.

Posted by: snakeman99 at July 17, 2007 7:05 PM

Waitasec.. I'm starting to like him. Fark links this news story-

>> Keith Olbermann describes his feelings about Bill O'Reilly: "It's, to some degree, the way a virus feels about its host"

The link also says-

>> Olbermann's Countdown show was "fourth in a four horse race at 8 p.m." 25 percent of the time among viewers aged 25 to 54, behind O'Reilly, CNN's Paula Zahn and CNN Headline News' Nancy Grace.

Posted by: Crid at July 17, 2007 9:58 PM

Keith Olbermann won't be substantial? Denial, not a river in Egypt.

When Bush decided he didn't like habeas corpus, Olbermann gave a substantial, if tongue-in-cheek, explanation of how its loss essentially does away with all but two Amendments of the Bill of Rights.

But of course, to Bush, the Constitution is just "a god-damned piece of paper."

So, Crid, why don't you try addressing the video in substance, or is Olbermann just too deep for you. Maybe Ann Coulter is more your speed.

Posted by: Patrick at July 18, 2007 6:37 AM

Keith and Coulter and O'reilly (and even Rather towards the end) are peas in a pod. If you think they're in the business of "substantial" rhetoric, then by all means. go nuts with them. Keep watching TV, Patrick... It has lots of shiny pictures and happy music, and the pretty people on there can explain how things work in an "essential" way you'll really appreciate. Find some shows that you enjoy and set aside time for them every week, or every day. Beautiful.

Posted by: Crid at July 18, 2007 9:35 AM

Leave a comment