http://www.thatlitevideosite.com/view/3268

He hates freedom.

9/13/2006 7:42:51 PM

im not even going to watch that...cause that dude is an idiot...like..really...he is like john stewart...he thinks hes important...but.....meh

9/13/2006 7:46:38 PM

Fingers in ears.

9/13/2006 7:47:09 PM

correct

9/13/2006 7:49:20 PM

That explains your ignorance, I suppose.

9/13/2006 7:50:48 PM

i suppose

9/13/2006 7:51:00 PM

flung out to dry.





[Edited on September 13, 2006 at 7:57 PM. Reason : lock]

9/13/2006 7:55:37 PM

OH NOESSS!!!!1 THE TURRISTS ARE WINNING BECAUSE THE HOLE IS STILL THERE!!!!!

9/13/2006 10:09:33 PM

this guy is the fucking man

9/13/2006 10:36:03 PM

That guy's gonna get a lot of people killed.

9/13/2006 10:37:42 PM

he would be a republican.

9/13/2006 10:40:02 PM

\message_section.aspx?section=2

9/14/2006 1:02:58 AM

http://www.vidiac.com/video/a9f5b4c9-f31a-4628-9462-983901619005.htm

9/14/2006 3:49:18 AM

I found a lot of unspoken truth in his comments. And maybe thats why people like to not pay attention to him.

9/14/2006 11:52:32 AM

I find a lot of empty rhetoric and self-absorbed indignation in his comments. Maybe that's why people like to not pay attention to him.

9/14/2006 10:48:48 PM

can someone post what he said, because i am on dialup and so can't watch videos. thanks.

9/14/2006 11:40:55 PM

Quote :

"Half a lifetime ago, I worked in this now-empty space. And for 40 days after the attacks, I worked here again, trying to make sense of what happened, and was yet to happen, as a reporter. All the time, I knew that the very air I breathed contained the remains of thousands of people, including four of my friends, two in the planes and -- as I discovered from those "missing posters" seared still into my soul -- two more in the Towers. And I knew too, that this was the pyre for hundreds of New York policemen and firemen, of whom my family can claim half a dozen or more, as our ancestors. I belabor this to emphasize that, for me this was, and is, and always shall be, personal. And anyone who claims that I and others like me are "soft,"or have "forgotten" the lessons of what happened here is at best a grasping, opportunistic, dilettante and at worst, an idiot whether he is a commentator, or a Vice President, or a President. However, of all the things those of us who were here five years ago could have forecast -- of all the nightmares that unfolded before our eyes, and the others that unfolded only in our minds -- none of us could have predicted this. Five years later this space is still empty. Five years later there is no memorial to the dead. Five years later there is no building rising to show with proud defiance that we would not have our America wrung from us, by cowards and criminals. Five years later this country's wound is still open. Five years later this country's mass grave is still unmarked. Five years later this is still just a background for a photo-op. It is beyond shameful. At the dedication of the Gettysburg Memorial -- barely four months after the last soldier staggered from another Pennsylvania field -- Mr. Lincoln said, "we cannot dedicate, we cannot consecrate, we cannot hallow this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract." Lincoln used those words to immortalize their sacrifice. Today our leaders could use those same words to rationalize their reprehensible inaction. "We cannot dedicate, we can not consecrate, we can not hallow this ground." So we won't. Instead they bicker and buck pass. They thwart private efforts, and jostle to claim credit for initiatives that go nowhere. They spend the money on irrelevant wars, and elaborate self-congratulations, and buying off columnists to write how good a job they're doing instead of doing any job at all. Five years later, Mr. Bush, we are still fighting the terrorists on these streets. And look carefully, sir, on these 16 empty acres. The terrorists are clearly, still winning. And, in a crime against every victim here and every patriotic sentiment you mouthed but did not enact, you have done nothing about it. And there is something worse still than this vast gaping hole in this city, and in the fabric of our nation. There is its symbolism of the promise unfulfilled, the urgent oath, reduced to lazy execution. The only positive on 9/11 and the days and weeks that so slowly and painfully followed it was the unanimous humanity, here, and throughout the country. The government, the President in particular, was given every possible measure of support. Those who did not belong to his party -- tabled that. Those who doubted the mechanics of his election -- ignored that. Those who wondered of his qualifications -- forgot that. History teaches us that nearly unanimous support of a government cannot be taken away from that government by its critics. It can only be squandered by those who use it not to heal a nation's wounds, but to take political advantage. Terrorists did not come and steal our newly-regained sense of being American first, and political, fiftieth. Nor did the Democrats. Nor did the media. Nor did the people. The President -- and those around him -- did that. They promised bi-partisanship, and then showed that to them, "bi-partisanship" meant that their party would rule and the rest would have to follow, or be branded, with ever-escalating hysteria, as morally or intellectually confused, as appeasers, as those who, in the Vice President's words yesterday, "validate the strategy of the terrorists." They promised protection, and then showed that to them "protection" meant going to war against a despot whose hand they had once shaken, a despot who we now learn from our own Senate Intelligence Committee, hated al-Qaida as much as we did. The polite phrase for how so many of us were duped into supporting a war, on the false premise that it had 'something to do' with 9/11 is "lying by implication." The impolite phrase is "impeachable offense." Not once in now five years has this President ever offered to assume responsibility for the failures that led to this empty space, and to this, the current, curdled, version of our beloved country. Still, there is a last snapping flame from a final candle of respect and fairness: even his most virulent critics have never suggested he alone bears the full brunt of the blame for 9/11. Half the time, in fact, this President has been so gently treated, that he has seemed not even to be the man most responsible for anything in his own administration. Yet what is happening this very night? A mini-series, created, influenced -- possibly financed by -- the most radical and cold of domestic political Machiavellis, continues to be televised into our homes. The documented truths of the last fifteen years are replaced by bald-faced lies; the talking points of the current regime parroted; the whole sorry story blurred, by spin, to make the party out of office seem vacillating and impotent, and the party in office, seem like the only option. How dare you, Mr. President, after taking cynical advantage of the unanimity and love, and transmuting it into fraudulent war and needless death, after monstrously transforming it into fear and suspicion and turning that fear into the campaign slogan of three elections? How dare you -- or those around you -- ever "spin" 9/11? Just as the terrorists have succeeded -- are still succeeding -- as long as there is no memorial and no construction here at Ground Zero. So, too, have they succeeded, and are still succeeding as long as this government uses 9/11 as a wedge to pit Americans against Americans. This is an odd point to cite a television program, especially one from March of 1960. But as Disney's continuing sell-out of the truth (and this country) suggests, even television programs can be powerful things. And long ago, a series called "The Twilight Zone" broadcast a riveting episode entitled "The Monsters Are Due On Maple Street." In brief: a meteor sparks rumors of an invasion by extra-terrestrials disguised as humans. The electricity goes out. A neighbor pleads for calm. Suddenly his car -- and only his car -- starts. Someone suggests he must be the alien. Then another man's lights go on. As charges and suspicion and panic overtake the street, guns are inevitably produced. An "alien" is shot -- but he turns out to be just another neighbor, returning from going for help. The camera pulls back to a near-by hill, where two extra-terrestrials are seen manipulating a small device that can jam electricity. The veteran tells his novice that there's no need to actually attack, that you just turn off a few of the human machines and then, "they pick the most dangerous enemy they can find, and it's themselves." And then, in perhaps his finest piece of writing, Rod Serling sums it up with words of remarkable prescience, given where we find ourselves tonight: "The tools of conquest do not necessarily come with bombs and explosions and fallout. There are weapons that are simply thoughts, attitudes, prejudices, to be found only in the minds of men. "For the record, prejudices can kill and suspicion can destroy, and a thoughtless, frightened search for a scapegoat has a fallout all its own -- for the children, and the children yet unborn." When those who dissent are told time and time again -- as we will be, if not tonight by the President, then tomorrow by his portable public chorus -- that he is preserving our freedom, but that if we use any of it, we are somehow un-American...When we are scolded, that if we merely question, we have "forgotten the lessons of 9/11"... look into this empty space behind me and the bi-partisanship upon which this administration also did not build, and tell me: Who has left this hole in the ground? We have not forgotten, Mr. President. You have. May this country forgive you."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6210240/

9/15/2006 12:03:28 AM

It went something like this:

'5 years after 9/11, ground zero is still a hole in the ground ...

Bush had unprecedented national unity afterwards and he squandered it with unilateralism and Iraq ...

How dare Bush make a political speech on the 5th anniversary of 9/11 ...

Bush and Cheney are horrible for branding critics of the administration as unpatriotic appeasers ...

etc'

Then there was some random obscure reference to a twilight zone episode where a town kills one of its own thinking that he's an alien.

9/15/2006 12:04:06 AM

Thanks.

So basically, he hates freedom and is a traitor.

9/15/2006 12:07:09 AM

More like,

He's irrelevant and nobody gives a shit what he says

9/15/2006 12:08:59 AM

I like seeing rabid Republicans argue.

It's a fun game trying to guess what logical fallacy they're going to pull out in support of their points.

[Edited on September 15, 2006 at 12:41 AM. Reason : .]

9/15/2006 12:41:14 AM

Quote :

"im not even going to watch that...cause that dude is an idiot...like..really...he is like john stewart...he thinks hes important...but.....meh"

people who do not know how to use an elipsis properly have no ground to call anyone an idiot.

9/15/2006 1:03:36 AM

What's the real gripe with Keith Olbermann's words, people?

These are very serious charges. I'd expect to see people responding to this with vitriol.

9/15/2006 2:08:20 AM

another celebrity that thinks they're a politician

9/15/2006 4:56:31 PM

unlike bush who was famous becuase of his ..... DADDY

9/15/2006 4:58:10 PM

but bush is actually a politician

not a sports reporter

9/15/2006 5:00:07 PM

he wasnt a politician before he was a politician.

9/15/2006 5:00:51 PM

john kerry grew up poor and made millions by his own hard work

9/15/2006 5:05:13 PM

well wait

business politician or government politician?

[Edited on September 15, 2006 at 5:06 PM. Reason : ...]

9/15/2006 5:06:21 PM

yet with all that he still went to war, and saved the lives of many people.

9/15/2006 5:06:34 PM

and voted for the iraq war

9/15/2006 5:22:38 PM

you would rather sadam be back in power?

9/15/2006 5:24:27 PM

Quote :

"FDR is such a fucking dumbass...he only got elected cause of his daddy...and now he gets us in this unjust war...wtf...D-Day was a clusterfuck...why didnt the administration plan for D-Day...what kind of President goes into a war so unprepared - Liberal Democrat, 1940s"

9/15/2006 5:27:17 PM

FDR was a liberal.

9/15/2006 5:30:47 PM

democrat /= liberal in the 1940s

9/15/2006 5:32:59 PM

^^^That would be funny if the Democrats were the liberals in the 1940's. That just shows the general ignorance that goes into people's statements on this board.

~You are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.~

[Edited on September 15, 2006 at 5:36 PM. Reason : .]

9/15/2006 5:36:09 PM

so you dont see any correlations in the quote i posted and the average viewpoint in the soap box? only difference i see is a few proper nouns

9/15/2006 5:38:24 PM

bla bla bla bla bla

[Edited on September 15, 2006 at 5:43 PM. Reason : !!!!!!!!!!!]

9/15/2006 5:41:40 PM

^^^ Exactly.

9/15/2006 5:42:30 PM

Quote :

"democrat /= liberal in the 1940s "

FDR sure was liberal.

Quote :

"FDR is such a fucking dumbass...he only got elected cause of his daddy...and now he gets us in this unjust war...wtf...D-Day was a clusterfuck...why didnt the administration plan for D-Day...what kind of President goes into a war so unprepared"

alright wise guy, who was FDRs daddy? D-Day was one of the largest military successes in modern history

[Edited on September 15, 2006 at 5:45 PM. Reason : .]

9/15/2006 5:44:17 PM

treetwister is an idiot

9/15/2006 5:49:28 PM

I want treetwista to tell me how James Roosevelt would have gotten FDR elected to the presidency.

9/15/2006 5:54:23 PM

Quote :

"I like seeing rabid Republicans argue. It's a fun game trying to guess what logical fallacy they're going to pull out in support of their points."

How cool is it that you used one in your own response?

9/15/2006 9:21:57 PM

I only discredit your arguments by pointing out your fallacies. There's nothing fallacious about throwing out somebody's argument because they commit one.

9/16/2006 12:33:50 AM

a) how is Olbermann a celebrity? He wasnt even on Dancing with the Stars.
b) the acusations are serious, when truth such as

Quote :

"History teaches us that nearly unanimous support of a government cannot be taken away from that government by its critics. It can only be squandered by those who use it not to heal a nation's wounds, but to take political advantage. Terrorists did not come and steal our newly-regained sense of being American first, and political, fiftieth. Nor did the Democrats. Nor did the media. Nor did the people."

.. is used in a way clearer than the Geneva Suggestions?
and c) why is it eveytime someone questions, acuses, or critizes President Bush the answer is,

Quote :

"Its [He's] irrelevant and nobody gives a shit what you [he] say[s]."

9/17/2006 12:06:32 AM

Simple answer: Some people hold the current wheels of power, and some do not.

Why they'd prefer the public be ignorant and not ask itself such questions. That's a question worth exploring.

9/18/2006 3:02:21 PM

KO kicked Georgie's butt again.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bsq-_tI_vCs

Quote :

"The President of the United States owes this country an apology. It will not be offered, of course. He does not realize its necessity. There are now none around him who would tell him or could. The last of them, it appears, was the very man whose letter provoked the President into the conduct, for which the apology is essential. An apology is this President's only hope of regaining the slightest measure of confidence, of what has been, for nearly two years, a clear majority of his people. "

Quote :

"It now shows us a President who has decided that of all our commanders-in-chief, ever, he alone has had the knowledge necessary to alter and re-shape our inalienable rights. This is a frightening, and a dangerous, delusion, Mr. President. If Mr. Powell's letter -- cautionary, concerned, predominantly supportive -- can induce from you such wrath and such intolerance, what would you say were this statement to be shouted to you by a reporter, or written to you by a colleague? "Governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government.”"

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6210240/

Declaration of Independence FTW!

9/19/2006 12:52:30 AM

Damn, Olbermann seems to take it personally whenever the administration responds to it's critics in an aggressive manner.

The motherfucker screams bloody murder every damn time Bush and Cheney defend their actions and criticize those who disagree with them. Somebody needs to let him know that partisan bickering is a part of politics in America, and that even the President is allowed to criticize others at times.

I'm not gonna try to defend Bush's foreign policy, but damn Olbermann needs to get off the rag about this. Bush clearly trying to rally the troops in wartime, which he has every right to do.

9/19/2006 2:23:54 AM

^Translation: Don't criticize the president, or you're a terrorist.

9/19/2006 10:35:14 AM

Translation:

OMG DID YOU HEAR THE LATEST ROUND OF BASHES BY THAT SPORTSWRITER?

9/19/2006 10:39:28 AM