1/6/09 12:39 PM

Thursday Links & Open Thread

Latest cable news links [updated through the day]:

Video: precocious pooch pukes on Mika.

Wednesday's numbers.

Matthews and Mrs
at the Marriott.

Keith Olbermann's craven
about face?

Greta booking allegation stirs controversy; awaiting CNN response. Updates: curiouser and curiouser.

Jon Klein, or copycat?

Hotline quotes.

(MS)NBC and MySpace in cahoots.

Geraldo takes the plunge.

Laura lockout ending?

Is Keith being marginalized?

Milbank misses the mark.

Alan's hate mail.

Use our valuable bandwidth to post your comments on any and all cable news topics in today's open thread. Standard rules apply.

olby sucks
Keefy marginalized:
"But why would Huffpo pick up this nasty item in a rival publication and play it big?"
What say you, patsy? You love keefy and you love the huffpo.
June 26, 2008, 1:10:13 AM EDT – Like – Reply

Maybe the libs are queasy over K.O.'s rabid treatment of HRC. They may have wanted her out of the way, but still be dismayed at the rough handling their inconvenient icon received at the only-too-wiling hands of one of their own.
There may be a big grudge against Jimmy Legs from Clinton fans over that and since the emphasis is now to unite the party, K.O. has to be kicked around a bit.
June 26, 2008, 7:42:21 AM EDT – Like – Reply

On The Mark
Olbermann was never the great hero of the American left that the right made him up to be. When Olbermann began questioning Bush Administration strategy, or the lack thereof, in Iraq, the first of the media personalities to do so in an outright and upfront mannet, of course he found a sympathetic ear. But, the attention lavished on Olbermann has always been more in the nature of derision from the American right. Olbermann became a lightening rod for the "we can't defend Bush or the Administration, so we'll attack the attacker" crowd. Novak succinctly and ably writes about this same general phenomenon persisting, today. And, as the right wing media, including talk radio, FNC and scattered personalities at other networks had this profound staleness overtake it, a phenomenon with which we see FNC feverishly grappling, today, Olbermann became the excuse for everything going wrong in the right wing media. In other words, it is no surprise some see the left distancing itself from Olbermann, but it is wrong-headed. The distance was always there, it was always kept. Olbermann's relative popularity and his mini-hero stature is simply a product of the right and more's the pity. He scarcely deserves it.
June 26, 2008, 7:46:25 AM EDT – Like – Reply

On The Mark
I think HRC coverage had precious little to do with Olbermann's rise or with his (perhaps, desired, but premature and wildly exaggerated) fall. The HRC dynamic was much more internal party than you seem to appreciate, largely unaffected by the media, except as a scapegoat when HRC found that she had so mismanaged her campaign that she could not recover. HRC, despite her limited political process skills, remains largely and widely popular, across and within the party.
Worst case: Olbermann has developed a devoted niche market. Perhaps, he'll become nothing more than a less whiney Beck, with a different audience, but, and I do regret having to say this, I am afraid that the great hero of this site, BOR, is going to have to put up with Olbermann for a least a number of years. Facts. Can't escape them.
June 26, 2008, 8:02:22 AM EDT – Like – Reply

Actually, what Olbermann is-- is emblematic of is the sort of rabid political partisanship that passes for discourse at places like the Daily Kos and the News Hounds and a myriad of other blue blog sites.
Chris Matthews on Hardball was more than eating Bush's lunch everyday with endless accusations and endless weavings of possible conspiratorial scenarios involving Dick Cheney and Karl Rove. You had Anderson Cooper on the other channel taking the Bushies on about the war and Katrina.
The difference is that both television shows were operated in the traditional manner of allowing rebuttal. With both hosts, and Matthews in particular, the audience is well aware that neither is a Bush fan, but both ascribe to the traditional ethos of journalism about fairness, equal time, and cheap shots...
Olbermann goes beyond the Limbaughesque poking fun at feminists who are all up in speech squelching arms over a Matthews saying that HRC's status is directly proportional to her standing by her man...rather than their being up and arms at the treatment of Bill Clinton's wife and the young intern he used as an ashtray.  
As the writer of the GQ piece so insightfully put it, Olbermann is not the political junkie, the lover of the process, and the student of the human heart....he is the zealot.... the angry ideologue...the crude elitist who mistakes cheap shots for irony.  
He IS the Daily Kos. He IS the John Ts of the world. He IS the pathetic troll of a thousand identities toiling away at the oppositional blog, his eyes gleaming with fanaticism for some political "cause" on behalf of his fellow man.  
That Olbermann's and their love for that fellow man is quite often nothing more than self-worship and a need to dominate, and that they will willingly turn from zealot to cold pragmatist throwing anyone "under the bus" to advance their own skin, does not negate the fact that he and they are indeed zealots.
He has made all the liberal libs journalists and pundits uncomfortable even as they conveniently used him.
THOSE, dear Mark, are the facts...
June 26, 2008, 8:40:11 AM EDT – Like – Reply

Damn girl, well put!  
Only one complaint. You never call me "dear."
June 26, 2008, 9:26:08 AM EDT – Like – Reply

Olbermann's popularity at kos, and his very revealing diaries and comments there over the years, totally refutes OTM's conclusions. He is a darling of the radical left or what they like to call themselves today, "progressives."
He is a zealot, a leftist ideologue....a bomb thrower and some leftists may indeed be uncomfortable with his style. He has fashioned himself in the style of Ann Coulter and Mark Levin but the difference involves integrity. Both Coulter and Levin clearly market themselves as partisan foot soldiers.....Olbermann is a fake trying to maintain an air of journalistic pride he does not deserve. That is a huge difference. The difference is honesty.
Many leftists enjoyed his presence in a major news organization only until he approached Howard Beale territory and his bias and lack of basic fairness were exposed. Also, it is clear he is not very loyal with the great treatment he gave HRC while she was the likely nominee and then turning into the Obama cheerleader (and HRC critic) when it was clear Obama would obtain the nomination.
SNOBamessiah and Olbermann are a good match with respect to identical ideology, character traits and levels of personal integrity. If there is a President Barrack Obama, I think Olbermann would be a terrific press secretary!
June 26, 2008, 10:02:54 AM EDT – Like – Reply

olby sucks
So, 4 justices tried trampling on the constituition, again? Shocker!
June 26, 2008, 12:05:45 PM EDT – Like – Reply

Great article from Salon. I love that the O bros (Obama and Olbermann) confirm my thoughtful conclusion of them.
Olbermann (and the equally dishonest Alter) is a hypocrite and butt-kissing Obama cheerleader who is willing to overlook behavior displayed by the savior of the world he ridiculed, only months ago, when others displayed it.
Obama is not a leader who knows what he believes but molds his beliefs for political expediency....NAFTA, abortion, the definition of marriage, the death penalty, gun control and now FISA.  
I truly believe SNOBamessiah would have voted for the Iraq War enthusiatically if he had been on the national stage at the time.....Then, like the squishy dems we have all grown to love, would have pulled his support 6 months later when the terrorists challenged the good guys.
I think Senator Feingold is describing SNOBamessiah perfectly:
"It's the latest chapter of running for cover when the Administration tries to intimidate Democrats on national security issues. It's the most embarrassing failure of the Democrats I've seen since 2006, other than the failure to vote to end the Iraq War. . . . It's letting George Bush and Dick Cheney have their way even though they're that unpopular and on their way out. It's really incredible."
The O bros....in a word.....PUTZES!
June 26, 2008, 12:52:43 PM EDT – Like – Reply

I hadn't seen the Olbermann-Alter conversation about the FISA legislation, Johnny.
My lord...after all that overblown rhetoric the only take Olbermann has on Obama's support for something K.O. called fascism is that's it's a good political move?
I don't know why I'm surprised, you often see this sort of thinking in liberals. When pres. candidate John Kerry or HRC speak out against gay marriage or state their support for "don't ask/don't tell" military policy, liberals will explain it as a necessary and therefore expedient and understandable political move, but yet rail against any people on the right who take the same stance out of real religious or social concerns.  
If you take a conservative stance because you truly ideologically support it, then you're an extremist... if you support the same out of political expedience, you're merely being politically savvy.
Go figure...
June 26, 2008, 1:05:56 PM EDT – Like – Reply

majarosh, thank you, dear...
June 26, 2008, 1:06:43 PM EDT – Like – Reply

Johnny, great OW blog on your link here, re: Olbermann doing an "about face" on Obama's embrace of the fascist Bush police state.
I can't tell you how gratifying it is to have BOTH McCain AND Obama doing flip-flops to win over MY conservative self... :D
June 26, 2008, 3:13:54 PM EDT – Like – Reply

The Obama interview should put to rest any theory that Fox is too hard on Democratic candidates. I thought the questions were far too easy, and I did not learn nearly as much as I should have.
For example what the hell is his energy plan? What plan does he have for lowering the price of energy to run my car (we are, in the short run, probably talking about gas-energy but I am open to other ideas). If Obma's plans are adopted, when can I expect the price of automobile-energy to come down and by how much?
He mentions something vague about oil speculation? Why didn't the interviewer make him be more specific about what he intends to do about that? How much will his actions to curb (?) oil speculaiton reduce the price of energy.
He says we will cut taxes for the non-rich. How does eliminating the Bush Tax Cut factor in to his tax cut? Will social security taxes be raised? How does that factor in?
I really don't know the answers to these questions. I wish the interviewer had been more intent on illuminating Obama's Presidential platform than in making a date to play basketball with him.
June 26, 2008, 4:59:31 PM EDT – Like – Reply

...after all that overblown rhetoric the only take Olbermann  
Let's also not forget all that hysteria from Olbermann about the Military Commissions Act allowing Bush to lock up any American without habeas rights.
Apparently, the Court missed that part in their recent ruling in Boumedienne ruling on the constitutionality of habeas rights for aliens held overseas.
Or maybe, perhaps?, the law never allowed Bush to lockup American? That's why the Court didn't strike that part of the legislation down?
In other words, Olberman was flat out wrong.
June 26, 2008, 5:04:57 PM EDT – Like – Reply

johnny dollar
That's pt 2 of the Obama interview. If you want to see pt 1 it is here:
June 26, 2008, 5:17:09 PM EDT – Like – Reply

Vince P
i cant stand b hussien.
June 26, 2008, 5:43:52 PM EDT – Like – Reply

OK. I have now watched the first part of the interview, and I still say that it was a puff piece. I did not really get my questions answered and I did not learn as much from the interview as I should have. I thought the interviewer was way too soft.
Do you disagree?
June 26, 2008, 5:49:19 PM EDT – Like – Reply

On The Mark
Sounds like Greta is creating a tempest in a teapot. Positioning for a new and enhanced role, perhaps? Rather did the same things with Senator Clinton's return to the Senate. When a "newsperson" makes herself the news, it is seldom a positive thing.
June 26, 2008, 5:55:43 PM EDT – Like – Reply

On The Mark
THOSE, dear Mark, are the facts...
Cecelia | 06.26.08 - 8:45 am | #  
Actually, more like raving parnoid delusions that miss the essential point of the post. Interest in Olbermann is far, far greater on the right than on the left. I know of no dedicated, serious liberal or even Democrat who takes Olbermann seriously. I seldom see Olbermann discussed anywhere except on right wing blogs. At political events I attend, which seldom include any righties, I never hear Olbermann mentioned. Whereas, the Republican senatorial district meeting minutes in my area had numerous censure resolutions about Olbermann. The right has turned this mediocre simpleton into a force far greater than he warrants. And, it continues to do so. If Olbermann was in the least effective, I suppose I could understand this phenomenon, but it is a mystery to me. In effect, you're repeating, "Thank you, Sir, may I have another?" Attack the man and his work with a simple recitation of the facts, as Johnny and others frequently do, with few lapses. Attacking his cosmetic features and his temperment seem to be accomplishing very little. And, as much as it pains me to say so, you, but not all of your friends, are bright and articulate enough to do just that. Use your gifts and skills, and Olbermann will be gone before the rest of the Christmas fruitcake.
THAT, dear Cecelia, was the point ....
June 26, 2008, 6:07:37 PM EDT – Like – Reply

On The Mark | 06.26.08 - 7:51 am |
" Olbermann was never the great hero of the American left that the right made him up to be."
An interesting,and IMO,a mostly accurate take on the KO phenomenon.
I think KO has been cast by the right as the latest strawman,personifying all the real and (mostly) imagined faults of liberals.Bill Clinton was a handy pinata (still is in some circles).Look at the smears heaped on Al Gore (some yet believe that he said he "invented" the Internet.).
I guess it provides an outlet for some.You can't hardly hate the "Liberal" who works in the next cubicle, even if Mr Hannity equates Liberals with terrorists.But KO is remote.So the RW portrays him as representitive of the left, of media bias,and it is safe to villify him.
June 26, 2008, 6:22:56 PM EDT – Like – Reply

I know of no dedicated, serious liberal or even Democrat who takes Olbermann seriously. I seldom see Olbermann discussed anywhere except on right wing blogs.
I think everyone got your point. And (to borrow your language) one thing that we have established beyond question is that you are dead wrong.  
Both Cecelia and Cee have already nuked your point, and it does no good for you to keep repeating yourself as if someone will say, "I did not agree with Mark the 99th time he said it, but now that he has said it 100 times . . . well yeah he is absolutely right."
You don't really need to go beyond this site to see that Olbermann is really the hero of some liberal fanatics. Do you remember the antics of Republican killa who gleefully spoke of how Olbermann was killing O'Reilly on the demographic? How much bandspace did she waste over her attempt to propagandize how well her hero was doing?
I have been told that there were some libs who were so upset over the Olbermann Watch site that they conspired to shut the site down; rather than have their hero be criticized. I understand, Mark, that you were even a part of that effort.
I am something of cross between a conservative and a libertarian. Olbermann means very little to me or to any of my friends. I spend little time thinking about him, But to say that Olbermann does not have a significant amount of fanatical followers on the left is just not facing reality.  
Indeed, despite what you say, you may be one of those followers.
June 26, 2008, 6:42:45 PM EDT – Like – Reply

If KO is somehow an icon of the left,then just judging by numbers BOR and Hannity must be a much greater hero to the right.And Mr Limbaugh,again by the numbers,must be in the vicinity of Lord God Savior.
Don't know about you,but Mr Limbaugh is not a lapel pin that I'd want to wear into most polling places if I were running for office as a Republican.
June 26, 2008, 6:51:37 PM EDT – Like – Reply

Well, your point is essentially that neither you nor your friends take Olbermann seriously and therefore we should extrapolate that out to mean that you speak for the majority on the left and we should take it on faith that you really have friends.
Well, I'll put THAT in the bank along with the other "point" (from a guy who has spent much time on a cable news blog and at an Olbermann critic site) that its right wingers who are giving him all the attention.... rather his being the focus of articles in several major publications this year and his becoming the virtual face of MSNBC.  
Yes, we know...we know, Obi Wan-- We don't need to see his identification... Those aren't the droids we're looking for.... We can go about our business....
We'll relegate this bit of analysis from you to the same caliber of insight you showed in your 400 word screed telling Danny that he isn't worth your time or effort...
June 26, 2008, 6:57:03 PM EDT – Like – Reply

On The Mark
Your understanding, Danny, is a misunderstanding, through no fault of your own. Repeating fallacies is the raison d'etre for many.
I always assumed Republican Killa was someone like, or perhaps even Jeff/Royal King/Mr. Sucks making some feeble effort to be witty. Perhaps, I am mistaken, but I am pretty sure he is no liberal.
Your conservative/libertarian characterization is interesting. In years past, most conservatives were libertarian. That seems to have changed when the faux family value, sex is wrong if you're enjoying it Republicans came to power. Little of modern conservatism appeals to me, but libertarianism, in its true sense, has much, much to offer. As I've said before, I am no more interested in the government in my boardroom than in my bedroom.
That is why I've always rather enjoyed a Buckley or, Lou Dobbs help me, a Buchanan, but have little use for a Hannity or an O'Reilly (or even a Pelosi).
June 26, 2008, 6:58:16 PM EDT – Like – Reply

On The Mark
Good evening, Cecelia. Thanky you for you instructive comments. We missed you at the Pub Night. It was brillo! Jim Tschusher, you may remember him from last fall's Wurstfarbenfest, did his impression of Vera Lynn singing "A Nightingale Sang in Berkeley Square," but instead of nightingale, he used mockingbird, the state bird of Texas. It was a cross-cultural smash.
June 26, 2008, 7:08:33 PM EDT – Like – Reply

Well, there you have it. When Mark says he knows of no "dedicated liberal" who takes Olbermann seriously, just understand that he means Jim Tschusher and some other dedicated kooks...
June 26, 2008, 7:19:26 PM EDT – Like – Reply

I always assumed Republican Killa was someone like, or perhaps even Jeff/Royal King/Mr. Sucks making some feeble effort to be witty. Perhaps, I am mistaken, but I am pretty sure he is no liberal.
Naah RK was a little too articulate. If he/she had been a shill I think RK would have made more obvious gaffes. As I recall, RK did not do that bad of job of articulating his/her POV.
If I had to point to someone who might be a shill (on the basis of his gaffes), I would point to Eric. But, I really don't think he was a shill either.
June 26, 2008, 7:32:01 PM EDT – Like – Reply

I don't remember seeing you at Olbermann Watch back in the day.
June 26, 2008, 7:45:48 PM EDT – Like – Reply

I have only been to this site for maybe a couple of weeks. I posted at NH until my treatment there reached a level that I could not tolerate any longer. I found out about this site from the posters at NH. And, I have posted here ever since.
Olbermann is not a subject that is of deep interest too me. Therefore, I have never been drawn to the OW site.
June 26, 2008, 8:09:27 PM EDT – Like – Reply

I have been really impressed by some of your posts. Particularly an earlier one you did about Olbermann.
June 26, 2008, 8:10:34 PM EDT – Like – Reply

david smawley
welcome back Laura.
June 26, 2008, 8:14:43 PM EDT – Like – Reply

Thanks, Danny.  
I thought that perhaps you'd been around OW because of your using Olby Sucks' old moniker "R.K.".
June 26, 2008, 8:15:20 PM EDT – Like – Reply

RK = Republican Killa
She (I think she is a she, but I could be wrong) pops up every now and then on this site to crow about how Olbermann is eating BOR's lunch. I guess Olby hasn't been doing all that great lately, so it has been a while since she has made an appearance here.
June 26, 2008, 8:19:54 PM EDT – Like – Reply

olby sucks
When a "newsperson" makes herself the news, it is seldom a positive thing.
On The Mark | 06.26.08 - 6:00 pm | #  
It was milbank who made her the news. Try reading.
June 26, 2008, 8:36:30 PM EDT – Like – Reply

olby sucks
Indeed, despite what you say, you may be one of those followers.
danny | 06.26.08 - 6:47 pm | #  
I would think anyone posting on a ko fan site giving kudos to him would qualify as a "follower."
June 26, 2008, 8:40:58 PM EDT – Like – Reply

olby sucks
I always assumed Republican Killa was someone like, or perhaps even Jeff/Royal King/Mr. Sucks making some feeble effort to be witty. Perhaps, I am mistaken, but I am pretty sure he is no liberal.
by donquixotesrocket
Wrong, wrong and wrong.
June 26, 2008, 8:43:49 PM EDT – Like – Reply

olby sucks
I always assumed Republican Killa was someone like, or perhaps even Jeff/Royal King/Mr. Sucks making some feeble effort to be witty. Perhaps, I am mistaken, but I am pretty sure he is no liberal.
by donquixotesrockt
Naah RK was a little too articulate.
by danny
I'll remember that, danny.
June 26, 2008, 8:46:25 PM EDT – Like – Reply

Fox Fan
Judging by the comments here, this site is the new OW. Like danny, I could care less about Keith. I might have watched 3 minute segments of his show twice in the last year. Can't stomach it.
OTM, I do see Keith as a liberal icon who is worshiped by the left, not inconsequential to the party as you suggest. In addition to the well-known far-left sites, check the comments on big groupthink sites like Digg, Youtube, and Reddit. Comment after comment worshiping Kieth and bashing his arch enemy.  
OS, your 12:10 comment was the news of the day IMO. How do 4 of the justices vote against the 2nd amendment and claim to represent the laws of the country?
I fear for the validity of my CCW if Obama is elected.
June 26, 2008, 8:47:16 PM EDT – Like – Reply

olby sucks
Thank God we have 5 Patriots in the group. Terrorists getting MORE rights was big news to the libby's. Being able to keep our guns a little longer is NO news to the libbys. Not hard to see whos side the libbys are on.
June 26, 2008, 8:52:24 PM EDT – Like – Reply

Suppose you manufactured a sock puppet liberal whose sole purpose was to go to a site to make liberals look bad. In that case, would you be as articulate as you know how to be? Or would you deliberately say stupid things to make liberals look bad?
I don't think so.
If RK were your sock puppet, I don't think you would be as articulate as she really was. I wouldn't be either (deliberately so), if that makes you feel any better.
June 26, 2008, 8:55:42 PM EDT – Like – Reply

I don't think so = I don't think you would be as articulate as you know how
June 26, 2008, 8:56:58 PM EDT – Like – Reply

Fox Fan
Being able to keep our guns a little longer is NO news to the libbys.
danny | 06.26.08 - 9:00 pm | #
When guns are outlawed, I WILL be an outlaw. Cold, dead hands.
June 26, 2008, 8:59:43 PM EDT – Like – Reply

Fox Fan
Oops, above attribution should have been olby sucks | Homepage | 06.26.08 - 8:57 pm | #
June 26, 2008, 9:00:28 PM EDT – Like – Reply

olby sucks
deliberately say stupid things to make liberals look bad?
by danny
Funny, otm did just that. Except she was playing the dumb republican as "rudy ramirez." She has the nerve to accuse me of being 'repub killa.' Rich, I tell ya!
I was only kiding when I said "I'll remember that."
June 26, 2008, 9:01:14 PM EDT – Like – Reply

Working from the figures that 30% self-identify as conservatives,50% self-identify as moderate and 20% self-identify as liberal,that would mean that there are 60 million Liberals in this country.Does KO get even 2.5% of this?
Yes,some liberals like KO,but what is the significance of this.Some conservatives like David Duke (He pulled 1/3 of the vote in La primary for Senate),but it certainly isn't a defining point of conservatives.
Extrapolating from even a thousand blog postings to make a generalizarion about liberals(or conservatives) might be easy and convenient,but it is unlikely to be accurate.But if this is the kind of conclusions you folks reach,then I think you'd be fun to play poker with.
June 26, 2008, 9:15:23 PM EDT – Like – Reply

Fox Fan
I can't believe O'Reilly said that if you're a premium member and you bought something from the site, his people would "come to your house and dump on your lawn". LOL
June 26, 2008, 9:15:24 PM EDT – Like – Reply

Fox Fan
notveryhow | 06.26.08 - 9:20 pm | #
The online communities certainly do not represent the populace as a whole, but they do give insight to what people think and don't say in public. Considering that, they do give insight to the feelings of the internet savvy population.
Thanks for letting us all know what you think is accurate and what isn't, especially after your "poll" comments from last night.
June 26, 2008, 9:20:41 PM EDT – Like – Reply

ROFL. Anyone just watch Hannity & Colmes?
Sean Hannity introduced the segment trying to claim, quote, "A major victory day for the Bush Administration on the North Korean showdown--but will the press report it that way?"
To which John Bolton immediately responded, "This is a disaster, this is a huge victory for North Kore"
And then Hannity tried to pretend that he agreed after just stating, literally ten seconds earlier, that he thought it was a great victory for Bush.
That was a pretty good laugh.
June 26, 2008, 9:34:45 PM EDT – Like – Reply

One problem with your analysis is that you take static numbers from each night and you assume that is the reach of the program. I have no idea what the reach of either H&C or Olby is but I rather suspect it's much higher than their numbers are for a particular night: unless you assume that exactly the same people watch the same shows night after night.
If an entirely new group of people watched Olby for each night of 300 days of the year (another unlikely assumption) then he would be reaching the total population of the U.S, during a year's time.
Of course Olby's reach is not going to be that high. But I would say that a reach of 2.5% of liberals during a years time would be a really conservative estimate.
Of course, you also might factor in the video clips of Olby on the net. When you do that, his reach is higher still.
June 26, 2008, 9:39:19 PM EDT – Like – Reply

Fox Fan
Eric | 06.26.08 - 9:39 pm | #
Bush's decision was folly IMO. Their nuke info, accurate or not, says nothing of the secretive and abhorrent treatment of the populace there. The militant gov't and Kim Il still deserve nothing. Too bad the N.K. public can't comment here to give us more details...
June 26, 2008, 10:00:35 PM EDT – Like – Reply