VIDEO: Olbermann Special Comment On Shefford & The Smear Merchants Of The Right
Tweet
50 Responses to “VIDEO: Olbermann Special Comment On Shefford & The Smear Merchants Of The Right”
GOP Rep. Spencer Bachus Facing House Ethics Probe For Insider Trading
Jennifer Aniston Reportedly Pregnant With Twins
PHOTOS: Tamara Ecclestone At The Langham Hotel
Red Front? “Center For American Freedom” Logo Echoes Communist Style
Romney Calls For Defunding Planned Parenthood, Wife Was A Donor
GOP Fundraising Email Asks Supporters To “Knock Out” Obama
Romney Comes Up Limp In Nevada
Obama Opens Lead On Romney In New Poll
Latest Entries
Why Do Liberals Support Drone Strikes?
Weekly Standard Rolls Out The Iraq Argument For Iran
Equal Polarization, My Ass
Some Crazy Stuff That Happened In World War II
Maryland Republican Campaign Funds Used To Defend Voter Suppression
The Obama Jobs Record In One Graph
Martin O’Malley All In For Marriage Equality
Newt Gingrich, Filled With More Excrement Than Your Average Politician
New Year, Powerline Still Stupid
Thanks Again
Meta
Blogroll
Disclaimer
The views on this site are mine and mine alone, and do not reflect the views of my employer, Media Matters for America
© 2000-2011 Oliver Willis
I have not watched an entire Countdown or one Special Comment since the end of the 2008 primary, but that was good stuff.
I hope Obama watched it.
Bang on.
ASSASSINATED by the NAACP !!!
Ooops! — didn’t mean to point a finger at the real culprits…
As usual, Olbermann is full of crap.
Frank returns to toss up a brick. Yes, the real culprits are the NAACP. Not Andrew Breitbart.
As usual, Frank is full of wingnut talking point semen.
I don’t think Frank watched it. Skimmed it, maybe. Perhaps missed the part where Olbermann takes everybody to task, including the NAACP and his own network.
Perhaps Frank missed the point entirely. You think?
Perhaps Frank needs a nap and a bourbon, as usual.
let obama be obama.
what if this IS the real obama?
excuse me while i cry myself to sleep now.
The main line from Olbermann–
‘they didn’t once consider the source.’
Once again, FrankDiSalle brings the stupid with one comment.
His best ever Special Comment. For once he wasn’t self-righteous at all and was on point on ever section.
And I think he’s right about Obama is trying to hard to be President of Everyone, when there are some in this country who simply HATE him. And yes, I use the word hate. It doesn’t matter what he does for them, they will hate him. And they think their hate is justified just as Keith said.
Fox News has turned their world upside down where they are the oppressed whites and Blacks are Latinos are the racist overlords holding them down.
Luv: “I think he’s right about Obama is trying to hard to be President of Everyone”
I think Obama should go back to Philly and deliver a visionary speech on race (i.e. aging white population that will be increasingly dependent on a browner population, etc.) and call out the birthers and the people who would ever, ever in a country that’s had 40+ White presidents before him and NEVER, never, ever questioned (or, for some, demanded) that they were President of “all the people.”
He should be self-righteous, Olbermann style, and say “HOW DARE YOU!!” How dare you when Black unemployment remains…? How dare you when the Black farmers Shirley Sherrod know well are…? How dare you when African-Americans were among the hardest hit by the sub-prime/economic crisis…? HOW.DARE.YOU!!!
Strong words coming from a network that has yet to retract either the fake Limbaugh quotes on race or the false allegations that Tea Party people used the N-word the day of the House Health Care vote.
What’s to retract? They are both true. But nice “look over there” attempt .
shorter Farris:
“Look over there!”
Oliver really does just need to make a script that replaces everything they say with that. Like a disemvoweling app but customized.
Shorter EL/locus: do as we say, not as we do.
Olbermann has no credibility on this issue: none. So his take on it is literally irrelevant. But it is humorous to see him get worked up over the exact same thing he (and his network) are guilty of perpetrating a million times over.
Shorter SF: I’ve got nothing! As always.
“Olbermann has no credibility on this issue: none.”
I’m not sure you get how credibility works. It is, by its nature, subjective. You don’t just have credibility, you have credibility among some constituency. You think Beck has credibility, I think Olbermann does. It’s pointless to argue about that when the issue is, you know, what actually happened rather than who told us about it.
That said, can we address the content rather than the ad hominem attack on Olbermann? That’s the honest thing to do.
Keith is on the money, as usual, with this special comment. Some might criticize his delivery (I won’t) but the man speaks the truth to a nation that sorely needs to hear it. In the process he has made many people uncomfortable, especially those on the left whose actions, and lack of action, serve as an example of the cowardice of which he speaks. But he doesn’t stop and some of us are grateful for that.
What I don’t understand is why no one except Keith, Rachel (whose first 15 minutes last night was the best breakdown of the far-right strategy I could imagine) and Ed will hold Fox News accountable for the evil they have wrought?
You here Scarborough shouting with unhinged glee about how the Whitehouse is afraid of Glen Beck, and it pisses me off because I agree with him, but HE and all the rest of NBC save for the three mentioned above, and ABC, CBS, CNN, and everyone else IS AFRAID OF FOX NEWS!
They stare at the situation and see exactly what I see …, what we all see …, then make the entire story about the REACTION of the Whitehouse instead of the ACTION of Fox news. Oh sure, they spend a minimal amount of time talking about Brie Bart, BUT ABSOLUTELY NO ONE ACCEPT KIETH, RACHEL AND ED WILL TAKE THE OBVOUSLY MUCH NEEDED CRITICAL LOOK AT FOX NEWS.
I have criticized the media in the past for not living up to their responsibilities as journalists, but always with the hope that they would prove me wrong, come to their senses, and once again report facts as facts, truth as truth, and evil as evil. I am now starting to believe I am better off not following this shit because, despite all efforts to call attention to our nation’s illnesses, we are spiraling out of control and the only ones who can stop it, The Fourth Estate, won’t.
Thanks for another subject for my next post, Frank DiSalle.
Here’s a link to the transcript, so you all can see for yourself what Keith said.
And that, hnice, is why Farris is sticking to attempts to kill the messenger.
You think Beck has credibility
Do I? I can say that I’ve literally NEVER watched his show, nor do I have any desire too. (That, and it’s on at a timeslot where I’m stuck in traffic.)
And if we aren’t allowed to ad hominem … then that goes for Keith (Brietbart and Fox BAD!) as well. If you take the ad hominem out of Keith’s comments, you’re left with a 20 second video clip.
(okay: one ad hominem: learn how to pronounce “filleted”, dumbass…)
It’s clear that the only person who came out of this looking better than when it started is Ms. Sherrod.
We — the howling fools of the far right, the stand-aside pathetic bureaucrats of the Department of Agriculture, the whole of the cowering media, this network included, the whole of the government, this self-defeatingly above-it-all president, included.
So why are you sticking up for MSNBC and Obama, SF?
(Brietbart and Fox BAD!) – Save Farris
Yes, because there’s absolutely nothing that’s happened in even the last two days to back that up.
“Do I? I can say that I’ve literally NEVER watched his show, nor do I have any desire too. (That, and it’s on at a timeslot where I’m stuck in traffic.)”
OK, fine. Poor example, though I’m not sure whether you didn’t get it or whether this was a deliberate attempt to steer us away from the topic.
I ought to have written, “There are people you feel have credibility, and people that feel have credibility, and regardless of whether those groups overlap, we are both correct insofar as we believe the things they say.”
Now, you respond, ah, but what of The Truth! To which I respond, yes, you see, that’s exactly what I’ve been trying to get you to talk about this whole time that you’ve been talking about Olbermann — what does he actually say here, and is it true?
You point out that Olbermann engages in ad hominem, but that is, again, entirely not the point. It is, in fact, just another ad hominem, of the third-grade variety — “Tommy hit me first!!!!”. It does not belong in a serious discussion. It belongs on a playground.
What does Olbermann say about the video, and is it true? That is the question here. It is simple, and it has very, very little to do with Olbermann.
No, credibility is not, by its nature, subjective. Credibility is the idea that a person is speaking the truth. A person who tells the truth has credibility – is able to be trusted. It’s limited, of course – you need to know a person to know if they are trustworthy. But it’s not subjective in the sense of only existing in a constituency.
However, especially in today’s political world, whether people are believed, or accepted as being trustworthy, has changed to a subjective thing.
Um.
I suppose this is a bit confusing, isn’t it?
Okay: politics right now is hideously sick. Okay? You have people who will find and edit a clip to make someone look bad (and then claim “oh, I never saw the whole video” as if being egregiously irresponsible about the truth is an excuse for pushing a lie) because it pushes their political agenda. Truth doesn’t matter, and no one important-to-him is going to realize what a foul and despicable liar it takes to do something like that.
People have been pushing such vicious, hateful lies for so long that if you’re part of this sick morass, you (the generic “you”) have got a good chance of losing sight of what normal is.
There was a time when credibility would *never* be seen as subjective. It might not be granted easily – but people would admit that truth was truth and lies were lies. And, let’s be honest – politicians have always been inveterate bullshitters. But there were times when you knew you could count on the essential truth.
There was a time when no one would have called the hydrogen generators in Iraq “Mobile biological weapons platforms” to prevent having a lying President look bad. The truth actually mattered!
But that’s not the world we live in right now. Now, we live in a world where trustworthiness – credibility – seems like a subjective thing. You can’t trust someone unless they’re part of your tribe.
That’s a *sick* fucking world.
But it is often the world we live in.
Who is this “Shefford” person mentioned in your headline? You gotta be careful when you’re posting in the wee hours. And don’t ask CK for spelling help, either.
“What does Olbermann say about the video, and is it true? That is the question here.”
If you’ll actually go read the original BigGovernment post that accompanied the video (and watched any/all of Breitbat’s subsequent interviews), you’d see that Sherrod was NEVER the target. It’s the rank and file of the NAACP who Brietbart holds up for scrutiny and condemnation. It’s the crowd who smile and cheer along at the story of someone who “stuck it to whitey!” without knowing that Sherrod would tag the tale with her renouncing of past ways and the search for redemption.
What does Olbermann’s think of these people and ther hatred? We still don’t know, because Olbermann’s literally missed the story. He was too busy demonizing his political opponents with whatever might have been handy that day to actually comprehend who brietbart’s actual target was.
In short, Olbermann’s Special Comment is nothing more than a 13 minute long “look over there!”
I see ferris has adopted the new talking point now that Sherrod has been vindicated- “We were after the NAACPEEEEEEEEEE.”
Weak.
SaveFarris: <i.It’s the crowd who smile and cheer along at the story of someone who “stuck it to whitey!”
Except that’s not what they were doing.
But don’t let facts and reality stop you, Farris. lord knows they never have.
SaveFarris: It’s the crowd who smile and cheer along at the story of someone who “stuck it to whitey!”
Except that’s not what they were doing.
But don’t let facts and reality stop you, Farris. lord knows they never have.
Farris, watch the video. Let us know the timestamp for when they are smiling (even though you can’t see their faces) and cheering, and what Sherrod is saying at that time. If you actually do this you will learn that Brietbart is lying to you and making you look like a fool.
>>the false allegations that Tea Party people used the N-word the day of the House Health Care vote.
>What’s to retract? They are both true.
Oh! You mean that you found some evidence of the Tea Party claim? Do share! Or are you just going with “fits the narrative”?
“you’d see that Sherrod was NEVER the target.” Save Farris
No, of course not. She was just falsely smeared a racist by Andy Breitbart. Somehow you find that acceptable or at least not worthy of scrutiny.
“It’s the crowd who smile and cheer along at the story of someone who “stuck it to whitey!” without knowing that Sherrod would tag the tale with her renouncing of past ways and the search for redemption.” Save Farris
More bullshittery. Absolute bullshit.
Please pull a Dennis and disappear. It’s cringe-inducing reading your talking points.
Olbermann has no credibility on this issue: none.
Farris, if you were so concerned about credibility, why did you believe the original story in the first place?
(and watched any/all of Breitbat’s subsequent interviews)
Oh, wait, you still do. Why the hell would you believe Breitbart. When has he EVER said something truthful?
you’d see that Sherrod was NEVER the target. It’s the rank and file of the NAACP who Brietbart holds up for scrutiny and condemnation.
So you’re admitting that Breitbart was intentionally targeting people for falsified character assassination? Gotcha.
“It’s the crowd who smile and cheer along at the story of someone who “stuck it to whitey!” without knowing that Sherrod would tag the tale with her renouncing of past ways and the search for redemption.” Save Farris
Save, what was edited out of the tape was Sherrod’s PREFACE to the story which clearly spelled out her intended point. The audience knew exactly what her larger point was going into the story.
You are an idiot. You don’t know the facts. You don’t care to know the facts. You allow yourself to get led around by the nose by liars and scam artists.
This has been said so many times about you and all the other trolls here that the sentences seem to have lost all meaning because every time it’s pointed out to you just how god awfully fucking wrong and stupid you all are, all the time, you keep coming back with the same crap, over and over and over.
Please just STFU.
They really don’t care.
Thank you, Keith. Just, thank you.
You know what I just realized? Dennis hasn’t said a single word about this entire controversy. One would think after all his whining about me supposedly commenting under someone else’s name, he would be a tad bit upset at Breitbart about this whole thing. It’s like they say, the silence is deafening.
P.S. Dennis, if you’re going to complain about me being “obsessed” about you, without condemning your hero Breitbart in the slightest, don’t bother. We went through that whole song and dance WAY too many times.
I don’t care if those pundits are far to the right or to the left. I have no respect for any of them. Beck and Olbermann have no credibility to me at all.
Zython,
http://www.oliverwillis.com/2010/07/19/alaska-tea-party-express-racist-shouldnt-have-been-expelled/#comment-236397
Huh, I guess I stand correct. Dennis isn’t a tool he’s…
Ok I guess he IS a tool. Nevermind.
Breitbart just likes doing things that are wrong.
Breitbart just likes doing things that are wrong.
Like that kid in a recent episode of “The Boondocks” who “likes doing bad things.” Breitbart is not as physically destructive, but exponentially more dangerous.
Breitbart just likes doing things that are wrong.
Or even better, Luther from the original version of “The Warriors.” He was the guy who shot Cyrus…and confessed that “I just like doing things like that.” In other words, a psychotic little shithead. Just like Breitbart.
“No, credibility is not, by its nature, subjective. Credibility is the idea that a person is speaking the truth.”
I think credibility is by definition, subjective to the ability of an entity or person in question to influence his/her ‘constituency’. The underlying basis of a persons’ perspective should of course be based in facts/truth, but all too often that definitely is not the case (e.g., as f$%ked up as Hitler was, he was still able to successfully convince a community that he and his agenda were righteous, truthful, fact-based, and credible)
No, that’s *exactly* the point. If it depends on constituency, it’s not credibility any more.
Herm. Glenn Greenwald is someone who I feel has credibility when talking about legal issues. When he says that the Citizens United decision has a sound basis, I believe him. I don’t *like* what he says, I don’t *like* his arguments, and I believe that the decision was wrong – but when I read his arguments for why it was defensible, I found myself forced to admit that, although I disagreed with his conclusion, I had to grant credence to his arguments.
I would have a *very* hard time believing that Glenn Greenwald would misrepresent the law intentionally. That’s credibility. It doesn’t matter whether we agree or not.
That’s what credibility is supposed to be about. The most Greenwald-hating person out there should (IMHO) grant that if Greenwald makes a legal argument, it’s because he believes that this is what the law represents.
But that’s what’s so incredibly foul about the political atmosphere. If you grant people credibility, you can’t paint them as the enemy if they don’t agree with you. So, bam, no one has any credibility. And in many cases, there isn’t any. Because partisan warfare makes people continue to spread bullshit lies. And when you know a person will spread a bullshit lie for partisan advantage, you really *can’t* trust them any more.
This piece is very good. You can’t be too over the top with this. Breitbart is scum. Scum. The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity.