That is the thrust of Olbermann’s main charge against Brown — hang the man for something an annonymous voice in the crowd had shouted? So what if he didn’t refute it even after the fact, are candidates now expected to reply to every single crank in a horde that bellows invective? This may actually become a new political ploy — dispatch operatives to live events and shout all sorts of venomous lines so the politician will be bogged down with apologies and denials. Expect a ramp up in YouTube savvy election team members as a result.

Let me try this retort for KO: You labled the individual who yelled out that comment was a Brown “Supporter”. PROVE IT!

What a nice and sensible man.

KO is the WPITW.

Keith as usual, is “talking out of his bare-bottom”.

Olberdouche needs to take a long walk off of a short pier.

When you are in third place, you must be obnoxious to be heard.

8PM – P2+ (25-54) (35-64)
The O’Reilly Factor – 3,661,000 viewers (956,000) (1,651,000)
Campbell Brown – 1,243,000 viewers (429,000) (593,000)
Countdown w/ K. Olbermann – 995,000 viewers (246,000) (504,000)
On Assignment: Iraq (8:00-8:30pm) – a scratch w/89,000 viewers (a scratch w/30,000) (a scratch w/45,000)
Options Action (8:30-9:00pm) – a scratch w/69,000 viewers (a scratch w/19,000) (a scratch w/40,000)
Nancy Grace – 745,000 viewers (270,000) (345,000)

Last nights rant was equivalent to holding his breath until he got his way (Coakley win). Tonight was equivalent to threatening that he was going to run away from home if Coakley lost.

Let’s see if he can muster to host his show tomorrow night.

did Olby ever apologize for suggesting Hillary Clinton should be taken into a room and killed?

Don’t count on it, Sara. You “meat-bags” are expendable like that.

He like Glenn never needs to apologize.

UPDATE: Brown told reporters this morning that he didn’t hear the remark, that it was “inappropriate” and that he would have “said something” had he heard it.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0110/Brown_didnt_hear_curling_iron_remark_.html?showall

we meat bags with lipstick, please!

Oh, sorry about that. Didn’t mean disrespect!

haha!

Additionally: Olbermann should apologize. Not to Scott Brown. Scott Brown didn’t cast enough votes to get himself elected.

Clear MA is not a republican stronghold or leans right. He should apologize to MA residents who voted for Brown because his tirade was a tirade against them.

Other than the “ex-nude model” he just insulted roughly 20% MA democrats and large % of MA independents. There’s no place for that kind of vicious attack to voters. Even with friendly fire on Democrat voters.

Watching MSNBC was a joy tonight; such a funereal atmosphere with Maddow (probably rightfully) at a bar while Olbermann and Matthews could barely get words out of their months. The Dems are an oxymoron; they chant ‘Change’ while pining away for a dead Kennedy who ought to have been put in jail for manslaughter if not for his last name.

I’d like to answer Keith Olbermann’s challenge that someone prove Scott Brown innocent– a formulation particularly ironic in light of Olbermann’s chicken little rants on the death of due process under the Bush Administration. A short-lived concern on Keith’s part, lasting no longer than 8 years of the Bush Administration…

Let me say I offer up this defense in the same spirit as Keith offered up his “proof” that Scott Brown is racist, homophobe, etc…etc…which means I’ll use Keith’s own pedantic and legalistic form of reasoning.

I’ll start with Olbermann’s “proof” that Brown is a “supporter of violence against women” because he failed to apologize for saying “we can do this” in response to a supporter who yelled “stick a curling iron up her [Coakley's] butt”:

First of all, Coakley may be a woman but she does not represent all of womankind. It is possible to bear an animus to an opponent that would not be extended to every member of their particular gender.

For example, if Coakley was a male and the campaign supporter had yelled “ream him!” or “bend him over!” (or some other similar expression that Olbermann has surely heard a thousand times by locker room jocks and MSNBC would-be political jocks), Olbermann would not assume that this sentiment extended to all of mankind, let alone that it was an actual threat of violence. Hell..he wouldn’t even assume that THAT sort of expression was even sexist. Was it an ugly remark– no doubt. Was it an actual inducement to violence– no.

That Brown did not apologize for his supporter’s remark proves nothing other than that he refused to be drawn into a scenario where he escalated the story in the media by making an apology. Ditto for the fact that Brown did not deny that his statement “we can do that” was in response to the man’s remark. By not being drawn into game of having to explain what could easily have been a nervous unthinking lapse in a public situation, and having this explanation aired and discussed continuously, Brown effectively squelched the story in all but internet blue blogs. Any denial (no matter how accurate), would have only extended the news value of the story.

You could argue that this would “prove” that Brown is a politician, but it’s certainly does not prove that he advocates violence against anyone.

BTW– it’s not for nothing that Olbermann ignored the shout of “suicide!” by one Brown supporter. Olbermann once told one of his critics via email to “kill yourself”.

As for the charge of homophobia, Olbermann is aware that pols he has supported (both Clintons, John Kerry, Pres. Obama) have expressly been against gay marriage. In order to imply that Brown’s stand is essentially different than…..merely being against gay marriage…. Olbermann must base this upon some perceived difference between a Constitutional Amendment banning gay marriage and the Defense of Marriage Act (that Clinton advocated) and the stated preferences of John Kerry and Pres. Obama that states be allowed to choose their own marriage laws.

But if being against gay marriage means you’re a homophobe then the matter of whether you’d go as far as constitutional amendment or just to the point of letting states settle it as they see fit, is of little consequence in mitigating the fact that you are against extending that privilege to gays. And in terms of Olbermann’s characterization of a concern for “states rights” as being code for “we don’t want to extend rights to minorities”, such a stand by Kerry and Obama should be of PARTICULAR disgust to Mr. Olbermann!

It’s significant too, that Olbermann did not quote Brown entirely in his comment about a gay political opponent adopting a child with her lover. Brown said, “It’s unusual for two women having a baby. It’s just not normal, in terms of what’s normal in today’s society.”

Perfectly true and certainly more consistent with the natural law premise that underlines Obama, Kerry, and Bill and Hill’s objections to gay marriage.

Olbermann is willingly to ignore what he labels as homophobia in one candidate, if he thinks his pols are merely turning their heads to gay civil rights out of political expediency!

I assign the appellations of “teabagging” and “reactionary” as a given from leftwing types.

Finally, let address too, Olbermann’s remarks that tea party protesters have only themselves (and Griff Jenkins) to thank for the implications of teabagging jokes. If there’s anything that exhibits how disingenuous this man is, it’s this.

It is a pity that Tea Party protesters and Mr. Jenkins weren’t aware of the pornographic definition of the slang term “teabagging”.

However, it took MSNBC news hosts and journalists to do snickering interviews airing the slang definition of the word and to double entendre about “nuts”, “Dick Armey” and “balls”, etc.

Olbermann ignores this and then points his finger at this own target and saying that they are responsible for not only not knowing porno slang but also of not understanding too that a television news network would then belittle and berate everyday joes with this information and make every effort to use it as a means of marginalizing them in the public eye.

If this doesn’t put anything Olbermann might say about anything or anyone into perspective then you don’t have a perspective you merely have a grudge and a control-freak insistence that sooner or later all will acquiesce to your way– FOR THEIR OWN GOOD…

One thing is for certain– Olbermann will never ask anyone to prove that Sen Kennedy was was at one time a sexist, adulterous alcholic, whose convenient memory led to the death of one woman and led to his falsely stating what and when he knew about the rape claim made by another woman against his nephew.

“he just insulted roughly 20% MA democrats and large % of MA independents. There’s no place for that kind of vicious attack to voters. Even with friendly fire on Democrat voters.”

Yeah, he actually “went there” and tried to get Howard Fineman to agree that the Mass vote was a reaction to Pres. Obama’s skin color.

He prefaced THAT implication with the remark that “this isn’t pretty”.

Olbermann stirs the pot of race-baiting slander and then warns everyone that it stinks!

Just watched this bottom feeder’s attempt at getting attention as the world moves on to Fox News. What came to mind as I watched was “someone forgot to flush at MSNBC.”

Whine, whine, whine.

MSNBC is not a “real” network. It’s irrelevant and just takes up bandwidth on my cable system.

NewsBusters — Massachusetts: Olbermann Cries Racism
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mark-finkelstein/2010/01/19/massachusetts-olbermann-cries-racism

Sara in Italy, you are a fucking liar!

Jelperman says:
January 20, 2010 at 4:34 am
Sara in Italy, you are a fucking liar!

What exactly, did I lie about?
About Keith suggesting Clinton be killed?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/25/keith-olbermanns-idea-for_n_98557.html

Or about Olbermann calling Malkin a mashed up bag of meat?
Keith Olbermann has done it again. The cable channel’s principal pontificator — in naming syndicated columnist Michelle Malkin “the worst person in the world” on Wednesday night — blasted her “total mindless, morally bankrupt, knee-jerk, fascistic hatred, without which Michelle Malkin would just be a mashed-up bag of meat with lipstick on it.”

Pretty obvious Olby is trying to out “Schultz” Ed Schultz!

I think this has to be the most convoluted logic resulting in the most convoluted attempt to impugn people, that I’ve ever seen.

Olbermann to Howard Fineman: ‘”the Republicans and the Tea Partiers will tell you what happens with Scott Brown tonight whether he wins or comes close is a repudiation of Obama policies. And surely one of Obama’s policies from the viewpoint of his opponents is it’s OK to have this sea-change in American history—to have an African-American president. Is this vote to any degree just another euphemism the way ‘states rights’ was in the ’60s?”‘

http://newsbusters.org/#ixzz0d9xrzdIw

That’s right, folks…since one the president’s “policies” is that people of color can lead the country too, when Mass voters said they are against some of Pres. Obama’s policies, that’s “code” for saying they are against having a black person as president of the U.S.A.!

Isn’t that brilliant in its creativity!

On another board here yesterday, I made the statement that at least Olbermann would not be calling blue state voters racists.

Oh, how I underestimated him! Olbermann determination to slander all inconvenient Obama critics with this appellation is nothing short of maniacal!

Jelperman says: the usual foul-mouth liberal speak…

Enjoy the crow she sat before you, dude….

Nice try on olbermann’s part, but it isn’t up to anyone to prove the negative lies spewed by Olby. It is his job to back up his smears, with fact.

For instance, if I, *hypothetically* wanted to stoop to Olby’s level, and say:

Keith Olbermann is a race baiting, sexist, limp dicked, fat ass hypocrite, stalker who sucks in bed and tries to date porn stars, promotes violent suggestions against women, and is such a loser he actually told someone to go kill them self.

it would be up to me to support my statements.

So… it is up to Keith to support his statement about Brown. Cecelia already pointed out his hypocrisy with homophobe, unless of course Olby is willing to call Obama and Hillary homophobes as well.

(I have a lot more back up to support the statment, I just ran out of linking room…)

Sign petition to fire Keith Olbermann
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/firekeitholbermann/

Sara, I believe you just did more legwork in one post than Olbermann does to substantiate his blather in a given week.
KO has this technique down pat: he spews his charges and once he catches fire for his words he simply says, “Well disprove it!.” In other words, you go do the work I couldn’t do. Fact is so few people watch him or care to engage his worthless charges they are technically allowed to stand and he then feels free to continue with the vitriol. This way he does not have to actually do serious research, or thinking. It is so far removed from journalism that his show may as well be named Sports Center.

LOL! It’s surprisingly easy to find negative things to describe Olby!

Even if he isn’t fired, at least we can take comfort in the fact that his ratings are in the toilet…along with him.

Why anyone watches the elitist Olbermann escapes me.
He is a “tiny man” with a cowtown education who thinks no one knows or understands that is the root of his problem.

Envy gets them every time!