Written by Olbermann under a nom de plume. 

"DumbAssity of Dope"

I don't care about Olbie, I don't care about dkos....and I sure as heck don't care about this nattering nabob writing this blarney...whose friends and family members must all be in the same nuthatch as the author of this is in.

I know...msm bias....but I just cannot stand to look at Olbie...he makes me ill...probably wrote this himself...along with Mr. Anonymous.

Btw Noel...Feels like Halloween indeed....Part 2.

Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart

Were they strapped down with their eyes forced open as in A Clockwork Orange? Now they've all become victims.

I don't know - maybe it's just that I find it hard to believe that an adult would be that naive - but it I'd be willing to bet that the writer of that DK entry is a college kid.

At least, I hope they are for their sake. That way they still have a chance to grow up.

Are you sure this wasn't written by Olberman?  I don't think ANYONE thinks this highly of Olberman.

I wonder whom Olby paid to write this load of crap about him? This smells a lot like the kind of person who writes a book and has ten of his pals go to Amazon.com under fictitious names and give him five stars. Or various other kinds of internet gaming of the system.

"Olbermann is a trustworthy, fair, funny, and passionate figure"??? Possibly someone was copying a testimonial from Keithy's late mom? I find it hard to imagine anyone else considering the co-enabler of Mancow's waterboard fraud, not to mention the twit who didn't know he was on Twitter, "trustworthy"! 

But like a stopped clock, "Bathtub Boy's" cheerleader was right on one thing: "I
genuinely believe that Olbermann's show helps us all to care a little
more." I certainly agree with that: I care a little more about the demise of journalism every time I hear Olby caught in yet another distortion or outright lie without being drummed out of the profession of "news" and sent back to ESPN where he'd at least have some pretensions to competence. 

People get all bent out of shape about O'Reilly and Hannity--but they are frankly commentators who don't pretend to the title "journalist" like Keith does. 

UNDENIABLE TRUTHS OF LIFE

1.)  Keith Olbermann is fair and unbiased.

2.)  Pro wrestling is real.

3.)  The next time they play football, Lucy will hold the ball down so Charlie Brown can kick it.

4.)  The ShamWow guy sells products that are vital to not only the American economy but the home life of us all.

5.)  I have dated both Britney Spears and Halle Berry, and have their numbers on speed dial.

6.)  Tax increases stimulate the economy as well as increase Treasury revenues.

Okay, I'm done.  Anybody else got anything? 

Power is the peoples' to give, but it is also theirs to exercise.

on it.  So I won't.  Jim Webster

And then they wonder why they have credibility issues after spouting this stuff.

Sad thing is, they really believe it.  

I guess Oberman's honesty and fairness is why his ratings are going through the floor. 

The best line I read was that "Olbie" would beat O'Reilly if he was on at a different time!

I think they need their meds.

Colbert and Stewart are entertainers but to say that they shouldn't be taken at all seriously is incorrect.

A Pew Research study published April 15, 2007 concluded that viewers of the show are highly informed. Regular viewers of "The Daily Show" and the Colbert Report were most likely to score in the highest percentile on knowledge of current affairs

(Colber/Stewart 54 %, New Hour with Jim Lehrer 53%, The O'Reilly Factor 51%, NPR 51%, Rush Limbaugh 50%) http://people-press.org/report/319/public-knowledge-of-current-affairs-little-changed-by-news-and-information-revolutions

"Even after taking into account their overall news gathering habits and their political and demographic characteristics, the audiences for the comedy shows, The O'Reilly Factor, the web sites of national newspapers, and NPR all have significantly higher knowledge scores than the average."

["The Daily Show", which launched in 1996, now has an average audience of about 1.8 million. By comparison, Fox News' primetime show "Hannity & Colmes" had an average audience of 1.9 million in the first quarter of 2008, and CNN's highest rated show, "Election Center," captured an average of 1.2 million viewers] http://pewresearch.org/pubs/829/the-daily-show-journalism-satire-or-just-laughs

I often mention how freaking crazy Olbermann is and how anyone who watches and likes Olby has got to have some serious mental problems.  I've gotten some strange responses (or looks) from people I thought were sane and Christian.  That's ever scarier.  Especially when they're family.

It is, however, what I expect from the K Kiddies.

''These people began to care about politics - they became active in the community, they learned how to debate, and they have worked harder towards a goal that all of us share.''

Of course this is a total fallacy. They are just saying this like Hussein says he has created and/or saved X-amount of jobs.  Does anyone notice a huge increase in Community Activism??  Leftist Debaters?

Bueler?  Bueler?

I worked in the technical side of Broadcast TV several years before switching to Software Development.

A question I have long pondered is: 'Which actually came first?

Do the AmericanPeople want someone like Olberman, who does nothing more than 'Parrot' their inner feelings?

OR

Do people like Olberman start from 'Scratch' and create an audience by inculcating people with their innane drivel?

This may seem to be an easy question to answer - I think it is complex without an easy answer - what say you?

"When liberals act hatefully, I know I can count on Olbermann to cover it. The thing is, they usually don't." Yeah, so labeling Bush as a Nazi and showing pictures of shooting him isn't hateful. And they hardly ever did that! I guess the only way the author could come to this conclusion is if KO was the first television show he's ever watched in his life.

"One fights for liberty and justice for all. The other continues to rule through fear and hatred." At least he got this spot on, even though he probably doesn't realize it. He said, "the other (liberals) continue to rule" which is true. Liberals are in the majority in The White House and Congress.

'Surveys' done by pollsters to try and measure political smarts vs TV habits are anecdotal at best. The Annenberg study asked only six questions and did not present the statistical accuracy of the survey, probably because it would have been so low as to be garbage. Annenberg is also a liberal organization, and I do not trust them to come up with politically neutral questions.

It's an interesting question though, and I hope that someone does collect some meaningful data. Comparing O'Reilly to Stewart in itself is an apples to oranges comparison, because by the shows very nature, they appeal to very different populations. O'Reilly focuses his show on his working-class populist viewpoint, so he will bring in fewer highly educated viewers. It's the opposite of measuring (for example) Rush Limbaugh's viewers against Ed Schultz's based on questions that Brit Hume makes up. I don't think liberals would want to see that data.

A more balanced survey should stay away from opinion, and measure the knowledge of viewers of (for example) Fox News 6pm hard news show against the CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, CNBC, and MSNBC exact equivalents.

threw up a little in my mouth.

Seriously, what color is the sky on their planet?