On Sunday, it was made infinitely clear to the Kossacks that although attacks on right-leaning figures are encouraged -- even if they've just passed away, such as the recent disgraceful posts about Jesse Helms' death -- you're not allowed to say anything bad about their hero, MSNBC's Keith Olbermann.
UPDATE at end of post: Kos denies the allegations.
Although frequent DK poster The Baculum King's "Keith Olbermann Stooping to Fox's Level Now??" has been deleted, Google still has the cached version for all to see (h/t NBer Thomas Stewart, vulgarity alert):
We all know that an important part of Fox News' basic model is the liberal use of the "making shit up" technique, but I, for one, expect better from those who claim to be real journalists. On Thursday, Keith Olbermann let us down.
As usual, Olbermann hyped the upcoming "Worst Person in the World" segment several times throughout the broadcast, including a teaser sandwiched between a discussion of an interview with Obama and the "Pine Tar Scandal" in baseball 25 years ago:
Oh, dear, a dough with a 50 percent bonus in the area of the leggings, and it could be in big trouble because a former Republican presidential hopeful wants to go out and shoot and kill endangered animals in the nation of Chad and then personally serve the meat to starving refugees. Sounds like I‘m making it up, but I ain‘t. Worst Persons is ahead on COUNTDOWN. [...]
But our winner, Representative Duncan Hunter of California, whose office recently notified the U.S. embassy in Chad that the Congressman would be delighted to visit that country and distribute food at a refugee camp. Of course, there was a catch. Mr. Hunter only wanted to distribute the food if he could first hunt the food himself, wildebeasts. He wanted to hunt wildebeasts in the nation of Chad, kill some of them, and then personally give the meat to starving refugees. The Chadian government said, gosh, thanks, but there are two problems: hunting large animals and mammals like wildebeast is illegal in Chad. And, oh, by the way, there aren‘t any wildebeasts in Chad!
Undeterred, Congressman Hunter has now reportedly transferred his interests in helping the refugees to Kenya, Tanzania and South Africa, where there are still wildebeasts to be slaughtered—sorry, I mean distributed to refugees. Congressman Duncan "great white" Hunter, today‘s worst person in the world.
Just a couple of minor problems.
First, and most jarring, is that there is probably no mammal on the African continent (other than humans) less "endangered" than the wildebeest, the main attraction of every nature film about the mass migration on the Serengetti ever made, where they annually gather in herds of 400,000 and more. This simple fact could have easily been ascertained by MSNBC's research staff by watching any of those films (which should be enjoyed with the sound off, they too rival Fox for bullshit) or by merely looking at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's Threatened and Endangered Species list, where one immediately notes the complete absence of any variety of wildebeest.
Furthermore, while all hunting is closed in Kenya (much to the detriment of that Country's wildlife, but that's a subject for another Diary, perhaps), both Tanzania and South Africa offer perfectly legal hunting opportunities for wildebeest which have no negative impact on the populations in either Country.
Calling Duncan Hunter a dumbass is pretty much always justified, no matter the circumstances, but it's not necessary to distort and lie to do so.
I guess it's okay to applaud the death of conservatives at Daily Kos, but NOT to point out mistakes made by one of the worst "journalists" in American history.
Stay classy, Kos!
*****Update: I received the following e-mail message from Kos moments ago:
What makes you think that editors deleted that post? Jumping to
conclusions, are you?
The author deleted that post. We did not. Sorry to ruin your "gotcha!"
Stay classy.
I responded:
Glad to hear it. Have the author send me an e-mail message to this effect, and I will post an update.
He replied:
The only people I communicate with are my editors, not regular diarists. I know it's hard for you guys to understand this, but I don't even have a way to contact any of them.
But don't sweat it. Feel free to continue posting unsubstantiated charges (or "lies", as others may refer to them). It's the classy thing to do.
Then the solution is easy: ask one of your editors to do it. I'm SURE they know how to get in touch with all of your diarists. After all, it is 2008.
Is the Great Kos so separated from his own website that he doesn't know the policies he created?
*****Update II: More from Kos...
Here's the bottom line -- there are two types of people who can delete a post -- the editors, and the author. You assume it's the editors who did it, though you have no evidence for that assumption, and my word to the contrary. Since you are making the charge, it's your responsibility to substantiate it. Not mine.You want to keep running unsubstantiated info on your site, feel free. It's your site. But it really does confirm the kind of person you are. i.e. it's not "someone who adheres to the truth".I don't care if you run a correction or not. It's no skin of my back either way. I was doing you a favor by pointing out that you're running false info thinking it might be something you care about. But since you don't, I won't worry about it either.
I updated the post hours ago to reflect our correspondence. Without actually hearing from the author, I don't believe there's more I should do. After all, it's your contention he deleted it, but you claim to not be able to get in touch with him -- this despite the requirement at your website for members to present a valid e-mail address when they open a new account.As such, how do you KNOW he deleted it? Did you check with all your editors to see if any of them did? Furthermore, if he did indeed delete it, I'd been interested in why. After all, there were 153 comments to his post when it was deleted. Maybe he was pressured to take it down either by readers, or even an editor.
Aren't you curious? As the associate editor of NB, I would be if something similar happened here.
I don't keep contact information. I have no need for it. And editors do not delete posts without my permission. It's reserved only for the most extreme or illegal behavior and happens maybe 2-3 times a year. I'd rather preserve evidence of someone's idiocy than delete and pretend no one ever says anything stupid on the site. Sure, it's easy material for people like you and Bill O'Reilly, but I think it's better for the site long-term, if for no other reason than to keep better tabs on our trolls.The author's motivations aren't much of my concern. With 600+ diaries per day, stuff comes and goes all the time. There are lots of reasons people add and delete material.
Well, I've posted all of our e-mail correspondence as updates -- which I believe is the classy thing to do. :-)Anyway, if you'd like to actually discuss our relative class in person, as well as our political differences, let me know. I live in the East Bay, and am a Cal alum. So, if you ever want to get a beer and just talk like two Americans concerned about the future of our nation RATHER than foes on opposite sides of the blogosphere, let me know. I'll even buy the first round. :-)
