Political & Elections

Woodwork · Senior Member

CNBC and Keith Olbermann

CelticClan07 · Senior Member

Good for KO. Does anyone watch Current TV? I guess a dozen or so folks will get their fill of angry, unhinged, commentary again. confuse

Abyss · Senior Member

Poetsheart wrote:

Quote from Payne: Do you go out of your way to not know how to quote a message? It's not hard, I promise./Quote

Is that the best you got?

The point was lost, clearly.

Poetsheart · Senior Member

Quote from Payne: Do you go out of your way to not know how to quote a message? It's not hard, I promise./Quote

Is that the best you got?

nbachris2788 · Senior Member

Abyss wrote:

Agreed. The conservative punditry is weak.
As outlandish as she is, Coulter is easily one of the best/smartest of conservative pundits.

A lot of conservatives are probably quite smart but play dumb on TV. Gretchen Carlson on that comedy show "Fox & Friends" is a Stanford graduate. Not every Stanford graduate is a genius, but you can't get into that school by being dumb.

Abyss · Senior Member

Poetsheart wrote:

Quote from MrPayne:
As outlandish as she is, Coulter is easily one of the best/smartest of conservative pundits./Quote

Yes, and Sarah Palin is the smartest and most logical Republican nominee for the next Presidential election....

Do you go out of your way to not know how to quote a message? It's not hard, I promise.

Sarah Palin is a degenerate (but still probably above average for an American). Coulter is actually pretty smart (educational credentials alone would indicate that).

Poetsheart · Senior Member

Quote from MrPayne:
As outlandish as she is, Coulter is easily one of the best/smartest of conservative pundits./Quote

Yes, and Sarah Palin is the smartest and most logical Republican nominee for the next Presidential election.... evileye

Bogney · Senior Member

Coulter is a buffoon. That was an imitation of her book titles.

-- Edited by Bogney on Monday 7th of February 2011 11:03:28 PM

Abyss · Senior Member

nbachris2788 wrote:
I don't have a problem with aggressive pundits as long as they use facts. This is why conservative pundits are a joke. Beck and his caliphate? O'Reilly and the tides? Laughable.

Agreed. The conservative punditry is weak.

As outlandish as she is, Coulter is easily one of the best/smartest of conservative pundits.

Bogney · Senior Member

Woodwork: I am glad that you dine with your wife, visit in her home, and vacation with her! smile My experience is similar to yours in that my values do not match the norm for where I live - more rural than suburban which translates to conservative rather than liberal even in California. All of my conservative friends are very nice - otherwise they probably would not be my friends. I don't attack them as hard hearted bigots simply because they voted for Bush; hell, I bought the compassionate conservative line the first time around. Two wars later I became more doubtful.

I suspect that we would probably get along just fine in person. Your posts give me the impression that you are reasonably well educated and intelligent, just a bit dismissive and off hand on occasion. I was reacting to an overbroad generalization which you are free to make based upon your personal experience, and I am free to point out is fairly outrageous to attribute to the majority of liberals not of your personal acquaintance.

john doe · Guru

Looks like the voice of reason is returning - Hallelujah!!!:

February 7, 2011, 9:00 pm

Olbermann Said to Be Going to Current TV

By BILL CARTER AND BRIAN STELTER

Keith Olbermann, the former top-rated host of“Countdown”on the news channel MSNBC, will announce his next television home on Tuesday, and people familiar with his plans pointed Monday to a possible deal with the public affairs channel Current TV.

Neither Mr. Olbermann, his representatives, or executives from Current TV would comment on the move, but they did not deny that the channel, which counts former Vice President Al Gore as one of its founders, will become at least one partner in Mr. Olbermann’s future media plans.

One of the people with knowledge of the plans said Mr. Olbermann would have an equity stake in Current TV. The people insisted on anonymity because they were not authorized by their employers to comment in advance of the official announcement.

On Monday a public relations agency hired by Mr. Olbermann scheduled a Tuesday morning conference call for an announcement about his next job. “He and his new partners will make an exciting announcement regarding the next chapter in his remarkable career,” the agency wrote in an e-mail.

Current TV has set up a presentation with advertisers for Wednesday afternoon in Manhattan to announce its future plans. The channel may be betting on Mr. Olbermann to put it on the cable map. The low-rated five-year-old channel needs the help. Targeting young people, it originally subsisted on YouTube-style submissions and video journalists. More recently it started producing and acquiring traditional television series, like repeats of “This American Life.”

Mr. Olbermann departed MSNBC in January after some stormy interactions with management, including a suspension for contributing to political candidates. The settlement of his contract precluded his joining another television outlet for an undetermined period of time, but an announcement of a future assignment on Current TV would presumably not violate the terms of that deal as long as he did not start until after the agreed-upon waiting period.

A move to Current TV would challenge Mr. Olbermann’s fans of his MSNBC show — where he drew about a million viewers a night — to follow him to a channel that is considerably less accessible. Current TV is available in only about 60 million homes, and is usually available only on the digital tier of cable television systems, which requires a separate receiver. MSNBC, which is owned by NBC Universal, is available in 85 million homes and is almost always available as a basic cable entry.

But the addition of Mr. Olbermann, the former sports anchor who made himself a progressive star at MSNBC, would surely elevate the channel, bringing it attention it has never before received. The channel also wears its liberal politics on its sleeve.

With Current TV, Mr. Olbermann would also gain a measure of independence. Unlike most cable channels, including MSNBC, which are owned by large media companies, Current is privately and independently owned by Mr. Gore and other backers.

It is also possible that Mr. Olbermann will separately pursue other ventures, like an Internet destination.

Speculation has surrounded Mr. Olbermann since he abruptly left his job at MSNBC. He has been savoring the speculation, even posting a link on Twitter on Monday afternoon to a countdown clock for his announcement.

The abruptness of Mr. Olbermann’s departure last month suggested that he already had lined up another media job. The Internet domain name TheOlbermannShow.com was registered two days before his televised goodbye. A few days afterward, he set up a new Twitter account, called “FOKNewsChannel,” short for “Friends of Keith.”

The departure came just days before Comcast took control of NBC, leading some to suspect that he was forced out by Comcast — an assertion that the companies vigorously denied. Comcast owns a 10 percent stake in Current

Woodwork · Senior Member

Bogney,

the best, and only true thing I have to offer here, is my own experience and education. It is singular. My views are generally anecdotal or based on something I have read, but I tend to trust my own experiences of life even over the views of the experts I've read wherein they differ --and they often do. I claim neither clear objectivity or transcendence. There is even a very good chance my view is incorrect and merely based on an overly limited experience of stuff. I try.

That being said, 90% of my friends and associates are liberals. Including my best friend, business partner and wife. We get along great, dining out and at each other’s homes. even vactioning together.

It has been my anecdotal experience that most liberals have only few conservative friends, if any (I’m usually him, in my circle). That's too bad for them, I think...in both respects.

My experience, in general, is also that conservatives, on the whole, take their politics somewhat less seriously or passionately than do liberals. Liberals seem to me to be able to fire it up a bit hotter and quicker. More sizzle and shake. Again, it's just my experience.

It's cool with me.

Bogney · Senior Member

He is "right" all of the tme.

geeps20 · Senior Member

^facts as you see them I'm sure. I suppose you thought the pundits were over the top when they were saying the health care bill was unconstitutional from the start..O'reilly has been right more often than not.

nbachris2788 · Senior Member

geeps20 wrote:

^got it...liberal pundits who attack conservatives are good, conservative pundits who attack liberals are bad...big yawn

I don't have a problem with aggressive pundits as long as they use facts. This is why conservative pundits are a joke. Beck and his caliphate? O'Reilly and the tides? Laughable.

Bogney · Senior Member

Woodwork: Your condescending generalizations about the character flaws of liberals really grows tiresome over time. You're often wrong but never in doubt. While I clearly dislike certain conservatives and conservative positions, I don't think you will find any posts where I lazily condemn the entire opposition with an off-hand smear like your doozy in this thread,

"It may be that my experience is singular, but such as it is I have always found liberals to be less tolerant of critique or an opposing view. I have often speculated that they too often take themselves too seriously and therefore their opinions, views and issues too seriously to brook dissent. I do, however, worry that the Tea Party has some of this hard-heartedness about them as well."

Mirroring your criticsim of liberals, you appear take yourself quite seriously by purporting to be able to crystalize the flaws of all liberals into a couple of sentences. I agree with your suspicion that your experiences may be "singular," and therefore your derogatory conclusions are, as you say, "speculation." Then why "speculate" in a negative fashion about an entire grouop of people with whom you disagree based on your singular experiences except to libel liberals without any real basis? You offer a couple of lame disclaimers, as if you can claim some pretence to being evenhanded, and then fire away with an ill supported stereotype, which is the essence of bigotry.

I am curious as to what groups you have found to be especially tolerant of opposing points of view? To make any sort of valid generalization about tolerance or intolerance of opposing points of view, the outrageousness of the point of view must be measured against the response. I don't think liberals or conservatives should be very tolerant of the point of view expressed by the Westborough Baptist Church folks.

Moderate viewpoints tend to draw moderate responses, outrageous viewpoints tend to draw outraged responses. Pundits tend to find outrage at moderate positions because they are paid to create controversy and move the lines as to what the public considers moderate or extreme. Your "liberals are hypersensitive" schtick is punditry at its worst, on par with, "Gee, I don't know, but the conservatives I have come in contact with seem to care nothing for the poor, and generally do not support the advancement of minorities. Maybe my experience has been singular, but perhaps they vote against social programs because they are stingy racists."

That conclusion is not justified by the sampling size or the factual basis stated, but is simply an example of gross pandering to liberal extremism and a libel of conservatives. It is certainly true in some extreme cases, but not something that can fairly be charged to all conservatives. Your conclusion may be valid as to some liberals, but the extension to all is an obvious prejudice that would make most people blush if applied to a religious or racal minority group.

john doe · Guru

Keith Olbermann is a hero. Geeps20 - I don't understand you and your views.

geeps20 · Senior Member

^got it...liberal pundits who attack conservatives are good, conservative pundits who attack liberals are bad...big yawn

nbachris2788 · Senior Member

All those interested in journalistic integrity should respect Keith Olbermann for doing what was then considered astounding: relentlessly going after Bush in the mid-2000s. Way before even Republicans started to cleanse their hands of Bush (after unconditionally supporting him for every second up until then), Olbermann went after Bush when it was still dangerous.

And it was marvelous. Just watch those special comments from the mid-2000s.

After Bush was gone, Olbermann wasn't quite the same lone crusader anymore. And especially with the rise of Rachel Maddow, he began to look more petty and driven by personal motives in comparison.

Whatever your opinion is of him, you have to respect what he did against the Bush administration. That took a lot of guts and he did it so articulately and forcefully.

And please, not the lazy comparisons to O'Reilly and Beck. If O'Reilly finally figures out how gravity works and Beck learns history to at least the 5th grade level, then maybe we'll start talking. Olbermann may have been loud and irritating to many, but he always based his ideas and opinions on facts as best he could, and apologized when he failed to do so. The conservative commentators never do so, even flouting centuries-old Newtonian physics to make their case.

pima · Guru

Off topic, but zooser I am so with you about Uno. Actually, I don't like beagles, more of an American Foxhound fan.

Back on topic, I use to listen to Beck yrs and yrs ago before he got to his new level of fame. Back then he was really a federalist, and I enjoyed that about him. Now he is just like Rush or Rhodes, he lost his voice.

I really respect Krauthammer and Juan Williams. The only time I lost respect for Williams is back in 08 because before Obama won the nom, he slammed him constantly (he was obviously a Hill fan), but once he got the nom, he back peddled on everything he said.

I live in the DC area, and my favorite people to listen to are Andy and Grandy (yes, Fred Grandy...Love Boat). I use to be a Chris Plante fan, but he has no also go off the deep end.

I can only stand so much vitriol before I say enough. Even with XM, my options are getting less and less with everyday.

Woodwork · Senior Member

A real critic would have called Beck on his hate and fear mongering. His intolerance of all religions not christian.

Jordcin,

Just so as to keep it real, could you point out for me the remarks at the rally that could qualify as hateful or fear mongering? You seem pretty certain that there were remarks like that that should have been pointed out. What were they?

I suppose there should be at least some in order to be so adamant about demanding it be called out.

In fact, as I recall, the Left Press was pretty disappointed at the time, that Beck hadn't given them any grist for the mill at his rally. I suppose that is what I meant when I called it hard-heartedness though. Uncomprimising? I do suppose, however, that inventing a controversy could also be considered 'passionate' if it was for a good cause.

Jordcin · Veteran Member

Those type of videos go viral on you tube and blogs all the time. When something like that is on Beck's website, it's for racist reasons only. Period. He does it all the time.

Jordcin · Veteran Member

As for Beck.

When Beck began his web site, The Blaze http://www.theblaze.com/ which 4 months in is now competing with Drudge for daily hits (1.25 million), he hired the CEO and HR head of Huffington Post to run his site...hardly doctrinaire. And as I said earlier, he not only recruited but has now hired my daughter as editor, even though she has written very, very critically of him and the Tea party up until now http://ricochet.com/main-feed/Glenn-Beck-a-thon-Honor-God-and-More-God .

I cannot imagine Olberman, Maddow or Shultz doing the same with a conservative or with anyone that has ever been critical of them in the past. And I think there is a fundamental reason for that rooted in their ideological dispositions, and therefore, to a degree the liberal disposition generally.

It may be that my experience is singular, but such as it is I have always found liberals to be less tolerant of critique or an opposing view. I have often speculated that they too often take themselves too seriously and therefore their opinions, views and issues too seriously to brook dissent. I do, however, worry that the Tea Party has some of this hard-heartedness about them as well.

That blog your daughter wrote was not very very critical of Beck. It was lukewarm. Your daughter's not a liberal, so it wasn't such a stretch for Beck to hire her.

As for the liberals, it's more about passion than "hardheartedness." They are passionate about social justice and won't allow someone like Beck to take that term and turn it into something ugly.

I can only suppose you did not actually have time to read the peice, Jordcin. You are right that Emily is no liberal, but it would be difficult for an astute reader to describe what she said of Beck and his signature rally as "lukewarm," I think:

These are the questions I’d be asking if I had the stomach to take such a revival—and Glenn Beck—seriously. But no, the entire event was political farce—an unleavened parody that did not rise to the level of either satirical humor or moral gravitas. It was kind of like going to a costume party with no discernible theme.
Perhaps, as you suggest, actual liberals used stronger terms than a political farce to describe Beck and his rally. But I would have supposed they would have been then, as they say now, more civil about it. In any case, that's pretty strong stuff to write about Beck on a conservative web site...as the comments afterwards indicate.

I did read it and what you quoted was the only critique and it came at the end and it was not exactly crushing. Unleavened parody? Ok. A real critic would have called Beck on his hate and fear mongering. His intolerance of all religions not christian. His exagerating the crowd numbers.

Only a far right conservative would be offended enough about the article to comment on it. It was just not that harsh.

When Beck is able to be interviewed by some of his critics, on a news channel other than Fox, that's when you can be a little impressed.

Razorsharp · Guru

Anywhere else and that video would be funny. On a redneck site like Beck's it's just racist.

What a perfect example of someone creating a double standard.

Jordcin · Veteran Member

Cartera wrote:

That's too bad Razorsharp. You won't want to miss the top story and video about a wild brawl breaking out at a South Carolina IHOP.

Anywhere else and that video would be funny. On a redneck site like Beck's it's just racist.

Razorsharp · Guru

I finally got into the website and was able to view the brawl at IHOP. No wonder the website was busy with a video like that one. :) I don't go to IHOP but if I ever do I will make sure not to order the "I ride, the ride" special.

Cartera · Guru

That's too bad Razorsharp. You won't want to miss the top story and video about a wild brawl breaking out at a South Carolina IHOP.

Razorsharp · Guru

I tried accessing theblaze.com and got this message:

The Blaze is experiencing a high load at the moment. Please be patient while we get things back up and running.

Apparently the site is on fire.

I have seen Beck in person and thought his show was wonderful and funny. I view him as an entertainer and not necessarily as someone from whom I would formulate political opinions.

Woodwork · Senior Member

Cartera wrote:

Big surprise that I'm not excited about Beck's success in spreading misinformation. I think he's dangerous and irresponsible. I have no doubt "The Blaze" will set the facts on fire.

Now, that's the spirit! smile

Woodwork · Senior Member

Jordcin wrote:

Woodwork wrote:

As for Beck.

When Beck began his web site, The Blaze http://www.theblaze.com/ which 4 months in is now competing with Drudge for daily hits (1.25 million), he hired the CEO and HR head of Huffington Post to run his site...hardly doctrinaire. And as I said earlier, he not only recruited but has now hired my daughter as editor, even though she has written very, very critically of him and the Tea party up until now http://ricochet.com/main-feed/Glenn-Beck-a-thon-Honor-God-and-More-God .

I cannot imagine Olberman, Maddow or Shultz doing the same with a conservative or with anyone that has ever been critical of them in the past. And I think there is a fundamental reason for that rooted in their ideological dispositions, and therefore, to a degree the liberal disposition generally.

It may be that my experience is singular, but such as it is I have always found liberals to be less tolerant of critique or an opposing view. I have often speculated that they too often take themselves too seriously and therefore their opinions, views and issues too seriously to brook dissent. I do, however, worry that the Tea Party has some of this hard-heartedness about them as well.

That blog your daughter wrote was not very very critical of Beck. It was lukewarm. Your daughter's not a liberal, so it wasn't such a stretch for Beck to hire her.

As for the liberals, it's more about passion than "hardheartedness." They are passionate about social justice and won't allow someone like Beck to take that term and turn it into something ugly.

I can only suppose you did not actually have time to read the peice, Jordcin. You are right that Emily is no liberal, but it would be difficult for an astute reader to describe what she said of Beck and his signature rally as "lukewarm," I think:

These are the questions I’d be asking if I had the stomach to take such a revival—and Glenn Beck—seriously. But no, the entire event was political farce—an unleavened parody that did not rise to the level of either satirical humor or moral gravitas. It was kind of like going to a costume party with no discernible theme.

Perhaps, as you suggest, actual liberals used stronger terms than a political farce to describe Beck and his rally. But I would have supposed they would have been then, as they say now, more civil about it. In any case, that's pretty strong stuff to write about Beck on a conservative web site...as the comments afterwards indicate.

Cartera · Guru

Big surprise that I'm not excited about Beck's success in spreading misinformation. I think he's dangerous and irresponsible. I have no doubt "The Blaze" will set the facts on fire.

Cardinal Fang · Senior Member

Celtic, did you happen to notice the Giants' victory parade? Lots of people are fans of something. Grownups too.

And if you want to know about adoring, uncritical conservative fans, just Google search on Dittohead.

Jordcin · Veteran Member

Woodwork wrote:

As for Beck.

When Beck began his web site, The Blaze http://www.theblaze.com/ which 4 months in is now competing with Drudge for daily hits (1.25 million), he hired the CEO and HR head of Huffington Post to run his site...hardly doctrinaire. And as I said earlier, he not only recruited but has now hired my daughter as editor, even though she has written very, very critically of him and the Tea party up until now http://ricochet.com/main-feed/Glenn-Beck-a-thon-Honor-God-and-More-God .

I cannot imagine Olberman, Maddow or Shultz doing the same with a conservative or with anyone that has ever been critical of them in the past. And I think there is a fundamental reason for that rooted in their ideological dispositions, and therefore, to a degree the liberal disposition generally.

It may be that my experience is singular, but such as it is I have always found liberals to be less tolerant of critique or an opposing view. I have often speculated that they too often take themselves too seriously and therefore their opinions, views and issues too seriously to brook dissent. I do, however, worry that the Tea Party has some of this hard-heartedness about them as well.

That blog your daughter wrote was not very very critical of Beck. It was lukewarm. Your daughter's not a liberal, so it wasn't such a stretch for Beck to hire her.

As for the liberals, it's more about passion than "hardheartedness." They are passionate about social justice and won't allow someone like Beck to take that term and turn it into something ugly.

Jordcin · Veteran Member

Did anyone see Ed Schultz at his new 10 pm time slot? He was so happy he could hardly contain it. Keith who?

zoosermom · Senior Member

Well, here's my confession. I worship Uno the Beagle, the 2008 Westminster Dog Show champion. I stalk his blog regularly and I cried my eyes out when I heard that he had been here in NYC on my birthday weekend and I didn't see him. I was also pretty upset to be unable to get tickets to the Westminster Show this year where he will be appearing. I donate to his charity, Angel on a leash. My goal in life is to have a beagle of my own called Duo. Someone has a relative of Uno named Deuce Beagelo. I am so jealous.

Jordcin · Veteran Member

CelticClan07 wrote:

Doesn't matter who is doing the celeb worshipping, I can't imagine what sort of person does that. To me, it's beyond bizarre.

Oh, relax Celtic, you take yourself too seriously. So what if someone admires or even "worships" a celebrity. And don't tell me you don't know anyone who is obsessed with a sports team (ie Celtics) or a talk show host. Really, big deal, as long as it doesn't keep a person from functioning.

Woodwork · Senior Member

As for Beck.

When Beck began his web site, The Blaze http://www.theblaze.com/ which 4 months in is now competing with Drudge for daily hits (1.25 million), he hired the CEO and HR head of Huffington Post to run his site...hardly doctrinaire. And as I said earlier, he not only recruited but has now hired my daughter as editor, even though she has written very, very critically of him and the Tea party up until now http://ricochet.com/main-feed/Glenn-Beck-a-thon-Honor-God-and-More-God .

I cannot imagine Olberman, Maddow or Shultz doing the same with a conservative or with anyone that has ever been critical of them in the past. And I think there is a fundamental reason for that rooted in their ideological dispositions, and therefore, to a degree the liberal disposition generally.

It may be that my experience is singular, but such as it is I have always found liberals to be less tolerant of critique or an opposing view. I have often speculated that they too often take themselves too seriously and therefore their opinions, views and issues too seriously to brook dissent. I do, however, worry that the Tea Party has some of this hard-heartedness about them as well.

SamuraiLandshark · Guru

Dammit, Celtic! You are spilling all of my secrets!

CelticClan07 · Senior Member

Aw c'mon SLS, we all know you're the card-carrying president of the Alan Colmes fan club.

tee hee......

busdriver11 · Guru

"Miley Cyrus or Justin Bieber?"

I don't think I'd get the appeal of these two when I was any age. They are terrible!

SamuraiLandshark · Guru

I honestly cannot imagine a reality in which I would be a member of any pundit or talking head's fan club.

I mean, I really like Charles Krauthammer, but he doesn't seem to get too many groupies. Doesn't have the charisma factor. On the other side, I always liked George Stephanopoulis, but he lacks that "it" factor, too.

Fan clubs are best left to tweens and their obsessions. What is it these days: Miley Cyrus or Justin Bieber?

CelticClan07 · Senior Member

^^^No, I don't read about Limbaugh or Beck. I do catch them on the radio, <TV for Beck> every so often. Have no inclination whatsoever to go looking for their fan clubs. Front page of HuffPo is hard to not see however, as I read that a couple times a day.

Did you read my last 2 sentence's? Doesn't matter who is doing the celeb worshipping, I can't imagine what sort of person does that. To me, it's beyond bizarre.

Poetsheart · Senior Member

Celtic, have you ever checked out the worshipful throngs that comprise the Limbaugh or Beck fan clubs?

CelticClan07 · Senior Member

Anyone see the frontpage on HuffPo?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/24/keith-olbermann-breaks-tw_n_813433.html

Better yet, just skip to the 1,900+ comments. Um, I get the feeling the majority of these "FOK" are 1. sad, sad people, 2. have a pair of tennis shoes and a robe stashed away 3. Would board a bus destination Olbermanntown in a NY minute.

I am truly fascinated with human behavior that is cult-like. I cannot phathom how this sort of worship begins and builds with a person on TV, any person for that matter.

-- Edited by CelticClan07 on Monday 24th of January 2011 09:16:07 PM

Poetsheart · Senior Member

Quote: I don't really see Olbermann any differently than Beck./Quote

Keith Olberman could only dream of wielding the level of influence, and media saturation of Glen Beck. One has had a much larger impact on political discourse in this country than the other. Hint: It's not Keith. evileye

Cardinal Fang · Senior Member

Hypothetically speaking, and I'm not an expert on this, but don't the pundits from the side that's NOT in power generally just have better ratings?

No. The conservative pundits (Limbaugh, Beck, O'Reilly, Hannity) have better ratings no matter who is in power.

poetgrl · Senior Member

Hypothetically speaking, and I'm not an expert on this, but don't the pundits from the side that's NOT in power generally just have better ratings?

I mean, wasn't this Oberman charcter more popular when the republicans were seen to be in control? And I seem to recall that this Limbaugh guys name first began popping up regularly when Clinton was in power, with a resurgence now that Obama is president.

I could be wrong, but it seems to me that the pundits from one side actually benefit when their guy or gal loses.

(Not a big TV watcher, so this is pure conjecture)

Hindoo · Senior Member

Excellent analysis, Woody! With only one or two minor exceptions, I think you're right on the money. Me, I would have shredded Limbaugh into sawdust.

Woodwork · Senior Member

I suppose I like a little political or cultural ****iness (ok then, 'roosterness)...but the old adage, if allot is good more is better, does not often apply. And to me, it did not apply, in the extreme, to Olberman. I've seen his show a number of times, and as much as Sarah Palin seems to make liberals blood boil Keith does the same for conservatives. His verbiage was always tilting on the edge of a dull knife. At times, it seemed nice that someone had put so much thought into their written scripts, but more often he seemed overwrought and boxy.

As for O'Reilly, his folksiness and condescension is a witches' brew of rhetorical affectations. Still, I will concede that he is substantally more "fair & balanced" than anyone on MSNBC --in the very least due to the fact that he has a mix of liberals and conservatives on every show. Still, blowhard would about cover it.

Hanity, to me, is about as sharp as a bowling ball. His saving grace, as I understand, is his affable cutesiness. He is the most politically partisan of all the cable talking heads. He IS a die-hard Republican far more than he is a conservaive, Whereas Olberman is an unhomogenized liberal at odds with his own, Hanity is a complete partisan hack.

Limbaugh is in the very least funny, witty and prepared (all the same could be said for Olberman, I suppose, but it seems to flow more easily from the conversational and hurrumping verbal dexterity of Limbaugh than from Olberman...or anyone else for that matter). Limbaugh captures the tone and substance of the midwestern frame of mind (male, that is) better than any political commentator I can think of.

Maddow is far too clever, snippy & defensive to enjoy as anything more than a liberal-curio. Although, I could imagine having a good conversation about sports with her.

Shultz is a Stalinist Stooge 65 years too late to matter.

Beck is, by all accounts, a real gentleman and very nice guy (my daughter knows him well...even though she has been very critical of him and his audience in print he still wants to hire her). His hypersensitivity seems to be a precursor to Boehner's tendency to weep in public. His interest in history is a bit much for the blackboard, but at least admirable in a political commentator.

-- Edited by Woodwork on Monday 24th of January 2011 08:08:11 AM

justamomof4 · Veteran Member

When it comes to politics and running our country if I want to be *entertained* I will watch Stewart or Colbert, at least they are funny.
I am not interested in being "entertained" under the guise of political commentary or news.