But Clinton got a blow job!
That’s because Olbermann is articulate, intelligent, and does his research.
Unlike yourself.
If I change my name to Bill Clinton can I get a blow job?
I assume the offer is still open.
Are you Keith Olbermann?
If I change my name to Keith Olbermann can I get a blowjob? 
As far as you know.
I am [DEL]Spartacus[/DEL] Keith Olbermann!
CMC fnord!
In all seriousness, it’s pretty sad when Keith Olbermann is the ONLY one speaking out-not because there’s anything wrong with him, but because more journalists should. Outside of Olbermann, and Colbert and Stewart, who else is there?
Damn that liberal media!
Yeah, that’s been bothering me a lot, as well. I’m especially irritated by the softball questions reporters keep throwing Bush in those Presidential Addresses/Garden Parties… they could totally nail him to the wall… but, of course, then they’d never get invited back.
It’s always refreshing to see, say, the British version. They’re not afraid to piss off their Prime Minister.
And why didn’t he? Either he just ignored the problem through incompetence, or he knew that Foley resigning would cause the press to ask why (and it seems some people knew he was gay) which would have hurt the Pubbies. So, this alternative is that Hastert thought ignoring the problem was safer for the party/
I’m not aware of what page of the liberal agenda this is on.
A 50 year old heterosexual male hitting on a 16 year old girl in just this way is just as sick, just as improper, and should lead to the same penalty - especially when the male is in a position of power over the female. Foley didn’t resign because he found the boys attractive, he resigned because of what he did. If every Congressman who watched porn was forced to resign - Washington would be a better place.
But the Republican leadership ignoring it or covering it up is.
I suspect the reaction to him taking action immediately and then refusing to disclose the reason due to the privacy rights of the involved parties would be much different from what has happened. The story would get out anyway. There are many instances at the local level of people being dismissed for undisclosed reasons.
Another special comment tonight.
I don’t want to see it overused either, but damn it if there’s one night we need this one played in a continuous loop to the “not it-getters” … this is the night.
Agreed-I don’t want him to over do the “special comments”, and have them not be well, “special” any more. But dammit, tonight he was on fire!
(Oh, and was that a permanent new set, or just a temporary one for the election?)
He’s supposed to be doing the all night election coverage starting at 6 pm, alongside Chris Matthews.
I wonder greatly if he actually believes what he says, is reading from script or merely trying to construct his fame and fortune by being “controversial.”
If you’ve read anything at all about Olbermann, I imagine he means EXACTLY what he says.
“Controversial” my ass. Just because he doesn’t have his nose so far up Bush’s crack that he can’t breathe – like the majority of the MSM – doesn’t make him controversial in the least. It simply makes him honest.
I mean, look around you. Read the majority of the post on this board – one of the best in the Internet as far as intellects go – and what do you find? Mostly an echo chamber of the things Keith has the balls to say on TV. He’s hardly alone in his reasoning; after all the infamous “mandate” was the smallest winning margin of any sitting President in a time of war.
So think again.
I notice Olbermann is co-hosting the CNBC coverage of the election. Would this be an expected job or has he got a bump because of his recent coolness?
I think it was only to be expected, after all he’s got the best ratings of all the programs on MSNBC. Or to put it simply, he’s their rising star.
Numbers look good for Keith Olbermann
Trust that answers your query.