# Olbermann & Matthews NOT chairing debates or election night on MSNBC **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 8, 2008, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/olbermann-matthews-not-chairing-debates-or-election-night-on-msnbc/462633 "2008-09-08T16:39:50Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Oy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/bc8723/32.png) [@Oy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oy)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2008, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/olbermann-matthews-not-chairing-debates-or-election-night-on-msnbc/462633/41 "2008-09-08T20:56:11Z")
> [@Mr.Moto](#): > > Personally, I’m of the mind that relying solely on either approach is unnecessarily limiting, and indeed many notable successes in the last few years have come from efforts from the LEC and entities like the Treasury Department. So I’m not sure that many conservatives will fault law enforcement. > > They will, though, point out its limitations. Law enforcement can’t penetrate a country where the state apparatus has been taken over by forces in active cooperation with terrorists - like Afghanistan. Nor is it helpful in places like Somalia where the centralized government and associated law enforcement functions do not exist in any meaningful way. I don’t think very many people here will dispute these points or the necessity of military force sometimes - Afghanistan remains an action with broad political support. > > So we’re just arguing over the scale of operations at that point, aren’t we? NOt entirely. I agree that in Afghanistan, it was indeed necessary, because there we did have true, state-supported terrorism. Thus far, it seems to have been unique, although there are little hints of it here and there in other places. But Law Enforcement and Military Ops don’t differ just in scale. They have a completely different approach, which is one of the reasons we fell apart so badly once we had “won” in Iraq. Our soldiers were absolutely brilliantly trained and equipped for fighting and winning battles and wars. They were not trained for police work, except for the MPs, and apparently it hadn’t occurred to anyone in charge that if we got rid of all the Iraqi police, we might need some to put in their place. I’m not an expert and I can’t tell you in what details they differ. I know that I have read and heard many times that they do. Their similarity is only that they both use force to enforce the will of the government. But there is an enormous difference between fighting other soldiers, and fighting criminals. Terrorists are criminals, and you give them too much credit when you call them soldiers. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_One](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/45deac/32.png) [@Evil\_One](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_One)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2008, 8:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/olbermann-matthews-not-chairing-debates-or-election-night-on-msnbc/462633/42 "2008-09-08T20:57:30Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > Nobody is going to forget 9/11. But only one party has milked the tragedy for political gain. And the other wishes it would go away. 9/11 is a stark reminder that not everyone in the world is sitting in a circle talking about “social justice”…and that those people need to be dealt with in a pragmatic way. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2008, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/olbermann-matthews-not-chairing-debates-or-election-night-on-msnbc/462633/43 "2008-09-08T21:01:06Z")
> [@Evil\_One](#): > > And the other wishes it would go away. Cite? ---
**Author:** ![Oy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/bc8723/32.png) [@Oy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oy)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2008, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/olbermann-matthews-not-chairing-debates-or-election-night-on-msnbc/462633/44 "2008-09-08T21:01:39Z")
> [@Evil\_One](#): > > And the other wishes it would go away. 9/11 is a stark reminder that not everyone in the world is sitting in a circle talking about “social justice”…and that those people need to be dealt with in a pragmatic way. And if you hadn’t noticed, we are discussing in what pragmatic way to deal with it. No one is suggesting that we sit in a circle, hold hands, and sing “I’d like to teach the world to sing.” ETA: But dealing with it in a pragmatic way does not mean whipping people up into an orgy of frenzied patriotism by showing the events of 9/11 complete with stirring music and lots of flags waving. ---
**Author:** ![Cisco](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ccd318/32.png) [@Cisco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cisco)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2008, 9:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/olbermann-matthews-not-chairing-debates-or-election-night-on-msnbc/462633/45 "2008-09-08T21:11:08Z")
I’m fine with the move. I like Keith but he is NOT a newsman - he’s a commentator. However, I’ve got to say that I’m disgusted with the pass Sarah Palin is getting in the media. All I’m seeing is story after story crying that everyone should leave her alone, but I never saw any stories provoking those. All smoke and no fire. Why didn’t the Republicans get angry when the “liberal media” was scrutinizing Obama’s private life? ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_One](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/45deac/32.png) [@Evil\_One](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_One)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2008, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/olbermann-matthews-not-chairing-debates-or-election-night-on-msnbc/462633/46 "2008-09-08T21:18:12Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Cite? Do I have a notarized copy of “Leading Democrat” stating “I wish 9/11 would go away?” No. But you knew that when you asked the question. Asking “cite?” when faced with an inconvienient concept is intellectual red zone defense. Let me take you through what you already know. 1. 9/11 really happened. It’s not a concept or political philosophy. It demonstrated that there are people that want to kill us and money and effort must be spent to combat them. 2. Most people who are even slightly educated about current events and ideologial thinking realize that the Republicans are much more comfortable with the concept of building up institutions like the CIA and Defense Department to deal with the issue. 3. They also realize that Republicans have enjoyed an advantage on the perception of being more capable on national security issues for at least a generation. 4. These factors combine to become a political disadvantage for the Democrats. The less people are thinking about national security and the more they are thinking about health care and the economy (areas where Democrats enjoy a perceptual advantage), the better it is for them. Therefore, many Democrats would like 9/11 to be a distant memory two months before an election between two candidates with stark differences on national security philosophy. ---
**Author:** ![Oy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/bc8723/32.png) [@Oy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oy)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2008, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/olbermann-matthews-not-chairing-debates-or-election-night-on-msnbc/462633/47 "2008-09-08T21:20:49Z")
> [@Cisco](#): > > I’m fine with the move. I like Keith but he is NOT a newsman - he’s a commentator. > > However, I’ve got to say that I’m disgusted with the pass Sarah Palin is getting in the media. All I’m seeing is story after story crying that everyone should leave her alone, but I never saw any stories provoking those. All smoke and no fire. Why didn’t the Republicans get angry when the “liberal media” was scrutinizing Obama’s private life? Because Obama was the enemy and they wanted him ripped to shreds, of course. Let’s not be naive about this. The so-called sexist treatment Sarah Palin is getting is a figment of the Republican spin machine, manufactured to get the press away from her while they are trying to turn her into My Fair Lady. Yet another piece of evidence that this was a last minute choice - they would have done this a long time ago if they had known it was coming. ---
**Author:** ![Digital\_Stimulus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@Digital\_Stimulus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Digital_Stimulus)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2008, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/olbermann-matthews-not-chairing-debates-or-election-night-on-msnbc/462633/48 "2008-09-08T21:21:13Z")
> [@Mr.Moto](#): > > You’re stating that there is an issue that you’ll either handle better or that the other guys will screw up - and illustrating the fact by displaying death and destruction. Really? Here, let me fix that for you: > [@](#): > > …or that the other guys **did** screw up and then were ineptly self-delusional about the situation (“_Heckuva job, Brownie!_”)… Honestly, is it that difficult to see that _culpability matters_ in this comparison? ---
**Author:** ![Bosstone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/22d042/32.png) [@Bosstone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosstone)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2008, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/olbermann-matthews-not-chairing-debates-or-election-night-on-msnbc/462633/49 "2008-09-08T21:25:48Z")
I probably wouldn’t have as much issue with bringing up 9/11 if _it wasn’t being used as the justification for invading Iraq._ If the Republicans were actually making inroads to deal with those responsible for 9/11, I’d have no problem with them reminding people of it. But they’re not. It’s empty and dishonest glitter to make people think the Republicans are the protectors of the American way while they’re actually getting away with murder. ---
**Author:** ![Oy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/bc8723/32.png) [@Oy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oy)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2008, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/olbermann-matthews-not-chairing-debates-or-election-night-on-msnbc/462633/50 "2008-09-08T21:25:54Z")
> [@Evil\_One](#): > > 1. They also realize that Republicans have enjoyed an advantage on the perception of being more capable on national security issues for at least a generation. > > 2. These factors combine to become a political disadvantage for the Democrats. The less people are thinking about national security and the more they are thinking about health care and the economy (areas where Democrats enjoy a perceptual advantage), the better it is for them. Therefore, many Democrats would like 9/11 to be a distant memory two months before an election between two candidates with stark differences on national security philosophy. That’s not exactly the same thing as wishing it would go away. Yes, of course Democrats would prefer the election focus on the economy. But we also happen to think that anyone with a brain looking at the national security situation will see that the Democrats were right and the Republicans were wrong about Iraq (and I don’t want to hear about who voted for it - you know damn well that Bush created a political situation where most people didn’t dare vote against it because Bush had their constituents convinced that Saddam would nuke 'em next Tuesday if they didn’t!) and that we never should have gotten involved there. We think that, given a chance, national security could become a Democratic issue too. ---
**Author:** ![Digital\_Stimulus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@Digital\_Stimulus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Digital_Stimulus)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2008, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/olbermann-matthews-not-chairing-debates-or-election-night-on-msnbc/462633/51 "2008-09-08T21:27:55Z")
> [@Oy](#): > > …view terrorism as a war, while we view it more as a law enforcement issue. And I’ve tried Googling this, but am not finding it… Ask and ye shall [recieve](http://www.dodbuzz.com/2008/07/31/time-to-drop-war-on-terrorism/). I have no idea whether there’s a bias at that site, but I believe it supplies the links to the RAND study. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2008, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/olbermann-matthews-not-chairing-debates-or-election-night-on-msnbc/462633/52 "2008-09-08T21:29:15Z")
> [@Evil\_One](#): > > Do I have a notarized copy of “Leading Democrat” stating “I wish 9/11 would go away?” No. But you knew that when you asked the question. Asking “cite?” when faced with an inconvienient concept is intellectual red zone defense. Let me take you through what you already know. > > 1. 9/11 really happened. It’s not a concept or political philosophy. It demonstrated that there are people that want to kill us and money and effort must be spent to combat them. And Barack Obama is the one who remebers who actually attacked us and who wants to commit resources to that instead of wasting time, blood and treasure in a country that had nothing to do with it. > [@](#): > > 1. Most people who are even slightly educated about current events and ideologial thinking realize that the Republicans are much more comfortable with the concept of building up institutions like the CIA and Defense Department to deal with the issue. I call bullshit on this, unless you’re trying to define “building up” as tearing down American civil liberties. The actual threat of Middle-Eastern terrorism is also hysterically exaggerated by the political right for reasons of cynical self-interest. A few thousand fanatics are not going to take over America. Relax. You’re going to be fine. You don’t have to hid under the table. The Muslsims are not going to get you. > [@](#): > > 1. They also realize that Republicans have enjoyed an advantage on the perception of being more capable on national security issues for at least a generation. This is _only_ a perception, of course, and it’s a political perception that, aside from being totally unearned in the first place, has now been largely destroyed by the ineptitude of the current administration. This also has nothing to do with your accusation that the political left “wants to forget” 9/11. > [@](#): > > 1. These factors combine to become a political disadvantage for the Democrats. The less people are thinking about national security and the more they are thinking about health care and the economy (areas where Democrats enjoy a perceptual advantage), the better it is for them. Therefore, many Democrats would like 9/11 to be a distant memory two months before an election between two candidates with stark differences on national security philosophy. Actually, you might want to check a poll here and there. The Republicans have lost all high ground in terms of national security. Americans overwhelmingly view Iraq as a disaster, and the fear-mongering about a largely fictional Islamic threat against the US isn’t working anymore. You can only parade those corpses for so long before you reach a level of diminishing returns. ---
**Author:** ![Cisco](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ccd318/32.png) [@Cisco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cisco)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2008, 9:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/olbermann-matthews-not-chairing-debates-or-election-night-on-msnbc/462633/53 "2008-09-08T21:30:46Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Americans overwhelmingly view Iraq as a disaster, and the fear-mongering about a largely fictional Islamic threat5 against the US isn’t working anymore. You can only parade those corpses for so long before you reach a level of diminishing returns. Heh. “Weekend at Saddam’s” ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2008, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/olbermann-matthews-not-chairing-debates-or-election-night-on-msnbc/462633/54 "2008-09-08T21:37:24Z")
> [@CJJ](#): > > I wonder if you feel the same way about Brit Hume, the fox news anchor who hosts Fox News’ [Special Report](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Report_with_Brit_Hume)–advertised as a roundup of daily news. He describes himself as a conservative Republican, yet that didn’t stop Fox from having him[host a debate among 2004 Democratic candidates](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/transcripts/090903debatetext.html). I have no problem with that. The debaters were All Dems, so whatever bias that might exist is equal, canceling it out. I also wouldn’t mind Brokaw, Stephanopolous, or some other thoughtful, reasonable Dem form hosting a Rep debate. > [@CJJ](#): > > Funny how it’s only complaints about “liberals” that the supposed-liberal news-media takes seriously. I’m still waiting for someone to name the left wing equivalents to Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilley, Brit Hume, Michael Tucker, and Glen Beck–i.e. liberals who are allotted a similar media megaphone to pontificate with. The right makes one complaint about Olberman and Matthews and their demoted, but lowly-rated loudmouths like Glen Beck and Michael Tucker continue to get paid by this supposed liberal media, and Brit Hume is hailed as a neutral anchor. Ohboyohboyohboy. First your including Brit Hume with Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity is laughable. You may want to acquaint yourselves with them a little more before ham-handedly lumping them together. As far as your “similar media megaphone”—that’s just too fucking bad, isn’t it. No one just gave them that megaphone out of the goodness of their hearts. They earned it. They started with very small shows on radio and then expanded because they attracted larger and larger audiences. Whose fault is it that there aren’t large audiences that want to hear the nonsense spewed by jerks like Olberman, or any of the Air America crowd. Even when it was funded to give them a head start, it failed miserably. I haven’t seen why Matthews was “demoted” as you say. What was the reasoning. Olberman was the one who made the crack about the 9/11 footage. Matthews wasn’t even in that short segment. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2008, 9:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/olbermann-matthews-not-chairing-debates-or-election-night-on-msnbc/462633/55 "2008-09-08T21:42:31Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Yes, because living in constant fear sucks and as a rule people don’t like doing it. It’s also generally unnecessary. A few legit security measures would probably do much more to prevent terrorist attacks than any kind of constant reminders ever could, but there’s little interest in those - perhaps because nobody sees much political benefit in them. And the few constant reminders that do exist, like airport security, are roundly despised and also widely mocked for being useless. I don’t see it as either/or. Who said that we need reminders instead of measures?Measures and reminders. They’re both good. > [@Marley23](#): > > And I’ll add another vote in the “not at war with Islam, radical or otherwise” category. I wish, wish, wish, wish, Obama would take this lead. Imagine that, they’re at war with us, but we’re not at war with them. Perhaps some couples counseling… ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2008, 9:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/olbermann-matthews-not-chairing-debates-or-election-night-on-msnbc/462633/56 "2008-09-08T21:47:55Z")
> [@Robot\_Arm](#): > > Do Republicans need reminding? They were the ones in the hall, watching the presentation, after all. I don’t think so. But regardless, it doesn’t hurt. Such is the nature of reminders. I find it troubling that you’re having such a difficult time with a rather simple concept. Oh well… > [@Robot\_Arm](#): > > By a “national event”, I meant one that represents the entire nation, not just one party out of two. And I specifically exclude those occasions when the two parties are in contest, and one promotes itself at the expense of the other. Well, it might help if you say what you mean, my psychic powers area little rusty. So you want to exclude all scenarios where it might be brought up that might show that one party takes the threat ore seriously than the other. Uhhhh, no thanks. I want to know that information. Especially during election season. ---
**Author:** ![Digital\_Stimulus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@Digital\_Stimulus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Digital_Stimulus)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2008, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/olbermann-matthews-not-chairing-debates-or-election-night-on-msnbc/462633/57 "2008-09-08T21:56:27Z")
> [@Digital\_Stimulus](#): > > Ask and ye shall [recieve](http://www.dodbuzz.com/2008/07/31/time-to-drop-war-on-terrorism/). I have no idea whether there’s a bias at that site, but I believe it supplies the links to the RAND study. Upon further thought, I suppose I should’ve quoted a bit to inject the appropriate findings into this discussion: > [@Greg Grant](#): > > According to an analysis conducted by RAND of 648 terrorists groups that operated between 1968 and 2006 the most common way, 43 percent of the cases, is they join the political process. But an almost equal number, 40 percent, met their demise at the hands of police and intelligence services that either killed or captured key leaders. Unleashing the military on terrorists was successful just 7 percent of the time. > > The RAND study says the military is too blunt an instrument for most counterterrorist missions, and is only effective, and only occasionally, when terrorists operate within the context of a full blown insurgency. Military power is too indiscriminate and can actually help terrorist recruitment by causing civilian casualties. So, 43% join the political process, 40% are stopped via law enforcement techniques, and just 7% are successfully stopped by military action. I also found that the link at that site goes to an outdated RAND link; [here](http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/MG741-1/) is a link to the page that has a free, pdf copy of the report available. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2008, 9:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/olbermann-matthews-not-chairing-debates-or-election-night-on-msnbc/462633/58 "2008-09-08T21:57:13Z")
> [@Oy](#): > > **magellan** You give these people too much credit, and you think they are more numerous than they are. Yes, a lot of people over there now hate us, but a lot of that has been the direct result of our own actions in Iraq, and even so, they’re no more likely to act on it than you are to fly over there and bomb Riyadh or Tehran. There are lots of haters, but not nearly so many terrorists, and few of _them_ have the means to commit acts like those of 9/11. Pipe bombs and car bombs are more their speed, and while they are horrible, they’re not something to go to war over, any more than we would declare war on Detroit if someone set off a pipe bomb there. The problem is that while although radical Islam is but a subset of Islam, and those adherents to radical Islam that might actually commit acts of terrorism is a subset of that. The starting number is so big that we still end up with way too big a threat. There’s a recent thread that explores the numbers involved. But the thing about 9/11 or the Cole incident or any other act of murderous barbarism is that you don’t need millions of people to commit it. How many were involved in 9/11, including those beyond the guys on the planes? A dozen? Two, Three? Your Detroit analogy fails. I said we were at war with radical Islam. Not a particular locale. Your analogy would be better in arguing against going into Iraq or going into Saudi Arabia. And if we had viewed it more as a war during the '90s, and brought all resources to bear—and retaliated—and were more vigilant, perhaps 9/11 wouldn’t have happened at thos 3,000 people would still be around. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2008, 10:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/olbermann-matthews-not-chairing-debates-or-election-night-on-msnbc/462633/59 "2008-09-08T22:01:18Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Obama wants to stop wasting resources n Iraq and send them to Afhganistan where the “enemy” (what there is of it) actually lives. McCain wants to dawdle in Iraq for 100 years sucking up resources. McCain wants the same thing. He just wants to make the wisest decision as far as Iraq since we’re there. If it were up to Obama, we would have run away two years ago and the surge never would have taken place. It is a good thing he didn’t have his way. And you know that “100 years” thing is bullshit. But I’m not surprised to see you parade it out. Thanks for not disappointing. > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > We’re not at war with _any_ kind of Islam. As a matter of fact, we’re not at war at all. At most, we’re trying to track down some criminals. Islam, “radical” or otherwise, is neither here nor there. Please get Obama to parrot this utter nonsense. Please, please, pretty please? ---
**Author:** ![Shayna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shayna/32/17976_2.png) [@Shayna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shayna)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2008, 10:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/olbermann-matthews-not-chairing-debates-or-election-night-on-msnbc/462633/60 "2008-09-08T22:04:37Z")
> [@Oy](#): > > But I don’t think I’ve ever seen a network news story that said “Although the candidate stated that the sky was orange today and has always been orange, we have this footage from June 13th of this year, showing the candidate under a blue sky and stating that the sky will always be blue.” I think I’ve seen a sidswipe at refutation once or twice on PBS, but it’s been very limited and infrequent. Man, I miss Tim Russert so much. ☹[Watch him do exactly that to John McCain](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ajm5JTf7jZs). [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/olbermann-matthews-not-chairing-debates-or-election-night-on-msnbc/462633.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/olbermann-matthews-not-chairing-debates-or-election-night-on-msnbc/462633.md?page=4)