Just going on titles, looks like no one posted this.
Worth a view.
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/0...ry-forgive-you
Worth a view.
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/0...ry-forgive-you
Olberman on 9/11
- Thread starter kidwoo
- Start date
how 'bout a KO drinking game for this tit?
take a shot of beer for each reference to himself ("i, my, me")
you'll be twisted before it reaches body temp.
i like that comment about the hole-in-the-ground: "it has become nothing more than a photo-op"; hey, keith, what's that behind you?
4th min in, he's accussing bush [& presumably his minions] "brand[ing] with ever-escalating hysteria" people who oppose his point of view; hey keith, you're 1/2-way through your own womanly caterwauling
at the 7th min we get a peek at what just may very well be the next best thing to a soul keith has when he likens the war on terror to an episode of the twilight zone. funny, he never tells us which parts of this analogy belong exclusively to mr bush, & which ones have bipartisan support.
irony, thy name is keith
"have you no decency, sir?"
take a shot of beer for each reference to himself ("i, my, me")
you'll be twisted before it reaches body temp.
i like that comment about the hole-in-the-ground: "it has become nothing more than a photo-op"; hey, keith, what's that behind you?
4th min in, he's accussing bush [& presumably his minions] "brand[ing] with ever-escalating hysteria" people who oppose his point of view; hey keith, you're 1/2-way through your own womanly caterwauling
at the 7th min we get a peek at what just may very well be the next best thing to a soul keith has when he likens the war on terror to an episode of the twilight zone. funny, he never tells us which parts of this analogy belong exclusively to mr bush, & which ones have bipartisan support.
irony, thy name is keith
"have you no decency, sir?"
Not bright enough to differentiate between an editorial and a policy speech?
You really were drinking heavily every time he mentioned himself weren't you?
was a sportscaster.
don't recall "ever-escalating hysteria" in his policy speeches.
Subliminal frames where adminstration officials put their hands up in the air and yell "ooga booga booga!!".
You might need HD to see them..........but oh are they certainly there!
You honestly don't remember that stupid mushroom cloud statement before beating up Iraq? I think that one was discernible even without HD. Remember Cheney saying something along the lines of voting for Kerry would get the US attacked again?
Anyway.......yes it's a self absorbed presentation......but that's the nature of putting on makeup and working on the assumption that people want to hear what you have to say when they tune the channel. But still........there are some valid points in there.
you can be subliminally hysterical? that sounds very - what's the word i'm looking for - "nuanced"
as far as "valid points" goes, didja catch his contrast of bush to lincoln wrt gettysburg? specifically, this quote where lincoln dedicated the memorial: "barely four months after the last soldier staggered from another Pennsylvania field"
Lincoln gave the Gettysburg Address at the dedication for the Soldiers' National Cemetery not the "Gettysburg Memorial". There is no "Gettysburg Memorial". There is a "Soldiers National Monument" in the center of the cemetery but that was not dedicated until July 1, 1869. The cemetery itself was not completed until 1872. Only the Union soldiers were buried there; the last of the 3,512 Union dead were not buried in the Soldiers' National Cemetery until March of 1864. The last of the Confederate soldiers were not reburied until 1877. In fact, if you look at any of the photos from that day (November 19, 1863) you will see that Lincoln gave the Gettysburg Address in the middle of an open field (the field on which the battle was fought) where they were PREPARING to build the cemetary and monument.
that "hole in the ground" is nothing compared to the hole in his story. what an historically ignorant tit he is.
my beef ain't w/ you; it's with him. i like him on sportscenter back in the mid 90's - that was his broadcasting neap.
as far as "valid points" goes, didja catch his contrast of bush to lincoln wrt gettysburg? specifically, this quote where lincoln dedicated the memorial: "barely four months after the last soldier staggered from another Pennsylvania field"
Lincoln gave the Gettysburg Address at the dedication for the Soldiers' National Cemetery not the "Gettysburg Memorial". There is no "Gettysburg Memorial". There is a "Soldiers National Monument" in the center of the cemetery but that was not dedicated until July 1, 1869. The cemetery itself was not completed until 1872. Only the Union soldiers were buried there; the last of the 3,512 Union dead were not buried in the Soldiers' National Cemetery until March of 1864. The last of the Confederate soldiers were not reburied until 1877. In fact, if you look at any of the photos from that day (November 19, 1863) you will see that Lincoln gave the Gettysburg Address in the middle of an open field (the field on which the battle was fought) where they were PREPARING to build the cemetary and monument.
that "hole in the ground" is nothing compared to the hole in his story. what an historically ignorant tit he is.
my beef ain't w/ you; it's with him. i like him on sportscenter back in the mid 90's - that was his broadcasting neap.
I think you mean "hypocrisy."
"I do not think that word means what you think it means" - Inigo Montoya (editted, of course. Damn you OMGF)
So do you disagree with any of the points he makes or do you just not like the messenger?
Wasn't that Inigo that said that?
Seriously. Have you watched Bush/Cheney/Rumsfield at any given time in the last 5 years? You can't see the ridiculous generation of mass, irrational hysteria? Do you bash your face into brick walls to scratch your nose? Do you still think Liberace was straight? Did you notice the light rain in New Orleans last year?
Oh yeah, it was pretty nuanced.
actually, if you read closer, you'll realise that he's telling the truth and *you're* the one who's misquoting.
the cemetary itself is the memorial. the land was purchased by David Wills, and donated as a cemetary dedicated to those who had lost their lives.
and it was 4 months after the last soldier "staggered from the field", which was the end of the battle. you're conflating dead soldiers (who certainly wouldn't be staggering from the field, they'd be lying there) and live but wounded soldiers.
nice try...
the cemetary itself is the memorial. the land was purchased by David Wills, and donated as a cemetary dedicated to those who had lost their lives.
and it was 4 months after the last soldier "staggered from the field", which was the end of the battle. you're conflating dead soldiers (who certainly wouldn't be staggering from the field, they'd be lying there) and live but wounded soldiers.
nice try...
Ohio beat me to it but seriously.....don't be pig headed. The messenger need not be hysterical to propagate the sentiment. I only wish they were as veiled as "subliminal" suggests.
Pretty semantic. A memorial at gettysburg by another name is still a gettysburg memorial......as any marked cemetary is a memorial. When the final tally is reached on occupants is not important. Besides....1864 when you say the burials began is one year after the battle. It's now 5 after our event in question. In case you hadn't noticed, technoligical advancements have greatly increased our construction capacity since the 1800s. At least lincoln got the ball rolling.
I realize that. Which is why I'm still typing. But I think you're intentially ignoring several merits of his speech because he's cheerleading for your rival team. For all the grandiose posturing we saw regarding how symbolically relevant it was that we stand tall both in memorializing and reconstructing.......all we've seen is an unrelated drain on resources in the form of war........a drain and weakening which were the attackers original goal. Our overseas and domestic endeavors are both without proper focus and lacking in relevance to the "lessons" bushco like to bring up.
and what do we have here?
sept 11 tribute center opens
submissions for memorial (don't think honest abe even had a suggestion box at penn ave)
but i see keith's bigger point: that breaking ground to a memorial in a vast field in pennsylvania is logistically as feasible as one in downtown manhattan that was so littered with debris it took 9 months to clean out. this is to say nothing that the "hole-in-the-ground" was (and still is) the sole jurisdiction of the port authority - not the president. but i won't wait for him to direct his vitriol at the local officials nor the governor (new orleans ring a bell?).
this should be directed at keith, who originally said it in his on-air comments
he does for charge of "ever-escalating hysteria" to stick. recall this is the [un]original charge made by the pseudo-journalist
so this is bush's fault. you'd think with all his executive priviledges he bandies about this would've been done by now with a big-ass braying horse & roy rogers emptying his 6-shooter.
have you met ohio? he thought they were nothing more than glorified wife-beaters before bush came into office.
ummm, no, Keith was correct in his on-air comments. I'm informing you, since you seem to have had an issue with them.
Here's the quote.
Again......I'll reference Cheney's claim about the country being attacked if Kerry gets elected.......actually you're right.......it is kind of hysterical........my apologies.
At least it would be something. But yes.....when the figure head with the pen makes personal claims about rebuilding what was and is now moreso a symbolic amercian landmark that has been desecrated as an affront to the countries ideals and foreign policy, it most certainly is his lack of initiative that is at fault. Especially when he goes on and on about it's lessons. The lessons I get out of the "actions" that have been taken are that when my family is attacked, I go punch the guy down the street watering his lawn rather than see if my wife's okay. Letting her sit there bleeding isn't exactly a showing of strength.
Seriously.........have you ever even listened to bush speak on the subject (barring the stubborn "war on terrorism" interjections?).
It wasn't an attack on manhattan, it was attack on the country. Even he's said that a bizillion times. And as even he has said, it should be addressed as such. Blowing up Iraqis has nothing to do with said purpose. And right now, 5 years later, that gigantic scar, coupled with the horribly misdirected allocation of resources is a slap in the face to the victims and a tribute to the jackasses who commandered the planes. It's downright weak.
The reason the port authority hasn't stepped up is that they're still fighting for the freakin insurance claim. In the meantime, those that can feasibly do something (and have made the claim that they will).........should.
I liked him on Sports Center and never took him serious as a news caster. But if he didn't write that himself, I give the person who did a lot of credit.
Considering a lot of media tends to stay away from anything even close to an objective view, I thought this was a good piece. Thanks for showing it.
Considering a lot of media tends to stay away from anything even close to an objective view, I thought this was a good piece. Thanks for showing it.