23 Jan 11
Originally posted by sh76Same thing, different channel.
Better than Olbermann
Olbermann does have the balls to admit when he makes a mistake, unlike O'Reilly. For example when he claimed that U.S. troops of committing the massacre at Malmédy and then tried to defend his position. Pretty classy!
23 Jan 11
Originally posted by CliffLandinO'Reilly screaming at a relative of a victim of 9/11 to "Shut up!" was pretty classy, too.
Same thing, different channel.
Olbermann does have the balls to admit when he makes a mistake, unlike O'Reilly. For example when he claimed that U.S. troops of committing the massacre at Malmédy and then tried to defend his position. Pretty classy!
23 Jan 11
Originally posted by PalynkaWhile he's clearly pompous, arrogant and of medium intellect, he is usually more composed, more intellectually honest (he's actually quite consistent within his own world view parameters), more refined, less bombastic and is better at making his points than is Olbermann.
What are his redeemable qualities?
Olbermann is the ultimate hysterical shrill. Although he "likes" the Clintons, when Hillary made that harmless comment about Bobby Kennedy still being in the primary fight as late as June in 1968, Olbermann all but accused her or conspiracy to commit murder. Everything Olbermann says is a means to a political end. He liked Obama, so he'd say anything; I mean anything, against any Obama opponent, no matter how far fetched.
O'Reilly, by contrast, breaks with the GOP frequently (CO2 emissions is one example) and is happy have guests that he disagrees with, like Michael Moore and (then Senator) Obama himself.
If Olbermann is comparable to anyone on the "right" it's Hannity who, like Olbermann, is a partisan shill and not a commentator. However, at least Hannity maintains some level of civility and composure. Olbermann is virtually a self-parody with his angry rants and "worst person in the world" nonsense. MSNBC wanted to go liberal and so they hired a full lineup of liberals; but even they can't stand to deal with this hysterical goon and so, after a rocky few years, they dumped him like so much trash.
23 Jan 11
Originally posted by sh76With a post like that, you have the nerve to complain about so-called "partisan shills"? LMAO!
While he's clearly pompous, arrogant and of medium intellect, he is usually more composed, more intellectually honest (he's actually quite consistent within his own world view parameters), more refined, less bombastic and is better at making his points than is Olbermann.
Olbermann is the ultimate hysterical shrill. Although he "likes" the Clintons, when Hill ...[text shortened]... hysterical goon and so, after a rocky few years, they dumped him like so much trash.
You've been around whodey too long; you're lapsing into self-parody.
23 Jan 11
Originally posted by no1marauderYou're incapable of sitting down on front of a computer without blasting people for no reason. You must be a sad person. I feel bad for you. Seriously.
With a post like that, you have the nerve to complain about so-called "partisan shills"? LMAO!
You've been around whodey too long; you're lapsing into self-parody.
23 Jan 11
Originally posted by sh76Considering that this thread you started is just a hack job directed at Olbermann filled with your frothing at the mouth invectives, this post is ironic in the extreme.
You're incapable of sitting down on front of a computer without blasting people for no reason. You must be a sad person. I feel bad for you. Seriously.
Originally posted by no1marauderUther and some of the others have tried to explain to you the difference between ripping a public figure and another poster on this board- a difference that no one on this board but you even needs to be explained. But it's a distinction you appear incapable of comprehending, so I'm going to give up trying.
Considering that this thread you started is just a hack job directed at Olbermann filled with your frothing at the mouth invectives, this post is ironic in the extreme.
You're nothing but a playground bully. You love to use the strongest invective you can think of to launch as many ad hominem attacks as you can. Most people run away and hide when you attack them because they're not interested in flaming warring with you because almost everyone has more human empathy than you do. This allows you to outlast everyone in flame wars, but it must be miserable for the people you hang out with in real life.
Just know, on behalf myself and all the people that are too afraid to speak up to you: When people stop debating with you it's not because they can't see through your ideologically inflexible, goal post moving, invective filled nonsense, but because they're not interested in getting flamed again.
For myself, I pledge from now on, as long as I have the will power, to ignore any post of yours that contains anything ad hominem.
23 Jan 11
Originally posted by sh76Since you're playing to the right wing crowd AGAIN, here's a rec for you. Kudos for writing an entire post of ad hominems while decrying their use on this board. Hypocrisy thy name is sh76.
Uther and some of the others have tried to explain to you the difference between ripping a public figure and another poster on this board- a difference that no one on this board but you even needs to be explained. But it's a distinction you appear incapable of comprehending, so I'm going to give up trying.
You're nothing but a playground bully. You love to u ...[text shortened]... as I have the will power, to ignore any post of yours that contains anything ad hominem.
23 Jan 11
Originally posted by sh76That was the one thing I most disliked about Olbermann, even if I didn't watch him every night. Not only did he rarely have guests with whom he disagreed, but he just cycled through the same commentators regularly.
O'Reilly, by contrast, [...] is happy have guests that he disagrees with, like Michael Moore and (then Senator) Obama himself.
23 Jan 11
Originally posted by sh76Composed?
While he's clearly pompous, arrogant and of medium intellect, he is usually more composed, more intellectually honest (he's actually quite consistent within his own world view parameters), more refined, less bombastic and is better at making his points than is Olbermann.
Olbermann is the ultimate hysterical shrill. Although he "likes" the Clintons, when Hill ...[text shortened]... hysterical goon and so, after a rocky few years, they dumped him like so much trash.
Since when is telling your guest to shut up composed?
23 Jan 11
Originally posted by no1marauderIsn't that what Jon Stewart called a "Palin"drome?
Since you're playing to the right wing crowd AGAIN, here's a rec for you. Kudos for writing an entire post of ad hominems while decrying their use on this board. Hypocrisy thy name is sh76.
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-january-18-2011/petty-woman