Keith Olbermann:So, uh, this looks like a nice site

[cal04]

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/6/22/878319/-So,-uh,-this-looks-like-a-nice-site
OK, I'm back.

I've always liked to invent backstories behind cliches and one of my oldest ones is the idea that the first guy who said "You can't see the forest for the trees" was actually running through a forest when he ran head first into a tree and didn't enjoy the experience. You do tend to swear at the trees, and, if you hit your head hard enough, you might even swear off that particular forest for awhile.

Needless to say, the overwhelming number of comments to my last diary divided into agreement with support, disagreement with support, or anger/frustration/namecalling - still with support. I did not write what I wrote to provoke a reaction but if I had, that would have been the spectrum I would have hoped for.

It occurs to me, in the full flower of the pomposity that always strikes me at midday, that this might be somewhat metaphorical for progressives and other centrists, particularly relative to criticism of the Administration. I was reminded of this last night when somebody asked me why I wasn't pounding the President more on Afghanistan, and I linked him the Comment I did last year saying Obama should declare victory and go home.

"Sure," the guy replied, "you've been critical of that, once, but you seem to go lightly on them." And I said, you're right...other than this stuff about the BP disaster, and the Public Option, and the political strategy on Health Care Reform, and Afghanistan, and not prosecuting torture, and the Kagan nomination, and maybe six dozen complaints about process or tone.

[JuniperLea]

1. He does whore out his opinions for money...

WTF? That's his job.

I'm so over KO. Really. I didn't give a flying rat's ass about his GBCW... I laughed it off. This post, however, is complete attention whorism, and this I cannot abide. Meta... pft.

[hlthe2b]

5. Interesting...

I don't agree, but I suspect there may be several in your camp. :shrug:

[loudsue]

12. Yes, I think it's a great idea to eat our own.

After all, that's why we're democrats and not republicans. :shrug:

[JuniperLea]

16. Lockstep vs Nailing Jello to the Wall

As it should be.

[damntexdem]

15. Sorry, but I'll think about your comments tomorrow.

Today I'll go home and watch Keith.

[JuniperLea]

18. Go for it...

If you misunderstand him, he will blame you.

[bullwinkle428]

2. So he has a hot temper and a tendency to fly off the handle on occasion -

it's not like anyone at DU ever does that... :hide:

[hlthe2b]

3. For all his bluster, I think KO wears his heart on his sleeve...

and worn spots in his armor occasionally poke through. Big ego? Sure. Why wouldn't he? But, I think he's imminently worth "giving a listen to," whether you agree with him or not.

[suffragette]

21. Spot on

Great description of him

[rocktivity]

4. He must have read what I posted on the Countdown thread yesterday!

It saddens me to think that Markos probably won't be on anymore.

But at the same time, I couldn't help but feel he was being just a little thin-skinned, especially in view of what he dishes out for a living. Well, I'm very glad that his hindsight kicked in and he's decided that he overreacted--or should I day, he's decided that he overreacted, TOO? Anyway, cut the Vonage theme, and welcome back to Countdown, Markos!

:woohoo:
rocktivity

[lazarus]

6. could you edit this down, please?

Could you please cut it in half to comply with DU's copyright rules?

Thanks, and thanks for posting this.

[WeDidIt]

7. There we go

That GBCW didn't last very long, did it?

[DirkGently]

8. "Criticism of Obama is...democracy"

Not such a difficult concept, really.

:)

[Hawkowl]

9. Regarding the last paragraph.....

"Incidentally, back to the point of all this, I still thought it was an unsatisfying speech, and that's granting the more substantive criticism that I misinterpreted who it was for, or what it was meant to facilitate, or any other factors of intent. What impressed me, and what I think President Obama should have done first, was have the meeting with the BP deatheaters and gotten the $20b escrow fund and the $100m oil riggers' moratorium fund, and then given the speech. Because in that way, he could have been his own newscaster and cut out the middle man, and we would have been left saying "the President made a forceful and specific impact on the Gulf Crisis and seemed to be setting a tone for the passage of the energy bill in the Senate."


I think that Obama announced the speech specifically to publicize the $20 Billion escrow account, but then was left holding the bag as BP deliberately dragged its feet at the last minute in attempt to make Obama look bad and get more leverage in negotiating the $20 Billion down.

The speech makes much more sense this way and it is an obvious negotiation tactic on BP's part. BP says they agree and then at the last minute before the announced speech say "we can't afford $20 billion right now, how about $15? No? Well then we need more time to agree to any number, good luck with your speech douchebag!" At the worst BP thinks they can simply mend fences by agreeing to the original $20 Billion.

At least that is my theory.

[annabanana]

10. A rational man.

Unlike the RW wurlitzer, which howls & blows with no regard to tone or facts or anything else but the sound of it's own racket.

[redqueen]

11. Hehehehe... I like Olbermann. (nt)

[Spazito]

13. I like it!

He maintains his position on constructive criticism, as he certainly should, while acknowledging his "GBCW" reaction was rash.

He was never in my bad books because of his rashness on that occasion or when he criticized the President's speech even though I thought he was wrong on both counts. If anything, my respect for him grows with this diary and the bonus is his 'bent' sense of humor.

"OK, enough. I assume I'm on some sort of probation, so I'll have to stop writing all those fake I-Hate-Olbermann diaries under aliases to drum up sympathy." Love it! :rofl:

[berni_mccoy]

14. Interesting. He blames readers for not understanding his intent on his last post.

Unfortunately, he's responsible for his own message. It's like he's saying with this post, "I'm back, you all misunderstood me, and I like President Obama. Really. And I bet it was BP's fault we didn't like his speech".

[JuniperLea]

17. Yep...

When a writer blames his/her readers for their lack of understanding the message... 'nuff said.

[Berry Cool]

19. Not necessarily.

Some people deliberately tune out what a writer is trying to say because they assume they already know he's going to tell them something they don't want to hear. Then they blame him for doing so, even if it's not there in his writing, because they're so convinced it is.

[KonaKane]

20. attention queen

come on Keith, do better.