NEWS: Olbermann Jumps into Linguistics Debate

POLITICS: Olbermann Jumps into Linguistics Debate

Keith Olbermann has becomes the left's latest hero with his pointed segments that often call out conservatives and high ranking officials on their hypocrisy and lies. His latest target: the media research center president Bozell, granted the "worst person in the world" award for claiming that the military wouldn't call Iraq a "civil war" without providing any examples.

It's interesting that it is primarily those on the right making the biggest deal out of NBC's decision to finally refer to what is clearly a civil war in Iraq as a "civil war." So pony up, please. If there really are "hundreds of generals" who are willing to make that claim, let's hear from them! And if they can't be produced, then maybe it's time to just admit that if it looks, sounds and quacks like a duck, it probably is one.

let me tell you, this place is a mess. Its been at civil war since we tried to give them their puppet government. We either need to get some no nonsense dictator in here to start stompin ass again or just ditch the place, call them savages, point fingers at them and laugh while they figure it out thier damn selves. Fuck Iraq.

Isn't that kind of what we're doing?

The selfish bastards

we could always nuke them until they glow and shoot them in the dark.

Let me see if I got this right. There is a country where people have collected into separate militant groups, and are running around killing each other and claiming they are the rightful political power. Right? That is defined as a civil war, right? So, was Bozell dropped on his head recently, or can someone actually be that stupid? Either way, it just makes me want to throw tomatoes at him like he was a mime.

I still have a hard time seeing Olberman as anything but a smugh NCAA sports commentator.

To me, his current events stance's seem disengenion (sp?) attention whoring for ratings.

Disengenion sounds like a pretty killer cyberpunk metal band.

Oberman jumped on the bandwagon late but better than nothing at all...

Pfft.

heh heh

By taking out Sadaam, the US created a new Yugoslavia in Iraq .. .Both had strongman dictators that kept other ethnicities down .. In Yugoslavia, Tito a Serb, held back Bosnian, Slovaks and Croatians ... In Iraq, Sadaam a Sunni, tortured Shiities and Kurds ...

When the dictator leaves chaos ensues .... And the US is stuck in the middle and wasting billions ....

I would say to partition Kurdistan now (although Turkey would hate that) .. It would be lovely to partition Sunni and Shiite Iraq .. But the Shiite side would be likely to ally with Iran, and the Sunni side might ally with Syria ...

Its a mess all around.

dammit, I didn't stir up nearly enough backlash!!! let me see if I can be even more insensitive...
, you see, we are fucking Iraq. just like the dirty whore they are. but for some reason we keep getting confused and we try to make sweet, sweet, love to it. And thats when Iraq sticks it finger up our collective ass.

but not in the good way.

We need to remember, that Iraq is just a dirty whore, and we don't need to make see love to it. we need to fuck it. hard. real hard. and if possible in the ass. so it will stop fucking with our ass.


ok, weird desert inspired sexually frustrated rant can conclude now.

hey moron. just what language is "thier"? Do you maybe mean "their"? yeah, next time, why not take a moment to spell check?After all, this is the internet. you can't go around just spelling things however you want. The Internet only has room for excellence buddy. get it together.

Does the United States even have 100 generals deployed in Iraq to validate Bozell's claim that it isn't a "civil war"? That appears to be too many generals to implement a failed strategy.

He's a Television commentator. He's paid to generate ratings. You're basically criticizing him for doing his job.

I am criticizing him for coming off disingenuous.

But, I guess if we classify him as a commentator or TV personality, not a jounalist... then that is what you get. i.e. He is no Chris Matthews, George Stephponopolous, or even O'Rielly. He is more like a John Tesh or Pat OBrien.

To me at least.

I disagree.

subrosa hearts olberman

Not really. Regardless, how is pointing out gross statistical inaccuracies in Hedgecock's statement and asking Bozell to back up his claims disingenuous? He's not even making an argument here (other than the wholle "worst person in the world" gimmick).

Yeah. Good researchers.

I was really only commenting on Olbermann, not the subject. Anyone who frequents these boards could have read what his production assistants put together.

If we are talking pure semantics, I'd be a little hesitant to call it a civil war too. Civil war implies organized groups fighting over control of the government. The situation reported in Iraq always sounds more like: everyone has guns and bombs, everyone has decades worth of unresolved grudges and the cops and military don't work. So every random yahoo who feels like decapitating a bus load of people can do it and get away with it. That sounds more like anarchy to me. But that's just semantics. I don't care what we call it, so long as it's clear that things are not going well over there.

Um. Dude, this is what people on the news do. You're criticizing him for not doing research that you don't know he doesn't do, that most television commentators don't bother doing, and saying he is somehow less than them seemingly purely on the basis that he started in sports. I'm not really a huge Olbermann fanatic - I think he's usually right based on what I see - but he's still O'Reilly style infotainment, which I don't view as a positive thing. But still, unless you have inside knowledge that Olbermann just shows up and reads off a prompt, it seems pretty damn unfair.

No I am criticizing him for being a commentator that is out of his genre and comes off disingenuous. At least he does to me.

If he does do his own journalism then he is even worse than I expect. MSNBC can do better.

This is no different than saying so and so is horrible baseball player or bad singer.

Wasn't O'Reilly an anchor on some tabloid news program for years before O'Reilly Factor?

I suspect that people who actually know what they're talking about wouldn't make good TV personalities. TV wants arrogant loud-mouths who will polarize and ridicule, not calm and informed intellectuals who are willing to consider gray area and avoid jumping to conclusions.


edit: Jon Stewart might in some ways be an exception, because he seems more informed than either Olberman or O'Reilly, and is not so arrogant because he is instead humorous. But I think it's the comedy format itself that makes for this perception. He can proclaim, polarize, mock, take sides, jump to conclusions, and then pass it all off as "just comedy" and not serious. Those other pundits can't.