Olbermann awarded O'Reilly "Worst Person" gold for blaming Bronx fire deaths on the "pro-amnesty, open-border crowd"
On the March 12 edition MSNBC's Countdown, host Keith Olbermann awarded Fox News anchor Bill O'Reilly "the gold" in his nightly "Worst Person in the World" segment because, as Media Matters for America documented, "He has now blamed last week's house fire in New York City, which killed 9 children and the mother of four of them, on, quote, 'so called compassion,' unquote, because his show could not confirm the victims were not illegal aliens." Olbermann continued: "He described sympathy and compassion for the dead, kids burned alive, as a, quote, 'new tactic by the pro-amnesty, open-border crowd, using children to demand sanctuary for illegal aliens.' " Olbermann also stated that O'Reilly had previously "blam[ed]" a "kidnapped teenager in Missouri" -- presumably a reference to Shawn Hornbeck -- "for his own sexual abuse." As Media Matters documented, O'Reilly claimed that Hornbeck "liked ... his circumstances" and had "a lot more fun" than usual.
Additionally, Olbermann named CNN Headline News' Glenn Beck the "runner-up" in the segment for saying to members of Congress who support a Democratic plan to set a date for U.S. withdrawal from Iraq: "If your bill goes through, I hope you can't go to bed any single night without images of body bags of our American soldiers coming off those planes ... because you will be just as responsible for their deaths as anyone who has ever strapped a bomb to their chest" -- as Media Matters also noted.
From the March 12 edition MSNBC's Countdown with Keith Olbermann:
OLBERMANN: Our runner-up, having found that his pose of moderation does not work, Glenn Beck of CNN back to radical extremism, opposing Democratic calls for a timed withdrawal from Iraq. He says, quote, "if your bill goes through, I hope you can't get to bed any single night without the images of body bags of our American soldiers coming off those planes ... because you will be just as responsible for their deaths as anyone who has ever strapped a bomb to their chest." "How do you sleep at night? How do you do it?"
Assuming you are right, and you're not, could those Democrats maybe get some sleeping tips from you and the other toadies who parroted the administration and got us into this horse-crap war in the first place? I mean, by your logic, Mr. Beck, aren't you just as responsible for the first 3,190 American dead in Iraq?
But the gold tonight: who else? The intolerant and intolerable Bill O'Reilly. Blaming a kidnapped teenager in Missouri for his own sexual abuse was not sufficient. He has now blamed last week's house fire in New York City, which killed nine children and the mother of four of them, on, quote, "so-called compassion," unquote, because his show could not confirm the victims were not illegal aliens.
He described sympathy and compassion for the dead, kids burned alive, as a, quote, "new tactic by the pro-amnesty, open-border crowd, using children to demand sanctuary for illegal aliens." He actually said that. Any issue can be freely discussed, should be discussed. The issue of amnesty or borders or tactics is for the moment, in the Bronx, with the funerals only today, irrelevant. Prioritizing it is indefensible. It is inhuman. Bill O'Reilly has left the human race, the "Worst Person in the World."
The other right-wing media mogul you should worry about
Palin's book and Obama's bow: a media week to forget
Media Matters: The Palin chronicles
Kieth Olbermann is my hero. The lone voice of sanity crying in the wilderness.
Wow. That's funny. Saying that Keith Olbermann is sane is like saying that Rush Limbaugh is skinny. Keith Olbermann is both hateful and insane. If he couldn't bash O'Reilly and other conservatives his show would be 10 seconds long. They guy is an absolute joke. You should all go watch him now and his audience might increase from 10 people to 20 people.
Keith Olbermann is both hateful and insane.
We'll wait here for proof of your assertion.
If he couldn't bash O'Reilly and other conservatives his show would be 10 seconds long.
Fortunately (or rather unfortunately, when it comes to the Bush Administration) Right Wingers are constantly saying and doing horrible and idiiotic and cruel and nasty and negligent things. So Olbermann's show is packed to the gills every night with new stuff. I don't feel comfortable "thanking" anyone for that, though. Thanking right wingers for all they do would be like thanking a tooth ache for the pain it causes.
They guy is an absolute joke.
Nice. Says a lot... About the person who said it.
You should all go watch him now and his audience might increase from 10 people to 20 people.
Actually, given the way his ratings seem to be consistently rising of late, he's doing at least that well. But thanks for the suggestion!
"If he couldn't bash O'Reilly and other conservatives his show would be 10 seconds long."
Boy, are you wrong there... The silly, humor parts of his show aside Olbermann is actually a pretty sharp guy who covers important issues in an insightful way. He also asks very good questions...
Tonight, for example, how much time did O'Reilly devote to the Alberto Gonzalez affair and the resignation of Gonzalez's chief of staff? How much time did O'Reilly spend discussing the use of the Patriot Act by the Justice Department to attempt to circumvent Congress in appointing new U.S. Attorneys? Apparently, "loyalty" to the President and his policies were criteria for appointment. By the way this is the same Patriot Act that was intended to fight terrorism, not to advance political ideology. Did O'Reilly actually show viewers copies of e-mails between the White House and the Justice Department? Did O'Reilly cover any of this like Olbermann did? Or was Bill too busy blaming compassionate people for the fire in New York.
The O'Reilly bashing is funny because Olbermann uses Bill's own words to skewer him... and that's why O'Reilly hates Olbermann so much.
From the side of Gangleskank Coulter, Weinerdog Savage and OxyLimbaugh YOU are calling Olbermann insane? Wow, nerve you have. The sense God gave the ordinary garden slug, not so much
Don't forget he went to one of the Ivy League schools--serious schools that teach serious journalism like "Worst Person in the World"...
But whattya expect from someone who knows that millions of people have found out that, in the sack he's the "Worst Person....
You need to watch Amy Goodman on Democracy now. You need Direct TV or Dish to see it, but it's worth it. It's also available on Pacifica Radio, or on the web at democracynow.org.
Inhuman?
I think that's taking things a little too far. Does he pay Media Matters to get his clips on here?
Fact: Media Matters has NEVER criticized anything said by Keith Olbermann.
So? Want me to call you the waaaaaaahmbulance?
And it's not taking it too far. O'Reilly was wrong. He was wrong about the facts. And he was wrong about attacking a family destroyed by fire and death. And he was wrong in his timing, using this family baselessly to try and score political points before the family had even buried their dead.
"Inhuman" is probably too kind of a word for the scum that is O'Reilly.
And if Ann Coulter called someone "scum" you would be outraged. You have been.
I was outraged when she called Edwards a F*****. Wasn't the first time, won't be the last.
keep posting your opinion is valued.
"keep posting your opinion is valued."
-----
Its value is zero, but zero is still a value.
The difference is Ann Coulter is scum , and she says hateful, vicious things on a regular basis . Things that are racist and homophobic. Do you see the difference?
Racist people are still people. Don't forget that.
"Racist people are still people. Don't forget that."
So are you saying we should be compassionate to racists?
Sorry. But most of you use personal attacks on here that are way worse than anything Ann Coulter has ever said. Maybe you should get rid of your own hate before you accuse others of being hateful. And also, if all of these conservatives are so insignificant then why do you spend so much time personally attacking them when they say anything that is controversial? What's the point?
First, prove "most." There are certainly some who say nasty things about Coulter. But most? And then you get to prove those things worse than anything said by Coulter.
Second, given that "most" of us say much nastier things than Coulter, does that mean we should get a regular column in dozens of newspapers? Shouldn't Fox be calling?
Your use of a bunch of message board bloviators to a vindicate a nationally syndicated is ridiculous.
I will not apologize for standing up to a hater who says disgusting thngs about the 9/11 widows. Does she not have a heart?
Rhino, there is a lot of ad hominem stuff on this board for certain people and it doesn't help as far as I can tell. But it is understandable. Certain people, in this case O'Reilly, are pawns of very antiAmerican, internationalist forces and personages, in this case Murdoch, but it's difficult to develope a case against them as they order the hit in private--- their minions pull the trigger. They are doing great harm to our country by misinforming voters. In O'Reilly's case specifically, he is better able than most to connect with Joe Sixpack and therefore he can do even more damage than the others.
Really? Then it should be easy for you to cough up examples of us saying WAY worse things than we should drop daisy cutters in the middle east, that the way to talk to a conservative is after you beat them with a baseball bat, that the only question is do we impeach Bush or assasinate him and that we ought to poison Anton Scalia? I will be waiting for you to furnish such examples but I wont be holding my breath. Mostly because your claim is ludicrous on the face of it.
That whole whambulance thing is a little worn out, don't you think?
"That whole whambulance thing is a little worn out, don't you think?"
-----
It wasn't, but since it needed to be called for you so many times, it has become worn out.
I just think it's a little childish to get into name calling.
If I had to guess the age level of the people on this thread, I would guess they are teenagers.
Name calling? Nobody called you anything. I IMPLIED and you INFERRED that I called you a big whiner, but I didn't.
You come trolling here, posting nothing of substance, and then get angry that people call you on it. Get. Over. It.What has he said that warrant criticism? Maybe we missed something. Please enlighten us.
You're about to hear stories about how he's mean and how he dumped some woman without calling her.
Was it too much effort to call the woman what she was? Was that too much to ask? Would it have been THAT much effort for Older?
Buuuuuut, Nooooo!
Olbermann calls O'Reilly a nazi all the time. That kind of rhetoric doesn't get us anywhere. O'Reilly was actually pointing out a valid, truthful argument here, regardless of the timing.
When has Olbermann called O'Reilly a Nazi?
Specifically?
Easy answer: Not once.
I do not think he called O'Reilly a Nazi, but he did give a Nazi salute with an O'Reilly mask.
http://www.adl.org/media_watch/tv/20060728-MSNBC.htm
Well he's not man enough to flat out say it, so instead he does more childish things like wear an O'Reilly mask and give the Hitler salute.
In other words you lied. so you lie again to try to cover up the lie, just making yourself out to be an even bigger liar.
There I go again using facts to attack the poor widdle liars...
So donning an O'Reilly mask and giving a nazi salute isn't calling O'Reilly a nazi.
Did you crush your head in a subway door, too?
Freakacreep, O'Reilly isn't a Nazi; he's a fascist.
Again, more name calling. In a logical, rational debate, that kind of rhetoric means nothing. Period.
I knew that someday, someone would come here and in O'Reilly's defense use the words "rational" and logical".
Have you ever caught Bill's act?
Ya know, thing is, Olbermann goes into great detail when tearing down the horrible things that O'Reilly and other right wingers say. But anything more than a soundbite is lost on those like yourself. So you complain about namecalling.
Maybe focus a little more on WHY Olbermann has issues with O'Reilly, Coulter, et al.
So again, stop your pathetic whining, and tell your idol Bill-oh to start dealing in facts and stop his own name calling and labelling. Then maybe we'll get somewhere.
try looking up the words one of these days, from your reply you do not know what either one really is.
I'm a little slow. What did Bill point out that was truthful and valid?
That encouraging illegals to hole up 20 to a room in rundown parts of town puts them at a greater risk to their lives in case of a fire.
What "illegal aliens living 20 to a room" are we talking about? The families suffering through this tragedy were not illegal aliens, nor were they living 20 to a room. Aside from that, brilliant comment.
Do you wingnut trolls have to practice to be this stupid, or does it just come naturally?====================
I never meant to say that the conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally conservative. I believe that is so obviously and universally admitted a principle that I hardly think any gentleman will deny it.
John Stuart Mill, letter to the Conservative MP, Sir John Pakington (March, 1866) http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/PRmill.htm
Wrong. Stupid people will sell their vote for $10 (Cook County, 1960--Kennedy).
Another Fact: Olbermann does not propagate conservative misinformation (see MMFA "About Us").
Well we all know why KO does this, he hates O'Reilly. He has a man on his own network in Imus who has said along with others on that show vicious, hateful things and they are never mentioned by KO. It is why I can not take KO seriously. Hate is in his own backyard and he ignores it. I do believe MMFA should not be in the business of promoting the Olbermann show, it seems they do when ever he attacks O'Reilly or Beck or Coulter . Now these are people who deserve it but does it really matter that KO things they are the worst persons in the world? Again especially when the racist Imus show calls Hillary Clinton a "B*itch' and that she is wearing Cornrows?
http://mediamatters.org/items/200703070009
They desreve the hate. (Yes I said it and I don't care.)
Deserves hate? Wow. I hope that isn't normal dialogue on this website.
It's not, but I stand by what I said.
Clinton deserves Imus' hate? Who...wha...
"Deserves hate? Wow. I hope that isn't normal dialogue on this website."
-----
It is from the right wingnuts on national television. It's part of what MMFA chartered itself to point out.
Senator Clinton deserves to be attacked with hateful racist hate speech? Why?
Hannity, Beck ETC. I was agreeing with you said.
P.S. I despise Imus and his cohorts.
The Imus act is really disgusting because it becomes racist as in the case last week with the "Gold Teeth and Cornwall" remark.
SO Keith is supposed to be the police for the network he works for? Was he hired for that? Or was it for his popular commentary?
Did I say he should be the police? I made an obervation. You do not agree that is fine. I feel Imus is hateful and should be monitored.
Older CASTS himself as the police. So...be consistent. And show some kahonees.
But, why would he endanger his job, just to point out hate.
Did you hear Hillary's fake black southern accent?
I hope she doesn't speak to any Japanese audiences.
Did you see the whole clip? Do you realize she was speaking "in character"? Do you have the slightest concept of what constitutes "dramatic reading"?
Although, of course, I am sure you approve of Chimpy's phony Spanish, don't you? And his phony Texas accent?
And he probably shouldn't be giving speeches to Japanese audiences, either. Hell, he shouldn't be giving speeches to American audiences since he can barely speak English.
Or West Berliners, Leather.
O'Reilly is KO's direct competitor. KO's success is not being measured by his ratings versus that of Imus.
Keith has ripped into other MSNBC personalities, like Rita Cosby.
I also heard he's had words for Tucker as well, but I can't confirm that.
He has called Rita Cosby as stupid or something like that. Not attacked her becuase of her politics. Glenn Beck is not a direct competitor and he is attacked by KO.
We know you have a thing for KO. We used to see you post your 'hatemonger' rants under your old name. You're sweet on him. We get it. Maybe if you're lucky he'll dip your pigtails in ink.
I do not know what your getting at, I do not have a "thing" for KO. I agree with him 99% of the time, agree with him on BO. I am just trying to be fair. I would also like to see him go after hate in his own network.
Also not sure what you mean about "hatemonger" as I have never called Keith a hatemonger.
Fine. WRITE HIM. It's not Media Matter's job to point out to Olbermann that he's not doing HIS job in a manner you'd like.
I have written KO to report more on Imus. No avail. I enjoy Olbermann though. It is MMFA job to report on Imus and they do. It is not MMFA job to endore a program, they seem to do that with KO.
Sigh... again with that.
MMFA uses references to Olbermann's bits as a way to draw more attention to the subject -- the Right Wing misinformation. That it gives publicity to Olbermann is a positive side effect.
Should MMFA not point out things said on the Sunday programs? Or that this or that website reported on? MMFA is an aggregator. It isn't a news source of its own. It isn't a talk show. MMFA GETS ITS MATERIAL FROM OTHER SOURCES.
So let it go already. Sheesh.
Should MMFA not point out things said on the Sunday programs? Or that this or that website reported on? MMFA is an aggregator. It isn't a news source of its own. It isn't a talk show. MMFA GETS ITS MATERIAL FROM OTHER SOURCES.
Of course they should point out what is said on Sunday.
You are really lost and trying to be confrontational.
I guess that, yes, rebutting your position is being "confrontational."
And I guess that calling me "lost" is your way of being respectful of my opinions.
Nicely done.
You are not rebutting anytthing, since you and I seem to have the same opinion. You are the one who is trying to flame the fires.
Excuse me? You think MMFA should not post references to Olbermann's topic's here. I consider it perfectly acceptable. I do NOT share your opinion on this, or on whether Olbermann has to go after other people you say, or a variety of other things.
I used to think you were a little slow or something. But now I think you come here for attention or something. I'm done providing it.
That is your right.
Doris, re: MMFA and Sunday material--MMFA is a Union outfit, so anything having to do w/a weekend is going to be too darn much trouble to deal with.
I really hate to respond to trolls on this site. but really- what has Keith Olbermann said that Media matters should note?
Provide something please.
Or in the words of O'Reilly- just shut up!
If you read anything at all here- you will see that MM notes lots of misinformation, slant, and smear coming from all sources including the New York Times, NBC, CNN, and CBS on a regular basis. (aren't those the usual suspects?)
Keith Olbermann is a public service to sanity!
BO has left the human race.
Who is the troll? Calling people trolls is a weak response to a healthy debate.
Is it that you coudln't get to the end of the first sentence of his post? Or to the end of his post? He did more than just comment about trolls.
No I just wanted to know the troll was. The rest of the post was great. Why the hostility?
It's not hostility. It's frustration. You've done the same thing in other topics. You pick out one little thing that has little to do with the topic at hand, ignoring the substance of a post. You did it repeatedly the Oprah Bill-Oh topic. It's dismissive.
I don't think he referred to anyone in particular as a troll.
(And I see now why I was particularly frustrated: "Calling people trolls is a weak response to a healthy debate." You made it sound like his whole post was "weak.")
He said this
I really hate to respond to trolls on this site. but really- what has Keith Olbermann said that Media matters should note?
I want to know who the troll was.
If you do not like my point of view that is fine, but be respectful. I am too you.
Actually, dismissing an entire post because of a single word or phrase isn't all that respectful.
You were the one who said I dismissed it, I said it was a fine posting.
Oh for god's sake. My last response on this. You dismissed, perhaps unintentionally, his entire post with
You didn't address anything else in his post. You did NOT in your initial response say it was a good post until I called you on it. I may have misinterpreted your intial, poorly worded response. But I responded to what you wrote.
Dunno why I bother. You're pure frustration in ASCII.
Again you are attacking me for no reason, since we agree on 99% of the issue. You want to fight for fighting sake. Give it up.
By the way MonsterMash, I love the rest of your post. Very insighful.
I enjoy KO and love the"wost Person" segment. However, I do agree that he shouldn't be ignoring IMUS. But then again I am a sucker for seeing Bildo called out for the worm he is. I guess we don't really need KO to belittle Bildo. O'Reily can pretty much make himself look like an idiot just by opening his mouth.
I know this is off topic, but you know what I think of when I look at Bill O'Reily? I think of that Gungan character in Star Wars Episode One. Y'know the Gungan leader guy who goes BRBRBRBRBRBRBRBRB and shakes his whole face around. I can't help it it just pops in my mind.
Bill-O!!! Bill-O ...You just can't seem to stop putting your big foot in your BIG FAT MOUTH.....
O'Reilly IS scum, that's why I religiously don't watch him. I get my info about O'Reilly from MM and Olbermann.
I have a some theories about O'Reilly and Fox.
First of all, O'Reilly doesn't believe a single thing he says, it's all make-believe, and he knows it. He knows there's a stupid section of the viewing public that just want to watch his train wreck of a show every night. It's kinda like people coming to the car races to watch the wreck, not to see who wins. Notice how the car wreck makes the 6:00 news, but not the finish?
Second, Fox is like the Star or National Enquirer for cable TV news. They much rather report on dead girls in Aruba than have to talk about Iraq or something else that really matters.
The whole immigration issue is more about deflecting attention away from real issues than anything else. People really care about Iraq. Fox doesn't want to talk about Iraq because that's bad copy for them. So Billo comes up with BS topics which he doesn't believe in anyway. Billo make a fortune, mindless people watch, and everybody it happy.
I think the smart people today get there news from the internet, it's people who don't know how to turn on a computer who watch Fox.
Olbermann is a fool. He took this completely out of context, as usual. O'Reilly was angry at the pro-amnesty crowd because the situation that these people were allowed to live in, because no one asked questions, had killed them. The living conditions in this home were deplorable and criminal yet, since no one cares to investigate, the result was inevitable. He takes one sentence, trims it up a bit, and parades these lies through the verbally accurate and politically correct streets of his countdown show, and they wonder why they have no ratings.
Speaking of fools...
"He took this completely out of context, as usual."
MMFA has provided the FULL context of O'Reilly's comments, and they're no better than what Olbermann highlighted.
"O'Reilly was angry at the pro-amnesty crowd"
For absolutely NO reason, because the family was here legally, but Bilbo doesn't really want to publicly acknowledge that, because if he does, it means he can't use the deaths of these children to rail against the Left.
"...because the situation that these people were allowed to live in, because no one asked questions, had killed them."
That's a poverty issue, a building code issue, and a social issue - not the issue Bilbo was trying to bring up, which was amnesty for ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS, which this family was not. In other words, O'Reilly was lying about the family's immigrant status in order to capitalize on their deaths and drum up more fervor about illegal immigration, which is inhuman and inexcuseable.
"The living conditions in this home were deplorable and criminal yet, since no one cares to investigate, the result was inevitable."
That is a valid complaint, and to alleviate this kind of thing in the future, the city's policies on building codes, fire escapes and the like should be addressed. It has nothing to do with the "pro-amnesty crowd" or anything else Bill has brought up.
"He takes one sentence, trims it up a bit, and parades these lies through the verbally accurate and politically correct streets of his countdown show,"
What lies? O'Reilly has been proven to be the liar, and Olberman called him out on it and publicly chastised him for his heartlessness and inability to tell the Truth when it stares him in the face. I would say that I'm sorry the Truth offends your delicate anti-PC sensibilities, but the long and short of this is: Bill lied. Bill did it at the expense of the reputation of dead kids. Olbermann is one of a minority of people on television that will actually call him out on this BS.
"and they wonder why they have no ratings."
Olberman's ratings are going up. Bill's are going down. Your point is what, exactly?
Why not be honest when you post here next time? You can say, "Like Bill, I hate illegal immigrants and their children, too, and think it's for the greater good that Bill lies about American citizens and legal immigrants in order to cast a bad light on all illegal immigrants. I think the PC crowd is being too sensitive and is out of line by pointing out that Bill was lying to make a point." You could also say, "Like Bill, I like to spout off without actually doing any research, so I'm just going to make vague accusations about some PC conspiracy and hope that I get the last word on this."