Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Keith Olbermann and "The Shrub"

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15004160/from/ET

Thank you Mr Olbermann.

QUOTE:

Thus in his supposed emeritus years has Mr. Clinton taken forceful and triumphant action for honesty, and for us; action as vital and as courageous as any of his presidency; action as startling and as liberating, as any, by any one, in these last five long years.

?????????

Clinton and Honesty are two words that don't belong in the same book.

BMT

Here's a response to Olberman that Ace put up over at polibundit---a little long but points out the hilarious inconsistencies of the Clinton lickspittles as they try to rehab Our Bill as a stalwart fighter of terrorism, and the Democrats as the party of strength----guffaw, guffaw:


Keith Olbermann: Lying Idiot


This airhead went on an unhinged diatribe last night which made him a hero among the Kossiacs.

"Bill Clinton did what almost none of us have done in five years.

He has spoken the truth about 9/11, and the current presidential administration"

Really Keith? Are you saying no liberal talked about the �truth� about 9/11 anywhere at all? If not, why?
Further, how is it �the truth� when Clinton lied about Dick Clarke getting fired?

Next he says, �The Bush Administration did not try to get Osama bin Laden before 9/11.�
Ok, Olberman appears to be contending that Bush should have just invaded Afghanistan or tried to kill OBL before we were attacked when the disloyal opposition was busy whining about the �stolen� election.
Yes, THAT would have gone over real well with the left. I�m sure Olberman would have been cheering as the bombs dropped on Kabul.

Then, �The Bush Administration did not understand the Daily Briefing entitled �Bin Laden Determined To Strike in U.S�

Note that no evidence of this was offered. Well, here is what the PDB said:

"We have not been able to corroborate some of the more sensational threat reporting, such as that from a [deleted text] service in 1998 saying that Bin Laden wanted to hijack a U.S. aircraft to gain the release of �Blind Shaykh� �Umar� Abd aI-Rahman and other U.S.-held extremists.

Nevertheless, FBI information since that time indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York."

As I noted before, here is how the Bush Administration responded

The government moved on several fronts to counter the threats. The CIA launched �disruption operations� in 20 countries. Tenet met or phoned 20 foreign intelligence officials. Units of the 5th Fleet were redeployed. Embassies went on alert. Cheney called Crown Prince Adbullah of Saudi Arabia to ask for help.

While we�re on PDB�s, why didn�t Olbermann mention the one given to President Clinton in 1998?

"Bin Ladin Preparing to Hijack US Aircraft and Other Attacks"

If President Clinton �understood� this why was there little response? Further, as Dick Morris asked today:

Why did he refuse to allow us to fire cruise missiles to kill bin Laden when we had the best chance, by far, in 1999?

Why didn�t Olbermann quote Michael Scheuer?

�The former president seems to be able to deny facts with impugnity. Bin Laden is alive today because Mr. Clinton, Mr. Sandy Berger, and Mr. Richard Clarke refused to kill him�

Just like most of his viewers and cheerleaders, Olbermann is wholly ignorant on this topic.

-- The Ace

Clinton and Honesty are two words that don't belong in the same book. BMT

-------

I've tried combining Keith Olbermann and intellect in many different fashions, by the way, and ended up with severe errors every time.

On every broadcast, Keith Olbermann reminds me of what one TV newsman said so accurately about a more than typically egotistical colleague, years ago: "[He] thinks that the purpose of the news is to bring you him."

Keith Olberman is part of the reason Fox news is the most watched.
MSNBC is just too angry. But liberals in general are angry.
I think they know, they are supporting those who want to take their guns away?

The mainstream media have so completely given in to their Bush-hatred that they have become a joke. The Washington Post put an anti-war protest on Capitol Hill on the front page with pictures----30 protesters way outnuimbered by cops and media. When 35,000 people protested the appearance of the Iranian psycho-in-chief at the UN, the WaPo completely ignored it---not a single word.

These daily choices to skew the news in favor of their anti-administration, and effectively pro-terrorist, stance are the reason nobody listens anymore, outside their own liberal echo chamber.

Steve, let's count our blessings, though.

Olbermann is one of them. (He's completely under Karl's influence. Rove's a genius that way.)

Keith Olbermann is a liberal sycophant and attack dog.

Sounds kind of like the "French Intelligence."

Yeah, I love the way he does that mind control thing. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Mr. Olbermann is an American hero. You go.

I see Karl has gotten inside your head, too. How does he do that?

WTF???
Are we being overrun with IDIOTS?
Maybe the Campfire needs a little fiber to loosen the stool...
If you know what I mean...

An American hero? Laughing my butt off here.

This is not a competition between Presidents. I could fill a book with the things I took issue with during the Clinton administration, but the primary problem I had were with the policies which led to the loss of millions of living-wage jobs.

I could fill another volume with my differences with the current administration's policies which champion the wealthy and throw the middle class wage earners to the wolves.

So take your shots at Slick Willie but quit making allowances for the current dipstick. No amount of perfume is going to make this pig smell any sweeter.

You may want to go here, olywa, before you present that argument too strongly:

http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2006/09/jec_releases_to.html

"So take your shots at Slick Willie "



Very well.


The Myth Of Clinton's Surpluses
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Look at the following web page, and you will notice something funny.
The public debt of the US never went down during the Clinton
presidency. What about all those surpluses we heard about? I guess
they were a lie. Apparently, Clinton lied about more than sex.

I am sure many of my dim-witted Democrat friends will point out that
the deficits were much smaller then than now, but they are missing the
point. We are talking about lies, not size.

http://www.publicdebt.treas.gov/opd/opdhisto4.htm

<quote>
09/30/2005 $7,932,709,661,723.50
09/30/2004 $7,379,052,696,330.32
09/30/2003 $6,783,231,062,743.62
09/30/2002 $6,228,235,965,597.16
09/30/2001 $5,807,463,412,200.06
09/30/2000 $5,674,178,209,886.86
09/30/1999 5,656,270,901,615.43
09/30/1998 5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1997 5,413,146,011,397.34
09/30/1996 5,224,810,939,135.73
09/29/1995 4,973,982,900,709.39
09/30/1994 4,692,749,910,013.32
09/30/1993 4,411,488,883,139.38
09/30/1992 4,064,620,655,521.66
09/30/1991 3,665,303,351,697.03

Quote:
We are talking about lies, not size

Most guys lie about their size.........

Low interest, lower taxes, no inflation, 4.6% unemployment, a Dow about to set a new record, solid real GNP growth for years, falling gas prices........Lawdy, throw me to that wolf, boss.