digg

Join DiggAbout

Introducing Digg Dialogg!
Check out the first Digg Dialogg with Nancy Pelosi. More guests to be announced soon!

Clinton vs Fox News: Olbermann slams Bush

youtube.com — Link goes to YouTube.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • Onetrack, on 10/12/2007, -24/+143' Until a grown-up takes the job '

    This guy rocks - someone kill Nancy Grace and her 22 hours of cnn / day and give this guy the front row he deserves.

    The man has some gigantic balls. Go Olbermann

    -A Canadian
    • whiskeymb, on 10/12/2007, -26/+80I'm not a huge fan of Olbermann, but I'll still dig the dupe just so more people see that there are still journalists out there willing to recognize, stand up, and point out the fallacies of this president and administration. Go Olbermann!
    • eplawless, on 10/12/2007, -41/+15If you watch at the bottom of the screen at about halfway you can see his testicles edge over the top of his tie.
    • idokoye, on 10/12/2007, -44/+3i agree
      i dav
    • manumitx, on 10/12/2007, -39/+6http://digg.com/design/DIGG_NEEDS_A_DELETE_BUTTON_IN_THE_EDIT_FIELD
    • flag564, on 10/12/2007, -82/+16Oh please!

      A f'ing loser with lower ratings than a 30 watt bulb goes on another one of his tired leftest rants and the Digg libs cream their man panties.

      Wow, wake me when we all give a damn.
    • flag564, on 10/12/2007, -65/+14"Oh please!

      A f'ing loser with lower ratings than a 30 watt bulb goes on another one of his tired leftest rants and the Digg libs cream their man panties.

      Wow, wake me when we all give a damn."

      Wow, -1 in one minute. Looks like the KOS kids are a little sensitive today.

      Do you guys have any Top Secert documents to leak to the NY Slimes to help calm your nerves?
    • artofwar420, on 10/12/2007, -21/+9Ditto, to what you and Olbermann say.
    • sanman, on 10/12/2007, -58/+14What crap. Clinton exploded as he always has. Remember that tirade against Jesse Jackson that was caught on camera? ("How DAST he! HOW DAST HE! blahblahblah")
      There have been plenty of instances of that ninny Clinton blowing his top. Ross Perot was correct in assessing the man as an amateur. The only reason he's praised so vociferously is because he was Pander Bear.

      Clinton HELPED TALIBAN IN ITS EARLY PHASE. Pakistan came up with Taliban, and the Clinton admin joined in to help. Read VOA transcripts from that time period.

      Clinton lies when he says cruise missile attacks on Osama were derided as "Wag the Dog". That's garbage -- it's his trumped up war on Kosovo that was derided as Wag-the-Dog. Remember, the whole irony of that movie was that it was about a fake war staged in Albania, and Clinton then subsequently launched a trumped up war on Kosovo, right nextdoor to Albania. Nobody ever accused him of wagging-the-dog on the other stuff. When he launched occasional punitive bombing raids against Saddam (Operation Desert Fox) nobody cried "Wag the Dog". When he launched tomahawk strikes against Bin Laden, nobody cried "Wag the Dog" then either. It was the fake trumped up war on Kosovo that triggered the Wag-the-Dog complaints.

      Clinton looked like a boorish and bellicose Yeltsin in that interview, when he flipped his lid. Howard Dean's own infamous shrillness was tame by comparison.

      Olbermann is some naive white liberal who can't see the forest through the trees. Bush has certainly done many wrongs since 9/11 -- eg. trumped-up war on Iraq (a la Kosovo), abandoning Afghanistan. Clinton however abandoned Afghanistan nearly a decade before 9/11, and then ***** those people over by supporting a Pakistan and Saudi scheme to "pacify" that country under monstrous and murderous oppression. By the time that dumb hick realized that the scheme was going awry, it was too late and the Taliban juggernaut had too much momentum. Read the NYT editorials during the months leading upto 9/11. when that fanatically Atlanticist tabloid mouthpiece appealed to Clinton to stop trying to blockade Afghanistan just because of some silly overblown paranoia about Bin Laden. That was NYT's stance at the time -- I remember it in bitter detail.

      Now white liberal bastards like the Clintonites are going around pretending to have been more hawkish than the neo-cons. What crap. The neo-cons are full of bull, but that doesn't mean the Clintonistas were on the ball -- not by a longshot.
    • shout, on 10/12/2007, -40/+4you are a nutsack just for liking this guy. he's all show. just to get you crazy people hyped up.
    • piper999, on 10/12/2007, -33/+9That rant was every bit as bad as an O'Reilly tirade. Good entertainment but personally I don't want news presenters handing me biased opinions in the form of rants with no-one to give any kind of balancing counterpoint.

      The funniest part was the guy from Scarborough Country appearing on screen immediately afterwards who paused looking like he actually felt embarrassed on behalf of his colleague.
    • detlev409, on 10/12/2007, -9/+29Flag564:

      What do Olbermann's ratings have to do with anything? I'd wager he's got a higher approval rating than Bush right now. So what? Dispute the message, not the messenger, unless you've got something solid against his credibility.

      Sanman:

      And the US also propped up Saddam Hussein and Bin Laden when it was convenient. Don't put Clinton in a vacuum, cause he's not.
    • flag564, on 10/12/2007, -31/+5"What do Olbermann's ratings have to do with anything? I'd wager he's got a higher approval rating than Bush right now."

      you ask me what does his ratings have to do with it, then you try to make a point based on ratings? Um, ok.



      "So what? Dispute the message, not the messenger, unless you've got something solid against his credibility."

      What message "I dont like Bush. Blah, blah, blah. Rant, rant, rant!!"

      If thats you idea of a message, then you are nuts!

      The only "credibility" this joker has with you is that he doesnt like Bush.
    • Intangir, on 10/12/2007, -8/+26that WAS the balancing counterpoint
      the attack already got made

      personally i think its extremely refreshing to finally see rants in the other direction, and its not just "CUT OFF HIS MIC! SHUT UP SHUT UP!" crap like o'rielly does its witty, intelligent, based on facts, and still funny and definately agressive ;)

      this guy is my new hero :)

      "get a new job selling seeds... by mail" HAHAHA :)
    • dclowd9901, on 10/12/2007, -6/+13"The man has some gigantic balls. Go Olbermann"

      With a voice that manly, he must have.
    • piper999, on 10/12/2007, -11/+9@ Intangir

      I love Olberman's show and the guy is very, very sharp but I think his 'special comments' are becoming a little over the top. He seems to try to top himself each night and someone needs to take him aside and tell him to take a few deep breaths.

      The problem is that he's falling into the trap of stooping as low as his right-wing competitors.

      Also, you must admit that showing the Room 101 scene from 1984 could be considered a little awkward not to mention crass. Obviously it was a reference to the current president advocating torture but he couldn't have been more melodramatic if he'd had "Ride of the Valkyries" playing in the background whilst brandishing a broadsword.
    • dclowd9901, on 10/12/2007, -7/+29I also wanted to say (and digg timer cut me off) that I'm very pleased to see someone as intelligent and eloquent as Olbermann making his points and blasting this corrupt, lying administration.

      The real tragedy is that 1) Bush probably doesn't watch MSNBC anyway, to see his ass handed to him (as he prefers to live under his blanket of lies and insecurity) and 2) Even if he did catch Olbermann, he probably wouldn't be able to wrap his monkey brain around what Olbermann was talking about.
    • Thuktun, on 10/12/2007, -5/+20For someone who still claims "The Very Hungry Caterpillar" as one of his favorite books, I worry that Bush can't really comprehend the language in Olbermann's commentary.
    • shout, on 10/12/2007, -20/+7I worry that you idiots fight over this *****. Get a life! You fall for propaganda from either side. Get your own educated opinions.
    • andreo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13@piper999:

      "I love Olberman's show and the guy is very, very sharp but I think his 'special comments' are becoming a little over the top. He seems to try to top himself each night and someone needs to take him aside and tell him to take a few deep breaths."

      He's upset. And he has every right to be. I get upset also when I hear the crap that comes out of the mouth of the media sometimes. I remember what was going on in 98 and 99. I remember the dog and pony show that was put on during the impeachment. I remember that there wasn't crap else on the news except the blow job chronicles. And it pisses me off that this administration and this president hasn't admitted to any screwed up thing that they've done.

      Hell, I even remember a few months after he took office the incident with the U.S submarine and the Japanese fishing boat with the students on board, killing 10 people. Some right wing nut case on WLS AM in Chicago actually blamed Clinton for that, saying that he used to let his friends party on military craft. So it shouldn't be Bush's fault.

      I also remember the bumble that Bush did with the downed airplane by the Chinese. Even after all the sword rattling that Bush did we didn't get the plane back until they were satisfied that they had stripped everything off of it and got all the data that they wanted.

      What bothers me the most about this administration is that it reminds me of the people in charge of the company that I work for. How I can hear the crap that comes out of their mouths and it doesn't match what is happening around me. How some catchy little catch phrase such as "Best Shore" is supposed to be good for everyone but what it really means is outsourcing to India.

      I simply do not like it when someone tells me to trust them everything is under control and they cannot explain what they are doing to keep things under control or make things better. Being told that I should not know what's going on for my own good does not make me feel warm and fuzzy.
    • neglesaks, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2As much as I disklike Bush, and as much as I support Clinton against the FOX news slime, this video comes across as a leftist propaganda piece.
    • SirCharge, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1How is this Clinton vs Fox News anymore than its MSNBC vs Bush?
  • victorycig, on 10/12/2007, -13/+100"To enforce the lies of the present, it is necessary to erase the truths of the past."
    • jake8689, on 10/12/2007, -27/+4Wonder if thats his quote or somone elses
      went to town a hit us with a cold sack of truth
    • briankoenig03, on 10/12/2007, -3/+40@jake
      It's from 1984, he cites it right after he quotes it.
    • rderveloy, on 10/12/2007, -17/+8"He who controls the past commands the future. He who commands the future conquers the past."
      -Kain (Fictional Character from the Command & Conquer game series on the PC.)
    • CoolHandLuke, on 10/12/2007, -25/+2"To enforce the lies of the present, it is necessary to erase the truths of the past."

      I think I saw Clinton wearing a T-shirt with this exact statement on it!

      I must say, he did look tired during that interview. I can't think of a more overwhelming task than rewriting history to make yourself look better than you really are.
    • sakuraz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Original 1984

      "
      'Who controls the past' ran the Party slogan, 'controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.'
      "
  • xtmno3, on 10/12/2007, -11/+31Man this is good entertainment. Watching one news network attack another makes me excited with the opportunity!
    • LoungeActx, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16Seriously, you don't need to be a democrat to dislike this administration. Hell, my parents and sister are registered republicans and they can't stand this administration (I'm a registered democrat so I don't exactly make a good example for this argument).

      What Olbermann is saying here is that our intelligence is constantly being insulted by this administration, and we just sit here and take it. It's constant lies. He's right, we should be pissed off.

      --oh crap I replied to the wrong comment!
  • AlaskaJack, on 10/12/2007, -83/+14Wow! -- "Olbermann slams Bush!" That IS news! Kudos, increasingly-left-wing-echo-chamber oops, I mean Digg!

    - Alaska Jack
    • ZeitMachina, on 10/12/2007, -9/+41Do choruses of agreement constitute echoes? Check the polls, your problem is not with Digg, but with America.
    • eklipsse, on 10/12/2007, -7/+46@AlaskaJack
      You think you need to be a lefty to dislike Bush or to enjoy GWB being slammed?
      I thought that all you need is, well, you know, common sense?
    • flag564, on 10/12/2007, -44/+9"Wow! -- "Olbermann slams Bush!" That IS news! Kudos, increasingly-left-wing-echo-chamber oops, I mean Digg!"

      Not an echo chamber, just a bunch of desperate traitors that rely on stand-up comics, low ratings TV shows and bankrupt radio networks to lie for them.

      They digg themselves as a way to make them believe that the rest of the nation follows their special brand of BS.

    • Barlo_Mung, on 10/12/2007, -3/+28Hey Jack,

      How's the bridge to nowhere coming along? Are you there yet?
      Sounds like it.
    • Aard88, on 10/12/2007, -5/+21Jack,

      Please explain to me how you conclude that criticizing Bush is indicative of "left wing" speak? What policies of this president do you find so Conservative?

      Olbermann was pointing out the failures, and the attempts to deflect the blame, they seem pretty apparent to anyone who is paying attention at all. I don't find criticizing this failed administration an exercise in liberalism at all. Just an honest look at the truth of the situation.
    • GoneSouth, on 10/12/2007, -6/+25I would have said the traitor is the one who, under false pretenses, sent 2000+ of his countrymen to their deaths and spent $200B+ of the national treasury.

      Wake up. This country was founded on questioning authority, not blindly following it.
    • spokenrope, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9Ironic that I seem to remember Alaska Jack using the term "echo chamber" in another thread today.
    • AlaskaJack, on 10/12/2007, -4/+0Jeesh. If I had thought my post through a little more, I would have said "Doubt that Digg is turning into a left-wing echo chamber? Just watch -- within a few hours, my relatively inocuous comment will be buried under an avalanche of negative votes."

      ZeitMachina -- I couldn't illustrate the problem any better than you inadvertently did. "Do choruses of agreement constitute echoes?" YES. That's what I mean. And as for your attempted point about polls, that makes MY point, not yours. At least 50 percent of Americans describe themselves as Republicans or conservatives or whatever (I'm neither, incidently). And, uh, have you noticed that Bush's approval ratings have come back UP? But you'd never get a sense of any of that reading Digg.

      eklipsse -- Where did I say "you need to be a lefty to dislike Bush"?

      Barlo -- ooh, good one. Bridge to Nowhere. I'm from Alaska, and that's where the bridge was supposed to be. Hilarious!

      Aard88 -- Yes, and I'm pointing out that Digg showcases these stories almost exclusively, and wondering if that is a wise business model for Digg.

      GoneSouth -- "Wake up"? What are you, a college sophomore?

      Spokenrope -- OK, in a semantic sense, though I'm not sure how meaningful that is. Next time I'll use "cocoon".

      I'm letting this go, because obviously it's hopeless. I just wonder, again, if the Digg team thinks this is a good development in the evolution of their web site. And I guess a little surprised that all the liberals flooding the site don't recognize the danger in building themselves such a cocoon.

      - Alaska Jack
  • ClassicJBC, on 10/12/2007, -11/+53Olbermann just goes to show that journalistic commentary CAN be both tasteful and entertaining. I saw Good Night, and Good Luck a few months ago, and I commented to my friend, "No one is making television like this anymore. Why not?!" I was wrong. Olbermann is succeeding in filling the shoes long since left by Edward R. Murrow. Keep it up.
    • boonesfarm, on 10/12/2007, -31/+4Sure.
      And Carrot Top is filling the shoes long since left by Lenny Bruce.
      Seek help.
    • jddigger272, on 10/12/2007, -17/+5ClassicJBC

      I Agree!
    • boonesfarm, on 10/12/2007, -25/+6Murrow asked tough questions, even when we wasn't supposed to. Wallace posed a question to Clinton that had been in print and commented on for months in this country, then Bill ***** his pants and cries about a right wing hit job.
      Would you like to ask Bush some tough questions? Or, is there a double standard here?
    • boonesfarm, on 10/12/2007, -23/+1And when I get buried, seriously, leave that Olbermann - Murrow refernce to stand on it's own.
    • Barlo_Mung, on 10/12/2007, -5/+29Wallace didn't ask a "tough question". He made an accusation in the form of a question.
      It was along the lines of "have you stopped beating your child?" type of question.
    • ClassicJBC, on 10/12/2007, -4/+17@boonesfarm

      While I try not to feed trolls, especially with comments like, "Seek help," I'll acknowledge your point and discuss its merits. Sure, Keith Olbermann is not Edward R. Murrow, nor will he ever be. However, in this most unfortunate of popular cultures we have, Mr. Olbermann is about as tasteful and classy as any anchor can be and still be commercially viable.

      While the celebrity gossip aspects of his show are not what I would call high art, and while his comments are often scathing, they are typically not without restraint and good taste. In fact, I think he handles his show with decidedly the highest class considering the top news stories of our day tend to be garbage like Britney and Kevin and the decade-old Jean Benet Ramsey case.

      He is forward with his opinions on the issues unlike some commentators who pretend to maintain neutrality. However, rationality is never lost for the sake of passion. I stand by my comments.
    • flag564, on 10/12/2007, -28/+7Dont you get it?

      Wallace ha NO RIGHT to ask Clinton any tough questions. Clinton is only allow to sipin and be asked about how his day was.

      Speak truth to power, my arse. These leftist aare exposed as being nothing more than a bunch of phonys with man crushes on Clintoon.


      They cant even dispute the fact that Clinton was exposed as lying through that whole interview.

      They just mod down comments and say how much they wish they could take it up the chute from Olbermann.
    • Fracture98, on 10/12/2007, -3/+21@boonesfarm
      No, I wouldn't like to ask Bush some tough questions. I couldn't take the 30 minutes of dementia-induced stuttering.
    • flag564, on 10/12/2007, -21/+4"Why didnt you do more to go after Osama during the 90?"

      Thaty is your jackass notion of "made an accusation in the form of a question." Even people who WORKED FOR HIM said he wasnt interested in defeating terrorism.

      God you leftist have your head up your arse sometimes!

      Do idiots like you even watch press confrences with Bush? Every damn "question" is an an accusation.
    • Nok1, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4@boonesfarm

      I respect both sides of this topic, but I personally don't think that GWB is a great public speaker. In fact, anyone watch that documentary video where that democratic journalist followed him around for the primaries (Sorry, I cannot recall the name). My point is that Bush would dodge the questions like a true politician whereas I think Clinton doesn't have much to lose (in comparison with a politician currently in office).
    • boonesfarm, on 10/12/2007, -13/+0back @ClassicJBC

      Nothing personal with the 'seek help' comment, but trolls like me can't respect a tv personality who carves out his niche with a daily rant about Bush mixed in with Geraldoesque tabloid stories and celebrity gossip. His picture is not next to "classy" or "tasteful" in my dictionary. I'm glad to read that you don't actually think KO will leave a footprint comparable to Murrows.
      It's not just the anti-Bush shtick that sours me. Bill Maher makes a good living off of Bush-bashing, but he's funny and looks at issues from many angles.
      KO is just the ying to O'Reilly's yang.
    • crweaks23, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14flag...

      Maybe you should actually watch the interview, because I dont believe you quoted it right. You oversimplified juuuust a little with "Why didnt you do more to go after Osama during the 90?"

      WALLACE: When we announced that you were going to be on Fox News Sunday, I got a lot of e-mail from viewers. And I’ve got to say, I was surprised. Most of them wanted me to ask you this question: Why didn’t you do more to put bin Laden and Al Qaida out of business when you were president? There’s a new book out, I suspect you’ve already read, called The Looming Tower. And it talks about how the fact that when you pulled troops out of Somalia in 1993, bin Laden said, 'I have seen the frailty and the weakness and the cowardice of U.S. troops.' Then there was the bombing of the embassies in Africa and the attack on the Cole.

      CLINTON: OK, let’s just go through that.

      WALLACE: Let me — let me — may I just finish the question, sir?

      And after the attack, the book says that bin Laden separated his leaders, spread them around, because he expected an attack, and there was no response.

      I understand that hindsight is always 20/20…

      CLINTON: No, let’s talk about it.

      WALLACE: … but the question is, why didn’t you do more, connect the dots and put them out of business?

      Intersting when you actually put the text in front of you how deliberate AND accusting Wallace was. He spoke about a number of things without letting Clinton respond (common attack tactic, he has a written speach, Clinton has the burdon of responding to every aspect of it from memory... which, by the way, he did), and threw in "why didn't you connect the dots," which is basically calling him an idiot.

      But no, you're right. Your version makes your story better.
    • flag564, on 10/12/2007, -18/+1"
      WALLACE: When we announced that you were going to be on Fox News Sunday, I got a lot of e-mail from viewers. And I’ve got to say, I was surprised."

      Wow what biased. He gets emails from viewers and he reads them. That bastard!



      "Most of them wanted me to ask you this question: Why didn’t you do more to put bin Laden and Al Qaida out of business when you were president?"

      Is that a fair question? Or is that somthing you are not allow to ask a liberal?


      "There’s a new book out, I suspect you’ve already read, called The Looming Tower. And it talks about how the fact that when you pulled troops out of Somalia in 1993, bin Laden said, 'I have seen the frailty and the weakness and the cowardice of U.S. troops.' Then there was the bombing of the embassies in Africa and the attack on the Cole.""

      Gee those pesky FACTS. Let me guess, that stuff is made up, right?
      Oh please try to tell me it's all made up. I dare you!
    • flag564, on 10/12/2007, -10/+1"anyone watch that documentary video where that democratic journalist followed him around for the primaries...."

      You want us to take anything away from a "documentary" put on by a "democratic journalist".

      Was that supposed to be serious?
    • LastVisibleDog, on 10/12/2007, -9/+0Barlo_Mung
      "Wallace didn't ask a "tough question". He made an accusation in the form of a question.
      It was along the lines of "have you stopped beating your child?" type of question."

      Total horse crap - even Bill Clinton admitted it was fair question - in-between rambling about conspiracy theories.

      Democrats are in a nose-dive right now.
    • sanman, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1@crweaks23:

      Oh, "why didn't you connect the dots" is just the height of rudeness. Totally worse than, say, cutting off Bush Sr on the air, like Dan Rather did years ago.

      CNN inviting Al Gore to host Larry King Live -- DURING THE PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN!!
      Networks prematurely declaring Gore the winner in the 2000 presidential campaign, and Bush saying "hey, wait a minute"

      What crap -- "connect the dots" was a perfectly fine question to ask, considering that Clinton not connecting the dots resulted in 9/11.

      Why did Clinton support the head-chopping Taliban in the beginning, when they were committing mass-murder against Afghans, particularly minorities?

      Clinton has a lot of blood on his hands, and the 9/11 deaths are the least of it. That bastard should be handed over to the Afghan people for justice. He supported the Taliban, and he supported the Pakistani and Saudi agenda.
      He wanted to wrest control of Central Asia away from Russia, to supplement his policy of rolling NATO right upto Russia's borders.

      Bush's frame-up job against Saddam for 9/11 was wrong, as was his abandonment of Afghanistan. But Clinton was absolutely no saint. His wrongs led to 9/11 -- and actually they led to a lot worse.









    • andreo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4@boonesfarm:

      How the hell will you be able to ask Bush anything. He has staged "town hall meetings". He only talks to people that will ask him pre-approved questions (in the US that is). When he was cornered by a few people in press meetings outside the country he choked on the questions that were asked.

      I mean honestly people. Anyone can tell that this guy (Bush) is being propped up and made to look better then he really is.

      But I understand (somewhat). That it's hard to let go. To admit that you were fooled, and lied to, and you fell for it. But believe me. You were taken. It's not your fault. These were professionals you were up against. And there were lots of them. Attacking you from every angle. And in the "busy" lifestyles that we have these days you can't always find the time to do your own research. Past events may be a bit fuzzy. So you take what they say as the truth. And when there are so many out there singing the same song you sometimes just have to believe it.

      But I remember. Sure I have to go and research some stuff that I hear because it doesn't seem to add up to what I remember to be the truth. But find the time to do that research. I know it won't change anything. But it helps me sleep better at night knowing that I have my facts straight.

      I would just like to know from the pro Bush crowd exactly what has Mr. Bush done that was so impressive. And please don't tell me about the captured, fat, pot bellied, former dictator, who's military was already decimated from the previous war. Because that had absolutely nothing to do with anything. Not 9/11, not WMDs, not terrorism, nothing. We simply picked a fight with a cripple and got the best of 'em (we hope).
      The only thing I can think of is the $600 check that I got. But that's been long spent on a DVD player that has long since stopped working. Or maybe it was for the bread maker. I don't remember, it was a while ago and my memory is fuzzy.
  • chinkmasterrice, on 10/12/2007, -11/+38This was on the frontpage earlier but somehow it got burried!

    Olbermann is catching up on the heels of Jon Stewert and Colbert in my book!
    • nmap, on 10/12/2007, -10/+5more like Murrow perhaps.....
    • allanpat, on 10/12/2007, -3/+133rd time this was on the homepage today. the other two were quickly buried. this is getting funny.
    • ucytheynv, on 10/12/2007, -15/+2you mean someone who uses jokies and partial facts to pretend that he knows more than the President. someone that gets credit for simply "slamming" Bush, regardless of how little class or how few facts are given.
      yeah thats it.
      nobody who watches these guys can turn around and complain about Karl Rove.
      hypocrits.
      the questioned asked clinton was legit. FYI- i voted for Clinton. but it was a legit question. are you guys just lemmings running after stewert, colbert and olberman. forgetting that humor is actually suppose to be funny. not just an attack that you like.
      olberman's entire presentaion regarding FDR, Hoover, Lincoln was fcatually incorrect. he knows history, and he knows he bent the facts. But he also knows that his rating are dependant on bashing Bush. so he basically played you guys, hoping nobody would be smart enough to call him.
      FDR never said "i was wrong, it was my fault", lincoln never said "it was my fault, i was wrong" "sorry for being incompetent and not being able to keep a General" yet thats exactly what Olberman implied.
      thats why i dont watch tv news anymore. some of you are so stuck on Fox News being biased, that you fail to see the hypocrisy in supporting a biased show like Olberman's.
    • chinkmasterrice, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7@ucytheynv

      Is it so unfathomable to you that anyone could be smarter than Bush? The inherent reverence in your tone is just sickening. World leaders are not always the smartest people. We trust them to make the best decisions and pick the best course of action that they can with the information they are given.

      Humor is a device used to address more serious topics. It adds a layer of lightness on somber and serious topics.

    • nixfu, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1Too bad he can't even catch up to "$40 a day w/ Rachel Ray" in ratings...more people watch reruns of Leave it to Beaver on TVLand than oberman.
    • Thuktun, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5@ucytheynv

      Perhaps Olbermann's eloquence confused you. If you look at the transcript (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id15004160), you'll find he said FDR was "rightly blamed", not that FDR admitted anything. Same with Hoover and Lincoln.

      Yeesh.
  • LastVisibleDog, on 10/12/2007, -49/+8Bill Clinton was lying and rambled on about conspiracy theories.
    Olbermann lies and spews hate and rambles on about conspiracy theories.

    Party on Democrats
    • subgeniusd, on 10/12/2007, -3/+30When did Ann Coulter join Digg?
    • flag564, on 10/12/2007, -24/+2"Bill Clinton was lying and rambled on about conspiracy theories.
      Olbermann lies and spews hate and rambles on about conspiracy theories.

      Party on Democrats"

      you are correct.

      Everything Clintoon said has been shown to be a COMPLETE LIE. Even by the people that worked their at the time. Even Richard Clark's own book showed him to be a telling nothing but lies!


      But say that to these so-called seekers of "truth". They just want to jerk each other off and mod down anything that doesnt agree with their narrow world view.
    • Barlo_Mung, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9Flag,

      You are confused. I think you are talking about Paul O'Neill's book about how Bush lied to get us into a war that is bad for everyone but his closest buddies.
    • igotdugout, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5@flag

      Honestly, I can only think of a few reasons of how can a human being make so many short-sighted arguments over and over again.

      a. You're on Bush's payroll
      b. Fox is your bread and butter.
      c. You were dropped as a baby, over and over and over again.

      For the last time, LISTEN to what Wallace is saying, he is actually accusing Clinton in the form of questions. I don't feel like quoting what many have already done, go look it up and THINK.
  • boonesfarm, on 10/12/2007, -21/+4So, is the topic 'the Clinton interview on Fox News', or do you all just default to "we hate Bush"?

    Talk about "monkey posing as a newscaster"...Olbermann is a reactionary. He is utterly worthless, unless blind hatred for Bush is your thing.
    • th3p0p3, on 10/12/2007, -18/+2All Olbermann is another talking head that simply wants to get ratings, just like O'Reily or Limbaugh. He realizes that there are already enough radical pro-bush Heads out there (Fox News), so he chooses to be totally against Bush, attracting a different audience and getting good ratings. These guys would tell you the sky is red if they would get good ratings, which is why you should take nothing they say as gospel truth, nor should you be posting it as such.
  • dblondon, on 10/12/2007, -7/+26Awsome - calls the FOX interviewer a "Monkey"....come do some political commenting in England dude we need that kind of honesty!!!!
    • flag564, on 10/12/2007, -18/+4"calls the FOX interviewer a "Monkey".

      Right on!

      Doesnt that monkey know you cant ask tough questions to leftist.

      How dare he!
  • dracheflieger, on 10/12/2007, -23/+4Who's Olbermann?

    Oh yeah...some moron on a channel nobody watches ...
    • chester, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Lots of people watching him now. And he just just got on my 'shows to watch' list.
  • stan205, on 10/12/2007, -14/+2SNAP!!
  • pkulak, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12Oh man, does anyone know of a torrent or anything somewhere that I can download that? That clip needs to be on my hard drive.
  • sKiLLa182, on 10/12/2007, -6/+29It really seems like this guy is the only journalist who really GETS IT.
    • nixfu, on 10/12/2007, -9/+1>journalist

      haha at that word and keith looserman in the same sentance
  • vandread, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10didn't this hit the front page and get burried earlier today? Or is this a dupe and the original hit the front page and got burried?
    • pkulak, on 10/12/2007, -3/+15If it's a dupe then I'm thankful, because I wouldn't have seen it otherwise.
    • ArchieAndrews, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9It's been on the FP and subsequently buried at least twice today. This is one dupe I can live with.
  • urbandistrict, on 10/12/2007, -4/+18SUPER MASSIVE DIGG

    Amazing commentary and editorial outside the guise of humor.

    We need more of this to wake the sleepy-heads.
  • danknerd, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5awesome rant!
  • locitman, on 10/12/2007, -20/+2What are you all praising Olbermann for? You should praise his producers. They write all his scripts. He is just the voice not "The Voice". If he speaks for the liberals why do none of the other shows on MSNBC have him on for commentary? I've never seen him on Hardball. Watch when Alison Stewart anchors the show and she has the same tone and delivery as Olbermann, just a little higher pitched. Kudos to Dan Abrams.
    • pkulak, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6The producers do the writing hu? Since when have producers ever written anything? Their job is to fund (produce). It's the journalist's job to write.
    • locitman, on 10/12/2007, -7/+0you obviously have no clue what a news producer does. lmao. try wikipedia or something.
    • mcnasby, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Tis the truth. And while it may not exclusively be the producers - it's certainly not Olbermann who's writing the script. I've seen everyone from interns to pubic relation analysts write on air commentary, however it is always the orator - the on air-personality that has the responsibility for pulling off a job well done. And I must admit - Olbermann did a fantastic job at it. Kudos to him and his entire team.
  • subgeniusd, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4The dominant US political parties are Dumb and Dumber. The one lead by our Chimpanzee-in-Chief is.............(vote below)
  • Biggus35, on 10/12/2007, -14/+5The dems have to start getting angry. It's the only way they can get noticed since they have nothing new or worthwhile to offer. I do enjoy the drama though. More people have seen this clip today because of digg than would ever watch his show otherwise.
  • Brian48216, on 10/12/2007, -7/+11For those who disagree with the message of this- here's how not to get dugg down.

    Avoid name calling.
    It's Democrats- not dems.

    If you want people to take your opinion seriously, offer a serious arguement.
    • Biggus35, on 10/12/2007, -11/+5I meant nothing by "dems". It was only a shortcut. Don't be so sensitive. And learn to spell argument.
    • ucytheynv, on 10/12/2007, -14/+2even though none of the Democrats on here are offering anything of substance? oh sorry, i forgot a double standard. lmao.
      last time i checked "this guy has balls"
      "he is th eonly one who gets it"
      "he slammed Bush"
      those do not qualify as serious arguments.
      seriously somebody bothered by someone else saying "dem" instead of Democrats. go get a life!
    • flag564, on 10/12/2007, -15/+2"For those who disagree with the message of this- here's how not to get dugg down.

      Avoid name calling.
      It's Democrats- not dems.

      If you want people to take your opinion seriously, offer a serious arguement."

      im sorry....

      Who the F*uck needs to give a damn about the Dems feelings? These brats have no problem with tossing names in our direction.

      They can dish it out but they get PMS when it comes back at them.
    • Nok1, on 10/12/2007, -6/+0ha.
    • night141, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Oh ok, so I guess that "neo-con" word you people love so much isn't politically biased? God forbid I say "dems" though.

      I love how every comment that has a conservative POV gets minus diggs. Digg is so seperated into the left and the right it's not even funny.
  • ByteReaper, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15Best segment on a news program I've seen in a long time.
  • devindotcom, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7Awesome. "So... 'sir'...Are yours the actions of a true American?"
  • Hensworth, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14I love how right wingers always use his ratings to attack him. If ratings is an indicator of quality than American Idol is one of the greatest shows ever.
    • flag564, on 10/12/2007, -14/+4Yeah, thats because HE HAS NONE.

      That ranting leftis idiot is at the bottom of the charts EVERY NIGHT.

      Flavor of Love gets more viewers than his trainwreck. That should tell you his BS is just that.
    • ProximaC, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10Even funnier is that they completely ignore the "ratings" of Bush that keep sliding farther and farther down the toilet bowl.
    • ProximaC, on 10/12/2007, -9/+0duped my own comment...
    • flag564, on 10/12/2007, -9/+4"Even funnier is that they completely ignore the "ratings" of Bush that keep sliding farther and farther down the toilet bowl."

      Hey dumbass, Bush ratings have been going up.

      Thanks for trying though.
    • ProximaC, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Uh... is THIS what you mean by going up?

      http://www.hist.umn.edu/~ruggles/Approval.htm

      Truly there is a dumbass here, and he's the same political affiliation as the one in the whitehouse right now.
  • krische, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11I liked the Daily Show episode last night. They showed the footage of Clinton getting asked the tough question on Fox News. Of course Clinton complained that Fox doesn't ask republicans that question. So Jon Stewart plays a clip of Fox asking Condie Rice about getting a date from the Canadian prime minister! lol, no bias in asking questions from Fox!
    • flag564, on 10/12/2007, -19/+3Oh Wow. So Jonny "Suck the Nearest Democrat Off" Stewart, couldnt muster enough "truthiness" to show the daily barrage of biased questions that are tossed at all members of the Bush administration. What a total con artist!


      That dumbass shill has some nerve.
    • lakawak, on 10/12/2007, -15/+3Yeah..that is really unbiased you ***** idiot. They take ONE question asked to Rice and you think that proves something?

      Clinton gets asked some puffball questions over hte course of any entire interview too.

      It is sad that dumb ***** like you actually see that crap on The Daily Show and think that that is indicative of reality. REally sad.
    • flag564, on 10/12/2007, -14/+2Notice how they just keep modding down comments. They arent even trying.
    • Nok1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8@flag564

      I've been reading all the comments on this digg, and I must say that if you want anyone to take you even somethign remotely close to serious - and this goes to everyone, not just you, please have something worthwhile for other people to read instead of cussing out someone you don't agree with.

      Percent ratio of flag564 comments being dugg down: estimated 9 in 10 (90% and counting)
    • flag564, on 10/12/2007, -10/+2"I've been reading all the comments on this digg, and I must say that if you want anyone to take you even somethign remotely close to serious - and this goes to everyone, not just you, please have something worthwhile for other people to read instead of cussing out someone you don't agree with."

      Let me guess, like all the wonderful "enlightened" comments from Digg leftist.

      If you tell me that, then please just save yourself from posting more BS.

      Like i said:

      Democrats here can dish it out but they get PMS when it comes back at them. These idiots are just used to other people patting them on their arse and modding up their moronic bull.

    • dclowd9901, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3"Oh Wow. So Jonny "Suck the Nearest Democrat Off" Stewart, couldnt muster enough "truthiness" to show the daily barrage of biased questions that are tossed at all members of the Bush administration. What a total con artist!


      That dumbass shill has some nerve."

      If they did, don't you think they'd show up on digg? According to you, we're so into sucking ourselves off, wouldn't we want to see a Republican get ***** thrown in their faces?

      I don't think I've blocked but 1 person since I started using digg way back a year or two ago, but flag, congrats. After reading your comments in this thread, you've made my block list. I can't handle the blatant stupidity any more. And as we both know, these comments can get pretty stupid.
    • Nok1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@flag

      Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems the right wings are the ones getting heated here... and believe you me, we take it much better than the lot of you because we're willing to listen and put up with the opposition instead of dishing out homophobic and other miscellaneous insults at the intelligence of the opposition.
  • dkarlson, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9Wow. That's gotta be one of the balsiest things I've seen on TV in quite a while.
  • shout, on 10/12/2007, -16/+3This guy is a royal douche. What a conceited ass.
  • RealSurreal, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10That was like watching a beautiful sunset, or making love to a woman. I think I'll get drunk later and watch it again just in case it never happens again. Thanks olbermann you rule
    • lakawak, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5Why does it not surprise me that you just equated a YouTube clip to making love to a woman?
  • lakawak, on 10/12/2007, -11/+4Awww... a sportscaster trying to talk politics.

    If only he weren't on MSNBC and therefore had a viewing audience of about 50,000.
    • shout, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1Yeah he has as much credibility as Chris Berman.
  • SwordofKahless, on 10/12/2007, -10/+3I watched it when it was on last night and thought I bet this partisan tasteless rabid rant will receive high praise from Diggers the next day. Much of MSNBC has stopped being a news channel and this is a good example why they should no longer be called one.

    I suppose Olberman sees the writing on the wall and must resort to selling his soul with these tactics to get the ratings up to keep his job. This since there is already talk of MSNBC getting away from being a news channel and becoming a full time Dateline type magazine channel.

    Good job Dan Abrahms for destroying whatever credibility MSNBC had as a news channel.

    btw - with an on-air personality that Olberman displays would any of you guys really want to be in the same room with this guy.
    • Nok1, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Hey, believe it or not, people have the opposing opinions to you, and some of them think that Olbermann said some quite risque things that not only were meant to stir up debate, but to force people to think.

      Be open minded - because if you're willing to just agree with what "real news channels" are feeding you, and are unwilling to accept any new ideas, good luck surviving in the world.
    • nixfu, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1>Hey, believe it or not, people have the opposing opinions to you
      But apparently not any viewers...
  • NakedSnake, on 10/12/2007, -13/+3It's amazing to me that this guy passes for "news".

    "This man on tv said it, and I kinda like him so it must be true!"
    • ProximaC, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11It's amazing that Americans can listen to this president lie again and again and lap it up like imported wine.

      When Clinton lied, you were all over him like stink on cowpies, but now that it's a republican lying while our sons and daughters are dying, he can do no wrong and you'll get very vehement defending him.

      Open your eyes, ears, and nose, and smell the ***** for what it is.

      Your president went from over 60 percent approval ratings to less than 30 percent. Half the people who supported him 5 years ago have woken up. When will the rest of you?
    • Barlo_Mung, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6What really scares me is that his approval rating is still 30ish percent. He's such a bad president that it seems like it should be in the low teens at least.
    • andreo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@Barlo_Mung:

      That's because there will always be people that just don't know any better. They listen to the people that cheer lead for the guy and don't have an opinion of their own. It's sad that 30% of the country is that way, but what are you gonna do...

      For example there are still people, even with all the facts in about Hitler, that still thinks he had a great idea. What can I say except: some people are just ***** in the head like that.

      AND NO, I AM NOT COMPARING BUSH TO HITLER! So don't get your feathers all ruffled up.
  • mingistech, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6My parents watch Fox News like it's the bible. It's quite sad.

    We're gonna need alot of smart young voters out there if we wanna get this present evil out of our current system.

  • dtfinch, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7This appeared on the front page with about 20 diggs, was buried/censored by 100 diggs, and now it's back (same, not dupe) over 400 diggs. Apparently the censorship can be overcome with enough diggs.
    • flag564, on 10/12/2007, -11/+1They dont give a damn. It's all about propaganda.
    • Danin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Neither do you for the same reasons.

      Pot, kettle, howd'ya do sir.
  • MacBigot, on 10/12/2007, -15/+3The only thing Olbermann's commentary lacked was him masturbating to a picture of Bill Clinton.
  • gruvsf, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10Great in calling out the administration and their apologists. He goes through the entire list of the recent attacks on the right in preparation for election season. Glad to see someone on the other side of Bill O'Lielly calling the administration out.
  • masterkenobi, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9Olbermann is truly the Edward R Murrow of today. He even closed with "Good Night and Good Luck"!
  • andrewrocks, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6It's funny to me that republicans see this and bitch and moan that MSNBC has no credibility or that they are no longer a news channel. Someone has the balls to stand up and say EXACTLY what the ***** is going on, and all anyone can say is: "I suppose Olberman sees the writing on the wall and must resort to selling his soul with these tactics to get the ratings up to keep his job." or "This guy is a royal douche. What a conceited ass." HOW ARE YOU SO IGNORANT?! HOW DO YOU NOT SEE THAT THIS COUNTRY IS GOING DOWN THE *****!? I cannot fathom how anyone can see the current state of affairs in the country and say that Bush is doing anything but ***** EVERYTHING UP. I have not seen a SINGLE person in this administration ever stand up and be even the slightest bit honest with anyone in this country. All I've seen is Republicans bashing the ***** out of Democrats because they haven't a leg to stand on. It makes me sick. So many ignorant people...people that put this administration in office for reasons like gay marriage and the Christian agenda. When are people going to learn?
    • banderbe, on 10/12/2007, -7/+4That you can't see the world from anyone's point of view but your own is largely your problem.

      Calm the ***** down already. You're not winning converts.
  • Softstep, on 10/12/2007, -6/+2This is nothing new. A president lied. Whats new? If you cannot at this day in age figure out that all presidents lie you have a issue. It just so happens that the current president has utterly no skill what so ever at lying or covering his tracks. I think its become a personal joke of the people that put him in office to see how bad they can make this guy look like a joke. I bet whenever the president does an sort of speech there is a group of guys in the back watching laughing there ass off saying comments like "holy ***** bob he really said it! You owe me 5 dollars and lunch".
    • banderbe, on 10/12/2007, -12/+4Oh horse *****.

      Bush didn't lie.

      The leftist goon squad says this over and over and over but never produce a shred of evidence to support the claim.

      These idiots don't even know what a lie is!

      To lie you have to know *at the time you make a statement* that what you're saying is false.

      The left has never demonstrated that Bush said something untrue and knew AT THE TIME that what he was saying was untrue.

      Sorry kids, it's just more lefty propaganda, pure and simple.
    • LastVisibleDog, on 10/12/2007, -8/+3 Softstep
      "This is nothing new. A president lied."

      Please show us proof that Bush lied (please remember one must know what they are saying is not true for it to be a lie)

      We will wait (but we won't hold our breath) - Moonbats don't do supporting evidence.
    • Barlo_Mung, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9@Banderbe

      You say that Bush didn't lie. So all I need is one example to prove you wrong. Fish in a barrel my friend.

      Bush said he did not authorize the NSA wire tap program before admitting that he did. So even by his own admission he lied.
      I can see the wheels turning in your small little mind about how that's not a good example. So here's a second one for you.

      Bush told us all that Iraq had tried to get yellow cake from Africa AFTER the head of the CIA had briefed him personally that this was not the case.
    • banderbe, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1@Barlow

      No, Bush didn't say he didn't authorize the NSA wiretap program. Again, you're close but your liberal goggles are making you see things that aren't there.

      No, Bush didn't say Iraq tried to get yellow cake from Niger.

      You're close though. Get your facts straight first, dumbass.

    • Barlo_Mung, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1That's all you've got? A "No he didn't nah nah nah!" response?
      Guess I didn't really expect any better but I'm disappointed none the less.
    • yoyoflake, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0@Banderbee

      "No, Bush didn't say Iraq tried to get yellow cake from Niger."

      Umm.. 2003 State of the Union Address: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."

      A total, outright lie that took us into a war we didn't need to fight. Proof: a memo, dated March 4, 2002 was distributed at senior levels by the office of Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and by the Defense Intelligence Agency. The review concluded that Niger was "probably not planning to sell uranium to Iraq,"
      (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/18/politics/18niger.html?ex=1159848000&en=7012f437efb864f0&ei=5070)

      Note the differences in date?

      Seems someone is trying to have his cake and eat it too.. Face the fact - Bush has lied, is lying and will lie until someone brings his administration to account. And unfortunately, no one is doing this. The small efforts we are seeing now from Clinton and Olberman are hopefully the beginning of the close of this dark chapter in American History.
  • flag564, on 10/12/2007, -15/+4Oh God!

    Spare me the "Olbermann is such a hero" BS.

    He is a leftist going on a rant Against Bush.

    Woooooweeeeeeee!

    Add that fool to the list.

    rant all you want, people still do not flock to your side because you are nothing more than a bunch a yelling leftist.

    you have no plan, no uplifting message, just RANT RANT RANT!

    That may be enough for the Daily Show drones or the Kos Kids, but it just turns everyone else off.
    • banderbe, on 10/12/2007, -14/+3Bingo!
    • daq42, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5And what uplifting message does Bush deliver?

      Let's go to war!!!
      Let's torture anyone we say is a terrorist! We can't show you the evidence, it's classified!
      Let's spy on our own citizens! They might be terrorists too!

      Or are all those things lies made up by the liberal media?
      Wait, they can't be, because all the right wing talking head pundits are always saying we need to torture people to keep America safe. We need to spy on our citizens to keep America safe. We need to have kangaroo courts to keep America safe.

      I must be a moonbat leftologist.
    • tehbishop, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1well said daq42!

      I'm ready to smoke some neocons for peace! lol, the irony.
  • banderbe, on 10/12/2007, -12/+6Keith Olberman is a walking non-sequitur.

    Not to mention a complete and total buffoon.

    No wonder the far left kool-aid drinking whack tards love him.
  • Scik, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Anyone know where I can get a text transcript of this?
  • Nok1, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3719710/

    Check there.
  • drag0ner, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5that was fricking awesome
  • michlibrarian, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2How wonderfully refreshing!!! May his tribe increase. We need a groundswell of moral outrage to throw the bums out.
  • Cyberdactyl, on 10/12/2007, -10/+6Jeesus Key-rist!

    Can anyone say, blinded by the left?

    Let Olbermann whine and whine and whine, I love watching pissed off liberals. If liberals want a leftist goverment, then get out and VOTE THEM IN. But for God's sake, quit whining like a second grader who's had his lolipop taken from him.
    • Danin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'll get right on voting those leftists in.

      Oh, wait, there's not an election running right now is there?

      See, we only get to vote one day out of every two years, so all we have to do the other 729 days of the cycle is talk our heads off.
  • jguy584, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8I don't care if you are a liberal or a conservative, a dem or a rep, a North East tight ass or southern red neck.
    You have to be ***** retarded to think that Bush is good for this country. His lies have been proven time and time again. His agendas have all failed, and have revealed his corporate intentions. Now its just a matter of time, while we wait for people to take in the fact that they have been had.
    I feel it is of the utmost importance that we have his whole cabinet impeached, i don't know who to make president, but anyone other then some other crazed neo-conserv. If Clinton's rant does indeed trigger some huge media focus on all of Bush's wrong doing, and eventually lead to some sort of discipline for such things, i will find it enormously ironic that the preceding president saved the country from his successor.
  • digitalintrigue, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4Hey, I heard the stock market was up to the highest point in 6 years. No, has nothing to do with Bush tax cuts, no way. Bush's agendas have all failed.
    • kremvax, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3"up to the highest point in 6 years"

      Um, so it's almost recovered to the level it was before he took office?
      And that's an accomplishment?

      When you have to dig that deep to find a silver lining.... well, that's bad.
    • mschatzabel, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0@kremvax
      An awful lot happened that knocked the economy down a few pegs (9/11, tech "bubble" bursts, ENRON, etc) so yeah it is a bit of a silver lining...
    • Danin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It doesn't. The market hasn't demonstrated a statistically significant reaction to any of Bush's tax cut initiatives. Probably has something to do with how they hardly apply to something like 90% of the citizenry.
  • 99PercentPure, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2"It really seems like this guy is the only journalist who really GETS IT. "

    Right. On.
  • hoppdawg, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1.12
  • fuelcell, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10I was a Republican going into this administration. The blinders came off and, while not a Democrat, I could no more vote for a Republican than sign my soul over to the devil. What an amazingly fruitful time for corruption in this country.
    • nixfu, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1>I could no more vote for a Republican than sign my soul over to the devil

      Yeah, Pelosi is gonna keep you safe.....or better yet you could vote for another dickless do-nothing blow-hard president like Clinton who will just sit in office for 8 years getting hummers from interns while people are dying in NY,LA, etc. because he thinks its a police action, and his pussy democrat touchy-feely secretary of state will just want to "talk some more" while the bombs are going off.

      Yeah good plan vote democrat.


      I will never vote democract because they CAN NOT BE TRUSTED to defend this country against enemies.





  • corvin, on 10/12/2007, -9/+1I'm an independent. I am so sick of the partisan in the media. I'm sick of people like Wallace and Olbermann. They are so full of their Ideaology; Some people on here are praising Olbermann on here but he's no different than Wallace or O'reilly.


    There are enough liars in the media today, I believe we could do without people like Wallace or Olbermann in the media; people so full of their liberal or conservative sh1t and should not be on TV giving me the news. They're always going to manipulate things.

    Olbermann is disgusting to watch as is Wallace. Both Full of their own ideaology and both are not albe to report the weather without spinning things and somehow blaming the other side for how bad things are going, people like this should not be on tv or in the media spotlight at all.

    I wish digg would ban this political crap from being posted, it only brings out the worst it people and causes arguments on the comment threads...
    • krouskop, on 10/12/2007, -6/+2Olbermann and O'Reilly are certainly 'partisan hacks' but Wallace is no partisan hack. Please name one time when he's gone on a tirade like the other two have. He never has.
    • HexInfinity, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Independent means you are always stagnant? How do you move forward?
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 62 of 62 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.