Sports

Keith Olbermann to Daily Kos: I Break With Thee

|

Come to think of it, Daily Kos *would* be more readable

Seems that criticizing the Leader of the Free World can be hazardous to progressive relationships:

For years, from the Katrina days onward, whenever I stuck my neck out, I usually visited here as the cliched guy in the desert stopping by the oasis. I never got universal support, and never expected it, nor wanted it (who wants an automatic "Yes" machine?). But I used to read a lot about how people here would 'always have my back' and trust me this was of palpable value as I fought opponents external and internal who try to knock me and Rachel off the air, all the time, in ways you can imagine and others you can't.

Now I get to read how we pre-planned our anger because 'beating up on the President has been good for ratings'.

If I can understand people's frustration with seeing a speech by a Democratic president criticized in a venue such as mine, why is it impossible for some people here to accept my frustration about the speech? You don't agree with me, fine. You don't want to watch because you don't agree with me, fine. But to accuse me, after five years of risking what I have to present the truth as I see it, of staging something for effect, is deeply offensive to me and is an indication of what has happened here.

You want Cheerleaders? Hire the Buffalo Jills. You want diaries with conspiracy theories, go nuts. If you want this site the way it was even a year ago, let me know and I'll be back.

Link via Mediaite by way of Doug Mataconis. Olbermann vs. the dramatic chipmunk below.

NEXT: Good-Bye, Free Checking. Thanks a Lot, Consumer Protectors!

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Damn!

  2. Wow. He sounds angry.

    Which would have a lot more impact if sounding angry wasn’t what he does for a living.

  3. whenever I stuck my neck out, I usually visited here as the cliched guy in the desert stopping by the oasis. I never got universal support, and never expected it

    And now he’s a martyr? Somebody pull the plug on this clown already.

    1. grate LOL. i could agree with you more. so pathetic this guy

  4. The recriminations and self hatred that is going to occur as the Obama Presidency crashes and burn are just going to be yummy.

    1. “Oh the inhumanity!”

  5. “But to accuse me, after five years of risking what I have to present the truth as I see it…”

    Risking what, exactly? He gets paid good money to feed red meat to the left.

    1. He gets paid good money to feed red meat room-temperature tofu to the left.

      1. He gets paid good money to ignorantly yammer Risk-Free.

    2. He gets paid good money to feed red meat to the left.sit at a desk and talk at his three viewers.

    3. Both points well taken, SF and Astrid.

    4. He risked everything, what with Bush having all critics dragged off to the gulag.

      What a brave, brave man.

      1. Gulag? That’s kids’ stuff! No, if Bush really wanted to torture his critics, there was a far more hellish place to send them.

  6. Watching Obama lose the left is a beautiful thing.

  7. Kos has a problem. When things go south it is the retarded kid that gets blamed. Big media is never going to step forward and take responsibility for never vetting Obama. Instead, they are going to re-write history and say that it was the new media and the Kos kids who were responsible for Obama not them.

    1. You know, I think you might have something here. Part of the Obama hype was that he was some kind of “master of the new media,” “energized the youth,” and “got all his support from small donors.” If it becomes undeniable that Obama is a failure, the newspapers and TV networks can claim the kids and their internet, and ordinary ignorant people, created an environment in which a nobody could take the presidency.

      1. and “got all his support from small donors unverified credit card transactions from people all over the fucking world.”

        Fucking Fixed It For Ya.

    2. the Kos kids

      This is what happens when you let them sit at the big table.

    3. It’s hard to re-write history in the age of the Internet, even moreso in the age of YouTube.

  8. Dammit, I want an automatic “Yes” machine and the Buffalo Jills.

    1. HARCOURT FENTON RC DEAN MUDD!!!! WHAT DID I TELL YOU ABOUT LEERING AT THOSE INTERNET WOMEN WHILE AT WORK?? DO WE NEED TO HAVE A WEINEE ROAST TONIGHT???

  9. You guys have to understand how big of a disaster November could be for the Democrats. You and I just see numbers on a page and one party or another just stealing. But for the hacks of the world, those numbers are life. If the Dems lose say 80 house seats and six or seven Senate seats, that is 80 house staffs that are out of a job. That is majority committee staffs being downsized to minority staff. This shit is life and death for these people. And when things turn out badly they are going to be looking for someone to blame. They are going to be at each other’s throats.

    1. I don’t think the left has it in them for self-reflection. When Bush won in 2004 they yelled racism, homophobia, fraud, etc.

      As George Will said, “When Democrats lose races in Kansas, they don’t go out and read a book titled, ‘What’s The Matter With Democratic Candidates?’ Instead they go out and read, ‘What’s The Matter With Kansas?'”

      1. When was the last time a Democrat lost and racism wasn’t attributed? Eisenhower’s 1956 victory?

  10. You guys should be asking the obvious question: Where can I buy that calendar?

      1. You’ve always been there for me…

      2. A thousand blessings upon you and your honorable family.

      3. They misspelled “calendar,” but it’s tough to proofread when you’re whacking it. I speak from experience here.

    1. You have an over-Photoshopped annorexic fetish?

  11. He should threaten to kick some ass.

  12. The KOS comments are the best.

    Fuck Olberdoodle and his faux rage. His ratings are shit, his station is sinking, he is reaping exactly what he sowed.

    1. He does actually have better ratings than Nancy Grace. That’s almost like getting a silver medal in the special olympics.

      1. and he does have a much, much preetier mouth.

  13. I agree that Olbermann shouldn’t be a martyr about it, but he’s right, and when someone is right we have to acknowledge that they’re right even when that someone is an asshole.

    Olbermann is discovering that the Obamabots don’t want to hear anything but Obama worship, and that they go berserk at any criticism of Obama, whether it’s valid or not. Actually, the more valid the criticism, the more berserk they tend to go.

    Whoever Olbermann that the left wanted people to tell the truth lied to him.

    File this under “Nobody invites Greenwald to parties any more, either – and Digby is next to go!”

    1. Well Fluffy, “but I was a good Bolshevik and fought in the revolution” didn’t cut it then, and it won’t cut it now with these people.

      1. It does put you in the 2nd group up against the wall.

    2. I can’t say I have been or care to pay all that much attention but aren’t people like IOZ all over Digby’s shiat for towing the pwoggle big D Democrat lion?

    3. I cannot state strongly enough how worrisome I find it that so many people want to have blind faith in a politician or a political party. It’s almost a religious fervor, which is great for dictatorships but not so good for republics.

      While the left seems to have a greater propensity to do this, I’m worried that this sickness could get us an authoritarian government of “either” flavor.

      1. I cannot state strongly enough how worrisome I find it that so many people want to have blind faith in a politician or a political party.

        You must find human nature pretty worrisome.

  14. When does Reason hire cheerleaders?

    And, for that matter, is there anything that doesn’t get better with cheerleaders?

    1. I think euthanasia might qualify.

    2. Cheerleaders are to society what bacon is to food.

    3. Lobster girl.

  15. Whoever told Olbermann…etc.

    Sentences without their verbs tend to make little sense. Sorry.

  16. It’s practically standing still now. They’ve dropped ropes out of the nose of the ship; and (uh) they’ve been taken ahold of down on the field by a number of men. It’s starting to rain again; it’s… the rain had (uh) slacked up a little bit. The back motors of the ship are just holding it (uh) just enough to keep it from…It’s burst into flames! It burst into flames, and it’s falling, it’s crashing! Watch it! Watch it! Get out of the way! Get out of the way! Get this, Charlie; get this, Charlie! It’s fire… and it’s crashing! It’s crashing terrible! Oh, my! Get out of the way, please! It’s burning and bursting into flames and the… and it’s falling on the mooring mast. And all the folks agree that this is terrible; this is the one of the worst catastrophes in the world. [indecipherable] its flames… Crashing, oh! Four- or five-hundred feet into the sky and it… it’s a terrific crash, ladies and gentlemen. It’s smoke, and it’s in flames now; and the frame is crashing to the ground, not quite to the mooring mast. Oh, the humanity! And all the passengers screaming around here. I told you; it?I can’t even talk to people, their friends are out there! Ah! It’s… it… it’s a… ah! I… I can’t talk, ladies and gentlemen. Honest: it’s just laying there, mass of smoking wreckage. Ah! And everybody can hardly breathe and talk and the screaming. Lady, I… I… I’m sorry. Honest: I… I can hardly breathe. I… I’m going to step inside, where I cannot see it. Charlie, that’s terrible. Ah, ah… I can’t. Listen, folks; I… I’m gonna have to stop for a minute because [indecipherable] I’ve lost my voice. This is the worst thing I’ve ever witnessed.

    ? Herbert Morrison, describing the events, as transcribed for broadcast by WLS radio

    1. Thta is the best summary of the Obama presidency that I have ever seen.

    2. Huh. Seeing that in context is kind of weird. “Oh, the humanity” just sort of comes out of nowhere.

    3. His lost his job for losing his cool during the broadcast. These days he’d get an award. And somewhat surprisingly, most of the people onboard survived.

    4. I think, from now on, we should all refer to his presidency as the Obamaburg.

      1. Though I also like the Titanic metaphor with November’s midterms looming like an iceberg in front of the supposedly “unsinkable” Obama. It’s been spotted, but it’s too late to avoid a collision, although the majority of those who bought tickets on the Obama remain asleep and unaware of the looming catastrophe. The only questions are, after the collision, how fast will it sink, and who will find spots in the life boats and escape unscathed and who will go down with the ship?

        My guess is Hilary has already picked out a life boat.

        1. I think Hillary will be shown to have been pretty prescient over the long haul…she knew he was a lightweight, and also that there was no way she could beat him at the time.

          Next time around, and by that, I mean 2012, she runs as a bona fide stateswoman, rather than as the shrill wife of a former president.

          Still a bitch, but now an official one.

  17. Oblerman reads like a comic version of this.

    http://www.yale.edu/annals/Rev…..22.99.html

  18. Matt, you’ll link to the DailyKos but not to the Buffalo Jills???

    You know, I usually visited here as the horny guy on the beach stopping by looking for lobster girl. I never got an automatic erection, and never expected it, nor wanted it (who wants an automatic boner machine?). But this is the final straw. I’m done with Reason.

    1. Come back Shane! Come back!

    2. Please don’t leave. I know (well…I hope) there will be plenty of articles about porn in the future.

    3. THE URKOBOLD READS REASON FOR THE ARTICLES. REALLY!

    4. “who wants an automatic boner machine?”

      TONY

      1. Have one. His name is Nate.

  19. Perhaps he is awakening. Perhaps he suddenly realized he needed to do something other than be a cheerleader himself to keep even a small audiance. I don’t know. But it is a good sign. Now we have even the New York Times criticizing The One. This plus Olberman is a positive trend. I hope it keeps up.

    In other news, Joe Lieberman wants to give the POTUS a “kill switch” for the Intertubes:
    http://www.prisonplanet.com/ne…..ernet.html

    1. This disgrace needs it’s own thread.

    2. I just read the article. Jesus.

    3. Here’s a link to Wired’s coverage, for those of us who are immediately skeptical of anything published on 9/11 Truther websites.

    4. On the bright side, what are the odds that they’re any better at plugging up the Internet than they are at plugging up an oil spill?

  20. But to accuse me, after five years of risking what I have to present the truth as I see it, of staging something for effect, is deeply offensive to me and is an indication of what has happened here.

    For some reason, I picture Olbermann saying this with mascara streaking his cheeks like Doktor Frank N Furter.

    1. LEAVE OLBERMANN ALONE! LEAVE HIM ALONE!!!

    2. But to accuse me, after five years of risking what I have to present the truth as I see it,

      Yes, we know Keith: It was absolutely terrifying attacking the Bush Administration while living in Upper Manhattan. You risked it all….

      How’s that $2 million condo you bought from Trump working out?

  21. Alright, now I want an automatic Yes machine, the Buffalo Jills, and an automatic boner machine.

    1. What? You think you’re Bill Clinton or something?

      1. No, he said he needs a boner machine. That would make him more like Bob Dole.

    2. …and an automatic boner machine.

      You know RC, they do make pills and injections for that sort of thing, though prosthetic implantation is also very successful and reliable as well.

      1. “If your erection lasts longer than 4 hours… call your friends and brag.”

        Priapastic? Fantastic!

        1. Breakthrough in cheap, flexible touch screens means SugarFree may soon be able to literally wipe his ass with Dan T.’s posts…

          http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37…..nnovation/

          1. Wow, that’s cool. Reminds me of the roll-up computers they had in Red Planet.

        2. Priapastic Fantastic Lover is the song Jefferson Airplane should have done. Or maybe Andrea True…

        3. It’s worth its weight in gold.

        4. call many, many female friends (with benefits)

        5. cum and get it while its hot (and hard).

        6. An excellently retarded name for a progressive rock group: Priapysm. The y stands for “yuppie pretentiousness”.

          1. I’m pretty sure I saw Priapysm a few years back on a gig with Teratism, Disturbed, Anal Blast and TBA.

        7. “If your erection lasts longer than 4 hours… call your friends and brag.”

          I always thought those commercials were strange. If I had an erection for 4 hours my wife would be the one needing a doctor.

    3. Take a straight and stronger course to the corner of your life.
      Make the white queen run so fast
      She hasn’t got time to make you a wife.

      cause its time, its time in time
      With your time and its news is captured
      For the queen to use.
      Move me on to any black square,
      Use me any time you want,
      Just remember that the goal’s
      for us to capture all we want, anywhere,
      Yea, yea, yea.

      Dont surround yourself with yourself,
      Move on back two squares,
      Send an instant karma to me,
      Initial it with loving care
      Dont surround yourself.

      1. I KNEW this was coming.

  22. The putz stages liberal shit for dramatic effect all the time. Liberals are drama queens after all.

  23. What I want to know is, what does Olbermouse have to say about the Perez Hilton vs Miley Cyrus child porn extravaganza?

    1. What is the Perez Hilton vs Miley Ray Cyrus child porn extravaganza?

      1. He posted a picture of her cooter on his Twitter feed.

        1. They say they are “upskirts”. I wondered below how bad they were.

          1. I’ve heard panties, no panties, and digitally removed panties. Since almost everyone seems to talking about it without having seen it, I’m not sure what it was. (Supposed pictures from the same event in sequence show her in panties. But they haven’t been around yet either, at least not in the sleazy part of the web I frequent for celebrity gossip.)

            1. I depend on Reason commentators for such things. That is how I found out where the Erin Andrews tapes could be downloaded.

              1. Not only downloaded, but digitally enhanced. Not that I would know anything about that.

        2. She should a post a pic of his on her feed.

        3. she is underage. And it is not like she consented to them being taken. That is pretty bad. I hope they send his ass to jail. He will enjoy the ass rapes. And the rest of us will get to forget who the hell he is. Everyone wins.

          1. John, she’s 17 for galt’s sake, not 12. And she posed partially nude for Annie Leibovitz; give your faux-outrage a rest. You really think that pics of her exiting a car warrants child porn charges?

            And nice crass “homo will enjoy the rape-age”. You’re a real class act.

            1. Perez Hilton gives human beings a bad name. He is the most loathsome human being on the planet. And who cares what she posed for with Libovitz. I don’t care she posed nude. That doesn’t give photographers the right to stalk her hoping to catch a shot up her skirt. And sure it sure as hell doesn’t give Hilton the right to publish it.

              And the law is what it is. 17 isn’t 18. Maybe that age is too old. Maybe it should be 16. But it is not like Hilton didn’t know the law when he posted the pictures. Fuck him. The pictures were child porn. There are other people in jail in this country for a lot less. He did something that any idiot knows is illegal for the sole purpose of being an asshole. Throw the book at him.

              1. “Child porn” – you make me laugh. Are diaper commercials child porn too John?

                There are other people in jail in this country for a lot less.

                Oh, well, then obviously…wait, no, you’re still stupid.

                And hey, perhaps common sense should rule the day here and say “Why is a 17-year-old celebrity climbing out of a convertible without any panties…with full knowledge that people take pictures of her everywhere she goes?”

                You are materially contributing to the infantilization and prison-culture of America. Oh, yes, and I have yet to hear your explanation for why Perez would “enjoy the ass rapes”.

                1. “And hey, perhaps common sense should rule the day here and say “Why is a 17-year-old celebrity climbing out of a convertible without any panties…with full knowledge that people take pictures of her everywhere she goes?”

                  That is right. It is all her fault. She should know that low lifes like Hilton are going to be stalking around in bushes looking to take pictures. What possible purpose does it serve to publish a scrumptiously taken picture like this? Yes, it is porn. It is not a diaper commercial. It is taken for the sole purpose of people being able to get off on seeing someone famous naked. If she had posed, that would be one thing. But she didn’t.

                  I think even low life strange child celebrities have the right to walk in public without perverts following them around hoping to snap a picture of them with their legs open. You really think that is okay? You think it is perfectly appropriate for camera men to follow people around and snap pictures when through the gaps in their clothes and then publish it on the net?

                  And she is fucking 17. Everyone knows you can’t publish naked pictures of 17 year olds. Should we just ignore the law because Perez Hilton is gay and you like him and no one like Milley Ray Cyrus or whatever her name is?

                  1. Should we just ignore the law because Perez Hilton is gay and you like him and no one like Milley Ray Cyrus or whatever her name is?

                    I don’t give a damn about either of them. What I care about is that you are reaching for your hankie over something that, here in Adultland, is a total non-issue.

                    I find it doubly hilarious that you are suddenly a big fan of “the right to privacy”. And yes, having paparazzi follow you around snapping pictures is called “free speech”. Suck it up and deal with it, Nancy.

                    1. “And yes, having paparazzi follow you around snapping pictures is called “free speech”

                      That is bullshit and you know it. It is not free speech to stalk someone. If they pulled this shit on anyone you liked or someone in your family, you would have a heart attack. You just don’t like Cyrus. Well neither do I. But I don’t base my decisions on who has a right to be left alone on whether I like the person or not, which is apparently what you do.

                    2. Again, I do not care about Miley Cyrus, John. Seriously…quit casting aspersions. And do you really believe you have a right to be “left alone”? I am eagerly looking forward to the Rep. Etheridge thread – why do I suddenly suspect that your newfound belief in the right to privacy will evaporate then?

                    3. And do you really believe you have a right to be “left alone”? I am eagerly looking forward to the Rep. Etheridge thread

                      I don’t speak for John, but if Rep Etheridge had said “no comment” in response to the Obama question, continued walking, and the camera people had continued following him and asking him questions, that would have been actionable harassment. So these situations are not comparable.

                    4. What I care about is that you are reaching for your hankie over something that, here in Adultland, is a total non-issue.

                      Amazing that Adultland is coterminous with ThisAngryOptimistland. I’m just thankful we have you here to tell us what adults are supposed to think (which just happens to agree with what you think).

                    5. And yes, having paparazzi follow you around snapping pictures is called “free speech”

                      Huh? Aren’t you supposed to be a lawyer or something? The most expansive legal definitions of free speech don’t include taking pictures of people, as that activity does not involve expression of any kind.

                  2. scrumptiously? WTF???

                    1. EAP, WTF indeed. Makes me look at TAO’s argument in a new light…

              2. He is the most loathsome human being on the planet.

                You a raffingstock with this hyperbore

            2. and I can think of at least three different South Park episodes that contain a “Mr. Garrison really wants someone to violate him up the ass” joke. I don’t hear you saying much about those. So spare me your bullshit outrage.

              1. Shorter John: “Prison rape is THE HILARIOUS!”

                1. Is there something you want to share with the group, TAO?

            3. “Perez Hilton” traffics in sleaze. Even his pseudonym is a ripoff of someone more accomplished. He’s as low as they come, if you don’t count the people who enable him. He provides a service to that festering, malignant corner of our culture that feeds on salacious gossip. But we digress.

              1. Yes…but so what? (Directed to “&”)

                OMG a 17 1/2-year-old’s vagina may have had a picture taken of it. jesus fucking christ where are my powders? What a social disaster!

                1. So it is legal to publish naked pictures of underage girls as long as you are doing it in a celebrity blog? And it is okay to publish any pictures even if they are taken without the person in them’s consent?

                  You think that 17 year old girls should be able to pose naked. Good for you. Maybe they should. But they can’t. The law is what it is. And it is not an unreasonable law. Hilton didn’t just have them in his possession. He published them to millions of people. And it is hardly the dark night of fascism to say it is illegal to publish naked pictures of underage girls to millions.

                  1. So next time a silly “sexting” prosecution comes up, I should expect not to see you saying one damn word about it? Beacuse, you know John, those little underage pornographers were breaking the law and tsk tsk and all that jazz…

                    1. This is not “sexting” you idiot. Sexting is them the girl takes a picture of herself. She has consented to it. If Miley Ray had taken the pictures herself and sent them to Hilton, it would be different. But that is not what happened here. These pictures were taken by someone else without her consent. This is not “sexting”. Just admit it. You shot your mouth off without thinking it through. Stop making stupid arguments defending the indefensible.

                    2. Nope, John, the law is the law – underage people cannot consent to have nude pics taken and distributed of them, even if they are themselves.

                      If Miley Ray had taken the pictures herself and sent them to Hilton, it would be different.

                      Not according to you, it would not. You said it yourself: you cannot distribute naked pics of underage girls. Consent is not an issue.

                      You are the one hyperventilating about “child porn” for something that is sooooo demonstrably harmless.

                    3. Yes the law is the law. And the law is written poorly. The law is there to protect underage girls. Therefore, it makes no sense to apply it to the girls themselves. That is why sexting should not be prosecuted. But the law is absolutely designed to apply in this case where photographers and Hilton are taking and publishing pictures of underage girls.

                      The guy is guilty. And he ought to be prosecuted. The fact that Cyrus is an annoying person or a public figure shouldn’t make any difference.

                    4. John, here’s the Federal Child Pornography Statute. Tell me how you fit the Cyrus photograph into this statute.

                      Hint: it will involve serious verbal gymnastics on your part, but you’re a lawyer – I trust you can handle it.

                    5. “You are the one hyperventilating about “child porn” for something that is sooooo demonstrably harmless.”

                      There is nothing harmless about it. I seriously doubt Cyrus wants the world to see up her skirt. I think she would probably say a lot of harm resulted in this. Basically you just don’t like Cyrus and therefore think she has no right to privacy or dignity. Well fuck that. She didn’t consent to those pictures and the people who took them and published them are criminals. You don’t want to go to jail, don’t go around stalking underage girls hoping to see up their skirt.

                    6. Basically you just don’t like Cyrus and therefore think she has no right to privacy or dignity.

                      Allow me to remember this moment, when John finally signed onto “penumbras and emanations” for the sake of defending someone’s right not to have pictures taken of them in public.

                      Hacktastic job, John.

                    7. Waiting around at every angle in hopes of catching someone’s clothes open is not “just taking pictures of them in public”. By your logic, standing under a set of open stairs taking pictures up the skirts of every women walking by would just be an exercise of your “first amendment” rights. That is just stupid and you know it.

                      This is not sexting. This is not taking normal public celeb pictures. This is a bunch of photographers specifically setting out to get pornographic pictures without the subject’s consent. And the subject is also an underage girl. There is no defending that. And you know it.

                    8. How is the photograph “pornographic”, John? Again, do you know the federal legal and commonsense definition of what is and is not pornography?

                    9. A picture of a women in public up a woman’s skirt showing her pussy is pornographic. How could it not be? If that is not pornographic, what is?

                    10. Read the damn statute! Read the definitions section! Do what lawyers are supposed to do and stop being so fucking lazy.

                    11. No you read the statute dumb ass
                      18 USC 1466a

                      (a) In General.? Any person who, in a circumstance described in subsection (d), knowingly produces, distributes, receives, or possesses with intent to distribute, a visual depiction of any kind, including a drawing, cartoon, sculpture, or painting, that?
                      (1)
                      (A) depicts a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; and
                      (B) is obscene; or
                      (2)
                      (A) depicts an image that is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in graphic bestiality, sadistic or masochistic abuse, or sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex; and
                      (B) lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value;

                      But sexually explicit conduct is defined at 18 USC 2256 as

                      (A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), “sexually explicit conduct” means actual or simulated?
                      (i) sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex;
                      (ii) bestiality;
                      (iii) masturbation;
                      (iv) sadistic or masochistic abuse; or
                      (v) lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person;

                      These pictures would hit (V). They are sexually explicit and would fit the definition.

                    12. Looks like The Angry Semanticist got shut down by John’s 2:07 post. Or possibly got back on his meds.

                    13. “A picture of a women in public up a woman’s skirt showing her pussy is pornographic. How could it not be? ?”

                      It’s called art (ibid.)

                  2. “So it is legal to publish naked pictures of underage girls”

                    Yes

                    (NSFW) http://www.google.com/images?h…..mp;q=David Hamilton&um=1&ie=UTF-8&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi

              2. Even his pseudonym is a ripoff of someone more accomplished.

                Ooh, snap!!

                1. His first choice was “Ken Kardashian.” It was the battle of the blowjob vids. Hilton “won.”

              3. Perez Hilton is the one who is an Achy Breaky Tart.

                1. He wanted to be a girl so bad.

    2. Am I the one person who instinctively refers to her as Miley Ray Cyrus?

      1. You asked this in another thread a few days ago. Are you under the impression that it’s really clever and funny or something? Because it isn’t.

  24. Dudes this is just my sophomore slump! Team O is going to have a great second half!

    1. His second year is up there with Gordon Beckham’s (#15 of Chicago White Sox).

  25. Google (news) is your friend, John.

    Read it and weep.

    1. I am at work. So I can’t google the pictures. How bad were they? A little leg bad or morning dew in the sun bad?

  26. Olbermann reads one negative comment about himself and goes ballistic on the whole site. Obviously, it’s OK to criticize Obama, but not Olbermann. Let’s get our priorities straight here.

    1. Negative stuff gets posted about you here daily, it seems, and you haven’t gone ballistic yet. Congratulations, Alan. You’re more mature than Keith Olbermann.

      1. I haven’t heard such affirmation since my “friends” told me that I was probably a little better than Hitler, but undoubtedly my mustache smelled worse.

    2. Shouldn’t you be at home working on your next Curious George book?

    3. I see the Valtrex isn’t working.

  27. Seems that criticizing the Leader Ruler of the Free World can be hazardous to progressive relationships

    Courtesy C.S. Lewis.

  28. Weigel would have certainly mentioned something about the smell in their parents’ basements.

  29. Door. Ass. No hit.

  30. I am at work. So I can’t google the pictures. How bad were they?

    There’s only one.

    And until I saw it, sometimes when I’d be drinking at a bus stop or leaning a ladder up against a sorority house, I’d find myself idly wondering if I’d take pleasure in catching a gander at Miley Cyrus’s lower sex-distinguishing area, and I’d think “Yeah, probably, I guess.”

    Now I think differently.

    1. that bad huh

  31. Emperor Obama has lost the Mandate of Heaven. The Left acted like every natural and manmade disaster of the Bush years was his fault. They are getting their own medicine

  32. The only thing this incident is indicative of is Olbermann’s grandstanding, thin-skinned megalomania.

    1. What?

  33. The only thing this incident is indicative of is Olbermann’s grandstanding, thin-skinned megalomania.

  34. But to accuse me, after five years of risking what I have to present the truth as I see it, of staging something for effect, is deeply offensive to me and is an indication of what has happened here.

    It’s a fucking TV show. EVERYTHING is staged for effect. Even live sporting events have hours of meetings and planning about how best to present the show. People may be naive about Obama, but no one under the age of 50 is that naive about TV shows are done.

  35. Poor Olbermann. Wah. I may have to kill myself now that he’s no longer tight with the Kos Kids.

  36. Olbermann so doesn’t deserve this. In the past, though he may have disagreed with people on the right, he always respected them and never assigned ugly motives to them. After all, his “worst people in the world” were always truly reprehensible people, never merely people he disagreed with.

    1. After all, his “worst people in the world” were always truly reprehensible people, never merely people he disagreed with.

      And he always allowed them to give their side of the story.

      Yep, balance is Keith’s middle name.

  37. Hilarious……he even whines like a little…..anyway…..i heard the door slam, but I’ll bet he’s still outside listening. Nobody move……

    1. I’ll get you for this. I’ll get all of you!

  38. The bigger news should be that a guy on a cable news channel in prime time went to a website that accused Bush and all Republicans of being Nazis forty gazillion times.

  39. …went to a website that accused Bush and all Republicans of being Nazis forty gazillion times.

    Umm, but Olbermann accused Bush and all Repubicans of being Nazis forty gazillion times.

    That’s how he was admitted to the site.

  40. But to accuse me, after five years of risking what I have to present the truth as I see it
    Headshake, who know. And here I thought he got paid for it.

  41. Can’t we just go back to the simpler, funner, better times when anyone who criticized Obama was a racist?

  42. Why does Reason care if one left-wing douchebag has a falling out with another left-wing douchebag?

    -jcr

  43. Olbermann needs to develop a thicker skin. I had a testy e-mail back and forth with him in 1999 about Women’s World Cup soccer of all things. He made some statements I felt were silly, wrote him telling him so in what I thought was a respectful way, but copied on his editor. He e-mailed back a rant which basically can be distilled down to “I am a journalist and you are not so shut up”. I told him to grow a thicker skin. It seems he did not take my advice.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.