Keith Olbermann announces tonight's Countdown as his last show!

I wouldn't be too happy if I was a conservative. Now they won't be able to respond any time someone complains about O'Reilly, Beck, or Hannity with: "but Olbermann _________!"

Personally, I don't care. Never watched Olbermann, and didn't much like what I saw in clips.

LuckyDan said:

Bob Beckel, Kristin Powers, Juan Williams, The Rev Al Sharpton, off the top of my head - Mara Lliason - not exactly shrinking violets. Colmes was every bit as annoying to my con tastes as any of the others mentioned, be he wasn't rude generally, (and I often thought Hannity appeared to be so to him and I didn't like it) but I think libs took a disliking to him simply because he worked at Fox.

Click to expand...

Look at the list that you mentioned. When I watched Fox I never saw Beckel, so I can't comment on him. Williams ended up agreeing with O'Reilly or Hannity most of the time, Powers disagreed, but never really said things with much force or she was like yeah I am disappointed in the Democrats. And Sharpton...hell most liberals don't even like the guy and he just ends up giving liberals a bad name more than not. And you are right Colmes wasn't rude, but he was completely submissive to Hannity.

And just so it doesn't seem like I am attack Fox, my Freshman year my roommate watched Chris Matthews and I pointed out to him a few times how the Republicans were just weak compared to Matthews. And in my opinion I think it has more to do with what opinion the show wants the public to believe is the more valid one.

"Weak and submissive?" Let's think about that. Many libs have said they will not - WILL NOT - appear on Fox. Not exactly a bold and powerful stance. If libs appear that way to you, maybe it's not so much their personalities as their arguments, heard side by side with cons.

Click to expand...

Agreed it, at times, is a girlish stance, but I remembered after Fox took a piece of a Colbert interview to smear a Democrat Congressman I didn't really blame them all that much. And I think it has more to do with the way the argument was presented more than the actual argument. I mean yeah sure sometimes the conservative host had a better argument and that was that. But then there were a lot of times where when I was listening I was thinking to myself there is a much stronger argument you could be making, so why not make it. And I felt the same way at times when I was watching Matthews.

If you care to reply, I'm interested in hearing what would give Fox balance in your view. Thanks in advance.

Click to expand...

Honestly, I don't think you can give any news network balance, given the way the media is set up now. I mean you have four or five corporations that own everything and they want to make money and get viewers, so they will put on what they want people to hear, but also what they want people to hear. That is the great thing about Fox because it shows it. Fox is the right's version of MSNBC that wasn't there before. So, to give any news network balance I think you would have to move away from this way the media is set up. Granted I could be wrong, I just started a class on U.S. Media and Politics, so I could discover a different reason by the semester's end.

ludahai said:

True that... but then again, there are some leftists on here that believe just because you are a Conservative (like myself) that means you love Sarah Palin (which I most certainly do not) and are a birther (which couldn't be further from the truth)...

Click to expand...

Truth people LOVE to use generalizations.

ludahai said:

What happened to hockey on ESPN? There used to be a ton of hockey games on ESPN -- both NHL and college... what happebed?

Click to expand...

It isn't as popular anymore, and they get better numbers showing college basketball and the NBA instead. I mean I still get to watch the Bruins up here on NESN, but when BU isn't home I have to listen to it online because it is only on NESN when they are playing BC.

O'Donnell has moved into Keith's timeslot and The Ed Show will be at 10. My question is why do they have Hardball playing at 5 and 7? Can't they find someone to fill in that time?

haymarket said:

The power of right wing corporatism strikes again. And all the little right wing toadies can now be content that the guy the said nobody watched or listened to has been silenced. But they want it both ways. They will celebrate and gloat but still insist nobody viewed him and he was no threat. Even in their revelry they wallow in their hypocrisy.

KO had two years to go on a contract that would pay him $7.5 million for each year.

Click to expand...

Dude, all cable media is corporate controlled.

Mr. Invisible said:

Dude, all cable media is corporate controlled.

Click to expand...

That is not news. What is news is that a corporation involved in this field puts politics ahead of its bottom line and ratings.

this from Deadline Hollywood

The statement (below) about Keith Olbermann's exit came without warning. The Last Word With Lawrence O’Donnell will move to 8 PM weekdays on MSNBC, and The Rachel Maddow Show remaining at 9 PM, with The Ed Show starring Ed Schultz moving to 10 PM. Cenk Uyger of the liberal "Young Turks" will be taking over Ed's 6 PM slot. The moves are simultaneous with new owner Comcast starting to show its hand over the broadcast network and cable NBCU after receiving FCC approval. "He's been very problematic," an NBCU source told Deadline about Comcast's attitude to Olbermann. Officially, the Comcast takeover is next week. But word has been circulating for months now that the new owners have wanted to "tinker" with MSNBC and had many changes in store, including a right turn for the left-wing cable channel so that it represents both political points of view more evenly. It is well known that both Comcast chief Brian Roberts and NBCU chief Steve Burke have donated heavily to the Republican party with Burke more recently donating money to a few Democrats as well as heavily to Republicans. Roberts was a co-chairman of the host committee at the 2000 Republican Convention while Burke raised at least $200,000 for George W Bush’s re-election campaign.

Olbermann hosts the highest-rated program on MSNBC. His Countdown averaged 1 million viewers, down a modest 10% from 2009. However, he's known as a very polarizing figure and a loose cannon, and became more and more of a liability for MSNBC. In November, he was briefly suspended for making Democratic campaign contributions -- and then reinstated. Olbermann's exit follows yesterday's departure of NBC primetime president Angela Bromstad in a housecleaning there.

Click to expand...

Krhazy said:

I wouldn't be too happy if I was a conservative. Now they won't be able to respond any time someone complains about O'Reilly, Beck, or Hannity with: "but Olbermann _________!"

Click to expand...

No worries, there's still Chris Matthews, Rachel Maddow, Ed Schultz (who's probably even worse), whoever the dip**** is the replaces Olbermann, and all of Media Matters. Our right wing conspiracy really needs to get on the stick.

X Factor said:

No worries, there's still Chris Matthews, Rachel Maddow, Ed Schultz (who's probably even worse), whoever the dip**** is the replaces Olbermann, and all of Media Matters. Our right wing conspiracy really needs to get on the stick.

Click to expand...

Be patient. The other shoe or shoes will fall. Your right wing conspiracy is indeed on the stick and riding it hard.

haymarket said:

That is not news. What is news is that a corporation involved in this field puts politics ahead of its bottom line and ratings.

Click to expand...

have you any proof for this allegation?

haymarket said:

Be patient. The other shoe or shoes will fall. Your right wing conspiracy is indeed on the stick and riding it hard.

Click to expand...

Seriously Haymarket, if this is a right wing conspiracy to silence the left, why replace Olbermann with someone just as liberal?

TurtleDude said:

have you any proof for this allegation?

Click to expand...

We have already established that he was not fired because of ratings since his ratings led the entire network.

We have already established he was successful in the task he was hired to perform, lead MSNBC past CNN in the ratings.

We have already established that not one person can demonstrate any proof that MSNBC has lost as much as one red cent from Olbermann and his show.

So the normal business reasons for firing him simply do not exist.

On the other hand, we have the political record of the new owners of MSNBC as movers and shakers in the GOP and they are opposite of that of KO.

So we have the complete absence of the usual business reasons for a shows cancellation but the existence of a partisan political motive by the new owners whose takeover was approved this very week.

Yes, that is evidence enough to continue looking at this entire issue very closely.

X Factor said:

Seriously Haymarket, if this is a right wing conspiracy to silence the left, why replace Olbermann with someone just as liberal?

Click to expand...

Hang on, I think I got this. I speak a little bit of tinfoil.

Because they guy replacing him will be under their control so they can... something something. (sorry, my translations aren't that great)

X Factor said:

Seriously Haymarket, if this is a right wing conspiracy to silence the left, why replace Olbermann with someone just as liberal?

Click to expand...

I suspect if we are patient we will get the definitive and final answer to your question.

Deuce said:

Hang on, I think I got this. I speak a little bit of tinfoil.

Because they guy replacing him will be under their control so they can... something something. (sorry, my translations aren't that great)

Click to expand...

LOL, you need better reception. Stop using recycled tin foil.

haymarket said:

I suspect if we are patient we will get the definitive and final answer to your question.

Click to expand...

In other words, you can't come up with a plausible answer.

X Factor said:

In other words, you can't come up with a plausible answer.

Click to expand...

Sure - I can speculate on why they are doing this. And if that is what you are fairly asking me to do knowing that I cannot prove what I suspect and you cannot disprove what I suspect, I will provide my musings on that question you ask. Is that what you want?

haymarket said:

Sure - I can speculate on why they are doing this. And if that is what you are fairly asking me to do knowing that I cannot prove what I suspect and you cannot disprove what I suspect, I will provide my musings on that question you ask. Is that what you want?

Click to expand...

Yes, I'd genuinely like to hear it. I'm not asking for proof.

haymarket said:

We have already established that he was not fired because of ratings since his ratings led the entire network.

We have already established he was successful in the task he was hired to perform, lead MSNBC past CNN in the ratings.

We have already established that not one person can demonstrate any proof that MSNBC has lost as much as one red cent from Olbermann and his show.

So the normal business reasons for firing him simply do not exist.

On the other hand, we have the political record of the new owners of MSNBC as movers and shakers in the GOP and they are opposite of that of KO.

So we have the complete absence of the usual business reasons for a shows cancellation but the existence of a partisan political motive by the new owners whose takeover was approved this very week.

Yes, that is evidence enough to continue looking at this entire issue very closely.

Click to expand...

you have no clue why he was fired. Since you aren't management of the company that he worked for all you can do is speculate

but one thing is true-you sure are squealing like a stuck pig over that hack getting canned

wtf was olberman--a second rate student at Cornell who started his career as a jocksniffing sports reporter with no real athletic background.

nothing is funnier than watching a guy who never was an elite athlete pretending to know about sports and competition.

then that same schmuck started commenting about politics with about the same level of education and experience that he brought to sports

the guy is pretty much a joke to me

haymarket said:

We have already established that he was not fired because of ratings since his ratings led the entire network.

We have already established he was successful in the task he was hired to perform, lead MSNBC past CNN in the ratings.

We have already established that not one person can demonstrate any proof that MSNBC has lost as much as one red cent from Olbermann and his show.

So the normal business reasons for firing him simply do not exist.

On the other hand, we have the political record of the new owners of MSNBC as movers and shakers in the GOP and they are opposite of that of KO.

So we have the complete absence of the usual business reasons for a shows cancellation but the existence of a partisan political motive by the new owners whose takeover was approved this very week.

Yes, that is evidence enough to continue looking at this entire issue very closely.

Click to expand...

He wanted more money than they wanted to pay him and he was an argumentative prick that they didn't particularly trust or care for.

Seems pretty ****ing plausible, unless you're the kind of person who always looks for black helicopters.

edit: Here's the part that kills me - you're implying that these evil corporate execs fired Olbermann to silence him because he's such a powerful and honest voice for the left. If that were actually the case, then why did he sign off on the confidentiality agreement they offered him?

Either this was just a standard contract dispute, or Olbermann is actually a corporate sell out.

Krhazy said:

I wouldn't be too happy if I was a conservative. Now they won't be able to respond any time someone complains about O'Reilly, Beck, or Hannity with: "but Olbermann _________!"

Personally, I don't care. Never watched Olbermann, and didn't much like what I saw in clips.

Click to expand...

We still have Pelosi, Reid, Dean . . . and their lackeys Matthews, Krugman, Maher . . .

Xfactor asks

Seriously Haymarket, if this is a right wing conspiracy to silence the left, why replace Olbermann with someone just as liberal?

Click to expand...

I would guess it is because KO is the shining beacon of the aggressive progressive who the right hate more than any other single person on the tube. By replacing him with anyone - even another liberal - they have done what most of those on the right would love to do if they had the chance. They know that O'Donnell does not have anywhere near the following of KO and is not replayed on other liberal sites the way KO is. I strongly suspect that Comcast is behind this and engineered the entire thing one way or the other.

haymarket said:

I strongly suspect that Comcast is behind this and engineered the entire thing one way or the other.

Click to expand...

You can suspect anything you like. Probelm is, since the merger has not completed, Comcast has not legal right or ability to have the liberal ball licker KO fired, promoted, or anything in between. Comcast has already said publicly they had nothign to do with it.

haymarket said:

Xfactor asks



I would guess it is because KO is the shining beacon of the aggressive progressive who the right hate more than any other single person on the tube. By replacing him with anyone - even another liberal - they have done what most of those on the right would love to do if they had the chance. They know that O'Donnell does not have anywhere near the following of KO and is not replayed on other liberal sites the way KO is. I strongly suspect that Comcast is behind this and engineered the entire thing one way or the other.

Click to expand...

So you're saying Olbermann is a ***** who would sit by and let this happen in order to get paid a few extra million?