Video: Arch-propagandist troubled by media’s lack of ethics
posted at 10:18 pm on July 21, 2010 by Allahpundit
And so a day that began with news of the Journolist all-stars celebrating Obama’s election win by sneering at “f***ing Nascar retards” and fantasizing about throwing conservatives through plate-glass windows ends with a lecture on decency and ethics from the most tinpot left-wing demagogue on the airwaves. Ethics? This is a guy who runs an echo chamber so notorious that it actually qualified as news when Dave Weigel told him something about Sarah Palin that he didn’t want to hear. Decency? This is a guy who compares Fox News to Al Qaeda (unfavorably!) and right-wingers to terrorists and derides the tea-party movement as some sort of neo-Klan at every turn, yet has the mammoth balls here to lament conservatives’ “fomenting of hatred of Americans by Americans.” Even some of his own regulars couldn’t take it anymore and cut ties to MSNBC in the interests of … ethics and decency. And of course, on the critical question of just how culpable “Fixed Noise” or whatever he’s now calling Fox is on Sherrod’s firing, he’s wrong on his facts. As noted earlier, Vilsack pulled the trap door on her before Fox ever ran the clip.
And yet, and yet, here’s Mediaite breathlessly slobbering all over him for a “classic” rant. Even if lefties agree with him on the substance and even if, somehow, they can stomach the gallons of hypocrisy he’s funneling down their throats, how can they stand the sheer pompousness of the performance? The extended Dreyfus metaphor, the heavy-handed dramatic camera cuts, the pathetic emphatic pronouncement of Breitbart’s name: How do you not cringe? All that’s missing by way of theatrical pathos is a final close-up a la Iron Eyes Cody of Olby turning towards the camera as a single tear rolls down his cheek.
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
This is the same channel that edited out a black man with a gun as an example of Tea Party racism.
rob verdi on July 22, 2010 at 8:04 AM
Exactly. The ethic they would like to apply to Breitbart represents, on so many levels, a preposterous double standard.
Breitbart may have gone fishing for minnows, but he ended up catching the whale. In that sense, his mission has been wildly successful, successful beyond anyone’s dreams. Even so, there seems to be some lingering doubt about whether he should have released the clip that was sent him before he saw the entire film, before he saw the context. (The entire film was in possession of the NAALCP. I understand that he asked the NAALCP to let him see it, but was refused.)
This morning on F&F, I hear Juan Williams saying in one breath it’s okay to blame Booosh for Obama’s problems with the economy “as long as the Ameriucan people are buying it”, and in the next breath blaming Breitbart for releasing the NAALCP tape because it didn’t accurately portray the entire story.
Now I happen to think Juan is one of the more measured, responsible Dems on the scene nowadays, but I ask you, why should we take seriously this ostensible gnashing of teeth over Breitbart’s judgment in releasing that tape when it represents such a preposterous double standard on the part of his critics?
Besides, where was the NAALCP’s sense of fairness, balance and veracity in attacking the Tea Party Movement as racist in the first place?
I’m sorry, but I just can’t get very exercised about Brietbart’s judgment in this matter. Not very concerned at all.
petefrt on July 22, 2010 at 8:08 AM
Why is it that every time I see something about bathtub boy slamming someone on the right, I think that the first words out of his mouth are, “So YOU, Kettle, are black!”
I guess I’m a racist for even knowing that phrase.
TugboatPhil on July 22, 2010 at 8:10 AM
I believe your take on Breitbart’s actions is thoughtless and useless.
He had a point he wanted to make which he made fairly (have you bothered listening to his explanation?)
People who recklessly throw around “RACISTS!” have no leg to stand when they see it’s boomeranging on them, and they sound really stupid as they complain about it.
Bizarro No. 1 on July 22, 2010 at 8:41 AM
Thank you. No leg to stand on is my feeling too.
petefrt on July 22, 2010 at 8:58 AM
And remember, Iron Eyes Cody was of Italian recent ancestry, not an American Indian. The Left lies all the time.
rbj on July 22, 2010 at 9:01 AM
Heh.
Olbermann. Sincerity. And saliva.
They just go together.
dissent555 on July 22, 2010 at 9:04 AM
Half this guys audience are media/polical critics taking notes on the stupid things he says.
If an advertiser wants to pay to put their product in front of his audience, then by all means go for it.
But if you are selling a product any your Ad agency is spending the higher dollars per viewer that it costs put it on this show over others, you really need to ask them why. They are mearly taking your money to support thier political soulmates.
barnone on July 22, 2010 at 9:11 AM
Glenn Beck and Pat are doing a parody of the Olby rant that is
~ h i l l a r i o u s ~
petefrt on July 22, 2010 at 9:29 AM
Schultz, Matthews, Bathtub Boy & Madcow – 4 VERY confused people, especially the last one.
50sGuy on July 22, 2010 at 9:33 AM
Does Olby really believe all the crap he spouts?
jeanie on July 22, 2010 at 9:34 AM
For the first time in my life I will admit I am a RACIST!!!
against Mr. Ogerman and his fellow tinpot left-wing demagogue of one – himself.
MSGTAS on July 22, 2010 at 9:41 AM
Olbermurrow was using conspiracy nutter site palingates as a source for a Palin story?
That’s almost as crazy as calling Scott Brown a racist who encourages rape.
juliesa on July 22, 2010 at 10:10 AM
Olbergoebbels belongs in a rubber room…Period……
adamsmith on July 22, 2010 at 10:34 AM
Win a keitholbermann.com e-mail address
I am going with this Ibreakfordramaticeffect@KeithOlbermann.com
I really want my own Keith Olbermann email address.
Dr Evil on July 22, 2010 at 10:47 AM
While Olbermann’s comparison of what happened to Sherrod to what happened to Captain ALFRED Dreyfus in France in 1894 is a stretch, Glen Beck and his radio pal embarrassed THEMSELVES by their ignorance. They start joking about RICHARD Dreyfuss, calling him “Dick” (which is NOT a nickname for Richard in France), confusing Captain ALFRED Dreyfus with the American actor RICHARD Dreyfuss.
http://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/histoire/dreyfus/dreyfus-chrono.asp
The linked article is from the archives of the French Parliament (in French).
Captain Alfred Dreyfus was accused of “high treason” in 1894 for having allegedly written an unsigned document giving military secrets to the enemy, then prosecutors forced him to write the text of the document dictated to him. Even when his handwriting turned out to be different from the unsigned document, “graphologists” in France accused Dreyfus of deliberately faking his own handwriting.
What Olbermann overlooked, and what Glen Beck SHOULD have criticized him for, was that Jean Jaures, who was one of the flaming liberals in France at the time, actually pushed for a special law to be passed by the French Parliament on Christmas Eve 1894 to have the innocent Dreyfus executed by firing squad, instead of being exiled to Guyana. After further investigations uncovered documents tending to exonerate Dreyfus, and the government was considering pardoning him, leftist novelist Emile Zola wrote an incendiary editorial “I accuse” against Dreyfus, that inflamed tempers of people on both sides of the issue, and prolonged the dispute for years, leading to mass-lynchings and riots.
Ironically, leftist Jean Jaures, who had initially tried to have Dreyfus executed, later became convinced of Dreyfus’ innocence and worked to have him pardoned.
Olbermann SHOULD be criticized for bringing up the Dreyfus case to compare it to Sherrod’s comments. Sherrod had nothing to do with the military, nor giving away military secrets–she only made some statements that some could consider racist. She was only fired, and no one has seriously mentioned jailing or executing her.
But by bringing up Dreyfus, Olbermann exposes himself to other criticism. Back then, French LEFTISTS tried to frame Dreyfus for allegedly giving away military secrets, while modern LEFTISTS in the New York Times publish military secrets and advertise them to our enemies! Back then, French LEFTISTS favored capital punishment which could have killed an innocent man–now LEFTISTS are against capital punishment! Back then, French LEFTISTS polarized the country into two factions and inflamed them to violence–does Olbermann want that to happen now? Does Olbermann really want to bring this up NOW, or leave “l’affaire Dreyfus” in the dustbin of French history, unknown to the American people?
There is plenty to criticize about Olbermann’s bringing up the Albert Dreyfus case, but Glenn Beck and his radio pal need to get their facts straight first.
Steve Z on July 22, 2010 at 11:17 AM
Glenn Beck’s parody is posted now at Mediaite. Enjoy:
http://www.mediaite.com/online/glenn-beck-has-a-jolly-old-time-mocking-keith-olbermanns-sherrod-comment/
petefrt on July 22, 2010 at 11:58 AM
the real action starts at 8:05
He is spitting out the words like he is reading disbelievingly at what is teleprompter.
Hijack?
seesalrun on July 22, 2010 at 6:50 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2