Keith, you have crossed the line. Gone are the days of you being a commentator who provided an alternative to Fox News. You have now become just another Bill O’Reilly---someone so obsessed with himself and his ego that he must go after individual politicians who he personally dislikes.
Keith, you say that you don’t endorse Barack Obama. Exactly who do you think you’re kidding? For the past 2 months, you have gone after Sen. Clinton night after night while providing glowing commentary on Obama. Your disdain for the Clintons is evident and your love for Barack Obama is well-known.
Keith, you indeed need to apologize to Sen. Clinton. You, last night, implied that she is a racist and compared her to David Duke. That is absolutely disgusting. The Clintons have done more for the African American community than any other politican in the last 35 years.
Secondly Keith, you and everyone else in the media should be ashamed by the way you've spun Geraldine Ferraro's comments. Did you bother to read them? Did you bother to look at the facts on which Ferraro based her remarks? Why do you think Obama has done so well in South Carolina, in Georgia, in Alabama, in Louisiana, in Mississippi? What do you think proved to be the deciding factor in the extremely close primary in Missouri? I’ll tell you Keith: the African American vote.
Why is it suddenly taboo to say the truth? Is it that you truly think that Obama, if he weren’t African American, would get 85-90% of the black vote? Are you that blind Keith?
It’s not that I or Ferraro, as she has explained, finds any fault nor is it degrading for African Americans to vote for their own. I, as many, understand the pride African Americans must have voting for one of their own. As do women concerning Sen. Clinton. Is it racist to say that the only reason Obama is getting such a large chunk of black votes is because he himself is black? Is it racist to say that Obama would have not likely won South Carolina, Missouri, Georgia, Alabama, Louisiana, and Mississippi if he were indeed white? Of course it isn’t. It’s not that Obama has a message that is so overly appealing to African Americans as compared to Sen. Clinton's.
Again, I stress that it is not a bad thing for African Americans to vote for Obama. But, Keith, it is a bad thing, no, a horrible thing, for you to say that anyone who says what I've just said is racist.
No one has said that the only reason Obama is where he is is because he is black. But it is undeniably one factor. We shouldn’t be so politically correct and censored that we can’t say that. Obama has run a terrific campaign. He is a great speaker. He has energized people of all races, men and women. But he has won many contests because he is black. That is a fact backed up by the exit polls.
So, Keith, get off Ferraro’s back for stating the truth that others are simply afraid to say. I'm not sure why they're afriad, since she didn’t say anything degrading or anything to belittle Obama, but whatever. She simply stated her analysis---which happens to be backed up by the exit polls.
And lastly, Keith, you say that Clinton is dividing the party? Excuse me? Who injected race into the battle for South Carolina when his campaign released memos accusing the Clintons of racism? Who dug up this Ferraro comment? Who refused to rise above the fray and won’t let this harmless story rest? Who has spun this quote from Ferraro from a simple analysis of the race at hand, into a sign of racism? You know the answer Keith---the Obama campaign.
And you, by posting your disgusting special comment and continuing your daily bias coverage of this campaign, are dividing this great party.
Not only should you apologize, but you should be removed from MSNBC’s election night coverage. You have let your personal opinions get in the way of what you’re supposed to be doing---covering a particular election.
I once though you were going to bring a voice for progressives to the world of cable news, but instead you brought a voice for one candidate----Barack Obama. You have implied, as recently as last night, that Clinton should not be considered a Democrat and neither should her supporters. Well, Keith, I am a Clinton supporter and I am a Democrat. What are you, though, Keith? I’ll tell you: just another pundit who can’t give fair coverage or analysis of anyone or anything for anything. If it doesn’t help your candidate, Barack Obama, it doesn’t get on your show. But if it does help him, you’ll spend days on it.
My request: stop thinking and reporting as if only Barack Obama is right on everything and everyone else is scum. Hillary Clinton is not scum. Bill Clinton is not scum. Geraldine Ferraro is not scum. For that matter, Barack Obama is not scum. But you, Keith, might just be.---
Keith Olbermann: today’s worst person in the world!!!
9 comments :
Why do you think Obama has done so well in South Carolina, in Georgia, in Alabama, in Louisiana, in Mississippi?
~~~~~~~
And what about Iowa, Wisconsin, Wyoming, etc....? As far as racist remarks, Yes, the Hillary Clinton camp has had her subordinates bringing up the "black man" innuendo. You don't have to scream n****r to have bigots and racists hear it. From the Jesse Jackson reference in South Carolina to the repeated "black man" comments of Geraldine Ferraro, America is constantly being reminded that they're voting for a n****r.
As for the Clintons, I used to be a big fan but I've gotten a very bad taste in my mouth from their "win at all costs" attitude and their willingness to bring the entire party down to meet their own selfish needs.
Keith Olbermann was on point. I also agree with Johnny.
^and of course, guys, Barack Obama is an angel right? Give me a break. Both camps are equally guilty at playing to win...no matter the cost. Obama has injected race in to this campaign more than Clinton. Yet she's blamed for it. Unbelievable!
^Exactly HOW did Barack Obama inject race into the campaign? By responding to Bill Clinton and Geraldine Ferraro's race baiting comments?
Of course, we know ANY black running for president is living in a fairy tale world. And, of course ANY black can win in the South. Hell, even Jesse Jackson carried South Carolina.
But then we're told by Geraldine Ferraro that being black is an advantage in a race for president. I guess that's why we've had 45 white men in a row!! It wasn't taken out of context because she repeated it several times before it was printed.
Enjoy President McCain guys!! Your willingness to destroy the entire party for your own short term gain will undo all progress made by the democrats over the past decade!!
The democratic party is not destroyed and the nominee of the party will be the next President. Those who think the republicans are the answer I say you get what you vote for if you thing McCain is the answer. The american people will choose the right democratic nominee. The reasons we have all these divisions during election time is because most people are followers and not leaders and will believe any thing they hear especially if it comes from news journalists. Some people just can't think for themselves.
John Said: The reasons we have all these divisions during election time is because most people are followers and not leaders and will believe any thing they hear especially if it comes from news journalists. Some people just can't think for themselves.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
No. Some of us, especilly in the deep south, have seen this crap used in campaigns before. Race baiting was a mainstay of southern governors such as George Wallace and Lester Maddox. Telling white folk that the n****rs are going to steal an election if they don't vote in block themselves is nothing new down here. It was the main campaign theme for decades. All a candidate had to do is convince the white voters that the black voters were voting "in block" for their opponent and the white voters would vote for them as a vote to keep the n****rs from stealing an election. Is that the kind of campaign that Hillary Clinton wants to run? Obama wants to end the division in Washington. Hillary is proving she'd be four more years of the same.
Also, don't assume that the democratic nominee is going to be the next president. If anything, we should have learned from 2004 that a sure thing isn't a sure thing. John McCain has trouble energizing the conservative, evangelical base. If Hillary is the democratic nominee, their hate for her will energize them more than John McCain ever could. That's why Faux News is so swift to defend her and why Rush Limbaugh urges his listeners to crossover and vote for her.
You have implied, as recently as last night, that Clinton should not be considered a Democrat and neither should her supporters.
~~~~~~~
Hillary Clinton broke the cardinal rule of politics. She made the remark that her republican opponent would make a better president than her democratic opponent. Why SHOULD we not consider her another Joe Lieberman? What can we expect from Hillary next? Hugging up to the president like McCain and declaring that because of her experience, she's best to continue the Bush momentum?
Past southern governors were not concerned about Blacks voting in a block. In fact they denied blacks the right to vote in many cases. They were true racist, they denied equal rights. That is not what is happening here. People who are supporting both sides have made comments that were not necessary. Neither candidate is without fault. I don't know a lot of people who took for granted that John Kerry would win the 2004 election. One thing seems sure after several comments by Johnny concerning Rush Limbaugh and Fox News. He must be starting to believe them. People who listen to Rush or Fox News are not going to vote Democratic no matter what, and they certainly are not going to vote for McCain because of the curve ball they are throwing at Obama and Hillary. The are going to vote republican because of their ideology.
Obama is trash! And Olberturd is SCUM OF THE EARTH!
Post a Comment