This idiot has been spouting off for quite some time, so I thought I'd put my own little commentary on his "ideals".
First off, he can't seem to hold onto the idea that rules are in place for a reason, and the passage of time don't make the breaking of those rules any less severe. This article he wrote defends Pete Rose for his gambling on the Reds when he was their coach. The MLB folks seem to have a problem with his gambling on baseball. 18 years later doesn't change the fact that he did something wrong and he paid for it.
You don't get to decide that a "lifetime" ban means only X amount of years. Take a look at Mr. Olbermann's other articles and you'll see them filled with half truths and outright lies.
For example: The President Who Cried Wolf.
He wants us to believe that Saddam wasn't a threat, even though Russian intelligence said they were, after September 11th, but before the start of the Iraq war.
He wants us to believe that there were no WMD's in Iraq, even though almost every intelligence agency on the planet believed there were, and a general has second hand knowledge that they were flown out of Iraq into Syria before the war started.
He wants us to turn a blind eye to Iran and Syria supporting the insurgency even though there's clear evidence that they provided extremely expensive sniper rifles to insurgents that were ordered from an Austrian company and delivered to Iran.
He even has the nerve to write an article titled: A Special Comment About Lying, about President Bush that points out all the "lies" the President has said, but won't condemn a guy who's proven to have lied.
The guy is full of shit and wants us all to believe that since you played great baseball, you're immune to the rules, but President Bush, who's actually trying to do something to defend this country, unlike his predecessor, isn't above a grilling over tough decisions that Keith Olbermann loves to second guess and rip into him about. So Keith, if you're so damned smart, where's your ideas on how to defend this country and strike a balance between security and civil liberties?
Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
There is quite a difference between someone who bet on his own baseball team, and someone who foolishly got us into a preemptive war based on faulty intelligence, and overthrew a soverign government whom we proped up. Even his own vice president said that Iraq would be a quagmire 15 years ago. What has changed? So your equivication between his reaction to Pete Rose and George W. Bush is like saying that a child who stole a lollipop is just as guilty as someone who has gone on a rampage and killed forty people. I'd gander that under most notions of morality, the latter would be far worse than the former.
Did you even read my article? The issue wasn't comparing Pete Rose to George Bush, it was comparing the hypocracy of Keith Olbermann. Lying is lying, regardless of how big or small the lie is. Someone who stole a lollipop is guilty of a crime different then someone who kills someone. Perhaps you should set your blind love of Mr. Olbermann aside and actually read what I wrote before commenting. It will make you look much more intelligent.
Travis
Post a Comment