Posted on 07/28/2005 2:27:03 PM PDT by Sam Hill
More questions than answers (Keith Olbermann)
[W]eren't those members of the military or the government with whom Newsweek vetted the plausibility of its item, honor-bound to say "you can't print this"?
Or would somebody rather play politics with this? The way Craig Crawford reconstructed it, this one went similarly to the way the Killian Memos story evolved at the White House. The news organization turns to the administration for a denial. The administration says nothing. The news organization runs the story. The administration jumps on the necks of the news organization with both feet or has its proxies do it for them.
That's beyond shameful. It's treasonous.
_________
How is it possible for such an intellect to not see the parallels to what Rove has been accused of doing? Rove apparently warned Matt Cooper of Time Magazine "not to get too far out" on the Joe Wilson story.
Why is Olbermann calling for Rove's head? Is it simply because that's what he is told to say by the DNC?
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
Another story from the files of "It's Bush's Fault."
The administration tried to correct the media and prevent them from spreading Joe Wilson's propaganda as truth, and look where it got Karl Rove...
"The administration tried to correct the media and prevent them from spreading Joe Wilson's propaganda as truth, and look where it got Karl Rove..."
My point bezactly.
"How is it possible for such an intellect to not see the parallels to what Rove has been accused of doing? Rove apparently warned Matt Cooper of Time Magazine "not to get too far out" on the Joe Wilson story."
That would assume that the 'Rats and MSM care about honesty or consistency. Actually, Olbermann's position amounts to "save us from ourselves when we need you to, but we'll fry your a--es anyway if we feel like it."
Just Damn.
(steely)
The Left has been specializing in the double-bind for years.
No wonder PMSNBC can't get better than a 0.5 share.
Compare and contrast:
"The news organization turns to the administration for a denial. The administration says nothing. The news organization runs the story. The administration jumps on the necks of the news organization with both feet or has its proxies do it for them.
That's beyond shameful. It's treasonous."
If the Bush administration would have said a thing, the MSM would have cried "cover-up" or "sensorship."
Same, irresponsible media.
When in doubt, blame someone else.
AND THIS MORON HAS HIS OWN SHOW ON MSNBC. NOTE TO LIBERALS: Do you wonder WHY your ratings suck? Start here...lol
"[W]eren't those members of the military or the government with whom Newsweek vetted the plausibility of its item, honor-bound to say "you can't print this"?"
YEAH, RIGHT! If the Bush admin did that, the media would instantly rush to print with headlines like "Bush Administration attempts cover-up!", or "Bush Admin tries to silence brave reporter!"
Better to remain silent and let the media print whatever they feel like. If they print some lunatic BS because they didn't bother fact-checking the story, it's their own fault.
It could only be considered treason if one's loyalty was owed to the media, rather than to the country.
Another air leak coming from Olbermann's head.
Isn't the 51-times a year "Newsweak" also a partner in that cable channel?
The DNC tells Olbermann to jump, and he says, "how high master".
Olbermann = IDIOT! Olbermann's intellect and common sense should fit quite nicely, with room to spare, in a thimble!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.