Sanders shames MSNBC over Olbermann suspension

[cal04]

Source: The Hill

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) shamed the cable station MSNBC for indefinitely suspending its liberal host Keith Olbermann for making political donations.

Sanders, an independent who aligns himself with Democrats, called MSNBC's decision to suspend Olbermann, who admitted to making donations to several Democratic candidates this cycle, "outrageous."

“It is outrageous that General Electric/MSNBC would suspend Keith Olbermann for exercising his constitutional rights to contribute to a candidate of his choice," Sanders said, referring to the network's corporate parent. "This is a real threat to political discourse in America and will have a chilling impact on every commentator for MSNBC."

Olbermann admitted to making the maximum donations to three Democrats: Reps. Raúl Grijalva (D-N.M.) and Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) and Kentucky Democratic Senate candidate Jack Conway.

Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/127961-sanders-shames-msnbc-over-olbermann-suspension

---

full
statement
http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2010/11/05-12

[Joanne98]

1. YAY Bernie!

[BrklynLiberal]

2. One can only hope that the outrage will result in an apology from MSNBC and MORE

of KO's comments.....

[Rhiannon12866]

3. K&R! I just received this petition. Sign and pass it on!

http://act.boldprogressives.org/sign/petition_olbermann/?akid=2630.624949.kfO-43&rd=1&source=e1-5mo&t=3

[pattmarty]

6. Done.

[GentryDixon]

7. Thanks.

I put my 2 cents worth in.

[Iowa]

8. Done. Thanks for posting.

[Slippery_Hammer]

24. signed

And Tweeted

[Homer Wells]

39. Done.

[Celtic Raven]

40. Done nt

[rfranklin]

4. It's because he supported Democrats...GE is a rightwing corporation (as most are)

Remember Jack Welch sitting in the control room telling them to call the election for Bush Jr.?

[Skink]

5. He should sue and cite citizens united.

[skepticscott]

26. What in the world does Citizens United have to do

with this situation? Do you even understand what that decision was about?

[lobodons]

9. Wouldn't it be nice if ALL MSNBC commentators joined together

and refused to go on air until KO is re-instated!!

[sabrina 1]

21. Yes, that is what should happen.

Canadian journalists once did that in a sense. When Harper decided to boss them around the way Bush was doing in the U.S. by telling them that he would no longer allow more than one question and no follow ups, the next time he went to the press room, there was no one there.

Every liberal host on MSNBC should go on strike. Look at what the French are doing over a raise in the minimum wage? They've shut down the country, millions went out on strike, across all lines, and millions more were marching in the streets.

We are so scared here of breaking the rules. Only the government gets to do that. It's a shame really.

[suffragette]

10. The full statement is worth posting

http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2010/11/05-12

Sanders Statement on Olbermann Suspension

WASHINGTON - November 5 - “It is outrageous that General Electric/MSNBC would suspend Keith Olbermann for exercising his constitutional rights to contribute to a candidate of his choice. This is a real threat to political discourse in America and will have a chilling impact on every commentator for MSNBC.

“We live in a time when 90 percent of talk radio is dominated by right-wing extremists, when the Republican Party has its own cable network (Fox) and when progressive voices are few and far between.

“At a time when the ownership of Fox news contributed millions of dollars to the Republican Party, when a number of Fox commentators are using the network as a launching pad for their presidential campaigns and are raising money right off the air, it is absolutely unacceptable that MSNBC suspended one of the most popular progressive commentators in the country.

“Is Rachel Maddow or Ed Schultz next? Is this simply a ‘personality conflict’ within MSNBC or is one of America’s major corporations cracking down on a viewpoint they may not like? Whatever the answer may be, Keith Olbermann should be reinstated immediately and allowed to present his point of view."


K&R

[Plucketeer]

11. LOL!!!

You can tell ol' Bernie's not in GE's pocket!

[MissDeeds]

12. Thank you, Bernie!

No employer should be able to demand that employees give up their rights.

K&R

[Vidar]

13. Give 'em Hell, Bernie!

[sabbat hunter]

14. Doesn't comcast

own a big chunk of MSNBC these days?

[eowyn_of_rohan]

15. And he SHOULD be able to contribute Anonymously!

Like "they" do...Actually, like all Americans should be able to do

[harvey007]

49. Campaign contributions: a matter of public record

Currently, campaign contributions by individuals such as Mr. Olbermann are a matter of public record via the FEC.

http://www.fec.gov/disclosure.shtml

Some people do advocate "anonymous" giving, however.

http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/Donald-Marron/2010/0322/Should-campaign-contributions-be-anonymous

In my opinion, as long as it is legal for individuals to make financial campaign donations, employers should not be allowed to bar anyone from doing so.

But I would much prefer public funding of campaigns and strict limits so that millionaires and billionaires can't buy themselves seats in Congress.

[HDPaulG]

16. Who is next Corp. GE?

Larry O'Donnell?

[HDPaulG]

17. Who ought to be suspended/fired

MSNBC President Phil Griffin...two faced a$$hole

[Hekate]

18. KNR. Already signed 2 petitions. Well done Bernie!

[farmboxer]

19. Bernie is a true American Hero

Thank you Bernie!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It's time that Dems fight!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This is serious!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[avaistheone1]

20. ^10

Thank you, Bernie!

[Window]

22. Gladly done. Thanks for sharing.

:kick:

[JJW]

23. We the people

We the people must demand the same rights as corporations.... that we are allowed to give to whomever and however much we wish, without being forced to disclose such donations.

[slay]

25. Who expected anything less from Comcast/NBC/USA/SyFy/Universal

Anyone? Anyone? Wouldn't it just be a lot easier for this GIGANTIC REPUBLICAN corporate behemoth if Keith was just gone - if only they had a reason.... So... the election was Tuesday - Dems mostly lost - and Keith was gone by when? WTF MSNBC seriously - WTF! Did he not suck enough corporate **** for yall? Don't give me this election donation BS - if so I expect Scarborough GONE IMEDIATELY. The whole thing is stupid as hell when you have Fox over there getting away with EVERYTHING and laughing their asses off while they do it. WTF MSNBC???

Also - what the hell did yall do with David Shuster? :mad:

[skepticscott]

27. Uh, he wasn't suspended

for exercising his "constitutional rights to contribute to a candidate of his choice". He was suspended for violating his contract, in which he agreed, in good faith, not to make political contributions without first getting approval. Assuming such a "right" even exists in the constitution, he voluntarily gave it up, as many people do when they sign employment contracts. No one put a gun to his head to get him to agree.

And this: "This is a real threat to political discourse in America and will have a chilling impact on every commentator for MSNBC." is just ridiculous hyperbole. Are the contributions of a few political commentators going to make any real difference in the amount of political spending going on out there? Olbermann has been pretty much free to say what he wanted on air, and would have continued to be so, if he had adhered to the rules he agreed to. What exactly is the big threat hanging over commentators' heads that will now keep them from saying what they want?

[soryang]

29. Rights don't "exist" in the Constitution

They are enumerated in the Bill of Rights. They exist in humans. If they are not enumerated, it doesn't imply that they don't exist.

[still_one]

31. A company does NOT make law, and if their policy is a violation of state or federal law, it will go

to the courts

[Bellcon10]

35. Let me get this straight.

If someone works for the Democratic party and decides one day they are a republican. That person can cheer on Repukes and slam Democrats, and donate money to whomever he wishes, and go on fox news and spill info about the democrats strategy but he can't be fired because he has a right to free speech. Are we really this stupid? I don't like keith being suspended but MSNBC has every right to do so.

[still_one]

50. A company's policy cannot supersede a law. Whether it is the case here or not may be determined in

a court, but you can find numerous examples where company policy was viewed in violation of law, anywhere from civil rights to employment law

However, everybody here believe they know exactly what companies can or cannot do

Personally, I think MSNBC is stupid for using this as a reason to fire KO. If they didn't want him employed, which I suspect they didn't, they should have used a different reason, ratings, or if he saidetc.

Now whether MSNBC can institute as company policy whether someone can or cannot donate to a political party is a violation of law, may be decided in the courts

[still_one]

30. It all depends. A company's policy does NOT supersede law. I know in this corporate country we

live in today, some believe that whatever corporations decide is law. Even if a person signs a contract, if the stipulation in that contract violate law, it is not valid

That is the real question, did the corporation incorporate in their company policy something that is a violation of law.

There are all kinds of cases regarding civil rights where an employer has been ruled against

I will give you a brief example. A corporation says I cannot carry over my vacation, to next year. Use it or lose it. The state I live in says employers cannot do that. Even though it is company policy, the company MUST honor that. In other words I cannot lose my vacation time that I earned, even if that is part of the company policy

[skepticscott]

37. No it doesn't

and I never said it did. I said that what happened here was NOT a violation of the Constitution, or any rights therein. It's not even a matter of an imposed company policy here. It's a matter of the terms of a contract voluntarily signed by Olbermann (presumably in good faith), in which he agreed to certain terms, namely that he would not make political contributions without approval. If they had tried to make one of the terms of his employment that if he voted in an election, he would be fired, then you might have a case that such a condition was impermissible, but this was nothing like that. Presumably, Olbermann had his lawyer review the contract before he signed it, and if there had been anything illegal, he would have been so advised...wouldn't you agree?

[still_one]

44. I gave you an example, I signed an agreement with my company which included no carry vacation carry

over to next year. That violates the state law I live in, therefore, if I don't use up all my vacation I get to carry it over to next year

You are assuming that a company has the right to prevent an employee to not contribute to a political party as part of its company policy. i don't know if that is a violation of the Constitution or not

Maybe you don't remember, but companies used to have policies not to hire on the basis of race, both overt and implicit. That was a violation of Federal law

We had a case where a New Jersey transit worker was fired from his job for protesting the building of the Mosque in NYC world trade center on his own time. That too may be a violation of his civil rights

It will be interesting if it gets to the courts how they rule. Just because YOU say it is NOT a violation of the Constitution does not mean it isn't

That is for the courts to decide, and then 10 years later, reverse that decision, which also happens

[L.Torsalo]

32. In reality,

no one can sign away their constitutional rights. No contract is more binding. Do your research, Olbermann should sue. His political rights can't be the basis for his firing, and it is clear that is what happened. Contractual obligations do not supersede rights.

[Bellcon10]

36. He won't sue because he would lose. People get fired all

the time for saying stupid things.

[still_one]

45. That is a different issue. A Company policy is not valid if it violates a state or federal law

Is this the case?

I don't know, but that is for the courts to decide

This is not for "saying stupid things", this is for a personal action not on behalf of a company, and the question if the company can involve itself on your personal time

[skepticscott]

38. Well, yeah, they can

Just ask anyone in the military about the right to privacy and free speech. People sign away rights to freedom of speech, freedom of movement, and all sorts of other things all the time, and it's perfectly legal and enforceable.

And in any case, which constitutional right did Olbermann sign away? And do you not think his lawyer would have so advised him if he were actually doing that?

[still_one]

46. Are you a Constitutional expert? There is a difference between civilian law and military, and

there have been cases where military law has been overturned by Constitutional law

[skepticscott]

48. Apparently more of one than you

The claim I was responding to was that no one can sign away their Constitutional rights. My response was that people can and do, in ways that are perfectly legal on both sides, the military being only one example. if you'd care to dispute THAT, be my guest. But your post doesn't even address that issue.

[still_one]

51. Yes, I agree you join the Army you sign your rights away. All I am saying is that the courts may,

or may not have a say in this, that remains to be seen

Much of it will depend on the contract, but other issues may supersede that contract

As an aside, from a PR perspective, I think if MSNBC was looking to fire KO, they would have been more prudent to use a different reason or mechanism. Doing it this way will generate not the kind of publicity I would suspect would help their ratings

[kenfrequed]

52. He was suspended

For failing to disclose a personal political contribution (if that is even what happened). Since when can a company require you to make or not make a contribution? I don't imagine Fox news, Halliburton, or any number of other companies have polices forbidding such a practice. Surely their CEO's are allowed to donate massive amounts of money if they choose. This is garbage. We are worried about the queensbury rules of boxing while going into the ring with a dozen rabid wolverines.

He donated personally to a few candidates. A few thousand dollars that any legal citizen could legally donate according to our constitution. A company cannot impel you give up your liberties when you are not on the clock. And don't even compare this to the military. The rules are entirely different as are teh reasons for those rules.

[fascisthunter]

47. riiiight, right... everyone look the way and say nothing

don't raise a ruckus to get the man back on MSNBC, because if you don't then maybe he won't get put back on MSNBC.

[Douglas Carpenter]

28. kick and recommend!! VERY IMPORTANT!!!

[PuffedMica]

33. K&R

[lupinella]

34. Yay!

Love you Bernie!

[onehandle]

41. Go Bernie!

[AmandaMae]

42. k&r!

[KeyserSoze87]

43. Bernie Sanders for President 2012!

:yourock:

[defendandprotect]

54. Love that one .... !!! Why is there only one Bernie Sanders ... we need 100's of them...!!!

[KeyserSoze87]

56. If there were more congressmen like Sanders...

this nation wouldn't be in the enormous economic mess that it's currently in.

[defendandprotect]

53. Sen. Bernie Sanders sums it up nicely ....!!

“It is outrageous that General Electric/MSNBC would suspend Keith Olbermann for exercising his constitutional rights to contribute to a candidate of his choice," Sanders said, referring to the network's corporate parent. "This is a real threat to political discourse in America and will have a chilling impact on every commentator for MSNBC."

That's all we really need to know --

GE is more right wing than Nazis --

And now Comcast -- which makes $500 million a year from INTERNET PORNOGRAPHY -- !!

Maybe 2X that much!

[Samantha]

55. Exactly, Bernie, and that is what they intended

""This is a real threat to political discourse in America and will have a chilling impact on every commentator for MSNBC."

Not a coincidence this is what many perceived would happen; this was what was intended to happen.

Sam