Salon's Greenwald slams Olbermann on Obama and FISA

[DeepModem Mom]

Salon: Glenn Greenwald
Thursday June 26, 2008 07:22 EDT
Keith Olbermann: Then and now

On January 31 of this year, Keith Olbermann donned his most serious face and most indignant voice tone to rail against George Bush for supporting telecom immunity and revisions to FISA. In a 10-minute "Special Comment," the MSNBC star condemned Bush for wanting to "retroactively immunize corporate criminals," and said that telecom immunity is "an ex post facto law, which would clear the phone giants from responsibility for their systematic, aggressive and blatant collaboration with (Bush's) illegal and unjustified spying on Americans under this flimsy guise of looking for any terrorists who are stupid enough to make a collect call or send a mass email."

Olbermann added that telecom amnesty was a "shameless, breathless, literally textbook example of Fascism -- the merged efforts of government and corporations that answer to no government." Noting the numerous telecom lobbyists connected to the Bush administration, Olbermann said:

"This is no longer just a farce in which protecting telecoms is dressed up as protecting us from terrorists conference cells. Now it begins to look like the bureaucrats of the Third Reich, trying to protect the Krupp family, the industrial giants, re-writing the laws of Germany for their benefit."

Olbermann closed by scoffing at the idea that telecom amnesty or revisions to FISA were necessary to help National Security:

"There is not a choice of protecting the telecoms from prosecution or protecting the people from terrorism, Sir. This is a choice of protecting the telecoms from prosecution or pretending to protect the people from terrorists. Sorry, Mr. Bush, the eavesdropping provisions of FISA have obviously had no impact on counter-terrorism, and there is no current or perceived terrorist threat the thwarting of which could hinge on an email or phone call that is going through Room 641 of AT&T in San Francisco."

Strong and righteous words indeed. But that was five whole months ago, when George Bush was urging enactment of a law with retroactive immunity and a lessening of FISA protections. Now that Barack Obama supports a law that does the same thing -- and now that Obama justifies that support by claiming that this bill is necessary to keep us Safe from the Terrorists -- everything has changed.

Last night, Olbermann invited Newsweek's Jonathan Alter onto his show to discuss Obama's support for the FISA and telecom amnesty bill. There wasn't a syllable uttered about "immunizing corporate criminals" or "textbook examples of Fascism" or the Third Reich. There wasn't a word of rational criticism of the bill either. Instead, the two media stars jointly hailed Obama's bravery and strength -- as evidenced by his "standing up to the left" in order to support this important centrist FISA compromise....

***

On an almost nightly basis, Olbermann mocks Congressional Democrats as being weak and complicit for failing to stand up to Bush lawbreaking; now that Obama does it, it's proof that Obama won't "cower." Grave warning on Olbermann's show that telecom amnesty and FISA revisions were hallmarks of Bush Fascism instantaneously transformed into a celebration that Obama, by supporting the same things, was leading a courageous, centrist crusade in defense of our Constitution.

Is that really what anyone wants -- transferring blind devotion from George Bush to Barack Obama? Are we hoping for a Fox News for Obama, that glorifies everything he says and whitewashes everything he does?...

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/06/26/olbermann/

VIDEO: Olbermann and Alter on Obama's FISA stance
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=li5tBw0qT-8

[LisaM]

1. Frankly, it's why I had to stop watching Olbermann

It wasn't even so much this candidate, or that candidate (though of course, since I was supporting the other candidate, that didn't help). But it's as if he had suddenly put on a pair of blinders; his coverage of Obama was so slanted, and I think he is somehow blissfully unaware of this.

[DeepModem Mom]

2. A personal note --

I was made aware today in another thread that it might be a good idea to post a reminder for any who might see it that I post articles here without an agenda other than to bring articles and/or information to attention. I usually post without comment, so DUers can respond however they'd like. I post many articles containing content I don't personally agree with, but think it might be of interest or valuable to see.

[Rick Myers]

3. We trust you DMM!

:thumbsup:

Rick

[DeepModem Mom]

4. Thanks a million for your understanding, Rick!

[iquiring mind]

5. Typical Olbermann

He's as worthless and as much of a demagogue as that O'Reilly fella. They are simply opposite sides of the same page.

Extremism, in any direction, is detrimental to all.

[featherman]

8. Thank you for your concern

[lordsummerisle]

6. It's a valid criticism...

I'm a huge KO fan and I don't agree with him on this, but I'm certainly not going to stop watching because of one issue.

Think of all the hypocrisy he's exposed, the issues he's brought up that the MSM won't discuss, his standing up to FN/O'Reilly, his insightful and eloquent special comments...

I like the fact that I can disagree with someone I admire, it shows I'm not a robot.

[stillcool]

7. I don't watch cable news...

so I guess I'm missing the context of the slamming thing, and can't comment on Keith's coverage. . I have read Obama's statement, and have heard the words he has spoken and I don't understand why it is necessary, politically or otherwise to vote for bad bills. It is capitulation.

Obama on the FISA 'Compromise' ...

"Given the grave threats that we face, our national security agencies must have the capability to gather intelligence and track down terrorists before they strike, while respecting the rule of law and the privacy and civil liberties of the American people. There is also little doubt that the Bush Administration, with the cooperation of major telecommunications companies, has abused that authority and undermined the Constitution by intercepting the communications of innocent Americans without their knowledge or the required court orders.

"That is why last year I opposed the so-called Protect America Act, which expanded the surveillance powers of the government without sufficient independent oversight to protect the privacy and civil liberties of innocent Americans. I have also opposed the granting of retroactive immunity to those who were allegedly complicit in acts of illegal spying in the past.

"After months of negotiation, the House today passed a compromise that, while far from perfect, is a marked improvement over last year's Protect America Act.

"Under this compromise legislation, an important tool in the fight against terrorism will continue, but the President's illegal program of warrantless surveillance will be over. It restores FISA and existing criminal wiretap statutes as the exclusive means to conduct surveillance - making it clear that the President cannot circumvent the law and disregard the civil liberties of the American people. It also firmly re-establishes basic judicial oversight over all domestic surveillance in the future. It does, however, grant retroactive immunity, and I will work in the Senate to remove this provision so that we can seek full accountability for past offenses. But this compromise guarantees a thorough review by the Inspectors General of our national security agencies to determine what took place in the past, and ensures that there will be accountability going forward. By demanding oversight and accountability, a grassroots movement of Americans has helped yield a bill that is far better than the Protect America Act.

"It is not all that I would want. But given the legitimate threats we face, providing effective intelligence collection tools with appropriate safeguards is too important to delay. So I support the compromise, but do so with a firm pledge that as President, I will carefully monitor the program, review the report by the Inspectors General, and work with the Congress to take any additional steps I deem necessary to protect the lives - and the liberty - of the American people."

[LaurenG]

9. I like Olbermann I also know that he isn't without his own bias

I realize that I don't agree with anyone 100% of the time but most of the time I agree with Keith.

What I find "concerning" is that people think in terms of "black and white." In some people's minds it's either all good or all bad.

There are tons of things that democrats and democratic voices say and do that are good and helpful and some things I just cringe over. However, I'm not going to demonize those who aren't doing things my way 100% of the time. I am getting really tired of all the "concern" around here over Obama and Olbermann and many other democrats. Criticism is fine but the hate is over the top.

Although I am responding to the OP this is not directed in any way toward you DeepModem Mom.

[DeepModem Mom]

10. I couldn't agree more OhioBlues. Thanks for your post! nt