If Duers can't come together to defend Keith Olbermann, what can we come together on?

phleshdef

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Nov-05-10 08:32 PM
Original message

If Duers can't come together to defend Keith Olbermann, what can we come together on?

Seriously, what the hell? I remember first finding DU in 2004, I didn't start posting till much later, but it was the place where I found solace when Bush was declared the winner for re-election. It was here, in that same week that I discovered DU that I also discovered Countdown, because Olbermann was the only one giving the possible vote counting fraud here in Ohio any coverage at all. It was here that I found Air America and Keith Olbermann, the only 2 things that kept me sane for the next couple of years.

Since then, for the past 6 years, this guy has been THE truth teller. He stepped up when Dan Rather got "Dan Rathered", and now he is basically getting "Dan Rathered" himself if you really think about it. There were some really dark times there and it seemed that Keith was the only one on the news to really report on any of it: the aftermath of the 2004 elections, the Scooter Libby/Valerie Plame fiasco, Iraq war contractors, torture, Tom DeLay scandal, Jack Abramoff - it goes on and on and on. Keith Olbermann was the only television media person that was giving any of these things adequate attention. He was the only television media person that was VALIDATING our point of view.

And after all of that, on election night in 2008, while watching MSNBC, it was Keith Olbermann that got to announce to us that Barack Obama was the projected winner in the campaign for President of the United States of America.

So yea, because of these memories, some of us feel connected to Keith Olbermann's ability to continue what he started in late fall of 2004, the return of truth telling.

Do I take it somewhat personal? Damn right I do.

Now of course, there are some that bring up this contractual agreement arguement, but its clear to me that these same standards, IF they even exist, have not been enforced on other hosts of MSNBC shows and that, to begin with, the language of it seems to pertain to individuals who may betray an otherwise perceived sense of not being impartial. No one in their right mind, that has ever watched Countdown, could ever place Keith as being anything other that a progressive/liberal/likely supporter of the Democratic party. He has not been vague about where he stands, AT ALL. His having contributed, in a perfectly legal fashion, to a small handfull of Democratic candidates does not violate those terms in the slightest, again, IF they even exist, which is still subject to some question based on how other employees have been treated and other inconsistencies where MSNBC has failed to practice the same standard.

At the end of the day, there is a lot of evidence to conclude that this happened to Keith for unsavory reasons and not because of any genuine concern that Phil Griffin had for maintainaing a sense of impartiality. Seriously, try to tell me that with a straight face. Its BS.

Given all that, we should have Keith's back, especially those of us that remember the way he became the truth teller for this generation.