Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Olbermann Plugs 'Conservatives Without Conscience' Attack on 'Authoritarian' Republicans
NewsBusters.org ^ | July 11, 2006 | Brad Wilmouth

Posted on 07/11/2006 6:40:58 AM PDT by Howlin

On Monday's Countdown show, MSNBC's Keith Olbermann hosted former Nixon White House counsel and frequent Bush administration critic John Dean to talk about his latest book attacking conservatives, titled Conservatives Without Conscience, which the Countdown host labeled "an extraordinary document." Olbermann, who has a long history of bashing President Bush's tactics in the war on terrorism, provided Dean with a sympathetic, nonchallenging forum to argue that modern conservatives are moving the Republican party toward "authoritarianism" as Dean tagged some conservatives as having an "authoritarian personality," and labeled 23 percent of the population as "right-wing authoritarian followers" who are willing to "march over the cliff." Olbermann not only made his latest reference to George Orwell's 1984, but he also found relevance in bringing up Nazi Germany as he wondered if there had been similarity in the "psychological principles" in "Germany and Italy in the 30s," and, quoting a passage from Dean's book, brought up the possibility that conservatives might intentionally "provoke potential terrorists" in an effort to "maintain influence and control of the presidency."

Olbermann began his interview with Dean discussing a recent story about the criticism of the Bush administration by Republican Congressman Peter Hoekstra over the NSA spying controversy. After queuing up Dean to claim former Republican Senator Barry Goldwater, and author of Conscience of a Conservative, would decry the modern Republican party's course, Dean moved on to describe a study by various researchers who claimed many conservatives "fit with the authoritarian personality." Dean contended that a number conservatives "march in lockstep when they get the word from the authority they are expected to follow."

The Countdown host then proceeded to bring up Nazi Germany and Italy's fascism of the 30s: "A lot of [the academic work] is very unsettling. It deals with psychological principles that are frightening and that may have faced other nations at other times in Germany and Italy in the 30s coming to mind in particular. How does it apply now? And to what degree should it scare us? And to what degree is it something that might still be forestalled?"

Olbermann admitted to his overuse of "Orwellian analogies" as he compared al-Qaeda to the Two Minutes Hate from 1984 which served as "an enemy to coalesce around or the whole thing falls apart." Olbermann showed fascination with a passage from Dean's book which suggested that "neoconservatives and many Republicans" might be willing to deliberately "provoke potential terrorists" in order "to maintain influence and control of the presidency." Olbermann continued: "That's ominous not just in the sense that authoritarians involved in conservatism and now Republicanism would politicize counterterror here, which we've already argued that point on many occasions. But are you actually saying here they would set up, encourage terrorism from other countries to set them up as a bogeyman to have again that group to hate here, that group to more importantly afraid of here?"

Olbermann went on to argue that "this all seems to require not merely venality or immorality, but a kind of amorality where morals don't enter into it at all. We're right, so anything we do to preserve our process, our power, even if it by itself is wrong, it's right in the greater sense." After Olbermann asked Dean whom he meant to label as "authoritarian figures," the Countdown host even voiced agreement with Dean's claim that Cheney and Bush are both authoritarian as Olbermann agreed, "Yeah."

Olbermann then implied there was a need for hope that either Bush's followers would "wise up" and stop their "lockstep salute," or that they, apparently referring to Bush and other conservatives in the government, would turn out to be "fanatics" which will cause them to "screw up." Olbermann considered it to be a "lockstep salute" for Bush supporters to claim "of course there's WMD, of course there are terrorists, of course there's al-Qaeda, of course everything is the way the President says it."

After inviting Dean to compare the Watergate activities of the Nixon administration to the Bush administration, Olbermann, bolstering Dean's credibility by referring to him as a "historian" and "a big part of history," wondered if America is "facing a legitimate threat to the concept of democracy." In conclusion, Olbermann gave his approval to Dean's book: "It's an extraordinary document."

Below is a transcript of the portions of Olbermann's interview with Dean during which they discussed Dean's book, from the July 10 Countdown show:

Olbermann: "It's interesting there was so much personal in that letter from Mr. Hoekstra to Mr. Bush, that it seemed that there was as much offense taken that he personally, Mr. Hoekstra did not know what Mr. Bush's people were doing as any violation of law there. Does this sort of segue us into the topic of the book, that there's way too much personal going on here rather than politically professional?"

John Dean: "Well, I think, you know, the question is really what had happened at the presidential or the vice-presidential level. A lot of these efforts to withhold information from the Congress are really coming out Cheney's office. It may well be his office giving instructions, and the President might have given Hoekstra an assurance, 'Hey, I'm going to give you everything I've got when I got it,' and he might have been offended by that. So it's hard to tell. We don't have enough facts yet, but to say again to the end of the book there certainly are a number of conservatives up there who will march in lockstep when they get the word from the authority they are expected to follow."

Olbermann: "That would be the thesis of the book, and we'll go into that at length, but I wanted to start at the very beginning. You dedicated this book to Barry Goldwater. What would he, in your opinion, having known him and having dealt with him on these political issues, have thought of the current conservative movement as it has become? And what would the conservative movement have thought of him at this point? What do they think of him now?"

Dean: "Well, that's a, I think right now we can say -- in fact, I discuss this in the book -- that Goldwater Republicanism is really RIP. It's been put to rest by most of the people who are now active in moving the movement further to the right than it's ever been. I think the Senator before he departed was very distressed with conservatism. In fact, it was our conversations back in 1994 that started this book. It's really where I began. We wanted to find answers to the questions as to why Republicans were acting as they were, why conservatives had taken over the party and were being followed, you know, as easily as they were in taking the party where he didn't think it should go."

Olbermann: "What did you find? In less than 200 pages that the book goes to?"

Dean: "I ran into a massive study that had really been going on for 50 years now, by academics, they've never really shared this with the general public. It's remarkable analysis of the authoritarian personality, both those who are inclined to follow leaders and those who jump in front and want to be the leaders. It was not the opinion of social scientists. It was information they drew by questioning large numbers of people, hundreds of thousands of people, in anonymous testing where they conceded, you know, their innermost feelings and reactions to things. And it turned out that these people were, most of these that came out in the testing were people who had been prequalified to be conservatives, and then they found that this indeed fit with the authoritarian personality."

Olbermann: "Does it really, do the studies indicate that it really has anything to do with the political point-of-view? Is it, would it be easier to essentially superimpose authoritarianism over the right than it would the left? Is it theoretically possible that they could have gone in either direction and it's just a question of people who like to follow other people?"

Dean: "They have found really maybe a small, one percent of the left who follow authoritarianism, probably the far left. But as far as widespread testing, it is just overwhelmingly conservative orientation."

Olbermann: "There is an extraordinary amount of academic work that you quote in the book. A lot of it is very unsettling. It deals with psychological principles that are frightening and that may have faced other nations at other times in Germany and Italy in the 30s coming to mind in particular. How does it apply now? And to what degree should it scare us? And to what degree is it something that might still be forestalled?"

Dean: "Well, to me it was something of an epiphany to run into this information. First, I'd never read about it before, I'd sort of worked my way into it until I found it. It's not generally known out there what's going on. And I think from best we can tell, these people, the followers, a few of them will change their ways when they realize what they're doing. They're not even aware of their behavior. The leaders, those who were inclined to dominate, are not going to change a second. They're going to be what they are. So, by and large, the reason I write about this is I think we need to understand it and realize when you take a certain step and vote a certain way and head in a certain direction where this can end up. So it's sort of a cautionary note. It's a warning as to where this can go because other countries have gone there."

Olbermann: "And the idea of leaders and followers going down this path and perhaps taking a country with them requires, this whole edifice requires an enemy -- communism, al-Qaeda, Democrats, me, whoever -- for the two minutes hate. I mean, there is, we overuse, I overuse the Orwellian analogies to nauseating proportions, but it really was, in reading what you wrote about, and especially what the academics talked about there was that two minutes hate thing. There has to be an opponent, an enemy to coalesce around or the whole thing falls apart. So is that the gist of it?"

Dean: "It is one of the things that, believe it or not, still holds conservatism together because there are many factions in conservatism, and their dislike or hatred of those they portray as liberal, who will be anybody who basically disagrees with them, is one of the cohesive factors. There are a few others, but that's certainly one of the basics. There's no question that the, particularly the followers, they're terribly very aggressive in their effort to pursue and help their authority figure out, or there authority beliefs out. They will do whatever needs to be done in many regards. They will blindly follow. They stay loyal too long. And this is the frightening part of it."

Olbermann: "Let me read something from the book. Let me read this one quote, then I have a question about it. 'Many people believe that neoconservatives and many Republicans appreciate that they are more likely to maintain influence and control of the presidency if the nation remains under ever-increasing threats of terrorism, so they have no hesitation in pursuing policies that can provoke potential terrorists throughout the world.' That's ominous not just in the sense that authoritarians involved in conservatism and now Republicanism would politicize counterterror here, which we've already argued that point on many occasions. But are you actually saying here they would set up, encourage terrorism from other countries to set them up as a bogeyman to have again that group to hate here, that group to more importantly afraid of here?"

Dean: "What I'm saying is that there has been fear mongering the likes of which we have not seen in a long time in this country. It happened early in the Cold War. We got accustomed to it, we learned to live with it, we learned to understand what it was about and get it in proportion. We haven't done that yet with terrorism. And this administration is really capitalizing on it and using it for its political advantage. No question, the academic testing shows, the empirical evidence shows that when people are frightened, they tend to go to these authority figures, they tend to become more conservative. So it's paid off for them politically to do this."

Olbermann: "This all seems to require not merely venality or immorality, but a kind of amorality where morals don't enter into it at all. We're right, so anything we do to preserve our process, our power, even if it by itself is wrong, it's right in the greater sense. It's that wonderful rationalization that everybody uses in small doses throughout their lives. But is this idea, this sort of psychological review of the whole thing, does it apply to Dick Cheney? Does it apply to George Bush? Does it apply to Bill Frist? Who are the names on these authoritarian figures?"

Dean: "You just named three that I discuss in some length in the book. I focused in the book not on the Bush administration and Cheney and the President, but I, because they really, I've been there, done that. But I wanted to understand is what they have done is they've made it legitimate to have authoritarianism. It was already operating on Capitol Hill. After the '94 control by the Republicans of the Congress, it recreated the mood, it restructured the Congress itself in a very authoritarian style, in the House in particular. The Senate hasn't gone there yet, but it's going there because more House members are moving over. This atmosphere is what Bush and Cheney walked into. They are authoritarian personalities, Cheney much more so than Bush."

Olbermann: "Yeah."

Dean: "And they have made it legitimate and they have taken it way past where anybody's ever taken it in the United States."

Olbermann: "Our society's best defense against that is what? Do we have to hope that, as you suggested, the people who follow wise up and break away from this sort of lockstep salute that, well of course they're right, of course there's WMD, of course there are terrorists, of course there's al-Qaeda, of course everything is the way the President says it, or do we rely on the hope that these are fanatics and fanatics always screw up because they would rather believe in their own cause than double-check their own math?"

Dean: "The lead researcher in this field told me, he said I look at the numbers in the United States and I see about 23 percent of the population who are pure right-wing authoritarian followers. They're not going to change. They're going to march over the cliff. The best thing to deal with them, and they're growing, and they have a tremendous influence on Republican politics. The best thing, the best defense is understanding them, to realize what they're doing, how they're doing it, and how they operate. Then it can be kept in perspective. Then they can be seen for what they are."

Olbermann: "Did any of this ring familiar to you from the Nixon administration? Or is this a different world?"

Dean: "No, I must say that about everything that went wrong with Watergate, you could really count to authoritarianism, as well."

Olbermann: "Give me an example. In other words, not getting away with it was a result of it, too?"

Dean: "Take Gordon Liddy and his following whatever Nixon wants, even a hint of anything he wants. Salute, yes sir, let's do it."

Olbermann: "And the story that he has told about you and you've told about him about him saying I have all of this knowledge in my brain that could bring the President of the United States down, tell me to go and stand in a corner and what was the rest of it?"

Dean: "Tell me where you want me shot. He said I don't want you shooting me in my house because I've got children. But shoot me on the street corner. That's a loyal right-wing authoritarian follower in action at the extreme."

Olbermann: "You've been an historian, you've been a part of history. You've been at one of the central moments of history in the 20th century. What kind of danger, are we facing a legitimate threat to the concept of democracy in this country?"

Dean: "I don't think we're in a fascist road right now. We are so close to it though, Keith. That's why I wrote the book. Because I want people to understand exactly what is going on and why it's going on."

Olbermann: "It is an extraordinary document. All the best with it. John Dean, former counsel, White House counsel to Richard Nixon, author of the new book, Conservatives without Conscience. As always, sir, great thanks for coming in."



TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; Philosophy; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: conservatives; espnsogladheleft; johndean; msnbcwhatsthat; nooneinaudience; olbermann; olberwoman; totallunatic; totaltrash
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-78 next last

1 posted on 07/11/2006 6:41:00 AM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Howlin

The only thing smaller than Olbermann's audience is Maureen Dowd's list of boyfriends or appearances by Helen Thomas in "most watched people" lists.


2 posted on 07/11/2006 6:42:31 AM PDT by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

Well, Keith finally found someone of equal intellect to interview.


3 posted on 07/11/2006 6:45:42 AM PDT by facedown (Armed in the Heartland)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: onyx; Mo1; A Citizen Reporter; McGavin999; Dog Gone; commish; Common Tator; deport; sinkspur; ...

Ping...


4 posted on 07/11/2006 6:45:50 AM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #5 Removed by Moderator

To: facedown; LS

I happen to catch this on the rerun; I swear they were slobbering on the TV screen.

It had that feeling of "Aha, finally! Now we know 'what's wrong with them.'"


6 posted on 07/11/2006 6:47:16 AM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
So people who support the President have been reduced to a psychological experiment?
7 posted on 07/11/2006 6:50:27 AM PDT by tobyhill (The War on Terrorism is not for the weak.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LS

No kidding. As I was reading the article, the only thing that brought a smile to my face is that I know that no more than 7 people saw it.


8 posted on 07/11/2006 6:52:36 AM PDT by Right Cal Gal (Conservatives know the names of Tookie's VICTIMS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

Pathetic.

Thanks for the ping.


9 posted on 07/11/2006 6:54:00 AM PDT by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone

The seemed like THIS was going to be something they are "going with" for the 2006 and 2008 election: fearmongering.


10 posted on 07/11/2006 6:56:55 AM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

Sounds like Dean and Olbermann think we just may be mentally unstable, doesn't it?


11 posted on 07/11/2006 6:57:33 AM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

I know we seem authoritarian (we, who espouse rule of law) to them (they, who espouse rule of "feelings" -- theirs).


12 posted on 07/11/2006 6:59:04 AM PDT by Migraine (...diversity is great (until it happens to you)...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

Could be, but then the opinion of a multiple white-collar felon and an ex-sports writer carries very little water with me.

Besides, their confusion about the correct distinction between authoritative and athoritarian is amusing. Little boys whining for having been busted for their cumulative stupidity is all I read there.


13 posted on 07/11/2006 7:00:58 AM PDT by BelegStrongbow (www.stjosephssanford.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Olbermann not only made his latest reference to George Orwell's 1984, but he also found relevance in bringing up Nazi Germany

Keith Olberman talking authoritatively about Nazism is like Rosie O'Donnell coming out with a book titled "The Heterosexual Weight Loss Plan".

The smaller his audience gets, the more he foams at the mouth in an effort to be seen as "dangerous" like that weirdo on CNBC who talks about stocks.

14 posted on 07/11/2006 7:12:00 AM PDT by Darkwolf377
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Olbermann admitted to his overuse of "Orwellian analogies"

Does he fool anyone into thinking he's ever read any book BUT 1984, which, as great a book as it is, is short and easy to grasp?

"neoconservatives and many Republicans" might be willing to deliberately "provoke potential terrorists" in order "to maintain influence and control of the presidency."

Yes, that's right, Bush is "overdoing it" in Gitmo and Iraq because he wants Al Qaeda to strike again.

What a freakin lepton.

15 posted on 07/11/2006 7:14:00 AM PDT by Darkwolf377
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

Laura Ingraham played salivating snippets of Olbermann tongue sucking John Dean last night. Hilarious!!

"Olbermann to Dean: "You've been an historian, you've been a part of history. You've been at one of the central moments of history in the 20th century...."


16 posted on 07/11/2006 7:14:17 AM PDT by YaYa123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: YaYa123
"Olbermann to Dean: "You've been an historian, you've been a part of history. You've been at one of the central moments of history in the 20th century...."

And I have no doubt Dean was nodding his head, right?

You should have SEEN them; they had their heads together like they had found the Holy Grail.

17 posted on 07/11/2006 7:15:17 AM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Pookyhead
They will chastise you publicly, label you a Neanderthal 'bigot', and kick your butt right out the door.

I've yet to meet the liberal who would dare even TRY to kick my butt. :)

18 posted on 07/11/2006 7:16:06 AM PDT by Darkwolf377
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
"I ran into a massive study that had really been going on for 50 years now, by academics, they've never really shared this with the general public."

LOL! You can't make this stuff up!

Oooooh, you "ran into this massive study"--hope your seat belt was on, John.

19 posted on 07/11/2006 7:17:07 AM PDT by Darkwolf377
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

Olberman and Dean "had their heads together like they had found the Holy Grail."


Watergate IS their Holy Grail!! Another reason why Ann Coulter is right about liberalism being a religion.


20 posted on 07/11/2006 7:18:34 AM PDT by YaYa123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
"Olbermann showed fascination with a passage from Dean's book which suggested that "neoconservatives and many Republicans" might be willing to deliberately "provoke potential terrorists" in order "to maintain influence and control of the presidency."

Olbermann continued: "That's ominous not just in the sense that authoritarians involved in conservatism and now Republicanism would politicize counterterror here, which we've already argued that point on many occasions. But are you actually saying here they would set up, encourage terrorism from other countries to set them up as a bogeyman to have again that group to hate here, that group to more importantly afraid of here?"

Is there a pair of dimwits anywhere, more clueless than these two and do they really believe the hate-filled garbage they spew or is their rhetoric simply to advance their liberal agenda?

Either way, its sad and disgusting to see anyone even suggesting such a crass and baseless accusation.

Yes, "we" (Conservatives) actually "invited" this response to our actions (whatever they might have been?) and most definetly "provoked" our enemy in attacking us on many occasions, in many places, including 9/11.

YES, WE (CONSERVATIVE) BROUGHT THIS ON OURSELVES.
WE "PROVOKED IT", DON'T YOU KNOW, SIMPLY TO RETAIN POWER

21 posted on 07/11/2006 7:21:09 AM PDT by seasoned traditionalist (ALL MUSLIMS ARE NOT TERRORISTS, BUT ALL TERRORISTS ARE MUSLIMS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
LOL, what a conspirazoid! Isn't he the guy who whined that Ohio was stolen?

What a NancyBoy, is he afraid of everything?
22 posted on 07/11/2006 7:21:54 AM PDT by roses of sharon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: YaYa123
Dean: "I ran into a massive study that had really been going on for 50 years now, by academics, they've never really shared this with the general public.

Sure; let's all pretend that they had this "information" and nobody talked about it.

It's remarkable analysis of the authoritarian personality, both those who are inclined to follow leaders and those who jump in front and want to be the leaders. It was not the opinion of social scientists.

Then who???

It was information they drew by questioning large numbers of people, hundreds of thousands of people, in anonymous testing where they conceded, you know, their innermost feelings and reactions to things.

Secret undisclosed testing? Who's sounding authoritarian here?

And it turned out that these people were, most of these that came out in the testing were people who had been prequalified to be conservatives????, and then they found that this indeed fit with the authoritarian personality."

What the HELL is he talking about???

23 posted on 07/11/2006 7:22:24 AM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

Oh yes, bring up the attention-getting Nixon comparison. Talk about beating a dead horse. That is worthy of the "award."


24 posted on 07/11/2006 7:25:06 AM PDT by onyx (Deport the trolls --- send them back to DU)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: YaYa123
Watergate IS their Holy Grail!!

To be honest, I was surprised when Dean didn't say "This isn't as bad as Watergate," because, after all, HE was involved with that and it's his claim to fame, and he and Woodward and Bernstein without fail come out and say that, no matter what the situation.

The entire time, I just think that they both felt like they have finally hit upon the 'fatal bullet' that will once and for all rid them of those pesky conservatives: "They're certifiable."

Their strategy to win in 2006 and 2008 is to say we're scary and crazy.

25 posted on 07/11/2006 7:25:28 AM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Darkwolf377
"I ran into a massive study that had really been going on for 50 years now, by academics, they've never really shared this with the general public."

I'm thinking a Manhattan-style study, how about you?

Geez.

26 posted on 07/11/2006 7:27:22 AM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: seasoned traditionalist
It's a well worn tactic of the left, they dehumanize their political opponents in order to induce hatred, fear, and violence.

Since they cannot win policy arguments, they incite radicalism, its done all over the world.

Islamic cults do the same to Jews and infidels in general, they dehumanize them in order to make us easier for their children and followers to kill.
27 posted on 07/11/2006 7:28:22 AM PDT by roses of sharon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
I'm thinking a Manhattan-style study, how about you?

At some wine-sipping party one of the "writers" of this said "Come in here, I wanna show you something" and dug out a moldy old manuscript from his college days. "Well, whaddaya think? Republicans are Nazis, huh, huh?!?!?!"

28 posted on 07/11/2006 7:30:48 AM PDT by Darkwolf377
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: facedown
LOL! Just what I was thinking! They are both "Dummer than a Bag of Hammers"!

Seem to me that Poor Mr. Dean, has a case of Nixon Era sour Republican grapes.........

I guess all of Olbermann's 12 viewers will rush out and buy Dean's book.

I wonder how long it will take for the book to be #1 on the NYT Bestseller list ?

29 posted on 07/11/2006 7:40:36 AM PDT by alice_in_bubbaland (NY Slimes the paper of record for OBL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Darkwolf377

"as "dangerous" like that weirdo on CNBC who talks about stocks."

Mu husband swears that he is a stock market genius! I just laugh....he's a prime candidate for the nuthouse! His voice drives me crazy too.


30 posted on 07/11/2006 7:44:02 AM PDT by alice_in_bubbaland (NY Slimes the paper of record for OBL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

The Universities better pump out more Shrinks because America is turning more and more mentally unstable.


31 posted on 07/11/2006 7:46:35 AM PDT by tobyhill (The War on Terrorism is not for the weak.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Olbermann admitted to his overuse of "Orwellian analogies" as he compared al-Qaeda to the Two Minutes Hate from 1984 which served as "an enemy to coalesce around or the whole thing falls apart."

This is the guy whose show features a two-minute or so “Worst Person on Earth” segment each day.

Seriously, Olbermann is a lunatic in a journalist suit. But, on the bright side, nobody but other lunatics watch him.


32 posted on 07/11/2006 7:47:27 AM PDT by dead (I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Migraine
I know we seem authoritarian (we, who espouse rule of law) to them (they, who espouse rule of "feelings" -- theirs).

Yes, they are animated primarily by emotions not logic not rationality. Unfortunately the emotions that dictate their actions and underly their attitudes are hatred, prejudice, bigotry and fear. This is the source of the fanaticism we sense from them.

They are focused in a very primal sense on their hatred for fellow Americans who hold traditional patriotic and religious values. The combination of traditional religious values combined with traditional American pride are the witches brew that sends liberals into an uncontrollable frenzy of hatred and bigotry.

Admit to traditional religious and traditional American values and you are worse than Islamofascist murderers. Liberals would much rather exterminate YOU than they would Bin-Laden. To realize this is to begin to understand the bigoted, hateful, prejudicial nature of liberals.

Should they regain power be assured that they will target YOU and all you hold dear. Their focus and resources will be aimed at neutralizing and/or destroying your ability to exercise control. Any energy or resources remaining will be half-heartedly used to create the impression that they are confronting Islamic fanatics.

33 posted on 07/11/2006 7:48:34 AM PDT by Awgie (truth is always stranger than fiction)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
To be honest, I was surprised when Dean didn't say "This isn't as bad as Watergate," because, after all, HE was involved with that and it's his claim to fame, and he and Woodward and Bernstein without fail come out and say that, no matter what the situation.

Woodward should just tattoo "This isn't as bad as Watergate" on his forehead to save the strain on his vocal chords.

34 posted on 07/11/2006 7:52:11 AM PDT by dead (I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: alice_in_bubbaland

Yeah, when he starts jumping up and screeching, I think "Holy cow, get the net!"


35 posted on 07/11/2006 7:53:47 AM PDT by Darkwolf377
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
"MSNBC's Keith Olbermann hosted former Nixon White House counsel and frequent Bush administration critic John Dean..."

He was a somewhat relevant lawyer with a trophy wife parsing syllables during Watergate in the 70's. He has never been a part of or had access to the current administration. He's supposed to be credible to cheap shot artist Keith Overthetopman? A show and interview about nothin'.
36 posted on 07/11/2006 7:53:53 AM PDT by Liberty Valance (Keep a simple manner for a happy life)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Liberty Valance

This was perhaps the worst interview in television history and that is saying something given that on the same day the Today show was interviewing a screeching pig.

The hapless Olbermann has precious few guests. The laughable Dean, the dress up clown Dana M from the Washington Post and that guy from Newsweek. Then for extra authority you throw in Lawrence "Creepy Liar!" O'Donnell and Mo Roca for balance.

This show is taking on water faster than Elizabeth Taylor.


37 posted on 07/11/2006 8:05:27 AM PDT by Patrick1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

Did you see the Keith Olbermann puff piece in the New York Times today? It goes on and on and on about how his ratings for the 24-35 demographic have gone up, but never says what the ratings are. It also doesn't have a word about him sleeping with a groupie of his show and dumping her (she's the one who revealed his snarky emails.)

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/11/arts/television


38 posted on 07/11/2006 8:13:51 AM PDT by NYCVirago
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
I ran into a massive study that had really been going on for 50 years now, by academics, they've never really shared this with the general public.

The supersecret ancient and unquestionable science revealed.


39 posted on 07/11/2006 8:25:25 AM PDT by dead (I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Darkwolf377

leptons are more useful.


40 posted on 07/11/2006 8:26:04 AM PDT by Getready
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

this is hillarious, rush is right if you want to know what the democrats are up to see what they are accusing others of...

go back and look at the quotes from olberman again but instead of republicans and al qeada think democrats and global warming or gay marriage or any issue at all and you have a copy of the democrat play book


41 posted on 07/11/2006 8:26:56 AM PDT by edzo4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dead

It evidently is more secret than Skull and Bones!

Who are these people? Is John Conyers involved?

Why haven't we heard one word about this since 1956???


42 posted on 07/11/2006 8:28:19 AM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

This interview could be summed up as simply two liberal ignoramuses yammering at one another. Imagine, a group of utra-liberal "intellectual" academia nuts deducing that conservatives are basically evil people. What a shock.


43 posted on 07/11/2006 8:32:07 AM PDT by driftless ( For life-long happiness, learn how to play the accordion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Does Oberman realize that Nazi Germany and Italy's fascism of the 30s .. they were all from the Socialist Party???
44 posted on 07/11/2006 8:39:28 AM PDT by Mo1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePb6H-j51xE&search=Democrats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
"Dean contended that a number conservatives "march in lockstep when they get the word from the authority they are expected to follow."

LOL Dean obviously has never visited FR. If you want to find critics of Bush, Rush, Hannity, Coulter, Buchanan, Savage, O'Reilly, or any other conservative, you can find plenty of them right here.

But can Dean explain why - if there are no authoritarians on the Left - the Left always creates authoritarian or totalitarian governments? As usual, when finding authoritarians only on the Right, the Left is engaging in psychological projection.
45 posted on 07/11/2006 9:33:16 AM PDT by Steve_Seattle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Darkwolf377
"massive study"

Did he ever identify the study or its authors?
46 posted on 07/11/2006 9:37:03 AM PDT by Steve_Seattle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

It's hard to know where to begin with these two, isn't it?

John Dean...I'd almost give him a pass because of his age- but that's unfair to the many older men who still have their wits about them and have retained the ability to T H I N K. Just reading the interview muddies my brain!

Olberman..well...ppppfffttt..


47 posted on 07/11/2006 9:43:49 AM PDT by SE Mom (Proud mom of an Iraq war combat vet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steve_Seattle

Oh, please! It was a "massive study," why question it, they said it on TV, it MUST be legit! It was MASSIVE! Too big to name!


48 posted on 07/11/2006 9:46:25 AM PDT by Darkwolf377
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Mo1

Just like Orwell's "1984" described EngSoc or English Socialism ruling England.


49 posted on 07/11/2006 10:01:24 AM PDT by Swiss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

John Dean has even less credibility than Howard Dean.

However, anything that fans the paranoia on the Left is OK with me.

Olbermann can't reach the moral ground of Dan Rather if he stands on his tiptoes. At least Dan had some journalistic capability early in his career. Now Dan is finished and Olbermann is a has-been that never-was.


50 posted on 07/11/2006 10:11:44 AM PDT by You Dirty Rats (I Love Free Republic!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-78 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson