Keith, Good Night, and Good Riddance

By Justin Gardner | Related entries in Democrats, Partisan Hacks

I know many Dems who love him, but I can’t stand the guy. And the fact that he used Edward R. Murrow’s famous sign off to end his show…ugh.

From NY Times:

In a closing statement on his show, Mr. Olbermann said simply that it would be the last edition of the program. He offered no explanation other than on occasion “all that surrounded the show – but never the show itself – was just too much for me.”

Mr. Olbermann thanked his viewers for their enthusiastic support of a show that had “gradually established its position as antiestablishment.”

In a statement, MSNBC said: “MSNBC and Keith Olbermann have ended their contract. The last broadcast of ‘Countdown with Keith Olbermann’ will be this evening. MSNBC thanks Keith for his integral role in MSNBC’s success and we wish him well in his future endeavors.”

The world will be better with him off the air.

Now…if only Glenn Beck would quit…


This entry was posted on Saturday, January 22nd, 2011 and is filed under Democrats, Partisan Hacks. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

17 Responses to “Keith, Good Night, and Good Riddance”

  1. Tweets that mention Donklephant » Blog Archive » Keith, Good Night, and Good Riddance -- Topsy.com Says:

    [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Justin Gardner, Donklephant. Donklephant said: DONKLEPHANT: Keith, Good Night, and Good Riddance http://ow.ly/1aYG71 [...]

  2. Jim S Says:

    I saw very little of Olbermann. That was pretty much enough. Just as glad he’s off the air now.

  3. kranky kritter Says:

    So now he graduates to douchebag at large until he finds a new landing spot. Will this be the last we hear of him at comparable volume. I hope so, but doubt it. Then again, Bill Maher is nice and easy to ignopre these days. So there’s hope.

    In theory, it would seem difficult to find someone as relentlessly smug and sanctimonious as Olberman to replace him. Ordinarily, I would not misunderestimate MSNBC. But Comcast seems to be taking the reins. And the seem to like the anti-star formula where you constantly rotate voices.

  4. Tillyosu Says:

    Wow some surprising moderation out of our blog host. I pegged you for a fan Justin. I actually happen to agree with you – on both Olbermann and Beck.

  5. BlackTantalus Says:

    Olbermann was fired because he would not hate and he would not lie. Right wingers hate that and lie about it. But if they could have caught him in a lie, they would have made sure you heard about it! Again and again. Notice you can’t think of a single lie!

  6. kranky kritter Says:

    Black Rantalous, is that really the best you got? Weak-@ss stuff.

    Olberman was fired because he was an employee who didn’t get along with his bosses. He has no intrinsic right to his privileged position as MSNBC’s high commercial priest of political commentary from the left. He served at the pleasure of the folks who made that throne. And their thrill was gone.

    Please notice that he has not been silenced. He is free to build his own independent church and sit upon whatever throne he and his minions think he deserves and are willing to tangibly support.

    Or he is free to seek new patronage. Whatever he does, he should have no illusion as to why any commercial media enterprise might hire him. He is an eyeball delivery man, notwithstanding the fact that many of the eyeballs he delivers are attached to those who adore his political views.

  7. theWord Says:

    I must disagree completely on the assessment of Olbermann. Olbermann was not a news person, Countdown was an opinion show and he has every right to his opinion (Kranky is correct that his corporate employers have the right to fire him but that doesn’t mean it is a good thing) and unless he lied, I don’t have an issue. There seems to be the most concern over his tone. I’d point out that a crack like “Douchebag at large” would put Kranky squarely under that same criticism.

    To my knowledge, there have been no studies showing that msnbc viewers have been misinformed by that network. So to me it seems like you just don’t like his opinion or delivery (I heard the term smug- Have you ever listened to George Will or Peggy Noonan?), Progressive views are given a fractional airing compared to the right wing propaganda machine. The GOP has several entire networks that not only have the other sides back but who are only casually acquainted with the truth much of the time.

    Equating Beck and Olbermann is an offensive comparison and more irresponsible than anything he has ever been guilty of. Calling someone a war criminal when to some there is no doubt (and to others there should at least be a reasonable question to pursue based on the evidence) is not equivalent to saying the President is a racist and hates white people. One is irresponsible, the other is saying something you don’t want to hear. It only needs to be shouted because of the silence and acquiescence of the press and of the GOP to any crimes of it’s party.

    For people who have spouted on about the benefits of divided government, If you think that having only a single side represented is a good thing, I think you must be delusional. Do you think O’Reilly or Beck will suddenly act like adults and present balanced, factual views?

    I think this article raised some great points. http://www.consortiumnews.com/2011/012211.html

  8. kreiz Says:

    100% agreement on Beck and Olbermann. Man does not live by sneering alone.

  9. blackout Says:

    The Beck=Olbermann meme is getting pretty tired. I don’t think they’re much alike in terms of rhetoric, purpose or influence. It’s a lazy formulation and is one of those curious areas of overlap between a certain subset of independents and conservatives which, I assume, makes those independents feel like they’re being objective while also serving as their bona fides when speaking with conservatives.

  10. kranky kritter Says:

    Kranky is correct that his corporate employers have the right to fire him but that doesn’t mean it is a good thing) and unless he lied, I don’t have an issue. There seems to be the most concern over his tone. I’d point out that a crack like “Douchebag at large” would put Kranky squarely under that same criticism.

    I’m OK with that. In case I was unclear, I don’t like Olberman. I think he’s part of the “anger over insight” problem. If it quacks like a douche… .

    Is his dismissal a “good” thing? Hmm. I won’t miss him. Lots of other folks won’t either, including Justin, a reliable supporter of the democratic party’s perspective.

    But it’s doubtful he’s gone away, except from MSNBC. Olberman will be replaced with someone else who will speak with the same editorial slant as the rest at MSNBC. And Olberman will at some point take his existing show on the road. He’ll find a new lectern from which to preach the same homilies to his loyal choir. That makes it pretty hard to argue that the left has actually lost a prominent voice.

    So to me it seems like you just don’t like his opinion or delivery (I heard the term smug- Have you ever listened to George Will or Peggy Noonan?).

    “Just?” Well, I don’t like his opinion or his delivery. And there are other things I don’t like. Like all partisans, Olberman tells half the story and glosses over inconvenient counterarguments regardless of their salience.

    (I heard the term smug- Have you ever listened to George Will or Peggy Noonan?), Progressive views are given a fractional airing compared to the right wing propaganda machine. The GOP has several entire networks that not only have the other sides back but who are only casually acquainted with the truth much of the time.

    Equating Beck and Olbermann is an offensive comparison and more irresponsible than anything he has ever been guilty of. Calling someone a war criminal when to some there is no doubt (and to others there should at least be a reasonable question to pursue based on the evidence) is not equivalent to saying the President is a racist and hates white people.

    Thank you for your lovely invitation to the CPD party. Mr Kritter respectfully declines to attend.

  11. theWord Says:

    @kk
    The fatal flaw of CPD is that it requires you to be devoid of thinking. Call out what needs to be called out eveywhere and anywhere.

    I have said in the past that there are people who have said things I disagree with Randy Rhodes comes to mind but IMO making everything falsely equivalent so that you can ride your high horse, is every bit as irresponsible and douche-like. Not seeing any insight there at all to keep on your track.

  12. kranky kritter Says:

    I did mean it when I said I was declining your invitation.

    The fatal flaw of CPD is that it requires you to be devoid of thinking.

    I find this preposterous: not worth debating or discussing here. Feel free to continue to believe this, and feel free to consider me to be on a high horse.

    At my own site, The Cranky Critter, I will be discussing what I consider to be a fatal flaw in the reasoning of many folks who love to practice CPD. When I get round to it. Hopefully tonight. I’ll probably be using elements of this thread, including a quote from you as part of my vehicle.

    Briefly the flaw is to consistently conflate comparison with equation for rhetorical advantage. The tactic is to accuse anyone who makes a comparison and notices worthwhile similarities of committing the high crime of false equivalence.

  13. theWord Says:

    Thanks for the freedom.
    Our problem continues to be that you see any attack as a partisan one on an equal footing while I think there are difference and that people who allow bad behavior on either side to be tolerated as wrong. I think you are an enabler and that is the issue I have but feel free to have a one-sided argument elsewhere and applaud yourself on the brilliance of your conclusion. If you have a quote of mine you’d like me to clarify, I’d be happy to.

    btw, I don’t believe you can’t think but when you equate everything as equal, I’d hardly call it critical thinking. When push comes to shove about a year ago you said Coulter was on a different plane. Had someone else said it you’d be looking down from the high horse again. There should be things we can all agree on. You believe we never will.

    You ended with
    Briefly the flaw is to consistently conflate comparison with equation for rhetorical advantage.

    I think that is precisely what you have all done with Olbermann. But then again only your judgment matters and anyone who exercises their own is engaging in CPD. Pompous as hell to my thinking. Feel free to quote me.

  14. kranky kritter Says:

    I don’t believe you can’t think but when you equate everything as equal, I’d hardly call it critical thinking.

    Cheerfully agreed. When anyone does that, it isn’t critical thinking. The next time I state that everything is equal, please be sure to point this out by calling attention to the specific example where I have done so.

    Also, the next time that I compare two things and notice similarities, please be sure to notice that I haven’t stated that those two things are therefore equal.

    That seems pretty doable to me. So be certain that the next time I compare things and you claim that I am equating them, I will point out this error.

  15. theWord Says:

    @kk
    To be honest I thought that was the reasonable conclusion by using Beck and Olbermann in the same post. Had you said I didn’t like him, that’s your call. I thought douche was over the top and I think any similarities between Beck and Olbermann are not too similar.

    Perhaps we have never heard each other. I repeatedly have said when I agreed someone was over the line – on both sides. It just gets tiresome to have every complaint dismissed as not valid. Some most surely are valid. Sometimes a Republican points that out, sometimes a Democrat and the sense I have always had is that it is never valid and always seen as partisan because of the religion of CPD which makes it unlikely that we will ever get beyond this.

  16. michael mcEachran Says:

    Olberman embarrassed me as a liberal. I hated that. I’m glad he isn’t there to embarrass me anymore. I wish Rachel Maddow could go back to her tone when she first started. She’s starting to embarrass me now, too. Chris Mathews embarrasses me mostly becuase he always seems to have spit on his lip. or in the corners of his mouth, and because of “shiver up my leg” comment. Ed Shultz is embarrassing because of his false rage thing. Lawrence O’Donnell hasn’t embarrassed me yet, but I’m waiting.

    If I were (more) conservative – i mean conservative enough to still believe in the Republican party after their dismal performance they’ve put in over the last decade – I’d be thoroughly embarrassed by the FOX line-up too.

  17. cutiepink Says:

    This is good new’s to one of us because 100% agreement on Beck and Olbermann…Thank you!!:D

Leave a Reply


NOTE TO COMMENTERS:


You must ALWAYS fill in the two word CAPTCHA below to submit a comment. And if this is your first time commenting on Donklephant, it will be held in a moderation queue for approval. Please don't resubmit the same comment a couple times. We'll get around to moderating it soon enough.


Also, sometimes even if you've commented before, it may still get placed in a moderation queue and/or sent to the spam folder. If it's just in moderation queue, it'll be published, but it may be deleted if it lands in the spam folder. My apologies if this happens but there are some keywords that push it into the spam folder.


One last note, we will not tolerate comments that disparage people based on age, sex, handicap, race, color, sexual orientation, national origin or ancestry. We reserve the right to delete these comments and ban the people who make them from ever commenting here again.


Thanks for understanding and have a pleasurable commenting experience.


Related Posts: