TresSugar

Janeane Garofalo Says Minorities in GOP Suffer Stockholm Syndrome - Overboard?

CitizenSugar — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 11:40:45 -0800

Comedian Janeane Garofalo came on Countdown With Keith Olbermann last night to play psychologist. Her subject was Rush Limbaugh and Republicans in general. Her prognosis for Rush? He's a narcissist who also struggles with self-loathing. Keith and Janeane also tried to figure out why Rush only has a 37 percent approval rating among women. She concluded that the type of woman that falls for Rush is exactly like Adolph Hitler's girlfriend. Ouch.

But perhaps, more irreverently, Janeane called out RNC chair Michael Steele as suffering from Stockholm syndrome. She said:

Michael Steele. Who's that black guy in the Republican party who suffers from Stockholm syndrome. Which means you try to curry favor with the oppressor. . . . Any female or person of color in the Republican party is struggling with Stockholm syndrome.

Do you think her sweeping comments went too far?

Keith Olbermann Rips Apart Subway Sandwiches

GiggleSugar — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 10:00:00 -0800

Can anyone on television get whipped up into a self-righteous frenzy quite like former sportscaster-turned-pundit-ranter Keith Olbermann on MSNBC? Here, an impersonator shows us what it would look like if ol' Keith told us what he really thinks about Subway's double meat special. He really gets rolling when he brings in the big guns, i.e. the threat of patronizing Quiznos instead. (On a side note, am I the only one who feels uncomfortable ordering a "6 inch double meat" sandwich? But I digress.)

Four More Years For Olbermann - Are You Counting Down?

LibertySugar — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 03:00:00 -0800

MSNBC President Phil Griffin announced yesterday that Countdown with Keith Olbermann has been renewed for at least the length of Barack Obama's term. He said:

"Keith Olbermann is at the core of MSNBC's current success. Countdown is our signature program and I'm thrilled that we're going to be able to bring it to Keith's loyal viewers for another four year term."

The often incensed and always passionate newscaster, who went on The View yesterday and admitted to not voting as a symbolic gesture of objectivity, will be on board for more of his Special Comments (surely to be creatively engineered after Bush leaves). Olbermann will also play a prominent role in MSNBC's coverage of all major news events. Is this announcement music (or noise) to your ears?

Briefing Book! Olbermann and Matthews Won't Anchor

LibertySugar — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 13:30:15 -0700

MSNBC: Too opinionated? Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews won't be anchoring election night coverage. - DailyKos
Palin: You know you've made it when . . .? Sarah Palin gets an action figure. - Townhall
Fred Thompson: Chivalry is dead? Fred Thompson flies first class wearing huge American flag top hat, while his wife sits in coach. - Huffington Post
Socialism: She built missiles to reach America and participated in Tiananmen Square protest? Interview with author of new book Socialism Is Great. - Shanghaiist
Interviews: Talking to the enemy with preconditions? The when, where, how of Charlie Gibson's Sarah Palin interview, which airs Thursday. - TVNewser

Military Prosecutor Says Justice Became Political at Gitmo

LibertySugar — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 14:30:01 -0700

Col. Morris D. Davis, the US military's former chief prosecutor at Guantanamo Bay, testified yesterday that top Pentagon officials interfered with his work for political reasons, and told him that there could be no detainee acquittals. The former prosecutor found himself on a peculiar side of a court case: testifying on behalf of a detainee, Osama bin Laden's driver Salim Hamdan, and being cross examined by his prosecutorial successor.

Brig. Gen. Thomas Hartmann (pictured), oversaw the military commissions and allegedly told prosecutor-turned-witness Davis: "If we don't get some cases going before the elections, this thing's going to implode." He also told him that charges against well-known detainees “could have real strategic political value” and that there could be no acquittals.

Last night, TV host Keith Olbermann's asserted that the policy Davis described, co-opted the values of the very constitution and sacred freedoms for which the heroes of the military have fought and died. To see that chilling video, and to find out what else went down in the court, read more.

On the witness stand, Davis recounted a conversation he had with General Hartmann: "He said, 'We've been holding these guys for years. How can we explain acquittals? We have to have convictions.'" Hartmann also insisted that prosecutors use evidence obtained during waterboarding.

Do you care whether justice is served at Guantanamo Bay? Is it dangerously easy to let slide these stories of partisan concerns compromising the constitution because we hear so many of them?

Source and Source

Not Worked Up: My Calm Response to the Culture of Outrage

CitizenSugar — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 10:00:17 -0700

Oh, Keith Olbermann. I think you're pretty smart. I do. I just have one tiny piece of hopefully constructive criticism. Your Special Comment segment, especially the one last night - well, you're becoming like too oft-prescribed antibiotics: ever-increasingly ineffective, while simultaneously making your opponents stronger.

I know that you feel strongly about a lot of things. But I'm beginning to think you can't possibly feel that outraged every single day. Your speeches while fairly well-reasoned, but delivered in your all CAPS LOCK style, are numbing. And it's not just you. Just in the past week or so, Obama's aide resigned over using the word "monster," and Geraldine Ferraro resigned over (arguably, allegedly, in my opinion) critical comments about her opinion of the nature of the media in this election. Have we come to the point where an apology, or reasoned discussion just isn't enough? Do we need blood in every battle? To make the Nancy Grace connection, read more.

While I do think there is a lot in this world to feel strongly about, I think that this fever pitch of reaction to every little thing is a distraction, focusing on the froth of response rather than the facts of the case. We get swept up in the Nancy Grace-ification, in essence responding to her reaction rather than reason. We've built a whole cast of characters around this appetite: Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck, anything on Fox News, the Drudge Report, to name but a few.

Are we so inured, so desensitized by the sheer force of the tidal wave of information, that it requires an ever increasing level of in-your-face, shocking, fist-pounding, outrage to snatch out attention? Are we addicted to outrage, this junk food of opinions? Perhaps if we were given quiet space, a moment to consider how we feel about the facts presented, we'd find ourselves with an opinion, maybe outrage of our own - without having to co-opt that which is created to sell the ads. I'd love to have a calm discussion about what you think.

Source

Keith Olbermann's Special Comment on Hillary Clinton

LibertySugar — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 06:00:59 -0700

In last night's Special Comment, Keith Olbermann painted HIllary Clinton as a dangerously passive figure in her own campaign. In his first ever Democrat-focused Special Comment, Keith regretfully reprimanded Clinton for not forcefully distancing herself from Geraldine Ferraro, whom he says dismissed Barack Obama's candidacy as nothing more than an equal-opportunity stunt. He labeled Ferraro's comments as manifestations of cheap, ignorant, and vile racism.

Keith never accused Clinton of being racist herself, instead disparaging her for following the perilous advice of advisers, who have left a mark of racial divisiveness on her candidacy.

I especially enjoyed the "experience montage" in which Keith compared great presidents with slight experience to presidential failures with perfect resumes. Keith effectively made the argument that either Clinton or Obama will inevitably have to present against the super-experienced McCain.

Check out the video for yourself. Do you think Clinton should have been as outraged as Keith by Ferraro's comments? Should she have emphatically distanced herself from the former congresswoman? Does Hillary need to grab the reigns back from her strategists, or should she be judged by the company she keeps?

Say What? Arnold Schwarzenegger Talks Smack About Rush

TresSugar — Thu, 28 May 2009 15:39:20 -0700

"Well I think that they say that Rush Limbaugh is the 800 lb. gorilla in the Republican Party. But I think that's mean-spirited to say that - because I think he's down to 650 lbs. I think one should be fair to him about this whole thing."

On CNN yesterday, the Republican governor of California sounded a bit like Rush-hater Keith Olbermann. Anyone think Arnold might switch parties soon? Who could be surprised? He's married to a Kennedy, after all.

To see the video, read more.

Top Ten Newscasters That Push My (Remote) Buttons

CitizenSugar — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 09:00:38 -0700

Think you have a pretty good idea how TV news insiders would talk about Bill O'Reilly and Keith Olbermann behind their backs? Radar went looking to confirm those suspicions in their feature "Head Trauma: Insiders Reveal Television's Most Hated Pundits." Sounds good, right? There are juicy quotes aplenty like this about Keith Olbermann: "He's just a full-blown, red-in-the-face screamer," followed by, "his disregard for those beneath him is almost comical." Ooh. And we thought O'Reilly was the screamer. The Radar list of hated new folks reminded me of the Maxim list of sexiest news anchors (hey, I have a brother. I hear things) and I'm convinced that surely there must be a middle ground. What's between love and hate? Ah, the all powerful remote button. Here are the top ten newscasters, that while I'm sure are lovely people, make me change the channel.

View Slideshow ›

No-Vacancy Mystery Solved: Ex Australian PM Usurps Obamas

CitizenSugar — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 11:00:58 -0800

Remember when the Bushes told the Obamas "no, you can't" when they requested to stay at the Blair House? The decline sent the incoming president into the frigid, Winter night to find lodging in a ~~manger~~ hotel. Fancy as it may be, Rachel Maddow led us to the overwhelming question "who is more important than the Obamas?" The answer came Tuesday from the Washington Post: John Howard, former prime minister of Australia, that's who.

Howard and his mates will stay at the Blair House on Jan. 12, the night (just. one. night.) before he, former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, and Colombian President Alvaro Uribe receive the Presidential Medal of Freedom from Bush. Blair and Uribe were also invited to stay but found their own rooms - Blair at the British Embassy (better cuppas, I'm sure) and Uribe in the vague warmth of "other accommodations."

But there's more! Back in December when the request was made, the White House would not say who or what was penciled in. And last night on Countdown With Keith Olbermann, it was reported that, at the time, it was no one. Awkward! Howard's arrangements were made after Obama's request, possibly to quiet the press when it came buzzing. Also, Laura's throwing some 11th-hour parties there. But, wouldn't you?

Source