Monday, September 11, 2006

Keith Olberman at Ground Zero

With a picture of the hole in the ground at the site of the World Trade Center, Keith Olberman spoke eloquently of our president's squandered leadership:
History teaches us that nearly unanimous support of a government cannot be taken away from that government by its critics. It can only be squandered by those who use it not to heal a nation's wounds, but to take political advantage.
Terrorists did not come and steal our newly-regained sense of being American first, and political, fiftieth. Nor did the Democrats. Nor did the media. Nor did the people.
The President -- and those around him -- did that.
They promised bi-partisanship, and then showed that to them, "bi-partisanship" meant that their party would rule and the rest would have to follow, or be branded, with ever-escalating hysteria, as morally or intellectually confused, as appeasers, as those who, in the Vice President's words yesterday, "validate the strategy of the terrorists."
When those who dissent are told time and time again -- as we will be, if not tonight by the President, then tomorrow by his portable public chorus -- that he is preserving our freedom, but that if we use any of it, we are somehow un-American...When we are scolded, that if we merely question, we have "forgotten the lessons of 9/11"... look into this empty space behind me and the bi-partisanship upon which this administration also did not build, and tell me:
Who has left this hole in the ground?


Blogger Catbird said...

Olbermann's one of the reasons I subscribe to cable. His rants (which are often posted at should be required viewing for journalism students.

2:44 PM, September 12, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Olbermann is a clown and a joke. He is no journalist. He is a left wing zealot. Funny, I doubt you would be saying the same thing about Sean Hannity...oh yeah, only left wingers are the best and brightest in the world that journalistm students should learn about...

2:55 PM, September 13, 2006  
Blogger Catbird said...

That's quite a leap of (il)logic, pal. Seems as if the only zealot is the one who looks back at you in the mirror -- if indeed you have a reflection.

3:31 PM, September 13, 2006  
Blogger Catbird said...

I apologize for that burst of vitriol. Lesson one: Don't post when you're all het up.

I neither stated nor implied that only liberals real or perceived are fit to be read by those studying journalism. Good writing can be found in pretty much throughout the political spectrum -- George Will (conservative) and John Tierney (libertarian) are two examples. Sorry, but I don't think Sean Hannity is much of a writer. However, despite my distaste for his views, I think Rush Limbaugh is an extremely talented broadcaster.

Again, I'm sorry to have taken the bait and sullied this blog's civilized tone.

4:15 PM, September 13, 2006  
Blogger Tom Noyes said...

Mollyvox, I apreciate your characterizing my blog as civilized in tone. It's the nicest thing anyone said to me all day. (Though sometimes I wonder if civilized equals dull and earnest.)

And don't feel you need to apologize for the tone of your comments. Honestly, I like it when I get spicy comments like yours--it livens up things around here.

10:35 AM, September 14, 2006  
Blogger Tom Noyes said...

My guess is that he writes his commentaries with little if any editorial oversight. The style and tone feel personal to me, which is part of their strength.

9:50 PM, September 14, 2006  
Blogger Catbird said...

No, Tommywonk, t'ain't dull; if it were, I'd be watching Richard Thompson or Spitting Image clips on Youtube instead.

And I agree -- I'm sure Olbermann writes those commentaries, as well as pretty much everything else that comes out of his mouth on-air. I figure a TV guy who correctly uses the word ameliorate in a sentence probably wrote it. He did, in his September 5, 2005 Katrina commentary.

3:12 AM, September 15, 2006  
Blogger Tom Noyes said...

I quoted Olbermann's use of the verb "ameliorate" in his Katrina commentary last year:

"It [the administration] promised protection — or at least amelioration — against all threats: conventional, radiological, or biological.
It has just proved that it cannot save its citizens from a biological weapon called standing water."

2:24 PM, September 15, 2006  

Post a Comment

<< Home