Quoting Mark Evanier:

Keith Olbermann tears Donald Rumsfeld a new orifice. If you haven’t read Rumsfeld’s remarks the other day before the American Legion, go read them first. Then read Olbermann.”

Olbermann also delivered this commentary live tonight at the end of his “Countdown” program on MSNBC. If you can catch the replay later this evening, do.

12 Responses to “Recommended”

  1. Charles Bryan Says:

    Keith Olbermann is underappreciated, while Stewart and Colbert get all of the press.

    By and large, I would have just dismissed Rummy and his nonsense, given that he was speaking to the American Legion. He knew he wasn’t going to be challenged there, and he knew what that group would most likely go for.

    The cringe-making phrase “circle jerk” would seem to apply.

  2. J. Alexander Says:

    Hmmm. Tonight was Keith Olbermann’s finest hour.

  3. Brian Spence Says:

    If you go back to Evanier’s post, he has the video now. It’s great.

  4. Brian Spence Says:

    Oh, and can’t they put Olbermann on at 7 or 9? Why does it have to be on when The Daily Show and Colbert Report are on????

  5. Micah Says:

    I don’t see the validity of Olbermann’s comments.

    His argument seems to be that as England under Chamberlain was wrong about Hitler , so is the US under Bush wrong about Al Qaeda.


    And because Bush didn’t predict 911, and failed in handling Katrina that means that his hands are now tied in dealing with Al Qaeda? I admit, I don’t understand this argument. One doesn’t need to be omniscient — nor does Rumsfeld seem to be claiming he is — to see they are a real threat. If anything, that argument seems to be bending over backwards to attack Bush.

    For Keith Olbermann to somehow lay claim to a right winger like Winston Churchill is strange too. Churchill was always a big proponent of military force as a solution. A first solution. The fact that history has landed on the side of Churchill is not an argument against the Bush administration. I find his logic circuitous.

    Also, comparing Bush and his administration to Nazis, as in a “new kind of fascism” is absurd. As presidents go Bush has to be considered average. Compare him to Truman for innocents killed or Nixon for violations of people’s rights. Fine. I would say that makes him a “new kind of Rebulican” But Hitler? Nazis? It’s people like Olbermann who’ve turned the word “fascist” into “someone I don’t like”.

  6. Stephen Payne Says:

    I have to agree with Micah on this one. The word fascist is thrown around just a little too easily these days by liberals to demean and dehumanize their opponants, much like how conservatives used to do the same thing with the word “communist” (“terrorist sypathizer” or “unpatriotic” being the new conservative scare tactic terms).

    As for Rumsfeld… well, it gets harder day by day to justify his existence, let alone the comments he makes.

  7. A.L. Baroza Says:

    Clearly, the Rove camp doesn’t know about Godwin’s Law.

    Olbermann is the only thing worth watching on MSNBC, a truly awful network. During the whole British terror arrest hoopla a couple weeks back I saw Brian Williams ratcheting up the fear index, hysterically advocating new airport detection technology–technology that his bosses, General Electric, conveniently specializes in. Shameless.

    But Olbermann can’t really be compared to Stewart and Colbert. By his own definition, Olbermann does a news program; the Comedy Central guys don’t.

  8. Steve Gerber Says:

    This time, the Rs brought the f-word into the argument. It’s only fitting that Olbermann throw it right back at them.

    And his point wasn’t simply that the Chamberlain government was wrong about the Nazis. What Olbermann’s saying is that Chamberlain’s absolute certainty in his own opinions — his arrogance, in other words — made it impossible for him to conceive that September, 1939 would turn into springtime for Hitler.

  9. Charles Bryan Says:

    And just to throw in a little poli sci — fascism is a system based around defining the individual’s role as service to the nation, essentially for the “glory of the state”.

    It may be a semantic difference – I suppose part of the motivation for these terrorists is the belief that the individual’s role is service to a religion – but I can’t imagine that this term is being used unintentionally, which makes semantics fair game.

    Calling them “fascists” makes people think of Nazis, and everybody hates Nazis, just like there have been times when Presidents refer to a dictator as Hitler-like, primarily to push that button. (Can I coin the phrase “Pushing the Hitler button”?)

    The subjects of those comments may have been monstrous in their own right, but it works soooo much better when you can convince enough Americans that someone is another Adolf.

    We could call the terrorists “killers”, but we’ve become used to killers running the streets. Or we could call them “religious kooks”, but that would offend some voters.

    But “fascists”? I doubt it.

    By the way, Mr. Rumsfeld, if you’re tuning in, I don’t blame America — I blame you.

  10. Micah Says:

    Speaking of Evaniers’ web site, he says it’s Gene Colan’s 80th birthday today. That means he was about twice your age when you originally worked together. Always loved his work on HTD. There was something sad and dreamy about it.

  11. Bart Lidofsky Says:

    There was just a discussion of Chamberlain on another board. He really got a much worse rap than he deserved. Two major points, commonly ignored:

    1) While speaking about “peace in our time”, he was building up the British military. If the British had opposed the Nazi’s at that point, they would have been creamed. The treaty bought the British valuable time to prepare.

    2) He may have disliked the Nazis, but he hated the Communists. It is clear that he was hoping that Stalin and Hitler would end up knocking each other out in a war, leaving Britain unscathed. Unfortunately for him, Britain, and the world, Hitler and Stalin knew the difference between a friend and an ally, and signed a mutual non-aggression pact.

  12. mister_pj Says:

    Somehow, any new orifice on Don Rumsfled is a scary thought. I pretty much have had my fill with what issues forth from the ones he has now.