President Bush, “you’re a fascist and a liar”

Published on February 18th, 2008

62 users responded in " President Bush, “you’re a fascist and a liar” "

Subscribe to this post comment rss or trackback url

# 1 Dallas said, on February 18th, 2008 at 7:12 am

WooHoo. I like the passion of this reporter.

However, I must say that Bush threatening NOT to leave the US is a powerful incentive, however short the trip.

# 2 Rolo said, on February 18th, 2008 at 7:16 am

The democrats had just better pray nothing happens while they are pulling off this bluff. As for the right to sue the telecoms, this just shows how much the democrats are in the pockets of the trial lawyers. The government asked them for their cooperation right after 9/11 and they did. Now the trial lawyers are insisting on getting their pound of flesh. These blood suckers will just increase the cost of communications to us all.

# 3 Grandpa said, on February 18th, 2008 at 7:17 am

Thank you for telling us what all us Christian Conservatives already know. We are willing to sacrifice for our God everything you say and more. Soldiers of the Lord, Armor up!

# 4 moss said, on February 18th, 2008 at 7:33 am

#2 – you poor ignorant git. Do you think the Telecom’s lawyers on retainer didn’t tell them they were breaking the law? As much as many of our corporations are owned and run by greedy sleazebags, they usually confine their lawbreaking to profitmaking – not defying the US Constitution.

They were promised immunity from the gitgo. Fools who care less about freedom roll over and stick their hooves up in the air and allow it.

# 5 Marc said, on February 18th, 2008 at 7:37 am

Olbermann seems to be the only one on american mainstream-media tv to speak out the truth and honesty.

# 6 Angus said, on February 18th, 2008 at 7:38 am

And he’s gone in ten months, Who Cares!?!?

# 7 GigG said, on February 18th, 2008 at 7:40 am

fas·cist (făsh’ĭst)
n.
1. often Fascist An advocate or adherent of fascism.
2. A reactionary or dictatorial person.

As for the first definition when did we start using a form of the word in the definition.

As for the second, sounds like the PC Police to me.

# 8 Sinn Fein said, on February 18th, 2008 at 7:48 am

” President Bush, “you’re a fascist and a liar” ”
And, now for the things about you that we DON’T admire!

He’s a Lame Duck, moron Olbermann…haven’t you noticed ANY of the new batch of fascists and liars currently running for the office??? ANY thoughts about any of them? I thought not, airhead.

# 9 Joe Citizen said, on February 18th, 2008 at 7:51 am

Mr. Bush a political felon and a liar. Indeed, but Keith forgot Bush’s primary objective…

Political Terrorist!

America Held Hostage day 2585.

336 days left.

# 10 Lord Crimson said, on February 18th, 2008 at 7:52 am

Looks like Obermann is practicing his new craft as drama queen. The biggest problem here is that in the past he praised Bill Clinton for being an exceptional liar and now scolds George Bush for being a bad one. Purely political and very disingenuous by feigning outrage when we all know lying is what all politicians do. Just report the news Obermann and we’ll take it from there.

# 11 jbenson2 said, on February 18th, 2008 at 8:09 am

Uncle Dave:

Great video capture – the still shot in this link shows Olby looking like a clown with a big white blob on his nose.

Just like reality – a goofy clown trying to read the news.

# 12 Jeff said, on February 18th, 2008 at 8:17 am

This really is not that far from the truth, our currently beloved resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue has used political terrorism and pandering to religious zealots as a conduit to manufacture consent. I think the smart thing to do is simply to wait it out. At this time next year we will have a new president (Mrs. Clinton, Obama or McCain) and anyway you silence it, it is the end of the Christian conservative in Washington. Hell, the second most liberal of the three is Senator John McCain.

# 13 dcseward said, on February 18th, 2008 at 8:17 am

Looks like we have another test of who is a Democrat and who is a Republican. Unfortunately, this rant is so devoid of any factual material that it is utterly worthless. I wish I could have those minutes of my life back.

# 14 MrBloedumpSpladderschitt said, on February 18th, 2008 at 8:24 am

Keep in mind that Olberman is not a “reporter”. He is an ex-sportcaster/comedian. His opinion doesn’t mean much.

# 15 reader said, on February 18th, 2008 at 8:25 am

#16 – Yes, he will be gone, thankfully. But we’ll read all the truth in the George W Bush Presidential Liebrary.

# 16 reader said, on February 18th, 2008 at 8:27 am

Sorry, I meant #6

# 17 GregA said, on February 18th, 2008 at 8:27 am

OMG Olberman is such a pussy. We need a media with balls. The specific crime Bush committed was treason, and if the media wont call an admitted traitor so, what good is the media?

# 18 BryanP said, on February 18th, 2008 at 8:32 am

Olberman is the left’s version of Bill O’Reilly and is to be taken about as seriously.

# 19 James Hill said, on February 18th, 2008 at 8:52 am

Liberals, you’ve lost this debate, too. Try again in Nov. ‘08.

# 20 Thinker said, on February 18th, 2008 at 9:22 am

I don’t know. Mr. Bush has done soo much damage to the image of the conservatives. His Neo-Conservative movement is now in the hangover stage for us Republicans.
I’ll side with Obermann on this one, Bush may be sincere in his belief that he is doing the correct thing. However, that has no bearing on whether he’s sincerely right, or wrong. : (

First DHS, and then the ‘Patriot Act’, then this bill. How can one not see him in terms of a Fascist? They all start somewhere, and from the greatest of desires just to do the right thing.

# 21 Mr. Normal said, on February 18th, 2008 at 9:35 am

Well said. I think he pretty much nailed it.

# 22 Jägermeister said, on February 18th, 2008 at 9:39 am

#20 – Thinker

Mr. Bush has done so much damage to the image of ~~the conservatives~~ the USA.

# 23 tallwookie said, on February 18th, 2008 at 9:41 am

politics = teh boring

bring back fudalism

# 24 Jeff said, on February 18th, 2008 at 9:42 am

So basically what you are saying is that liberals lost… even though President Bush adheres to most of the so-called liberal agenda. Though, in truth, he could use some work on human rights.

If he was a true conservative you would not have gotten what Thinker said (DHS and Patriot Act) because of the federal government expansion necessary to accomplish this. He would have not invaded Iraq because he would have isolationist policies, instead of adhering to democratic peace theory.

Worse, you would have seen some real effort to protect the so-called institution of marriage and ban abortion. He did neither. He pretty much just used the Christian conservatives to get elected, and likely will float some half-ass legislation out there at the end of his term in order to protect his legacy with the understanding that it has little chance of passing.

Finally, if Senator McCain is elected, you got and even more moderate (maybe even a lefty) entering office with a Republican name.

God Bless these United States!

# 25 Matt Garrett said, on February 18th, 2008 at 9:49 am

Third rate anchor on a third rate network who has delusions of grandeur to Edwin R. Murrow proportions. He’s a miserable person who seeks to only see the worst in anyone.

I, for one, have no time for it.

# 26 Jeff said, on February 18th, 2008 at 9:50 am

A third rate network, you mean sort-of like FoxNews and that liberal from Boston pretending to be a conservative. I liked him better when he had the gay personality on Inside Edition.

# 27 Jim W. said, on February 18th, 2008 at 9:59 am

This from the same network that bent over backwards to apologize and suspend a reporter over one comment about Hillery Clinton.

Don’t you just love how unbiased they are?

# 28 Uncle Dave said, on February 18th, 2008 at 10:04 am

#25: So you’re saying Bush has some good points? I’ve yet to see any.

# 29 Jeff said, on February 18th, 2008 at 10:05 am

I never said they were not bias, what I said was that both MSNBC and Fox News are third rate networks that attract fringes of the left and right population. The only real name is news is still the Chicken Noodle News Network.

# 30 highaman said, on February 18th, 2008 at 10:24 am

I feel sorry for you americans but you RE-ELECTED the bastard! How could you? NO matter what can be said against him, you gave him the authority and the power to do so, even if you saw what a disaster it was on his first term. Maybe you should start a war against ignorance and disinformation so you could keep fascits out of the white house in the first place!

# 31 Li said, on February 18th, 2008 at 10:25 am

Well said; the next president has a lot on his/her plate to return the balance of powers and resuscitate our reputation.

# 32 Hmeyers said, on February 18th, 2008 at 10:32 am

There is a reason Olbermann is on … um, what channel is he on. FoxSports? MSNBC? ESPN2?

It was a blessing when that dufus was kicked off of SportsCenter. I hated to see that he was re-hired.

Olbermann can go back to kissing his dad on the lips. ^^ Not my words, Olbermann’s words.

# 33 YeahRight said, on February 18th, 2008 at 10:54 am

Well said!

Bush is the Homer Simpson of the USA.
And he is the president. Wow.
Can’t wait for him to leave. I wouldn’t take that job and I take pity his successor.

People that voted for GWBush twice should not be able to procreate ! Too dumb.

# 34 Milo said, on February 18th, 2008 at 11:26 am

Matt Garrett: You are on record as taking time for something you have no time for!

# 35 Bill said, on February 18th, 2008 at 11:46 am

Keep in mind that Olberman is not a “reporter”. He is an ex-sportcaster/comedian. His opinion doesn’t mean much.

He should try for yet another career. He sucks at the first three he has tried.

# 36 Thomas said, on February 18th, 2008 at 12:11 pm

#20
What about all of the Democrats that voted for the Patriot Act? It was under Clinton’s administration that the idea of a consolidated DHS was devised. Bush simply implemented it after 9/11.

Olbermann should go back to doing sports. As a political pundit, he rants and is full of crap. The comparison to O’Reilly was quite apt.

# 37 bobbo said, on February 18th, 2008 at 12:12 pm

All you dumbass nay sayers–why not take a crack at what Olbermann actually reported?

What would YOU call someone that said you must pass this legislation or you put our troops safety at risk, BUT if you don’t include this telecom no sue provision, then I will veto this same legislation.

What does THAT make Bushieboy? And why is he willing to put our troops at risk and why does he want to give the telecom’s immunity?

Yea, the Head Born Again Retard off Crack is definitely a credit to the Repugnick party ==REGARDLESS== of what Olbermann is or isn’t.

# 38 OhForTheLoveOf said, on February 18th, 2008 at 12:12 pm

Keith Olbermann is not and never was a comedian. The Cornell University graduate has been in broadcast journalism and sports throughout his successful and still young career.

Also, with an icepick in his head, he’d still be smarter than all his detractors here combined.

# 39 hhopper said, on February 18th, 2008 at 12:42 pm

Way to go Keith Olbermann. It needed to be said, even if it was only on MSNBC.

# 40 qsabe said, on February 18th, 2008 at 12:43 pm

Olbermann is a breath of fresh air in a field of talking heads who have determined, with their ability to provide free advertising the other politicians can’t match, who the contenders in this election will be. Looks like I get to vote for McCain after all.

# 41 dwelter said, on February 18th, 2008 at 12:49 pm

I tivo his show every night. He is one of the few commentators that is willing to come right out and tell the truth about Bush and his failed administration. I just wish I didn’t think it was falling on deaf ears most of the time.
Example:

# 42 ECA said, on February 18th, 2008 at 12:51 pm

1. Bush is a Lame duck, and little he can do to HIDE. Others can step forward NOW and say almost anything about him. PROBLEM: Why not 6 years ago?
2. SUCKUP… HOW many of those seeking re-election THIS YEAR are going to be ACTIVE, while int he past 4-6, SAT AND SLEPT in congress and representatives… TRY and make it LOOK like they DID something or ARE GOING TO do something.
3. want to fix a few things? GET THE GOV, to make and FORCE a standardized BUSINESS plan that ALL major CORPS should run with/under. No backdoors, no hiding the pea(money).
4. PUBLIC RECORD. should NOT be a SECURITY ISSUE. SHOULD BE PUBLIC. ALL things corps and the GOV do SHOULD BE PUBLIC.

# 43 J said, on February 18th, 2008 at 12:56 pm

bobbo

You and I don’t agree much but on this I am with you brother.

# 44 bobbo said, on February 18th, 2008 at 1:01 pm

#43–J==and when I saw you had responded I thought “I bet J agrees.”==and you have.

If I’m awake and ready to go, I don’t post when I agree with you. Note that I mostly don’t post? 3HC stimulates a lot of people, not just you.

# 45 PJAM3 said, on February 18th, 2008 at 1:09 pm

Who cares what anybody in the media says…

The media either praise the democrats or they praise the republicans. Even a couple praise the independents and Ron Paul. Same goes for all the celebrites that come out of the woodworks but very few actually have objective opinions. It’s always about some kind of agenda to eithe rmake their rooting interest better or make the opposing interes worse.

Bush has been a bad president, but Clinton wasn’t any good, Sr. Bush wasn’t that good, Reagan is regarded as some kind of hero but was far from it, Carter was a joke, Ford probably was the best of the bunch over the past 50 years and rarely gets much credit for anything and he was never even elected and he wasn’t that good. Nixon was ok but not impressive and then he became paranoid and started doing stupid things including all that illegal spying crap that seems to be what everybody including the loved Google seems to do today. LBJ had issues and never got over the fact that he wasn’t JFK nor had to be, JFK did many things but gets a lot more credit than he deserves because of being killed.

So the reality is, Bush might be one of the worst presidents of all time, but then again, the US really hasn’t had a good president in the past 50+ years. And they sure haven’t had too many good politicians.

Yet the media is about as objective as Google and Microsoft are when it comes to talking about one another.. Which is, not objective at all.

# 46 bobbo said, on February 18th, 2008 at 1:21 pm

#45–PJam==coherent post and accurate, but what a load of irrelevant blather.

In context, Mr. Olbermann has given us a good EXAMPLE of how Bushieboy is a bad president and how our freedoms and pocketbooks have been put at risk. That is need to know information. To have concrete examples about how Clinton was bad, we can go back to the press reports of the time.

Existential nihilism is so trite. Why not offer something substantive?

# 47 Lord Crimson said, on February 18th, 2008 at 3:04 pm

Why are Obermann and the media in general surprised at the actions of any president? Government intrusion is certainly no secret and has been growing at least since the days of Roosevelt.

Perhaps Obermann should look closer to home. News organizations have become no more than high paid gossips and event manipulators ever since the reporter became a commentator. They will waste endless hours playing Nostradamus guessing at polls and rejoicing at some self-destructive pop tart. Rarely, if ever do they show the planes hitting the twin towers and pentagon, which are real reminders of how we got into this mess in the first place.

Obermann, and those like him are talentless hacks and will remain so until they remember to “report” the news and stop attempting to manipulate the public with commentaries and personal agendas.

# 48 OhForTheLoveOf said, on February 18th, 2008 at 3:27 pm

#41 – If you grab interviews with every dumb redneck and ghetto scrub you can find, sure you can paint a picture of the US as stupid.

There isn’t a question in the video that I would have answered wrong, and thus, had I been interviewed, my bits would not have made the final cut.

Oddly enough, I don’t know anyone, ever, who has been stopped and asked questions on camera about politics or current events.

Aside from a couple of this site’s knuckdragging trolls, has anyone here ever been stopped and asked about current events or politics?

# 49 Rich said, on February 18th, 2008 at 3:42 pm

If the telecoms were really allowing taps into folks’ phone conversations and network traffic, then they should be sued until they bleed from the a$$. People who monitor network traffic are essentially monitoring peoples thoughts, feelings and aspirations. It’s a fundamental invasion of privacy. The people who did the eavesdropping should just think about what they did, realize the harm done to thousands or millions of Americans, then arrange an evening with a bottle of their favorite alcoholic bevarage, a typewriter, and a shotgun.

# 50 Rick Cain said, on February 18th, 2008 at 3:48 pm

Republicans already know Bush is a liar. They’re just hoping that Bush’s false legacy lives on the way Ronald Reagan’s does, despite the fact that 31 members of Reagan’s cabinet went to jail.

# 51 MikeN said, on February 18th, 2008 at 3:51 pm

Bush has some fascist tendencies, but fascism is primarily and historically a liberal impulse. Bush has some liberal impulses himself, but I would say it’s more political expedience than hsi natural behavior.

# 52 Lou Bix said, on February 18th, 2008 at 4:19 pm

Wake up People!

# 53 bobbo said, on February 18th, 2008 at 4:31 pm

Hey Mike #51==so which do you admire Bush the most for?==for having liberal impulses or for having fascist tendencies, or for exercising political expediencies?

Bonus Points==which of the foregoing mark Bushieboy as second only to Regan as the greatest president?

# 54 OhForTheLoveOf said, on February 18th, 2008 at 4:41 pm

#45 – Who cares what anybody in the media says…

I’m not sure who does, but it’s clear that you don’t.

The media either praise the democrats or they praise the republicans. Even a couple praise the independents and Ron Paul.

I love hearing people pontificate on the topic of that wonderous institution, the global, monolithic media.

You realize, I hope, that “the media” is news, both large and small corporate news agencies, across 6 continents, in print, broadcast (radio, TV) and on the Internet, and it is also entertainment, which comprises all forms of fictional and reality shows, pundit shows, talk show, the Daily Show and brethren, and Fox News, as well as thousands of online sources, and if this run on sentence isn’t long enough already, C-Span and a gazillion public access and government feeds worldwide are in that mix too.

It is a fairly good bet that “the media” isn’t just praise for Republicans or Democrats, which, like Ron Paul, are proper nouns, and thus capitalized.

Same goes for all the celebrites that come out of the woodworks but very few actually have objective opinions.

And neither do you.

It’s always about some kind of agenda to eithe rmake their rooting interest better or make the opposing interes worse.

An agenda in this context being defined as what motivates people who disagree with you to speak.

Bush has been a bad president,

Understated, but granted.

but Clinton wasn’t any good, Sr.

I wholeheartedly disagree and would easily place him near Kennedy or either Roosevelt in a list of 20th Century Presidents.

Bush wasn’t that good,

No argument here, though far better than his son and far better than:

Reagan is regarded as some kind of hero

For reasons I can’t possibly understand.

Carter was a joke

If you think honesty and integrity are jokes.

Ford probably was the best of the bunch

Because he caused the least damage?

Nixon was ok

Like having cancer is okay.

LBJ had issues

But he stepped up to the plate in regards to civil rights, and that shouldn’t be denied.

So the reality is, Bush might be one of the worst presidents of all time

And he is.

but then again, the US really hasn’t had a good president in the past 50+ years.

Respectfully, bullshit.

And they sure haven’t had too many good politicians.

And if there were, you’d never realize it as long as you represent that uniquely pessimistic demographic of cynical, sky is falling, they’re all a bunch of crooks, we’re all doomed voters who can sure dish out the disdain for our corrupt system but never seem to have an idea of their own and surely never step forward to serve in politics.

Yet the media is about as objective as Google and Microsoft are when it comes to talking about one another.. Which is, not objective at all.

And how, pray tell, does one have an objective discussion of so subjective a subject, and how can I present my argument in the political arena if you are simply going to dismiss it as being driven by an “agenda”?

# 55 Joshua said, on February 18th, 2008 at 5:21 pm

#50…Rick Cain….please…just for the fun of it…name those 31 cabinet members.

Olberman is a stooge. Whoever compared him to O’Reilly had that one pegged right. Neither should be considered anything more than entertainment for the far right and the far left, not for serious individuals.

The *media* is made up of a bunch of mostly second rate college losers who get to pass along their personal opinions as *news* these days. No one in todays world really follows the ethics of journalists of the past and just reports the news and keeps commentary on the editorial page anymore.

Bush will go down as primarily a failure. Though he will get points for *resolve*, standing on his princibles*, and his efforts to help Africa.

All of this feigned horror over the telecom’s and the spying bill is phoney bullshit. There is hardly a prominiet Democrat or Republican who didn’t support this program when it was first brought up and the only reason it’s being held up by Pelosi is because she was told in no uncertain terms that the Trial Lawyers will plug it’s contribution hole to the Democrats if they allowed the telecoms to get immunity. No one here gives a rats ass about intelligence gathering. But wait until the next attack does come, and it will, our luck can’t last forever, and watch the Democrats burn their own at the stake.

President Obama and President Clinton will want this program as it is….wait and see.

# 56 Timbo said, on February 18th, 2008 at 7:10 pm

Save this video to look at next year, when Obermann is without a job and disappearing from the public scene.

The economy was due to collapse for ten years now, but the last two presidents couldn’t let it go down without a patsy to blame. Bush now has his Patsy and is out of the country when things go down. Stockpile emergency supplies! Advance the doomsday clock!

# 57 Thomas said, on February 18th, 2008 at 9:11 pm

#54
> > but Clinton wasn’t any good, Sr.
> I wholeheartedly disagree and would easily
> place him near Kennedy or either Roosevelt
> in a list of 20th Century Presidents.

You cannot be serious. He won both elections by less than 50% of the vote. If we are able to look past the fact that he was impeached by the House for lying to the Grand Jury, he backed down on the issue of homosexuals in the military, signed the DMCA and the Defense of Marriage Act and don’t even get me started on how his administration handled the whole Elian Gonzales episode. If his record on military affairs had been nothing instead of what it was, it would have been an improvement. Had the Internet boom not happened, his Presidency would have been seen as below average. He belongs where most historians will put him: in the middle which coincidentally is where they will put GWB.

>> Reagan is regarded as some kind of hero
> For reasons I can’t possibly understand.

End of the Cold War? Defeat of the Soviet Union perhaps?

# 58 Hmeyers said, on February 18th, 2008 at 11:12 pm

I think it is notable people finding out what Olbermann said on TV from a blog

(And not from watching his show, haha. I can’t stand pompous gas bags like this clown or O’Reilly who think their feeble thoughts are so damn important.)

# 59 Uncle Patso said, on February 19th, 2008 at 2:28 am

# 30 highaman said, on February 18th, 2008 at 10:24 am

I feel sorry for you americans but you RE-ELECTED the bastard!
———-

With a little help from Diebold…

# 60 Mister Catshit said, on February 19th, 2008 at 7:31 am

#55, Joshua,

#50…Rick Cain….please…just for the fun of it…name those 31 cabinet members.

Good response. You beat me o it.

… only reason it’s being held up by Pelosi is because she was told in no uncertain terms that the Trial Lawyers will plug it’s contribution hole to the Democrats if they allowed the telecoms to get immunity.

OK, if it is fair for you to demand Rick Cain back up his claim, how about you back up your claim?

# 61 Mister Catshit said, on February 19th, 2008 at 7:46 am

#55, Joshua,

The *media* is made up of a bunch of mostly second rate college losers who get to pass along their personal opinions as *news* these days.

In Olberman’s case, he is not a reporter. He is more accurately a commentator. He doesn’t report news, he comments on it.

No one in todays world really follows the ethics of journalists of the past and just reports the news and keeps commentary on the editorial page anymore.

Is that opinion or more “fact”. In case you didn’t notice, again, Olberman, as well as his contemporaries, all posit analysis. It is rare they report the news although on the rare occasion that will happen.

I think, and this is just my opinion, that you are more bothered because the news media on the whole does not support Bush. He will get NO POINTS for his resolve which most rational people think of as blind stubbornness in spite of the facts. He will be sadly dismissed for his “principles” which consist of “His way or the or you’re a traitor”. Last of all, his actions in Africa will fade into the obscurity they deserve simply because he hasn’t done anything to benefit the continent.

# 62 Mister Catshit said, on February 19th, 2008 at 8:00 am

#56, Thomas,

Aahhh, once again you raise your ignorance to a new level.

Bill Clinton will stand among the best of Presidents. This nation has seldom known the prosperity it had when Clinton was President. Very few people then, or now, blame Clinton for lying about a personal matter. Most people were more upset with the money squandered by Kenneth Starr. Elian Gonzales was a police matter and handled as such. I only wish the “family” had been charged for the extra police costs they cost the nation. The Bills that Clinton signed had more to do with his philosophy that the Congress represents the people and their will should not be dismissed

George W. Bush will challenge Buchannan and Pierce for worst President of all time.

Reagan brought us closer to nuclear war than any other person. He broke the law and pardoned his minions. BTW, The USSR self imploded with Glasnost. Reagan had nothing to do with it.

Leave Your Reply Below...

Comment Moderation is Active, so if your comment doesn't
show up immediately, please don't submit it again.

Special Deals 4U

25% off eHarmony subscription with code EHTECH
12-percent discount forever with code TECH
10-percent discount and free month using TECH10
10-percent or 30 dollars off weekly car rental!
Get 10-percent discount on car rental!
Get 10% off rental cars!
Get 10% off Dollar rentals!
Discounts on domain names!