Whose Ann Coulter's biggest enemy..... That's what I thought.

godless liberal - good to see that you got things back under control today. You had just a little too much "wheee" yesterday.

I'm just offering a "litany of facts", you know, those hard, funnily shaped things you throw at people to make them believe you're credible. Sometimes you cook them up like a nice sauce, which the waif thin Ms. Coulter has a penchant for, other than being unmarried, 45, and generally unlikeable. Doubtless, she could top that list every year.

"other than being unmarried, 45, and generally unlikeable"...

Ah yes, well, the politics of personal destruction doesn't have anything to do with it, does it? As for Olbermann, putting aside the observation that can't be bothered to come up with his own book outline instead of ripping off an idea from Bernie Goldberg, I wonder if Saddam will be in the book at all.

once upon a time Olbermann was a reasonably competant SPORTSCASTER in Los Angeles.

At some point he morphed into one of the most illogical, nonsensical Moonbat Leftists on the planet (lots of redundancy there) and got warmly embraced by the mangiest mutt in the Cable News pound (MSNBC). From there he reaches out nightly to his VAST audience (upwards of 22 people on a GOOD night) and spews his conspiracy theories!

Makes me wonder if he was even getting the SCORES right, back when all he had to do was read 'em off the teleprompter!

God only knows what keep the MSNBC ship afloat...it sure isn't ratings, and it sure isn't honest reporting or clear reasonable commentary. Witness Olbermann.

I really like Olbermann when he did SportsCenter with Dan Patrick. I was told by a guy who interned at ESPN that Dan and Keith hated each other with a passion. Maybe it was the fact they both had huge egos or something like that but given Olbermann's subsequent behavior since leaving ESPN one has to wonder if it was because he was a jerk.

All conflict end with talk. But, the vitriol that flies back and forth from the far left and far right seems antithetical to a possible dialogue that would result in actual progress.

So Keith Olbermann has a book coming out. Sure, I'll probably read it. Probably enjoy it. Just as I read and enjoyed 100 People Who Are Screwing Up America (And Al Franken Is #37) by Bernard Goldberg. His book didn't contain any mention of Connie or Rummie or Bush. Indeed, the oddity about Goldberg's book was that most of the derision was against low profile college professors and feminists.

As Goldberg had important things to say about the luncay of the left (such as one feminist stating something crazy like every second woman in the US suffered severe spousal abuse), Olbermann's book (if it follows the trend from Countdown) will show-up some of the rampant hypocracy of the right.

Unfortunately, I might undo all my good centrist work by edging towards the left for my closing statement. Most of Olbermann, Franken, and (to a much, much lesser extent) Moore do is counter the Coulters, O'Reillys, and Hanitys. They don't initiate. By that rationale, if Coulter and co. didn't get things factually wrong (malmidy, for instance), Olbermann and co. would be out of a job.

All conflict end with talk.

But Cousin Dave, aren't those facts? It's incidental, tragic even, that her personal biography is true and sad. She is, if I recall, 45. She is, if I recall, unmarried. She is, it's obvious, generally unlikable. Again, the politics of personal destruction are very much embedded in her biography. She's a looker, I'm sure she'll snag someone by her Fiftieth.

And Justrand, Olbermann's show, especially for cable (which traditionally gets smaller audiences), and especially compared to O'Reilly's, is a ratings powerhouse. More people watch him than watch that perpetual curmudgeon, Mr. Falafel. Oh, and Olbermann went to an Ivy.

Cousin Dave

You wrote, in response to Godless Liberal's post:

"Ah yes, well, the politics of personal destruction doesn't have anything to do with it, does it?"

GL's comments on Coulter are DEFINITELY fair game when, in reality, Coulter only exists on a plain of making personal destructive remaerks about others.

When one is commenting on an acidic bitch like Coulter, only destructive remarks can be made about one who is not just the "worst person in the world," BUT THE MOST HATEFUL PERSON in the world.

Godless Liberal

You refer to Coulter as a "looker." Have to disagree w/ you on that one. By the time she is fifty she will look like Dr. Laura w/ a giraffe's neck and when she is 60 she will be in about the same condition as Norman's mother in Psycho.

Coulter only exists on a plain of making personal destructive remaerks about others.

And of course Mak44 would never do such a horrible thing himself.

Why the mystery over who is the worst person in the world? He's prominently pictured to the right of the book's title on the cover!

Even though I find her Shtick pathetic, I also find her oddly appealing. She grew up in New Canaan; she's not going to stay a conservative long. It was probably a bad liberal boyfriend, or something. She'll come back to the claque; and when she does, I'll be there to nurse her wounds like a young, injured fawn.

Dear Keith:

For Christ's sake, be original. Bernard Goldberg already beat you to the punch last year with his "100 People Who Are Screwing Up America (And Al Franken is #37)". In fact, he has a secondprinting of the book, titled "110 People..."

And if you can't be original, then at least go back to ESPN where you belong. Your high school freshman won't annoy Dan Patrick and Stewart Scott.

ripping off an idea from Bernie Goldberg,

Yeah. It takes a freakin' genius to come up with the ida of a list of people.

Goddless Liberal: "Olbermann's show...compared to O'Reilly's, is a ratings powerhouse"

huh? I'm not the biggest O'Reilly fan, but his ratings always eclipse CNN and MSNBC combined!

I think you need to define "powerhouse"

and a major difference between Coulter and Olbermann is that she provides her opinions...labeled as such...and provides facts (yes, of her choosing) to back up her opinions. Olbermann states the most outrageous opinions AS fact...and provides NOTHING to back them up.

His show is utter tripe...as is pretty much all of MSNBC. They continue to fund this money-losing venture, though no one can quite figure out why!

Mak sucks, Olberwoman is a waste of sperm, Ann Coulter is a beautiful woman!!

not necessarily in that order..

I find it hilarious that Olbermann will whine about receiving "mean" email (so much so that he'll write email to people telling them to die), then will write this idiotic crap.

See, Michelle Malkin --- who truly receives some viciously nasty email --- doesn't tell people to drop dead and act with an air of all-around doucheness as Mr. Olbermann does.

I'll also GUARANTEE you that the same people who whined about Goldberg's book on Amazon will APPLAUD this book.

And Justrand, Olbermann's show, especially for cable (which traditionally gets smaller audiences), and especially compared to O'Reilly's, is a ratings powerhouse. More people watch him than watch that perpetual curmudgeon, Mr. Falafel. Oh, and Olbermann went to an Ivy.

Funny, considering O'Reilly's ratings trump is. Have for years. I think Olbermann's first-run show is now drawing better ratings that O'Reilly's 4A replay.
-=Mike

My latest book, "The Worlds Biggest Dickheads" has Keith Olbermann's face on the cover. It's a coffee table book, cause I couldn't fit his head on the cover of a normal book. It goes well with the previous book which also has Olbermann on the cover, "Giant Pricks and the MSM"

"Olberman when to an Ivy." ooooh.

"One thing I would just about bet money on is that the top of Olbermann's list does not include Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden, or al Zarqawi."

I am sure you felt the same way about Goldberg's book, and Horowitz's as well. They received a ton of media attention. I'll check the archives for your response, Lorie.

Seeing as how Goldberg dealt with people in the US and Horowitz dealt with professors --- while Olbermann deals with the "whole world" (according to the title) --- that is a nice, irrelevant point ya made there.
-=Mike

By Goldberg: 100 People Who Are Screwing Up America

Wrong. Again.

mak44 and GodlessLiberal (or LiberalGoodman, or whatever your name is), thank you. Your unwillingness to address the substance of Coulter's words, and your insistence on attacking her on an appearance-and-relationship-status basis (which flies in the face of your own supposed principles) proves my point exactly. Had I said it, you wouldn't believe me. But it came from your own keyboards. There is no need for me to say anything further. The prosecution rests.

"Who are Screwing Up America". Thus, WITH THE UNITED STATES ONLY. Unless you wish to argue that the world is our concern.

Saddam didn't. Zarqawi didn't. We cleaned up from OBL and his damage to this country has been fixed.

You're still wrong.
-=Mike

"Who are Screwing Up America". Thus, WITH THE UNITED STATES ONLY.

lol
Interesting logic. You put a thus in there and suddenly you prove your point.

You're right about Horowitz though. Good point.

jp2 - I don't think Saddam was in America at the time, or any of the others I mentioned, for that matter, so I am sure I didn't make a similar statement about Goldberg's book. It was an excellent book, by the way, although I did not agree with all of his choices. The book was about those screwing up America, like judges making ridiculous rulings setting bad precedent and people suing for crazy things clogging up the courts. It was not about people threatening the security of America, or chopping off innocent people's heads or waging jihad against America. It was about people "screwing it up." Olbermann uses the word "worst" which gives a different connotation in my mind.

"It was an excellent book, by the way,"

I know. Someone really, finally, has to stand up to Barbara Streisand. Thankfully he had the courage to do it. Why he didn't get a Pulitzer nod astounds me.

Cousin Dave

I once had many occasions to discuss politics w/ a wise old man in his 80's who would remark from time-to-time." There are 2 things I cannot tolerate: intolerance & Rpeublicans." On the surface, that may appear contradictory, but upon reflection not always quite so.

To the extent that Coulter is the poster-girl for both, one cannot aim too low in commenting about her. When the Bitch of Hate dishes it up, she generates hate in response.

Mak44, you obviously don't get the concept of intolerance.
-=Mike

Keith,

So which is more rewarding...being a second rate sportscaster or a third rate "journalist"? Please just quit and free-up the bandwidth for someone else.

MikeSC
He has a fine grasp on intolerance...
Or rather, it is the other way round... ;)

Yes little jape2.. but the question remains? do You have the guts to stand up to Yourself?

Is this pertinent?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/12/14/wterr14.xml

No, because EVERYBODY knows Saddam never had ANYTHING to do with terrorists. :)
-=Mike

Who let all these moonbats in here anyway?

Olbermann's narcissism is out of control. Doesn't he realize just how stupid it is to put your big dumb horse face on the cover of a book next to the title "Worst Person in The World"?

Idiot.

Hmmmm,

Why does Nnamreblo use 911 in the title of his book?

Do these terrible persons live in hollywood,san francisco or washington D.C. or do they belong to the demacratic party? or PETA or are they one of those 70 peace freaks

I wonder if Olbermann should of re-thought his book cover after all it looks its saying He's "The Worst Person In The World"...Which isn't to far from the truth...but still what was He thinking when They made that cover?