[Westside]

Olbermann Suspended From MSNBC for Campaign Donations
By BRIAN STELTER AND BILL CARTER

3:08 p.m. | Updated Keith Olbermann, the top anchor on MSNBC, was suspended on Friday after the channel discovered that he made campaign contributions to three Democrats last month.

The MSNBC president, Phil Griffin, issued a statement saying: “I became aware of Keith’s political contributions late last night. Mindful of NBC News policy and standards, I have suspended him indefinitely without pay.”

Politico had reported Friday morning that Mr. Olbermann’s contributions were in apparent violation of MSNBC policy.

In a statement to Politico, Mr. Olbermann, the longtime host of “Countdown,” acknowledged donations of $2,400 to the campaigns of Representatives Raul Grijalva and Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona and Attorney General Jack Conway of Kentucky, who lost his Senate race to Rand Paul.

Several hours later, Mr. Griffin released the statement about the suspension.

No one at NBC News, MSNBC’s parent, would speculate about what this might mean for Mr. Olbermann’s future, though one NBC executive privately suggested this was not a step toward firing him.

In suspending Mr. Olbermann, NBC appeared to be trying to differentiate itself from the Fox News Channel, a unit of the News Corporation. NBC executives privately said that they saw a chance to draw a distinction between the journalistic standards of their news division and the standards of Fox, a favorite of Republicans. Media Matters, a liberal media monitoring group that opposes Fox, noted on Friday afternoon that two Fox News hosts, Neil Cavuto and Sean Hannity, had given money to Republican politicians in the past.

The News Corporation also came under scrutiny this year for a $1 million donation to the Republican Governors Association — a donation that Mr. Olbermann has been sharply critical of.

In Mr. Olbermann’s absence, Chris Hayes, the Washington editor for The Nation magazine, will fill in as the host of “Countdown” on Friday, an MSNBC spokesman said. Bloggers immediately pointed out that Mr. Hayes had made contributions to Democrats just like Mr. Olbermann had, but Mr. Hayes is not an MSNBC employee.

Mr. Olbermann’s “Countdown” is the most popular program on MSNBC. He worked at MSNBC in the late 1990s and rejoined the channel in 2003. He routinely draws more than a million viewers a night, and his show is seen as a leading forum for liberal politicians.

He has long been a volatile figure inside MSNBC, in part for his polarizing points of view. He has sometimes clashed with Mr. Griffin and other managers over editorial decisions, and he has been publicly critical of some of his former bosses.

Mr. Olbermann did not immediately respond to a request for comment after the suspension was announced Friday afternoon.

There was some head-scratching about MSNBC’s decision, since it is well known that Mr. Olbermann is a liberal newsman. There were defenders, including a writer for the libertarian magazine Reason, Michael C. Moynihan, who wondered why MSNBC had a “one-size-fits-all policy” about contributions.

Mr. Moynihan asked, “Isn’t it unfair to hold Olbermann, who is one of the most partisan people on television (if not of Earth), to the same standards as, say, Brian Williams? Countdown exists to promote Democratic candidates and liberal policies, which is just fine by me. So why shouldn’t Olbermann, as a private citizen, be allowed to donate money to those candidates he plumps for on television?”

[Westside]

I love it!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It cound't have happened to a bigger a$$hole!!!!:lmao:

[vundy33]

Keith Oberman suspended by MSNBC

Haha.

[Hoot Gibson]

First of all, as anybody who reads my posts could have easily guessed, I despise Keith O. I never liked him on ESPN and he has been even more arrogant and nerve-grating on MSNBC.

That being said, I find the MSNBC decision absurd. The network and its parent corporation, GE, have allowed this jerk to spew the most venomous type of hate on the air for years. They have even given him cast him as an "anchor" at their political news desk during elections. Yet none of his outrageous behavior was enough for GE to put a muzzle on KO.

Now, MSNBC suspends Olberman for for exercising what most of us consider a constitutional right to support the candidates of his choice on his own time. I mean, give me a break MSNBC. Which is worse letting Olberman openly support every Democratic and Socialist candidate on the planet for all of those years or donating a few dollars to three Democratic candidates?

I believe that GE is suddenly rethinking its decision to go all-in for Obama in 2008 and their management believes that Olberman is the best sacrifice they have to offer to the incoming Republican House majority.

I avoid purchasing anything associated with GE or its subsidiaries. If you either hate MSNBC or love Keith Olberman, you should do the same. :biggrin:

[Beetle01]

Who here thinks Olberman is actually a liberal? If so I recommend you watch an interview about him with Dan Patrick. I cant find it right now, but maybe over the next few days. When he first went into the news business he wanted to be a conservative host, but FOX had that market on lock so he went with the liberal side of things. This is why I never understand anyone that ever listens to any of these idiot pundits on TV. From Beck to Olberman they are all frauds in it for the money.

[Hoot Gibson]

Who here thinks Olberman is actually a liberal? If so I recommend you watch an interview about him with Dan Patrick. I cant find it right now, but maybe over the next few days. When he first went into the news business he wanted to be a conservative host, but FOX had that market on lock so he went with the liberal side of things. This is why I never understand anyone that ever listens to any of these idiot pundits on TV. From Beck to Olbermann they are all frauds in it for the money.

I don't watch Olbermann enough to say whether you are right about him or not, Beetle, but you are wrong about all pundits being idiots and/or phonies.

Rush Limbaugh is a conservative to the core and has been throughout his career and anybody who thinks he is an idiot is a fool. Limbaugh is an entertainer but nobody articulates conservative ideals any better than he does. Limbaugh comes from a conservative Republican family and if you ever listened to his grandfather, who practiced law well into his 90s, you would not doubt Limbaugh's sincerity when it comes to his conservative beliefs. That is part of what has made Rush much more successful than people who jump into talk radio thinking that it is an easy way to make a fast buck.

It is also why politicians, whether they have been liberal or conservative, generally have not been successful in talk radio. Politicians are conditioned to avoid offending constituents, so they tend to be too careful with their words to be entertaining.

Laura Ingraham, Neal Boortz, Herman Caine, Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, and Mark Levin are also thoroughly conservative - although Boortz holds many libertarian views that are just as likely to offend conservatives as liberals. All of these people were very conservative before they began writing columns or picked up a microphone as a pundit. Ingraham gave up a very promising law career (she clerked for Clarence Thomas), Boortz was a very successful attorney, Caine was a very successful businessman (including becoming the CEO and president of Godfather Pizza), Levin was and is a respected constitutional lawyer; and Sowell and Williams are both respected economists. I included Sowell and Williams in the list because they have been two of Limbaugh's most popular guest hosts over the years. He does not turn over his microphone to people who are simply entertainers. The audience can spot phonies.

There are some total phonies in punditry circles but if you really spend much time listening to them, it is not hard to distinguish them from the genuine article. What you say is true of many pundits but to say that they are all idiots or that they all are actors just trying to draw an audience is to paint with a much too broad brush. Like any other profession, the most successful pundits tend to be those who enjoy what they do, which in most cases requires them to believe what they are saying themselves.

[Bob Seger]

Who here thinks Olberman is actually a liberal? If so I recommend you watch an interview about him with Dan Patrick. I cant find it right now, but maybe over the next few days. When he first went into the news business he wanted to be a conservative host, but FOX had that market on lock so he went with the liberal side of things. This is why I never understand anyone that ever listens to any of these idiot pundits on TV. From Beck to Olberman they are all frauds in it for the money.

Super liberal Ed Shultz is one example of what you say Beetle. He tried conservative radio first and flopped before going the liberal talk route.

Now the question is, was Shultz a conservative fraudulently posing with true liberal convictions, or is he a true conservative now posing as a socialist....er liberal all for an entertainer paycheck? It's one way or the other.

Cant say for all that have been named by other posters, but with Shultz, I believe it's all been about the greenback. I however, tend to believe that most of the leading conservative talkheads are true to what they advocate.

[SKINNYPIG]

Who here thinks Olberman is actually a liberal? If so I recommend you watch an interview about him with Dan Patrick. I cant find it right now, but maybe over the next few days. When he first went into the news business he wanted to be a conservative host, but FOX had that market on lock so he went with the liberal side of things. This is why I never understand anyone that ever listens to any of these idiot pundits on TV. From Beck to Olberman they are all frauds in it for the money.

Please enlighten me on what's wrong with being "in it for the money". As long as it's legal why would anyone give a rat's rump how much Olberman, Beck or any of them make? IMO it's irrelevant.

[nky]

Oberman violated his contract and was suspended

The real question is (since it's absurd that clause was in his contract):

1. Is this a publicity stunt (MSNBC doesn't have political conflict of interest with their journalistic integrity secure, unlike those heathens at Fox)?
2. A way of pushing him out? His show doesn't have great ratings and continues to fall.
3. Combination of both and away for Oberman to leave gracefully plus be view as a martyr (worked for Juan Williams didn't it?)

Something doesn't seem right about any of this so sit back an watch the liberal work.

[Hoot Gibson]

The reason for including the no political donations clause in so-called journalists' contract is to avoid the appearance of media bias. I would like to hear from anybody who ever thought Keith Olbermann was an honest broker of the news and now believes that Olbermann was biased because he made a few thousand dollars of political donations to Democrats. I expect that anybody stupid enough to have held such a belief is incapable of pluggin a computer into the wall, much less making a post. Prove me wrong.

[TheRealVille]

The reason for including the no political donations clause in so-called journalists' contract is to avoid the appearance of media bias. I would like to hear from anybody who ever thought Keith Olbermann was an honest broker of the news and now believes that Olbermann was biased because he made a few thousand dollars of political donations to Democrats. I expect that anybody stupid enough to have held such a belief is incapable of pluggin a computer into the wall, much less making a post. Prove me wrong.

I vowed to stay off the politics forum, just because of you, but I can't let this one go. What about the million plus that Fox gave to Republican candidates. Can you say they really are unbiased?

[Hoot Gibson]

I vowed to stay off the politics forum, just because of you, but I can't let this one go. What about the million plus that Fox gave to Republican candidates. Can you say they really are unbiased?

To be more correct, I believe that you have repeatedly vowed to stay off the politics. In fact, you have lost all credibility in that area. :lmao:

Rupert Murdock has also hosted fundraisers for Democratic candidates in the past, including Hillary Clinton. I do not believe that any of the media are unbiased, nor do I think that would be a good thing or even something that is possible.

However, unlike GE, Fox's donations have not been made with the expectations that its bottom line will be boosted by billions of dollars because of government policies it has tried to affect. GE gambled that Obama would pass cap and trade and other left wing laws and positioned itself to cash in. They gambled and they lost. Now, their CEO needs to move the company back to the center and Olbermann's head rolls within days of the disastrous election for the Democrats.

Coincidence? I think not.

Almost forgot...welcome back, again. :biggrin:

[nky]

I vowed to stay off the politics forum, just because of you, but I can't let this one go. What about the million plus that Fox gave to Republican candidates. Can you say they really are unbiased?

GE parent company of NBC gives millions to all parties. That's not the point just a muddling of the water.

Is Oberman a journalist or is he an entertainer? O'Reilly's , Beck, Hannity all claim to be a commentators/entertainers not journalist.

A journalist should be political neutral. But then again if Oberman claims to be a journalist he is the WORST one on the air.

[Hoot Gibson]

GE parent company of NBC gives millions to all parties. That's not the point just a muddling of the water.

Is Oberman a journalist or is he an entertainer? O'Reilly's , Beck, Hannity all claim to be a commentators/entertainers not journalist.

A journalist should be political neutral. But then again if Oberman claims to be a journalist he is the WORST one on the air.

I believe that Keith actually earned a journalism degree from the Cornell School of Agriculture. My nomination for the second worst journalist on the air is KO's former co-anchor of the MSNBC political desk, Chris Matthews. Nobody will ever mistake either of these men for Woodward and Bernstein or even a Dan Rather or Katie Couric.

[nky]

I believe that Keith actually earned a journalism degree from the Cornell School of Agriculture. My nomination for the second worst journalist on the air is KO's former co-anchor of the MSNBC political desk, Chris Matthews. Nobody will ever mistake either of these men for Woodward and Bernstein or even a Dan Rather or Katie Couric.

Tingly feelings up (or was that down) his leg aside neither are very neutral in their shows or interviews

[TheRealVille]

To be more correct, I believe that you have repeatedly vowed to stay off the politics. In fact, you have lost all credibility in that area. :lmao:

Rupert Murdock has also hosted fundraisers for Democratic candidates in the past, including Hillary Clinton. I do not believe that any of the media are unbiased, nor do I think that would be a good thing or even something that is possible.

However, unlike GE, Fox's donations have not been made with the expectations that its bottom line will be boosted by billions of dollars because of government policies it has tried to affect. GE gambled that Obama would pass cap and trade and other left wing laws and positioned itself to cash in. They gambled and they lost. Now, their CEO needs to move the company back to the center and Olbermann's head rolls within days of the disastrous election for the Democrats.

Coincidence? I think not.

Almost forgot...welcome back, again. :biggrin:

I've finally come to realize that Torqque is going to continue to allow you to spew your rhetoric, so I might as well laugh and suck it up, until he kicks me off or sells me the forum. At least, if I owned the forum, I would enforce the rules that I made.

1.Use common sense and be considerate and respectful toward all users. Diversity of opinion is encouraged here at BGR, however insulting or flaming another member because he or she doesn’t agree with you will not be tolerated. (This applies to everyone on the board, including staff members) Disagreeing with an idea or opinion of one is perfectly acceptable and is not the same as attacking that individual. An example of this would be calling someone a disrespectful name because you don’t agree with them. - Violating this rule will result in an immediate ban of user account and you could possibly be prosecuted.

[TheRealVille]

The reason for including the no political donations clause in so-called journalists' contract is to avoid the appearance of media bias. I would like to hear from anybody who ever thought Keith Olbermann was an honest broker of the news and now believes that Olbermann was biased because he made a few thousand dollars of political donations to Democrats. I expect that anybody stupid enough to have held such a belief is incapable of pluggin a computer into the wall, much less making a post. Prove me wrong.

How goes Glen Beck?

[Old School]

I tought this was a nice tribute to Olberman. Enjoy

[TheRealVille]

To be more correct, I believe that you have repeatedly vowed to stay off the politics. In fact, you have lost all credibility in that area. :lmao:

Rupert Murdock has also hosted fundraisers for Democratic candidates in the past, including Hillary Clinton. I do not believe that any of the media are unbiased, nor do I think that would be a good thing or even something that is possible.

However, unlike GE, Fox's donations have not been made with the expectations that its bottom line will be boosted by billions of dollars because of government policies it has tried to affect. GE gambled that Obama would pass cap and trade and other left wing laws and positioned itself to cash in. They gambled and they lost. Now, their CEO needs to move the company back to the center and Olbermann's head rolls within days of the disastrous election for the Democrats.

Coincidence? I think not.

Almost forgot...welcome back, again. :biggrin:

To be even more correct, I paid cash money to post on this site. You continue to leech it for free. Just the opposite of what you believe politically.

[Hoot Gibson]

I've finally come to realize that Torqque is going to continue to allow you to spew your rhetoric, so I might as well laugh and suck it up, until he kicks me off or sells me the forum. At least, if I owned the forum, I would enforce the rules that I made.

1.Use common sense and be considerate and respectful toward all users. Diversity of opinion is encouraged here at BGR, however insulting or flaming another member because he or she doesn’t agree with you will not be tolerated. (This applies to everyone on the board, including staff members) Disagreeing with an idea or opinion of one is perfectly acceptable and is not the same as attacking that individual. An example of this would be calling someone a disrespectful name because you don’t agree with them. - Violating this rule will result in an immediate ban of user account and you could possibly be prosecuted.

What do the rules say about sending ridiculous PMs challenging other posters to knock on your front door and confront them in person? Do the site owners encourage that sort of anti-social disorder? :flame:

[Hoot Gibson]

How goes Glen Beck?

I don't understand how your post is responsive to the point that I made. Were you under the impression that Olbermann was an unbiased journalist before the disclosure of his donations to Democrats? Are you under the mistaken notion that I consider Glenn Beck to be a journalist? Or do you believe that Fox News presents Beck as a reporter or anchor, as MSNBC did in Olbermann's case?

Come on, now, help me out here. What is the connection between my post and your response? Enough with the riddles.

[Hoot Gibson]

To be even more correct, I paid cash money to post on this site. You continue to leech it for free. Just the opposite of what you believe politically.

Yet another disjointed post-response combo. What does the fact that you paid to spew your ridicule of religious people and everybody else who disagrees with your left wing views have to do with your failure to keep your serial vows to avoid the political forum?

However, you do make one good point. Although it is not required, I have been considering becoming a contributing member. It is something that all of us who use the web site much should consider. Web hosting services is not free.

[TheRealVille]

What do the rules say about sending ridiculous PMs challenging other posters to knock on your front door and confront them in person? Do the site owners encourage that sort of anti-social disorder? :flame:

Well, for one thing, it says PM's are to stay private, and not posted in open forum.

[TheRealVille]

Yet another disjointed post-response combo. What does the fact that you paid to spew your ridicule of religious people and everybody else who disagrees with your left wing views have to do with your failure to keep your serial vows to avoid the political forum?

However, you do make one good point. Although it is not required, I have been considering becoming a contributing member. It is something that all of us who use the web site much should consider. Web hosting services is not free.

Get back to us when you pay.

[Hoot Gibson]

Well, for one thing, it says PM's are to stay private, and not posted in open forum.

Is there a rule against disclosing thinly veiled threats in an open forum? If so, I plead guilty and I do not believe that I am alone. But enough about you, why don't we get back on topic, shall we?

Do you support MSNBC's action against Olbermann, or do you think Keith got a raw deal?

[TheRealVille]

What do the rules say about sending ridiculous PMs challenging other posters to knock on your front door and confront them in person? Do the site owners encourage that sort of anti-social disorder? :flame:

The Pm was to allow you to threaten me in person, not under the guise of a keyboard.

[Hoot Gibson]

Get back to us when you pay.

:Thumbs: I will do just that - and thank you again for the reminder.

[TheRealVille]

Is there a rule against disclosing thinly veiled threats in an open forum? If so, I plead guilty and I do not believe that I am alone. But enough about you, why don't we get back on topic, shall we?

Do you support MSNBC's action against Olbermann, or do you think Keith got a raw deal?

I support their action. The same as I think Fox, should do the same with theirs.

BTW, the offer still holds, next time you make it to Paintsville.

[Hoot Gibson]

The Pm was to allow you to threaten me in person, not under the guise of a keyboard.

You seem to be having difficulty staying on topic. What do the rules have to say about that?

[Hoot Gibson]

I support their action. The same as I think Fox, should do the same with theirs.

BTW, the offer still holds, next time you make it to Paintsville.

Sorry, I do not respond to threats and I do not go knocking on strangers' doors looking for trouble. There are just too many nut cases running around free.

Does Fox prohibit their commentators from donating to political causes? If not, then why should they fire people for taking advantage of their voting franchise?