This transcript comes from a reaction that MSNBC leftwing propaganda fiend, Keith Olbermann, had to a Donald Rumsfeld speech a month ago. I wrote about the Rumsfeld speech when it happened. It was a great speech. Olbermann’s reaction would be comical if it weren’t for many American’s buying into his monkey logic.
The main message of that Olbermann seems to convey is that people who believe in absolutes are always dumb. He also voices his concern over people who challenge the intelligence, morality, and patriotism of others. To help illustrate this, he talks about the Bush administration being intellectually confused, their lack of morality, and how they are destroying the country.
In case you are wondering, no, it doesn’t make sense. It really is a debate between Olbermann and himself. You can also watch Olbermann in action on YouTube.
Olbermann’s nonsensical tirade begins like this…
The man who sees absolutes, where all other men see nuances and shades of meaning, is either a prophet, or a quack.
Donald H. Rumsfeld is not a prophet.
In other words, if you view the answer of certain issues in black and white, you are a quack. Last time I checked, that is an absolute. Therefore, by his own logic, Olbermann is a quack.
We’ll give him a break. Everyone makes mistakes.
Mr. Rumsfeld’s remarkable speech to the American Legion yesterday demands the deep analysis—and the sober contemplation—of every American.
For it did not merely serve to impugn the morality or intelligence — indeed, the loyalty — of the majority of Americans who oppose the transient occupants of the highest offices in the land.
Ok that seems fair…right? His problem is that he later countered this statement and said…
Mr. Rumsfeld is also personally confused, morally or intellectually, about his own standing in this matter.
He then flip-flopped back to his original position and attacked Rumsfeld again.
And yet he [Rumsfeld] can stand up, in public, and question the morality and the intellect of those of us who dare ask just for the receipt for the Emperor’s New Clothes?
That, about which Mr. Rumsfeld is confused is simply this: This is a Democracy. Still. Sometimes just barely.
After this, he then decided to question Rumsfeld’s patriotism…
In what country was Mr. Rumsfeld raised? As a child, of whose heroism did he read? On what side of the battle for freedom did he dream one day to fight? With what country has he confused the
? United States of America
The confusion is about whether this Secretary of Defense, and this administration, are in fact now accomplishing what they claim the terrorists seek: The destruction of our freedoms, the very ones for which the same veterans Mr. Rumsfeld addressed yesterday in
, so valiantly fought. Salt Lake City
This country faces a new type of fascism - indeed.
Quoting Edward R. Murrow, Olbermann says that "never in the trial of a thousand years of writing could I come close to matching how he phrased a warning to an earlier generation of us, at a time when other politicians thought they (and they alone) knew everything, and branded those who disagreed: 'confused' or 'immoral.'"
I wonder how Olbermann justifies his "Worst Person in the World" segment? What a rollercoaster. It isn’t over yet though.
That government, like Mr. Rumsfeld’s, had a monopoly on all the facts. It, too, had the “secret information.” It alone had the true picture of the threat. It too dismissed and insulted its critics in terms like Mr. Rumsfeld’s — questioning their intellect and their morality.
Olbermann obviously suffers from a severe disconnect from reality. A monopoly on the facts? Is that possible today? Is he aware of the internet? What a douche.
“We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty,” he said, in 1954.
I think Olbermann is confusing disloyalty with dissent. Again Olbermann evokes Edward R. Murrow...
“We must remember always that accusation is not proof, and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law.”
So accusing the president of lying doesn’t mean its true…got it. More Murrow…
We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason…
Like believing that driving our cars will destroy the planet? Olbermann used one last Murrow quote…
… if we dig deep in our history and our doctrine, and remember that we are not descended from fearful men, not from men who feared to write, to speak, to associate, and to defend causes that were for the moment unpopular.
Right on Murrow. Like defending Wal-Mart’s right to conduct business against do-nothing politicians with economic ignoramuses as constituents?
The difference between liberals and conservatives is simple. Libs fear monger about economics, conservatives fear monger about terrorists. Terrorists kill, Wal-Mart sells you products for cheap prices. Decide for yourself who is on the right side of history and who is completely out of touch with reality.Stumble It!