Obermann Blasts Bush

September 12, 2006

Last night, MSNBC host Keith Obermann blasted Pres. Bush on his show with Ground Zero in the background. It is the most scathing attack on the current Administration that I’ve heard to date.

      “Five years later this space… is still empty.
Five years later there is no Memorial to the dead.
Five years later there is no building rising to show with proud defiance that we would not have our
America wrung from us, by cowards and criminals.
Five years later this country’s wound is still open.
Five years… later this country’s mass grave is still unmarked.

      Five years later… this is still… just a background for a photo-op.
It is beyond shameful.”

Advertisements

10 Responses to “Obermann Blasts Bush”

  1. roberrt Says:

    And how is that W’s fault? Oberman should go back to ESPN, where, if nothing else, he was entertaining.

  2. Bill Braskey Says:

    Five years later, Obermann is still a cheap-shot A-hole.

  3. Wayne A. Says:

    Robert, Obviously you did not watch the video of his entire commentary. The point had nothing to do with Bush being responsible for the WTC building being replaced and everything to do with how he has used 9/11 to justify his folly of war with Iraq. In Olbermann’s words:

    Terrorists did not come and steal our newly-regained sense of being American first, and political, fiftieth. Nor did the Democrats. Nor did the media. Nor did the people.
    The President — and those around him — did that.
    They promised bi-partisanship, and then showed that to them, “bi-partisanship” meant that their party would rule and the rest would have to follow, or be branded, with ever-escalating hysteria, as morally or intellectually confused; as appeasers; as those who, in the Vice President’s words yesterday, “validate the strategy of the terrorists.”
    They promised protection, and then showed that to them “protection” meant going to war against a despot whose hand they had once shaken… a despot who we now learn from our own Senate Intelligence Committee, hated Al-Qaeda as much as we did.
    The polite phrase for how so many of us were duped into supporting a war, on the false premise that it had ‘something to do’ with 9/11, is “lying by implication.”

    The impolite phrase is: impeachable offense.

    How anyone can defend the actions of this man? He has squandered the good will that we had as a country after 9/11. Remember the candle light vigils held around the world for the US? His father knew how to build coalitions and how to fight a war with a purpose. Remember the 1991 Gulf War? Iraq had nothing to do with the war on terror until the Bush administration decided to invade it. The president now admits that Saddam Hussein was not responsible for 9/11. He claimed last night that the invasion was necessary because Iraq posed a risk. Iraq’s risk did not compare with the risk that is posed by North Korea & Iran.
    And they have no plan for Iraq, only speeches. And there is no sense of reality coming from the White House either.
    It’s hard to figure out how to build consensus when the men in charge seem to be living in a parallel universe. Vice President Dick Cheney suggested last weekend that the White House is even more delusional than Mr. Bush’s rhetoric suggests. The vice president volunteered to NBC’s Tim Russert that not only was the Iraq invasion the right thing to do, if we had it to do over again even knowing that he did not possess WMDs, we’d do exactly the same thing. Bush & Cheney are beyond insane. They are criminally insane.
    I pray that our country survives the blunders of this administration. 2008 come quickly.

  4. roberrt Says:

    You’re right Wayne; I didn’t watch the commentary and I wont watch it. The above looks better – a play button that could be mistaken for a band-aid across Oberman’s mouth 🙂 If the post had contained your quotes as opposed to the “five years” quotes, it would’ve made more sense (from a liberal’s point of view anyway.)

  5. Wayne A. Says:

    Yes, don’t let pesky facts get in the way. Makes about as much sense as labeling me a liberal. I have voted republican for most of my adult life and I voted for this guy twice. But I wouldn’t again. Two of the biggest mistakes I’ve ever made.

  6. afischer3 Says:

    Wayne, you sound so confused. A liberal voting Republican? I suppose you are now claiming to be an “Independent” (another word for Liberal without admitting it to yourself). I know it’s been 5 yrs, but if you recall, we were attacked without provocation. Whether we attacked Iraq now or later doesn’t really matter. Eventually we would of had to go there. I know you think they were a peace-loving society, with a leader that feels your pain. But they were Muslims that wanted the US destroyed. Do you deny that? Who cares if we found no WMD’s. They were evil. Now it’s Iran’s turn, or Syria’s, or N Korea. Take your pick. This is war, and we either defeat evil, or it defeats us. What don’t you get? By the way, Hitler had no WMD’s either. And did nothing to us. Guess you would have stood up for him too. I thank GOD that true leaders like Bush have the guts to stand up for this country, despite all the invertebrae’s.

  7. Pinney Says:

    afischer3, I won’t even touch on the absolute stupidity on your comments on liberals, but: “we were attacked without provocation. Whether we attacked Iraq now or later doesn’t really matter. Eventually we would of had to go there.”

    What does 9/11 (I’m assuming that’s what your referencing when you say attack) have to do with us going to Iraq? Iraq had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11. Nothing.

    “Who cares if we found no WMD’s.” I would say all the people that supported Iraq’s invasion on the premise that they had WMDs.

    “They were evil.” And who are you to make that judgement?

    “By the way, Hitler had no WMD’s either. And did nothing to us. Guess you would have stood up for him too.” However, Hitler had invaded a good part of the world that did nothing to him, and was partaking in massive genocide. Once again, Iraq was not.

  8. Joe Says:

    If you visit afischer’s blog, you’ll see he’s a Hovind-style creationist. (Jeez, Rick, did someone carve your URL into a Dinosaur Adventure Land bathroom stall or what?) The thing that confuses me — and maybe Tom and Todd can help me out on this — is how someone who takes the Bible as 100% literal truth can have a list of countries he thinks we should invade next. Do you interpret the command, “turn the other cheek,” as a literal rotation of your neck and nothing more?

  9. afischer3 Says:

    It’s painfully obvious Joe is bible illiterate. But no matter, so are most liberals. How else can they justify the disgusting ooze of love they have for the radical, anti-Son-of-God Muslim religion? Turn to other cheek all of a sudden means you let Christian haters kill innocent civilians? Great interpretation. Ever read the Old Testament before? Did God not destroy multiple nations and people for unrighteousness? YES, He did. Should I not be a fan of stopping those who want to do us harm for NOT being Muslim? YES, I am.

    Cute rip on creationism. Again, read your bible friend.

  10. afischer3 Says:

    Pinney, You must be smarter than most. Here I thought it was common knowledge that we found mass graves of “ethnically inferior” Iraqis slaughtered by Saddam. Do you know something we don’t know? And did you forget about their invasion of Kuwait? You’re still saying he did not want to expand his borders? The only difference here is he wasn’t invading white flag France. And we stopped him.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s