Announcements

I've set up a multi-author social blog to be used by my part-time blogger friends who don't want one of their own. Send me a note if you'd like to be able to write on For Consideration

Wednesday, September 27, 2006

Olbermann's Special Commentary

For those of you who have not had a chance to see this, following is a link to Keith Olbermann's "special commentary" regarding the Bill Clinton Fox News Chris Wallace interview as it specifically relates to the former president's statement that he tried to get bin Laden and that leading up to 9/11 the current administration did not Special Commentary

While there is much in this 10 minute commentary that I agree with and much that I feel needed to be said by someone with an audience larger than the biggest blog site, its tone and lack of respect for the current president defeats the purpose. Though I do not respect President Bush, I respect the presidency; and though, as I said, there is much there that needed to be said and said strongly, Olbermann must understand that the way his message was delivered will turn off anyone who should hear it. He can use that "tone" when preaching to the choir all he wants; but preaching to the choir is just that, raving to the already-converted.
For the message to have true value, it must be delivered in such a way that those Americans who have yet to consider it or have not had access to the information which make up its points are willing to hear it.
If I sat in my seat and squirmed, what effect do you think it had on the people who in my opinion most needed to hear it? That's right, they immediately turned it off or, worse yet, it served to push them further away from the light, the light that should be shone brightly on the truth. There is much truth in what President Clinton said and in what Olbermann said, but there is also much truth available to counter-balance their side. So why not make a political commentary nearer the whole truth, thus nearer the middle where the vast majority of the hearts and minds of Americans reside?
Keith, you come across as disrespectful and biased. What point does that serve? What point does it serve to insinuate that our president is not a grown-up?

For a commentary such as this to have any real value, its messenger must deliver it with facts only, not intertwined with opinions as facts. To do so makes you no better, the same, as those you attack. The messenger will be seen as much a tool as the tools he hopes to shine the light of truth on. So while he fancies himself a crusader of truth and justice, he instead pushes us further from the truth.


5 comments:

David said...

I have said and still say that Olberman was at his best when he was working for ESPN. At least there he knew what he was talking about.

Ingrid said...

Amen to that! It's all in the delivery and the preaching to the choir is exactly what people react to when Bush is talking to his 'choir' with his particular lingo and simple minded comparisons. So that goes both ways. Otherwise it becomes just a manner of speaking to your audience for the sake of numbers and popularity, not for the (originally) perceived idea that all you wanted was to speak out and speak the truth.
We need someone who's really mature and commands respect from 'all' sides,
Ingrid

Sally said...

Having seen many many of Keith Olbermann's show Countdown I expected nothing less from him! If you watched Olbermanns reply to Bill O"Reilly's many many misinformed rants such as on Malemady you would not be surprised!

Zebster said...

He did another one last night that falls into the same category, where there's plenty in it I agree with but it's still the President. So the tone needs to be much more respectful.

Sally said...

I do agree with "The President" deserves respect point and I think Bush got a lot of that "respect" especially after 9/11. People who normally mocked Dubya stopped for awhile. The tone of a lot his critics now are bad because people see the free pass Bush had for two years as a waste. Bush frittered away all the trust people gave him...would he have done that if the critics were doing their jobs?