News anchor gets suspended . . . .

[tosberg34]

While it's possible to differentiate between Murdoch and Olbermann, it's more difficult to differentiate between Olbermann and Sean Hannity, who has donated to Republicans this year.

 

But what you're failing to understand is that it is company policy at MSNBC (at most new organizations as well - CNN and ABC to name a few) that all donations be approved by corporate at first. Hannity does not have any such stipulations in his contract and I bet FOX has no company policy (but I can't be sure at this point). Olbermann broke a company policy and it's that simple. Trying to compare him to others is comparing apples and oranges.

[Ursa Majoris]

But what you're failing to understand is that it is company policy at MSNBC (at most new organizations as well - CNN and ABC to name a few) that all donations be approved by corporate at first. Hannity does not have any such stipulations in his contract and I bet FOX has no company policy (but I can't be sure at this point). Olbermann broke a company policy and it's that simple. Trying to compare him to others is comparing apples and oranges.

Sure, it's in his contract and he breached it. No argument there. Still, since MSNBC is the left's supposed equivalent to Fox, you have to question why one organization has such a stipulation while the other doesn't.

[bushwacked]

Sure, it's in his contract and he breached it. No argument there. Still, since MSNBC is the left's supposed equivalent to Fox, you have to question why one organization has such a stipulation while the other doesn't.

 

Or the hypocrisy of being outraged by the Juan Williams firing and then championing MSNBC's right to exercise their rights.

[gbpfan1231]

Or the hypocrisy of being outraged by the Juan Williams firing and then championing MSNBC's right to exercise their rights.

Not even close to the same thing.

[tosberg34]

Sure, it's in his contract and he breached it. No argument there. Still, since MSNBC is the left's supposed equivalent to Fox, you have to question why one organization has such a stipulation while the other doesn't.

 

I see your point and I'm not sure how I feel about that.. I'll have to dwell on it some more.

 

However, from merely a policy perspective they were in the right to suspend Olbermann. Those who want to argue about "fairness" and then go on to compare them to FOX are missing the point.

[bushwacked]

Not even close to the same thing.

 

Wrong. Juan Williams violated a policy of his company, so did Olberman. To be outraged by one and applaud the other is predominately due to nothing more than hypocrisy. That goes both ways.

 

 

I'm of the opinion that both NPR's and MSNBC's policies and subsequent actions were silly. However, that is their right as an organization. You don't think they are close to the same thing because your ultra-sensitive to "your side" being a victim of political correctness.

Edited November 7, 2010 by bushwacked

[gbpfan1231]

Wrong. Juan Williams violated a policy of his company, so did Olberman. To be outraged by one and applaud the other is predominately due to nothing more than hypocrisy. That goes both ways.

 

 

I'm of the opinion that both NPR's and MSNBC's policies and subsequent actions were silly. However, that is their right as an organization. You don't think they are close to the same thing because your ultra-sensitive to "your side" being a victim of political correctness.

Now you know how I think? Did you not rip on me for that same thing like two days ago?

 

I actually don't think Olbermann should have been fired fired - It seems like a stupid policy and seemed pretty minor. Everyone knows he is a left wing nut so he gives a little cash to some liberals big deal. I would say the same about Hannity if he did the same and got fired.

[bpwallace49]

Sure, it's in his contract and he breached it. No argument there. Still, since MSNBC is the left's supposed equivalent to Fox, you have to question why one organization has such a stipulation while the other doesn't.

 

Because MSNBC at least does a feeble attempt at impartiality with their stipulation. Fox is wholly owned by the right, and would have no compunctions about having one of their own donate to . . . hell . . one of their own paid commentators that will probably run like Palin or Gingrich.

 

[bushwacked]

Now you know how I think? Did you not rip on me for that same thing like two days ago?

 

You think that getting outraged by NPR exercising a company policy and applauding MSNBC for doing the same thing isn't hypocrisy. I have logical deduction on how you think based on your viewpoints, that you alone express. I ripped on you two days ago for a retarded reach in facetiously insinuating that since small group of liberals in California banned Happy Meal Toys, then no other liberal in the world, specifically Ursa, could have a good idea.

 

I'm addressing the point at hand, you didn't two days ago.

Edited November 7, 2010 by bushwacked

[tosberg34]

Because MSNBC at least does a feeble attempt at impartiality with their stipulation. Fox is wholly owned by the right, and would have no compunctions about having one of their own donate to . . . hell . . one of their own paid commentators that will probably run like Palin or Gingrich.

 

 

Well, I would argue that only enforcing a policy when it suits you is far worse than not having one at all. No double standards or hypocrisy to worry about. And besides, let's not lose sight of the fact that Olbermann's numbers (and MSNBC as a whole) are terrible. This is just a flimsy excuse for MSNBC to cut their losses and save face.

 

Besides, MSNBC is wholly owned by the left and Madcows feeble attempt the other day to deny that was laughable:

 

“We’re not a political operation. Fox is. We are a news operation.”

–Rachel Maddow, The Rachel Maddow Show, November 5, 2010.

 

I nearly choked on my cup of Deans 2% low fat Milk when I read that.

Edited November 7, 2010 by tosberg34

[tosberg34]

You think that getting outraged by NPR exercising a company policy and applauding MSNBC for doing the same thing isn't hypocrisy. I have logical deduction on how you think based on your viewpoints, that you alone express. I ripped on you two days ago for a retarded reach in facetiously insinuating that since small group of liberals in California banned Happy Meal Toys, then no other liberal in the world could have a good idea.

 

I'm addressing the point at hand, you didn't two days ago.

 

Well, if the shoe fits...

Edited November 7, 2010 by tosberg34

[bpwallace49]

Well, I would argue that only enforcing a policy when it suits you is far worse than not having one at all. And besides, let's not lose sight of the fact that Olbermann's numbers (and MSNBC as a whole) are terrible. This is just a flimsy excuse for MSNBC to cut their losses and save face.

 

Besides, MSNBC is wholly owned by the left and Madcows feeble attempt the other day to deny that was laughable:

 

Maybe you cant see very well, leaning that far to the right, but it has been stated, stipulated, and written on stone tablets that no one thinks that MSNBC is NOT far left, just like Fox News is equally as partisan and very far right.

 

It is just as laughable as the "fair and balanced" moniker that people swallow hook,, line and sinker.

 

I think it is HILARIOUS that MSNBC has a stipulation that says that their journalists at least ahve to pretend to not be partisan, while Fox News proudly flaunts their biased positions without shame. MSNBC was destined for an incident like this to happen, while Fox just shows how much they are not a news organisation at all . . . but merely an entertainmnet venue. Hell, they should change their name to "Fox entertainment". It would be more factual.

[gbpfan1231]

You think that getting outraged by NPR exercising a company policy and applauding MSNBC for doing the same thing isn't hypocrisy. I have logical deduction on how you think based on your viewpoints, that you alone express. I ripped on you two days ago for a retarded reach in facetiously insinuating that since small group of liberals in California banned Happy Meal Toys, then no other liberal in the world, specifically Ursa, could have a good idea.

 

I'm addressing the point at hand, you didn't two days ago.

Where did I applaud MSNBC?

 

I never insinuated that Ursa could not have a good idea. I enjoy reading his posts. I would more likely insinuate that you are a complete tool and really never add much to any conversation. You are probably smarter than I am but I do read and learn things from reading posts by Ursa and BP - I get zero from any of your posts.

 

Sit back and look and reflect that you are ripped on by most of the conservative posters on here - people don't rip on the other lefties anywhere near as much as they rip on you - that should tell you that your schtick is old and tiresome.

 

I enjoy reading the political posts and look forward to reading things by Ursa, BP, Az, SEC, etc - you not so much.

[bushwacked]

Where did I applaud MSNBC?

 

 

I don't know, you tell me. I made a statement, that had nothing to do with you. If you were outraged by Juan Williams getting fired and applauded MSNBC's decision to suspend Zoblerman, you're probably a hypocrite. You took offense to that,saying they were entirely different things, and since then, you have been tripping over yourself trying to avoid defending what you think.

[gbpfan1231]

 

I don't know, you tell me. I made a statement, that had nothing to do with you. If you were outraged by Juan Williams getting fired and applauded MSNBC's decision to suspend Zoblerman, you're probably a hypocrite. You took offense to that,saying they were entirely different things, and since then, you have been tripping over yourself trying to avoid defending what you think.

In my opinion I don't think they are the same thing. In my opinion Juan Williams firing had more to do with race and they used that as an excuse to fire him. Olberman was fired for making a campaign contribution that they say was a direct violation of his contract.

 

Yes technically they were both fired for doing something that was against what was written in the contract but I see what they actually did as being two totally different things.

 

I don't think it is worth arguing because you are the smartest guy and always right on the money.

[bushwacked]

I don't think it is worth arguing because you are the smartest guy and always right on the money.

 

 

This is the most accurate post you've made on the Huddle to date. Sometimes arguments on the innerwesbs end up in the proper fashion.

[gbpfan1231]

This is the most accurate post you've made on the Huddle to date. Sometimes arguments on the innerwesbs end up in the proper fashion.

Thanks. I will try to be nice also. That post by you was the only time a post by you did not annoy me. Good job.

[tosberg34]

This is the most accurate post you've made on the Huddle to date. Sometimes arguments on the innerwesbs end up in the proper fashion.

 

Actually, this would be the most accurate post gbfan has made about you:

 

I would more likely insinuate that you are a complete tool and really never add much to any conversation.

 

AND THE TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE!

[bushwacked]

You don't think they are close to the same thing because your ultra-sensitive to "your side" being a victim of political correctness.

 

Now you know how I think?

 

 

In my opinion I don't think they are the same thing. In my opinion Juan Williams firing had more to do with race and they used that as an excuse to fire him.

 

Yes, I do know how you think.

[gbpfan1231]

Yes, I do know how you think.