The Radio Equalizer: Brian Maloney

20 May 2008

Mark Levin Responds To Olbermann Smear


Levin: MSNBC Host Is 'On My Radar Screen Now'


After being slimed by MSNBC sicko Keith Olbermann, syndicated talk host Mark Levin (shown lower left) is fighting back.

On last night's show, the meltdown artist accused both Levin and fellow talker Laura Ingraham of hating our troops.

Noel Sheppard at NewsBusters has the details here:

OLBERMANN: I cannot imagine that kind of evil knee-jerk reflex. I feel very sorry for those that have shown it. It seems to me these right-wingers have inadvertently shown their true colors, their instinctive hatred for, and contempt for those self-sacrificing Americans who have been needlessly placed in harm's way and the politicians they support.

They hear criticism of our nation's collective conduct in Iraq, and they immediately assume it's the fault of the soldiers. In the wake of an insult that exists only in their minds and never in my words or in my heart, there remains I think only one question to ask: Laura Ingraham and Mark Levin, why do you hate our troops?

Reached for comment, Levin told your Radio Equalizer, "Olbermann is Tokyo Rose in a rented suit. He suffers from a bad case of audience envy. He's on my radar screen now as is anyone who smears America's military."

NRO's Media Blog has more on the controversy, as does Olbermann Watch with its ongoing coverage of Keith's increasingly reckless antics.

For conservatives, a debate is necessary: how much attention should be paid to this low- rated cable host? The case for confronting him head- on is that he generates a lot of mainstream media attention and it's good to have an opposing view out there.

Interestingly, just today, the New York Times has an item on whether Olbermann and MSNBC are harmful to NBC's overall reputation:

Critics are increasingly citing MSNBC for what they say is left-leaning partisan political coverage and commentary. More and more, NBC shares staff, office space and an identity with MSNBC, exposing the news division to complaints about opinionated cable hosts like Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews.

Does this mean Olbermann's house of cards will fold on its own, or does it need a good push?

YOUR RADIO EQUALIZER quoted in today's Washington Post

FOR New England regional talk radio updates, see our other site. NEW: Ted Kennedy updates

Your Honor System contributions keep this site humming along. Thanks again!

Technorati tags:


  • Keith Olbermann=brave+bright+pure!!!!

    AMEN Keith!!!!!!!! God We Love You!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 21 May, 2008 04:26  

  • I don't particularly care for Olbermann's style of delivery, but the points he raises are usually valid points which I believe are shared by a significant portion of the general public.

    Sadly, someone has to fight the knee-jerk, flag-wrapping spin which the likes of Levin and Ingraham use.

    I've noticed that when Ingraham sits in for O'Reilly she talks over the top of any points a guest who has an opposing view wants to make (as she does on her radio show). If she wants to have a TV show in the future she's going to have to allow for some actual discussion.

    I don't think she could survive in such an open ended environment.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 21 May, 2008 15:48  

  • Keith Olbermann / Ubermann = Rules

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 21 May, 2008 23:57  

  • Keith Olbermann=SUB-MENTAL MIDGET
    His fans=sub-sub-mental midgets

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 22 May, 2008 02:14  

  • "If she wants to have a TV show in the future she's going to have to allow for some actual discussion."

    You mean like Olby, who never invites on guests who disagree with his opinions? He basically has a three or four person rotation of talking heads who almost always preface their remarks with, "You're right, Keith,..." when Olby introduces them and posits an opening/leading proposition for them to remark upon.

    Ingraham certainly can be a grating, 'holier-than-thou' yenta when dealing with guests she disagrees with, but at least she invites on people who don't march in lockstep with her own opinion every ding dong day, as does Olby.

    By Blogger TC, at 22 May, 2008 08:13  

  • If she wants to have a TV show in the future she's going to have to allow for some actual discussion. "

    At least Laura has guests who have an opposing view.

    Olbermann only permits guest who are lock-step with his far left views. He is incapable of debating anyone.

    By Blogger The Benson Report, at 22 May, 2008 08:59  

  • Laura Ingraham doesn't talk over guests she doesn't agree with as has been smeared here. She talks over guests when she asks them a question and they make no attempt to answer that question and go off on their tangent.

    Just last night she had Nancy Soderberg (former U.S. Diplomat) on the show. She's been on the show before, she's always an awful guest and never answers questions with anything other than, "It's George Bush's fault..."

    So, Soderburg went into her usual rant of answering each question with "It's George Bush's fault..." even though the topic was Obama's ignorance in dealing with terrorists and had nothing to do with Bush.

    Like a GOOD interviewer, Laura had to cut Soderberg off repeatedly since she refused to answer the questions and was obviously there just to continue bashing George Bush (can anyone say Bush Derangement Syndrome?)

    Earlier in the show, Obama lackey Tanya Acker was on the show and Laura had to interrupt her as well. Acker is another one who ignores every question and goes right into her talking points.

    Later on, Laura had to interrupt the liberal college student who protested Phyllis Schlafly's reception of an honorary degree at Washington University. The "student" didn't understand that she was on the show to answer questions, not spout an inane, pre-prepared script.

    All of this was one show and in every instance, Laura justifiably interrupted every one of the idiots that didn't want to answer the questions.

    You see, a good interviewer will ask insighful questions and demand a response. I understand why liberals think anyone they agree with should get away with not having to answer questions, but that only explains why Conservative shows dominate the ratings and liberals aren't even a faint blip on the radar.

    By Blogger Dr. T, at 22 May, 2008 17:02  

  • Whether he flakes on his show or not, Olberman has Ingraham, Levin and Maloney by 20 IQ points (each, not combined...).

    His show is not a talk show and should not be compared to the others, though I agree that some opposition views would be nice. As with Franken, their lefty points are more nuanced and thus not conducive to the TV snappy soundbite format that O'Reilly and others employ so well.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 22 May, 2008 19:51  

  • Whether he flakes on his show or not, Olberman has Ingraham, Levin and Maloney by 20 IQ points (each, not combined...).

    Dude (and you must be a guy, because most chicks ain't this thick), there are TWO people in the snippet above who could, if pushed, would be able to credibly construct and argue a case in front of the United States Supreme Court.

    Our host here ain't one of them.

    Can you name the other one?

    (HINT: ESPN fired hiss ass.)

    By Blogger TC, at 23 May, 2008 12:51  

  • ingraham is vile.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 23 May, 2008 17:27  

  • "ingraham is vile."

    Well, posting as "anonymous" is the sign of a gutless, puerile, childlike idiot.

    I'm always amused at the fact that so many knee-jerk lefties lack the personal fortitude to put their name to their words; content to hide behind that blind.

    I mean, hell, you can't even make up a handle?

    By Blogger TC, at 23 May, 2008 23:57  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Page Rank Checker

Powered by Blogger