Democrats & Liberals Archives

We Have Not Forgotten, Mr. President

This is the title of the outstandingly stirring Edward-R.-Murow-speech that Keith Olbermann delivered from Ground Zero yesterday night. This is the definitive answer to the president and the way he has made the 9/11 massacre a political issue. What a speech! It will leave you breathless.

Here is but one section of the speech:

However, of all the things those of us who were here five years ago could have forecast -- of all the nightmares that unfolded before our eyes, and the others that unfolded only in our minds -- none of us could have predicted this.

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.

And another:

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.

There is more to this great speech. For full impact, you must go read it. Better still, see Olbermann deliver it at

http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20060912/cm_thenation/15120539

Posted by Paul Siegel at September 12, 2006 5:00 PM
Comments
Comment #180860

ABSOLUTELY an excellent commentary. He has had several commentaries over the past week or so - saw him deliver this one live last night.

I know many people - who support Bush - will blow this off, they might even call Keith a “terrorist appeaser”, but this was exceptional writing and delivery.

Yes yes yes. HELL YES, my sentiments exactly. Thanks Keith.

Posted by: tony at September 12, 2006 5:18 PM
Comment #180863

From Obermann’ss running battle with Fox to his “Murrow-esque” commentary, there finally is a cognizant media voice which clearly articulates what a good number of American’s feel- we are off track, out of touch, out of focus, and hopefully, not yet out of luck. I for one am glad to be called what ever “cliche’ of the day” that Rumsfeld, Cheney, and even the President want to equate with loyal dissent or questioning. Well done Keith. For those who support his action and words, be sure to let the producers at MSNBC know, as I’m sure they are under the same pressures as CBS was 40 years ago with Edward R. Murrow and his commentaries. Thanks for stepping up… not down Keith. peace
mjondo

Posted by: mjondo at September 12, 2006 5:32 PM
Comment #180865

And they showed this on free TV? So close to the elections? Who paid for this? Was there a disclaimer saying this was opinion and not fact?
How did KO get away with this? I thought “King Bush” had taken away all of our rights?
He should have been censored.

Posted by: kctim at September 12, 2006 5:38 PM
Comment #180866

Keith’s ratings are consistantly bad. Wonder when he’ll get cancelled.

He was once kinda funny for ESPN. Now he just comes across as a mean jackass. He is a lightweight—but at least he can plagiarize.

BTW: How many dems here believe in the current 9/11 conspirancy theories?

Posted by: nikkolai at September 12, 2006 5:39 PM
Comment #180867

Seems to me that there are plans to build on the twin towers site and to errect a memorial to all who lost their lives. Do we really need to errect buildings and plant a marker to remember those who lost their lives? Or do we need to remember them in our hearts? As a memorial to those who lost their lives on 9/11/2001 getting this Nation together and put away our petty differences would be a more fitting memorial.

Posted by: KAP at September 12, 2006 5:45 PM
Comment #180869

kctim -
Fair election coverage covers public airwaves, not private cable channels. There’s also a huge difference between editorials and fictionalized treatments of fact.

nikkolai -
I expected people to trash Keith, and they’ve been pretty much the exact ones I expected.

KAP -
“As a memorial to those who lost their lives on 9/11/2001 getting this Nation together and put away our petty differences would be a more fitting memorial.”
This was very much the spirit of Keith’s commentary…

Posted by: tony at September 12, 2006 5:55 PM
Comment #180870

Bravo to Keith Olbermann…

I watch this speech last evening and was glued to the TV at what and how he was saying. He hit it right on the head. We need a ton of this.

Keith has done this severzl times recently. He did it to Rumsfelds speech a week or so ago.

I am elated that someone is pounding the idiots of the ‘axis of evil’ (Bush, Chaney & Rumsfeld).

Thank you Keith and KEEP IT COMING

Posted by: James Taylor at September 12, 2006 6:04 PM
Comment #180872

In case anyone wants to watch the speech without the MSNBC software…

http://www.alternet.org/blogs/themix/41501/

Posted by: tony at September 12, 2006 6:09 PM
Comment #180873

Tony
I read the commentary. I really think it’s full of hate. As far as bringing the Nation together? No

Posted by: KAP at September 12, 2006 6:14 PM
Comment #180876

KAP -

This editorial is full of frustration… it’s full of condemnation for such excessive failure of this administration… hatred of the inexcusable power grab by this administration disguised as patriotic duty. And if you’re concerned about divisive natures and speeches… Bush was the one to promise to be the “uniter”, and he was the first to divide and conquer. Please find a single quote from Keith calling people who disagree with his point of view “traitors” or terrorist “appeasers”.

Posted by: tony at September 12, 2006 6:23 PM
Comment #180878

Paul Siegel

THANK YOU

Posted by: mark at September 12, 2006 6:42 PM
Comment #180881

Tony
It takes time and planning to build on a site. It seems to me the people of New York city have more say as to what they want on that site than the president. Why should the president get involved in a local matter except maybe allocating some funds towards the rebuilding. His hatred was directed towards Bush and Bush has no say in what New York City wants to build.

Posted by: KAP at September 12, 2006 6:55 PM
Comment #180883

KAP -

You’re missing the point… Ground Zero is a metaphor for the larger issue facing America. Ground Zero is still a hole in the ground because the delays and infighting among the developers, owners and NY City. The power gained has become more important than their original goal, making America stronger.

America has become weak because those in charge have been distracted by doling out power and pork.

Posted by: tony at September 12, 2006 7:03 PM
Comment #180884

The article that you linked was emailed over 2300 times from yahoo’s opinion page. That is by far the most I can ever remember seeing.

I read it twice today and heard it once. Right now all I can think of is my friend and his wife. Just last month my friend began his third tour in the sandbox.

Posted by: darren159 at September 12, 2006 7:16 PM
Comment #180885

Tony
Dosen’t the pork thing work both ways. Dosen’t the infighting work both ways to. Making America stronger is both parties working together which isn’t going to happen unless we all put away our PETTY differences and quit with the partisian BULLCRAP.

Posted by: KAP at September 12, 2006 7:18 PM
Comment #180887

I absolutely agree…

Posted by: tony at September 12, 2006 7:28 PM
Comment #180889

Here’s a great example of putting Americans first:

“WASHINGTON (AP) — Nonlethal weapons such as high-power microwave devices should be used on American citizens in crowd-control situations before being used on the battlefield, the Air Force secretary said Tuesday.

The object is basically public relations. Domestic use would make it easier to avoid questions from others about possible safety considerations, said Secretary Michael Wynne.

“If we’re not willing to use it here against our fellow citizens, then we should not be willing to use it in a wartime situation,” said Wynne. “(Because) if I hit somebody with a nonlethal weapon and they claim that it injured them in a way that was not intended, I think that I would be vilified in the world press.”

The Air Force has paid for research into nonlethal weapons, but he said the service is unlikely to spend more money on development until injury problems are reviewed by medical experts and resolved.

Nonlethal weapons generally can weaken people if they are hit with the beam. Some of the weapons can emit short, intense energy pulses that also can be effective in disabling some electronic devices.”

… it just different than I had hoped.

Posted by: tony at September 12, 2006 7:31 PM
Comment #180897

“Olbermann is just hot-dogging it to push sales of his new book, “The Worst Person in the World: and 202 Strong Contenders”. He’s just shilling.”

So, who’s going to be the first from the Right to try this one on for size? Anyone? Anyone?

Oh, that’ right, reading isn’t the Right’s strong suit, is it?

(Just thought I’d try a general, generic smear of an entire sub-species; hmm, I still prefer facts and a subject matter.)


Never mind.

Posted by: Tim Crow at September 12, 2006 8:12 PM
Comment #180899

Paul, as a non American thousands of miles away from the States, I find myself asking myself about this Olbermann piece - so what? I have a very strong sense that lone voices in the wilderness willl bring little change. Given the governance that the US seems to have received these last six years, there should be a massive yearning for change. There should be a coherent and highly focused opposition party hammering home convincing alternatives, inspiring the electorate with their manifest committment to shaping a compellingly persuasive vision of the future. So why do I, admittedly from this distant remove, get the sense that the Dems are not a convincing alternative for enough Americans? Why do they seem to be divided, caught like deer in the headlights of change and paralysed by the fear of the Rep propaganda machine. Its sometimes said that oppositions don’t win election, governments lose them. There is no doubt truth in that, but in my experience it only applies where the electorate have a sense that the opposition is electable. That’s why the British Tories had such a long run before British Labour made itself electable. And that is why the Labour party has held onto office these last ten years, because the Tories carried out an internicine internal feud since losing office and were clearly deemed by the British electorate as being unfit for office.

It seems to me, that there is a mainstream democratic party that is afraid to seriously stick its head above the parapet, for fear that Rove wiil cut it off, and another wing which wants to present itself as unapologetically centre left. Any party speaking with two voices, but especially in a country that is as polarised as the US appears to be, does itself little favour.

Posted by: Paul in Euroland at September 12, 2006 8:28 PM
Comment #180905

so much poetic stupidity wrapped up in a nice little speech. no longer a fan.

keith

Posted by: keith at September 12, 2006 8:58 PM
Comment #180907

I think most of us are aware that Olbermann has been a nut job for years. The only reason he has a show now is the hope that he says something so off the wall that instead of reporting the news he himself becomes the news and therefore that powerhouse of a network he works for finally gets some ratings. I didn’t see the report, was keith rolling ball bearings in his hand during the report?

Posted by: Carnak at September 12, 2006 9:03 PM
Comment #180910

Are you kidding me.

Olberman is so far over the top and full of himself that anybody who takes him seriously probably needs the same medication he forgot to take.

Posted by: Keithly needs at September 12, 2006 9:10 PM
Comment #180912

One thing I can say for Mr. Olbermann: he seems to be pissing off all the Right people.


Get it? Yuck, yuck.

Posted by: Tim Crow at September 12, 2006 9:16 PM
Comment #180913

It seems to me that Keith Olbermann rattled some cages. (I love the RIGHT’s reactions to critisism.)

Posted by: tony at September 12, 2006 9:18 PM
Comment #180923

Add one more. To this day, ground zero is still littered with thousands of pieces of human remains. No concerted effort has been made to retrieve them all, identify them with DNA testing, and provide closure to hundreds and hundreds of families who have no remains to bury. It sounds like a such an inconsequential thing, unless you are a family member with nothing but an empty hole in your life where love, support, and living together once was.

We can afford tax cuts for the very wealthiest, 300 billion a year to defend Iraqis and Afghanis from terrorists and themselves, but, we can’t find the funding to bury our dead properly. This speaks volumes of the topsy turvy priorities of our government and its compassion for the fallen and their families.

Posted by: David R. Remer at September 12, 2006 10:04 PM
Comment #180927

I guess I will take a shot at this from the right.

Is it George Bush’s job to rebuild the twin towers?

Do you want a building/memorial that George Bush would build?

Do you on the left want Bush to do it?

It looks to me like the current process is the right one. It is a mess, because it is democracy. So many competing interests. New Yorkers are sorting through this emotional topic.
It will take time, but in the end it will be a new york solution

If it were up to George Bush to get it done, he would have acted, and it would be up in the sky and none of you would like it.

Keith Olbermann would still give his speech and use the creation as an example of how terrible Bush is.

Ground zero is not the issue, hatred from the left of George bush is the issue.

Craig

Posted by: Craig Holmes at September 12, 2006 10:19 PM
Comment #180928

What about the partisan crap that Clinton had to put up with for years, when the repugs countered everything he wanted to do? OH I forgot it was ok then cause it was to make him look bad. The only thing Bush knows how to do is come across as a dumb ass cowboy. I’ve said it before if the members of congress had to have their loved ones in harms way they either wouldn’t have started this “war on terror” or it would have been over and done with long ago. I haven’t seen this much fighting since I was in elementary school on the playground. It’s about time those in power grew up and quit putting themselves and their rich friends in front of the ones protecting their asses. God Bless to those who are serving this country trying to keep us safe and to give some other country that has never and will never be a democractic way of life.

Posted by: Sherri at September 12, 2006 10:22 PM
Comment #180929

“Ground zero is not the issue, hatred from the left of George bush is the issue.”

Oh, brother. We’re in hell, right? When did enter hell?

Posted by: Tim Crow at September 12, 2006 10:23 PM
Comment #180931

“When did [we] enter hell?”

Posted by: Tim Crow at September 12, 2006 10:24 PM
Comment #180933

By the way, while I am on a roll, I will give you my take on who it is to blame for 9/11.

Are you ready? We are. As near as I can tell, we had an absent president in those critical years at the end of the 90’s.

We on the right were as consumed with Clinton hatred as you on the left are with Bush hatred. We felt self justified. Clinton was evil and corrupt. Of course if you look for imperfection sooner or later you will find it. He was guilty of lying about a sexual encounter with an intern.

It was during that impeachment process that critical decisions were not made that might have changed history.

Of course now the shoe is on the other foot. The left is looking for flaw after flaw. Why did 9/11 happen? Because of our hatred. Our hatred drives us to action to take out elected officials. And while we are seeking their political demise (So we can take power), they are distracted from defending us.

We are responsible for 9/11. Our ugly political climate keeps our politicians from doing the jobs they were elected to do.

By the way, this works for Katrina as well. The Dems and Republicans were so busy postering (Both sides are guilty), that the work of helping our citizens during the worst natural disaster in history was harmed.

Craig

Posted by: Craig Holmes at September 12, 2006 10:25 PM
Comment #180937

Sorry, Craig—your impeccable logic was lost on me because I’m spending all my time hating you.

Posted by: Tim Crow at September 12, 2006 10:31 PM
Comment #180943

“Making America stronger is both parties working together which isn’t going to happen unless we all put away our PETTY differences and quit with the partisian BULLCRAP.”

Shouldn’t the party with ALL the power be the first ones to offer the olive branch?
I’ve heard more than once that the ulitimate goal of the current Republican power structure is the ELIMINATION of the opposing party.
So, were supposed to what? How is the left supposed to stop being partisan? By losing what little we have left? By giving up the few victories we can squeeze out now?
Why don’t you elucidate your version of what you think the Democrats could do that would show bipartisan cooperation, and not end up with the liquidation of what they/we stand for.

Posted by: Observer at September 12, 2006 10:50 PM
Comment #180944

“Why did 9/11 happen? Because of our hatred. Our hatred drives us to action to take out elected officials. And while we are seeking their political demise (So we can take power), they are distracted from defending us.”

Uh, sorry, but gwbush was NOT being attacked, distracted, or otherwise harrassed in the early months of 2001.
His only distraction that I remember was his goal of breaking the record for vacations and brush clearing.
Even now, bush is experiencing 1/10th the distracting attacks that Clinton had to deal with.
You have another version of history?
You have another version of history?

Posted by: Observer at September 12, 2006 10:53 PM
Comment #180950

While I’m not sure I blame Bush for the Trade Center mess (I think the NYC corrupt patronage system has much to do with that), I do blame him for Iraq and the lack of action on Bin Laden.

I AM tired of the political lying to scare us into voting for the Republican party. It’s time for a change.

Posted by: gergle at September 12, 2006 11:26 PM
Comment #180961

9/11 was not GWB or Clinton’s fault alone. Fault belongs to a lot of people.

Iraq is mostly GWB’s fault and he and his administration should pay for it, preferably with their jobs. If not GWB should be impeached for his multiple violations of the Constitution.

The Republican Party is not totally evil and corrupt. Some of it does not deserve the kind of general assault usually launched from dems. (not to excuse the harsher attacks from Bushco on dems) Both parties have extreme wings that need to go.

Posted by: Silima at September 13, 2006 12:10 AM
Comment #180978

What constitutional violations?

Posted by: Keith at September 13, 2006 1:33 AM
Comment #180983

Tim Crow,

Your flame bait:

“Oh, that’s right, reading isn’t the Right’’s strong suit, is it?”

insults many well read and educated WB visitors who support the right. Comply with our Rules For Participation or lose the privilege to comment here at all.

Posted by: Managing Editor at September 13, 2006 2:24 AM
Comment #180990

—- nikoli —- Why would you make the statement
that Kieth O. ratings go down. He happens to have
the highest ratings of any personality on
MSNBC an have gone up 15% in the last Mo. The
Your passion for incorrectness, would appear
as a deliberate attempt to spin Obermans views.
You have every right to your point of view but
but none of use own the facts, an when known
facts are changed for political gains, or for
any other reason, I would consider those changes
Intellectually inconsistent of facts making
you a spinmeister apprentice.

Posted by: DAVID at September 13, 2006 5:47 AM
Comment #180994

—-Regarding Keith Olbermann—- You people on
the right have an unacceptable, violent, passion, with out correctness against Mr. Olbermann because he always ketches Hannity, Rush
an O Riley in many lies. He also goes after Dems
if he catches them in a lie. I personally, deal in a Rationality of trying to get along with
most people, an when someone lies for any reason,
I consider that an attack on every thing I
stand for.
——Managing Editor————
I believe chastising Tim Crow for defending
him self against a known (problem) was some what
unjustified an bourgeois.

Posted by: DAVID at September 13, 2006 7:03 AM
Comment #181002

Obermann and MSNBC’s ratings are so consistantly bad that many wonder why they don’t change programming. Again, I once found Keith rather amusing (on ESPN). Now, not so much. He comes across as arrogant, condescending and mean-spirited. You know, an elitist windbag.

Posted by: nikkolai at September 13, 2006 8:29 AM
Comment #181126

Observer
What does the democratic party stand for? I know it used to be for the people. Now I haven’t the foggiest what the Democratic party stands for now.

Posted by: KAP at September 13, 2006 5:14 PM
Comment #181131

nikkolai,

—-He comes across as arrogant, condescending and mean-spirited. You know, an elitist windbag.—-

So being arrogant, condescending and mean-spirited are attributes of elitist windbags?

So then, with that definition in mind, would you agree that Limbaugh, Hannity, O’Reilly and Coulter (I’ll stop here) are as well?

Posted by: matt at September 13, 2006 6:05 PM
Post a comment