Glenn Greenwald responds to Keith Olbermann's childish response to Glenn's original article and I add my pawltry 2 cents

Glenn Greenwald responds to Keith Olbermann's childish response to Glenn's original article pointing out Keith's own flip-flop on holding accountable those who are willing to vote to give the telecoms immunity:

In his Kos reply, Olbermann pronounces that my piece yesterday was "simplistic and childish" but then adds the standard dismissive Journalist defense: "I don't know much about Mr. Greenwald and I didn't read his full piece." He says that he refrained from criticizing Obama's support for the FISA bill in reliance on John Dean's comments, and "John Dean is the smartest person I've ever met" and "John Dean is worth 25 Glenn Greenwalds" -- so that settles that (for what it's worth, I also have a high opinion of Dean's legal acumen; hosted his appearance at FDL's Book Salon; don't disagree with him about this bill at all; have communicated with him about many issues; and he has said many complimentary things about my work in the past, so waving the flag of Dean's Unassailable Authority establishes nothing).

Olbermman then denies that he was justifying Obama's support for the FISA bill but then goes on to do exactly that:

Seriously, there is little in the polls to suggest McCain has anything to run with other than terror . . . . So why hand them a brick to hit him with -- Obama Voted Against FISA -- if voting Aye enhances his chances of getting himself his own Attorney General to prosecute FISA
How can Olbermann accuse me of distorting his commentary and deny that he's rationalizing Obama's support for the bill and then write the above -- which does nothing but justify Obama's support for the bill? That's exactly the mentality I was criticizing yesterday -- that Obama should be excused for supporting this assault on core Constitutional liberties and the rule of law because doing so is necessary to avoid appearing Weak on Terrorism. That's the behavior which Obama has repeatedly vowed to reject, and it's that precise mentality that has to be extinguished, not perpetrated.

read more | digg story

Here are my thoughts on/for Keith:
You should actually read Glenn Greenwald before you dismiss him, Keith.

If there were two people over the past 2 years that I’d say have given me hope, it’s been YOU & Glenn Greenwald. Maybe I could add Joshua Marshall from TPM to the list. I blog more of Glenn’s article and videos from your show (including you “Special Comments”) than I probably do most any other two individuals. So, I say this with affection: Read Glenn before you childishly try to dismiss him. He’s right. You’re not (in this case).

There’s no “secret plan” on Obama’s part and rationalizing it as if this the case in order to justifying not holding him to account for the flip-flop – and for justifying that flip as a way to neuter the onslaught of attacks that the right was preparing to throw at him I say this: You should have more faith in Obama by now!

And if by some chance there is a ‘secret plan to prosecute” on Obama’s part, and that’s a big IF; and an IF I’m not willing to risk while excusing the “real chance” that this was just an election year tactic in order to avoid a ‘soft on terror label.”

I had more faith in Obama’s ability to turn those inevitable attacks on their head.

You should too.

I hope you take the time to read his reply to your DK post.
digg my post

blog comments powered by Disqus