So, Are We Sure About These Tigers Scrimmages?

Fascinating history — Marty Lurie on KNBR in San Francisco just mentioned this on his show, so had to come take a peek. It’s a fine line between developing rust and risking injury. Life is definitely interesting here by the Bay; chance of rain early in the week which could push the Series start back even farther if STL/SFG have to play a game 7. (But hey, would it have killed ya to actually acknowledge the presence of the San Francisco Giants in the NLCS, instead of calling them “somebody else”?)

Given this is Leyland’s solution to the same no-play stint that is blamed for 2006, what’s your in-between solution?

And how many times has a team sat around and done nothing and been the favorite and end up losing? Oh that’s right, how about the Tigers in 2006 with Jim Leyland as manager. Freak things happen in life. How many players have been injured taking batting practice, or even slipping in the shower.

so, perhaps the answer is to A. have scrimmages, but B. don’t use knuckleballers?

thanks for posting this, love the blog and glad I found it

Wow OO
You put a list that is all wrong and is all been debunked. OO you do not even know KO career, KO has not been fired from MSNBC and ESPN, again here is what happened Keep showing that you would rather bash KO than listen to the truth, that he has never naplenmed a bridge and that he unemployable has always been debunked and always will be, I look at those articles and you have to live in fantasy world if you think that shows that KO is a jerk or that he unemployable, I already apologized for what happened with Suzie but people like you want to put that out because KO has to be a bad guy here is what KO did A long, long time ago, one of my bosses at ESPN told me that during times of contention, I always showed too much backbone.
Well, he was damned right.
A whining sacroiliac sent me to the chiropractor’s last week and the X-rays proved my old boss literally correct. I am part of that hidden minority, the spinal mutants, who have six lumbar vertebrae instead of the customary five. I do have too much backbone.
This was the final sign that it was time to do something that for months has been crystallizing out of the gauzy haze of the unconsciousness that surrounds us all: I need to apologize to ESPN.
This began to become evident weeks ago when the deputy mayor of Indianapolis attacked Chris Mortensen, one of my reportorial role models. I once watched Mort protect a source who not only publicly denied what he’d told Mort in private but also questioned his ethics. Just this month, Mort went on the air and criticized the thoroughness of his own reporting on a story. Mortensen is the gold standard, and this hack politician slashed him and said ESPN was “a sports channel first and a news organization fifth.” I was amazed to find my hackles rising and myself rushing to defend my old employers on my radio sportscast.
It all became remarkably clear after that. This isn’t about my skeletal freakiness, or Chris Mortensen, or even, particularly, the primary area of wounded feelings for my former bosses and colleagues, Mike Freeman’s book about the network. This isn’t even about specific events or people, although nearly everybody at ESPN merits an apology from me, and I give it willingly and with great sadness, but with some hope that it will explain if not erase my actions, and might even be of some inspiration to any who might be afflicted in the same curious way I’ve come to learn I am.
This is about not knowing why you do things — literally, not knowing for years and years — and then suddenly beginning to scratch the surface of understanding. That earlier imagery about the gauzy haze is almost factually precise: It feels as if I’ve been coming out of a huge fog bank.
Enough preamble. After five and a half years there, I left ESPN at the end of June 1997. My decision inspired a lot of head-scratching, everything from graffiti on a wall in a syndicated comic strip, to shouts of “traitor” from a viewer at a World Series game. There have been a lot of explanations conjectured, by myself and others, but heretofore I have never definitively stated why I left — in large part because until recently, I didn’t really know. In point of fact, I couldn’t handle the pressure of working in daily long-form television, and what was worse, I didn’t know I couldn’t handle it.
Not the broadcasts themselves, mind you — I’ve rarely had as much fun in life as I used to during those hours on the air with Dan Patrick. I’m talking about an inability to digest all that led up to those hours, about which I had no clue at all. And unless somebody at ESPN had the insight to look for a big-picture pattern, nobody else had any clue at all. I think some executives, most notably John Walsh, had a sense that something was wrong. But whatever any of them said about “insecurity” or “perfectionism,” I know I just took it as an attack and stiffened my extra-long spine.
On top of everything else about it that can destabilize the soul, television is fraught with a million commonplace things that can go wrong. A surprisingly large number of things can go wrong even when everybody involved is giving their all. It’s the nature of a medium so complex it would’ve made Rube Goldberg blanch.
But I didn’t see it that way.
I have lived much of my life assuming much of the responsibility around me and developing a dread of being blamed for things going wrong. Moreover, deep down inside I’ve always believed that everybody around me was qualified and competent, and I wasn’t, and that some day I’d be found out. If you think that way, when somebody messes up, you can’t imagine that it just “happened.” Since they’re so much better than you are, how could they not complete a task successfully? They have to be not trying hard enough — and when they don’t try and the show goes to hell, who gets blamed? You do.
In other words, you start thinking like George Steinbrenner, circa 1977.
Mix that in to the very public nature of the field, and especially the high-profile nature of a job like hosting “SportsCenter,” and you have a combustible combination.
The results can probably be summarized by this conversation I recall from the weeks after the infamous launch of ESPN2 in 1993. After three hours of live shots failing, news breaking, entire 20-minute segments of the show being swapped during commercial breaks, tapes physically falling apart, and production assistants wiping out as they ran through the snow to try to get us information, the producers, my co-host Suzy Kolber and I somehow managed to cover Michael Jordan’s first retirement professionally and entertainingly.
Afterwards, the coordinating producer, Norby Williamson, greeted us like the survivors of a World War I foxhole at Ypres. “Great job. Great show,” he said.
“The hell it was,” I said.
Wrong answer.
You suspend — no, let’s be exact about this, I suspended — the whole human part of the equation. It never occurred to me that most of the problems were the result of mere events. Even the chaos that surrounded the entire launch of the experimental show “SportsNight” was merely the inevitable result of the fact that it was experimental.
And it never, ever occurred to me that if it failed, I wouldn’t be found out, fired, banished, finished.
The oddest thing about all this, is that even when I left — and in six weeks I will have been gone longer than I was there — executives like Walsh and Howard Katz underscored that I was welcome to return at some distant future date, despite all the Sturm und Drang. And, man, I was usually producing both the Sturm and the Drang. Months later, Katz even approached me about contributing to ESPN Classic, shortly after the company had bought that network.
Of course, I could not know that the major bone of contention, the veritable sixth lumbar vertebra of contention, still awaited: Freeman’s book. I should herein point out that none of this should reflect on Mike: He did an exhaustively thorough job, and more to this point, he didn’t misquote me, not once, nor did he use anything I said out of context. Nor did he cajole or sweet-talk me into discussing topics I didn’t want to discuss. Also, this isn’t some kind of loudspeaker confession from George Orwell’s “1984.” I’m not going to renounce most of my criticisms of the place. I did not consort with Goldstein. I don’t think I was wrong on the issues — I think my methodology was wrong. Outstandingly wrong.
My answers to Freeman constituted the ultimate act of somebody who lived in terror of being blamed. After I left for NBC in 1997, I was unprepared for a question I would literally hear daily — on the street, at events, even on the air on MSNBC: “Why’d you leave ‘SportsCenter’?” If you make a decision in your life, even one as eminently logical and self-improving as “Why’d you start washing your hair every day?” and you start getting questioned hourly about it, you’re going to start second-guessing yourself. I eventually got up to about my millionth guess.
So. The logic was impeccable. To answer that question, I couldn’t take the blame (responsibility) for the disaster (career growth) about which I was being persecuted (sympathetically asked about). Why did I leave “SportsCenter”? Obviously, because it was a medieval torture chamber (fairly typical television workplace providing a high level of ego gratification and creative freedom).
There’s a lot in Freeman’s book that I regret. I won’t inundate you with details, but a few require specificity. Referring to ESPN’s executives, I told Freeman that “other than Steve Anderson, I don’t think any of them are any good.” Well, that was ridiculous then and it is ridiculous now. Without even judging how good they were, just to keep a monolith like ESPN on the air every day requires as many good executives as they have at NORAD.
As suggested earlier, I don’t regret my stances on the work environment there, but to say that some actions management took were merely “covering their ass legally” was to subtract the humanity from the equation. It never dawned on me that some of these guys had been thrown in at the deep end of the pool, or would have to expose, prosecute and fire friends and colleagues who themselves had done things that until a decade before had been standard operating procedure at every corporation in America.
I now read with horror of my ESPN2 co-host, Ms. Kolber, sequestering herself in the women’s bathroom and weeping over how I treated her. She told Freeman that as things deteriorated, I wouldn’t talk to her. She’s wrong: I couldn’t talk to her. I pumped up some small-scale complaints into a scenario in which she was at fault for everything ESPN2 hadn’t become. I wasn’t completely obtuse back then, and if anything would have cut through my neuroses, it would’ve been a colleague’s tears. If I had known, I think I could’ve jumped over the fence I’d built around myself and said what the inner guy always knew: No TV show is worth crying over. Suzy: I’m sorry.
There are lots of little gratuitous shots in there that also reflect an insensibility to parts of reality. I get queasy at all of them, but one stands out as representative. Freeman accurately quotes me as complaining about how a labor-intensive participatory field piece I did in 1996 about what the first-base coach does and says during a game, got little airtime. A year later, ESPN ran a similar piece in which the coaches of the Anaheim Angels wore microphones. I complained to the relevant coordinating producer, Jeff Schneider, and he replied that the new ESPN-Disney-Angels connection explained why one piece ran and the other didn’t. It is almost certain that Schneider was joking, or tweaking me, or, most probably, protecting me from a fact I could never have admitted to myself or have survived hearing from him or anybody else: My coaching piece just wasn’t that good.
Several ESPN folks suggested to Freeman that I was trying deliberately to violate the rules — appearing on other networks and writing for publications without notifying them just to tweak management. That was almost right on the money. But it wasn’t as simple as merely trying to annoy ESPN or John Walsh or whoever else. It was me trying to give myself an excuse to get out from under the pressure of working in an environment of my own creation in which I daily expected the blame ax to fall. It was prepackaged sour grapes.
Oddly, I did figure some of this out then, which is why, even after we’d finalized my departure I went back and proposed to them that I do one show a week. That really was instinct cutting through all of these neuroses. That was, should’ve been, and remains my ideal TV schedule: one or two days a week, and the other five or six to remember that I’m not going to be blamed for everything by anybody — even myself.
So, I’m sorry. It should have been done differently. It wasn’t. Then again, I’m only finding out now about that extra vertebra and the extra steps I have to take to learn how to be, well, flexible. Wow so Suzie is beating up on a guy that was able to man up and apologize for what happened wow that shows that she would not know what character is just like you, also Suzie is not great herself on stuff like working well as you and others want people to believe because jack does not want to hear that KO ego is not why he not on Current, here is what KO said about SuzieBelow is an excerpt from Those Guys Have All The Fun: Inside The World of ESPN, which is finally in paperback so those readers anxious for more Bristol back-biting don’t have to carry around the cumbersome hardcover. The new version includes more bitchy anecdotes from Bill Simmons, further details about Tony Kornheiser’s on-air insults about Hannah Storm, and, of course, more from Keith Olbermann, who maintains that he didn’t treat his one-time co-anchor Suzy Kolber as horribly as most people think.
Keith Olbermann:
I hate to put this on the record, but I’m really annoyed that Suzy has portrayed herself as this sweet bystander victim all the time. I swear on my niece’s head that this is true. When those touch-and-go negotiations for her to stay in ’96 ended, we were all working in a trailer while they rebuilt the newsroom, and Dan I were even sharing a computer. And one day she comes in and tells everybody—and I mean every on-air guy on the network was in this double-wide—”I’m leaving for Fox. It’s been real.” And as soon as she was out the door everybody stood and applauded. McQuade came over to me and said “Well at least her time here produced something positive. You get her computer.
Two-and-a-half years later, maybe the day after I got to Fox, now she’s leaving there to go back to Bristol and she sweeps through the news bullpen to say goodbye and damned but it doesn’t happen again. She says her farewells and as soon as she’s out of earshot, the row of writers stands up and starts applauding and cheering.
I liked Suzy then and I like her now but she wasn’t just sinned against.”
“Suzy’s statement seven or eight years later that I had caused her to go into the bathroom and cry really affected me. I mean, it provoked genuine introspection and sincere guilt. But, honestly, that was the first I’d ever heard of it. I mean, we shared an office desk for six months and she never even hinted that however I had treated her it was a problem.
In fact I had been proactive in trying to help her, because Norby and Mike Bogad were really pushing her around during the earliest rehearsals. My agent, and a very good woman friend of mine at ESPN, came to me and said “you know, you can be a little intimidating sometimes, you should take Suzy out to dinner and be her friend.” That floored me, but I took their word for it, and I tried to remind her that while she was the newcomer, they had bent over backward to try to get her, and the very biggest wigs at Cap Cities had personally pushed for her, and while it made sense for me to lead things off because I was by that time established with the brand, she should not just sit there if they shunted her off to the side or sent her on these punishing trips to Edmonton to interview Doug Flutie or whatever. I said I’d back her up completely. That night, we parted closer than ever. And the next day she was in Norby’s office demanding that she get the lead story instead of me! Wow hearing that just makes me love and show that KO gets along with others just fine.
Murdouch, this is guy who would not know what truth is if you put in his face, Jack do you realize that Murdouch has no idea what honesty is, he also like Hyatt thinks that it okay to blackmail his employees like he did KO hereOn Countdown tonight Keith Olbermann used a Special Comment to detail how Rupert Murdoch blackmailed him when he worked for Fox Sports.
Here is the video:
After retelling the story of how he got fired from Fox Sports for reporting that Rupert was looking to sell the LA Dodgers, Olbermann got to the new details,
The second half of my story I have never told publicly before. It’s time. In June of 2000 after a year and a half of doing two one hour cable shows a night for Murdoch and baseball from 7 AM to 5 PM on Saturdays, I got sick. My doctor told me that if I didn’t among other things slow down at work; he would be treating me for heart disease within the decade. I took him very seriously. I told my employers about cutting back maybe from the six days to 5, and offered to give back to Fox some of my salary in the process because my health was at risk maybe even my heart.
They immediately took me off the air. They refused to put me back on until I had gotten a letter from my doctor guaranteeing them that I was well enough to work. By itself that was hardly an evil thing to do. In fact, I recognized it as a prudent business decision, and I complied because I didn’t know what they intended to do with it. They blackmailed me with it.
Wow a guy who thinks like Hyatt and Brohem thinks that someone should work while they are sick that shows that Murdouch is a boss no one even KO should work for, also jack, KO got fired from there for telling the truth, KO found out that Murdouch was selling the Dogers he even went to someone asking if Mourdouch would be okay with the story, which they said yes and than he was fired when Murdouch, because Jack honesty is not allowed when Murdouch organization is in it, I should listen to a guy that is underinvestigation for warptapping when it comes to how KO is, you really love to show me that KO is easy to work with and that you like Current have zero clue what being hard to work for. MSNBC let’s see they thought that it was okay for Scaurbough to donate also and if KO had not gotten caught would have let Scraubough get away with donating so you show again how hypocritical MSNBC is on that here is MSNBC suspended host Keith Olbermann today, following revelations that he made campaign contributions to three Democrats in the elections — a violation of MSNBC policy.
But a search of OpenSecrets.org reveals that MSNBC host Joe Scarborough and MSNBC contributor Pat Buchanan have also made contributions to political campaigns. Here’s what we found…
In March 2006, Scarborough, who hosts the show Morning Joe, gave $4200 to Derrick Kitts (R-OR). And, as the Daily Kos points out, a month later Kitts was a guest on Scarborough’s show.
Between 2005-2008, Pat Buchanan made five contributions to Republican candidates, totaling $2250.
Chris Hayes, the Washington editor for The Nation, is a frequent contributor to MSNBC shows, and often fills in for Rachel Maddow on her show. The Upshot reports that he gave $250 to Alabama Democratic candidate Josh Segall this year before he signed his contract with MSNBC.
NBC News producer Mary Murray, who also does reporting for NBC News and MSNBC, gave $250 to John Waltz (D-KY) this year. In 2008 she gave the same amount to Barack Obama’s presidential campaign.
Update: New York Times reporter Brian Stelter Tweeted that Hayes, in fact, would not be subbing for Olberman after all.
Later Update: Alex Pareene at Salon notes that CNBC anchor Larry Kudlow donated to former Congressman Christopher Shays (R-CT) in 2009 — one of a number of donations Kudlow made to Republican candidates over the years.
Even later update: Chris Hayes Tweeted that it was his decision to decline to host “Countdown” tonight, and that his donations were all made prior to his MSNBC contract. Also MSNBC has had others like Geogary who spoke at a republican event, hereThe National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB), which calls itself “the voice of small business,” is one of the Republican party’s strongest allies. The group spent over $1 million on outside ads in the 2010 campaign — all of it backing Republican House and Senate candidates (and, Bloomberg News reported last month, “another $1.5 million that it kept hidden and said was exempt” from disclosure requirements). The group is the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit against the Obamacare law and bankrolled state governments’ challenges to the law. The NFIB has also taken stances against allowing the EPA to regulate greenhouse gases, opposing regulations on businesses, and supporting curtailing union rights.
Given the group’s obvious Republican alliance, it comes as little surprise that the NFIB’s three-day 2012 Small Business Summit, which begins Monday, will feature headliners Karl Rove and House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH).
But the first name and photo on the invitation for the $150-per-person event — Tuesday’s “keynote address” speaker — is NBC’s Meet the Press host David Gregory. He is marketed by NBC as an anchor and “trusted journalist.”
The Society of Professional Journalists’ Code of Ethics states:
Journalists should:
— Avoid conflicts of interest, real or perceived.
— Remain free of associations and activities that may compromise integrity or damage credibility.
— Refuse gifts, favors, fees, free travel and special treatment, and shun secondary employment, political involvement, public office and service in community organizations if they compromise journalistic integrity.
Regardless of whether Gregory is being paid for this event and of what he says in his keynote, allowing the NFIB to raise money for its political mission using his name, reputation, and celebrity appears to be at odds with journalistic ethics.
Gregory did not to respond to a ThinkProgress request for comment. So your article just shows what a hypocrite krutz, where does krutz get on Georgary case for speaking at a even or when ED was suppose to speak at a Wisconsin event, so Krutz has no creadiblity when it comes to KO. Also all those stories have been disaproved, KO never had people put notes outside his box that came from suggestions jack and a disgulted employer made the other stuff up, also dealing with personal problems like his parents death that shows that KO bad and hard to work with, also dude that shows that MSNBC was not watching Countdown because he was not getting angry after his parents died, that shows that MSNBC wants to lie, mangement wants to re-write the history of who put them on the map, that how BS, also this came from gawker I suppose to believe gossip site on how KO cannot get work, maybe you should read Carter when it comes to this and than tell me that KO is unemployableGiven Keith Olbermann’s abrupt removal at Current and his typically temperate response — “Current’s statement are untrue and will be proved so in the legal actions I will be filing against them presently” — it seems as if his next stop will be a puppet show shot from a basement somewhere. He’ll never work in this town, or any other, again, right?
Wrong. Many of his past employers will testify to his unmanageability and unpleasantness, but the fact of the matter is that somewhere, sometime, after some kind of cooling-off period, Mr. Olbermann will be coming to a television near you.
That has less to do with the greater fool theory, which suggests that there will always be someone naïve enough to think that they can accomplish what others have not — that is, make Mr. Olbermann behave like a professional when he is not on the air. (Remember that former Vice President Al Gore and Joel Hyatt — two of the principals at Current — blew through many stop signs to get to Mr. Olbermann. They made very hopeful statements when the deal was cut, which were followed by very frustrated noises thereafter.)
No, the mistake that the executives at Current made was to think that by giving Mr. Olbermann a stake in the enterprise and a title of chief news officer, he would forgo the drama that has characterized his stints at CNN, Fox, ESPN and MSNBC. After all, you can’t rail against the Man when you are the Man.
But Mr. Olbermann is talent, and a big baby to boot — any reporter who has covered him could tell you all about that — so the idea that he would default to the good of the many over the needs of the one is just not in his nature. The title was used as leverage, nothing more, when Mr. Olbermann became dissatisfied and starting communicating with his employers through lawyer letters months ago. Mr. Olbermann is a ferocious fan of team sports, but that’s not how he plays the game.
He is the equivalent of a supremely talented left-handed pitcher with a strong arm — and some obvious control issues — that can give whatever team hires him a lot of quality innings. On the bench and off the field? He will complain about his coach, his teammates, the quality of the field and the stadium lights.
He did not solve the miserable ratings math at Current — as my colleague Brian Stelter pointed out, in his 40 weeks on Current TV, he had an average of 177,000 viewers at 8 p.m., a shadow of his former incarnation at MSNBC where he drew a million-plus people a night.
That’s not all his fault. Anybody who has watched the Keith-less version of Current could understand why they wanted him so badly in the first place. Beset by technical problems that had Mr. Olbermann broadcasting his show with a black backdrop in a kind of hostage/protest motif, Current was not and is not ready for prime time.
The channel’s election coverage has been tendentious and painful to watch, and the depth of its bench can be measured by the fact that it is bringing aboard former Gov. Eliot L. Spitzer of New York to replace him. Current will have to do some renovating to make room for all of the baggage he brings with him, from both his scandal-ridden exit from the governorship and his ratings-challenged turn at CNN.
Which brings us back to Mr. Olbermann. Anchoring a show on television looks easy. Buy a nice suit, get a nice haircut and read the words on the prompter in the right order with some semblance of conviction. But it’s not. As cable stations proliferate, the desperate search for people who can credibly show up every night — or not, as Mr. Olbermann was frequently on strike at Current — and hold an audience’s attention will only become more acute. Mr. Olbermann has a terrible relationship with actual humans, but a very good relationship with the camera.
When I was working on a magazine piece about Mr. Olbermann, we went to a Yankees game and he explained the camera voodoo:
“Mechanically, if you look very carefully in a camera, it has a series of reflections and dimensions to it, you can look past that,” he said. He holds up his hands in the shape of a box. “Here’s the camera, here’s the front of the camera, here’s the lens of the camera, but if you look deeply enough, you can see the inner rings at the far end of the lens and maybe a glimmer of light very deep in the distance. You can always see something that might be an inch or two below the surface. Whenever I can, I try to focus there, not on the prompter or the front of the lens.”
Maybe that’s overexplaining something that is actually innate, but history has shown that even though Mr. Olbermann’s employers do not like him, the camera, and the people at the other end, like him just fine. As Jonathan Wald, the producer for Piers Morgan put it, somewhat more industrially, in a tweet on Saturday night, “Stars star and producers produce.”
And that means he will find work. He is a free agent in a business that is remarkably akin to pro sports, full of divas who are great at hitting the curve or making impossible catches, but baffled by the rest of life. Think Terrell (“I love me some me”) Owens. Or Randy Moss. Or Babe Ruth. Or Ted Williams. Jerks, louts and narcissists, all tolerated because within the four corners of the diamond, the football field and, yes, the television studio, they can do what others cannot.
So some executives will eventually plug their noses and write a check and a contract that they hope will contain Mr. Olbermann’s less attractive aspects. He and they will say that this time it will be different, and it may be. Just don’t expect him to be part of the team.
Wow jack so even Carr who would agree with you about KO’s behavoir says that KO is employable and will come back, that is how made up that statement is. You really love to show me why I love KO and why his personality had zero to do with what happened at Current, that article even tells about Hyatt and AIDS aka firing someone with AIDS and you want me to believe KO’s the bad guy. Keep making me love and respect KO more and more and show that all you wnat to do is bash him and put up gossip articles that can easily get refuted, you also do not get what I do about KO is that he a professional and someone that is not afraid to stand up for what he believes in which is what mangement hates about him and why he has a hard time with them, it what people love, keep lying about KO that is all you know how to do, you keep showing why I am a fan and always will be. Jack you also show why KO got unjustily fired from Current you have no evidence that KO is unemployable, only a gossip site by mangement that for the first two aka MSNBC and Fox are hypocritical and includes Current, and one with someone who has just as bad a reputation as KO suppose to have, and who wants to still get on KO’s case about something that he apologized for showing that she has zero crediblity and sounds like it just a revenge post. KO keep being yourself again will be pissed if you do not get the justice for being unjusticly fired from Current. Jack why does KO been in this industry for 33 years if he so unemployable that is how BS your argument is. KO keep being yourself and showing off your great personality and showing why KO is this generations Murrow and why he will be around for years to come, keep being yourself KO and you will always have a fan in me, again Current needs to stop lying and tell people the truth that your personality and ego is not why you got fired and that you work fine with others, Hyatt needs to explain why he and Brohem thinks it okay to make thier broadcating stars to work with a throat infection, that jack shows that Current never cared about KO, just like MSNBC who wants to re-write history and is okay with people that speak at partisain events and other employers doanting but KO the bad guy, that he unbelieveable MSNBC is on that topic. All that shows jack is why I do not watch Current and MSNBC and how dishonest those mangements are. You really love to show that KO works fine with others. KO keep being yourself and you will always be perment on my wall, ipod and ipad and life and why you got unjustily fired from Current. jack you just make me love and respect KO more and more with your BS crap about who he is. Jack thier is no and you just showed once again there is no evidence that KO personality was what got him fired. Keep lying about KO and showing that KO has zero clue how to lie and that you Jack have zero clue how to tell the truth about KO and his past employment. KO love you faults and all. Here is KO true oo job history not your made up debunked version Mike thanks for showing me that you are beyond ingorant on KO’s job history. KO Mike was never fired from MSNBC or ESPN, also Mike KO was rehired by both of those companies, wow some bad personality there, Mike do you live in alternte reality, Mike you do not do last shows which KO did at both MSNBC and ESPN if you been fired. KO and even MSNBC have said that KO quit, he even got his salary that also Mike does not happen when you are fired. So no Mike he has no history of being fired by every employer that is pure BS and again has been debunked. He only be fired from Fox and that was for reporting the truth and Current and that was unjutily because they promised him the moon and never delivered. Also MIke he did not leave for the same reasons, you really hate listening to facts. ESPN he left because he and his bosses could not agree on a new contract, he wanted to go to New York, they wanted him to stay in Bristol, the reason he left the second time was that Patrick had quit ESPN and thier was nothing that he really did, so no ESPN had nothing to do with KO working well with others and personality and ego, so wrong there. MSNBC he left first time because he hated doing repaeted news of Monica Lewinsky, they sold him to Fox Sports, Fox is where he got blackmailed and fired for reporting the truth about Murdoch and the Dogers. So wrong there Mike, MSNBC a second time he left because a they scwered him over on campaign crap and he felt that they were taking creavity control away, again had nothing to do with personality and ego. So Mike you just again show how ingorant you are on KO. KO personlity again is not the reason he got fired at Current, again I care crap about that Mike, and I looked at the evidence thier is no proof Mike that KO broke the contract, none, zipo. Keep embarrassing yourself with made up debunked crap. I do not listen to people who are beyon igorant of KO’s job past espically ones that put out that debunked crap that KO was fired from MSNBC and ESPN. Mike I do not have to be a fan to tell you, people that are fired do not get rest of salary and last shows, KO got a salary from both the times that he worked at ESPN and MSNBC and did a last show that he thanked and said goodbye to people, that shows even to people that are not fans and people that unlike you know what commen sense is and uses it that KO was never fired from those networks. Mike sorry but you lie throught your teeth when you put out the debunked crap that KO’s ego and personality are bad they are not. Mike all you do is make me love and respect and show why he this generations Murrow. Sorry only got fired from Current and Fox, quit MSNBC and ESPN both times, that does not show that he hard to work with only that mangers have zero clue how to handle independent, prefetionist like him. I do not oo listen to people about KO who are so igorant when it comes to his work history, those people show that have no idea what facts are. OO you do not do last shows like KO did at MSNBC and ESPN if you were fired, you do not get a salary if you are fired, KO is this generations Murrow, you would not know what Murrow is. You oo are the one that is showing that you are Krusty the clown, you cannot refute anything that I say, so you decide instead to be the grammer and spelling police, people that are like that show that they are everything that they claim KO is. KO has worked in this industry for 33 years, that is the truth. OO I know that people that lie about KO’s career show that they are not to be listened to when it comes to KO, because they show that they do not know what facts are. OO you just showed that you do not have common sense. People that live in the real world not your fantasy world know oo that if someone does a last show and still gets a salary, that means OO that they quit and did not get fired. You show that you are beyond igorant when it comes to KO and you know that you are igorant when it comes to KO, but you are such a gutless coward that you only care about putting up debunked crap, like the lies about KO’s career than listen to the truth. You show with that post that KO is this genertions Murrow and you Oo are Krusty the clown and do not say different because I know like all your other posts that will be a lie and just show how igorant you are on KO. OO keep showing that KO can never lie and that you do not know what facts are and what truth is. OO KO only been fired from two places and they were by bad bosses, one that thinks like you telling the truth is bad aka Murdouch and one that wants to be lazy and not take responsibity for what happened at Current, that is it, the other places he quit out. There is no evidence but in your mind OO that KO was fired from MSNBC and ESPN. You do not even know what being fired is and what quiting is that is how made up your posts are.
OO quiting is when you do a last show and still get a salary like what happened at MSNBC and ESPN, getting fired is no salary and no last show that is what happened at FOX and Current, anyone with a brain that they like to use unlike you know that. You are so igorant on who KO is. YOu show again with this post why KO is this generations Murrow and show that you do not know what facts are. Keep lying about KO’s job history, the facts are and always will be and if you say different you would be lying and showing that you do not know what a fact looks like. KO quit ESPN in 1997 because of contract neogations falling apart, went to MSNBC quit MSNBC the first time because he wanted to do real news not just report on MOnica Lewnsky all the time, went to FOx got blackmailed by a guy that is know been in a scandal for hacking phones showing that he not to be trusted when it comes to honesty about anything, fired for telling the truth about Murdoch selling Dogers. Went to MSNBC, quit again because he did not like the hypocricracy that went on there and thought that he was loosing support and got a offer from Current. Than got unjustily fired and if you say different you be lying and showing how igorant you are on KO. There is no evidence that his personality is why he not there. This shows that he worked pretty steady in his career also
You again show why KO is this generations Murrow and why he will be around for years to come, you Oo are Krusty beacuse your post has no facts and truth in them. You even lie about KO’s career and put up stuff that has been debunked over and over again. Keep making me love and respect him and showing why I am a life long fan.
I do not listen to people on KO who put up that debunked crap about KO’s career because I know that people like you who say that, have no facts and are not wanting to argue facts all you want to do is show and if you say different than that will be a lie beacuse KO has quit MSNBC and ESPN both times. People like you show why we need KO and why KO is this and always will be this generations Murrow. KO keep being yourself and you will always be perment on my wall, ipod and ipad and life. Love you faults and all.

TODAY ON CABLE TEEVEE 6:10 pm March 30, 2012

Al Gore Fires Keith Olbermann For Being Terrible

by Jim Newell

Sanctimonious screeching creep Keith Olbermann, whose ego isn’t the size of Jupiter but certainly is that of Jupiter’s largest moon, has been fired from his 757th job on television, for being horrible. Current TeeVee owner and other relatively liberal person Al Gore was the one who did the firing, in an explosive memo which arrived at the common conclusion that Keith Olbermann is someone with whom it’s impossible to work. His replacement — starting tonight — will be former New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer, last seen achieving the remarkable feat of being CNN’s most boring primetime host and, before that, constantly having sex with prostitutes. But but but, you will inevitably say in the comments because that’s what you always do on Olbermann posts, Keith Olbermann was the only thing that kept me sane during the Bush administration, with his unwatchable 10-minute fake rants where he pretended to be Ed Murrow! Never understood it; can’t offer you much help in that regard.

THE POLITICO has the hot cable television news, of Al Bore being mean to Dearest Keith:

“Current was also founded on the values of respect, openness, collegiality, and loyalty to our viewers,” write Current founders Al Gore and Joel Hyatt in an open memo to viewers. “Unfortunately these values are no longer reflected in our relationship with Keith Olbermann and we have ended it.”

Editor Rebecca has asked your author to post some “greatest hits” of his craziest moments, but your author has never watched Keith Olbermann’s Current TV program. Here he is announcing that he’d been forced out of his last job:

You can catch Olbermann reading Thurber out of a cardboard box in Central Park, weeknights at 3 a.m.

UPDATE: Keith is suing Al Gore!
LMFAO!!!!!!!!!!

I see these ‘scrimmages’ drew about 2,000 fans.

From what I know about baseball of that era, the sox saw a chance to make some more $ and took it.

I’m not sayin it was a good decision, just why it was made.