We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.

Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]

Keith Olbermann is right

That is, if this sentiment attributed to him does indeed reflect his thoughts:

It’s his money that he has earned, he should be allowed to do whatever he wants with it.

How about considering that the same courtesy should be extended to everyone else in the world, Mr Olbermann?

11 comments to Keith Olbermann is right

  • Chuck6134

    LOL, no chance of that. It’s ok for Mr Olbermann because he’s always right, the rest of humanity likely would do dumb things with their money.

  • Laird

    It is his money, and he can certainly do with it what he pleases. However, if as has been reported, MSNBC’s “ethics policy bans journalists from making political contributions,” then that was a condition of his employment to which he agreed, and MSNBC has every right to enforce it. After all, it’s their money and their network, and they can set whatever rules they like. But I guess rules and contractual commitments don’t apply when you’re a leftard media star, right Mr. Olberman?

  • Laird

    Oh, and so no, Keith Olberman is not right.

  • David Crawford

    Nice shoutout from James Delingpole at the Telegraph. Liberty: it’s an easier sell than you’d think. What is so sad about the readership of the Telegraph is that he will be attacked by as many “conservatives” as he will be by those on the left.

  • Er, I meant his sentiment regarding one’s earnings in general. Couldn’t give a shiny shite about his MSNBC contract, except that I love to see my enemies fighting one another.

  • Jackie, he already extends this courtesy to everyone – I have little doubt he believes firmly their money is his, and although he has not earned, he’s smart enough that he should be allowed to do whatever he wants with it.

  • Kim du Toit

    Olbermann is a typical lefty hypocrite: whining about “the rich” and wage inequity, all while pocketing a compensation package which includes a quiet $4 million annual salary for expressing his oh-so “liberal” thoughts on air for an hour a day.

  • J.M. Heinrichs

    His thoughts on many things tend to be flexible.


  • Chris

    It is his money, but only AFTER TAX!!!

  • John Blake

    Olbermann’s political donations to extreme-radical leftist candidates are not the point. What matters is that, as a newsroom commentator he has acted for years in bad faith, under false pretenses, as an objective, rational recorder of the passing scene.

    Exposing this as a comprehensive, fulsome lie, then allowing him to resume his sad-sack propaganda, is radically at odds with journalistic standards– not that today’s cliche mass-media have any to begin with.

  • Laird

    That’s not true, John Blake. No one ever pretended that Olbermann was an “objective, rational reporter”. He’s not a journalist, he’s a commentator, paid to express opinions. And his political contributions were completely consistent with the hard-left opinions he expressed on-air. The only reason for his suspension was his violation of the terms of his employment, not some lapse in his “journalistic integrity” (yeah, right!).

    Anyway, I’m sure we’re all relieved to know that the crisis is over, the stars are back in their proper alignments, and Olbermann is back on the air. I for one can rest easier now.