Keith Olbermann Attacks Campbell Brown, CNN Over Mistake

Keith Olbermann has long gone after his 8PM competition at Fox News, Bill O'Reilly, but Wednesday night he started a new line of attack — against CNN's 8PM host Campbell Brown.

Olbermann chided Brown for mistakenly claiming that the last time the same party controlled the White House, the Senate and the House was under Jimmy Carter.

"The talking point got out enough that the anchor of another news broadcast at this hour reported yesterday that last time it happened it," — and here Olbermann turned on his Brown impression — "didn't go so well, and people who have been worried about the possibility of one party controlling the White House and Congress. 'The last president to do that, of course, was Jimmy Carter.' Swing and a miss. Her colleague tried to correct her. 'Bill Clinton.' Swing and another miss. Correct answer: George W. Bush, that current guy. Early 2001 and again from 2003-2006."

Watch:

Comments

[Tommygun2146]

Olbermann merely called CNN and FOX Noise for getting their facts wrong. The term "journalist" used to mean something - it was a person who personally researched and reported facts, not someone who just waltzes in an hour before the show for hair and make-up and then reads whatever comes up on the teleprompter. The other day I heard Wolf Blitzer actually say, "The Democrats haven't controlled both the House and Senate under a Democratic President since forever". And we wonder why the average American is so profoundly ignorant of the basic workings of their own government.

Cronkite, Brinkley and the late Tim Russert all did their own research so when they went on the air they could speak with authority, ask follow-up questions and actually converse with the people they interviewed. I believe that is the reason for Rachel Maddow's meteoric rise in the ratings - she actually spends her days and nights researching the material for her show. Whether or not you agree with her political leanings, you can't accuse her of being an empty pantsuit. That's why her interview with Senator Obama the Thursday before the election came off more like an informative conversation - Ms. Maddow wasn't just going down a list of questions and not listening to the answers. Our so-called journalists should be more than just pretty people reading whatever is put before them. Mr. Olbermann's was not criticizing anyone personally, he was criticizing today's "journalists" for not verifying their facts.

[RussellH]

Blitzer has become an embarrassment to CNN. Perhaps they're not sure what to do with him but he is history! The beard can no longer veil his incompetence!

[SteveMDFP]

Good idea. Wolf Blitzer would be a nice fit for the History Channel. He could narrate all those WW II documentaries about Nazi Germany.

[Crozier]

Blitzer's contacts were forged at the White House and the Pentagon. His friendship with Cheney even got his ears boxed back by the Hypocrite in Chief when Wolf dared to mention the fact that the official homophobe had a lesbian daughter in a committed relationship having a child.

It is not as if Blitzer did not remember that Bill Clinton had a Dem Congress from 1993-95. The reality is that few listeners know or bother to think.

[Crozier]

Dr. Rachel Maddow is one highly perceptive " member of the tribe, and our LGBT community. I am proud of her. Unlike Shepherd and Anderson who are forced by contract into an official closet despite the fact that they are "out" to their friends and those who frequent NY bars and parties. Rachel does not hide the fact that she and her wife live in MA in order to live in a state where same-sex marriage is legal. I under the former who works for neocon Fox and their theocratic homophobes, but CNN should have known that since the latter is a Vanderbilt scion, that his social register standing alone would have accepted it. Ellen after all made it possible.

Rachel is a Rhodes Scholar and earned her D.Phil (Oxon) while living in Britain. Rachel is a real journalist and not an infotertainment anchor.

Yes, it takes all day to get MSNBC from its neo-conservative bent all day long. We start with Joe Scarborough and Buchanan and Company with Alan Colmes' sister Mika.

[notconfindtweenhatnboots]

Actually, Dr. Maddow is not a journalist but has her doctorate in Poli Sci from Oxford. She would be an excellent analyst or advisor for anyone in elected office, but her actual "journalism" creds are a little light, in that she never studied "journalism" as distinct from politics. You could tell this a little bit in her Obama interview as she was not forceful with questions, like most journalists are. But she was much more thoughtful and asked him questions more to re-assure herself that O was indeed making good decisions.

Oh, and perhaps if she was not out (& so lib.), she would have gotten sucked into politics and would not be there to explain what was going on to America.

[Teyshar]

No. The problem is here Keith is wrong if he checked his facts. The last time the Congress was controlled aka filibuster proof was under Carter in the 95th Congress. The senate was 61 democrat, House 292 of 435. i think this is what was meant. Keith is right however in stating that Control is simple majority and that case would leave it to GWBUSH. Depends on what your definition of control is. The point they are both trying to make is silly. Republicans have NEVER had complete control aka Filibuster proof in the last century. Trying to say that one party filibuster proof control ruined us is a joke. Kennedy was in a filibuster proof democratic congress. Yet under Johnson again. I am unsure if this criticism was a good move overall.

[RussellH]

And you, dear lad, seem to not be in control of your English. You may have made some cogent points here, but your writing is pathetic. Night school?

[Sneakerface]

Keith is only wrong if you *change* his facts, which is obviously what you're doing. The "facts* are what was actually said, not what you *think* was meant.

[notconfindtweenhatnboots]

Campbell said NOTHING about a Filibuster proof senate. When King brought up Clinton, she even clarified and asked "you mean the D's had control of the house and the senate"? To which King said "yes". If Brown knew anything about how filibusters are historically used in the Senate, she would know that the Senate usually only uses them to stop real important partisan issues- like Jim Crow laws or Judge Appointments. Filibusters have never historically been used to stop normal bill passages or normal senate business.

I think if this is her "excuse" it just shows further that she is a pizz poor journalist.

[Ahmah]

All you Fox news lovers who just LOVE that 'fair and balanced' reporting are just so irked that someone is out there giving the other side! Stick with your own channel and stop worrying about ours! We don't need you guys, the election just proved it! BillO, Hannity and friends are welcome to you!

[MyUserName]

Oh..okay. I didn't know there was a "we' channel and an "our" channel.
Irked? LOL..hardly. If you don't mind I will continue to watch a mix of CNN, FOX, MSNBC,
ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS and CBN. Then and only then can I get a true, fair and balanced news
and view points. I see you as well as most here aren't about the Obama mandate at all.
You have no intentions of coming together for the country and the good of the nation...
It's still all about us and them..we don't need you, watch your own news station.
I hope Obama is a bit more sensitive and mature to the over 50 million Americans that didn't vote for him above and beyond the mass majority of posters at the Huff. If not..He breaks his first promise and then it will be the first of many.

[Salon]

What are you talking about?

[cyranobob]

And re: pyoungberg's comment, why does this kind of debate always boil down to a nit-picking defensive statement, such as '...(she) said the 'same' party, meaning the Democrats...'. Well, no she didn't, and she was wrong anyway if she did mean that. The point is that if Ms. Brown is out to make some sort of comparison or analogy relating to one party controlling two branches of government, she should at least have the facts straight, or else her entire thesis is meaningless. I find it disconcerting (i.e. maddening) when the 'experts' literally don't know when they're wrong, or else just don't care, and when they skew their comments to support some personal theory or biased viewpoint.

And of course Olberman is biased. Is there a law against it? O'Reilly is biased, in case you haven't noticed. It's sadly not so strange that 'our' guy is always right on, and the other guy is a mean-spirited (fill in appropriate expletive). As for Hannity, he's just.....well, it's hard to find a word for his particular kind of bias. Let's just say he's probably just going to explode some day. Hopefully.

[MyUserName]

Keith Olbermann and MSNBC are the most pitful excuses I've ever seen for any real or unbiased news.
He isn't a news anchor, He was cheer leader for the Democratic Party and Obama..He wasn't as bad as Hannity but certainly worse than O'Reilly.

[LemonMeringue]

But does he tell the truth?

[Mosby007]

Yes he does!

And lets not forget, that just because someone is biased, it doesn't mean that they are wrong.

[Ahmah]

You're not actually trying to suggest that O'Reilly and Hannity are/were pro Obama? If anything, there disgusting drum beating can only correctly be classified as un-American! They are largely responsible for pushing the insane swill that has passed for 'news' in this country for far too long!

[notconfindtweenhatnboots]

Bill O and Hannity both are told what to say by the White House. Scott McClelland admitted to it. What are Billo and Hannity going to do now that the new White House doesn't send them questions to ask their guests, and topics to talk about?

Good thing Karl Rove is staying on at Fox as the NeoCon prop. egandest in charge.

[neesy08]

It was Bush. He and the GOP controlled from 2000-2006. I was wondering why everybody kept going back several decades. Te GOP had no problem with this, of course, when they were in control.

[pyoungberg]

Wait, why is everyone missing the obvious miscommunication here between her remarks and Olbermans retort:

Brown was making a comment about how the last time the SAME party, **i.e. the Democrats,** controlled it all was Jimmy Carter.

The last time ANY party controlled it all, correctly, was with GWB.

She was taken out of context. Straw man argument Olberman. Drop it. I still love you though.

[LemonMeringue]

Did you miss the part where he said Bill Clinton?

[notconfindtweenhatnboots]

And Campbell Brown didn't believe King when he said it. She clarified and asked "you mean they controlled the House and the Senate?"

She had no idea what she was talking about. She must gotten her information from some book that was written in the 80's maybe?

[R644918]

Kudos for Keith Olbermann. And thumbs down for Huffington Post for pushing an "attack dog" image on Keith where it does not apply. Fortunately for Americans, Fox news with its bullies and hatemongers has been held to the fire by Keith O. If CNN perpetuates distortions and lies, it too, should be exposed.

This particular misinformation was potentially inflammatory, as it was a continuation of the rightwing strategy to scare Americans into thinking they will be under a dictatorial-like system with no one to represent any opposing positions. I doubt if that statement given by Campbell was an accident. In fact, the more I viewed her show the more I've sensed that show was cleverly misnamed: It is "bull" that it is without "bias". It is CNN's subtle way of promoting the continued domestic repressive and pro-aggression foreign policies which it has done for so long.

At last we have found an effective counterattack to such disingenuous appearances of neutrality, along with a strong stance against the Fox 'news' follies of the Bush and pre-Bush era, in the two daily shows of Keith's Countdown and Rachel Maddow's show.

The question here is, why would Huffington Post want to distort the reality concerning Keith's straight-up correction of Campbell Brown? Hopefully, this is not an attempt to water down Keith Olberman's style of exposing misconceptions and untruths. If it is, then Huffington Post needs a closer examination.

[cyranobob]

I had the same reaction to the Huff Post headline. Why is pointing out an error in facts wrong, especially when that "fact" is being used to imply that only Democrats screw up when they control both houses of Congress, etc....? Almost sounds as if someone is trying to protect a defenseless journalist, which would be ridiculous. Or that they're trying to protect George W. Or that journalists nowadays simply don't know how to write a headline without making it sound "news worthy".

[HARVIN]

"Er,I meant to say a country and a continent are just the same when you're standing on your front porch." Campbell Brown

[HARVIN]

"Olbermann is a no-class jerk and a liberal.And for the record,Sarah didn't get the Africa question that wrong.A city and a continent are exactly the same when you are standing on your front porch." Campbell Brown

[R644918]

Kudos for Keith Olbermann. And thumbs down for Huffington Post for pushing an "attack dog" image on Keith where it does not apply. Fortunately for Americans, Fox news with its bullies and hatemongers has been held to the fire by Keith O. If CNN perpetuates distortions and lies, it too, should be exposed.

This particular misinformation was potentially inflammatory, as it was a continuation of the rightwing strategy to scare Americans into thinking they will be under a dictatorial-like system with no one to represent any opposing positions. I doubt if that statement given by Campbell was an accident. In fact, the more I viewed her show the more I've sensed that show was cleverly misnamed: It is "bull" that it is without "bias". It is CNN's subtle way of promoting the continued domestic repressive and pro-aggression foreign policies which it has done for so long.

At last we have found an effective counterattack to such disingenuous appearances of neutrality, along with a strong stance against the Fox 'news' follies of the Bush and pre-Bush era, in the two daily shows of Keith's Countdown and Rachel Maddow's show.

The question here is, why would Huffington Post want to distort the reality concerning Keith's straight-up correction of Campbell Brown? Hopefully, this is not an attempt to water down Keith Olberman's style of exposing misconceptions and untruths. If it is, then Huffington Post needs a closer examination.

Keith Olbermann, you are still needed. Don't let up!

[JWakkaJane]

"And thumbs down for Huffington Post for pushing an "attack dog" image on Keith where it does not apply"

ditto that

[scotthawk]

bingo, I see they sorta changed the headline on the main page. Still says its an attack in here though. Less sensationalism please.

[nagor76]

Why do libs like KO's act? He's using the same self righteous buffoonery that O'Reilly & Hannity used to build their audience. It seems to be working, though. His 1.5 mil per nite is almost as good as Rachel Maddow.

[jcapflorida]

Well, pointing out something that someone reported VERY incorrectly can't always be characterized as an attack. I mean, I watched her, and I'm no political scholar, but I thought "Didn't dems win a majority in '06 because people were disgusted with the GOP controlling everything and what they were doing with that control?..." And SHE didn't even know it? Come on. There is absolutely no reason on earth, at a time when you can find the information instantly, a freaking journalist can't get something like that correct before they go on the air. It did make me wonder if I had inadvertently changed the channel to FOX "news".

[Ahmah]

Of course she knows it! She is just one of many on a long list of Republican owned media personalities. If you can't spot one by now, you need new glasses!

[HallStyle]

Yeah Keith is over the TOP. BUT MOST OF THE TIME HE IS RIGHT! Unlike Hannity or O'Reilly. They just spit BULL! Campbell was wrong he corrected her. Case Closed. I get corrected all the time over My Opinions. But Opinions aren't facts. She was WRONG FACTUALLY.

Keith Is Da Man.

http://www.hallstyle.blogspot.com

[LemonMeringue]

But does Keith tell the truth?

This I know: He pronounces people's names correctly.

[ZekeBundren]

The only problem I see with the article is the writer piggybacked on Olbermann's popularity to get some clicks of his or her own.

Olbermann clearly did NOT attack Ms Brown or the second CNN contributor who got it wrong.

Brown is a fine reporter who deteriorated as many women reporters and journalists did in their coverage of Palin. There was incredible resentment by many influential women that Clinton didn't get her "turn". Brown is among that group who do not understand that there is no "turn" in the Democratic party food chain.

Republicans seem to rotate in some has been every once in a while like this year and 1996, but Democrats don't for some reason.

[HallStyle]

This wasn't an attack. I seen Keith Correct and ATTACK people many times. This is just a little jab. Nothing More. Just letting people know that he acknowledges Campbell and her success. Before Campbell wouldn't have even been acknowledge as an actual threat but her show is pretty good. He was very respectful and didn't call her out by name.

Keith is doing what Keith always does, giving us the FACTS! Something journalist have forgotten about or thrown out the window altogether. Anderson Cooper and other, including Dan Abrams had segments on their show that would do the exact same thing all the time.

http://www.hallstyle.blogspot.com

[livingfree]

Come on guys, I like both Keith and Campbell. Let's not make a war here because I just can't go back to FOX. FOX gets on my last nerve.

[notconfindtweenhatnboots]

There are other people they could put on in her spot. Rick Sanchez maybe? He seems to have a good grasp of the world and has a little bit of gall to go with it.