Saturday, July 01, 2006

My apologies!

I just realized that not only do I have a few comments, but I had this thing set to only allow registered users to comment. That was not my intention.

The floor is open. And I can assure you that I will not be deleting any comments.

I will also be gone for three days, so while the mouse is away you cats can play.

119 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thank you, Raton, for starting this blog. This "person" is trying to prove something. Whatever it is is unclear.

I think she is playing with fire.

If she thinks smearing someone in a blog is cute, sophisticated, whatever, she is wrong.

Many posts have been deleted over there. What's there to hide, I wonder?

I can tell you this: Posts that she claimed were written by NBC were written by ME. No NBC writer am I. There were two sets of posts she tried to pass off as NBC written.

After I said that she was wrong, she posted another set. Wrong again.

The fact that she wanted your phone number....how laughable is that??

Thanks for staying on the case.

9:53 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thanks for creating this blog, raton!

10:42 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

News flash! The karmabiteskarmabites blog is GONE!!

In other news, karmabites, on that blog, is still being goaded to publish her e-mails. But it's funny, no one is suggesting she post them with FULL HEADERS so she can prove to any doubters where they really came from.

And so far, she hasn't published a thing that even skirts the personal.

She is SO bogus it's ridiculous.

10:05 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So the logic here is that Karma created a blog to insult herself? And to slam a few more people while she was at it? Yeah, that makes perfect sense. Do you people hit the crack pipe throughout the day or just take hits from it before you post your wild-ass theories on the internet?

11:11 AM  
Anonymous Look here, kids! said...

I clearly watch too much CSI

I think the CIA should hire us as cybersleuths to find al-Qaeda cells and other terrorists.

Man, are we good or what?

11:40 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It DOES make perfect sense...for someone who now realizes what a pickle she's in and needs desperately to cover her tracks!

Looks as if "Psych 101," aka Shopaholic, Elle Woods and a whole puppet theatre full of other characters (alhough WhirlyGirl is NOT one of them; I knew WhirlyGirl, and this person PICKED on WhirlyGirl something terrible) was a little sorry that she dug herself this hole, and was desperately trying to think of something, anything she could do to extricate herself.

Only it didn't work. So she took the blog down.

She also took down a really whiny, pathetic post that she made to her own QuickTopic Olbermann board, designed to curry pity with her constituents, which I guess she thought better of and took down.

That's OK. I saved it before she took it down. I just may choose to post it somewhere sometime.

She really is a piece of work. And if she doesn't stop listening to all the Olbermannwatchers trying to goad her into posting her phony, headerless e-mails, and take the Karmabites blog down and fast, she's only going to make herself look worse. Much worse.

I say this because I believe the most recently posting "anonymous" prior to me may want to pay heed...after all, she too could be the masquerading Psych 101!

11:52 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

For everybody's edification, All About Email Headers:

http://www.stopspam.org/email/headers.html

They are NOT simply the To: and From: fields that your email client displays to you, but you will be able to find them if you try. Different email readers have different methods for viewing the full header information.

3:07 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anon 3:07

That's exactly what she's not showing. She has been repeatedly asked to show the FULL headers and won't.

4:23 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anon 4:23,
Yes, I know. I tried to send her a comment explaining the difference, but she didn't post or respond to it.
So, I'm putting the information here, so everyone will know what everyone else means when they say "full headers".

4:41 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

One thing you might also want to look at:

E-Bay Olbermann card:
http://cgi.ebay.com/Keith-Olbermann-business-card-MSNBC-Countdown-ESPN_W0QQitemZ130003367573QQihZ003QQcategoryZ201QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

It looks like Karma is using "kreamofthekrop" to sell a dummied up Olbermann card (look at the back and the phone # sticker).

4:45 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sorry, link didn't work. Just go to e-bay and search for kreamofthekrop.

4:46 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

She posted the email that was published by Lloyd Grove in the New York Daily News. Don't you think she had to show proof? And furthermore, don't you think the Daily News gave MSNBC the opportunity to claim the emails were false?

MSNBC didn't claim they were false. Quite the opposite, Olbermann issued an apology. If you don't want to believe she met Olbermann, fine. But at this point, any suggestion that the emails were faked is simply ridiculous. Olbermann has admitted the email came from him.

5:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

She's nothing but a sick, lovelorn groupie grasping at straws. Other people were involved in the e-mail story. She's just trying for 15 minutes of fame.

Where are the trackbacks?

5:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Where is the proof that she was the one to give Lloyd Grove that email? Becase she said so? What if I tell you no, it was I who sent it to him? I could fake a better printscreen than the ones she did. We all know what Grove said the email said, so any of us could do it.
You can say, "It COULD be true," all day long, but I'm assuming it's not until I see solid evidence.
Call me "Krazy" that way. I like evidence before I believe things.

6:05 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ditto.

She's said she has proof, but won't show it until she gets your phone number.

I give Olbermann the benefit of the doubt here. And if he did get taken by this psych-o, I feel bad for him.

6:10 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thank you for not deleting comments here. If Karma had done the same, her believability would have soared in my eyes. If she's so innocent, what does she have to hide??

6:39 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't get how she could give proof over the phone anyway.
What do you think she was talking about?

6:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, it's pretty simple. Lloyd Grove only printed Olbermann's side of the conversation in his column. Karma has made public both sides of the discussion.

Why not call Lloyd Grove (better yet, send him an email) and ask him whether that was the email that he authenticated? It's pretty fucking simple.

6:59 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

No one could translate Karma-babble. She makes no sense.

7:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

One of our many anonymouses said: "She posted the email that was published by Lloyd Grove in the New York Daily News. Don't you think she had to show proof? And furthermore, don't you think the Daily News gave MSNBC the opportunity to claim the emails were false? MSNBC didn't claim they were false. Quite the opposite, Olbermann issued an apology. If you don't want to believe she met Olbermann, fine. But at this point, any suggestion that the emails were faked is simply ridiculous. Olbermann has admitted the email came from him."

Um...go back and look at the FACTS, please?

Karma is saying the e-mail about Rita Cosby and Rick Kaplan came from her. She never said word one about the "foul language" e-mails coming from her.

If you go back and reread Lloyd Grove's two "stories" about this matter, one thing should jump out at you quite clearly: NOWHERE IS IT ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THE RITA COSBY/RICK KAPLAN E-MAIL IS LEGITIMATE, NOR IS IT ACKNOWLEDGED THAT KEITH SENT IT, NOR DOES KEITH EVER APOLOGIZE FOR IT.

The statement quoted by Grove (which for the sake of argument we will take at face value here) is clearly about the "foul language" e-mails and NOT about the alleged "fan" e-mail referring to Cosby and Kaplan.

Funny, after mentioning that one once, and Cosby's alleged reaction to it, Grove never mentions it again. Nor do we have any evidence that Keith ever was made to apologize for it, or to Cosby for what he said--in public or private.

Which leads me to believe that THAT whole story is bogus.

And so is Karmabites and her story.

3:52 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Let me just add that the main reason I believe Psych 101 is at the head of this whole piece of garbage is that she and all the harpies on her QT board qualify as anything but "fans" of the man. They seem to get off sexually on some mental image of him as this horrible abusing womanizer who has loved and left thousands of unhappy women in his wake...so many that you could have a convention of all those he has used, abused and abandoned over the years. It's really quite sick when you think about it.

The "evidence" they have for this image of him? A handful of trolls who wandered into their midst over the past few years and spieled out supposed "true stories about what he's really like" in order to draw attention and admiration to themselves. Never did any of them present anything to back up or verify their stories, yet each one was believed like it was the gospel truth. So was the legend of Keith the Cad created.

I think Psych 101 got tired of some other people not believing in their cock-and-bull (and I mean that literally) legend, and decided it was time to try to come up with some "irrefutable proof." Yeah, right! You bet, baby!

HEADERS are irrefutable proof...not this garbage.

4:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The ebay auction of the "business card" is now gone -- pulled by the seller. Hmmm, does that sound familiar? (For anyone unfamiliar, karmabites1 had posted an ebay auction about a month ago that was for a tie she claimed to have been given by Olbermann. She posted and pulled the auction -- twice!) Incidently, the user ID "kreamofthecrop19" says the person is in FL -- which is also where the ebay user "karmabites1" is registered to, and where Karma herself claims to be from.

I definitely smell a rat!

4:26 AM  
Anonymous Joe Friday said...

Personally, I've had a suspicion from the start that karmabites1 is Robert Cox (or another Olbermann Watcher). For a person who allegedly does not like Mr. Olbermann because of his liberal opinions, the attacks are frequently of a personal (not ideological) nature. But at least Mr. Cox allows dissenting comments to be posted on his board.

As for the QT-GalPals board, my impression is that they are female fans who pretty much harmlessly like to gossip about men, in particular Mr. Olbermann. The last time I looked some are critical of karmabites1 while others have thrown Olbermann under the bus for his "documented" Lotharian ways.

If I say "I dated Keith, had sex with him, then he dumped me, he takes Viagra, and his penis is small" do you believe me?

Gossip is kind of fun, but it can be cruel and dangerous as well.

Give me the facts, Ma'am. Just the facts.

8:30 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And now Karma's blog is gone. Must be kind of scary when the world starts closing in on you.

11:16 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The creepy lady known as Karma has her blog back up....

Now she's really a freak.

12:54 PM  
Anonymous Anon 3:52am is an idiot said...

"If you go back and reread Lloyd Grove's two "stories" about this matter, one thing should jump out at you quite clearly: NOWHERE IS IT ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THE RITA COSBY/RICK KAPLAN E-MAIL IS LEGITIMATE, NOR IS IT ACKNOWLEDGED THAT KEITH SENT IT, NOR DOES KEITH EVER APOLOGIZE FOR IT."

Actually, I did go back and look at the Lloyd Grove columns and neither of the column's make it clear which emails specifically MSNBC verified and Olbermann apologized for. But as someone who works in the business, let me clear something up for you. The New York Daily News doesn't print emails that it can't verify, or emails that MSNBC denies came from one of their on-air personalities.

You claim that Mr. Grove never explicitly address the Rita email. What he said was that he sent the "foul-mouthed" emails, along with other emails, to MSNBC. What we all can be perfectly damn clear about is that MSNBC most certainly did not deny (and neither did Olbermann) that the email came from him.

Give it up already. The story is true. And those of us who have worked in the business-- and known Mr. Olbermann for a long time-- know it's true. You think this is the first time he's done this? Think again, it's just the first time he's been burned.

5:56 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Karma is simply out for attention. Plain and simple. A groupie who didn't get her way. She was looking for money, didn't get it, and now she's mad. Thinks that her blog is cute. Well, not many people have fallen for it. Her e-mails were fake.

6:01 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And what's with the eBay angle?

8:53 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Since I was quoted and called a name, I will answer:

The idiot who answered said:

"Actually, I did go back and look at the Lloyd Grove columns and neither of the column's make it clear which emails specifically MSNBC verified and Olbermann apologized for."

Oh really? Do you think maybe there was a reason for that? His "apology," however, makes it clear that he was responding to mail that expressed "hate." Not "fan" mail, but "hate mail." Connect the dots.

"But as someone who works in the business, let me clear something up for you."

I'm supposed to take the word of an anonymous person that you "work in the business"? Nice try.

"The New York Daily News doesn't print emails that it can't verify, or emails that MSNBC denies came from one of their on-air personalities."

You seem to be forgetting something. Even if we were to assume that this, ahem, person received the Cosby email from Keith, nowhere in that mail is there any statement verifying what she claims about the rest of their "relationship."

Think. Did Lloyd Grove ever publish any excerpts from emails in which Olbermann said anything to try to lure a woman to visit him and have sex with him? No. Did Karmabytes publish any excerpts from such emails (even faked ones)--aside from the (easily fakable) one saying he was "sending her secret signals" by tapping on his desk while on the air? No, she did not.

And she would not be the first person, according to him, to think he was sending her "secret signals" while on the air. The first person who did it was a stalker. Think about that.

"You claim that Mr. Grove never explicitly address the Rita email. What he said was that he sent the "foul-mouthed" emails, along with other emails, to MSNBC. What we all can be perfectly damn clear about is that MSNBC most certainly did not deny (and neither did Olbermann) that the email came from him."

I will repeat: Grove never, never published or forwarded to MSNBC a single email in which Olbermann said anything sexually suggestive to a fan. I would presume that if he had that kind of material, he'd have published it and sent it on.

"Give it up already. The story is true. And those of us who have worked in the business-- and known Mr. Olbermann for a long time-- know it's true."

Again, you are asking me to take ON FAITH that you "have worked in the business and known Mr. Olbermann for a long time." What a heap of bullshit. You must think I'm extremely stupid or naive. Well, guess what. Not so.

"You think this is the first time he's done this? Think again, it's just the first time he's been burned."

Yeah. And we're to take you at face value because you SAY you know him and you SAY you know for sure. Yet you hide yourself behind a cloak of anonymity.

Sure, I'll believe you. As soon as I stop laughing myself silly.

8:57 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

People, please. Karmabites is obviously a liar, and let me tell you why:

I've been married to Keith for the past 16 years, we have 10 kids together, and every time we have sex he finishes with a lusty "good night and good luck".

9:18 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

People, please. Karmabites is obviously a liar, and let me tell you why:

I've been married to Keith for the past 16 years, we have 10 kids together, and every time we have sex he finishes with a lusty "good night and good luck".

------------

LOLOL!

9:22 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh, before we begin he also admonishes me to "keep my knees loose".

Now if that doesn't convince you, I don't know WHAT will.

9:26 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anon 8:53:

The e-bay angle is this: A couple months ago someone was trying to sell a tie, stating that it was Olbermann's. The auction was pulled, put back on, then pulled again with no "winner."

This past weekend, a person put up a
business card" of Olbermann's for auction. It came with his work and home phone numbers. The seller in question, kreamofthekrop19, is in the same state as karmabites.

That auction has since been pulled too.

There are lots of oddities about the business card. First of all, the #'s for MSNBC and ESPN were put on a sticker and then stuck onto the card (the email address was funny looking, crooked or something). Second, the card was never signed, usually fans ask for them to be signed (no, not always). Third, it doesn't match the card he used last year.

Lots of things lead to suspicion.

9:32 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

To whoever claimed to be married to Keith for 10 years and know what he REALLY says in bed: LOL!!!!! Brilliant! You gave me my laugh of the night!

Oh my gosh, the plot just keeps getting thicker. Karma claims KO told her on May 28 about his dying relative; some attention-paying soul consulted a calendar and said May 28 was a Sunday and he didn't even work the next day, so how can what Karma said about his showing up for both his jobs that day be true? Ah, but Karma says, it was the day of the FUNERAL, that Wednesday, that he showed up for both his jobs--not the 28th or 29th!

Next question, Karma dearie: How could KO be such a dimbulb as to tell you he was attending a funeral out of state, when all you would have to do is turn on a radio or TV to know whether he was lying? Most philanderers are better at covering their tracks, aren't they?

Come on...I mean, I know Keith's enemies think he's stupid, but that's ridiculous!!

9:46 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Karma has made lots of errors on her blog.

She's said that Olbermann knows about the blog, then she said "if he sees it." There's just so many things that have never added up.

Who ever saw that date thing just added something else.

10:12 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

That's true. Didn't she have a post earlier in which she first changed her logo from the broken heart to the "peace characters" and imply that some sort of resolution had been reached? Of course, she never said what it was...she let other people fill in the blanks, by assuming that "he apologized to her." Of course, she never said he did any such thing. And her sense of "peace" sure didn't last long...look at how gleefully she posted "WE'RE EVEN!"

She's as bogus as a three-dollar bill.

10:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

She did indeed.

About the posts she said were written by someone at NBC? Well, I know the person who wrote them. She's NOT an NBC employee.

10:58 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The type of blog KarmaBites1 is presenting (then deleting), is not just something to be laughed off.

This type of stuff can influence people against someone. What if some deranged person decided to hunt down Keith Olbermann because of what they read? That's scary.

What if this could damage his career? It's unlikely, but what if it happened?

How is Olbermann supposed to respond to this? No matter what he says, the allegations have already been publically dissected.

I cannot respect any "woman" who can't keep her trap shut. There is no reason for a smut blog like hers.

11:04 PM  
Anonymous Quanlin said...

I just want to say, I love ya, KO. Don't let the crazies get you down. There are plenty of normal, rational fans out here who support you and your work.
Hang in there!
-q

11:18 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh, there's a reason for a "smut blog" like Karma's...but it has nothing to do with jilted lovers getting revenge on the famous.

Nah, it has more to do with one of two other things:

1. "I care more about being right about the things I BELIEVE Keith Olbermann does in his personal life, vs. what some of his fans think of him, than about him personally and the impact the things I believe may have on his career. I will get the disbelieving portion of his fan base to believe he's the cold, unfeeling Lothario I suspect he is, no matter WHAT it takes";

2. "I don't like what Keith Olbermann says on his program, and I want him OFF THE AIR--whatever it takes--even if it takes trumping up a phony sex scandal against him. After all, goading him into responding to nasty e-mails with foul language was fine as far as it went, but it wasn't enough. It failed to get him fired, and it failed to get him off the air. I (we) had to come up with something that would get him FIRED and get him OFF THE AIR. And only one thing had a hope of doing that--a sex scandal. Preferably one involving his work e-mail account.

"And this is working. Now, even if we don't get him fired and off the air, every time he throws up the words 'loofah' and 'falafel,' we have a comeback. Aren't we the little stinkers?"

It's so transparent it's disgusting.

6:42 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You can solve all the confusion fairly easily...call Lloyd grove and ask him if the "Rita" email was the same one he saw.

It's pretty fucking simple. All of this can easily be verified without even knowing this woman's name.

But as much as you claim this other woman has an agenda, you do too. If you really wanted this settled, one of you would simply be smart enough to send Lloyd Grove an email and ask him if the "Rita" email was verified, and further ask whether he's seen enough evidence to make him think the email is authentic.

And while you're at it, why don't you ask Mr. Grove if he's seen any of the other emails this woman claims to have. You know, the one's that verify Olbermann was doing more than just replying to a fan? I bet he has...

6:52 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You can solve all the confusion fairly easily...call Lloyd grove and ask him if the "Rita" email was the same one he saw.

It's pretty fucking simple. All of this can easily be verified without even knowing this woman's name.

But as much as you claim this other woman has an agenda, you do too. If you really wanted this settled, one of you would simply be smart enough to send Lloyd Grove an email and ask him if the "Rita" email was verified, and further ask whether he's seen enough evidence to make him think the email is authentic.

And while you're at it, why don't you ask Mr. Grove if he's seen any of the other emails this woman claims to have. You know, the one's that verify Olbermann was doing more than just replying to a fan? I bet he has...

6:52 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Quanlin wrote "There are plenty of normal, rational fans out here who support you and your work"

Perhaps there are normal, rational fans out there but you, Q, are most certainly not one of them.

Robert Cox
OlbermannWatch

PS, just to clarify a pointed raised by an earlier commenter - I did not have sex with Keith Olbermann or put up an anonymous blog claiming to have done so.

7:51 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

anonymous 6:52 am, it is not that simple. What you're asking we who doubt to do is to trust that Lloyd Grove would tell us the truth. Why should we do that, when his own editor thinks he's a bastard and he's lied about things before?

And Bob Cox...you son of a bitch...leave Quanlin alone. You have some nerve talking about who qualifies as "normal" and "rational." And are we supposed to believe YOU or one of your freak-show geeks didn't start this crap just because you SAY you didn't? Good luck getting anyone to think so! You have a reputation, bub, and you can't shed it THAT easily. It's quite easy to believe you would say and do and post anything you thought would get Keith Olbermann off the air for good. Especially after certain of his fans predicted, with 100% accuracy, that once the "dirty e-mails" campaign failed to do the job, you'd go for the heavy ammunition...a sex scandal.

So predictable. So pathetic.

8:11 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Quanlin is a nutjob. If anyone is going to accuse anyone else of being a whiny, pathetic, sick, lovelorn groupie, accuse Q of it. She's got a rep as big as the Internets and a mind as small as Bob Cox's.

9:20 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, I see Psych 101 is here...in the form of the Quanlin-basher!

Or would that be Mary Ellen? Sometimes it's just so hard to tell you hateful gals apart, you know?

Don't worry...I am sure Psych 101 and Mary Ellen are not sockpuppets of each other (so you don't need to har-har yourselves about that) but rather two separate individuals. Although when it comes to hate, they're obviously sisters under the skin...

Nah, Psych 101 and Mary Ellen are separate people.

It's just that Psych 101 is also several other people on her own board...or has been...Let's see, there was Shelley, Dee, A2, and Mme Astrologer (she just admitted to being Mme Astrologer). And possibly a few more.

It's not that she's the entire population of QT (give me a break!), but she HAS been more than one person.

Together, you can just call them "The OlbermannWatch Ladies' Auxiliary." Because that's what they've become.

Go on up, gals. Give your loverboy Bob Cox a big kiss now. Smoochy smoochy!

9:58 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's WWIII in the Olbersphere!

10:23 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

_____You can solve all the confusion fairly easily...call Lloyd grove and ask him if the "Rita" email was the same one he saw.

It's pretty fucking simple. All of this can easily be verified without even knowing this woman's name. ______

Sure, that way he can't confirm if it was that loser who sent the mail or someone else. What she did is copy the lines of the e-mail and attempt to fake one that looked like he wrote it to her. Very "fucking simple."

11:20 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You know nothing about Quanlin so leave her alone. It's pretty sick to try and switch the subject from some crackpot loon faking e-mails from Olbermann to an innocent poster.

11:22 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The idiot known as Karma says that she will not release any information as proof. That she knew that no one would give a phone number, so she'd not give it out.

What a moron.

11:23 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And the deluded "crackpot loon" Krabloonik is here, too. You have such an active imagination! Too bad you're always wrong.

I know plenty about Q, and I bet you'd like to know the kind of shit she was up to before she joined the sanctimonious syncophants. I think you would not find her to be of "real fan" material.

2:04 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Karma is all talk, no bite. I could say that I did John Lennon, yet there'd be no proof.

She should just shut up while she has a shred of dignity left.

2:32 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Nice, QT chickadees.

2:33 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Beware "Michael" who has so thoughtfully provided a link to his Ko-devoted website. He uses any and every opportunity known to man to pimp his own website about Olbermann. He's not exactly an impartial observer.

I think it's hysterical that Olbermann might actually have to use some other route to get booty other than soliciting fans for it.

And no, I will not be buying any book that this hypocrite writes where he's morally lecturing to others when it's clear he needs to clean up his own house first.

2:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's the latest piece of Keith Olbermann fiction: that he couldn't possibly have done anything remotely like this. They said the same thing AFTER he apologized for the obscene emails he sent that were reprinted in Lloyd Grove's column. This group: of which Hotrod & Michael descend from are known for being the joke of all the Olbermann fan sites and tha's really and truly saying something. They are perhaps best known for creating 10,000 "fake" members to make it look like they had the largest forum and prone to making boastful claims such as they have the most popular Olbermann forum. That's all a lie: the largest and most heavily visited would in fact be Olbermannwatch.com.

And word to all of you: you can't swiftboat someone unless they put the boat in the water to begin with and Olbermann in spite of his self-proclaimed intelligence is a dolt who keeps giving himself self-inflected wounds. Sounds familiar to you Kerry lovers out there huh?

2:51 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh. My. God. Do you want a laugh? See what Michael the site-pimper has posted on his front page. Hilarious. In fact, it's one of the funniest things I've ever read in my life. I hope it means he won't be posting more pretentious drivel here.

2:51 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh. My. God. Do you want a laugh? See what Michael the site-pimper has posted on his front page. Hilarious. In fact, it's one of the funniest things I've ever read in my life. I hope it means he won't be posting more pretentious drivel here.

2:51 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Brandon--everyone in the Olbermann Internet community--pro or anti--knows that KO.org is a laughingstock. There are about 6 people who post there (give or take 2). They spend their time telling each other how great and smart they are, how they're the only real Olbermann fans, and bashing other boards. If only they realized...oh, well, I guess ignorance is bliss.

It's all predicated on a fantasy: if they're really good fans, and never, ever say anything bad about Keith, and deify him every single day, he'll come to their board and post there all the time because they're true to him. He'll make Michael an on-air consultant on Countdown, and he'll welcome all the women into his harem, treating each equally tenderly and fairly. Then they'll all live happily ever after.

Bwahahahahahaha!

2:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Michael and his band of loonies give an entire meaning of the word insane & deluded. They complain about "others" posting at multiple boards but you can totally tell where they do it too and yes, it's using the same phrases and within minutes of each other. And I don't think anyone has been fooled by Rat's blog being a suburb of KO.org's board. It's pretty obvious. Only they are that obsessed with all of this. I wish someone would wake them up to the fact that Olbermann is a minor celeb at best and that he is guilty as charged here.

2:52 PM  
Anonymous Quanlin said...

Hi Bob! I see you found my little post about you on KO.o. Why ever did you take that sexy pic of yourself out of the rotation on OW?
-q

3:27 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Incidentally, Krabloonik, you and Q could teach PhD level classes on hatred. No one at QT hates either of you--you're just regarded as ridiculous, intellectually deficient laughingstocks, as does the rest of the online Olbermann community. No matter where you think we're posting, we're not the only ones. There are better things to do than trash your board--even though you incessantly trash QT, no matter how many times Michael tells you to stop. You must think he's a real asshole since you regard him so lightly.

And to quote the rules of your board, which Michael posted: "Do not be an ass. Flame wars with other boards: We do not encourage posters to use this site to start or maintain conflicts with other boards. This is a discussion board and should be treated as such. If you have a problem or issue elsewhere, take it there: elsewhere.”

Ta ta.

4:33 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh my goodness, this is such a laugh.

The QT and OW nutcases have really gone off the deep end now...ridiculing a board that they have no proof has anything to do with this site, along with Quanlin and someone named Krabloonik wwho must have really gotten their goat! Whacked-out and weird, indeed it is. Made me want to go over there right now and see what I'm missing!

Oh, and if you don't believe their posts the first time, they make the same ones over and over again, apparently thinking they can hypnotize you into believing what they say (I guess!).

Poor souls. There's sure a lot of hatred out there, isn't there?

The real loonies and sickos, of course, are not the people who have a realistic, non-worshipful admiration of Mr. O. The real loonies and sickos are the ones who would hang on every word posted by some anonymous nutcase who they believe is imparting to them Big Deep Secrets about the man they claim to admire, but really don't.

They live in this strange black-and-white world in which the only way they can "prove" that they don't "worship" someone is to knock him down, ridicule him and make him out to be a buffoon. Before you know it, they're so busy taking potshots at the guy, you have to wonder whether they are the "fans" they make themselves out to be. "Oh, we ARE fans! We just don't WOOOOORSHIP him like everyone else!!!!!"

Well, you got that right, ladies. You sure don't worship him. Of course, neither do any people who are sane. Trouble is, you seem to think you need to stone him at every opportunity just to prove it.

In other words, if these ladies are looking for dates, they really should be looking on OlbermannWatch because there they will find just the right kind of men for them--despite their supposed left-leaning political thinking.

For some of them, it might just be the solution to their loveless lives.

If James Carville and Mary Matalin could make a go of it, why not?

5:40 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You ko.org people are a riot. Do you try to be this funny or does it just come naturally to you? You do realize what a laughingstock you are right? You've attacked other KO boards viciously, never mind you are supposedly fans of the same guy. And in the process, you just make yourself look like even bigger idiots than you already are thought to be. There's a reason no one posts at your board despite Michael's 24/7 pimping of it everywhere he could find on the internet.

5:40 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This has nothing to do with any site but Karma's. The burden of proof is on her and as of yet she's failed to provide it.

KarmaBites seems to enjoy playing a game with Olbermann's reputation. Whatever the facts are in this story, she's lost credibility over and over by the way she selectively edits posts, the lack of proof she promises, and the general attitude she has towards anyone who dares question her story.

5:48 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Then why have the posters here chosen to attack other KO "fan" boards here? Stay on topic or don't bother to post here.

And I wasn't aware that Karma is in a court of law here. Olbermann can talk smack about people on his show--why the hell can't she tell the truth about him?

5:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Actually karma has answered many questions on her blog posed by posters. I guess you just have a problem with her answers.

5:57 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Karma has answered many questions posed to her by posters at her board. It's not her fault that you don't like her answers. Face it, your mind was made up before this woman ever came forward with her story: he was perfect and you will except nothing less than affirmations of this.

5:58 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

My apologies is right--you ought to apologize for the creation of this sorry blog. Seriously people: GET A FUCKING LIFE.

6:01 PM  
Anonymous Brandon said...

These people don't have lives. They watch Keith Olbermann. Need I say more?

6:04 PM  
Anonymous Brandon said...

And credibility? Why should she have credibility? Olbermann doesn't.

6:05 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

They go out of their way to criticize Olbermann? Quelle horror! Sort of how you people go out of your way to attack this other board and the people who post there at every available opportunity you can find and at every possible venue you can find?
You'd be pathetic if you weren't so darn amusing.

6:11 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh you acknowledge he's human alright. You just have to create bullshit blogs like this to discuss anything "human" about him because you're scared shitless to discuss anything "bad" about him on your own board. LOL. Too funny. Not to mention incredibly stupid.

6:26 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Swiftboating Defined (From Wikipedia as of 7/3/06): Swiftboating is American political jargon for an ad hominem attack against a public figure, coordinated by an independent or pseudo-independent group, usually resulting in a benefit to an established political force. Specifically, this form of attack is controversial, easily repeatable, and difficult to verify or disprove because it is generally based on personal feelings or recollections.
The name comes from the portrayal of Presidential candidate John Kerry's military service in Vietnam and subsequent antiwar activities by the Swift Vets and POWs for Truth organization. Although many of the charges were unverifiable, they were disseminated widely, which led to swiftboating's reputation for being a controversial but highly effective form of "smear campaign".
Swiftboating frequently refers to a campaign that uses viral marketing techniques to sell the allegations. By using credible-sounding sources to make sensational and difficult-to-disprove accusations against an opponent, the campaign leverages media tendencies to focus on a controversial story. Mostly used as a pejorative, the term has gained currency among some writers and commentators. Its appropriateness as a description of political debate has been questioned by some conservative commentators.
***
Smear Campaign. The game is to drive up negatives using rumor and innuendo. Turn people off so they tune out… breed apathy. Didn’t you know? The 9-11 widows are enjoying their husbands deaths (widowhood IS such a party after all)… Did you hear John Kerry shot a Viet Cong in the back and didn’t really deserve his Purple Heart? It was only a sliver… Max Clelland was on his way to have a drink at the officers club when the grenade blew off his legs! Did you hear Olbermann is lousy in bed? Really? Is that all you got?
I once heard a man is judged as much by the quality of his enemies as his friends. Of course Olbermann has made enemies. He has directly taken on Rupert Murdoch, Roger Ailes (Jabba the Hut), and of course, the “Big Giant Head” himself--Bill O’Reilly.
They can’t beat him man to man--Olbermann has the facts on his side, Olbermann has the verbal abilities, both spoken and written, to eviscerate his enemies and make them appear the buffoons they in fact are. How to bring him down? Attack his manhood directly. Make up an anonymous “ex-girlfriend” using a free blog so easy to create anyone can make one in five minutes, with stories of his—what exactly? She never really says… he broke up with her by e-mail? Doesn’t really matter—this forum is the launching pad for “others” (all anonymous of course) to “come forward” and share “their stories” of his depravity.
Then supposed “fan” blogs state they would “be remiss” if they didn’t repeat this smear campaign in a slightly more legitimate venue, and open up access for the smear merchants to tell more tales of woe in a more visible forum, until finally someone that almost reports news will print “there is a controversy” about Keith Olbermann. No one has ever really stepped forward, everything is anonymous, and everything is innuendo.
And what is Olbermann supposed to do? Deny he is a bad lover? Feed the “controversy”? He is doing the wise thing. He is ignoring it. As should you.
This is who I am writing to. The dupes. There are two groups in this equation, the fraudsters—those who know they are lying and don’t care (because the end justifies the means and Olbermann must be silenced) and the dupes. The dupes give the fraudsters their forum, the dupes spread the word—they are the “useful fools”. Hey, useful fools—this isn’t 2002, we know the game, we have seen it played over and over again, what exactly is your excuse for spreading this manure?
You are going to look silly when it blows up in your face--and we will be here to remind you, over and over again.
If there is a former girlfriend of Mr. Olbermann who is unsatisfied with his performance in bed, feel free to let me know—using your real name, and let me interview you on the phone—and I will faithfully report what Keith failed to do so he can better satisfy the next fan he beds. Otherwise this is unsubstantiated nonsense spawned by some demented dittohead, and will not be dignified with one pixel here at this forum [KO.org]."

No, it's all here! This is the fool forum!

6:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"KO.org Board Rules:

Do not be an ass.

Warning Signs:

Flame wars with other boards. We do not encourage posters to use this site to start or maintain conflicts with other boards. This is a discussion board and should be treated as such. If you have a problem or issue elsewhere, take it there: elsewhere."

Krabloonik, if you were so damn smart, you'd use your moderator screen. Then you'd know where people are posting from. And you'd know all the posts here are not from QT people. Since you have an encyclopedic knowledge of both the old and current boards, you should have a pretty good idea where everyone who posts there is from.

I don't understand your fascination with QT. We really don't give a fuck what you at KO.org and this auxiliary board do until you start bashing QT and seeing every member everywhere. It's unrealistic and delusional.

And you couldn't get the goat of anyone on QT unless one of us had a pet we could give you. A pet might be a good thing for you--calm you down and take up some of the many hours you spend on QT every day. You might even learn how to love something.

Incidentally, are you Berry-something on DU?

6:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

First of all, I have no clue who Krabloonik is, nor any idea why some idiot posting here is assuming Krabloonik is the person who created this blog and thus can see the moderator screen. Seems as if some people here are jumping to big conclusions, but then again, what's new?

As for me, I can tell that not all the posts here are from QT people. Some are from OlbermannWatch people. And some are actually from SANE people.

Exactly who is this "anonymous" accusing of having "an encyclopedic knowledge of both the old and current boards"? And which boards? I'm thoroughly confused now. "Berry something on DU"? Who ARE all these people? And who are you addressing?

And who is fascinated with QT--except as an excellent example, apparently, of what it means NOT to be a fan?

And how do you know whether anyone who has posted here has pets or not? And why does it matter--any more than it would matter if we had relatives or friends who were dying or had horrible medical conditions? I certainly wouldn't stoop so low as to talk about their problems in order to curry sympathy for my own self.

Seems to me like some people have forgotten the original point of this blog, which was to point out how Swiss-cheesed the whole Karmabites story has been from day one. Not a lick of sense in it, and "she" has to keep working harder and harder to try to weave a convincing story, without producing a shred of proof. Whatever happened to Occam's Razor?

I can't say I know exactly who came up with this stupid fairytale, but it was either some severely disturbed fan operating on her own, or it was a concerted effort by at least one or two people on the QuickTopic board (where they give lip service to liking the man but actually hate him) or OlbermannWatch (where at least they're honest--they don't even PRETEND to like him).

I don't say that because I don't believe the man is human or because I think he can do no wrong. I say it because of one simple reason: The story doesn't wash, yet so many are in a rush to believe it and reinforce it. Now why do you suppose that is? They couldn't have a vested interest in its being believed, could they?

And, oh yeah, I hear that someone over on the QT board is deleting old posts there like there's no tomorrow. Just deleting up a storm! Gosh, I wonder why that is?

Too bad it won't do them much good. I heard there's someone who has been saving the the whole board and all the old posts for a long time. I imagine that person would be happy to step forth if there were ever a question of what was being posted there that was later wiped.

7:42 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Karma's story does have a million and one holes in it. If it weren't so absolutely delusional it would be funny.

8:28 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

In case y'all lovely ladies missed this on QT:

Psych 101 16805

07-04-2006 11:35 PM ET (US)
Edited by author 07-04-2006 11:40 PM
Here you go. Here's my recent visitor activity logs. Keep it up bitches. I'm about two steps away from password protecting this board and what will all of you people who hit this board sometimes up to 50 times a day EACH do in your spare time when you find yourselves locked out of this board for good???? the choice is yours. Stop this shit-talking about this board and spreading lies you know goddamned well aren't true or you will find yourself minus your favorite hobby and punching bag.

Edited to add: sorry these are skewed. Email me and I'll be happy to send you the real thing. The key thing to look for below are the number of visits a day someone has spent here and the total time of those visits. Seriously people--you spend upwards of 5 hours a day on this site and you don't post here??? Uh--you have a problem and it sure as hell ain't me.

Oh--and these were just the first 2 pages. I've got 28 more just like them filled with stats and IP addresses and the number of hours certain people spend here but who oddly never seem to post. I guess they are just too busy spreading lies about this board elsewhere to actually make it around to posting. Or it could be that they've been banned from this board for being the trolls they are. You decide.



Number of Entries:
Entry Page Time:
Visit Length:
Browser
OS
Resolution 2
4th July 2006 22:48:46
0 seconds
MSIE 6.0
Windows XP
1024x768 Returning Visits:
Location:
Hostname:
Entry Page:
Exit Page:
Referring URL: 43
District Of Columbia, Washington, United States
208-59-112-161.c3-0.129-ubr2.lnh-129.md.cable.rcn.com (208.59.112.161)
www.quicktopic.com/29/H/CCZ5hH7RnZhQ
www.quicktopic.com/29/H/CCZ5hH7RnZhQ
No referring link

Number of Entries:
Entry Page Time:
Visit Length:
Browser
OS
Resolution 34
4th July 2006 17:17:04
5 hours 31 mins 38 secs
MSIE 6.0
Windows XP
800x600 Returning Visits:
Location:
Hostname:
Entry Page:
Exit Page:
Referring URL: 4
Ohio, Columbus, United States
adsl-69-211-142-104.dsl.wotnoh.ameritech.net (69.211.142.104)
www.quicktopic.com/29/H/CCZ5hH7RnZhQ
www.quicktopic.com/29/H/CCZ5hH7RnZhQ
search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=Keith Olbermann and his galpals&Form=MSNH

Number of Entries:
Entry Page Time:
Visit Length:
Browser
OS
Resolution 6
4th July 2006 19:36:25
3 hours 4 mins 24 secs
Firefox 1.5.0
Windows XP
1024x768 Returning Visits:
Location:
Hostname:
Entry Page:
Exit Page:
Referring URL: 25
Georgia, Atlanta, United States
ip72-197-200-124.sd.sd.cox.net (72.197.200.124)
www.quicktopic.com/29/H/CCZ5hH7RnZhQ
www.quicktopic.com/29/H/CCZ5hH7RnZhQ
No referring link

Number of Entries:
Entry Page Time:
Visit Length:
Browser
OS
Resolution 6
4th July 2006 22:30:02
4 mins 3 secs
MSIE 6.0
Windows XP
1024x768 Returning Visits:
Location:
Hostname:
Entry Page:
Exit Page:
Referring URL: 16
California, Palo Cedro, United States
67-139-119-23.dsl1.pco.ca.frontiernet.net (67.139.119.23)
www.quicktopic.com/29/H/CCZ5hH7RnZhQ
www.quicktopic.com/29/H/CCZ5hH7RnZhQ
No referring link

Number of Entries:
Entry Page Time:
Visit Length:
Browser
OS
Resolution 2
4th July 2006 22:33:41
0 seconds
Safari 1.2
Mac OS X
1024x768 Returning Visits:
Location:
Hostname:
Entry Page:
Exit Page:
Referring URL: 0
Pennsylvania, Bensalem, United States
c-68-85-161-81.hsd1.pa.comcast.net (68.85.161.81)
www.quicktopic.com/29/H/CCZ5hH7RnZhQ
www.quicktopic.com/29/H/CCZ5hH7RnZhQ
No referring link

Number of Entries:
Entry Page Time:
Visit Length:
Browser
OS
Resolution 4
4th July 2006 17:00:25
5 hours 11 mins 53 secs
MSIE 6.0
Windows XP
1280x1024 Returning Visits:
Location:
Hostname:
Entry Page:
Exit Page:
Referring URL: 25
South Carolina, Greenville, United States
68-118-5-010.dhcp.hlrg.nc.charter.com (68.118.5.10)
www.quicktopic.com/29/H/CCZ5hH7RnZhQ
www.quicktopic.com/29/H/CCZ5hH7RnZhQ
No referring link

Number of Entries:
Entry Page Time:
Visit Length:
Browser
OS
Resolution 12
4th July 2006 18:20:01
3 hours 50 mins 56 secs
MSIE 6.0
Windows XP
1024x768 Returning Visits:
Location:
Hostname:
Entry Page:
Exit Page:
Referring URL: 31
New Jersey, Jersey City, United States
c-68-84-61-223.hsd1.nj.comcast.net (68.84.61.223)
www.quicktopic.com/29/H/CCZ5hH7RnZhQ
www.quicktopic.com/29/H/CCZ5hH7RnZhQ
No referring link

Number of Entries:
Entry Page Time:
Visit Length:
Browser
OS
Resolution 2
4th July 2006 19:33:29
2 hours 33 mins 31 secs
MSIE 6.0
Windows XP
1024x768 Returning Visits:
Location:
Hostname:
Entry Page:
Exit Page:
Referring URL: 40
Virginia, Reston, United States
cache-dtc-ad09.proxy.aol.com (205.188.116.203)
www.quicktopic.com/29/H/CCZ5hH7RnZhQ
www.quicktopic.com/29/H/CCZ5hH7RnZhQ
No referring link

Number of Entries:
Entry Page Time:
Visit Length:
Browser
OS
Resolution 1
4th July 2006 22:03:33
0 seconds
MSIE 6.0
Windows XP
1024x768 Returning Visits:
Location:
Hostname:
Entry Page:
Exit Page:
Referring URL: 40
Virginia, Reston, United States
cache-rtc-ac06.proxy.aol.com (152.163.100.135)
www.quicktopic.com/29/H/CCZ5hH7RnZhQ
www.quicktopic.com/29/H/CCZ5hH7RnZhQ
No referring link

Number of Entries:
Entry Page Time:
Visit Length:
Browser
OS
Resolution 2
4th July 2006 21:45:16
18 mins 17 secs
MSIE 6.0
Windows XP
1024x768 Returning Visits:
Location:
Hostname:
Entry Page:
Exit Page:
Referring URL: 40
Virginia, Reston, United States
cache-rtc-ae09.proxy.aol.com (152.163.101.13)
www.quicktopic.com/29/H/CCZ5hH7RnZhQ
www.quicktopic.com/29/H/CCZ5hH7RnZhQ
No referring link

Entry Page Time:
Visit Length:
Browser
OS
Resolution 12
4th July 2006 17:55:10
5 hours 1 min 39 secs
Firefox 1.5.0
Mac OS X
1280x1024 Returning Visits:
Location:
Hostname:
Entry Page:
Exit Page:
Referring URL: 2
New York, Hicksville, United States
ool-457c704f.dyn.optonline.net (69.124.112.79)
www.quicktopic.com/29/H/CCZ5hH7RnZhQ
www.quicktopic.com/29/H/CCZ5hH7RnZhQ
No referring link

Entry Page Time:
Visit Length:
Browser
OS
Resolution 113
4th July 2006 17:53:44
4 hours 57 mins 6 secs
MSIE 6.0
Windows ME
800x600 Returning Visits:
Location:
Hostname:
Entry Page:
Exit Page:
Referring URL: 57
New York, New York, United States
cpe-68-175-126-141.nyc.res.rr.com (68.175.126.141)
www.quicktopic.com/29/H/CCZ5hH7RnZhQ
www.quicktopic.com/29/H/CCZ5hH7RnZhQ
www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLD,GGLD:2004-07,GGLD:en&q=quicktopic Olbermann Fans

Number of Entries:
Entry Page Time:
Visit Length:
Browser
OS
Resolution 2
4th July 2006 22:48:46
0 seconds
MSIE 6.0
Windows XP
1024x768 Returning Visits:
Location:
Hostname:
Entry Page:
Exit Page:
Referring URL: 43
District Of Columbia, Washington, United States
208-59-112-161.c3-0.129-ubr2.lnh-129.md.cable.rcn.com (208.59.112.161)
www.quicktopic.com/29/H/CCZ5hH7RnZhQ
www.quicktopic.com/29/H/CCZ5hH7RnZhQ
No referring link

Number of Entries:
Entry Page Time:
Visit Length:
Browser
OS
Resolution 34
4th July 2006 17:17:04
5 hours 31 mins 38 secs
MSIE 6.0
Windows XP
800x600 Returning Visits:
Location:
Hostname:
Entry Page:
Exit Page:
Referring URL: 4
Ohio, Columbus, United States
adsl-69-211-142-104.dsl.wotnoh.ameritech.net (69.211.142.104)
www.quicktopic.com/29/H/CCZ5hH7RnZhQ
www.quicktopic.com/29/H/CCZ5hH7RnZhQ
search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=Keith Olbermann and his galpals&Form=MSNH

Number of Entries:
Entry Page Time:
Visit Length:
Browser
OS
Resolution 6
4th July 2006 19:36:25
3 hours 4 mins 24 secs
Firefox 1.5.0
Windows XP
1024x768 Returning Visits:
Location:
Hostname:
Entry Page:
Exit Page:
Referring URL: 25
Georgia, Atlanta, United States
ip72-197-200-124.sd.sd.cox.net (72.197.200.124)
www.quicktopic.com/29/H/CCZ5hH7RnZhQ
www.quicktopic.com/29/H/CCZ5hH7RnZhQ
No referring link

Number of Entries:
Entry Page Time:
Visit Length:
Browser
OS
Resolution 6
4th July 2006 22:30:02
4 mins 3 secs
MSIE 6.0
Windows XP
1024x768 Returning Visits:
Location:
Hostname:
Entry Page:
Exit Page:
Referring URL: 16
California, Palo Cedro, United States
67-139-119-23.dsl1.pco.ca.frontiernet.net (67.139.119.23)
www.quicktopic.com/29/H/CCZ5hH7RnZhQ
www.quicktopic.com/29/H/CCZ5hH7RnZhQ
No referring link

Number of Entries:
Entry Page Time:
Visit Length:
Browser
OS
Resolution 2
4th July 2006 22:33:41
0 seconds
Safari 1.2
Mac OS X
1024x768 Returning Visits:
Location:
Hostname:
Entry Page:
Exit Page:
Referring URL: 0
Pennsylvania, Bensalem, United States
c-68-85-161-81.hsd1.pa.comcast.net (68.85.161.81)
www.quicktopic.com/29/H/CCZ5hH7RnZhQ
www.quicktopic.com/29/H/CCZ5hH7RnZhQ
No referring link

Number of Entries:
Entry Page Time:
Visit Length:
Browser
OS
Resolution 2
4th July 2006 22:12:18
0 seconds
MSIE 6.0
Windows XP
1280x1024 Returning Visits:
Location:
Hostname:
Entry Page:
Exit Page:
Referring URL: 25
South Carolina, Greenville, United States
68-118-5-010.dhcp.hlrg.nc.charter.com (68.118.5.10)
www.quicktopic.com/29/H/CCZ5hH7RnZhQ
www.quicktopic.com/29/H/CCZ5hH7RnZhQ
No referring link

Number of Entries:
Entry Page Time:
Visit Length:
Browser
OS
Resolution 12
4th July 2006 18:20:01
3 hours 50 mins 56 secs
MSIE 6.0
Windows XP
1024x768 Returning Visits:
Location:
Hostname:
Entry Page:
Exit Page:
Referring URL: 31
New Jersey, Jersey City, United States
c-68-84-61-223.hsd1.nj.comcast.net (68.84.61.223)
www.quicktopic.com/29/H/CCZ5hH7RnZhQ
www.quicktopic.com/29/H/CCZ5hH7RnZhQ
No referring link
onemoregirl77 16804

07-04-2006 11:27 PM ET (US)
Well this is just proof that there are lots of lunatics (errr, sock puppets??) out there on the internets who clearly had nothing better to do on their holiday weekend.

Take Psych's advice people: GET A LIFE!!!
MaryEllen 16803

07-04-2006 11:17 PM ET (US)
Thank you, Psych. This kind of inaccurate bullshit travels really fast on the Internets. Edit
Delete


Psych 101 16802

07-04-2006 11:16 PM ET (US)
WAIT! IT GETS BETTER!!!!! Look at my latest email from yet ANOTHER board--see this is why I don't go to these sites. Anyway, here's the latest:


"And, oh yeah, I hear that someone over on the QT board is deleting old posts there like there's no tomorrow. Just deleting up a storm! Gosh, I wonder why that is? Too bad it won't do them much good. I heard there's someone who has been saving the the whole board and all the old posts for a long time. I imagine that person would be happy to step forth if there were ever a question of what was being posted there that was later wiped."


You have got to be fucking kidding me. Are you people honestly THAT fucking obsessed with what goes on at THIS board??? Holy Shit. Let me save you some time. Hit that subscribe button at the top of the page and you too can receive every single QT post by email or chose instead to receive a daily summary! And is someone planning on suing us later for something that I'm not aware of? Oh my God people: GET A FUCKING LIFE.
Psych 101 16801

07-04-2006 11:10 PM ET (US)
Edited by author 07-04-2006 11:11 PM
And FYI? That "table for one?"

Weekly Stats Report: 26 Jun - 2 Jul 2006
Project: QT
URL: http://www.quicktopic.com/29/H/CCZ5hH7RnZhQ

Mon Tues Wed Thur Fri Sat Sun Total Avg
Pageloads 2,520 2,370 2,451 2,360 1,833 1,236 1,178 13,948 1,993
Unique 707 693 617 744 664 464 542 4,431 633


Wow--I really am truly a busy woman aren't I?

Anyone liking the logs for this site which show the IP addresses and the number of times a day people visit this site--please email me, I'll be THRILLED to send them to you.
Psych 101 16800

07-04-2006 11:06 PM ET (US)
I need to address this. I just received an email from a Galpal that contained the following posts from another KO forum:

WolverineDG 04:18 PM
The QT site is also getting scrubbed
Interesting deletions of weeks-old posts going on
mid-June, about the time the email controversy
started, almost like someone is trying to cover their
tracks.

BerryBush Tue Jul-04-06 09:38 PM
Hmmm...that is a VERY INTERESTING fact...
...You don't suppose the "galpals" over at QT are
gettin' a little nervous????

RevCheesehead Tue Jul-04-06 09:43 PM
galpals?
Is that a table for one?

WolverineDG Tue Jul-04-06 10:02 PM
Someone over there sure is
But they didn't cover all of their tracks....


Not that I owe an explanation to anyone but FYI: I delete troll posts on this board on a fairly frequent basis. I also periodically go back and delete photo posts because there is a limit to the number of photos that can be posted at QT. Only a certain amount of photos can be uploaded and after that, posters receive a message telling them our storage limit has been exceeded. That's when they'll notify me by email or using the contact form that they're getting the message and then I go back and delete some of the posts that were simply photos. I try not to delete a photo post if there was also text there too but I can't keep every single photo on this site. I'm not "scrubbing" the board nor am I "covering our tracks". If you go back far enough in QT "history" you'll see that I've deleted quite a few posts for various reasons since the board first launched over a year ago. And here's how to tell the difference between a post I've deleted and one a poster has deleted: the ones I have deleted clearly state that they have been deleted by the administrator. I am not responsible for what posters to this board delete however.

In the future, if you've GOT a question for me, please use the contact admin form and I'll be gladly happy to answer your questions BEFORE you post this shit on other forums. These "conspiracy theories" really need to STOP.

8:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I wonder if the QT ladies get spit bubbles forming in the corner of their mouths that fly off in random directions when they get worked up.

9:11 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I've heard Olbermann eats worms for breakfast. Can anyone verify this disgusting rumor?

9:14 PM  
Blogger Michael said...

Michael Writes:

Wow, I AM late to the party--seems like the fireworks were actually here!

To whoever reprinted my editorial, thanks.

Funny, only one site pimper in sight on this thread--can you spot him? (Hint: It isn't me.)

This smear campaign is being run on a scale beyond what I think the buffoons at OW could pull off alone. They aren't so great with the sockpuppet thing. It thus seems to be a collaboration of the two anti-Olbermann groups on the internet--QT and OW have evidently joined forces to slime the man. Sick, evil, perverted stuff--the Joker and the Penguin join forces. (I just hope you can't breed.)

What did he ever do to you?

I used to be a "stainless steel rat", but this is not my site. I wish it was, though. Great stuff.

This is the time for good people to step forward--I kept all on a short leash until now, but it is time to "let slip the dogs of war" (Ooh, a Shakespeare quote! Was it good for you?)

We just set up an "Olbermann Watch Watch Forum", which I think can be expanded to include the OW "women's auxillary" given the recent "rat bastard" posts from that corner of cyberspace.

Further, we have to suspend KO.O's rules of neutrality for the duration of the unpleasantness.

I have my money on who is behind this whole thing, and expect her around any time-after all, she has a shiny new IP randomizer to get around being banned, and likes to make up character names--
with "fans" like that, who needs enemies?

9:18 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I've heard Psych 101 bathes in the blood of Jewish babies. Can anyone confirm this troubling rumor?

9:36 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

That's right, Michael. It was Independence Day. Why not celebrate it, albeit a little late, by becoming an independent thinker?

What did QT ever do to you or your board? Nothing. You asked us to join KO.org, we declined, you got pushy, we told you to take a hike. End of history.

On the other hand, QT and its members have been attacked regularly, both on KO.org and by its members on other forums (like this one). Why?

Because we don't think Keith Olbermann is a god.

Do you realize that you're trying to protect, in some bizarre way, a man you don't know and who doesn't know you? Do you think he appreciates that? With fans like YOU, who pretend to speak on his behalf, who DOES need enemies?

I think Keith Olbermann can defend himself.

And since you choose to be Olbermann's "official" online defender, why not contact him or his agent and get his imprimatur so you can speak--and attack--on his behalf with his blessing? To run his official fan site? Or have you--and been turned down? Or worse yet, ignored?

Dogs--even dogs of war--aren't frightening. Rabid hounds, however, are. And I'll bet you scare the hell out of Keith Olbermann.

And check your "editorial." I think you missed a few well-placed edits.

10:04 PM  
Anonymous Psych 101 said...

You'll all be thrilled to know that QT is history. I've just deleted the entire board. Happy now? But what WILL you do with your time now that you don't have us and me to attack on every other board in the free world? What will you do now that you don't have a DECENT board to go to 5 or 6 hours a day? Well, that's your problem. I just know it's not mine any longer. Congratulations. You Win. That's what you wanted right?

10:17 PM  
Blogger Michael said...

when I was setting up the KO.O. board I tried to round up all the fans and give them a place to come. At the time I didn't realize QT was a group of "anti-fans" -- haters. (I am so glad you didn't take me up on my offer.)

I don't for a minute think the galpals are gone--but I can only hope they are done with Olbermann and re-incarnate as Anderson Cooper 'fans'. Or how about David Hasselhoff?

I can almost understand the ideology driven Rupert Murdoch worship displayed by Robert Cox--it is mainly politics--but QT was replete with psychosexual wierdness right out of a Stephen King novel. It was probably enough to creep out even the guys at OW.

4:05 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Michael, you tried to force people to come to your board because you want it to be the #1 KO board on the web. You're obsessed with coming up first on Google (really, he is, there are posts saying so on his site) and being the only group listed on Wikipedia.

You think QT was a group of Olbermann haters. Not true. We just didn't worship at the altar of Olbermann in a way that satisfied you.

We had nothing to do with OW except that they made fun of the board as another group of Olbermann fans.

And you can keep your diagnosis of psychosexual weirdness to yourself. You and your band are a bunch of creepy pseudo-stalkers who are trying to protect a man you don't know and who doesn't know you, or even know you exist. And QT never posted slash, fanfic, or adolescent stories of "dreams about Keith" posted by a bunch of women with the vapors over a man they'd turned into a "pseudosexual" idol.

It's too bad that you're so thin-skinned that hard truths bother you, Michael. Reality is refreshing. Try it sometime.

5:25 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"And QT never posted slash, fanfic, or adolescent stories of "dreams about Keith" posted by a bunch of women with the vapors over a man they'd turned into a "pseudosexual" idol."

It must be nice to live in a dream world where you can just make up your own history.

Tell me what brand of crazy you QT ladies are; it sounds really personally satisfying!

7:50 AM  
Blogger Michael said...

To QT Galpals:

QT members invaded our space with sockpuppets named obsessmuch, badass, smartass, jackbooted thug, whirly girl and about 6 others. The sheer number of sockpuppets, and way they acted, makes it a pretty safe bet that "Karmabites" is just another incantation of same--I see the same stock phrases repeated here as from the sockpuppets on my board, and on wikipedia. QT people--or person--posted vile and insulting comments and generally tried to troll up an otherwise pleasant landscape. They fought against even a mentioning of KO.O. on Wikipedia. Much of the hostility we have aimed at Cox was rightly to be directed to one QT member in particular, "Mary Ellen" although "Psych 101" may well be complicit. (I would apologize to Mr. Cox, but he is his own kind of bad--and they at OW certainly ran with the smear campaign.) You have no business calling someone YOU don't even know a "rat bastard" as you did Keith Olbermann, you have no business soiling his reputation with unfounded lies and innuendo, you simply have no business being EVIL to another human being. You are entirely in the wrong here, and although you are evidently incapable of shame, at least your little trick did not work--no one is running with this story, and no one believes it. We fans are not blindly loyal, but we ARE rational human beings who decry slander. Karmabite's "stories" have so many holes in them they wouldn't make swiss cheese. Olbermann deserves as much respect as any human being deserves--as you feel you deserve yourselves--and you have not given him that respect. I am doing for him what I would do for any human being being slandered.

9:50 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Michael, what part of "we're quits" do you not understand? It's over. Over. The board is gone. For good. And, since I no longer share your sphere, I feel the freedom to say this: fuck you.

Incidentally, slander is spoken, not written. Libel is written. And since Olbermann is a public figure, your use of either term is incorrect.

10:17 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Michael, what part of "we're quits" do you not understand? It's over. Over. The board is gone. For good. And, since I no longer share your sphere, I feel the freedom to say this: fuck you.

Incidentally, slander is spoken, not written. Libel is written. And since Olbermann is a public figure, your use of either term is incorrect.

10:19 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Karma stated that she would be publishing all comments on her blog. She still is not.
I posted a comment asking her to reveal all the comments since its inception, and she chose not to publish that request.
-q

12:21 PM  
Anonymous Just Sayin' said...

Michael-- really, you're going way out on a limb here for someone you don't even know.

Just shut up and stop protecting Olbermann. You don't even know the man. If you don't want to believe Karma, fine, but stop with all this "tin foil hat" stuff. Seriously. It's ridiculous.

I'll say this as someone who is not a member of ANY Olbermann "fan club" anywhere. The emails from Olbermann to Karma are real. As real as they get. And from what I've been able to verify (from the other side of this thing) the story is also true.

If you don't believe the story, fine, but stop trying to link this thing to whateve ridiculous conspiracy theories you have about some stupid Olbermann discussion board. You're making yourself look like a lunatic.

12:28 PM  
Blogger Michael said...

You guys just don't know when it is over, do you? The window has closed, no one is going to run with this story--it is yesterdays news. Go home, nothing to see.

Slander just sounds more dramatic than defamation--probably why Coulter used it for her book.

What is going on here is actually a special category of defamation:
"Defamation, per se" -- because the alegations are of sexual misconduct.

http://www.dancingwithlawyers.com/freeinfo/libel-slander-per-se.shtml

Oh, and in regard the gratuitous "fuck you" directed my way above--I was tempted to reply in kind, but that might be taken as an offer, and I wouldn't willingly do that even with someone else's equipment.

1:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

defamation
n. the act of making untrue statements about another which damages his/her reputation. If the defamatory statement is printed or broadcast over the media it is libel and, if only oral, it is slander. Public figures, including officeholders and candidates, have to show that the defamation was made with malicious intent and was not just fair comment. Damages for slander may be limited to actual (special) damages unless there is malice. Some statements such as an accusation of having committed a crime, having a feared disease or being unable to perform one's occupation are called libel per se or slander per se and can more easily lead to large money awards in court and even punitive damage recovery by the person harmed. Most states provide for a demand for a printed retraction of defamation and only allow a lawsuit if there is no such admission of error.

public figure
n. in the law of defamation (libel and slander), a personage of great public interest or familiarity like a government official, politician, celebrity, business leader, movie star or sports hero. Incorrect harmful statements published about a public figure cannot be the basis of a lawsuit for defamation unless there is proof that the writer or publisher intentionally defamed the person with malice (hate).

fair comment
n. a statement of opinion (no matter how ludicrous) based on facts which are correctly stated and which does not allege dishonorable motives on the part of the target of the comment. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that to protect free speech, statements made about a public person (politician, officeholder, movie star, author, etc.), even though untrue and harmful, are fair comment unless the victim can prove the opinions were stated maliciously-with hate, dislike, intent and/or desire to harm. Thus, a public figure may not sue for defamation based on published opinions or alleged information which would be the basis of a lawsuit if said or published about a private person not worthy of opinion or comment. This is a crucial defense against libel suits put up by members of the media.

Michael, stop making such an ass of yourself. You can't even understand simple tenets of the law. All the education in the world can't make a person smart if they aren't.

2:12 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So, anon 2:12, you are saying it's true that Psych 101 bathes in the blood of Jewish babies?!

2:29 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anon 2:29--ask Michael, he knows everything.

3:11 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Some anonymous soul posted this:

"public figure
n. in the law of defamation (libel and slander), a personage of great public interest or familiarity like a government official, politician, celebrity, business leader, movie star or sports hero. Incorrect harmful statements published about a public figure cannot be the basis of a lawsuit for defamation unless there is proof that the writer or publisher intentionally defamed the person with malice (hate)."

Reread that last part, folks..."unless there is proof that the writer or publisher intentionally defamed the person with malice (hate)."

I think the "malice" and "hate" against Keith Olbermann have already been abundantly proved.

For more information on what can happen in these cases, see what Carol Burnett did to the National Enquirer.

4:48 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The malice and hate is in your eyes, Michael. What's been said is fair comment, based in truth (another critical factor). If only you knew, you gullible bastard.

5:05 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Some little fart decided to rage against Olbermann. I'm glad that there are some people here that can see that, and see through her comments.

5:33 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yeah. Just what part of "intentionally," "malice," and "hate" don't some people understand?

6:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

From The Cable Game (http://www.thecablegame.com/):

Alas, poor Olbermann; I knew his career well

Before I begin: 'morning, lawyers! All of this is ALLEGEDLY. Ok, now that we have that out of the way: There are updates on the site providing more personal insight into the theory that not only is MSNBC "Countdown" host Keith Olbermann a world-class hypocrite/slimeball/cad, but he also ranks as an international Olympic nerd for ALLEGEDLY quoting Shakespeare after sex ALLEGEDLY. That has got to count as retroactive birth control. Specifically, from Hamlet, "For this relief much thanks," which explains the name of the blog.

Oh, and the authoress/wronged party credits both Jossip and The Cable Game for helping to even the score. Right back atcha, doll.

Enjoy, Olbermaniacs.

7:33 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Wronged party"? Give it up.

8:01 PM  
Blogger Michael said...

Poor, degraded, souls. I do, actually and honestly, feel sorry that you have been so hurt, become so twisted.

How deluded do you have to be to think that you can perpetrate such an evil plot against a person and be free of consequence by hiding behind a technicality? I know "Karmabites" believes she is skirting the line--never quite crossing over to where she has committed an actionable offense. But what she fails to consider is the bigger picture--the tapestry of all the little lies, each free of consequence, into one big lie where the big picture is clearly over that line.

That aside, it totally begs the true question--just because you THINK you can get away with something which is unseemly, disgusting and morally reprehensible does not mean you should DO something unseemly, disgusting and morally reprehensible.

I just watched a retreat into "nah, nah, you can't catch me". Disgusting.

By the way, KO.O. does have an actual and authentic attorney as a Moderator, and he says I got it right: "Defamation, per se". I am not a lawyer, but I used to be a damned good cop, my father was also a damned good cop... if it smells this bad, there is usually a law against it. Because it is mala in se--at its core it is rotten.

8:45 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Nobody reads The Cable Game. It's a joke. It's like the guy who does it is masturbating because when you blog in an empty forest, how can it possibly make a sound?

Jossip is almost as bad. At least they have SOME readership. But they're so small that they can afford to be lying sacks of shit without ever having to pay for their laziness and lack of fact-checking whatever garbage gets fed to them. I mean, what's the point of suing people with no money?

Oh, and the "personal insight into the theory that not only is MSNBC 'Countdown' host Keith Olbermann a world-class hypocrite/slimeball/cad"? And the crap about him quoting a completely obscure piece of stage-business dialogue from Hamlet after sex? The latter comes from Karma (hardly a reliable source) and the former comes from the OlbermannWatch gang. And did we really expect them to do anything but reinforce the worst possible things?

This all reminds me of one of those situations where some poor mentally troubled soul is standing on a window ledge, about to commit suicide by jumping, and people start to gather around below and chant "JUMP! JUMP! JUMP!"

8:49 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

michael, thanks for bringing up what I was remiss in bringing up: namely, that it's horrible for them to do this, period, whether they can "legally get away with it" or not. This "nyaah nyaah, we can say anything we want about Olbermann, and Olbermann can't do shit about it, because it constitutes 'fair comment on a public figure'" stance is ridiculous. Of course, anyone who has studied communications law even a teeny bit also knows it's not only ridiculous, but full of shit. Celebrities have legal recourse against people who a) accuse them of things that aren't true and b) do it with malicious intent. True, they have to prove the intent, but it can be done and it has been done. Perhaps those who feel so brave in their evil would not feel so brave if they understood that.

It's one thing to say "Olbermann is stupid" or "No one watches Olbermann's horrible show" or "Olbermann is a liar," but saying "Olbermann used his work e-mail to pick up this fan, then seduced her and left her" is a whole different animal. That's something that can be demonstrably proven false, and the malicious intent behind why it was said can be proven as well.

9:05 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I doubt that "malicious intent" would be hard to prove.

Scenario: fan sends hundreds of e-mails to her "love." In the beginning, she might have one or two responses, but when the letters became more than a comment about the show, she was rebuffed. After x number of years, it would be clear to most that she is a stalker.

The blog with invented details would only serve to further this idea.

9:18 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Michael, did you pick up a history book and read about the McCarthy witch hunts of the 50s? You sound exactly like him. "There are 536 card-carrying malicious Olbermann-haters on the Internet. Um, no, it's 427. Well, I can't really remember, but they're out there, destroying Olbermannland." Of course, you have no names--you can just accuse and harass. If that isn't "unseemly, disgusting and morally reprehensible," I don't know what is. And what does your "actual and authentic attorney" say about harassment?

If Olbermann knew that you existed, not only would he not associate with you, he would tell you to knock off your amateur sleuthing and attempts at strong-arming. He's a rational man, much more intelligent and savvy than you are, and can take care of himself. I can imagine him saying "J'accuse"--to you.

Seriously, if Olbermann was going to sue someone for defamation, don't you think he'd have sued Bob Cox long ago? Now there's hate and malice.

3:53 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Uh, you know who sounds like McCarthy? Anyone who says "There are 526 card-carrying ex-lovers on the Internet that Keith Olbermann has screwed and discarded like an old tissue. Um, no, it's 427. Or, uh, maybe it's just one. Of course, she hasn't got any proof, but we think he should be fired."

YOU have no name--YOU can just accuse and harass.

If that isn't "unseemly, disgusting and morally reprehensible," I don't know what is.

You're right, Olbermann can take care of himself. And I don't doubt he will.

And he wouldn't have sued Bob Cox long ago--because as hateful and malicious as Cox is, up until now, he hasn't accused Olbermann of anything that can be demonstrably proven untrue. And even if he did, why sue someone who probably doesn't have a dime?

4:25 AM  
Anonymous Just Sayin' said...

"YOU have no name--YOU can just accuse and harass."

See, that's the part you don't get, Olbermann knows EXACTLY who this person is. You're getting all caught up in the idea that YOU don't know this person's identity.

But she's released email exchanges that occurred with Olbermann...he knows who she is and could very well file a lawsuit against her if she were saying things that are untrue.

If this woman wanted attention, she would use her name. She doesn't want attention, she wanted revenge, and she got it.

Olbermann knows who this woman is, and could defend himself if it were untrue. He won't. He can't.

5:10 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

just sayin'--his silence is deafening. He generally has no problem skewering anyone who crosses him or says something inaccurate. Not this time. And I don't think it's because he's refusing to dignify it with a response.

And Anon 4:25--pot, meet kettle. "YOU have no name--YOU can just accuse and harass." You can come up with something better, can't you? Or did I get your thinking off track because I poked a big hole in your plan to save Olbermann?

Why not just start up a legal defense fund if you're so concerned with laws and lawyers?

7:28 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

just sayin'--his silence is deafening. He generally has no problem skewering anyone who crosses him or says something inaccurate. Not this time. And I don't think it's because he's refusing to dignify it with a response.

Yes, I agree with this.

12:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So, Michael, you were a cop? Well, if that's true, it explains a lot.

What's next? You were a construction worker, a biker, an Indian ch-- hey, that's the Village People!

1:37 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anon, is that your idea of a good joke? All cops are gay because of the Village People? Kind of a stretch, don't you think?
There's the OW sense of humor for you.

4:57 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anon 4:57, you're exemplary of the KO.org lack of sense of humor.

I may be a lot of things, but I'm not a homophobe.

I'm just wondering what Michael will have been next.

5:39 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anon 4:57, you're exemplary of the KO.org lack of sense of humor.

I may be a lot of things, but I'm not a homophobe.

I'm just wondering what Michael will have been next.

5:39 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

No one's poked a big hole in anything here except their own brains, and Keith Olbermann doesn't need a legal defense fund.

His "silence is deafening" only in one sense: it proves to me that he knows this is a bunch of bullshit and isn't going to dignify it with a reply.

Have some breaking news, people: in America, silence does not equal guilt. If go up to you at work and I accuse you of embezzling funds from your employer, and you laugh at me and say "You're nuts!" and go on about your work without crying and getting all upset and trying to PROVE what I said wasn't true, that doesn't make you guilty. You are only guilty if someone can PROVE you actually did it--missing money, cooked books, etc. Without that, no case.

Of course, I'm talking about the real world, where evidence consists of something other than doctored-up computer screen caps and imaginative hearsay.

8:13 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anon 8:13 PM: I agree with you. I have a feeling that she's going to drag this out as long as she can.

Of course, Olbermann isn't going to comment, that would be pointless. I think that as long as he knows the truth and his bosses know the truth, there's no issue.

I agree that we'll probably see some doctored pictures. Of course, if she can't even mimic an e-mail, I can't wait to see the mess she'll make with photos.

8:47 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"In the works" = "I'm working on doctoring the pictures"

12:07 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous 12:07: Exactly! LOL

@ Raton: I think it might be a good idea for you to remove the IPs from Psych's comment.

Thanks for giving an open forum where opinions really DO matter and aren't edited or not posted based on how well they make Karma look.

9:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes, thanks for this space for open discussion, Raton. It's very strange that anyone would encourage you to shut it down. Talk about an agenda...

1:15 PM  

<< Home