MY THOUGHTS ABOUT THE OLBERMANN POST

First of all, I want to clear up that if you read Keith's post and from all that I've heard it is clear that Bev was scheduled to go on Nov 8 and MSNBC, NOT BEV, wanted to reschedule. That is why he said,

"But we didn’t cancel on her - we wanted, on that first night raising this touchy subject nobody else had previously covered, to have more mainstream guests. And we wanted her back another night."

As if to say it wasn't to cancel, but to reschedule.

I, too, find it odd that Bev can't show the poll tapes that were thrown in the trash and show the difference between them and the copies she received. HOWEVER, have you watched MSM lately? The more I think of it I can imagine several reasons NOT to. It might not be in our self interest right now.

My suggestion to everyone is to keep in mind what Bev has been doing for the past 2 years. She has been on this issue for a while now and I have a hard time believing that she doesn't take this issue seriously. I don't think Howard Dean would have listened to her if she was just some kook, and the fact is, SHE ISN'T. She deserves the benefit of the doubt.

As for Keith: Yes, he has done us a great service. But he has only just started ccovering the BBV issue these last couple weeks and that hardly makes him a crusader. Remember that his boss, NBC, is about as crooked as they come and VERY republican. I see no reason to throw so much trust their way. It would be very easy for them to use her appearance in a harmful way to us. Editing does wonders, and guess who does the editing.

One more thing, I found it interesting that Keith said HE hasn't spoke to Bev, but his staff has. Why is that? I think he deserves some scrutiny too.

I think we see here two different temperaments: Olbermann is the king of irony, and Bev Harris is very direct, loud, aggressive. That's why they don't like each other maybe...

But they are both on our side - and we have to fight together at least.

Why does it have to be personal? Isn't it possible that they are simply working from two different sets of circumstances?

Journalists can't just go off half-cocked with unsubstantiated claims.

Bev can't just give up video that she has likely got tagged to her Volusia lawsuit.

They are just working from different circumstances, with different interests. I doubt it's personal.

I agree with you. There are professional differences as well.

B Harris is not

He doesn't work for us. He is not "our monkey"

But he is the one TV news that has been looking at and respecting the issue in any respectful way. We don't want someone to say only what some group agrees with, even if we are the group.

I don't know why Bev hasn't gone on the show or showed the tapes. I've been hoping she would since I heard of them. Of course Keith would want to show them. She might have a good reason to not have done so yet. I appreciate that she is out there working.

Maybe egos clash, I don't need to decide who is wrong or right. I am sure both of them and all of us want the truth about the votes and voting system to come out.

I'm not sure if Keith is with us or being played as well. But don't trust MSNBC.

It is hardly a necessity at this point and could only harm our cause

See what was happening with his own eyes.

And Bev doesn't have trouble being interviewed. She'd been on AAR and Pacifica, that I know of.

But they don't censor her, and on Randi Rhodes, Bev told that she would have been censored, and because she wouldn't go along with it, they cancelled.

And I'll believe Bev long before I believe Keith.