Ed Schultz As Incoherent As Ever

Written by Robbie Port
Published November 25, 2003
page 1 | 2

What a joke.

If you listen to Schult's current radio program, News & Views on KFGO out of Fargo, you will soon learn of his intense hatred for conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh. He accuses Rush of being a pawn for the conservative right. I would like to point out one thing about Rush Limbaugh: At least he doesn't try to hide who he is.

How can Ed Schultz decry the so-called "conservative mantra" when he has taken up a very liberal mantra of his own? Do his cries of conservative dominance not echo throughout the Democratic party? Are his views not very liberal? How can he claim to occupy the "middle of the road" when it is obvious that he is being supported by Democrats? Democrats even asked him to run for governor.

I take politics very seriously. When I'm going to give my attention to any type of media (be it television, radio or internet) I like to know where the host or producers are coming from. When I listen to Rush Limbaugh I can temper his statements with my knowledge that he is a conservative. With Schultz you never really know. One moment he's rallying against conservatives and the next moment he's claiming the middle of the road again.

I think Christopher G. Adamo summarizies the issue well in this quote from an article in the Sierra Times:

An October 28, 2003 article in the Bismarck Tribune explains how North Dakota liberal radio personality Ed Schultz is being recruited as a national radio voice to counteract the likes of Limbaugh and rising conservative radio star Sean Hannity. But the forces at work to launch Schultz as a major personality are not the normal commercial interests that invest in promising individuals with the hope of a financial return. Rather, they are, according to the Tribune, "Democratic lawmakers in Washington" who have pledged $1.8 million in support of their cause.

No doubt, they anticipate that conservatives will tremble in their boots at this possibility, as if Schultz has anything to offer that has not already been tried by CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, National Public Radio, The New York Times, Washington Post, and Los Angeles Times (to name just a few...). Among liberals, it is invariably presumed that the manner of the messenger, and not the message itself that carries ultimate weight.

I don't think Schultz knows what he's getting himself into. If I were him, I'd stick to broadcasting football games because I don't think he's got a chance with a nationwide talk show.

page 1 | 2
Keep reading for information and comments on this article, and add some feedback of your own!
Ed Schultz As Incoherent As Ever
Published: November 25, 2003
Type:
Section: Culture
Filed Under: Culture: Media
Writer: Robbie Port
Robbie Port's BC Writer page
Robbie Port's personal site
Spread the Word
Like this article?
Email this
Submit to del.icio.us Save to del.icio.us
RSS Feeds
All RSS Feeds (240+)
Comments on this article
BC articles by Robbie Port
Culture: Media
All Culture Articles
All BC articles
All BC Comments

Comments

#1 — November 25, 2003 @ 21:41PM — Hal Pawluk [URL]

I think I read recently that "progressive" means left/liberal in some parts of the country.

And he could easily be middle-of-the-road and a Democrat, if the road is bounded by, say, left and right.

However, he sounds just as your heading says: incoherent. Who are the parties recruiting him to "counteract the likes of Limbaugh"? They sound like losers, too, and conservatives should cheer them on,

#2 — November 25, 2003 @ 21:49PM — Rob [URL]

Well, according to the article from the Bismarck Tribune (which, unfortunately, I can no longer find on their website) the Democratic Party is raising funds for the show. The figure I remember hearing is 1.8 million dollars, but that seems incredibly high...

#3 — November 25, 2003 @ 23:27PM — Rob [URL]

Here, I found a

#4 — November 25, 2003 @ 23:31PM — Hal Pawluk [URL]

I found the article and it appears that it's a claim by Schultz, but no more details:

"Democratic lawmakers in Washington are raising money for the show, and Democrats have pledged about $1.8 million over two years to get it off the ground, Schultz said Monday."

http://www.bismarcktribune.com/30dayarchives/10-28-2003/sta01.html

#5 — April 21, 2004 @ 14:48PM — Mark G

I'm in Portland OR and have had recently heard the Ed Schultz show. All I have to say is Thank God that there is finally a political talk show that is focused on normal people. This guy is absolutely fabulous and I listen to him every day and I'm telling everyone I know about him. Sure, he's biased to the left, but after being lied to about the reason for invading Iraq, so are a lot of people. I have called my self independent for the last 20 years, voting for both republicans and democrats, but after witnessing this administration in action the last three years, I will never vote "R" again for the rest of my life. Bush's press conference the other day was embarrassing.

#6 — May 8, 2004 @ 01:54AM — Casey Lehl

Ed Schultz is an excellent radio host who calls them how he TRULY see's them. He is a moderate Democrat, not a radical Republican like Rush Limbaugh-- who compares the dispicable military abuse allegations as soldiers"blowing off steam." Give me a break... Ed's for real; Rush is not. (He's a propagandist!)
Casey
Portland, OR

#7 — May 13, 2004 @ 17:19PM — Kin [URL]

Ed Schultz is right on! Man, I would LOVE to see a debate between him and Rush, The Lyin' King! LOL!!
Ed would eat Rush for BREAKFAST...and LUNCH...and DINNER!

The best way to counter the lies of the radical right is with truth from the progressive left!

Yahooooooooo!! Go Ed!!

#8 — May 17, 2004 @ 21:05PM — Red Owens

iTS NOT NEW REPUBLIC.COM, ITS FREE REPUBLIC.COM,THAN ASK FOR ED SCHULTZ...MANY TELL THE TRUTH ABOUT HIM.
HE IS A FAKE WHO CHANGED TO LIBERAL 3 YRS AGO TO GET A TWO YEAR HUGE CONTRACT AND TO GO NATIONAL FROM FARGO AS HE IS PALS WITH SEN DORGAN AND DASCHLE. DEMOCRAT RICH FOLK ARE SUPPLYING THE CASH

#9 — June 9, 2004 @ 21:54PM — d. quinn

SGT. Schultz a living breathing heap of swine excrement.

#10 — July 19, 2004 @ 04:54AM — Tony

I have corresponded with Ed (email) and found his replies to be grammatically incorrect (e.g. "your" instead of "you're") with misspellings, and also to be somewhat non-responsive and/or abusive. The most coherent reply was "If you don't like it, don't listen."

All in all, I find Ed to be a bit thin skinned (bad characteristic for a talk show host) and somewhat illiterate. (I don't think I'll ever forget the time he said, "Folks pull into McDonald's and GOUGE themselves." Highly unlikely, unless they left the spoon in their coffee cup.) He tends to REALLY oversimplify and distort reality. Name calling (e.g. calling right wing folks "slantheads") does little for his image.

I called in and talked to him once and he simply would not address my question and attempted to change the subject. When I returned to the subject, he became angry and started yelling over me and at me.

Personally, I think he'll last until after the election. He is serving a purpose until then.

tony

#11 — September 22, 2004 @ 15:36PM — john

Ed Schultz is damn good on the air, and his ratings are kicking ass.
Conservative domination of talk radio will be a thing of the past in another 1-2 years, thanks to guys like Ed.

#12 — September 23, 2004 @ 19:41PM — cc [URL]

I sometimes listen to Ed Schultz and I can't figure out how he claims to have the views of an average middle-of-the-road guy unless the middle of the raod has shifted far to the left. Some of his 'Bushy' conspiracy rhetoric seemed pretty far out until I listen to some of the persons (and I use the term 'persons' loosely) who call. Some of them must also be on the Democratic 'venture capital' payroll.
Is it me or does Ed sound like he's banking his entire radio career on the dems losing the 2004 presidental election?

#13 — September 24, 2004 @ 12:43PM — Dr. Truth

All of the Doper Limbaugh dittoheads are going to be in for a rude awakening. Go ahead and keep thinking Ed Schultz is not going to succeed. PLEASE keep thinking it dittoheads, PLEASE!! The right wing liars are all going to get their just rewards in due time. So again, PLEASE keep underestimating Ed Schultz. PLEASE!!!

#14 — November 2, 2004 @ 02:03AM — Tj

I listened to Ed when he was a conservative, and now he's a liberal? Guess what? Money does talk. Call his show and challenge him, if you disagree with him, young or old he don't care, you'll adventually get called a few names and get hung up on. Ed's got about as much class as Howard Stern. Sorry if I offended any Stern fans.

#15 — December 14, 2004 @ 19:31PM — richard arellano

I recently began listening to ED a few months ago and can't say enough about how great it makes me feel to have someone on the air who is as mad about the state of affairs as I am. I have gotten as many of my friends as possible to tune in and I am constantly thanked for doing so. I'm just an average guy and I really think he speaks for alot of us working folks. Keep up the good work ED!!!

#16 — December 22, 2004 @ 12:50PM — C. Pagani [URL]

My opinion is that liberals are going to be in for a big surprise at some point in the future - when Ed Schultz reveals that he is still a conservative and he fooled them to take their money.

I base this on his conduct. For one thing, Ed seems unaware of progressive arguments for and against common issues that arise. Both sides have cogent arguments as to why they believe what they believe, after all, and a so-called spokesperson for the left should know those arguments. Instead, Schultz is struck dumb by even the most inane arguments from the right, indicating that he is either unaware of known refutations or is unwilling to use those refutations because he agrees with the caller.

Now as for the money thing, it's both true and false. Yes, Ed on the Jones Radio Network and Air America came into being with money from liberals. That means nothing and I'm surprised at how many people claim this is an argument against legitmacy. All it actually means is that left wing radio is funded just like right wing radio - money comes from people who identifiy with the point of view being expressed. The idea that people who believe in left wing causes are doing something scandalous by funding left wing radio is almost beyond ridiculous. ...If you told me Republicans funded Ed Schultz, THAT would be a scandal.. Now, how Ed will stay in business (or not) will depend on ratings. Nothing else will do.

I still think he's a fake, though. If he were for real he could make the case for liberal causes instead of being flumoxed by even the weakest counterarguments.

#17 — January 7, 2005 @ 15:21PM — kelly

Ed was a right-winger until some leftists with money asked him to play a democrat.

Odd, someone only being liberal for the money.

#18 — January 27, 2005 @ 22:46PM — Clem

I have witnessed the metamophisis of Ed over the last 25 years, amazing to say the least. Ask his first wife what a swell guy Ed is. Lets start with Ed getting drunk at a concert at the Red River Valley fair, then going on air to do his "nightside" show. Hilarious, people ketp calling in and asking him why he sounded depressed! Getting drunk and shooting his dog during a pheasant hunt because it wouldnt come to him or getting mad while commentating a NDSU football game because someone threw a bottle at the press box, that was a doozy, Ed declared on air he was going to kick that guys ass! I think he needs to take a serious look at his alcohol comsumption, especially considering his 2nd wife seems to be much more accomodating to his libation habits. What drove Ed over the edge, from conservatism to liberlism, is the fact that North Dakota republicans basically gave him a cold shoulder. Ed wanted to belong in the worst way, he wanted republicans to beg him to run for governor, but the GOP in ND saw him for what he was, a loose cannon, marginally intelligent, and much to thin skinned to make it in a political arena. America, the joke is on you with this guy, North Dakota gets it, when will you?

#19 — January 28, 2005 @ 00:23AM — Temple Stark [URL]

Clem - from your narrative, the guy sounds pretty typically American then

:-)

#20 — January 29, 2005 @ 15:17PM — Zeke

I hope Ed opens up an old-fashioned can of North Dakota whup-ass on Shawn and Rush. It's to bad that right wing fanatic's need someone to tell them who to vote for. Ed is just giving the facts. Kick some ass Ed.

#21 — February 1, 2005 @ 16:07PM — Mike

As an ACTIVE duty 27 year Naval Officer I have finally found a voice that stands for reason. The right wing, drug dealer, womenizing, wackos of the world were wearing me down. ED is THE MAN and I listen EVERYDAY!

#22 — February 4, 2005 @ 17:41PM — Bruce

I do not trust Ed. He is a loud mouthed conservative in liberal clothing. When the guy has to tell you over and over he is 'liberal' it begins to sound like Faux Spews 'fair and balanced' On Fridays 2/4/05 show good old 'liberal' Ed defended the general who enjoyed killing Afghani men. And the wonderful interview with Democratic Senator Chuck "let's privatize SSI" Hagel was very revealing. Neither mentioned anything about shrubs lie on SSI going bankrupt and both endorsed privitizing SSI using 'personal' retirement accounts. Good ol'Ed's is more interested in making it big and it overshadows anything else on his show. Maybe he should call himself the Zell Miller of liberal radio.... yeah maybe that would be more fitting.

#23 — February 8, 2005 @ 15:54PM — Steve

As a moderate I think Ed has about the right tone for me. He is liberal on most issues but conservative on others. He is hard on both sides and seems consisant and honest. Rush rips on moderate Republicans which I find radical. Ed is not perfect but he is the best talk show host out their from what I can see.

#24 — February 16, 2005 @ 21:48PM — Lauging lib... [URL]

How interesting to read the comments from a year ago and how small any of the right-wingers thought Ed's chances of success were. And now he's gone national and is a genuine phenomenon.

If Ed sounds somewhat conservative at times, he may actually be that way, I wouldn't know, but he is also aware that he is speaking to the brainwashed people who have been listening to Rush for years, and sounding like a flaming liberal would just get the station changed in the truck.

Better late than never, but between Ed Schultz and Air America (which has also seen phenomenal growth this year) we are finally on our way to countering the liars on the Right who have put this country into such a depressing financial and spirtual hole.

No doubt, Druggie Rush (Ed's term for him) saying that the torturers of Abu Ghraib were just letting off some steam and that it was similar to college pranks and hazing....if that isn't a true low point in the nation's discourse, I don't know what is.

Thanks Rush, you can retire now with your drug habit and your third wife, knowing that you've made torture okay with the family values crowd.

#25 — March 6, 2005 @ 13:29PM — SteveK

Ed's comments on issues are right on the mark most of the time. A discriminating lister just needs to stop trying to read graffiti and listen to the ideas. Few people entrenched in ideology can change their thinking when they see things going wrong, as Ed has done.

On the other hand, too many Americans seem to have a little trouble thinking for themselves, preferring to let talk show hosts do their thinking for them, and getting their "news" on unknown, uncredentialed rapsheets and blogs.

#26 — March 14, 2005 @ 18:28PM — Bruce E Baby

Ed is a loud mouth shill who gets his wages from the Democratic elite and is just as bad as any other shill for any other party. Ed the Shill is just as phony as Flush Limpballs who he pretends to be like. I have said it before and I will say it again, anyone who has to tell you over and over again what he is, is lying. That is just what the blow hard does. Callers call up and say what a scandal something is like "enron" and good ol Ed Shill blows hard and says if it ain't in the conservative media it ain't news and no one is interested in it. Then he blows off to another subject that is 'hot' in the news. Callers call up with solutions to wrong doings and Ol Shill shines them on and then he tells them he has no solution other than to say theirs won't work. What Ed the Shill really likes to do is complain and be a victim. Oh yeah, and say he hunts and fishes.......... wow a liberal that is a sportsman......... now that is unheard of....... The best thing Ed the Shill could do is stay on the Jones network and stop polluting Air America.

#27 — July 22, 2005 @ 17:26PM — Kerry Harrison

Ed was not on today but some other liberal left wing anti american, pro terrorist cry baby wimp was taking his place but it really didnt matter because its still all horses_ _ t.
the liberal punks cannot and will not tell the truth and its really starting to piss off the good people of America.
today on air against America some punk said 41% of Americans wanted President Bush impeached.Thats liberal punk BS!!
the punk doing air against America today was really proud because he had a impeach Bush Bumper sticker. Thats really something to be proud of!!!!

#28 — July 22, 2005 @ 17:35PM — Mark Saleski [URL]

i can see your forehead vein throbbing.

tee hee!

#29 — July 22, 2005 @ 17:42PM — billy

ed shultz is great. he is finally waking the public up to the right wing traitors like karl rove, and his aplologists, who sold out our country to the terorists for political gain. the republican chickenhawks are traitors and they are scared, and now over half the country knows it.

#30 — July 22, 2005 @ 18:23PM — El Bicho [URL]

Tony, it's amusing to read your complaint about Ed's replies being grammatically incorrect when you apparently don't know how to use a hyphen: thin-skinned, name-calling.

If saying "gouge" instead of "gorge" makes a person "somewhat illiterate," what does it make the President when he says, "fool me once, shame on -- shame on you. Fool me -- you can't get fooled again.' I mean, aside from a Who fan.

#31 — September 6, 2005 @ 17:40PM — johngossom

The fact that Ed Schultz speaks in ungrammatical sentences or makes spelling mistakes in his e-mails is proof positive that he is a regular guy. A glance at the postings above shows that quite a few of you have the same problems, I don't doubt that you are regular guys, certainly you aren't spelling bee champs, neither am I. Clearly you don't have to be a genius to be a talk show host, you just have to be somewhat likable, a decent talker and have an opinion that you can argue for to a captive audience.
Why is it so hard to believe that Ed used to be a conservative and now he is a Democrat? I used to be a conservative and now I am so far to the the left that I find the Democratic party to be too centrist. Ed is extremely middle of the road. Yeah, he rants about the neo-con agenda, but anyone who listens to the show will soon realize that he gets much nastier with people he thinks are so left that they are out of mainstream than he does with his callers that identify themselves as Republicans. He seems to honestly want to convert people whose views aren't that different from his own, or how his used to be, into centrist Democrats. The real effect of rightwing radio and tv has been to convince people that really are in the middle that Republicans have their backs and that Democrats are way out on the left trying to made God, the flag and apple pie illegal. Ed is just trying to counter this effect and make the idea of voting for Democrats seem acceptable to people whose real interests are better served by them.
Only extreme rightwingers or those brainwashed by them believe that someone can't be both a Democrat and middle of the road. Believe it or not but Bill and Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, even John Kerry are very much in the center along with people like Rudy Guiliani, John McCain, Jim Jeffords and Chuck Hagel. There are still lots of points of disagreement between these people, but none of them is far out in either direction. You might remember that the last two presidential elections were both pretty much 50-50, despite the fact that both times the Democrats ran candidates with all the charisma of cigar store indians against a likable, but terribly unqualified boob. Beyond that, a substantial amount of the population didn't vote at all, and everyone that I know who didn't bother doing so said it is because they think that there is no real difference between the candidates. If you don't think that someone can be both a Democrat and be in the center, then turn off Rush Limbaugh and try paying attention to what is really happening in this country, talk to working class people in cities, suburbs and rural areas, and see how similar their views and needs really are. Ed Schultz is trying to get these people to see that liking guns or being against abortion, like him, isn't enough of a reason to vote Republican.

P.S. There is nothing liberal about the corporate media...but this post is already too long to get into that.

#32 — September 14, 2005 @ 08:52AM — mj

Yeah i'm a conservative, and i signed up for the Ed Schultz message board. i went under the name, screened_conservative and i posted some pretty common sense solutions to herr schutlz nonsensical rantings and bam, i got banned LOL. by the way, he does screen calls, thats why i had the name. i tried to call his show and answer his questions to "righties" and his screener homey, and thats what he is, asked me what i wanted to ask or tell ed, and then asked if i was Rightie and i told him, yes ed asked for righties to call him. CLICK. so not only is herr schutlz a liar for wanting righties to call, he screens them.

#33 — September 22, 2005 @ 17:16PM — Robert Cimbalist

I was listening to the Ed Schultz show today 9/22 and although he had a substitute sitting in, the main topic of his show was some BS article in the Enquirer stating President Bush fell off the wagon and has been drinking. Maybe on tommorows show Big Eddie can talk about UFO, Martians or the discovery of a brain in a Democrat. Hey Eddie if you want respect leave those rags and lies where they belong .... in the Supermarket

#34 — September 23, 2005 @ 19:30PM — j j glanz

Today's show was the breaking point. Ed Shultz has driven me to satellite radio in order to obtain UNINTERUPTED AirAmerica Radio. Schultz is an absolute, poorly researched ass with as much dumbfoundedness, incapacity and knowledge of events for countering right wing comments as GWB has the capability to think on his feet. EX: Bush press conference when asked if he could cite any mistake he made; .....pause.... "That's a, er, ah, ah, hard question to answer without having time to think about it. I wish I had time to think about this, ah! Is there anything I've done wrong or would have changed in my presidency? Duh!!!" This is the response from a (the) world's leader? Schultz had a right-wing talk-show host on today. The right-winger repeatedly slammed Mayor Nagin and Governor Blanco as incompetent, corrupt Democrats and contrasted their mistakes to (his words) "the competent, capable, ethical and prepared Republicans who are preparing for the hurricane in Texas". Schultz was dumbfounded and remained totally silent, never refuting these repeated statements.! Shultz pulled a Bush. He showed his shallowness and lack of knowledge. He was totally unequipped and incapable of handling opposition without capitulating. Shultz is an embarrassment to the liberal cause. He is a blowhart, incapable of countering opposition. He hangs up when it is apparent he has only superficial understanding. What a great Republican tool. No wonder he has invitations to appear on conservative shows. The same shows are petrified of having Franken, Rhodes, Garofalo, Seder, Malloy, Riley, Maron, Maddow, Kennedy, Papantonio, Hartmann, etc.
Schultz is a poorly informed Alan Colmes! Are we sure that Rupert isn't supplementing Schultz's distributor? And the DNC is supporting him. Baby, we've lost again! He reminds me of a certain President! Talk about vacuuous, shallow, without a clue! Fat Eddie is a disgrace to the Dems. To say he is a breath of fresh air in comparison to the conservative talkers is much like saying Saddam (Hussein)only murdered 10 million while Adolph (Hitler)exterminated 12 million Jews and another 3 million others. As long as you work by percentages, I quess one could say Saddam was better....or at least, not as bad.
Idiocy and shallowness is incompetence whether a pol be a Dem or Repub. Randi Rhodes, Jeanne & Sam, Mike Malloy, we love you.
As far as Dorgan and Dashchle....where were they whenever a strong opposition voice was needed? Tom Dashle wasn't defeated by Tom Thune or Bill Frist. Tom Dashle LOST the election due to the loss of his Cahonies. He was petrified of standing up and shouting from the rooftops that this administration is wrong, wrong and wrong and outlining the reasons. During his time in the Senate, Daschle was a constant capitulator, constantly fearing going against the establishment and being labeled an obstructionist. He was cowardly. He would have rallied troops if he only told Terry McAuliffe and his appeasers to go to HE__. Dems want strong leaders, not fearful, middle-of-the-roaders. Why aren't we heard? We worked our derrieres off for the Dems in 2000 & 2005. As an above active Democratic activist, my family (wife, 8 sons, daughters, in-laws) spent numerous hours campaining for Kerry. We are confident we created over 1000 new Democratic voters, spent election day picking up people and bringing to the polls, etc., working well passed polling hours to bring people home. We were not alone. Never again if a Clinton, Biden type runs. We want a liberal who is unafraid. Harry Belafonte put it correctly. It's hard to tell a DEM friend from a Repub foe. They sound the same. I'm tired of hearing the same!
Never again. It was the middle of the road voters who saw no difference in the candidates and were convinced that those who played both sides of the fence were obstructionists who could not be counted on to be loyal when it is necessary. Dashcle, Dorgan, Reid, Clinton, Biden, Lieberman, Landrieu, Kerry, Feinstein, Baucus, Bingamon, Dodd, both Nelsons, Leahy, Reed, Stabenow are disgusting. Can anyone even name one vote that anyonef them has made that went against the Republican majority that would have been the difference one way or the other. NOT A ONE! They are a band of capitulators. Don't forget, Bill Clinton pushed vociferously for a national ID...he wasn't perfect. As his wife, Hillary campained for it! Clinton wasn't perfect. Thank God, the Repubs were against it as were the majority of Dems (Excluding the majority of the aforementioned Dems).
I spent two tours in Nam. I return with injuries on both occasions. How dare those who call me unpatriotic. I'll paste my medals over anyone's and they would be dwarfed. I saw my best friend burned to death and couldn't help him, another's body shattered into toothpick sized bits, another weeping over the remains of the boy who would be his best man, while unaware that his own legs were blown off....and on and on.
Let Biden's JAG son serve on the front line as a grunt to kill and be killed, not safely ensconced in the American confines as a NG commissioned attorney, where he is safer than walking across Wall Street in New York or LaSalle Street in Chicago while on lunch break. Biden is a phony who will use his son's 6 mo. NG duty to publicize his commitment and promote his ambitious and calculating son's future plans for public office. Where was Biden during Nam?? Deferment City! Bahumbug!
He is such a phony. He should take his god-awful transplant (LOOKS WORSE THAN BURT REYNOLD'S TOUPE) over-sized capped teeth, mutton-chop side-burns and disengenuous smile and go to Satan's paradise.

#35 — September 29, 2005 @ 21:37PM — Neil

Iam in Iraqi war VET, 364 days spent in Baghdad as a senior NCO, and I can not get enough of ED!! Yeaah baby! Finally, someone who can and does call the Bushies on their lies, deceit and B.S. on WMD! I didnt see one mililiter of WMD in my year over there! I guess 2000 american lives are worth the NO WMD we found. Keep up the pressure Ed, bring MY troops home NOW!

#36 — October 3, 2005 @ 16:50PM — rick

If all babies of Republicans were aborted the IQ of the country would be raised.
or how about

If all babies of soldiers were aborted we'd be in fewer wars.

how's that?

#37 — October 3, 2005 @ 16:50PM — rick

If all babies of Republicans were aborted the IQ of the country would be raised.
or how about

If all babies of soldiers were aborted we'd be in fewer wars.

how's that?

#38 — October 11, 2005 @ 16:29PM — Romario

Amazing how some people are just attacking Ed Shultz without any real substance. I hope you clowns still feel Ed will not succeed...lol....he's almost at 150 stations and counting.
I also see no one mentioned the fact that Ed is taking in families that were hit by Hurricane Katrina....say....how many families have Oxycontin Limbaugh or Dork Hannity taken in or helped directly?

#39 — October 20, 2005 @ 01:46AM — deadissue [URL]

Anyone who doesn't like Schultz would be hard pressed to compile a list of instances where he lied.

Whereas www.mediamatters.org has documentation on Limbaugh, O'Reiley, Hannity, etc.

If he's so wrong, tell me where. Where is this guy making it up? Rush makes it up on a daily basis.

#40 — October 20, 2005 @ 01:48AM — Eric Berlin [URL]

I listen to him while I'm back and forth to lunch over the last few months. He's pretty solid, has an above average radio personality, and is for the most part more moderate than most of the other broadcasters on Air America.

#41 — October 20, 2005 @ 21:30PM — Phil from syracuse

Ed Schultz is not that impressive, a wanna be commie-lib Michael Savage counterpart or a less perverted Howard Stern at best. After listening to a few of his shows, I have concluded that he will pretty much fall into whatever liberal garbage conspiracy that is floating around at the time (though, at least as far as I know, he does not believe that the dams were blown up in New Oleans). Oh well, at least he will not be defeating the vaunted right-wing (right-thinking) radio guys anytime soon. Maybe libs should stop caring what Limbaugh thinks. Because it seems like a rule that anytime a red, err, excuse me, lib has any extended air time like Schultz or Franken, they always have to spend 51% of their time attaking Limbaugh. If they are going to do that, at least make it entertaining.

To Eddy boy's credit, he is perhaps one of a ton of libs on the radio who is at least listenable, however annoying and liberal boarding-on-communist his talking points are.

#42 — October 20, 2005 @ 22:01PM — Eric Berlin [URL]

Phil, that's your objective opinion, right?

Just want to make sure we know where you're coming from.

#43 — December 3, 2005 @ 15:50PM — Listener

Ed does in fact refer to Sean Hanity as 'slanthead' because in fact his head is tilted somewhat when he speaks on TV; sorta like a robbin listening for worms or a Spaniel with an ear infection.

The fact that anyone is talking about him is in fact a confirmation of his appeal and therefore he is right in stating that he takes such 'buzz' as complimentary; the truest insult would for him to be ignored.

As for being incoherant ask yourself honestly whether Rushed Libmaul is coherant, even on a day when he isn't on the Oxy.

#44 — December 15, 2005 @ 18:23PM — JFK

Sounds like there are some scared "righties" out there. In fact, we should call them "wrongies". To be a group of people that consider themselves Christians, it amazing that these same people align themselves with other "wrongies" that cut funds to children, senior citizens, and poor people in general...the same people that true "Christians" believe should be helped. Aren't these the people that Jesus helped?

#45 — March 27, 2006 @ 18:48PM — Delmo

Rush will never debate Ed Schultz because he is a chicken shit, gutless drug-addict who can't debate his way out of a paper-bag. Suck it, Neo-Cons. Your days are numbered.

#46 — April 20, 2006 @ 19:30PM — Avram Mirsky [URL]

David Brock was also "blinded by the right" for many years, but look at his services to the truth now, via "Media Matters for America." Hell, Steve Earle was a crackhead once and has been married 5 or 6 times, but he's the best damn topical singer-songwriter around these days. People change, unlike you heartland heartburns who have no frigging idea how the world works. The knuckle-dragging right is addicted to corporate bullshit dressed in the flag, and Rush is the best they can muster. Oh, and that pudgy pedophile Karl Rove.

#47 — April 18, 2007 @ 08:36AM — tinchamplin

Debate?
Big Ed chalanged Dennis Prager to a debate. Ed backed out. It was all a bluff.
Liberals cant debate about the truth because it is not on their side. They will lose every time.

#48 — September 7, 2007 @ 04:35AM — liz pierce

go big ed! love your show. you don't yell or call names. mostly i agree with you but i know if we differed on a point you would hear me out and we could have a reasonable discussion.

Want comments emailed to you? No spam, promise! Address:

Add your comment, speak your mind

(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/10433)

Personal attacks are not allowed. Please read our comment policy.





Remember Name/URL?

Please preview your comment!

Fresh
Articles
Fresh
Comments