Ed Schultz doesn't have a clue about Mideast politics or policy

[zulchzulu]

I don't know whay I subject myself to listening to Big Ed sometimes.

He has utterly zero understanding of the Palestinian problem and has utterly no interest to even try to understand what Israel has done to the Palestinians over the years. He makes no mention of the amount of our American tax money goes to Israel's weapons, but harps about how Hezbollah has gotten the weapons they have from Syria and Iran.

People have tried to explain the situation to him and he has screamed them down. He is a bully. He's too lazy to do a little homework. He should just stick to sports talk and how to skin a muskrat and leave the real issues to those who know BOTH sides of the argument.

I'm sure he'll be saying we should attack Iran any day now.

[KyndCulture]

1. You coulda stopped at:

Ed Schultz doesn't have a clue

[Maat]

4. Exactly! He doesn't have a clue.

I once sent him an email about the 1st Amendment (never got a reply). Hold on - I'll find it.

[LincolnMcGrath]

5. That is right!

Ed Schultz doesn't have a clue.

[Arugula Latte]

25. Yep. He's poorly informed on many issues.

I wish my affiliate would dump his ass and get a smart liberal in there.

[blue collar welder]

34. being a union man

I happen to like big Ed,but my local station has droped him along with Air Amercia in favor of sports programing

[Arugula Latte]

35. Too bad they dropped Air America.

Welcome to DU! :hi: :toast:

[liberaliraqvet26]

2. He's better than Limbaugh....

but he is bad on the mideast, as are many American "liberals".

[MarinCoUSA]

3. and he did the same thing last week re:Lieberman-Lamont.! Almost quiting!

Say the guy from LA who subbed for Sam Seider (sp) on Air America 2 weeks ago broadcast from LA at same time.

Anybody got is name/station?

[calimary]

18. I forget what timeslot it was, but Jim Lampley, former sportscaster

from local TV here in L.A. (and later, network TV sports) - a surprisingly good, informed, articulate liberal on the air. I was impressed. A pleasant surprise. Didn't realize he had that in him. Evidently, his ex-wife, broadcaster Bree Walker, is doing some stuff on air here in L.A., too. Don't know if she's on Air America proper, but she was on during the weekend.

[zulchzulu]

22. Lampley sat in a couple days for Ed...and was fantastic!

He talked about topics Ed refuses to even discuss (DSM, 911 Commission, 2004 election fraud) intelligently and with a mature balance. Plus he has a great voice that would as easily cater to the audience Ed is supposedly grabbing into the progressive light...

More Lampley!

[Botany]

6. Ed is an act .... end of story

Ed Schultz doesn't have a clue 'nuff said.

[lastknowngood]

7. I think you could have stooped with Big Ed doesn't have a clue.

he is reformed repug and not that well reformed

[question everything]

8. Or, perhaps, he does not accept your very one-sided theory

I have not listened to him but your Mideast policy does not have a clue, either.

You may be against all things military. But if you do not, then the US has gained invaluable information all these years by watching how American made weapons withstand assault by Soviet made - during the cold war - and now by Iranian made ones.

Earlier today there were rumors that Hezbollah downed an F-16 fighter plan. It was found to be false but if it were true, this would be something for our military to know.

And what is your starting point? The war of 1967? When Egypt blockaded the straits of Tiran - an act of war worldwide unless, again, you trust others to spill their blood for your safety - Israel attacked. Jordan and Syria decided to join the festivities and ended up losing.

But wait, before that, around 1950, the former Trans Jordan took over the West Bank and Egypt - Gaza Strip but I did not hear the likes of you weeping for the poor Palestinians then. Or during all of those years keeping the refugees in crowded, miserable refugee camps instead of helping them rebuild their lives, the way Israel did with a similar number of Jewish refugees from Arab countries?

Or how about going back to 1947, when the UN voted to partition the land into two states: a Jewish one and and Arab one yet the Arab refused this and attacked Israel the next day and... lost, again?

Nothing exist in vacuum. If you are talking about "a problem" be prepared to know what you are talking about. I think that Ed is smart to ignore your complaints.

[zulchzulu]

9. Perhaps I can go over to your home and split it with your neighbor

See how you feel...

[question everything]

14. You obviously have no idea of the history of that region

Here is a place to start

http://www.mideastweb.org/briefhistory.htm

[zulchzulu]

21. I like the Truman quote from the site you mentioned...

"No two historians ever agree on what happened, and the damn thing is they both think they're telling the truth." Harry S. Truman.

[High Plains]

11. What a ridiculous post. Put down that bottle!

[question everything]

15. Do you find every thing that does not confirm your

ignorant knowledge "ridiculous?"

[iconocrastic]

16. Thank you.

[alvarezadams]

17. Vacuum, starting point?

"By the standards of international diplomacy, the Balfour Declaration of 1917 is an amazing document, succinctly summarized by Arthur Koestler who wrote that the declaration amounted to "one nation solemnly promised to a second nation the country of a third."

BTW, remember the USS Liberty?

[question everything]

19. And whose country was it in 1917?

It was part of the Ottoman Empire that ceased to exist shortly after that date. The few people that lived there arrived only 50 years earlier - according to the Ottoman census.

And, following this reasoning most of the nations that came following WWI after the major empires were defeated and dissected should not exist.

The Balfour declaration came during WWI when the land currently referred to as the Middle East, not just Israel and Palestine, was part of the Ottoman Empire.

For example, the British promised the thrones of Trans Jordan and of Syria to the sons of Sharif Hussein. But then Syria was part of the French mandate and he was evicted, and was given Iraq as a consolation.

Or what about tearing Kuwait from the new Iraq and setting it as a separate country?

What about the Baltic countries and others in Europe?

What about this country?

Yes, I remember the Liberty. Just like Rachel Courie. You venture into a war zone you may get hurt.

[alvarezadams]

20. Non sequitor

If the Ottomans were oppressing the area it doesn't justify the Brits or the Israelis doing so as well.

And as for: "And, following this reasoning most of the nations that came following WWI after the major empires were defeated and dissected should not exist."

You're absolutely right. A good number of them are artificial creations, with borders crossing ethnic, cultural and other divides. Iraq? Kuwait? Jordan? The pan-Arab movements largely come from the mistaken divisions created at the whim of the colonial powers.

"The Balfour declaration came during WWI when the land currently referred to as the Middle East, not just Israel and Palestine, was part of the Ottoman Empire"

And? What's the point? That the 55,000 Jews that lived there at the time suddenly had the "right" to be accompanied by hundreds of thousands of others, regardless of the desires of the inhabitants?

"For example, the British promised the thrones of Trans Jordan and of Syria to the sons of Sharif Hussein. But then Syria was part of the French mandate and he was evicted, and was given Iraq as a consolation."

Yep - an example of the mistakes caused by the colonial powers.

"Or what about tearing Kuwait from the new Iraq and setting it as a separate country?"

See above.

"What about the Baltic countries and others in Europe?"

Remember the "14 Points"? That's the point. While your point seems to be either that two wrongs make a right or that because others have made mistakes, the mistake you're defending is AOK.

"Yes, I remember the Liberty. Just like Rachel Courie. You venture into a war zone you may get hurt."

Or when you deal with an utterly and selfishly amoral nation you're liable to be manipulated.

[ProudDad]

31. It's NOT a war

It's an occupation.

Your crack about Rachel Corrie is rather callous in addition to being misspelled.

You should check your facts better...

Here's a link to help:

http://www.rachelcorrie.org/

[LittleClarkie]

10. He sounds the most like the Repub he was when on this subject

If a caller supports the Palestinians, he asks immediately if they support Hezbollah, as if having sympathy for the Palestinian people means you're automatically cheering on terrorism. Binary freeper thinking.

He's a "New" Dem ala Hillary and Lieberman, I reckon.

[zulchzulu]

12. Yep...and he can't seem to understand there is a complicated story

It's not even that some callers support the Palestinians...he seems to go right to the talking point sheet with the same question about Hezbollah if people question whether Israel is overreacting or killing hundreds of innocent people. If I'm not mistaken, he was saying that death happens in war and innocent people will die, so get over it... that's the same crap the William Kristol is saying, the same crap that Bush is saying...and on and on...

I'd like to ask Ed how he would feel if someone came to his town and decided to give it all back to the native Americans...what would he do? And what if we armed the native Americans to the teeth with military weapons and let them blow up his town? How would he feel?

Again, like I've said before, some topics should be off-limits to Ed...he should just talk about fishin' and huntin' and his new electric car...until he does his homework...then he can brag about how great he is...

[ProudDad]

32. He's in it for the money

and only the money.

Just like Rush, I don't think he has very many real principles or values beyond naked greed.

[MzNov]

13. He's not a "progressive" lefty

he just says he is. I'm afraid he doesn't get it. He's got too much Repuke left in him. He lets the freepers go on and on when he should be kicking their butts off the air, like Mike Malloy does. And when a liberal calls in, Schultz is reading him the riot act on one thing or anyother. I can't stand listening to him and now I don't. I was furious with his Lamont/Lieberman remarks so that did it for me. I turn him off and wait for Randi.....

:kick:

[neverforget]

23. I quit listening to him a couple months back. I find him to be abrasive

rude and arrogant.

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MarkDevin]

26. Schultz is a schmuck.

What a shame the only Air America station in Connecticut carries Schultz instead of Randi Rhodes.

[LincolnMcGrath]

27. Welcome to DU MarkDevin

:hi:

[Zhade]

28. ...or much of anything, for that matter.

He lied about Murtha, like or hate the guy's politics - I don't trust liars.

FUCK Schultz. I can't believe people still listen to that windbag.

[zulchzulu]

29. I forgot about how he lied about Murtha...

Ed really needs to look at the top of the talking points fax sheet he gets. When it has the Republican logo and something about GOP Headquarters on the header, he should know enough to throw it out.

[ProudDad]

30. No SHIT

I can't even listen to him any more.

At first, I thought it was pretty good that there was a "liberal" who sounded enough like Limbaugh to probably fool some of the idiots who listen to the blowhard drug fiend into going "ditto" to Ed's "liberal" line. Those yahoos will listen to anybody.

I still think that's a bonus.

But...Except for his pro-Union positions, I find him to be someone more interested in making a buck any way he can...he tried "conservative talk show host" and now he's held his finger up into the wind and decided that the future is "liberal talk show host" since the conservative blow-hard arena is already too full.

His latest stupid mutterings about the current mid-east debacle were so filled with crap, I've had to permanently turn him off...

[zulchzulu]

33. Here's what Ed could do to educate himself on the Occupied Territories

Go here and read a little bit about the human rights violations that Israel has committed over the years. Yes, Hamas, Hezbollah and Palestine have committed atrocities too, but the facts and events are documented and utterly overwhelming:

http://web.amnesty.org/library/eng-isr/index&start=1