HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » You guys remember Ed Schu...

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:38 PM

 

You guys remember Ed Schultz on MSNBC? Now he works for RT and he's pro-Putin and pro-Trump....

Back when he hosted a prime-time talk show on MSNBC, Ed Schultz divided the world into heroes and villains. The heroes usually included Democrats like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. The villains were most Republicans, and especially Donald J. Trump. When Trump obsessed over Obama’s birth certificate and academic credentials in 2011, Schultz branded him “a racist.” When Trump flirted with running for president the next year, Schultz ridiculed him. “Who has shown any interest in Donald Trump being the next president of the United States other than Donald Trump?” he fumed. “Mr. Trump, stop embarrassing yourself!”

Another bad guy was Russian President Vladimir Putin. Schultz delighted in ripping conservatives for what he called their “love affair” with the Russian leader and his ability to make Obama look weak on the world stage. “They hate Obama so much they will even embrace the head of the KGB ... ‘Putie’ is their new hero!” Schultz said in one 2013 segment. In another, he smugly reminded conservatives about Putin’s “nasty human rights record” and the way his “reckless behavior” was “crippling” Russia. More generally, Schultz often framed GOP opposition to Obama as “anti-American” or “unpatriotic.”

That was all before last July, when MSNBC abruptly canceled The Ed Show after a six-year run and dumped the 62-year-old prairie populist from the network. By the time Schultz resurfaced this January, he had been reincarnated in a very different journalistic form: as a prime-time host, reporter and political analyst for RT America, the U.S. branch of the global cable network formerly known as Russia Today, funded by the Russian government.

Gone is the praise for Obama and Clinton. Gone, too, are the mocking references to “Putie.” And gone are the judgments about others’ patriotism. Schultz’s 8 p.m. RT show, The News with Ed Schultz, now features Putin-friendly discussions about the failings of U.S. policy in the Middle East, America’s “bloated” defense budget and the futility of NATO strategy.


Even Trump is getting a new look from Schultz. Speaking at various points on RT in recent months, Schultz has said that Trump “has tapped into an anger among working people,” is “talking about things the people care about,” and even, as Schultz recently declared, that Trump “would easily be able to function” as president.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/04/donald-trump-2016-russia-today-rt-kremlin-media-vladimir-putin-213833

151 replies, 9322 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 151 replies Author Time Post
Reply You guys remember Ed Schultz on MSNBC? Now he works for RT and he's pro-Putin and pro-Trump.... (Original post)
Cali_Democrat Jul 2016 OP
apcalc Jul 2016 #1
GusBob Jul 2016 #11
Hortensis Jul 2016 #77
Stevepol Jul 2016 #122
Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #2
JRLeft Jul 2016 #5
glennward Jul 2016 #9
JRLeft Jul 2016 #13
hrmjustin Jul 2016 #16
JRLeft Jul 2016 #21
hrmjustin Jul 2016 #23
JRLeft Jul 2016 #27
hrmjustin Jul 2016 #32
JRLeft Jul 2016 #39
hrmjustin Jul 2016 #44
JRLeft Jul 2016 #49
hrmjustin Jul 2016 #52
JRLeft Jul 2016 #55
hrmjustin Jul 2016 #59
JRLeft Jul 2016 #62
Lord Magus Jul 2016 #85
Stryder Jul 2016 #107
hrmjustin Jul 2016 #113
SticksnStones Jul 2016 #121
JTFrog Jul 2016 #139
joeybee12 Jul 2016 #36
DanTex Jul 2016 #97
chwaliszewski Jul 2016 #101
Maru Kitteh Jul 2016 #137
chwaliszewski Jul 2016 #143
rjsquirrel Jul 2016 #3
BlueCaliDem Jul 2016 #17
revbones Jul 2016 #79
rjsquirrel Jul 2016 #87
JRLeft Jul 2016 #4
Skinner Jul 2016 #6
JRLeft Jul 2016 #7
MohRokTah Jul 2016 #15
Hortensis Jul 2016 #64
MohRokTah Jul 2016 #68
grossproffit Jul 2016 #83
JCanete Jul 2016 #88
MohRokTah Jul 2016 #89
JCanete Jul 2016 #92
Hyper_Eye Jul 2016 #120
JCanete Jul 2016 #125
MohRokTah Jul 2016 #140
chwaliszewski Jul 2016 #144
JustAnotherGen Jul 2016 #151
grossproffit Jul 2016 #12
TwilightZone Jul 2016 #50
Dem2 Jul 2016 #119
hrmjustin Jul 2016 #8
JRLeft Jul 2016 #14
hrmjustin Jul 2016 #19
MohRokTah Jul 2016 #22
JRLeft Jul 2016 #25
MohRokTah Jul 2016 #26
JRLeft Jul 2016 #29
MohRokTah Jul 2016 #31
JRLeft Jul 2016 #35
MohRokTah Jul 2016 #38
JRLeft Jul 2016 #41
MohRokTah Jul 2016 #48
JRLeft Jul 2016 #53
MohRokTah Jul 2016 #56
JRLeft Jul 2016 #60
MohRokTah Jul 2016 #65
JRLeft Jul 2016 #67
MohRokTah Jul 2016 #69
JRLeft Jul 2016 #70
MohRokTah Jul 2016 #74
JRLeft Jul 2016 #75
HarmonyRockets Jul 2016 #127
chwaliszewski Jul 2016 #103
Nancyswidower Jul 2016 #128
uponit7771 Jul 2016 #132
Iliyah Jul 2016 #10
chillfactor Jul 2016 #18
RonniePudding Jul 2016 #30
randome Jul 2016 #20
RonniePudding Jul 2016 #24
runaway hero Jul 2016 #46
RonniePudding Jul 2016 #47
runaway hero Jul 2016 #82
RonniePudding Jul 2016 #86
Liberal_Stalwart71 Jul 2016 #131
RonniePudding Jul 2016 #135
Squinch Jul 2016 #72
runaway hero Jul 2016 #81
Squinch Jul 2016 #112
Music Man Jul 2016 #28
mcar Jul 2016 #33
renie408 Jul 2016 #34
sufrommich Jul 2016 #37
runaway hero Jul 2016 #99
runaway hero Jul 2016 #40
Gidney N Cloyd Jul 2016 #42
JRLeft Jul 2016 #45
Maru Kitteh Jul 2016 #138
chwaliszewski Jul 2016 #145
rug Jul 2016 #43
JRLeft Jul 2016 #51
hrmjustin Jul 2016 #54
JRLeft Jul 2016 #58
hrmjustin Jul 2016 #61
rug Jul 2016 #73
DemocratSinceBirth Jul 2016 #94
Blue Idaho Jul 2016 #57
Mike Nelson Jul 2016 #63
ecstatic Jul 2016 #66
DemocratSinceBirth Jul 2016 #71
beachbumbob Jul 2016 #76
Thinkingabout Jul 2016 #78
Purveyor Jul 2016 #80
Hoyt Jul 2016 #84
doc03 Jul 2016 #90
JRLeft Jul 2016 #136
Sancho Jul 2016 #91
wishstar Jul 2016 #93
RonniePudding Jul 2016 #106
Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Jul 2016 #95
DemocratSinceBirth Jul 2016 #96
7962 Jul 2016 #98
radiclib Jul 2016 #100
guillaumeb Jul 2016 #104
guillaumeb Jul 2016 #102
Lil Missy Jul 2016 #105
yuiyoshida Jul 2016 #108
riderinthestorm Jul 2016 #124
reign88 Jul 2016 #109
raindaddy Jul 2016 #110
mckara Jul 2016 #111
Botany Jul 2016 #114
63splitwindow Jul 2016 #115
George II Jul 2016 #116
warrprayer Jul 2016 #117
redstateblues Jul 2016 #118
chwaliszewski Jul 2016 #146
warrprayer Jul 2016 #147
Cha Jul 2016 #123
wisteria Jul 2016 #126
Liberal_Stalwart71 Jul 2016 #129
uponit7771 Jul 2016 #133
flamingdem Jul 2016 #130
Hekate Jul 2016 #134
tallahasseedem Jul 2016 #141
MFM008 Jul 2016 #142
Adrahil Jul 2016 #148
DrDan Jul 2016 #149
B Calm Jul 2016 #150

Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:40 PM

1. Good grief, that's revolting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to apcalc (Reply #1)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:44 PM

11. Did Wendy leave him? I bet he is a selfish slob

The only reason he went "liberal" is he met her. That and Rush had the bowhard ratings damped up across the midwest

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to apcalc (Reply #1)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:25 PM

77. Politico: "As Trump has risen, RT has gotten much more interested

in the U.S. presidential campaign. Tune in to Ed Schultz and his colleagues these days and you’ll find a presidential race featuring Hillary Clinton as a malevolent warmonger, Bernie Sanders as an insurgent hero—and Donald Trump as a foreign policy savant.

A network that up until now has found little to celebrate about America has finally settled on a candidate it can believe in. Vladimir Putin’s TV channel isn’t just covering the 2016 campaign: Increasingly, it’s choosing sides.
...
Speaking at various points on RT in recent months, Schultz has said that Trump “has tapped into an anger among working people,” is “talking about things the people care about,” and even, as Schultz recently declared, that Trump “would easily be able to function” as president.
...
Seated next to Simonyan at the dinner and just two seats away from Putin himself was perhaps the most intriguing example of how the Russians have gone about recruiting disaffected members of that establishment: a rugged-looking man in a tuxedo who less than 18 months earlier had been head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Pentagon’s powerful in-house equivalent of the CIA. Michael Flynn, now a private citizen after a reportedly disgruntled retirement, was not there to gather intelligence. His attendance at the RT gala, before which he also gave a talk on world affairs, appeared to inaugurate a relationship with the network—
...
At a moment of semi-hostility between the U.S. and Russia, the presence of such an important figure at Putin’s table startled current and former members of the Obama administration. “It was extremely odd that he showed up in a tuxedo to the Russian government propaganda arm’s party,” one former Pentagon official told me.
...
Flynn now makes semi-regular appearances on RT as an analyst (interviewed by Schultz occasionally), in which he often argues that the U.S. and Russia should be working more closely together on issues like fighting ISIL and ending Syria’s civil war. “Russia has its own national security strategy, and we have to respect that,” he said in one recent appearance. “And we have to try to figure out: How do we combine the United States’ national security strategy along with Russia’s national security strategy, despite all the challenges that we face?”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/04/donald-trump-2016-russia-today-rt-kremlin-media-vladimir-putin-213833#ixzz4FNIfrV2U


Michael Flynn, whom Trump was just considering for VP, he admires him so much.
Ed Schultz who now sees Obama as the world's troublemaker.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to apcalc (Reply #1)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 10:34 PM

122. It's revolting to you because it's bullshit, at least part of it is.

Schultz is not "pro-Putin."

Schultz is, as usual, telling it like it is. Read the quotes below the incendiary headline and you'll see that the Politico article says that "now (his show) features Putin-friendly discussions about the failings of U.S. policy in the Middle East, America’s “bloated” defense budget and the futility of NATO strategy." This sounds like a pretty apt opinion, i.e., that US policy in the Middle East is lousy, the defense budget is indeed "bloated" and a constant confrontational attitude toward Putin is not necessarily the best approach. The remark about Schultz's discussions being "Putin-friendly" is purely Politico's opinion. The ideas are essential good. Shultz isn't on Putin's side because he recognizes limitations in US foreign policy.

I was unaware of Schultz's statement, assuming it's true, that Putin “would easily be able to function” as president. That's a little over the top. I suspect there might be some slicing up of quotes to make something appear to be true that may not be. Because Trump definitely wouldn't be able to tie his shoes as prez without the "mob" or some other criminal type to tell him how to do it and even then he would tell twenty lies on the way to getting them tied, if he ever did, and in the end he'd probably end up buying a whole new pair of expensive shoes rather than worrying about learning to do something so demeaning as tying his own shoelaces the next time. He's definitely the worst presidential candidate I've seen and I doubt if a worse candidate could be found in all of American history.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:40 PM

2. Very sad, used to like him and

 

Listened to his radio show.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Duckhunter935 (Reply #2)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:42 PM

5. He's backing Stein not Trump.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JRLeft (Reply #5)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:44 PM

9. And Stein is backing Trump...without saying so. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to glennward (Reply #9)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:45 PM

13. LMFAO!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JRLeft (Reply #13)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:46 PM

16. What is so funny?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hrmjustin (Reply #16)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:47 PM

21. She's not backing Trump.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JRLeft (Reply #21)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:47 PM

23. No but helping him.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hrmjustin (Reply #23)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:51 PM

27. She's going to lose ND, but it still helps him? How?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JRLeft (Reply #27)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:53 PM

32. She is not only running in ND.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hrmjustin (Reply #32)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:56 PM

39. He's voting in ND. So that doesn't impact ND. It's going Trump.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JRLeft (Reply #39)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:57 PM

44. Ok but in post 23 I was making the point overall Stein is helping Trump.

 

Meaning nationally which she clearly is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hrmjustin (Reply #44)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:59 PM

49. Gary Johnson is and is having a bigger impact than Stein.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JRLeft (Reply #49)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:01 PM

52. Yes he is having an impact. But my point still stands that Stein is helping Trump.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hrmjustin (Reply #52)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:02 PM

55. In my opinion those 2 should be allowed in the debates.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JRLeft (Reply #55)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:04 PM

59. I don't. I don't want Stein to get any help.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hrmjustin (Reply #59)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:06 PM

62. Presidential debates should include all of the political parties and should be questioned

 

by the League of Women Voters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JRLeft (Reply #62)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:42 PM

85. All political parties? So we should have like 30 people on the debate stage?

The Libertarians and Greens aren't the only minor parties that nominate presidential candidates. Why should we distract from the debate between the actual contenders by also including every vanity candidate who gets their name on the ballot somewhere?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hrmjustin (Reply #44)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 09:41 PM

107. Nader Nader Nader...

That shit's gettin' old.
If you want to get elected, be the best
candidate for the majority of the people.
Easy Peasy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stryder (Reply #107)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 10:05 PM

113. Hillary is the best candidate and Stein is helping Trump.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stryder (Reply #107)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 10:34 PM

121. All 2016 Presidential Candidates should be included in the debates

From Ballotpedia.org



As of July 15, 2016, a total of 1,796 candidates had filed a Statement of Candidacy with the Federal Election Commission.[1].


It could become quite unwieldy...


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stryder (Reply #107)

Mon Jul 25, 2016, 12:54 AM

139. Fuck Nader and Nader-like tactics. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JRLeft (Reply #5)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:55 PM

36. Nope, he has plenty of nice things to say about trump

 

now that Ed works for Putin.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JRLeft (Reply #5)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:58 PM

97. Backing Stein is backing Trump.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #97)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 09:32 PM

101. I'm starting to understand this now.

You're either for us or against us. Got it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to chwaliszewski (Reply #101)

Mon Jul 25, 2016, 12:48 AM

137. Are you offended that Democrats would attack Stein?

Take it up with Skinner

In the discussion thread: Are we allowed to criticize Jill Stein? [View all]

Response to rbrnmw (Original post)

Wed Jul 13, 2016, 11:37 AM

Star Member Skinner (62,247 posts)
1. Of course.

The DU Terms of Service make clear that we support the Democratic nominee. Presidential elections in the United States are a zero-sum game in which other candidates must lose in order for the Democratic candidate to win. We are competing with Jill Stein and Gary Johnson and Donald Trump in our effort to win the presidency. They are our opponents.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maru Kitteh (Reply #137)

Mon Jul 25, 2016, 03:24 AM

143. Offended? No. It's the logic or lack of that is troublesome.

If you vote for Hillary, she has one vote. If I vote for the rabbit from Trix cereal, Trump's vote total doesn't increase by one because of me. So the whole 'a vote for Stein is a vote for Trump' spiel is all hogwash.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:41 PM

3. He's not the only progressive hero

 

on the RT payroll.

They're entertainers: they say what they're paid to say.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rjsquirrel (Reply #3)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:47 PM

17. And Putin has money to burn - stolen from the Russian people, of course. But that's what despots do:

steal from their people, and Putin's networth today is over $200 BILLION, more than twice that of Bill Gates!

Let's also not forget how Schultz lobbied on his MSNBC show to "teach the BlueDogs a lesson" and for "Liberals to stay home" in 2010. He got his wish and in a census year of all years, too!

The Republicans took control of our House and swept through States (except California, thanks to the Latino and African-American vote) where they took control of governors houses and State legislatures for at least 10 years.

Look how well that worked out for us ever since.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rjsquirrel (Reply #3)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:31 PM

79. I'm sure you think Maddow has some integrity left as well.

 

But isn't she just an "entertainer" too?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to revbones (Reply #79)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:44 PM

87. Absolutely

 

You can tell she is constrained by whom she works for. However, her employer is not directly an institution controlled by state power. And it's an American company. So there are differences.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:41 PM

4. He doesn't support Trump I've watched his show.

 

He's backing Jill Stein.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JRLeft (Reply #4)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:42 PM

6. Close enough. (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Reply #6)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:43 PM

7. Jill Stein isn't Trump. His state is going republican anyway.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JRLeft (Reply #7)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:46 PM

15. Actually, yes, she is Trump. Tehre is no difference.

 

A vote for Stein is a vote for Trump.

There is no difference.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #15)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:07 PM

64. Today's Green Party is useless except as a way of expressing rejection

of the other parties, for making a statement by trashing their own votes. But for some that's value enough.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hortensis (Reply #64)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:10 PM

68. Anybody who has ever even barely studied poltics understands how this works.

 

If you want to start a new party, it must be built from the ground up, not the top down.

Every third party wannabe since the Republicans did it the right way pre-Civil War has attempted to build their party from the top down and every one of them has failed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #15)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:35 PM

83. Yep. A vote for her is indeed a vote for Trump. This isn't rocket science.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #15)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:48 PM

88. fuck that nonsense. It isn't the same thing at all. If that ends up being the result, it isn't a

 


Stein supporters fault that it went that way. Your insistence on diminishing people who try to vote on principle is pretty shameful. If the democratic party had been what it should have been the last 30-40 years, reactionary magnets like Trump would never have been able to survive in the political climate, so while I'm not one of the supporters of a third party candidate, I understand the frustration with the establishment and the GAME of politics it likes to play out for the masses, while the same interests continue to get served. Bother to make a nuanced and thoughtful argument as to why people shouldn't vote for Stein for a change. There are plenty of good reasons, and even practical ones, without resorting to name-calling and accusations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JCanete (Reply #88)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:50 PM

89. There is no principle involved in voting for Fascist Stein.

 

IT is the exact same thing as voting for Trump.

There is no measurable difference whatsoever.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #89)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:53 PM

92. Okay, I'll step back from what I said, if your complaint is about Stein as a candidate, and not as

 


a spoiler. I may have misinterpreted your original post, and I haven't looked hard at her platform, and have no business commenting on that or your opinion of it. So if I did mistake you, my apologies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JCanete (Reply #92)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 10:34 PM

120. No their complaint is not about Stein. It is hyperbole and nonsense.

You can read about some of Stein's political beliefs here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jill_Stein#Political_positions

Her platform is very liberal and most of it is generally supported by people on this site. Further down the truth is revealed when the poster states that there are only two possible votes in this election: for Hillary or for Trump. They stipulate that a vote for anyone other than Hillary is the same as voting for Trump and thus a vote for fascism. Through this silly logic they label Stein a fascist. It's absolutely ridiculous. A vote for Jill Stein is a vote for Stein and nobody else.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hyper_Eye (Reply #120)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 10:42 PM

125. thanks for the clarification, and sadly, no surprise. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hyper_Eye (Reply #120)

Mon Jul 25, 2016, 12:55 AM

140. Stein is an outright openly stated FASCIST, and so is anybody who would vote for her.

 

She claimed Trump was better than Hillary. That makes her a self avowed FASCIST!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #140)

Mon Jul 25, 2016, 03:34 AM

144. Your ill logic is truly unbelievable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #140)

Mon Jul 25, 2016, 08:39 AM

151. Plus 1000!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Reply #6)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:44 PM

12. This! eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Reply #6)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:00 PM

50. Agreed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JRLeft (Reply #4)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 10:32 PM

119. That was obvious based on the quotes

Most reporters have acknowledged similar when attempting to explain the Trump nomination.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:43 PM

8. Revolting.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hrmjustin (Reply #8)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:46 PM

14. Except he's not backing Trump.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JRLeft (Reply #14)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:47 PM

19. No he is supporting Stein which is just as sad.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JRLeft (Reply #14)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:47 PM

22. Yes, he is.

 

You just admitted he is supporting Stein and there is not any difference at all between supporting Stein and supporting Trump.

They are identical positions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #22)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:48 PM

25. Hillary was going to win North Dakota?

 

That's news to me?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JRLeft (Reply #25)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:50 PM

26. Irrelevent.

 

Voting Stein is morally the same thing as voting Trump regardless of where you live.

They are identical positions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #26)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:52 PM

29. Please explain?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JRLeft (Reply #29)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:53 PM

31. I already did.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #31)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:54 PM

35. No you didn't you just repeated a point.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JRLeft (Reply #35)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:55 PM

38. You obviously missed it.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #38)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:56 PM

41. Saying they are the same isn't an explanation it's a talking point.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JRLeft (Reply #41)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:59 PM

48. Yep, you missed it. eom

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #48)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:01 PM

53. No I didn't you have no standing which is why you cannot explain

 

your position.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JRLeft (Reply #53)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:03 PM

56. I explained it. You missed it. That's it.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #56)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:04 PM

60. Are you trying to say Stein is fascist or Trump is a progressive it's one or the other?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JRLeft (Reply #60)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:08 PM

65. Stein is a fascist.

 

There are two choices in our presidential elections. A vote against the Democrat is a vote for a fascist.

There are no other choices.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #65)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:09 PM

67. Evidence?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JRLeft (Reply #67)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:11 PM

69. Every election since 1856. eom

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #69)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:12 PM

70. You made it up. At least you admit it.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JRLeft (Reply #70)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:15 PM

74. Flag on the play...

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #74)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:17 PM

75. I like you, even though I disagree with most of your posts.

 

😂😂😂😂😂

You're entertaining.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JRLeft (Reply #67)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 10:56 PM

127. How about her polling 3% in polls?

 

It's down to 2 people you know.

Who are you planning on voting for, by the way?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #65)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 09:35 PM

103. So if you don't vote at all, who is it helping?

I've never voted Republican in my 30 years of voting but some of the logic by some Democrats here is just insane.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #65)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 11:37 PM

128. That's not how voting math works...

 

Say you vote for Hillary...that's a vote in her column....say I vote for Sponge Bob...that is NOT a vote for Trump
Hillary's vote total has NOT been decreased and the Dumpster's has NOT been increased.
Just a smaller pool of main candidate votes...NOT a Trumpanzee vote.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JRLeft (Reply #14)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 11:44 PM

132. By proxy he is... he doesn't need to say the words

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:44 PM

10. Oh noes

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:47 PM

18. you are kidding..right?

I cannot imagine that dramatic a change in Schultz.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to chillfactor (Reply #18)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:52 PM

30. He was once a Republican

 

So he has shape shifted before.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:47 PM

20. I'll add my voice to the 'revolting' chorus.

 

[hr][font color="blue"][center]A 90% chance of rain means the same as a 10% chance:
It might rain and it might not.
[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:48 PM

24. I never bought his schtick

 

His GOP past always gave me pause.

Oh, and fuck RT and Putin and anyone else who gives them cover or actively supports them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RonniePudding (Reply #24)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:58 PM

46. GOP Past

Last edited Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:33 PM - Edit history (1)

So why are you backing Hillary then.


All I hear is don't play the purity game... every day...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to runaway hero (Reply #46)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:59 PM

47. GOP past AS AN ADULT

 

You do understand the difference, right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RonniePudding (Reply #47)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:35 PM

82. Warren was a repub until 96

She and schultz have (had?) the same positions on the issues.


You see where this is leading right? You can't do the purity thing at will.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to runaway hero (Reply #82)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:43 PM

86. I have zero idea as to what you're talking about

 

And I have zero idea why you're so hung up on purity. It's a little odd, frankly.

But hey, you do whatever you need to do. I'll be working to defeat Trump, a long with most people here.

Tah-Tah

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RonniePudding (Reply #86)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 11:42 PM

131. Warren was a Republican who voted for Reagan. She tells her story and admits this openly.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal_Stalwart71 (Reply #131)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 11:57 PM

135. I'm aware of that

 

But it had little do with Ed Schultz, who is just an actor for hire.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to runaway hero (Reply #46)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:14 PM

72. Seems like maybe you aren't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Squinch (Reply #72)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:34 PM

81. Seems like you missed the point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to runaway hero (Reply #81)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 10:01 PM

112. Nope. I got the point just fine.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:52 PM

28. I never cared much for Ed Schultz's faux journalism on MSNBC, which was a caricature of the left.

"Time to get out your phones for today's poll. 'Do you think John Boehner is a terrible Speaker of the House?' And the results are in... Wow! 98% think John Boehner is a terrible Speaker!"

He was actually a Republican until the late '90s or so. He's a mere talk show host. A weathervane, actually.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:54 PM

33. Way to sell your soul Ed

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:54 PM

34. EW....just, ew. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:55 PM

37. Shultz goes wherever someone will pay him to go.

When he couldn't make it as a right wing radio host he moved to the left. Can't stand the guy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sufrommich (Reply #37)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 09:12 PM

99. Bingo.

Money and nothing more.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:56 PM

40. He's backing stein

OP loves stoking the flames.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:56 PM

42. I don't know about this story or RT in general but Ed just never struck me as genuine.

Can't put my finger on it but something about him just threw red flags up all over the place. His support of progressive positions was great yet it was interesting how seldom any other progressives aligned with him. He seemed alone out there like no progressives in a position to know him wanted to risk their reputations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gidney N Cloyd (Reply #42)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:58 PM

45. He's backing Stein.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JRLeft (Reply #45)

Mon Jul 25, 2016, 12:51 AM

138. Backing Stein helps Putin's boy, Trump

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maru Kitteh (Reply #138)

Mon Jul 25, 2016, 03:38 AM

145. How exactly do you figure that?

If someone votes for Stein, the vote goes to her, not Trump.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 07:57 PM

43. He started out on conservative radio.

 

After two decades of sports reporting, Schultz launched a 2 1/2-hour regional talk show in 1996.

The show, which he continues to host, blends interviews with local officials and sharp-edged banter with callers, spiced up with Big Eddie's rants about national affairs. He might report on a local school board meeting, break for the latest on pork belly futures, then swerve into acid commentary on the presidential primaries. The broadcast area reaches into South Dakota and Minnesota; on any given morning, nearly 30% of radio listeners in the region are tuned in to his show.

For years, Schultz's patter on the regional show was conservative. He scoffed at the homeless for complaining about the cold. "How about getting a job?" he'd ask. He sneered at the three Democrats who represent him in Congress, nicknaming them the Three Stooges.

"I lined up with the Republicans because they were antitax, and I wanted to make a lot of money," Schultz said.

http://articles.latimes.com/print/2004/feb/05/nation/na-radio5

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #43)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:00 PM

51. David Brock destroyed Anita Hill, but he gets a pass right?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JRLeft (Reply #51)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:01 PM

54. Brock is supporting the nominee.

 

This site is about dupporting the nominee.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hrmjustin (Reply #54)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:03 PM

58. So he gets a pass. Got it.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JRLeft (Reply #58)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:06 PM

61. If you read DU for the past year you would know Brockwas regularly attacked here.

 

He never got a free pass.

We are not in primary mode anymore.

This site is about getting Clinton elected now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JRLeft (Reply #51)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:14 PM

73. Anita Hill wasn't destroyed.

 

And I don't think Brock has mocked the homeless.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #73)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:56 PM

94. Ed cut his teeth as a right wing talk show host.

He was a poor man's Rush Limbaugh.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:03 PM

57. Alas poor Eddy we knew him not well.

Or maybe we did. Being a celebrity is expensive - so as long as someone is writing him a check, he'll be ready willing and able to read their scripts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:06 PM

63. I'd say...

...Ed Schultz knows who is buttering his bread.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:08 PM

66. Bernie was a frequent guest on his MSNBC show.

Interesting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:13 PM

71. Ed is a POS

He began his career as a right wing talk show host but he wasn't able to compete with the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage, and Sean Hannity so he went left... He couldn't cut the mustard there either....

Check my posting history. I saw right through that charlatan from the jump.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:25 PM

76. Sicken betrayal...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:27 PM

78. Wonder where are his big union buddies now, guess when all else fails join some one else,

Can see now he was never a friend of unions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:32 PM

80. My memory escapes me. Was McCarthy a DEM or GOP? 👻

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:39 PM

84. They had those thin leather helmets back when he played football.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:50 PM

90. Thom Hartmann also on RT was a Bernie supporter and he is convinced Trump

is going to win the election the last I heard.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #90)

Mon Jul 25, 2016, 12:23 AM

136. Thom Hartmann says Trump will win if Hillary doesn't tack to the left of Trump on TPP.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:51 PM

91. Not surprising to me...

I was critical of Ed's Archie Bunker logic many months ago.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:54 PM

93. Article mentions Trump's buddy Michael Flynn attending the RT gala

Thanks for posting this article. I was not aware of this Russian funded propaganda network before. Larry King doing their bidding too.

Putin/Trump/Flynn/Manafort are thick as thieves.

Although Ed Schultz is not "endorsing" Trump, if the article is accurate in describing Ed's comments, he is "enabling" Trump and Russian agenda by soft pedaling any criticism of Trump and making him seem more palatable to American voters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wishstar (Reply #93)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 09:41 PM

106. RT strives for subtlety

 

If they were openly pro Putin they wouldn't be able to bamboozle some on the far left. If you look around, those are the folks pushing the "nothing to see here" meme.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:58 PM

95. Read that this morning

How sad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 08:58 PM

96. Sad about Larry King. He used to be an old school liberal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 09:06 PM

98. Schultz proved years back he wasnt above lying on his show.

 

His altered audio clips & videos turned me off of him for good. When caught, he'd never own up to it
A lot of folks here still fell all over themselves praising him
He's a douchebag

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 09:28 PM

100. I have been here since 2003 and this thread is the biggest load of crap I've ever seen on DU.

Bye!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to radiclib (Reply #100)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 09:36 PM

104. I wish DU would allow me to recommend your reply. eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 09:35 PM

102. But..........

Schultz’s 8 p.m. RT show, The News with Ed Schultz, now features Putin-friendly discussions about the failings of U.S. policy in the Middle East, America’s “bloated” defense budget and the futility of NATO strategy.



True, but US Mideast policy is a disaster, the US does have a bloated war budget and the NATO strategy is provocative and war inducing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 09:37 PM

105. I never did care for him. And contrary to popular belief here, he was cancelled due to low ratings.

It's all about the $$$$$$

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 09:42 PM

108. Ed must have drank some of that TAINTED WATER in Flint

he was a BERNIE SUPPORTER, this is a 180 degree turn...nothing else can explain this, unless it isn't true!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yuiyoshida (Reply #108)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 10:41 PM

124. It's not true. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 09:46 PM

109. Hahaha

 

He's pretty much who I always thought he was.

Let's not pretend that the majority of these TV personalities don't sell their "core beliefs" to the highest bidder. They are phonies. Journalistic integrity is long dead.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 09:49 PM

110. Schultz doesn't support Hillary but he also doesn't support Trump...

Just like Cenk Uygar he's happier than hell to be out of MSNBC/Comcast.. He talked about the TPP one too many times...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 09:56 PM

111. The Article is More Innuendo than Facts

 

I didn't see one quote from Ed Schultz supporting the reporter's argument. The article looked like a hatchet job against RT without any real evidence, only supposition. I think the technical term for this type of "news" is BS.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 10:08 PM

114. Please

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 10:10 PM

115. Gotta do something to keep the liquor cabinet full. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 10:11 PM

116. He railed in favor of the Keystone Pipeline for more than six months, and then....

....almost overnight began railing against it, contradicting ALL the "reasons" why he was in favor of it for so long, but without mentioning his change of heart.

And for the last few months of his 1-hour show he spent more than half of it on Keystone.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 10:18 PM

117. Here he is with Putin!

What a bloviated douchebag!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to warrprayer (Reply #117)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 10:26 PM

118. Are you sure that isn't Ted Cruz's dad?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to warrprayer (Reply #117)

Mon Jul 25, 2016, 03:43 AM

146. Wow! Talk about misinformation.

That is Steven Seagal with Putin. Get your facts correct.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to chwaliszewski (Reply #146)

Mon Jul 25, 2016, 06:13 AM

147. I was

Being tongue in cheek.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 10:37 PM

123. trump has tapped into the rascist bigoted idiocy that's in America..anyone

can see that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 10:48 PM

126. I am surprised. I always considered him a moderate Dem.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 11:39 PM

129. Is this a joke???

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal_Stalwart71 (Reply #129)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 11:46 PM

133. He's supporting Stein, might as well be supporting tRump

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 11:41 PM

130. Bummer, but I don't read that as an endorsement

He endorsed Bernie

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 11:46 PM

134. How does this even happen? This is completely revolting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Mon Jul 25, 2016, 12:57 AM

141. Really?

WOW! I used to listen to him religiously during the 2008 and 2012 elections. I guess he sold out for the paycheck.

Damn.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Mon Jul 25, 2016, 01:59 AM

142. I never missed his show

Im very disappointed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Mon Jul 25, 2016, 08:23 AM

148. He sold his soul. Disappointing. NT

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Mon Jul 25, 2016, 08:29 AM

149. back to his roots

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Mon Jul 25, 2016, 08:29 AM

150. Mike Malloy has been saying for years that Ed is a phony.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread