Fast Eddie Schultz Suspended, Watch Him Plead for His Job (Update: Malkinalanche! And Ingraham Accepts Schultz’s apology)
[Guest post by Aaron Worthing; if you have tips, please send them here. Or by Twitter @AaronWorthing.]
Update: Michelle Malkin links, writing:
Aaron Worthing reacts just right to the idea that Schultz is “sincere.”
Yes, he sincerely wants to hang on to his corporate job…
Read his whole post. Amen, amen, amen.
High praise indeed.
Update (II): And how did I forget that I saw that Laura Ingraham accepted his apology? That’s the fine and classy thing to do, but are we going to see a deeper change in personality and persona for Fast Eddie, or just a decision not to to that one thing again? I have seen no evidence of the former.
Of course that is my interpretive gloss on a video I will show you in a moment.
I think that its important to start by pointing out that Ed Schultz has been a dishonest, hateful P.O.S. for years. He’s literally the Alan Grayson of talk radio. Like here he is taking criticism with grace and humility:
Anyway, yesterday on his radio show, he allegedly overstepped a line by calling Laura Ingraham a slut. Via Radio Equalizer:
Now I say “allegedly” because… well, come on now, he has been a hateful, dishonest P.O.S. and now suddenly they are noticing? Talking about ripping Dick Cheney’s heart out…
…is okay, but calling Ingraham a slut is out of bounds suddenly? It is arguably worse, but we are talking a really fine line. I am more inclined to think this is about making the new owners at Comcast happy than MSNBC suddenly developing standards. I mean this is the same network that didn’t bat an eye when Keith Olbermann called Michelle Malkin a “big mashed up bag of meat with lipstick.” I mean seriously he looks at this…
And that is what he sees? You have to be filled with some sort of hate to feel that way about her. Hate her beliefs, fine, but while there is no such thing as objective beauty, let’s say you have to have a very unusual concept of beauty to consider her ugly.
And needless to say that all of this is example #5,982 of the hard left’s resentment of sexy conservative women. I mean for evidence sake (and not at all any rule 5 needs), here’s proof that Ms. Ingraham fits that pattern:
And notice how often their insults and vulgar comments fit a pattern. They imagine Ann Coulter being raped. And Michelle Malkin? They call this lovely Asian-American woman a hooker, which just happens to fit with a popular stereotype of Asian women. I am sure that is a coincidence. And on and on. A few years ago Playboy ran an article listing the conservative women they would like to “hate f__k.” Yeah, Malkin was on that list, as was Laura Ingraham and a number of other frankly beautiful and sexy conservative women. Because what has happened with those on the hard left is that they have mixed up sex and politics in a way that is genuinely unhealthy. They hate their politics but they want their bodies, and that only makes them even angrier. So they imagine them being raped, or being a slut, or being a whore, because that makes it possible to imagine they might end up f__king them.
(Sorry to be that crude, but there is no other word that fits than “f__king.” It’s not making love. It’s not even having sex. It is far more animalistic than that.)
So anyway, Schultz was suspended from the network. The official release says it will be for a week. But in his announcement of his suspension, he says it is indefinite:
And really you get the sense listening to him that he is genuinely worried. He is also brazenly dishonest, pretending that he cares about truth, honesty or character. Indeed, he only promises never to use those words again, not to never use insulting language again. I suppose he won’t dare to call Ingraham a whore the following week, but do you think he will stop being a dishonest, hateful P.O.S.? Perhaps if his little speech demonstrated any broader sense of remorse I would give him the benefit of the doubt, but he didn’t do that, did he. He acted like as if he was normally a perfectly reasonable voice, who just had one outburst, which is the essential dishonesty in the speech.
And indeed, I will reiterate my theory that the entire Ed Schultz routine is an act anyway. He has decided to be exactly what the hard left imagines Rush Limbaugh to be. Not that Limbaugh is all those things, but there are enough on the hard left who believe that he is those things that they think Schultz is simply fighting fire with fire. But I cannot believe that Schultz is so deluded as to actually believe what he is shoveling. He is like Alan Grayson, a carny barker pretending to be a flamethrower.
Hat tip: Mediaite.
[Posted and authored by Aaron Worthing.]