How do you feel about Ed Schultz, a supposed Progressive, giving RON PAUL a 20 minutes interview

[in_cog_ni_to]

yesterday? I was in the car and when Ed said he would be interviewing Ron Paul on his show, my head exploded. WHY did he give that racist 20 minutes airtime on a SUPPOSED Progressive radio show? I couldn't listen to the interview in the car yesterday, so I went online today and forced myself to listen to it just to see if Schultz called the PIG on his racism and of course, he didn't. I just sent Schultz an email about it with a link to Stormfront.com (A White Supremacist group that RP accepted campaign donations from) and all of DUer, jobycom's, racist quotes. I just thought I'd enlighten him and let him know just exactly who the PIG is.

How do you feel about people like Ed Schultz, who tries to portray himself as a "Progressive", yet has people like Ron Paul on his show? Ed is in Iowa. He was in Iowa yesterday and could have had anyone on his show and he CHOSE to have on Ron Paul? WHY?

[helderheid]

1. Ed is no progressive n/t

[in_cog_ni_to]

4. I know that, but he plays one on the radio.

:(

AND he spends day after day after day bashing Hillary Clinton. Screw him.

[helderheid]

20. Such is true!

[Stuckinthebush]

2. I agree about Ron Paul

I'm amazed that there seem to be some here at DU who really like the guy.

Ed tries to be as even handed as possible - at least that's my take. I didn't hear the interview, but I would imagine that he hit him with some tough questions.

[in_cog_ni_to]

7. NO, he didn't hit him with ANY tough questions...and then thanked him for the pleasure of the

interview.:grr:

Here's the interview...if you can stomach it:

http://home.comcast.net/~kpijon/Ron_Paul_on_Ed_Schultz.mp3

[Stuckinthebush]

8. Jeez...

That's messed up.

[OregonBlue]

3. Hopefully because Paul will keep doing well and split the pug vote.

[Sanity Claws]

5. Hillary won't go on his show

I didn't listen to the show so I don't know whether Ed Schultz was helpful or hurtful to Paul. Tom Hartmann regularly brings on people who are conservative in order to tear them apart.
I remember hearing that Hillary Clinton won't go on his show or any show run by Air AMerica.

[in_cog_ni_to]

9. It was a softball interview. All he did was let RP talk about all the great things he wants to do

to destroy our government. Schultz didn't challenge him on any issue. NOT ONE.

[rodeodance]

14. He was dissing Hil last week--I turned him off.

[still_one]

31. He was dissing Hillary because she would not appear on his show

EVERY other Democratic candidate had no problem

She didn't want to answer direct questions, because she was concerned she could NOT triangulate her answers as she usually does

Frankly, I think it would have been to her advantage to appear. Bill Clinton had no problem appearing on faux news

[in_cog_ni_to]

36. Why would Schultz want to ask Hillary tough questions and didn't bother to do the same with Ron Paul

WTF?

[still_one]

39. Since I didn't hear the show your talking about, I can't really address that

Did he allow callers to ask paul questions?

When I heard Dennis Kucinich and Edwards on his show, he didn't ask them tough questions either.

The reason I suspect he would want give Hillary a harder time, and by harder time, I don't mean rude, is because she won't appear on his show. That of course is not a good reason, but I think that objectively is why he would be harder on her than most of his guests

[0007]

6. I think its great!

But I wish Ed would stick to issues like this one.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E02E7DF...

[in_cog_ni_to]

12. Why is it great?

Why should Schultz be giving airtime to the likes of Ron Paul? Schultz didn't challenge him on anything. NOTHING.

[still_one]

23. Are you saying he didn't let the callers ask paul any questions?

Schultz will have anyone on his show, so will Thom Hartman. What are we afraid of?

He also gives Kucinich and other progressive a lot of time.

Is their anything that paul said that you didn't already know about? We know he is anti-abortion, for state's rights, for us getting out of Iraq, and essentially an isolationist policy

What questions would you have asked?

[in_cog_ni_to]

38. Yes they asked questions, but NO ONE EVER ASKS HIM ABOUT HIS RACISM! I'm not

afraid of anything. The RWers OWN the airwaves. There's ONE FREAKIN' LIBERAL STATION IN CHICAGO and THAT station goes off the air at 5 freakin' 30 in the afternoon. It's a daytime ONLY station and I don't think they NEED to be airing their freakin' RW views on what little time we do get on the airwaves! WTF is wrong with that? Let them go on Boortz, Savage, Rush Limpball, InSannity, Glenn Beck, O'LIElly or any other RW radio show which DOMINATES the airwaves...they don't need to use ours. That doesn't make someone afraid. It makes me sick as shit of them having a platform on the MINIMAL airtime we do get.

[still_one]

41. That is his style. I definitely understand your frustration. Unfortunately,

the only option you have at this time is streaming or satellite radio

Of course the real problem that caused all this crap was the communication act of the 90's, and the destruction of the fairness doctrine

In my view, Schultz will slowly get us a foothold back into the market. He has shown that his show, even though it is not as progressive as you would like, can make money, and that is all the markets are looking for at this time

Hopefully, that will change

The most outrageous thing in my view is that CNN gives that racist glen beck airtime

Other than that I don't know what we as consumer's can do about the lack of progressive view points

[0007]

53. Because Ed Schultz should talk to as many candidates as possible.

Why limit it?

[chascarrillo]

10. Schultz had a fawining interview with :Lou Dobbs a year or two back

That's when he was dead to me. Never listened to him since.

[still_one]

25. So you ignored his interviews with Kucinich, Edwards, and Obama I guess

Incidently, Hillary wouldn't appear on his show

[chascarrillo]

46. I absolutely ignored the interviews because I ditched Ed Schultz

The Lou Dobbs interview was a big sloppy wet kiss. Not a contrary word was said. Anyone who aids and abets Dobbs's vile, putrid racist bile can go and fuck off for all I care.

[undeterred]

11. He's got 3 hours to fill. Gives people time to take a break.

Ron Paul is nuts.

[KansDem]

13. Depends on the milieu, I guess...

I didn't hear the interview, so I'm not speaking about what was said or discussed, however, giving him airtime to let him disseminate his views and not challenging him is one thing. Giving him airtime and pounding him with questions about his views and requiring him to back up his comments with facts is quite another. CorpMedia currently subscribes to the former, not the latter, version of "journalism."

I agree that Schultz should have called him on his ties with white supremacists. Paul should have been permitted to explain his stance. I understand that that is how a functioning democracy is supposed to work.

I'd love to see someone like Olbermann give 15 minutes of airtime to Bush.

[Diamonique]

15. Schultz is pissed...

... because ABC/FOX left Ron Paul out of the upcoming debate. He feels the Paul has a following, and has a right to be heard. That's why he had him on... not because he agrees with him.

[in_cog_ni_to]

17. It's not Ed Schultz's job to carry the repuke garbage on his show. Let Rush Limpballs do it.n/t

[still_one]

29. Hey, you don't want to listen, don't listen. He is a top rated show for a reason

Also most progressives and liberals appear on his show, there is nothing wrong with presenting an oppossing view once and a while, especially someone is controversial like paul

On the whole most of his guests are progressives

If you just want to hear a catartic experience of trashing the repukes listen, without arguing why their ideas are crap then listen to Malloy

[still_one]

26. Absolutely.

[blondie58]

16. Ed like to let everyone have their say, even Repubs

but his voice is a big turn off for me- he sounds too much like Rush Limbaugh. I much prefer Thom Hartman or Mike Malloy. Ron Paul does have some good ideas, but the fact IS he is a Libertarian/Republican with a totally different set of values.

[still_one]

30. What are we afraid of. Schultz provides a way to influence republicans to our views

and that is good

He doesn't insult his callers or hang up on them, and does not pre-screen calls

[salin]

18. maybe he is trying to mess with the GOP race

look he seems to be mostly centrist, so I imagine many of his listeners are centrist and/or independents. Some of those folks might like the libertarian (esp the isolationist) rhetoric - so perhaps ole Ed is trying to mess up the repubs numbers (esp since the pubbies won't let Paul be at the debate) by inspiring some of those independent listeners to go to the pubbie caucuses and primaries and stick it to the gop by voting for their least favorite candidate.

[still_one]

19. Ed is the best thing that happened to progressive talk along with Sam Seder

He doesn't alienate the other side, but provides an opportunity for them, especially the independents, to listen to our point of view

You mention why he gave Ron Paul 20 minutes? He gave Dennis Kucinich much more time, and allows ANYONE to be on his show, which incidently, Hillary Clinton refused to do. Edwards or Obama had no problem appearing on the show

If brings all ideas to the table, as does Sam Seder, and allows the callers to provide the tough issues

If you want to hear someone just rant and rave about the BFEE, and slam and hang callers who don't fit a particular mode, listen to Mike Malloy

If you want critical thinking, listen to Seder and Schultz

Yes, Ed doesn't fit the mold, but he was against our involvement in Iraq BEFORE we went in, is for stem cell research, and most of the progressive ideas

but most important, he has the ratings, and that is why he is good for our cause

[ProfessorGAC]

21. Give Him Enough Rope

The more people who aren't already drinking the Kool-Aid hear from the lunatic, the better. The Schultz audience is going to mostly be moderates and centrists who aren't already willing to jump in with the Randian fringe. The more they know about him, the more likely he is to turn people off.
The Professor

[morgan2]

22. the same reason fox news gives the most time to kucinich and

sharpton.

[Earth_First]

24. While I am no Big Eddy supporter...

Would you rather a Limbaugh/Hannity/Beck/O'Reilly format where only one viewpoint is presented day in and day out?

...or screened out to prevent dissenting opinion?

[in_cog_ni_to]

33. YES, I would. How do you think they've rallied the troops all these years?

It sure as hell isn't because they have Liberals on their shows. They have their own airwaves. Hell, they have ALL of the airwaves...they certainly shouldn't be allowed time on ours. Why do you think they alienate Liberals on their shows? It's because they want THEIR message to get out, not the Liberal message. That is exactly what we should do...send out our message and BURY theirs.

[dionysus]

27. thom hartman interviews rw loonies all the time... whats the big deal?

[in_cog_ni_to]

35. Thom Hartmann CHALLENGES them with FACTS. Schultz doesn't...BIG DIFFERENCE....n/t

[still_one]

42. You are absolutely correct, Shultz isn't the sharpest tack, but his show

makes money, and the otherside will listen to an Ed Schultz over say a Mike Malloy, and we are able to get some of our ideas out, which is everything

He also has far more progressives on his show than right wingers, and like Sam Seder lets right wingers hang themselves

Heard a show where a caller was making an ass out of himself by telling Schultz that Obama was a Muslim, and anti-American

Schultz not only exposed that caller's distortion and racism, but at the same time informed his listeners, which are the other side, the stupidity of that position

[allthingsimportant]

28. I really can't take Ed serouslly....

and am very pissed that on XM they carry him live over Hartman.

Before the '06 election he was taking points right from the RW playbook. He had the balls to say that the "leftists on the coasts have to be more in touch with middle america or the dems will never win another election".

Now I know there are some very good progressives living in states all throughout this country, however please don't tell me that I have to in touch with the same people who want creationism taught in schools, the same people that if it was not for the supreme court and the national guard would still segregate schools, etc, etc, etc....

Let Ed and people like him call me an elitist. I have no problem with that. If that means I am educated, and believe that all people are really equal...then so be it.

[LSK]

32. Thom Hartmann always has Conservatives on his show

:shrug:

[in_cog_ni_to]

37. See post #35. n/t

[napi21]

34. I listen to Ed almost every day. Yes he has all kind of guests on his

show, and he has stated many times that he would give ANY candidate the entire 3 hours on his show to put forth their views. The only demand he had was that they had to take unscreened calls from his audience. That's what he gave Dennis.

I listened to his show yesterday. He didn't beat up on Paul, but he didn't give him a free ride either.

I guess I'm not "left" enough to suit many of you, but I like listening to all sides at least once. I've NEVER voted for a Pub and don't ever intend to! I like Paul's position on Iraq and that the US should STOP sticking it's nose in everybody elses business, but that's where my agreement with him ends!

[Kashka-Kat]

40. JUST FINE THANK u

the world needs more communication/ cross fertilization

NOT LESS.

What exactly are you "losing" by acknowledging common ground with someone you may disagree with on most other things?

[in_cog_ni_to]

43. LOL...I have no "common ground" with any repuke...ESPECIALLY a racist like Ron Paul

from above post:

The RWers OWN the airwaves. There's ONE FREAKIN' LIBERAL STATION IN CHICAGO and THAT station goes off the air at 5 freakin' 30 in the afternoon. It's a daytime ONLY station and I don't think they NEED to be airing their freakin' RW views on what little time we do get on the airwaves! WTF is wrong with that? Let them go on Boortz, Savage, Rush Limpball, InSannity, Glenn Beck, O'LIElly or any other RW radio show which DOMINATES the airwaves...they don't need to use ours. That doesn't make someone afraid. It makes me sick as shit of them having a platform on the MINIMAL airtime we do get.

[yurbud]

44. Ed also gives more time and positive coverage to unions than anyone else on the radio

[LWolf]

45. I think it's a symptom of the condition of the Democratic Party.

When progressives have to go to Ron Paul to get a progressive conversation about Iraq, for example, you know the Democratic Party is leaving progressives behind, despite their claims.

Of course, I don't consider Ed Schultz to be that progressive, myself.

Lastly, just to mix things up a little more, "progressive" does not mean "liberal" or "left." A progressive can be defined someone who wants to achieve change, make "progress" on the change they wish to see, regardless of what that change is. Under that definition, fascists can be "progressive," as long as they are moving fascism forward.

[Buzz Clik]

47. I am not troubled by being informed about all sides of all issues or being exposed to all candidates

I cannot understand why Schultz's standing as a progressive (or not) could have anything to do with who he brings on or what he talks about.

Stupidity and narrow-mindedness are far more dangerous.

[in_cog_ni_to]

49. No. Giving airtime to a racist pig is far more dangerous than my not wanting to give a racist pig

airtime on one of the FEW Liberal/Progressive radio shows we have. Let him spew his crap on Limpballs, Insannity, Glen Beck, Savage, Boortz or O'LIElly's show. They OWN the airwaves. Why waste OURS on the likes of a racist pig? It sucks.

[RFKJrNews]

48. Perhaps the more intriguing question is...

not why Ed Shultz had Ron Paul on his show, but why Ron Paul agreed to do an interview on Air America?

Uuuuh, isn't he a Republican?

OK, just kidding...the answer is fairly obvious. Paul is expecting to win over Democratic-leaning undecided voters in the Iowa caucus. AAR would be a perfect platform to do just that.

Tonight, we'll find out if it worked or not.

[in_cog_ni_to]

50. Yes he is trying to win over Dems and undecided voters. He also runs ads on AA radio.

Why would Schultz be helping him woo voters away from our party?

Schultz isn't on AA radio. I get him on a local Chicago station.....that goes off the air at 5:30 in the afternoon. I don't know who pays him to be on the air. It could be Clear Channel for all I know.:(

[Rosco T.]

51. ..and in that 20 minutes, he exposed the BAD things about Paul

- no medicare, no universal health, no social security.

And when it was done, he basically said 'No Sale' on Ron Paul.

[Wiley50]

52. The same way I feel about Alexander Cockburn at Counterpunch supporting Ron Paul

Some otherwise liberals are blind to the very serious downside of Paul.

As a disabled man living only on my SSI disability, he scares me to death.