Ed Schultz Condemns Media Not 'Cheerleading' for Bailout of Detroit

Ed Schultz Condemns Media Not 'Cheerleading' for Bailout of Detroit

By Jack Coleman (Bio | Archive)
Mon, 12/08/2008 - 13:48 ET

Liberal radio host Ed Schultz is fed up with denizens of mainstream media and their skepticism about yet another federal bailout, this one for Big Three automakers.

Here's what Schultz said on his nationally syndicated show Dec. 3, prior to Democrats in Congress announcing a "rescue package" for Detroit --

"Folks, why are you being such a hard ass on the Big Three? And I'm asking the question of the networks, I'm asking it right up, where's the cheerleading?!"

Lest anyone get the impression Schultz was kidding, he hammered away at this later in the show while speaking with a caller --

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

SCHULTZ: Look, we're either going to pull together and get this thing done, but to vilify an industry when it has such a ripple effect if they fail, I just think is the wrong way to go.

CALLER: But we need to call the networks.

SCHULTZ: Yeah, they're not, they're not, they should be cheerleading! They should! Forget all this journalistic crap! I'm serious!

(click here for audio)

You know, like you did for Obama during the campaign!

Speaking of the campaign, Schultz provided an example of what he expects of media "cheerleading" on Sept. 18 when he spoke with Alaska state senator Bill Wielchowski about the first "Troopergate" probe and investigator Steve Branchflower. As Schultz demonstrates, "cheerleading" can take the form of not asking follow-up questions that could hardly be more obvious but, if asked, might mean a setback for "the team" (click here for audio) --

Wielchowski initially refers to Republican criticism of the Alaskan legislature's investigation as motivated by partisanship, then makes a eyebrow-raising revelation --

WIELCHOWSKI: They didn't want a Republican, they didn't want a Democrat looking at this. They wanted this to be non-partisan. That's why they hired an independent investigator.

SCHULTZ: All right, they're saying (Branchflower's) a Democrat.

WIELCHOWSKI: He's not a Democrat ...

SCHULTZ: He's not?

WIELCHOWSKI: ... He doesn't even live in Alaska anymore, he's lived here for 25 years, he lives in South Carolina now. This guy has been a prosecutor, well respected, in fact, 25-year prosecutor, he actually wrote a scathing report about Walt Monegan, the commissioner, a few years ago on, on another issue (laughs). So the idea that, you know, one of the things that they're saying is, well he's friends with Walt Monegan because he was a prosecutor and Walt Monegan used to be a police chief and they used to work together on prosecutions. Well, he actually wrote what the Daily News reported as a, quote, scathing report on Walt Monegan several years ago in another independent investigation that he was asked to do.

SCHULTZ (pause): All right, uh, these people that have been subpoenaed, there's 13 of them ...

See how it works in the Schultz Playbook Of Media Cheerleading? Even when a source underscores the newsworthiness of a revelation by preceding it -- twice -- with "actually," Schultz still can't bring himself to ask an obvious question -- gee, what about that "scathing report," senator? And just out of curiosity, why did you laugh when you brought it up?

Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Where do we turn when we want the news....?

Mon, 12/08/2008 - 13:52 ET by supercon

If all media outlets are to become televised advocacy groups with a newsy flavor then where do I go when I want to listen to the news?

The old media is a painted saloon whore.

Barber shop?

Mon, 12/08/2008 - 13:57 ET by general company

NB, and the Barber shop is were I get mine anymore

"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg

→ Dang straight GC

Mon, 12/08/2008 - 14:01 ET by Cool Arrow

And in four part harmony, no less.

LYDSEXICS UNTIE!

Oh, I think I know why the

Mon, 12/08/2008 - 14:35 ET by dscott

Oh, I think I know why the MSM isn't cheering wildly, that would be the 800# gorilla in the room... The UAW. We all know most of what ailes the big 3, high labor costs, the so called Job Bank and bloated staffing are high up on the list of things that must change otherwise a bailout would have to occur every year until forever. Wagner of GM could take $1 a year as salary for the next 50 years but that would never compensate for the greed of the UAW. The bailout is literally a bridge loan to nowhere as the Senator said.

The 800# gorilla is up to 2/3s of the workers on the assembly lines have to go in order to be competitive with Toyota and Nissan never mind keep the current salaries! The UAW has been fighting this for years.

What the MSM is tip towing around and NOT asking the question and you noticed the Democrats at the hearing WOULDN'T ask is if we give you this money to modernize and stay competitive, how many workers would you have to shed?

Here is an interesting article from the labor side, their mentality: http://www.labornotes.org/node/951

Unionized workers typically do cost their companies more. The whole point of unions is to force management to consider workers' needs, even if they hurt the bottom line.

http://www.richmond-toyota.com/buy-american.htm

Each of the Big Three manufacturers in the same year employed roughly three times as many U.S. workers, on a per-car-sold basis, as Toyota. "What's better for the American economy?" Mr. Doyle asks. A GM car "built in Mexico with 147,000 jobs back here in America or a Honda built in Alabama with 4,000 or 5,000 jobs in America?"

http://nospeedbumps.com/?p=606

GM versus Toyota costs.

THE UGLY TRUTH IS THERE WILL BE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF LAYOFFS IN DETROIT NO MATTER IF THEY GET THE BRIDGE LOAN OR NOT. Why waste $15 billion for a couple months to delay the inevitable, the big 3 must declare chapter 11, slash the payroll, slash the wages, slash the retirement benefits and slash the non-productive dealerships to survive in the 21st century.

Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, starving the poor one gallon of ethanol at a time. Fill your tank with E85 and cull a village.

Damage Control

Mon, 12/08/2008 - 14:57 ET by jackie3

I don't think the Unions or any other org is making them sit on the sidelines for this one. I believe it's called "damage control." The news has already made an ass out of themselves with the bail-outs, with cheerleading a "socialist" into office. They already cheerleader their way to the verge of bankruptcy.

Now, they will sit back on the un-popular issue and let the dice fall. Thus, they don't look any more bias than they already are.

Damage control--that's all it is.

Never under estimate the power of stupid people in large groups.

Give them a break, Ed

Mon, 12/08/2008 - 15:12 ET by Arminius

"Folks, why are you being such a hard ass on the Big Three? And I'm asking the question of the networks, I'm asking it right up, where's the cheerleading?!"

The mainstream media just spent two years cheerleading for Obama. They're obviously exhausted, so give them some time to rest up.

Don't Bailout the Big 3

Mon, 12/08/2008 - 15:53 ET by PopularTech

First of all the Federal Government is broke, that is why we have a deficit. The bailout will do nothing but temporarily prop up unsound businesses that are uncompetitive and cause more inflation. The Big 3 should have long ago downsized and became more efficient. This is how the market works and market failures cannot be fixed with socialism.

Detroit Needs Drilling, Not Bailouts (FOX News)
Don't Bail Out the Big Three (The American)
Let Detroit Go Bankrupt (The New York Times)
Say No to the Auto Bailout (CNN)
There's nothing wrong with a "Big Two" (New York Daily News)
Why Bankruptcy Is the Best Option for GM (The Wall Street Journal)

Amazing that the Japanese can open a new plant just as this is going on:

Honda opens new U.S. plant as Detroit seeks bailout (Reuters)

Censored Global Warming Videos

Now here's a most

Mon, 12/08/2008 - 16:29 ET by dscott

Now here's a most unpleasant admission: http://wordpress.redstate.com/blog/2008/12/08/barney-frank-predicts-second-big-3-bailout/

"At least Frank is honest about how much of your money he wants to spend saving the jobs of the UAW. The billions spent this week (if the plan goes through) will be just a small downpayment on a tab that will run well past $100 billion."

So after we have frittered away those hundreds of billions of dollars on maintaining the status quo, who will be on the hook for paying it back? Tell me again, what is in it for us?

Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, starving the poor one gallon of ethanol at a time. Fill your tank with E85 and cull a village.

→ Barney Frank's plan

Mon, 12/08/2008 - 16:37 ET by Cool Arrow

Obviously Barney Frank believes Americans crave economically what he craves intimately and personally.

LYDSEXICS UNTIE!

Ed Who?

Mon, 12/08/2008 - 16:49 ET by ZuccoZoid

Who cares about this Ed Schultz guy, nobody listens or cares - why draw attention to him?

Do you monitor ham radio as well?

Bashing the Detroit Three

Mon, 12/08/2008 - 23:13 ET by BW222

I realize that it's fashionable to bash the Detroit Three (and they have a lot to be bashed for), but here are a few facts that are readily ignored:

1. Most foreign car companies receive significant government support (European and Asian). Germany and Franch recently gave "bailout" money to their vehicle manufacturers. The Japanese have even manipulated the yen to benefit its auto manufacturers.

2. Try to import a vehicle into Japan or Korea and you'll see how protective their import laws are.

3. Most Import nameplates currently receive more tax breaks than the Detroit Three (primarily from local and state goverments as incentives to locate their plants).

4. The imports are also being hurt by the sales slump. Toyota and Nissan had greater sales declines than Ford in November

5.There is so little objection to huge bailouts to CitiGroup and AIG compared to the auto companies. CitiGroup recently paid $400 million for the naming rights to the Mets new stadium and AIG paid $125 million for sponsorship of Manchester United (British soccer team). Where's the level of outrage that's shown toward the Detroit Three?

By the way, Ed Schultz admits he drives a Toyota.

BW222

Points 1, 2 & 4 well

Tue, 12/09/2008 - 09:30 ET by dscott

Points 1, 2 & 4 well taken. However, you missed the point, the average person doesn't buy much of European cars, it's mostly the yuppies and limosine liberals. The Japanese had the wit to realize small cars were a niche where they could recover their money IF they assembled them in the US thus bypassing import tariffs. This is also why US car companies have assembly plants in other countries, the exact same tactic of bypassing import tariffs. Buick is a big seller in China. Like the Japanese with Toyota and Nissan, the US big 3 repatriate profits from foreign countries to their share holders. Why build them here to ship there when you can maximize your profit by cutting out the shipping cost???? There is no import tariff on profits and all foreign taxes they pay are a direct credit against any US taxes they would owe. That BW222 is globalization.

#3 - you just pointed out that low taxation creates jobs.

#5 - you must have been sleeping through the tantrum the country went through with crap sandwich 1.0 causing the Congress to vote it down. We all here strenously objected to crap sandwich 2.0 as well but you know the cowards in Congress were too afraid of being blamed for doing nothing when the s$%%#$%t was going to hit the fan anyway. They ran for political cover to claim "they did something even though it failed so you can't blame them for not trying." We equally object to all bailouts.

Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, starving the poor one gallon of ethanol at a time. Fill your tank with E85 and cull a village.