Ed Schultz Reveals Inner Warmonger, Trumpets Obama's Decision to 'Invade' Libya
To tweak the punchline of an old joke -- what's this talk of invading, paleface?
Unleashing the bellicosity that's been kept corked since MSNBC put the kibosh on his "Psycho Talk" segments, Ed Schultz has weighed in at The Huffington Post in an op-ed titled "Why I Support President Obama's Decision to Invade Libya."
Psst, Ed -- we haven't invaded Libya, at least not yet. And I'd venture to say that most Americans don't expect we will, at least if Obama is to be believed. Remember how he said American troops would not be sent there? The president was pretty emphatic about it, as I recall. Agreed, it was all of eight days ago, distant enough that it slipped down your memory hole.
What's most amusing about Schultz as shill for Obama's exercise in foreign-policy resume building is that Schultz vilified Sen. John McCain during the 2008 campaign as a "warmonger." It brought considerable attention to Schultz at the time, which was surely his motivation for saying it, and Schultz has repeated it ad nauseum ever since. Now Schultz is gushing about actions taken by Obama that are indistinguishable from those that President McCain would have taken.
Correction -- this isn't amusing. It's pathetic.
Schultz writes at HuffPo that after nearly a decade of war in Afghanistan and eight years in Iraq, "I think many of us have war fatigue. I think we all deserve clarity on this issue. However, it's important to note, President Obama explained this won't be a long-term operation. Matter of days, not a matter of weeks. Not even months."
Obama, and Schultz, believing this based on the confident expectation that wars always go according to plan.
Republicans, Schultz writes, "are hammering the president not because he is not invading the entire Middle East, but because he's not doing it the way they would want to do it.'" (italics in original).
Wow, talk about getting tied up in nots. As for those shadowy Republicans who want to invade "the entire Middle East" -- insert frantic Maddow hand-waving here -- Schultz cites exactly none.
"This president, President Obama, has made his choice," Schultz writes. "And it is his leadership. He inherited Iraq. He inherited Afghanistan. And now, he has made a decision to invade Libya."
Enough with the hand-me-downs, he wants his own splendid little war.
- Jack Coleman's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
This video cartoon, for
Submitted by motherbelt on Sat, 03/26/2011 - 10:19pm.
This video cartoon, for anyone who hasn't seen it yet, will explain the difference between Barack Obama and George Bush.
Obama is awesome!
is there a joke to be had
Submitted by TruthMonger on Sun, 03/27/2011 - 7:31am.
is there a joke to be had here about Eds brown nose...? just curious
Congratulations Jimmy Carter!
motherbelt,
Submitted by Ashrak on Sun, 03/27/2011 - 9:57am.
Thanks for sharing that.
I especially loved the faceplant!
Have Michael Moore on your show then.
Submitted by Texndoc on Sat, 03/26/2011 - 10:46pm.
He disagrees. I'd tune in (to laugh). Or is he invited only when you two lick each other clean like cats?
That might be worthy of a pay per view.
Submitted by Army Brat on Sun, 03/27/2011 - 3:13am.
I bleeb I'd pay a little sum t' see that...
Pathetic
Submitted by grammajane on Sat, 03/26/2011 - 11:18pm.
Pathetic is a polite word for this jerk. Wish he and that ignorant Maher would both slip down a slippery hole. These two having tv shows is an example of low some idiots will go, to get attention. Either are worth the space in NB to write about.
Ed Putz
Submitted by Bill Brasky on Sat, 03/26/2011 - 11:42pm.
This fat slob is the most ignorant buffoon on tv since... since Keith Olbermann.
BRING BACK PSYCHOTALK.. TRUTH IN ADVERTISING
Submitted by JPTSO3 on Sun, 03/27/2011 - 12:20am.
Ed doesn’t just drink the Kool-Aid, he sticks his whole fat-faced melon into the punchbowl and sucks it up like an industrial dredger. My guess is, Ed’s entertainment is watching reruns of Obama's inaugural address while spooning with a life-sized blow up doll of his Messiah.
Schultz, you and your
Submitted by Van Halen on Sun, 03/27/2011 - 12:23am.
Schultz, you and your credibility be damned!
27 MONTHS Obama has had to deal with Afghanistan and Iraq. Longer if you count from his election in November. What has he done? Expanded the war into Yemen and Pakistan. Driven the death toll in Afghanistan to record levels. And yes, we're still in Iraq.
GTMO is still open. Why? Tell us again why, Ed. What is your defense of that?
And now comes the icing on your big fat cake of Obama-defending hypocrisy: War #3. Obama bypassed Congress. Got a coalition half the size of Bush's. Never sat down at the table with Libya. Never gave them a warning. Never told us how this would be funded. Sends our troops into battle and immediately heads off to Brazil to award Soros-dominated Petrobas an oil rig contract so they can drill in the gulf and sell the oil to us. Is Obama a warmonger, Ed? Is Obama an oil man, Ed? Why can't we drill for our own oil, Ed? Why is Obama sending our troops to save the flow of oil to Europe, Ed? Why is Obama even working with oil in any capacity - this 'green energy' President you so fawn over?
More questions, Ed:
Where are the antiwar protests now?
Where is Code Pink now?
Where are Cindy Sheehan, Susan Sarandon and the Dixie Chicks now?
Where is Not In Our Name now?
What happened to No Blood For Oil?
How much is this latest war costing us?
What exactly do we intend to do there?
What is our exit strategy?
Why is Obama ignoring the economy, Japan, and the rest of the Middle East to fight this war?
Why don't the Arab League pony up money, ships and troops?
Is there not a single ONE of you Liberals willing to stand up and denounce this horror? What exactly DO you believe in anyway?
Special Ed can read and
Submitted by LAM SON 719 on Sun, 03/27/2011 - 12:36am.
Special Ed can read and write? Who knew? Judging from his speech, confusion over word definitions and bizzare rants I thought he only ate the crayons and chalk. He is without a doubt the biggest retard on TV radio.
Apples and oranges
Submitted by melvin on Sun, 03/27/2011 - 5:43am.
I think Libya and Iraq are totally different. I supported the war in Afghanistan to get the people that killed us. The war in Iraq was a total mistake. Every body agrees with that. I did always. The Libyan war is going to be limited, it's UN sanctioned, and backed by Europe and the Arab League. I'm for it .
Great
Submitted by sentry_99 on Sun, 03/27/2011 - 5:56am.
Melvin gives the seal of approval because it's UN sanctioned and backed by Europe and the Arabs. Doesn't matter Congress wasn't consulted and no real plan has been laid out with any transparency.
The congress would have approved it
Submitted by melvin on Sun, 03/27/2011 - 6:52am.
I wish the plan would have gone to congress for approval , but it would have been a slam dunk anyway .
Melvin
Wish in one hand.....
Submitted by sentry_99 on Sun, 03/27/2011 - 6:57am.
A slam dunk you say? Maybe there would have been questions asked like "Who are we supporting with airstrikes?" "Who are these rebels?" "Should we really get involved in a civil war?" But, we'll never know since Obama didn't feel the need to be consistent with his campaign jibber-jabber.
I think were on the right side.
Submitted by melvin on Sun, 03/27/2011 - 7:21am.
We are supporting freedom.
That Depends
Submitted by sentry_99 on Sun, 03/27/2011 - 7:29am.
If we knew who was going to be taking over if/when Qaddafi falls then you could say that. However, with reports it's actually Islamists who stand to benefit from our actions, in the long run we could be setting Libya up to turn out like Afghanistan after we aided the Taliban against the Soviets. Time will tell.
We are supporting freedom?
Submitted by hobie on Sun, 03/27/2011 - 9:57am.
Only for the Libyans?
What about the uprisings in:
Iran
Yemen
Syria
Bahrain
Egypt
Saudi Arabia
Each of these countries is doing the exact same thing that the Libyans rebels are doing. Why support only the Libyan revolution?
Next question: Who are the rebels that we are supporting? You don't know, I don't know, O don't know. What happens if the rebels turn out to be worse than Gaddafi?
Your reaction is so knee-jerk and without any support that it is meaningless. Put some details into your arguments or just let the adults chat about the adult topics.
This is a perfect example
Submitted by hobie on Sun, 03/27/2011 - 9:59am.
Of a classic liberal tactic.
A simple lie is easier to spread than a complex truth.
freedom?
Submitted by ripper58 on Sun, 03/27/2011 - 10:27am.
Al Quadea is freedom? how you gonna sell that when our enemies are being back by Obama???? Since when did a "no FLY zone" include attacking TANKS?? didn't know they could FLY!!!!!!!!!
melvin, we got your number---
Submitted by matthewdean on Sun, 03/27/2011 - 6:19pm.
Troll + spam = Troll-spam.
Troll-spam = rotten meat.
MD
Melvin, this comment shows us who you are
Submitted by hobie on Sun, 03/27/2011 - 10:15am.
You are omnipotent! You can both see into the past, and make other people share your opinions!
Let me paraphrase your statement:
Formula: sidestep legality, project personal opinion on others
or
While it is regrettable that our President violated constitutional law in order to drop bombs on a sovereign country and support Al Qaeda fighters, Melvin is okay with it because he conjectures that had the Constitution been followed [again very regrettable that our President is willing to break the law], we'd be in the same place.
Wrong. You are so wrong it is criminal. You confuse your opinion for reality.
You cannot tell the future, nor how anyone informed would react being given this choice, and now you are trying to tell us how a hypothetical situation might have worked out if our Congress were informed of what the President intended to do.
That's a great trick! Do it again; justify some other illegal action by projecting your opinion into the past and onto others!!! Its so neat!
Plan?
Submitted by Radical1979 on Sun, 03/27/2011 - 10:32am.
What plan melvin? What is the goal? When do we stop bombing? What happens if the country falls into a civil war?
Show me a plan for Congress to even approve.
OK. Can you tell us what our missions is?
Submitted by Galvanic on Sun, 03/27/2011 - 4:40pm.
Ultimately, it must end with the removal of Qaddafi -- or not, depending on which US government official you listen to. Even the President, who has yet to consult the Congress or address the nation but found time to grant interviews on the subject, doesn't appear to know.
Obama supporters in the MSM point out that not knowing the outcome of this intervention should not preclude us from taking action.
OK, but this Administration can't even articulate what the desired outcome is. He hasn't even told the Congress.
Instead, he is actually engaging in war while insisting that it is merely a humanitarian mission. This kind of deceit is like Soviet Foreign Minister Molotov's explanation to the League of Nations that the bombs dropped on Helsinki by Soviet bombers were actually "breadbaskets" -- food to help through the 1939-1940 winter.
If this is the face of "kinetic military action," Obama is taking us for a ride, and it dwarves any bait-and-switch Bush Jr. was accused of doing.
How do you know this war is
Submitted by Scuba Dude on Sun, 03/27/2011 - 3:01pm.
How do you know this war is going to be limited, do you have a functioning crystal ball?
UN sanctioned? What about Congressional approval? The President bypassed them in waging his war.
Backed by Europe and the Arab League? Did you know the Iraq War had at least 27 countries that deployed forces and resources? What does The Absentee President have?
Send your own son to Libya CHICKENHAWK SHULTZ
Submitted by Jack Bauer on Sun, 03/27/2011 - 6:49am.
Okay Schultz* how about SENDING YOUR GOLFER SON TO FIGHT, you stinking hypocrite
Yes yes, I know it's a bizarre argument to think that a father could send his adult offspring to join up.
But I'm using Putz's own TOXIC LOGIC (and then degenerate left) and his previous form in calling conservatives, who supported the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, CHICKENHAWKS if they hadn't served. Or if they were not prepared to press gang their adults kids into the military. As if they could.
http://radioequalizer.blogspot.com/2007/09/liberal-talk-radio-ed-schultz...
An argument between a GOP supporter and liberal talk radio host Ed Schultz over the Iraq war actually turned physical, according to the Forum of Fargo, North Dakota.
Nagle, who was visiting relatives in the area, said his cousin introduced him to Schultz Saturday night. She wrongly thought Schultz was still a Republican, as he was earlier in his radio broadcasting career.
Nagle, who was with his fiancee Saturday, said he and Schultz had a civil discussion for about 10 minutes and that Schultz didn’t appear uncomfortable. The conversation went sour when Nagle said he respects Joe Lieberman, the Independent Democratic senator from Connecticut known for supporting the Iraq war.
Nagle said Schultz said he doesn’t like Lieberman, and then commented that if Nagle felt so strongly about the war, his family should go over and fight in it.
The daughter of Nagle’s fiancee serves in the Army and may soon go to Iraq.
His fiancee’s son-in-law has served in Iraq. “It was at that time that Mr. Schultz completely lost control, in my opinion,” Nagle said. “He became enraged, and then our interactions became far less civil.”
This is from Sgt. Putz's Radio Show forum
http://edschultz.invisionzone.com/index.php?showtopic=1781
Another Republican Chickenhawk wont send his own sons to fight for HIS President
"LIBERAL "LOGIC"
#2. It's acceptable for the state to abort a baby carried by 13 year old without TELLING THE PARENTS, but Conservatives have to send their ADULT children to join up.
All of the above Mr Obama? --- How about ALL OF THE BELOW, instead.
Donald Trump: The Word Hope Should Not Be Used When Talking Abou
Submitted by im41 on Sun, 03/27/2011 - 7:31am.
I agree with Trump. Why don’t he just go ahead and show it?
I do not care about the birth
Submitted by Scuba Dude on Sun, 03/27/2011 - 3:21pm.
I do not care about the birth certificate, I would love to see these records that he has under lock and key to be released. I feel there is a treasure trove of information in them that will really show what kind of person he is.
* Occidental College records - not released.
* Columbia Thesis paper - not available, locked down by faculty.
* Harvard College records - not released, locked down by faculty.
* Selective Service Registration - not released.
* Medical records - not released (only a one-page report).
* Illinois State Senate schedule - 'not available.'
* Law practice client list - not released.
* Harvard Law Review articles published - None.
* University of Chicago scholarly articles - None.
* Illinois State Senate records--'not available.'
Scoob---
Submitted by matthewdean on Sun, 03/27/2011 - 6:40pm.
and maybe clarification about a SSN issued from Vermont (?) where he supposedly never resided.
MD
I believe it is Connecticut
Submitted by Scuba Dude on Sun, 03/27/2011 - 6:57pm.
I believe it is Connecticut not Vermont.
There is only a 1 year difference in age between Odumbo and myself. My SS # first set up numbers correspond back to the state I was born in, Florida. I do not know his SS# so I cannot speculate on its issuance, but if the first set of numbers is not between 575 and 576 then I would start to question his origins. Another thing, supposedly his SS # was not issued until sometime around 1977 - 79. Why so long? My parents had ours before we started school. This is very interesting.
Social Security Numbers Structure
The Bosses At MS-DNC Require Adjustments
Submitted by Boil It Down on Sun, 03/27/2011 - 7:35am.
Ed has to reshape his perspective to accomodate the DNC (the parent company of MSNBC). He is merely being lead around by the choke collar. He apparently has no foundation in his own independent thought or objectivity.
I'm sure...
Submitted by commentkazi on Sun, 03/27/2011 - 9:22am.
....every US combat infantryman is relieved to hear Ed's reassurance that this won't be a long operation. It's not like they haven't heard that one before.
Furthermore, who does he think he is to use the phrase "many of us have war fatigue..."?
I'm not sure he understands what war fatigue is. Either way, I'm pretty sure he doesn't have it.
Yes, months!
Submitted by Texndoc on Sun, 03/27/2011 - 12:12pm.
"However, it's important to note, President Obama explained this won't be a long-term operation. Matter of days, not a matter of weeks. Not even months."
Fat Ed might want to check this morning's Drudge Report headlines.
Ed is a pathetic POS.
Submitted by rbosque on Sun, 03/27/2011 - 12:39pm.
Ed is a pathetic POS. Listening to what he has to say is an audible version of a turd. I'm sick of him and people like him.
You think the Chyron operator on his show...
Submitted by redright88 on Sun, 03/27/2011 - 1:00pm.
..has to use smaller than usual fonts...to accommodate for the size of Ed's head?
You think the Chyron operator on his show...
Submitted by redright88 on Sun, 03/27/2011 - 1:00pm.
..has to use smaller than usual fonts...to accommodate for the size of Ed's head?
Special Ed jumped the gun
Submitted by Galvanic on Sun, 03/27/2011 - 2:42pm.
He's working off the WH 'invasion' talking points for April, and now the Administration regrets faxing them early out to MSNBC.
I feel so much better now that Field Marshall von Schultz assures us that this mission -- whatever it is -- will be over soon.
In the immortal words of General Westmoreland, "We can see the light at the end of the tunnel." (November 1967)