Ed Schultz Cuts Off GOP Strategist for Calling Him a Liar About ObamaCare
Ed Schultz on Tuesday abruptly ended an interview with a Republican strategist when she accused him of lying to his audience about the significance of Monday's ruling striking down the Constitutionality of ObamaCare's mandate to buy health insurance.
When the host of MSNBC's "The Ed Show" said, "It’s not a big key element of the health care bill," sparks began to fly (video follows with transcript and commentary):
KAREN HANRETTY, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: No, look, why don’t you just look at the facts of the case and let’s have a discussion about, you know, whether or not the federal government.
JACK RICE, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Let’s talk about the facts of the case.
HANRETTY: .can determine whether or not they can force people across the United States to purchase something that they don’t want to purchase.
ED SCHULTZ, HOST: I can understand.
RICE: It’s a fascinating thing to me. It’s a very same arguments, Ed, that I heard about Social Security and Medicare. It’s the same sort of.
(CROSSTALK)
HANRETTY: You don’t purchase Social Security.
RICE: It’s exactly the same. And by the way, this very same judge said, you know what, we’re going to be arguing this case until 2014 anyway. Trust me, he’s going to make enough money on this either way. So will he benefit from this? Without question. I don’t doubt that. Frankly, if I have a judge who I think is bias, he should remove himself under these circumstances. It’s what I would expect when I walk into court today and when I walk into court tomorrow.
HANRETTY: What’s the Obama administration going to do? Is the Obama administration going to say, look, let’s send this -- we can appeal this, they can appeal this, you’re right, for the next two years or they can settle it once and for all and send it to the Supreme Court.
SCHULTZ: Well, they’ll probably send it to the Supreme Court. It’s not a big key element of the health care bill, in my opinion, because the insurance companies.
HANRETTY: It’s actually a huge part of the health care bill.
SCHULTZ: No, it’s not.
HANRETTY: No, it is, Ed. And you know what, you’re lying to your viewers.
SCHULTZ: Well, I’m not lying. Wait a minute, now, don’t call me a liar here on my own show here.
HANRETTY: No. You are absolutely -- you’re absolutely giving the wrong impression to your viewers.
SCHULTZ: Karen, I’m not going to take that, all right? You’re going into the gutter.
HANRETTY: If you don’t have a mandate.
SCHULTZ: Karen, you telling me you know more about health care than I do? See ya!
HANRETTY: Yes. I probably do. Sure.
SCHULTZ: No, you don’t, you don’t know. Let me straighten that out. Good night, Karen. Jack, thanks for being here.
HANRETTY: All right. I don’t know more than the guy on the radio. You’re right. I forgot, you’re the health care expert because you’re on the radio.
SCHULTZ: I want to be very clear about this. The president has never gone around saying that you got to have a mandate. This was a controversial issue. The fact of the matter is, one of the things that the Democrats definitely want is to get as many people covered as they possibly can. Now, if this provision is struck down, it will change the CBO forecast because maybe not as many people will be in it. But to say that it is key, no, it has nothing to do with pre-existing condition, it has nothing to do with an insurance company saying that we’re going to drop you because you got sick. Those are the two big things. It has nothing to do with young kids going on their parents’ policy until the age of 26. Those are the three big things in the health care bill.
The individual mandate isn't important to ObamaCare? That's certainly not how the Hill saw it on Monday:
The individual mandate was a central part of the healthcare reform law. It requires all people to buy insurance by 2014 or face a penalty. [...]
"Anyone familiar with 'ObamaCare' knows that Congress would not have approved any of its major provisions absent the individual mandate," said Michael Cannon of the libertarian Cato Institute. "The compulsion contained in the individual mandate was the main reason that most Democrats voted in favor of the law." [...]
However, major parts of the law — including the prohibition against rejecting people with pre-existing conditions and the requirement that everyone be offered the same rates regardless of their medical condition — "cannot be severed" from the mandate, the administration acknowledged.
Judge Hudson appeared to agree, saying that it would be "virtually impossible within the present record to determine whether Congress would have passed this bill" without the mandate. "Moreover," he added, "without the benefit of extensive exert testimony and significant supplementation of the record, this Court cannot determine what, if any, portion of the bill would not be able to survive independently."
Schultz himself must have felt the individual mandate was key to the legislation, for in March when the first lawsuits were filed specifically against this requirement, he devoted a good deal of time bringing on guests to determine the merits of the complaints.
This from March 23:
SCHULTZ: And 14 states officially filed suit against the federal government, claiming the insurance mandate is unconstitutional. With us tonight, Salon.com editor Joan Walsh and Republican strategist John Feehery.
John, I'll start with you first. Let's talk about the lawsuits. Do they have merit, in your opinion? Or is this just political theater and postures before the midterm?
So Schultz was worried about these suits when they were filed, but now that one has gone against the Obama administration, he doesn't think the individual mandate is important.
Seems like Hanretty was right about Schultz's veracity, doesn't it?
- Noel Sheppard's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Dr Ed Schultz??
Submitted by Utherpend on Wed, 12/15/2010 - 12:09pm.
When did Ed get his medical degree? Typical, if someone calls you out, cut their mic and then take over the discussion without giving the other side the ability to retort.
Coward.
That clip was the only time I ever saw Shultz. ACA
Submitted by acaiguana on Wed, 12/15/2010 - 12:15pm.
And it was a doozy.
ACA
...
Quoted from: 'Acaiguana notes from the Underground' (Soon to be at theaters near you)
Insurance
Submitted by iveseenitall on Wed, 12/15/2010 - 2:13pm.
Schultz just admitted it. This "Healthcare" bill is an attempt to kill the private insurance industry by forcing outlandish govenment regulations on it.
BTW--love that "radio talkshow guy" zinger by the young lady.
NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"
"You're not gonna call me a liar on my show"
Submitted by SickofLibs on Wed, 12/15/2010 - 12:22pm.
LOL. So many rules on the Ed Show it's hard to keep up.
See what happens when you have those crazy Republicans on, Schultz? Olby learned this valuable lesson many years ago.
Great slapdown, though.
Um, what?
Submitted by Model850 on Wed, 12/15/2010 - 12:28pm.
RICE: It’s exactly the same. And by the way, this very same judge said, you know what, we’re going to be arguing this case until 2014 anyway. Trust me, he’s going to make enough money on this either way. So will he benefit from this? Without question. I don’t doubt that. Frankly, if I have a judge who I think is bias, he should remove himself under these circumstances. It’s what I would expect when I walk into court today and when I walk into court tomorrow.
Um, what the hell is this guy talking about? Does a federal judge now get paid by how many cases are heard in their court? Exactly how is Judge Hudson going to "make money" off hearing a legal challenge, which is, um, his job? He's paid regardless of how he rules in cases. And even if he were to just sit in his court and hear no cases he'd still draw a paycheck. Or is Rice suggesting misconduct and bribery?
And is Rice alleging bias on Judge Hudson's part? Oh, right. I forgot. Hudson was appointed by Bush so he MUST be biased. Judges appointed by Dems have NO bias whatsoever. Silly me. Why hasn't Rice "complained" about possible bias on the part of the judges who ruled in favor of the administration's position?
Model850
Submitted by Denny Crane on Thu, 12/16/2010 - 12:17am.
This is what he is talking about
http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/12/judge-who-ruled-health-...
We Are The 53%
Thanks
Submitted by Model850 on Thu, 12/16/2010 - 11:24am.
Didn't know about this at the time but I'm not sure it falls into the area of "pay for play." I mean, the dividends Hudson received would be paid regardless of his ruling. And I don't know anything about the author of the piece so I don't know if he was being sarcastic, but he did write this: (emphasis added)
"...it has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that he as a major shareholder in a political messaging firm that gets paid to argue that health care reform's individual mandate is unconstitutional. It's really just that he's a Republican."
But thanks for the link.
No problem Model
Submitted by Denny Crane on Thu, 12/16/2010 - 8:54pm.
I didn't know either so I did a little research.
The first halfway credible thing I found was huff n puff, and it linked to democracy now. (gag)
I think it is just one of those coincidental things.
It's not like he was heavily involved with a racist group like la rasa or something.
We Are The 53%
That was great! Sgt Shultz
Submitted by inquiringmind on Wed, 12/15/2010 - 12:30pm.
That was great! Sgt Shultz called a liar on his own show and he couldn't come back with a good answer.
IT was the most "key part" of any legislation past since . . .
Submitted by Galvanic on Wed, 12/15/2010 - 12:33pm.
. . . Obama took office.
If left to stand, the mandate marks a major empowerment milestone of the Federal government to dictate human behavior. By extending the reach of the commerce clause to include individual decisions not to participate in commerce, there isn't anything the government could not mandate its citizens to do.
Schotsy is a moron
Submitted by hbnolikeee on Wed, 12/15/2010 - 12:41pm.
It is common knowledge that they need the mandate to fund this monstrosity. A better question to Schotsy: Are you stupid or a liar?
Deleted.
Submitted by Newsbusterbrown on Wed, 12/15/2010 - 2:14pm.
Deleted.
“There are no easy answers, but there are simple answers. We must have the courage to do what we know is morally right.” - Ronald Reagan (1964 Republican Convention)
mmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Submitted by djwolf12 on Wed, 12/15/2010 - 12:46pm.
Karen hanretty is one hot momma!!!!!!
Hot she is, as in smokin'
Submitted by Newsbusterbrown on Wed, 12/15/2010 - 2:15pm.
Hot she is, as in smokin' hot!“There are no easy answers, but there are simple answers. We must have the courage to do what we know is morally right.” - Ronald Reagan (1964 Republican Convention)
Sgt. Shultz is not only a liar, but an idiot, to boot
Submitted by Dave. on Wed, 12/15/2010 - 12:51pm.
Repealing just the individual mandate would save $202 Billion.
But Brain-Dead Ed says the individual mandate is not a "key element of the health care bill."
Right, Ed, and a pig's arse isn't really pork, either.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
Ditto
Submitted by jon_torlin on Wed, 12/15/2010 - 1:23pm.
It just proves all along, as we have known, that this bill was design to break the country. And if we needed proof that the dems are indeed trying to break the country, this nonsense of a 1900+ page bill they came out with yesterday is proof of it. They are scuttling the ship with the passengers locked belowdecks.
These bastards need to be thrown out TODAY.
-Jon
Sgt. Shultz
Submitted by RightRealDeal on Wed, 12/15/2010 - 12:55pm.
Why is this clown still on the air? Isn't he embarrassing even for MSNBC? Oh, that's right Olby is still on too; Comcast hasn't rode into town yet.
They can't get rid of Schotsy
Submitted by hbnolikeee on Wed, 12/15/2010 - 1:05pm.
He is pooping on the moron envelope and is not done. Soon he will have piled it so high that the envelope is pushed to hell like he and his ilk belong.
It is undeniable that in that
Submitted by Beukeboom on Wed, 12/15/2010 - 1:08pm.
It is undeniable that in that segment he either lied or was completely ignorant of the subject. Either way he's amateur-hour.
Isn't the individual mandate
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Wed, 12/15/2010 - 1:24pm.
Essential to paying for this BS? IIRC, the mandate was imposed to keep people from not purchasing insurance and thus drying up funds. That's why the penalty was put in, to make sure money still rolls in.
the mandate IS the bill
Submitted by OffTheLows on Wed, 12/15/2010 - 1:29pm.
I'm not sure Ed is a liar though, because he is a meathead who probably had a few too many concussions during his football days. Everything revolves around the mandate, that's how you can get rid of pre existing conditions. You can't have the latter without the former. Even removing the lifetime caps has some dependency on the mandate. In theory the mandate sounds good to those who espouse personal responsiblity, but the problem is that not everyone can afford health insurance, so now and especially in the out years, this will become a psuedo entitilement/welfare program with those who can afford insurance footing the bill through taxes and higher premiums to those who can't.
Government option
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Wed, 12/15/2010 - 1:33pm.
The mandate was going to fund the government option. If people don't pay for insurance, or get penalized in the form of fees, then the government can't afford to offer their option, not without raising taxes. That would destroy their agenda here.
Where did Ed get his law degree?
Submitted by allouchsit on Wed, 12/15/2010 - 1:39pm.
"Congress found that this minimum coverage provision 'is an essential part of this
larger regulation of economic activity,' and that its absence 'would undercut Federal regulation of the health insurance market.' Id. §§1501(a)(2)(H), 10106(a)." (Department of Justice, Memorandum in Support of Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment, page 13)
Ed needs to call the DOJ and let them know they have this thing all wrong and that is why they lost that case in Virginia.
"I know nothing"...."My
Submitted by DWoSD on Wed, 12/15/2010 - 1:56pm.
"I know nothing"...."My viewers know nothing"...and "I count on that."
That left a mark
Submitted by Tomorama on Wed, 12/15/2010 - 2:08pm.
Karen is totally correct here, this was a huge part of the plan, EVERYONE forced onto it would help pay for those who can't pay for it.
Oblunder actually is on record saying that a mandate is the right thing to do.
Ed you fat bast@@@, you are either dumb or lying, your pick.
Karen. hugs go out for you for coining OUR NEW name for him not Radio Flyer but "Radio LIAR".
I will use it anyway...................................
But to say that it is
Submitted by TerryWest on Wed, 12/15/2010 - 2:23pm.
" But to say that it is key, no, it has nothing to do with pre-existing condition, it has nothing to do with an insurance company saying that we’re going to drop you because you got sick. Those are the two big things. It has nothing to do with young kids going on their parents’ policy until the age of 26. Those are the three big things in the health care bill."---- Those are only the "three big" parrot talking points of the Obamcare disaster that you can grasp Ed, the majority of America can comprehend the entire " big thing" and it's over all negative consequence.
Wow, I loved that, we need
Submitted by Radical1979 on Wed, 12/15/2010 - 2:32pm.
Wow, I loved that, we need more Republicans to speak out like that woman!
When all else fails and Schutlz can't win the arguement, shut off the microphone. That's the way all 5 year olds do it.
Wee, Wee, Weee
Submitted by Tomorama on Wed, 12/15/2010 - 3:04pm.
Radio liar took his microphone and went home?
Google Obama and Snuffaluffagus interview where Oblunder uh, uh, uh, uh clearly explains why the mandate is so important.
The other beef was that they were saying at the time IT WAS NOT A TAX and even Snuffy took him to school on it.
IF YOU MANDATE someone to buy something and they DON'T and you then take money from them, that is a TAX on the folks making less than $250,000.
Thank god for the internets......., thanks Al Gore.
"Colonel Hogannn!!!"
Submitted by bigdaddy on Wed, 12/15/2010 - 3:19pm.
"I know nothink...NOTHINK!!!"
"Apfel Strudel!!!!"
He who fights and runs away,
Lives to fight another day
-Eddie "Sgt." Schultz
If you can't debate 'em, cut 'em off!
"Good Bye...Good Night...See Ya..."
-typical Eddie responses when he is confronted by the truth from one of his guests.
Lean Forward, Grab Ankles!
he needs to check with the peeps at msnbc first
Submitted by sarainitaly on Wed, 12/15/2010 - 4:20pm.
he needs to check with the peeps at msnbc first, before he starts rattling off those falsehoods.
Everyone into the risk pool — or else
‘Individual mandate’ to buy health insurance is key to universal coverage ~ msnbcI think I like Ed's method of allowing free speech
Submitted by TheHistorian on Wed, 12/15/2010 - 4:45pm.
and equal time for all sides of the argument. If Rush, Sean, or Glenn did this to a liberal analyst, there would be he11 to pay. But, since it was a liberal doing it to a Republican, it was all right.
I am so glad that liberals have such strong principles and beliefs in free speech.
Dennis Prager
I don't think he have any
Submitted by 4rcane on Thu, 12/16/2010 - 3:23am.
I don't think he have any loyal viewers or fans. They're simply people who have nothing to do one day and just flip on a channel. He insult his audiences daily by lying to them. This is not something Rush, Beck, Hannity or Levin do. They discuss important topics honestly and giving their audiences both side of the debate. Of course, they mock the left's argument, but at least they tell their audiences what they are
MSNBC acts like a stupid school yard bully
Submitted by jackieaxe on Thu, 12/16/2010 - 9:44am.
GE/MSNBC is nothing but school yard bully name calling. They are constantly attacking Fox News while their line up of morons just can't hold back their stupid hatred on working people's money. It doesn't get more snarky that Rachel Maddow, and it doesn't get stupider than Ed Shultz. Mathews and Olbermann are no prizes either.