Joan Walsh Says She Looks 'Stupid' For Defending Weiner - Then Continues to Defend Him
To a liberal media member, politics means never having to say you were wrong.
On Tuesday's "The Ed Show," Salon's Joan Walsh said she looked "kind of stupid" for defending Congressman Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.) last week, then went right on defending him (video follows with transcript and commentary):
ED SCHULTZ, HOST: Joan, we'll start with you tonight. Thanks for joining us. The New York Times is reporting that Weiner told Nancy Pelosi he would not resign only fifteen minutes before his press conference. Do you think Weiner will ever resign? Is this just part of his overall plan that he will never give in? What do you think?
JOAN WALSH, SALON: I don't know. You know, I don't think that's clear yet. He obviously tried to dig his heels in and say that it wasn't him. He tried that strategy. He lied. And I agree with you, Ed. You know, the lying is what disturbs me. He implicated a lot of us. I defend, I gave him the benefit of the doubt. Let's just say that. You know, I look kind of stupid.
Yes, she does, and she should have ended it there. But because she's a devout liberal media member, she just couldn't:
WALSH: But on the other hand this was, this was brought to light for political reasons.
So? Most things involving politicians are brought to light for political reasons. What does that have anything to with her and many of her colleagues being quick to defend someone exclusively because he had a "D" next to his name?
SCHULTZ: Why do you look stupid? Why do you say that?
WALSH: Oh, because I, you know, gave him the benefit of the doubt publicly, and, you know, pointed to the, you know, motivations of the people who were bringing this to light, which was to destroy him. And, you know, it's all kind of creepy and he lied and that's the worst thing.
Correct. Walsh publicly gave a guilty man the benefit of the doubt - purely for her own political reasons, mind you - and besmirched those in the new media that did the job biased dinosaurs like her refused to.
Once again, she should have stopped right there - but she didn't:
WALSH: But on the other hand, you know, this is, this is private business, you know, I'm not his wife. She has reasons to be upset. But if we really lower the bar as you referred to to this level where you can't accuse him of hypocrisy, he's not a family values moralizer, you can't accuse him yet of breaking the law. I'll get back to that. At this point I'm not going to join a call for him to resign because…
SCHULTZ: Okay.
WALSH: …I don't think we have all the facts. I'm proud of Nancy Pelosi for saying she's going to investigate him. That's where Democrats are different because we take this stuff to the mat.
"We take this stuff to the mat?"
Hardly. If you did, you wouldn't have given Weiner the benefit of the doubt from the get go, and you wouldn't still be defending him now that he's been found to have done exactly what he was accused of initially while repeatedly lying to the entire nation to protect himself.
Of course, we learned earlier in the day Tuesday that lying is a valued attribute to liberal media members appearing on MSNBC.
In the end, there is a lot more that is coming out concerning this matter, and the Congressman in the middle is guaranteed to look worse and worse.
He can at least rest assured that there will still be folks in the press like Walsh who despite looking "kind of stupid" for standing by him before are willing to continue to do so until this ship is at the bottom of the ocean.
That's how liberals "take this stuff to the mat."
(H/T Breitbart TV)
- Noel Sheppard's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
What a howler!
Submitted by HockeyKid on Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:18am.
Not only is Joan Walsh completely deluded, but she's incapable of speaking without, you know, saying, "you know," at least, you know, once every other sentence.
It's Special Ed and the Valley Girl.
Speaking of great lib shows, I wonder when CNN debuts "Weiner Spitzer".
"Beauty is only skin deep, but liberal's to the bone." - me
Weiner Spitzer -- a great idea for a show
Submitted by Galvanic on Wed, 06/08/2011 - 3:41pm.
Now, my friend once owned a Spitzer Weiner -- it's a canine with a long body and short legs that sh**s on itself.
Joan, Joan
Submitted by Ed Gregory on Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:24am.
If there's a bigger pile of dumbness than Joan Walsh, I haven't seen it. "We take this stuff to the mat" -- what does that even mean? Like, the wrestling mat for 2 out of 3 falls? The laundry mat? I don't know. Maybe she means the the Mafia term "going to the mattresses," meaning to hunker down for war. Probably not.
Also, when she says the lying is what disturbs her, she's lying. The only thing that disturbs her is that her guy got busted by somebody on our side.
It's NY, definitely the Godfather reference
Submitted by Blonde on Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:39am.
Utterly absurd, but there it is.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Don't worry, Joan. You've always looked stupid
Submitted by Galvanic on Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:30am.
WALSH: " . . . But if we really lower the bar as you referred to to this level where you can't accuse him of hypocrisy, he's not a family values moralizer, . . . "
Weiner prided himself on sponsoring a bill to clamp down on online sexual predators. Now, it turns out that he is one -- a self-described stalker.
WALSH: ". . . you can't accuse him yet of breaking the law. . ."
"Yet."
WALSH: ". . . . At this point I'm not going to join a call for him to resign because… I don't think we have all the facts. . . "
That's never stopped you before, Joan.
WALSH: " . . . I'm proud of Nancy Pelosi for saying she's going to investigate him. That's where Democrats are different because we take this stuff to the mat."
Like they handled Gerry Studds? Barney Frank? How about the months it took to get Rangel to step down from his Chair of the Ways and Means Committee?
The primary purpose of Pelosi's call for an ethics investigation is to shut everyone up -- including Weiner -- and stop the hemorrhaging and get it off the front page. It wasn't necessary otherwise because Boehner was already calling for an ethics investigation.
The ethics investigation will take weeks to start and months (years?) to conclude, thus stalling any action on Weiner until the Democratic legislature in New York state redraws the congressional districts based on the 2010 census. New York loses two seats in the House -- probably one GOP seat upstate, and a Dem seat in NYC. They can merely dismantle Weiner's district out from under him before they have to discipline him.
Why do Democrats hate people who emphasize family values
Submitted by Lipton on Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:05am.
I totally agree with the hypocrisy of his support for this harrassment bill while he behaved in this manner, and I am sorry that more people have not brought this up. On the blogs I have mentioned this, I have been ignored.
I am also getting tired of the term "family values" being thrown around like some kind of slur. As if standing up for "family values" is a bad thing. I know it opens up sleezy republicans to charges of hypocrsiy, but I have to wonder are democrats against family values?
'Family values' issues have been a very effective . . .
Submitted by Galvanic on Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:35am.
. . . GOP political weapon for decades, going at least as far back as the Eighties when it was used to energize evangelical Christians and get out their vote. And with gay activists very visible on the Left, it hit hard.
Since then, the Dems have taken two separate but related paths on family values.
(1) Demonize and ridicule any Republican whose own behavior runs counter to family values. Gingrich is a prime example. Craig, Vitter, et al are others. The theme is hypocrisy.
(2) Broaden the definition of family from the traditional to the progressive, to embrace gay and lesbian families, and then promote the broader family values. Portray these families as normal and preferred to the hypocrisy of whore-chasing Republicans.
One might even consider a third path, and that's to ridicule famous spokesperson for family values, from TV evangelists to Sarah Palin, portraying them as un-hip, uncool idiots.
I don't have any data, but I think they have had some effect, if only to check the advance of the family values agenda for the GOP.
Just tell it like it is.
Submitted by blazermaniac on Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:24am.
Joan Walsh looks stupid!
Give it up, Joan.
Submitted by SickofLibs on Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:24am.
He's not friending you and he's not sending you any photographs.
Nicely done, Sick
Submitted by Ed Gregory on Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:35am.
Gold star for you.
what a joke
Submitted by Hoosier Conservative on Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:42am.
How is it a private matter for a sexual predator to disturb strange women he found on the internet? This is not like Bill and Monica where it was a consensual affair, it was anonymous women being harrassed by unwanted pornography.
All the libs out there calling it no big deal, okay. When/if a sister or daughter of yours walks up saying some Republican was acting creepy online and trying to flirt with her - you look her in the eyes and tell her to shut up because it's between him and his wife.
She Looks 'Stupid' For Defending Weiner
Submitted by John21 on Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:44am.
She Looks 'Stupid' For Defending Weiner, what do you men "LOOK" when was the last time you or salon said or did anything close to "looking smart"? Hell, Special Ed has more credibility than Salon, he get something right once or twice a month when did that last happen at that rag you work for?
Perhaps Joan
Submitted by hbnolikeee on Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:50am.
has received a WeinerGram and is enamored?
"Joan, you ignorant s l u t."
Submitted by johnsonl on Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:58am.
Instant classic.
when you play in the dirt-
Submitted by JIMMY1660 on Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:58am.
you will get dirty. You can be anything you want to except a liar.
Those who followed Weiner into the mud-got muddy-Liberal Pigs who got muddy-i like that.
Enough said.
Need a shorter headline
Submitted by Ed Gregory on Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:58am.
As much as I enjoy NewsBusters, I, as a professional editor, take issue with the headline on this entry. The writer should've capped it after "Stupid."
It's so delicious, I'm skipping dessert.
Submitted by thestalkinghorse on Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:02am.
I promised God that if he would just make this last a few more days I would never ask another favor of Him.
I've never seen...
Submitted by BBallleaper on Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:04am.
a woman whose 'part' goes completely to the back of her head!!! Weird!
That's not
Submitted by oldmanatee on Wed, 06/08/2011 - 12:53pm.
a part, that's too many facelifts....
Statesmen or Political Hack-
Submitted by JIMMY1660 on Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:03am.
You in elected office have a choice-roll in the mud with the likes of folks like Weiner-or be a Statesmen and do what right for the country not the party.
we are all watching and remembering.
Yes Joan, you are stupid.
Submitted by drsamherman on Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:04am.
The first step is admitting you have a problem. The second step is taking responsibility for all of the damage you have caused. Considering how long it took for you to take the first, it will be 2023 before you start making amends.
Why do they object now to
Submitted by Beukeboom on Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:09am.
Why do they object now to Weiner's lying? Schultz and Wash lie unabashedly on-air all the time. And that's no hyperbole.
Idiots on parade
Submitted by jessieH on Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:13am.
Private business? The man is unfit to be a Congressman. The fact that he lied to the citizens is proof of that. I know, I know, most of Congress is unfit, but they must be held accountable for their actions. Pelosi should be investigated for her lies, as speaker of the house.
Stupid is as stupid does.
Submitted by Utherpend on Wed, 06/08/2011 - 2:15pm.
Stupid is as stupid does.
No offense Joan
Submitted by Clemenza on Wed, 06/08/2011 - 2:49pm.
You didn't need weiner to make you look stupid. MSNBC's transcript service already does that.
I FINALLY get it, yay me........
Submitted by Tomorama on Wed, 06/08/2011 - 3:00pm.
So because Ted "the swimmer" Kennedy didn't run on a "no drowning my girlfriend" platform, he is A-OK?
Christ, if I had know that, I wouldn't have bashed the drunken, kicked out of Harvard, serial adulterer and cowardly murderer all those years.
He never made that part of his platform.
My bad, I apologize to Joan and the other liberals I offended.........
Kind of stupid Joan? You
Submitted by AngryInOhio on Wed, 06/08/2011 - 4:43pm.
Kind of stupid Joan? You really are flattering yourself...you are VERY stupid.