Ed Schultz

Until now, MSNBC's "Lean Forward" ad campaign had largely avoided wearing the network's leftward slant as a badge of pride. Sure, there were hints here and there that "Lean Forward" really means "left-leaning," but the older ads were subtle compared to the latest batch which beat you over the head with their liberal take on major political issues.

For example, you can expect to see MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell in this spot lamenting that ObamaCare didn't go far enough to the Left:

MSNBC action hero Ed Schultz is really on a roll.

On his cable show Monday, Schultz claimed that federal tax revenue declined in the seven years following the start of the Bush tax cuts in 2001, a patently bogus assertion demolished by NewsBuster Noel Sheppard.

All of 24 hours later, Schultz stepped in it once more with his revisionist history of federal spending over the last two decades and was again eviscerated by Sheppard.

On his radio show yesterday, self-proclaimed working class hero Schultz showed that his shabby disregard for accuracy also extends to labor union laws, specifically those in Michigan. Here's what Schultz had to say (audio) --

You know the situation is serious when "even" an avowed socialist worries about government spending.

Here's a clip of Democrat congressman Peter Welch of Vermont on Ed Schultz's radio show Monday talking about the looming battle over the debt ceiling (audio) --

For the second night in a row Tuesday, MSNBC's Ed Schultz called Republicans liars.

Also for the second night in a row, he did so moments before lying himself (video follows with transcript and commentary):

As NewsBusters has been reporting, America's media have been on a full-court press to raise taxes ever since Barack Obama proposed this in his deficit reduction speech last Wednesday.

So supportive of soaking the rich is MSNBC's Ed Schultz that on Monday's program bearing his name, seconds after claiming "Republicans are forced I guess you could say to make stuff up," he lied about what happened after taxes were cut by President George W. Bush (video follows with transcript and commentary):

Like most liberal media members, Bill Maher thinks violent political rhetoric only comes from Republicans.

Proving this once again, HBO's "Real Time" host on Friday disputed former Republican National Committee chairman Michael Steele's claim that Democrats used such hostile talk against Republicans during the recent budget battle (video follows with transcript and commentary):

In this week's "Is Bill Maher Really That Stupid" segment, the "Real Time" host on Friday actually said that ending the Bush tax cuts would solve 75 percent of the nation's budget deficit.

This deliciously came before Maher called Sen. John Kyl (R-Ariz.) "an evil liar who insults the intelligence of all living things including mushrooms and mold" (video follows with commentary):

Details, details.

Wisconsin Democrat state senator Lena Taylor really hates those $142 million in tax credits for businesses and the wealthy passed by Gov. Scott Walker and fellow Republicans in the legislature.

So much so that Taylor couldn't elaborate on any when asked during Ed Schultz's radio show yesterday, a rebroadcast of the program from a theater in Madison, Wisc., on Wednesday (audio) --

Ed Schultz really hates hoggish behavior. Except when he's planning to engage in it.

On his radio show yesterday, Schultz trotted out his new label for Republicans, one that he clearly labored to create, and with Schultz providing helpful porcine sound effects at the unveiling (audio) (more audio clips after page break) --

MSNBC's Ed Schultz began his show Monday talking about all the jobs President Obama has created since he took office.

Unfortunately, as he made the case about how terrible the Bush years were by comparison, the "Ed Show" host wrongly informed his viewers that Democrats took over in January 2009 (video follows with transcript and commentary):

At the start of each hour of his weekday radio broadcast, Ed Schultz touts his show as "where America comes to talk." Provided, of course, that you agree with Schultz. Otherwise, it's where Schultz comes to bail.

Nine times in less than three months, and twice in the last week, Schultz has abruptly hung up on callers who don't share his politics. And in the most recent example of this, on April 5, Schultz cited a patently bogus reason for why he did so. (audio) 

CALLER: You know, you asked the question earlier about, can the president spend money? No, he's already spent enough money as it is. And ...

SCHULTZ: No, that's not it, it's not whether he's spent enough money or not. He - cannot - spend - money. Not a dime. Thank you, Leonard.

Followed by Schultz saying this to the next caller, who asked Schultz not to hang up on him (more audio clips after page break) --

MSNBC's Ed Schultz on Thursday expressed a great deal of skepticism concerning Thursday's revelation that a significant number of ballots had not been included in the Wisconsin Supreme Court election held two days prior.

While he pointed fingers at the Waukesha County Clerk as being a Republican operative, he completely ignored the fact that a the very press conference he aired a clip from, the Vice Chair of that county's Democratic Party spoke and confirmed the results (videos follow with partial transcripts and commentary):

That's OK, he wasn't planning on any speaking gigs from AARP anyway.

As is his wont, libtalker Ed Schultz revealed his underlying opinion on a specific subject without even being aware he was doing it, this time on senior citizens.

Here's Schultz on his radio show yesterday with his warped take on elders, after initially referring to Republicans' proposed budget plan calling for broad spending cuts over the next decade (audio) --

Ed Schultz is so gungo ho for the Libyan war that he wants Obama to provide weapons to anti-Qadhafi forces -- without scrutinizing who gets them.

Seeing how Qadhafi's opponents in Libya could include al Qaeda and Hezbollah, according to the U.S. NATO commander, what could possibly go wrong?

Here's Schultz engaging in his singular brand of bellicosity while talking to a caller on his radio show yesterday, followed by an unintentionally hilarious remark by Democratic congressman Adam Smith later in the same show (audio) --

It was revealed Wednesday evening that the Obama administration sent clandestine CIA operatives to Libya weeks ago to assist rebels in their civil war against Moammar Gaddafi.

Not only did MSNBC's Ed Schultz express his support for this action as well as arming these rebels, he also got into a heated argument with a Nation magazine reporter that compared this operation to the "disastrous dirty wars of the 1980s" bringing up images of Ollie North and the Iran-Contra scandal (video follows with transcript and commentary):

What's next: MSNBC hawking "America: Love It Or Leave It" bumper stickers?

The new fashion among the liberal network's anchors is to accuse critics of President Obama's Libya policy of being unpatriotic.  Last week, we documented how Cenk Uygur did it.  Now, it's Ed Schultz's turn.  The man recently relegated to the 10 PM slot went on an extended rant last night, repeatedly accusing Republican critics of the Libyan operation of being unpatriotic. Schultz set the tone with his opening graphic.  As you see in the screengrab, Schultz branded Sarah Palin and John Bolton as "patriots, not" for questioning the president's conduct of the attack on Libya. 

But Schultz was far--far--from finished.   He eventually asked the question: "whose side are you on?  Are you with the terrorists, Sarah, or are you with the President of the United States?"

View video after the jump.

Look at the bright side when it comes to Libya, Ed Schultz said yesterday, "we haven't invaded anybody."

Come to think of it, we have, Schultz quickly spun -- and I'm gung ho for the invasion!

Here is Schultz on his radio show Monday doing a pirouette worthy of Nureyev while defending President Obama's decision to intervene in Libya (audio) --

For a mercifully fleeting moment, Ed Schultz was considered a possible candidate for Senate.

It came in the wake of Sen. Byron Dorgan, Democrat of North Dakota, announcing in January 2010 that he would not seek re-election. Speculation briefly centered on Schultz running to succeed Dorgan until Schultz adamantly denied he had any intention of doing so.

On Friday, Schultz demonstrated why he is unfit for public office or anything resembling genuine power over other people. It came during a conversation with a caller to Schultz's radio show after the caller complained that "war criminals" in the Bush administration were "not held accountable" for their crimes  (audio) --

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.

MSNBC's Ed Schultz on Wednesday claimed recent polls finding three newly-elected Republican governors wouldn't win if elections were held today represents a turning point in American history.

Not surprisingly, his far-left guests from the Nation magazine quite agreed with him (video follows with transcript and commentary):

They won't agree on much, but Fox News host Bill O'Reilly and Medea Benjamin, founder of the far-left anti-war group Code Pink, found some common ground on one fact Tuesday night: MSNBC talkers Rachel Maddow and Ed Shultz are hypocrites.

Both Schultz and Maddow defended President Obama's decision to impose a no fly zone over Libya on their respective shows. Maddow trotted out the "reluctant warrior" line, while Schultz insisted that the president "deserves the benefit of the doubt and our support."

O'Reilly asserted - and Benjamin agreed - that neither MSNBC host would have been so generous had Obama's predecessor engaged in such a conflict. "The word 'hypocrisy' comes to mind," Benjamin quipped (video and partial transcript below the break).

Allow me to refresh his memory.

Ed Schultz and a caller to his radio show Thursday got into a heated argument after she criticized him for suggesting last year that Democrats stay away from the polls on election day to express their anger with congressional Democrats for not extending unemployment benefits.

Schultz not only denied what the caller said, he was unequivocal and emphatic about it. Here's how the exchange went (audio) --

The liberal media collectively hyperventilated the past couple of days after conservative author Ann Coulter had the nerve to claim that radiation at certain levels is actually a good thing.

Jumping on the breathless bandwagon was MSNBC's Ed Schultz Friday who called Coulter "toxic" as he attacked her assertions without clearly elucidating her point (video follows with transcript and commentary):

Liberals rarely hesitate to express their disdain for Ronald Reagan, except when it's convenient to compare him to Barack Obama. 

Now comes a novel criticism of Reagan from radio host and environmental lawyer Mike Papantonio -- the Great Communicator as Almost A Mass Killer.

Here's Papantonio explaining this while guest hosting on Ed Schultz's radio show yesterday, to a caller skeptical of demands for nationwide strikes in support of  public-sector unions (audio) --