Liberal radio host and MSNBC parolee Ed Schultz -- they let him out only on weekends -- will never face accusations that he's a stickler for accuracy. Schultz counts on those who follow his shows as too dumb or indifferent to care when he gets it wrong, as often the case.
On his radio show Tuesday, for example, Schultz made a deceitful claim that bordered on nonsensical while talking about the so-called Corker-Hoeven amendment to the immigration reform bill in the Senate. (Audio clip after the jump)
The amendment, co-written by GOP senators Bob Corker of Tennessee and John Hoeven of North Dakota, calls for beefed-up border security as essential to the legislation (audio) --
It's interesting that the senator, the rookie senator, first-time serving, John Hoeven, former governor of North Dakota who wrote the, who wrote this amendment, it's going to cost the country $46 billion, the amendment which is likely to be approved later this week now that the procedural obstacle has been swept away, also calls for finishing construction of 700 miles of border fence. I mean, a whole boatload of money. Should we point out that Hoeven is a former Democrat?! That he used to be a Democrat but he changed to the Republican Party because he saw the tea leaves and he wanted to be elected governor way back when and so (guffaws), the Republicans love to call 'em tax and spend Democrats, damned if they're not having lunch with one every Tuesday, huh?!
Hoeven jumped ship, according to Schultz, "because he saw the tea leaves," clearly implying Hoeven was motivated by the emergence of the tea party since 2009. Turns out Hoeven was remarkably clairvoyant -- he switched parties more than a decade ago to run for governor of North Dakota in 2000. Hoeven was re-elected twice before running for Senate in 2010, again as a Republican.
Adding inanity to his deception, Schultz further claims that when Republican senators caucus every Tuesday and disparage "tax and spend Democrats," they've got one of these disreputable reprobates in their very midst. As coincidence would have it, Schultz switched political allegiance in the late '90s though in the opposite direction, after working several years as a conservative radio talker. By what passes for logic from Schultz, the fact he was conservative "way back when" means this remains is an entirely accurate way to describe him now.