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:
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:
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)
