Trafik Jamz;257697 wrote:
Pro-Gun
Pro-God
Anti-Abortion

Heck, throw in anti-gay and anti-union and he'd be the total republican package.

Anti-gay? Thats typical far left lingo for pro-traditional family.

zbrown;257713 wrote:
I agree, Joel Heitkamp leans left and i enjoy listening to him, but something about Schultz puts a very foul taste in my mouth

I think it's just Schultz himself. I listened a bit today in a KFAN deadspot and I just couldn't get rolling with it. In all fairness, it was his News and Views show, which is only local, so pretty boring. I think he's just one of those love 'em or hate 'em sort of hosts.

Trafik Jamz;257711 wrote:
I don't blame anyone for not liking him...he pisses me off regularly as well...usually by having a logical argument against something that I am for or vice-versa...and he is arrogant.

I agree, Joel Heitkamp leans left and i enjoy listening to him, but something about Schultz puts a very foul taste in my mouth

integra_gsr98;257684 wrote:
No, his take used to be to the right until he tried to get a national show and needed a paycheck.

Uhh...he started shifting to the left in the late 90's when he met Wendy (his wife) and started working with the homeless and working class. He didn't even get considered for a national show until the mid 2000's.

Wikipedia...yes, I googled this Hando wrote:
Evolution of political views

In the late 1990s, several events occurred which he said changed his attitude. One was his mother's illness. A former educator, she got Alzheimer's Disease and began a long, slow decline. Schultz found it frustrating trying to get her the services that she needed. The other was that he met a psychiatric nurse named Wendy who ran a homeless shelter in Fargo. He attributed much of his political change to her, and although he had frequently made fun of the homeless on his show, he said in his book that she helped to humanize them; to his surprise, he found some of the people he had insulted were veterans, and many were unable to get the psychiatric or medical services that might help them. He says that began to look at poverty differently. (Schultz, 9-10) In June 1998, they were married, the second marriage for each.

While he claims to have become a Democrat in 2000, the political evolution seems to have been gradual. He went out to do radio promotions in rural parts of North Dakota, and told reporters about how he met farmers who were suffering and hard-working people who were going hungry, even though Republicans said the economy was doing fine. (Vowell, 2004) He began to hold benefits to raise money for people in the heartland who were going through tough times. (Winter, 2002) And he began questioning some of the assertions of George W. Bush; although he supported several Republican candidates in the 2000 election, he was becoming critical of other Republicans. For example, Schultz considered running for the Democratic-NPL party nomination for governor against incumbent Republican John Hoeven in 2004, but decided to continue his career in radio.

Political views

Schultz considers himself a "progressive liberal". As such, his talk show is generally considered to be a liberal-leaning program. He is pro-union and centers a large portion of his radio show on the "plight of working class Americans". He has also repeatedly stated that he is a liberal Democrat willing to change political parties upon necessity.

Air America Feud

On February 13, 2007, Schultz dedicated the first hour of his show to a heated monologue against Air America Radio. Air America host Sam Seder suggested that the XM Air America channel should only have Air America hosts on it and reportedly asked his viewers to call XM to remove Schultz in favor of Air America host Thom Hartmann, who replaced Al Franken. Schultz interpreted this as an attack from the entire network. Other hosts on Air America have made negative comments about Schultz, saying he is not liberal or progressive enough.[citation needed] They've also made light of his rural accent and location in Fargo, North Dakota.[citation needed] Schultz responded by saying Air America "sucks" and "If you listen to Air America, I don't want you to listen to the Ed Schultz show cause I'm better than them!" Schultz also stated, "They're bankrupt ... they don't know how to run radio," alluding to Air America's chronic financial problems.

Radio show

The Ed Schultz Show is broadcast from Fargo via the Jones Radio Network to over 100 radio stations (as of October 2005[update]), including nine of the 10 largest radio markets [1]. It can currently be heard nationwide on Sirius Satellite Radio's "Sirius Left" channel, and XM Radio's Air America Radio channel. The program can also be heard on Armed Forces Radio.

Schultz continued to experience audience growth throughout 2005 and into 2006. According to a 2007 survey done by Talkers magazine, he ranked #5 nationally, with a weekly audience of more than 3 million listeners. This is the highest ranking of any liberal talk radio host up to this point.

During the 2006 Congressional elections, Schultz provided opportunities for varying views on the candidates and politics in general. This included guests such as Michael Rogers of BlogActive, a blog that identifies gay politicians and staffers. Rogers discussed “outing” Republican staffers and elected officials he believed were gay. [2] Rogers was invited back to Schultz's show several times during the Fall 2006 elections to discuss outing Republican staffers and legislators Rogers believed they were hypocrites because of their legislative votes affecting homosexuals. [3] Rogers reported on US House member David Dreier (R-CA) and US Senator Larry Craig (R-ID), both of whom he believes are anti-gay closeted gay men.

On November 30, 2006, Schultz announced he was moving to the "prime real estate" time slot from noon to 3p.m. ET, to directly compete with Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly, whose shows are also broadcast in that time slot.

As the Ed Schultz Show has continued to attract listeners, Schultz has increasingly been called upon by national TV talk shows to be one of the guest pundits. To facilitate this, Schultz purchased an up-link so that he could broadcast live from the KFGO Studios in Fargo. During the past year, his TV appearances have included June 27, 2007, when he was on the Tucker Carlson Show on MSNBC; July 1, 2007, when he was on Larry King Live on CNN, and again with Larry King February 6, 2008; and on September 21, 2007 as well as January 23, 2008, Schultz was a guest on Hardball with Chris Matthews.

He is far from what I'd consider a far left talk show host. He is slanted left, no doubt, but his success comes from being an good entertainer, not cheerleading his group.

There is no doubt also, that a national show has been a goal of his for years, he modeled his local show after Rush's and (someone correct me if I'm wrong here) he was considered to be one of the next in line for a republican national show as well in the 90's.

He continually gets blasted by the left for being not left enough. Mostly because of the following views:

Pro-Gun
Pro-God
Anti-Abortion

Heck, throw in anti-gay and anti-union and he'd be the total republican package.

Anyway, I'm not changing anyone's mind on this, and I know this but for some to claim he is nothing but a lefty cheerleader is crazy which is why I put some stock in his assertion that the NYT is right leaning...at least on issues that Murdoch has control over.

PSiedTSi;257647 wrote:
Yeah he's a lefty, but he has been considered not "progressive" or "liberal" enough by some lefties. Remember his take used to the right, until he actually started talking to working americans.

No, his take used to be to the right until he tried to get a national show and needed a paycheck.

zbrown;257637 wrote:
cough....Ed Schultz ...... cough

Yeah he's a lefty, but he has been considered not "progressive" or "liberal" enough by some lefties. Remember his take used to the right, until he actually started talking to working americans.

Afsil80;257636 wrote:
It just means that they are not AS left as the nutjob talk radio hosts.

cough....Ed Schultz ...... cough

Trafik Jamz;257546 wrote:
Listening to lefty talk radio...yes, they regularly blast NY Times for being far too conservative.

Just because the left says the NY Times is to the right doesn't mean they are. It just means that they are not AS left as the nutjob talk radio hosts.

The question is then, which newspaper (nationally) would you say is right leaning? The Limbaugh Letter of course, but if I wanted cheerleading I'd go to a football game...

Either way the Supreme Court (which is fairly central right now...leaning left ever so slightly I'll admit) seems to agree with the statement that many are being held at that facility with little/no solid reason and a number are being held with out charges at all. Apparently the left isn't the only party that can be accused of socialist/communist practices and complete ignorance of the constitution/other legal treaties that we have entered in to over the years.

integra_gsr98;257287 wrote:
The NY Times is a right leaning news paper? Are you fucking kidding me chuck?

I suppose it is if you compared it to Moveon.org and the DailyKos.

integra_gsr98;257287 wrote:
The NY Times is a right leaning news paper? Are you fucking kidding me chuck?

x2.

Not trying to be rude, but sometimes I wonder if you're losing a grip on reality, Chuck.

better? That was more recent AND from a right leaning newspaper (aka controlled by Rupert Murdoch)

Trafik Jamz;257258 wrote:
http://www.latimes.com/la-na-gitmo22dec22,0,2294365.story

Go touch yourself with rusty fishhooks.

StangerBanger96;257048 wrote:
Exactly. We don't know half of the story when it comes to most of this stuff but I think just shutting it down is kind of a short sighted attempt at trying to appease to world and make yourself (referring to Obama) look like you care.

aww fuck, did I actually bring reason and logic into Fargostreet again?

24valvenotak;257149 wrote:
for one isnt there more important things to worry about right now? Ask Obama, he's the one that brought it up

24valvenotak;257149 wrote:
and secondly, if i had to spend a year in gitmo i would probably try to blow up america too.

You got it backwards... they try to blow america up, so they end up in gitmo. Its actually a pretty cushy place compared to anywhere else they could go. What other options does Obama have to put them? Any U.S. based prison and they will be killed by the inmates, so they'd have to be in isolation the whole time. I'd take gitmo over solitary confinment any day.

and secondly, if i had to spend a year in gitmo i would probably try to blow up america too.