erieangel
Posts: 2237
Joined: 6/19/2011
Status: offline
|
"Ed Schultz has unwittingly ended up in many tweets and headlines this week for being one of the more recent talk radio abusers of the word “slut,” and the comparisons to Rush Limbaugh seemed to finally get to him enough to make the distinction between the two clear: Schultz, he noted of himself, was unequivocal when he apologized, and unafraid to remind people today how big a mistake he made.
Schultz noted that Limbaugh had said he didn’t expect liberals to apologize for myriad offenses they had racked up against conservative women, something Schultz personally took umbrage at. “As usual, he is wrong,” he noted, and found the comparison between Limbaugh’s “tirade for nine hours” and the “12 seconds [in which] I made an inappropriate statement” ridiculous. “Drawing a moral equivalence between me and Rush… diminishes the outrageous nature of Limbaugh’s attack,” he argued, adding that Limbaugh “completely failed to offer an adequate apology.” To depict what he considered an adequate apology, and in case anyone had forgotten, he played his mea culpa to Laura Ingraham from last year, and noted that he personally called Ingraham and they made amends. “I went to management and told them I need to take myself off the air without pay,” he concluded. Noting that Ingraham had attacked the President for calling Fluke and not her after Schultz’s remarks, he appeared surprised he would bring it up since, to him, it was a closed case after his repentance– that lack of remorse being the fundamental difference between his remarks and Limbaugh’s."
Schultz was off the air at MSNBC for a week after he uttered a 12-second vile phrase on his radio program (not on MSNBC)--without pay. He apologized the very same day to Laura Ingraham and she reportedly (at the time) accepted the apology with grace and humor. However, recently, Ingraham has been complaining that President Obama never bothered to telephone her as he had phoned Fluke. And when Schultz returned to his tv show, he offered a second, 9-minute apology to Ingraham, during which he accepted full responsibility. He went to saw far as to say that the content of his words didn't matter. He also vowed to prove his sincerity by never using those words again...and since last May, he has not.
In contrast, Rush has offered an "apology" in which he claimed he used the wrong words. What words would he have used other than the ones he had? Would harlot been any better? He's claimed the left, saying he stooped to the level of the left. And he has failed to apologize for suggesting that women who pay no co-pays for their BC upload videos of themselves having sex on the web so that he can watch.
To draw a moral equivalency to the two situations is just ridiculous. And to show the stark contrast, last night Schultz played portions of Rush's prolonged 3-day attack and his non-apology apologies then replayed a portion of his own 9-minute on air apology to Laura Ingraham That apology was issued AFTER Ingraham had already accepted Schultz's apology on the phone, the apology Schultz had offered the very same day he had called her a vile name. A video of the segment is embedded on the link.
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/ed-schultz-teaches-rush-limbaugh-a-lesson-on-apologies-by-replaying-his-to-laura-ingraham/
And also: David Frum offers 4 reasons why the backlash Rush is suffering is not a double standard in any way.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/05/opinion/frum-rush-limbaugh-fairness/index.html
|
Ed Schultz teaches Rush about apologizes - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread