MSNBC host Ed Schultz calls Laura Ingraham a slut.

[zsdersw]

What'd she call him?

She said: "I was going to have a few comments about John Edwards but you have to go into rehab if you use the word lovely human."

 

[zsdersw]

Another couple Coulter-isms:

"If I'm going to say anything about John Edwards in the future, I'll just wish he had been killed in a terrorist assassination plot."

"My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building."

 

[werepossum]

Where are your criticisms of right-wing pundits when they do similar things?

Atreus hasn't been criticizing Schultz so much as pointing out that the perceived misogyny is what caused such an uproar and that many here on the left are going through amusing gyrations to justify his behavior whilst maintaining criticism of equivalent behavior on the right.

For once, I'm forced to agree with PokerGuy. Claiming Ed Schultz's use of the word 'slut' wasn't misogynistic because he's a good liberal and didn't mean it but a Republican's use of the same word would be because we know Republican are all evil bigots is the very paragon of partisan hypocrisy.

Very, very true. Still, I think you'd agree that it's perceived misogyny rather than actual misogyny, especially in the context of "talk slut" which (at least arguably) could be equally applied to a male. When one spends several hours daily in unscripted, off the cuff, heated political rhetoric, trying to make it controversial enough to attract a good audience, one will occasionally step over the line. No biggie.

I'd think Coulter calling Edwards a derogatory term for homosexual would be as bad or worse. Discuss away.

Agreed, about the same in my opinion. Coulter was not claiming Edwards is gay, but merely slurring him for his excessive concern over his hair and appearance. "i love you" is no longer necessarily associated with homosexuality, in the same way that people say "that's so gay" without necessarily meaning homosexual. (I try not to use either, because I have a gay Internet buddy who is offended by both terms. I much prefer to offend people intentionally rather than unintentionally.) In much the same way, Schultz probably didn't mean anything about Ingraham's sexuality, but rather was expressing the common if Craiglike view that he considers opposition to his viewpoint to be res ipsa loquitur evidence of corruption.

In both cases, it's all part of the act. I'm not saying that either isn't honest in the professed views, but this behavior is part of political theater, and people are silly to take it so seriously considering the amount of actual hatred expressed in more polite terms. Ingraham obviously wasn't particularly offended. On the flip side, Schultz's apology actually sounded heartfelt, and this whole thing has slightly raised my opinion of him.

 

[Ape]

She said: "I was going to have a few comments about John Edwards but you have to go into rehab if you use the word lovely human."

Here is the transcript of Anne being questioned about this back in 2007.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,256949,00.html

 

[zsdersw]

Here is the transcript of Anne being questioned about this back in 2007.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,256949,00.html

... which is of no more relevance to the point I was making than Ed's apology is to any of the criticisms of him.

 

[Atreus21]

Another couple Coulter-isms:

"If I'm going to say anything about John Edwards in the future, I'll just wish he had been killed in a terrorist assassination plot."

"My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building."

We have a deal then.

You call Schultz a misogynist, and I'll call Coulter a stupid asshole.

 

[zsdersw]

You call Schultz a misogynist, and I'll call Coulter a stupid asshole.

Earlier in this thread I called all of them assholes; the entire spectrum of highly-paid, television or radio, political pundits.