meh, they're all the same. Just attack attack attack. Never anything useful.

Story Update

http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/ed-schultz-suspended-from-msnbc-after-calling-laura-ingraham-a-right-wing-slut/2011/05/26/AGOcV2BH_story.html

You know, if someone gets mad and says something insulting like this then I can understand if they later apologize. When one is angry it's not easy to stop oneself from saying things one shouldn't say. In this case Ed was not angry, he was being a clown, a talk show host. He planned this ahead of time. He had every intention of insulting Ingram in this manner except he apparently did not expect it to be picked up as so insulting. The guy had enough time to think about what he was gonna say because his broadcast was not within minutes of Laura's comments about Obama.

An apology in this case is worthless and forgiveness should not be given. if anything she should be honest and state that he can say I am sorry all he wants but the truth is he really isn't, he is simply doing this not because he knew he was wrong but because he had to.

You touched on the real truth.  Liberals expect to get a pass from both the media and the public when they exhibit misogynist or racists aspects of their personality.  Unfortunately, despite all the talk of how they are utilizing the new technology of the 21st century, they still fail to understand that while MSM is still the big dog in the kennel - it is not the ONLY dog in the kennel and their hatred will be exposed.  Schultz is not sorry for what he said - he is sorry for being called out on it.

I'm not much of a TV viewer and never heard Ed Schultz on the radio before this incident.

Schultz's loose lips brought attention to himself but in all the wrong way.

What he said was coarse and cruel and hateful as you note DrG.

Myfist0, Thanks for the story update. His apology is what interested me most.

Re: the highlighted. How do you know that? Is this his typical way of speaking  ... or was it out of the heat of the moment ...more spontaneous? Again, I don't know anything about him so I'm asking.

Well what happened? Schultz was forced to recognize what he said was wrong. Now maybe he hadn't thought of it as wrong before and he learned a lesson. That's what the tone of his apology was to me.

And so his apology was  a beginning of repairing the harm done and it seemed sincere to me and I hope Laura graciously accepted it.

As to your advice not to forgive, Our Lord Jesus Christ tells us otherwise. In the Lord's Prayer, we ask our Father to "forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us..."

I don't find much of anything on the left ... amusing. 

Hateful to women, cannot be argue about with but it is strange though, huh - Why?  

But in most of the baser things in life, there are plenty of slanders for everyone to deny. It seems (R & D alike) feel that these defamations are important enough to make … seemingly for the whole purpose of being able to deny them later.

I would like to think that our Harvard grads and the other elitists, the best minds in America … could at least keep their mouths out of the gutter.

I would also like to think that at some point … like when they were 5 or 6, they learned what honesty was. I can handle the slurs and such a lot easier than the lies, just me though, go figure.

This was the correction ... http://youtu.be/kKwoknj7gu8

Nice to know that the liberals are the nasty and cheap ones ... wouldn't get this from one of those nice conservative warmongers ... whoa

Well let's see then...  

OK.  Thanks for the tip.

It is a corollary to the misery loves company adage.  In their case, if they can convince themselves everyone does it, it justifies their doing it.  It is an example of their loss of a moral compass.

I guess in a detached way it can be amusing - as you say, ants under a magnifying glass.

Mason, meet our new forums moderator.  She will lecture you in all things forum - just do not ask her to follow her own lectures.

There's the door, do not let it hit you in the ass upon leaving.