It was a solemn scene. What began as an upbeat assemblage rife with hope and optimism quickly turned upside down into a somber, grief stricken gathering. As Governor Scott Walker put a stranglehold on the Wisconsin recall election a gut wrenching sickness descended upon the Tom Barrett rally in the same way it descends upon Wrigley Field when the Cubs tease their fans every ten years or so with a playoff appearance, deluding them into thinking they might actually win a world series before getting swept out of the playoffs.
When MSNBC this same sickness fell heavy upon Ed Schultz [4]. In fact if I didn’t know any better I would have guessed that Schultz was broadcasting live from Tom Barrett’s wake rather than his rally. For a moment I thought Schultz was going to break down in a tear-filled rant like this guy [5]. Hmmm … it seems I’ve answered my own question. I guess The Ed Show was in fact overseeing the passing of a deceased spirit. It was democracy that died on Tuesday night. Yeah … right.
I tuned into MSNBC following the announcement that Walker had won not only to revel at the sight of Schultz’s smug face ravaged with defeat and despair but also to see how he and his progressive pals were trying to spin the unfortunate results. What I heard was the predictable drivel one would have expected. Whining about how Walker out spent Barrett 7 ½ to 1 and bragging about how the exit polls showed that Obama had a 52-43 lead over Romney so the recall outcome actually has no effect on November. Two problems: a) The Media completely neglected the amount of money that Unions raised [6] for Barrett and b) those were the same exit polls [7] that predicted the Walker-Barrett vote would come down to a dead heat. I didn’t hear any complaining when Obama heavily outspent McCain. So when did spending large sums of money become an issue with Democrats? Oh right, when they lost.
All this is just typical liberal nonsense that you will hear every time you tune into the The Ed Show. However, it pales in comparison to the brazen, pompous bombast Schultz wailed on Wednesday night. With the smug look that is permanently plastered on his face, Schultz began decrying the 27% of union members and 38% of union households that voted for Walker, going so far as demanding an explanation [8] for why they would do such a thing. Using this logic he should be demanding an explanation from Hollywood as to why they would vote for Obama when he wants to raise their taxes. He won’t because that fits into his obstinate agenda. The difference of course is that increasing taxes during a recession can only hurt the economy, while Walker’s policies actually work.
If Schultz wants an explanation as to why people voted for Scott Walker he should look no further than his record as governor. He turned a $3.6 billion deficit into a surplus and he dropped the unemployment rate to 6.7% - a point and a half below the national average. But Schultz doesn’t care about these numbers. If he did he wouldn’t be so "shocked and stunned" that people actually voted for a politician that can balance a damn budget. It’s quite a concept indeed. Maybe if Schultz wasn’t arrogantly manipulating his viewers with his own ideological agenda every night like the rest of the crooked fiends at MSNBC he would realize that balancing a budget and lowering the unemployment rate is actually a good thing.
And as for those union voters that supported Walker whom you demand an explanation from: they don’t owe you squat Schultz. Welcome to democracy. They can vote for whoever they damn well please.
