Awww, isn't it sad when liberals turn on one another -- unless, of course, you're watching from the sidelines as a conservative, in which case, break out the popcorn!
The easily irritated Ed Schultz tore into foremost left-wing court jester Jon Stewart after Stewart committed the unpardonable offense, and only three short weeks before the midterms, of pointing out Democrats' blatant hypocrisy on big money in politics.
On his Comedy Central show Monday night, Stewart apparently decided it was time to fill his quota of ripping into fellow libs (a 5 to 7 percent likelihood on any given night, by my calculations) and the results were, to his credit, hilarious.
Schultz wasted no time going after Stewart on his daily podcast yesterday (audio) --
Jon Stewart, do you have your head screwed on right? What was your point last night, Mr. New York Funnyman? Stewart's got an awesome following, he's got, you know, immense success in his career and for the most part people think he's a pretty good lefty. But now he's saying that the Democrats are hypocrites because they take big money. Duh! Wanna win or you wanna lose?
You know how you change things? You get power. Power is the avenue to change things. And the Republicans understand power. (Democrats, on the other hand, can't help but see it as racist). When they get power, they go to war and don't answer to anybody. When they get power they give tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans and don't give a damn about the budget and, oh by the way, the war was off-budget.
When the Republicans get power they put more conservatives on the Supreme Court. (Unlike Democrats, who never put liberals on the court). When the conservatives get power, they attack workers. So, Jon Stewart, give us a solution since you're the smart guy, you're the funny man-smart guy that everybody pays attention to. You're calling Democrats hypocrites because they're against big money? You've got a better way to win right now?The fact is is that if the Democrats ever did get power, there would be campaign finance reform that would be real. You give the Democrats the power, you let them put forward the initiative legislatively to get rid of Citizens United with that legislative power, they'll do it! But right now, this is the nasty fishbowl that Democrats have to swim in if they're going to compete and win and get that power. Jeez, buddy, you got a huge audience, big time. Don't show everybody you're a freakin' political idiot. (Schultz asserting his territorial prerogative here).
So, Jon Stewart's solution is what? OK, don't take the big money because we said we didn't want to take the big money and we'll just get our ass kicked at the polls and the Republicans will take over the Senate and some day they'll have the White House, the House and the Senate again and we can get more conservatives on the Supreme Court. We could do Citizens United, round two. We can get rid of health care and privatize everything! We can privatize Social Security, we can attack workers' rights! Sure, Democrats, don't take the money!
Psst, Ed -- Democrats did have the power, from January 2009 when Obama took office to January 2011 when the GOP regained control of the House. The Supreme Court issued its decision on Citizens United in January 2010, smack-dab in the middle of that two-year stretch. The Democrats had the power to legislate "campaign finance reform," i.e., further restrictions on expression of political opinion during campaigns when voters are paying attention, and chose not to pursue it.
What Schultz can't bring himself to admit is that "big money" isn't a problem for liberals when the person who owns it also has the surname of Soros, Clinton or Kennedy, to cite three of many possible examples. Liberals hate "big money" only when possessed by conservatives, whereupon it is deemed theft and not property.
