DNC chair attacks Gov. Scott Walker with domestic-violence language
I don’t know what this means, other than that Democratic National Committee Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz is a nasty piece of work, but we already knew that. She enjoys that magical Democrat shield from criticism that keeps the media from dwelling on even their most outrageous remarks, so they get to blame Republicans for inspiring murders, giving a steel worker’s wife cancer, lusting to bring back slavery, standing as either the metaphorical or literal incarnations of terrorism, etc. Alabama Democratic candidate J.T. Smith, who is running against Republican Rep. Mike Rogers, felt obliged to apologize for saying congressional Republicans were worse than ISIS this week, but that’s one of the very rare examples of a line Democrats can’t cross.
So now we’ve got DWS employing the language of domestic violence against Republican Governor Scott Walker of Wisconsin, metaphorically accusing him of slapping women around, as reported by the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel:
Democratic National Committee chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz ripped into Republican Gov. Scott Walker’s record Wednesday during a round-table discussion on women’s issues at the Milwaukee Athletic Club.
The Florida congresswoman said: “Scott Walker has given women the back of his hand. I know that is stark. I know that is direct. But that is reality.“
Wasserman Schultz added: “What Republican tea party extremists like Scott Walker are doing is they are grabbing us by the hair and pulling us back. It is not going to happen on our watch.“
Republican Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch said she was “shocked” that Wasserman Schultz used domestic violence language to discuss political disagreements.
“I think the remarks were absolutely hideous and the motive behind them was despicable,” Kleefisch said Wednesday.
Kleefisch called on Democratic gubernatorial candidate Mary Burke to “denounce these outrageous statements” made by the DNC leader.
Good luck with that, Lt. Gov. Kleefisch. Democrats are never expected to distance themselves from other Democrats, not even when it’s a long-serving creepazoid like former congressman and San Diego mayor Bob “Filthy” Filner. It would be a nice surprise if Burke denounced Wasserman Schultz, or if DWS apologized. Actually, the latter would be more like a minor miracle, if it’s an unqualified apology that doesn’t immediately segue into her talking points about the Important Issues.
This is the same party that had a national freak-out and accused Sarah Palin of being an accessory to the Tucson shootings because of the symbols she used on a map the shooter never saw. But floating language that paints Scott Walker as an abuser of women? All in a day’s work for the chair of the DNC.
What hideous abuse by hulking brute Scott Walker set DWS off?
Joined by U.S. Rep. Gwen Moore, a Milwaukee Democrat, Wasserman Schultz attacked Walker’s opposition to increasing the minimum wage. She also slammed Walker for signing a bill in 2012 that would prevent people subjected to employment discrimination from seeking punitive and compensatory damages in state court.
Democrats have also criticized Walker and Republicans for passing tighter regulations on abortion.
Yeah, I can see where that’s all equivalent to beating women up. If you’re tempted to point out that abortion-crazed Democrats kill a lot of very young women in the womb – and are quite comfortable with killing them solely and entirely because they are female, in sex-selection abortions – well, remember, unborn children don’t have any hair to pull, so it’s all good.
Oooh, was that a little rough? I thought that’s how Democrats wanted to play it. The question is why DWS, who is often dispatched to swing the kind of loony rhetorical hatchets only Democrats get to wield, would run such a desperation play in a race that’s neck-and-neck according to the polls. Have the Democrats heard something about the Walker-Burke race behind the scenes that makes them nervous? Is this a dry run for tactics they plan to use elsewhere? Are they getting nervous about the womens’ vote they depend so heavily on? They really should be nervous about that, because no self-respecting woman should be interested in voting for a gang of shrill hysterics who think women are dumb and easily stampeded with scary language.
And remember, Wisconsin voters, Democrats are the party that thought nothing of corrupting your state’s justice system to run a deranged fishing expedition to dig up dirt on Walker, until the judiciary shut it down. Doubtless they’ll bring all the managerial expertise they displayed at the Department of Veterans Affairs to the governor’s mansion. Oooh, was that a little rough…?
Would this be a good time to quote from President Obama’s much-ballyhooed speech in Tucson? Let’s run this by Debbie Wasserman Schultz and make her signal her agreement or disagreement with each individual line.
But at a time when our discourse has become so sharply polarized, at a time when we are far too eager to lay the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who happen to think differently than we do, it’s important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we’re talking with each other in a way that — that heals, not in a way that wounds.
[...] As we discuss these issues, let each of us do so with a good dose of humility. Rather than pointing fingers or assigning blame, let’s use this occasion to expand our moral imaginations, to listen to each other more carefully, to sharpen our instincts for empathy, and remind ourselves of all the ways that our hopes and dreams are bound together.
[...] And if, as has been discussed in recent days, their death helps usher in more civility in our public discourse, let us remember it is not because a simple lack of civility caused this tragedy — it did not — but rather because only a more civil and honest public discourse can help us face up to the challenges of our nation in a way that would make them proud.
We should be civil because we want to live up to the example of public servants like John Roll and Gabby Giffords, who knew first and foremost that we are all Americans, and that we can question each other’s ideas without questioning each other’s love of country, and that our task, working together, is to constantly widen the circle of our concern so that we bequeath the American dream to future generations.
They believe — they believe and I believe that we can be better. Those who died here, those who saved lives here, they help me believe. We may not be able to stop all evil in the world, but I know that how we treat one another, that’s entirely up to us.
And I believe that, for all our imperfections, we are full of decency and goodness and that the forces that divide us are not as strong as those that unite us.
Where in all that do you see a license for talking about your political opponents as if they were wife-beaters, because you hope your incendiary rhetoric might scare a few more female voters to the polls, Rep. Wasserman Schultz?