Monday, October 12, 2015

Debbie Wasserman Schultz Has Ruined The First Debate Already-- They Should Fire Her Before She Ruins The Rest


Thank God-- a debate without Trump! Finally! Watching every word from every candidate being geared to pleasing or provoking Trump-- based on each one of these nothings' strategies for dealing with him plurality of primary voters-- has been sickening and demeaning of the democratic process. (Not that he hasn't stuck his nose into the Democrats' debate. He took a hand in setting silly expectations for Hillary to choke on and was widely quoted in the media saying "a lot of people will turn off after a little while." After all, without the Trumpish freak show, why would 23 or 24 million people-- many probably not even voters-- bother watching?

Remember how CNN hired Rachel Maddow to host the Republican debate? No, you missed that one? Me too. But CNN did hire Fox-Republican shill Brian Kilmeade to make sure the GOP perspective was well represented in the first Democratic primary debate. Blame DNC chair, Debbie Wasserman Schultz. More on that idiot below.
Kilmeade asked Trump if he would be nervous in Hillary Clinton's shoes.

"Well I think she's nervous about her whole future. She's got a lot of problems, you know, beyond the debate. I think she's got a lot of problems," he said, before adding that, "I think that she will, you know, probably do fine."

Clinton "hasn’t been a great debater in the past, but I think she just has to hold," he remarked, adding, "I can’t imagine Bernie Sanders will beat her."

"I can’t imagine she’s going to be allowed to run based on the email scandal, but she probably will because the Democrats are going to take care of her," he went on to say.
Aside from being able to keep GOP propagandists from asking the questions at the DNC's debate, Wasserman Schultz has made herself the object of scorn and even hatred in many other ways as well. lIke by disinviting Hawaii Congresswoman and DNC vice-chair Tulsi Gabbard from the debate altogether because she dared to disagree with the disastrous way Wasserman Schultz has gone about setting up the debates. Now, I'm no fan of the psychotically homophobic Gabbard family and Tulsi is way too conservative for my tastes-- not to mention that she was actually dating Mafia figure Michael "Mikey Suits" Grimm before the corrupt NY Republican became Federal Inmate No. 83479-053, but this isn't about Gabbard's bad taste in boyfriends-- besides, she's married now-- or even her bad taste in politics. It's about Wasserman Schultz stepping all over her. Keep in mind that Wasserman Schultz is a Hillary backer and that Hillary made it clear she wanted fewer debates, not more debates. Washerman Schultz promulgated moronic rules to hold down viewership and to prevent Bernie from debating Republican candidates outside the official debates at the risk of being kicked off the DNC debates. Oh, would the Wicked Witch of Weston dare do that? She did it to Congresswoman Gabbard.
Gabbard confirmed on Sunday that her chief of staff received a message last Tuesday from the chief of staff to Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the chairwoman of the national committee, about her attendance at the debate. A day earlier, Ms. Gabbard had appeared on MSNBC and said there should be an increase beyond the current six sanctioned debates.

A person close to the committee who asked for anonymity to discuss internal discussions insisted, however, that Ms. Gabbard had not been disinvited. Instead, the person said, an aide to Ms. Wasserman Schultz expressed a desire to keep the focus on the candidates as the debate approached, rather than on a “distraction” that could divide the party, and suggested that if Ms. Gabbard could not do that, she should reconsider going.

Ms. Gabbard insisted otherwise.

“When I first came to Washington, one of the things that I was disappointed about was there’s a lot of immaturity and petty gamesmanship that goes on, and it kind of reminds me of how high school teenagers act,” Ms. Gabbard said in a telephone interview on Sunday night. She said she would watch the debate in her district in Hawaii, which elected her to her second term last year.

“It’s very dangerous when we have people in positions of leadership who use their power to try to quiet those who disagree with them,” she added. “When I signed up to be vice chair of the D.N.C., no one told me I would be relinquishing my freedom of speech and checking it at the door.”

...Gabbard and R.T. Rybak, a committee vice chairman and a former mayor of Minneapolis, have for weeks publicly called for more debates.

“More and more people on the ground from states all across the country are calling for more debates, are wanting to have this transparency and greater engagement in our democratic process at a critical time, as they make the decision of who should be the next person to lead our country,” Ms. Gabbard said in her MSNBC appearance.

The next day, two people briefed on the conversations said, the chief of staff to Ms. Wasserman Schultz reached out to her counterpart in Ms. Gabbard’s office about attending the debate. Weeks earlier, Ms. Gabbard had said she would like tickets for herself and a guest to the Nevada debate, the one closest to Hawaii.

The person close to the committee insisted: “She was not uninvited. The D.N.C. team wanted this first debate to have all the focus on the candidates. Gabbard’s people were told that if they couldn’t commit to that, since Tulsi was trying to publicly divide the D.N.C. leadership last week, then they should consider not coming.”

The person added, “The fact that she is still making this about her and not our great candidates by talking to the New York Times says something unfortunate.”

Ms. Gabbard said the only issue raised had been “the fact that I had publicly disagreed” with Ms. Wasserman Schultz.

“This isn’t about any one person,” Ms. Gabbard said. “It’s about how the Democratic Party should be representing democratic values, allowing for free speech and open debate within our party, and for more transparency and debates for our presidential candidates.”

“All of our candidates agree with my position,” she added.

Former Gov. Martin O’Malley of Maryland, who has been struggling to gain traction in the Democratic primary contest, has been calling for more debates and has accused Ms. Wasserman Schultz of trying to benefit the leader in the polls, Hillary Rodham Clinton, by limiting debates. Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont has also called for more debates, although he has not been as adamant as Mr. O’Malley has.

People who disagree with Mr. O’Malley have pointed out that he infrequently debated his challenger for governor in Maryland. And they note the number of sanctioned debates is the same as in the 2008 race for the Democratic presidential nomination.

But there were more than a dozen unsanctioned debates and forums back then. This time, the candidates could be excluded from the sanctioned debates if they take part in ones that are not approved by the national committee.
Bernie's campaign manager offered to give Gabbard a couple of tickets and invited her to watch the debate at their table. One Member of Congress, speaking on the condition of anonymity, who has known Wasserman Schultz even before she was elected to Congress, told us she is so thoroughly loathed by her colleagues because, among other things, "she has a way of always making everything about her... She was a terrible choice to head the DNC and they should have eased her out long ago once it became apparent to everybody that she's all about Debbie and nothing else."

Labels: , , , ,


Post a Comment

<< Home