The difference between Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Mary Burke.

As you no doubt know, Debbie Wasserman Schultz trivialized and degraded victims of domestic abuse Wednesday via the use of inappropriate, and frankly rather graphic, language:

Getting a little over excited at a women’s issues event in Milwaukee, Wasserman Schultz accused Wisconsin’s Republican Gov. Scott Walker of engaging in domestic violence against women. She said that Walker has “given women the back of his hand” and is “grabbing us by the hair and pulling us back.”

The fallout was immediate, and led to the following two responses to CNN.

Debbie Wasserman Schultz:

Lily Adams, a spokeswoman for the congresswoman, did not apologize for the comments but said later in a statement to CNN that “domestic violence is an incredibly serious issue and the Congresswoman was by no means belittling the very real pain survivors experience.”

Wisconsin gubernatorial candidate Mary Burke:

Stephanie Wilson, press secretary for Burke, said Schultz’s comments are “not the type of language that Mary Burke would use, or has used, to point out the clear differences in this contest. For the last 11 months of this campaign, and in the final nine weeks left to go, Mary is committed to pointing out those clear differences. There is plenty that she and Gov. Walker disagree on, but those disagreements can and should be pointed out respectfully.”

And what’s the difference? …Ah, simple. Debbie Wasserman Schultz kind of wants Mary Burke to lose the election – which Mary Burke is going to do, anyway – because Burke losing will help with the DNC’s meta-narrative in 2016. Mary Burke, on the other hand, would actually like to win the election – which she will not – so it’s a really good idea for her to disassociate herself with the idiots at the DNC. But mind you: if Mary Burke was winning right now she’d be lining up behind the aforementioned idiots.

Just go to show: don’t watch the mouth.  Watch the eyes, and the hands.  That’ll do a better job of telling you intentions.

Moe Lane

PS: It need hardly be said that any Republican official – male or female – would be hounded from office for this.  It also need hardly be said that the Democrats have no intention of doing any kind of internal policing over this.  Heck, their supporters should be grateful that at least they had a woman say this stuff this time.  That’s a step up for that party…

6 thoughts on “The difference between Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Mary Burke.”

  1. Moe, Wisconsin isn’t a New England state, nor is it Illinois. While things can get heated, people are generally turned off by the kind of comments Debbie Wasserman Schultz used. Speaking as a midwesterner, I can say we generally see more civility in our political discourse than what someone from out east would be used to seeing (at least until you see the 3 ring left-wing media circus, and a bunch of paid leftist aggitators show up).

    Seriously, when I interned at Goddard out near DC, people could tell I wasn’t from the area, simply because I was too polite or too nice.

  2. It is time that Little Debbie turned to Alan Grayson to pick up some much needed tips on style points.

    1. Nah, I think it’s good that she’s making comments that are so off the wall that Democrats are having to take the time to refute her comments (putting them on the defensive).

      I do kinda feel sorry for Ms. Burke though (unless evidence surfaces of her using that kind of rhetoric), especially if her refuting of Ms. Schultz is genuine.

      1. Okay, I need to add a little more moisture to my humor. Have you ever seen clips of Alan Grayson speak? He comes off kinda like Fred Astaire, wearing an evening bear skin while carrying a club over his shoulder.

        FYI, if you want the video of our Debbie, here it is:

        1. I don’t think what Ms. Schultz said was amusing. I think it was way out of line, and people are right to condemn what she said.

          In other news it appears that Kay Hagan tried to follow Ms. Schultz’s lead in that NC debate the other night.

          1. My inappropriate sense of humor precludes me from ever becoming a Republican:
            •RULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.”

            I brought up Grayson because, like MRS Schultz, he is a nasty piece of work and for the subliminal Neanderthal connection which, based on cartoon mythology, included the idea of gently clubbing your bride-to-be before dragging her by the hair to the honeymoon cave.

            RE Kay Hagan

Comments are closed.