Header Image (book)


Friday, July 31, 2015

Debbie Wasserman-Schultz Spills The Beans

The more accurate title for this blog post might be "Debbie Wasserman-Schultz Tries To Hide The Beans." Heh.

On July 30, 2015, on MSNBC, the DNC Chairwoman could not or would not answer the question "What's the difference between a Democrat and a Socialist?" Please watch the short video below (Wasserman-Schultz's stammering and deflection begin around time marker 0:57):

Rough excerpt from the transcript below the fold:
Matthews: What is the difference between a Democrat and a Socialist?

Wasserman-Schultz: (Laughter)

Matthews: I used to think there’s a big difference. What do you think it is?

Wasserman-Schultz: Wuh...The difference between...

Matthews: Like Democrat Hillary Clinton and Socialist Bernie Sanders?...Well, what’s the big difference between a Democrat and a Socialist. You’re chairman of the Democratic Party. Tell me the difference between you and a Socialist.

Wasserman-Schultz: (She won’t answer) The relevant debate we will be having over the course of this campaign is what’s the difference between a Democrat and a Republican.
America, are you paying attention? The Democratic Party has slid to the far Left.


  1. People on the left are intellectually-incapable of discussing political philosophy because they have none. "Liberalism" or "Progressivism" is a noisy collection of competing victim groups, privileged classes and narrow interest tribes.

    They have no philosophy and so they have no philosophical discussions. They emote, sputter in outrage, scold others, marinate in smug sanctimony, and dole out social media pats on the head for 'acts of bravery' like turning yourself into a woman, scorning Christians, supporting gay marriage, making the controversial statement that Black Lives Matter, defending Barack Obama, criticizing GOP candidates, and spouting vapid climate change propaganda.

    1. Some might disagree...

      STEPHEN KOTKIN: So this is a book about ideas. The revelation of the communist archives, the secret of the communist archives is that behind closed doors they spoke the same way to each other when nobody else was listening as they spoke in their public propaganda. They spoke about class warfare, kulaks, rich peasants, finance capital, bourgeois revolution, socialist revolution, privately that’s how they spoke. It turns out the secret archives have shown that the communists behind closed doors were communists. (laughter) That’s the big revelation, and that turns out to matter. Because if your system is based on the Federalist papers or your system is based upon Marx and Lenin, you’re going to get different outcomes. Not exclusively based upon those things because many factors are at play here: state-to-state relations, geopolitics, the international system.


    2. Thersites,

      I should have specified American liberals, so-called. Indeed, communists and socialists delve deeply into philosophy. No so our liberal friends here in the US. The closest you get is a college student regurgitating the crap he ingested from an aging hippie college professor.

    3. Not Your Typical Auntie Intellectual Bigot said

      And that ALONE should prove, SIlverFiddle, that "delving deeply into philosophy" is a WASTE of TIME.

    4. Anon: Obscurantism is never a good thing.

    5. You could say the same thing about most conservatives. They are both (liberals/conservatives) "hysterics" when it comes to applying the "fundamentals idea's" that our Founding Father's were "conversant" in and used to construct our Republic. All they know is that "something" isn't working. They don't know what. They don't know how. They only know that more and more people are failing in the once most prosperous country that the world has ever known.

  2. I'm a little surprised that LARDBALL put her on the spot. I didn't think that he had it in him.

    SF, good job!

    1. I imagine the tingley Lardball was trying to get her to say that the Democrats are not socialists, but Schultz has never struck me as being too bright. Like most lefty political operatives, she's all crafty guile and sharp tongue, but there isn't a lot of deep thought behind it.

    2. Her false look of emotional outrage is a cue to the audience of his bad taste. The only acceptable positions for Americans are "left" and "right" defined as "democrat" and "republican".

      Using the terms "socialism", "communism", "fascism" seems to be worse than using profanity.

  3. Her deer-in-the-headlights look was priceless!

  4. The strongest impression I got from this dreary little piece was of the obnoxious manner displayed by Old Kris Tingle towards one of his compatriots.

    I've never liked Dummy Whatsername Schitz, but I developed a good deal of sympathy for the poor foolish creature after seeing her subjected to Matthews' bullying.

    Who the h-ll does Matthews think he is? BILL O'REILLY?

    An ABYSMAL performance all the way 'round. Absolutely pathetic.

    1. "Kris Tingle"

      "Dummy Whatsername Schitz"


      You should win some kind of internet award for those.

    2. @FT,

      "poor foolish creature"

      Yep, that about says it all!

    3. FT,
      That the head of the DNC is a poor foolish creature is telling about the state of party politics in today's America.

      Tingles in a jerk. No doubt about that. However, I think that he expected Wasserman-Schultz to explain that the Democratic Party isn't a socialist party. And she could not do so.

      I haven't seen the rest of the footage. Tingles said that doesn't equate Democrat with Socialist. But what did he provide for evidence of that statement he made?

  5. I expect her shabby performance and fear of admitting Sanders IS a Socialist, but I'm a bit surprised by Matthews!
    He even CARES that a socialist might speak at the DNC convention in prime time?
    I used to like him but he suddenly and completely became so knee-jerk Left I couldn't watch anymore.....this surprised me more for HIM than HER reaction!

    By the way, how's he like his pal Lawrence O'Donnell , an admitted and proud Socialist, having a show on the same cable channel as Matthews does?

    1. Z,
      He even CARES that a socialist might speak at the DNC convention in prime time?

      I had that same thought.

      Of course, he might not really care. What he might be truly concerned about is that a Democrat won't win the White House in 2016.

  6. Pretty well done.
    Why would the party chairman want to answer in a way that promotes discord in the party. We'll deal with that in the primaries.

    Meanwhile you have your own party problems to deal with.
    Hint: Rhymes with T-R-U-M-P

    So why doesn't Rience Priebus, the human anagram, give us all a lecture on running a primary.

    Did you catch Perry trying to answer a question yesterday?
    Rick, the glasses ain't helping.

    What happened to Ben Carson?

    1. Great stuff, isn't it, politics?
      And now we have BIDEN THE JOKE considering running...the guy who apparently likes to swim in the nude in front of female Secret Service agents? Oh, I KNOW, the book stating this uses "unnamed sources" so it simply can't be true! Only Republicans do things this stupid, right? Or maybe they just don't get covered up (you should pardon the pun) by the media as often or as well!?

      Perry.....almost as stupid as Biden. We've finally lost Huckabee who suggests that we should employ the FBI or Federal troops to stop abortions...and Lindsey Graham for saying he'd go to war in a heartbeat. "Don't let the door hit you on the way out"..

      Ben Carson? Our country's not good enough to deserve a man like him. You know that, I know that. But you only know that deep, deep down, IF you can admit it.

      Donald "I'm so rich" Trump; he is a problem, no doubt about it. I'm personally hoping for a Hillary/Donald debate. OH, brother, am I HOPING....not that I want Trump to get that far.
      Or a Biden/ Bernie or Lenin (or whatever Dem is picked by the hordes of Kool Aid drinkers) v Trump debate....let's go!

    2. Duck,
      Liberalmann's comments, reasonable or not, and replies thereto are typically removed by a blog administrator as soon as a blog administer becomes aware of such comments.

  7. If I were head of the DNC, I would do just as she is doing.
    Avoid getting into a conversation on just hat a "socialist" is and keep harping on news from the Republican "candidates".

    Mike Huckabee Won't Rule Out Using Federal Troops To Stop Abortions
    "I will not pretend there is nothing we can do to stop this."

    You folks have the problem, not us and Wasserman-Schultz is smart to put the focus where it will inflict casualties.

    1. Actually, Ducky. You guys have the problem. Cons still outnumber libs, and Obama ain't running next time. His hopium high is all that is powering the DemonCrap party. You sure as hell ain't running on intellectual ferment.

  8. What's wrong with the interviewer? He still thinks there's a 'huge' difference between Democrats and socialists? Fascist may be a bit more accurate - they still seem to want to allow private industry to actually 'own' the means of production, just no control at all over how they acquire, use them or disseminate their products. Kind of like minor children. Let the parents pay for them, but big brother will fill their heads with mush.

  9. There is a difference from the socialism defined by most morons on the right as something sinister, and Democratic Socialism which provides for all and doesn't sell out to corporations to the demise of the middle class and suffering of the poor. But losers on the right are convinced the poor are running scams and too lazy while they themselves pay a 100 times more in their taxes to subsidize corporate loopholes and tax breaks. Can you blame Schultz for not wanting to engage a so called liberal media, who have been covering Trump more than the amazing crowds Sanders has been attracting, with red meat the pea brains on the right will lap right up? Sander will tell you straight out he's a 'socialist,' and if you give him a chance to explain, you may just learn something.

  10. Can someone tell me the difference between Bernie Sanders and the original anti-TARP Tea Party?

    1. Sure. The anti-Tarp Tea Party would have liked to make a one-time economic playing field levelling alteration to the legal system and government that now advantages the largest artificial corporate entities over small business owners. Bernie wants to take ALL private enterprise permanently and run them with government bureaucrats and central planning. It's a classic One vs Many argument.

      The Tea Partyers agree with Bernie that a fundamental economic change is required. They disagree as to the extent and duration of the government's "engagement" in THAT process.

      The anti-TARP Tea Party believes in laissez-faire economics with less "social-adjustments" than your typical neoliberal Democrat. Bernie does not believe in laissez-faire economics AT ALL.

  11. The media traipse after 'personality' which Trump has in spades, and Sanders completely lacks. The absence of abundance of it, of course, in no way qualifies one for the job. Coolidge, who was an excellent executive, would never get elected in this market.

  12. As for Sanders, his 12-point plan might be catchy to the ignorati but most will recognize it for the half-baked pie-in-the-sky in the sweet-bye-and-bye that it is. http://www.sanders.senate.gov/agenda/

    Mixing a few cogent observations ( #1, 7) with half-truths and innuendo (#5, 6, 8, 9, 10,11 esp!) whose leftist slant derives from lack of depth and context, and outright fables (#2) is good for a laugh. It appeals to greed as long as it's YOURS, not THEIRS.

    People realize they are being lied to and taken advantage of by the political club as a class. They want someone to speak plainly and honestly. If you lean left you will find some appeal in Sanders' ideas despite his nebbishness. If you lean right you will find some appeal in Trump's bold forthrightness if you can stand the ego.


We welcome civil dialogue at Always on Watch. Comments that include any of the following are subject to deletion:
1. Any use of profanity or abusive language
2. Off topic comments and spam
3. Use of personal invective