From Glenn Reynolds, we get this bit of speculation from Ann Althouse, “Imagine if Anthony Weiner were a Republican. (I know, it’s such a hackneyed visualization, but it’s important here.) The liberal/lefty blogs would be shredding him mercilessly. I’m not saying Weiner’s not getting his hair mussed. But if he were a Republican, the feeding frenzy would be of a different magnitude entirely.”
Well, there’s a more important story in the nets this weekend that’s not getting nearly as much attention as a tweet from Anthony Weiner and that’s a comment by his colleague from the Sunshine State, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the woman Obama tapped to head the Democratic National Committee. I mentioned this yesterday, but today, let me give you the actual clip:
In response to Harry Smith’s query, where he points out that Medicare could be “could be insolvent in the next decade” and asks if the Democrats had a plan to fix Medicare in light of its looming insolvency, the chairman of the Democratic National Committee responds by attacking Republicans. She doesn’t tell us what her party would do, but instead tells misrepresents the Republican plan.
If Moderator Harry Smith were like his former CBS colleague Katie Couric and he were dealing with a Republican woman rather than a Democratic one, he would have followed up and pressed her to answer the question. But that’s not all, no, that’s not all. After failing to answer whether or not her party had a plan, the DNC chair then had the gall to offer this:
I think Tea Party activists and Republican candidates elected to Congress by the Tea Party are finding that governing is hard. And that, you know, it’s easy to, you know, to– to throw bombs and– and to be incendiary. Not so easy to sit down and actually govern.
Um, Ms. Wasserman Schultz, you’re so committed to repeating your party’s talking points, then you fail to realize you just described your own rhetoric in that very interview. Your entire strategy on the Ryan plan has been to be incendiary and to throw bombs. Meanwhile, most (if not all) of the Tea Party Republicans in Congress voted the Ryan plan. An actual plan. Voting for a plan is called governing, Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Your party hasn’t even offered a budget. Now, please do tell me, who are the ones throwing bombs and who are the folks sitting down and actually governing?
If you were governing Ms. Wasserman Schultz, you’d have been able to tell Mr. Smith just what your plan was instead of offering such an incendiary tone toward the Republican plan.
. . . have settled on a political strategy of isolating and attacking the Ryan plan instead of offering constructive solutions that could leave them open to attack. If history is any guide, this is a winning election strategy. But it is not necessarily responsible governance. The nation faces an unprecedented debt crisis that makes the problems in the health care system pale in comparison. Both former President Clinton and President Obama at least rhetorically acknowledge that the current and projected federal deficits are unsustainable.
And while throwing bombs, Ms. Wassserman Schultz accuses Republicans of throwing bombs. How does she plan to sit down and actually govern? She hasn’t let on. If she were a Republican, a CBS reporter who didn’t get an answer to his question might follow up.