This obsessive fanning of extreme hatred for DWS is getting creepy.

[sufrommich]

She's a mediocre chair for sure,but she's not the reason Sanders is losing or evil incarnate,nor does she rule the DNC by herself. This seemed to move into hyperdrive when the Sanders campaign was caught being where it shouldn't have been during a computer breech. This constant need for 2 minutes of hate directed at her every single day doesn't help the Sanders campaign and seems a little unhinged.

[earthside]

1. Past anything to do with Sanders.

A lot of people wonder how she survived after the 2014 debacle.

Her bias in the nomination contest hasn't helped her reputation.

Now it is increasingly about her political judgement and her representation of the Democratic Party.

Really, she needs to resign.

Debbie Wasserman Schultz Under Fire for Comments About Young Women
ABC News - Jan. 7, 2016

DNC Head Debbie Wasserman Schultz Said Some Stupid Stuff About Drugs
GQ - Jan. 6, 2016

[Punkingal]

2. My dislike of her has nothing to do with Bernie...

And everything to do with the shitty job she has done getting Dems elected.

[daleanime]

51. +1

[avebury]

53. + 1,000 nt

[Hortensis]

82. That is not supported by behavior of many here.

Sufrommich is right. "This obsessive fanning of extreme hatred for DWS is getting creepy."
And worse, IMO.

Fortunately Bernie is not the kind of leader to encourage people to turn words into violent action. Unfortunately, not all leaders are as principled.

[Punkingal]

87. Violent action?

Don't think anyone here is talking about killing her, just firing her.

[avebury]

122. You might not be looking at this in the right way.

I don't look upon the support for the idea of the Democratic Party looking to take DWS out of a leadership position as being creepy.

I look upon the Democratic Party's continuing support for DWS as just not in the best interest of the party. The Democratic Party operates far too often as their own worse enemy. If you want to try to get the people to rally around the Democratic Party then you need to act like you know what you are doing and DWS just comes across as a wolf in sheeps clothing.

What are the consequences? Take myself for example. In the 2008 and 2012 Presidental election I was obsessed with following the primary and general election process. The current Presidential election process I am virtually tuning it out. I had reregistered from an Independent to a Democrat so that I can vote for Bernie in the Primay. But now the Democratic Party had decided that they will allow Independents in my state vote in their primaries so there is no longer any need for me to be a registered Democrat. How many people are being turned off by the way DWS is running the Democratic Party in the primary elections? She in no way shape or form excites the people. She is no Howard Dean. The Democratic Party flat out needs to get their act together. They cannot rely on a Barack Obama type of candidate to run in every Presidential election.

The Republican Party has a way of coming up with total wack job candidates and what boggles the mind is how much Rupublicans will rally around these nuts. I will vote Democrat in November but, except for Bernie, I am not that excited about any of other candidates. If Bernie is not the Democratic candidate I feel like my vote will be based more on voting for the lesser of evils then a candidate that really excites me.

[madokie]

149. I'm excited

to vote for Bernie. I will Have to vote for Hillary. Big difference in the two

[Warren DeMontague]

150. And I'm ecstatic I will never be in a position where I will ever be asked to vote for Debbie.

She wouldn't make it as dogcatcher in Oregon. We laugh at people who float tired reefer madness tropes while trying to defend arresting medical marijuana users.

Just ask former establishment favorite for OR Atty General, Dwight Holton.

[avebury]

159. I am excited for Bernie too.

However, the Democratic Party establishment does not realize what a jewel he is and people like DWS will do what they can to deep six Bernie's chances. Bernie is much more a man of the people then anybody they could ever come up with at this time.

The biggest problem with the Democratic Party is that they cannot continue to rely upon getting the WH but need to start rethinking their Congrnessional race strategy. Howard Dean was great, a big picture guy in overseeing the election process. The Republican Party has become an institution run by bat shit crazy people but they run circles around the Democratic Party in state and local races so to speak. If the Democratic Party can't find a way to overcome that this country will remain pretty dysfunctional for a long time. If I were young I would be so out of here because I just don't see things changing. At my age I have become tired of spitting in the wind, hence the disengagement in the whole process. Just let me know the primary and general election voting dates and I'll show up and vote. Beyond that I try really hard to just tune it all out.

[Hortensis]

169. "I look upon the Democratic Party's continuing

support for DWS as just not in the best interest of the party." Sure. THAT is a reasonable, uncreepy statement. I can't defend many actions of Debbie, and perhaps your are right. We could discuss her decisions over many screens.

The "creepy," though, is the scary level of hate some are focusing directly on this one person as a person. It's not okay. It feels wrong because it is. And IMO it's an an indulgence of something that should never be indulged.

[avebury]

170. Now that Obama will be leaving office it seems like the DNC

is moving back to the old status quo and that is what will hurt the party in the long run. People are hungry for change and if the DNC isn't prepared to fight for that change, people will leave. Whether they like it or not, Bernie Sanders could really energize peopel if they weren't so set with trying to make him a non-entitiy.

The Republican Party has been taken over by the bat shit crazy side. They fight tooth and nail for their bat shit crazy beliefs.
As much as they may be despised you have to admire their tenacity in digging in and not giving up.

I just don't see that level of commitment and tenacity on the democratic/progressive side of the isle. Instead we are too often settling for less then what we want and deserve. I think that is what costs us so many local and state races. And where are the decisions made on redistricting? At the state level. What takes place at the local and state level does flow up and impact Washington.

DWS is just one cog of a very dysfunctional system. Fighting to have her removed from her office will not settle all the woes fo the Democratic Party and the angrty crowd miss that point. She is a disaster but she is just not worth my time and energy thinking giving her much thought.

[leveymg]

84. I don't hate Little Debbie. It's just that she's mostly corn syrup and preservatives

[ejbr]

99. +1 n.t

[Warren DeMontague]

3. She just gave an interview where she insulted Millennial women- and told the majority of Americans

(not just our party, where the numbers are even stronger) who support Pot Legalization, to fuck off, because of some incoherent reefer madness argument that she couldn't even keep straight from one paragraph to the next.

This has jack shit to do with Bernie Sanders. She's not "mediocre", she's a fucking train wreck.

[1StrongBlackMan]

44. That comment about the apathy of young woman ...

born after Roe v. Wade was decided ... to abortion rights is probably the most non-controversial comment of all time.

Workers born into having weekends, and other working conditions, that unions had to fight for, tend to be more apathetic towards union efforts ... Black kids born into a non-jim crowd world, tend towards being apathetic with respect to the Civil rights movement.

That just is how it is.

[Warren DeMontague]

47. If it was non-controversial, then by definition there wouldnt be controversy about it.

As it is, she's catching all kinds of flak on twitter from these people who (erroneously, I guess) believe she was dissing them- to the point where she's having to walk it back and justify it.

[1StrongBlackMan]

56. Amazing that those giving her flak on twitter all have something in common with ...

those on DU giving her flak ... the all feel the bern.

The real issue "Hate DWS" issue is because of her insufficient feeling the bern.

[Warren DeMontague]

64. No, I was pissed at her over her inane bullshit around medical marijuana long before the primaries.

When she teamed up with Sheldon Adelson to fight against the MMJ law in Florida, for starts.

[1StrongBlackMan]

71. Why do you keep trying to make this about MMJ when it really is about ...

YOU wanting to be able to get high, unmolested?

[Warren DeMontague]

73. So--- you're opposed to marijuana legalization, then.

Go ahead and make that case. Stand up for your beliefs!

One can recognize the vast benefits that cannabis can have for sick people AND believe that consenting adults should be able to use it recreationally.

Also, if you've been paying attention, I happen to live in a state where consenting adults can ALREADY "get high unmolested" - and personally, I do it once every blue moon if Bob Weir is in town, but that's about it... but it being illegal never stopped me either.

So no, it's not about what I myself want, other than being a taxpayer and citizen who wants government to not waste energy and resources fighting something which so clearly should be legal, regulated, and taxed.

[1StrongBlackMan]

76. No ... I, actually, support the legalization and controlling for taxing of ALL drugs. n/t

[Warren DeMontague]

79. then by your own logic, doesn't that mean you just want to 'get high unmolested'?

I mean, why else could you possibly hold that position, derp

[1StrongBlackMan]

83. No ... I don't do drugs. n/t

[Warren DeMontague]

86. So why do you assume that I do?

Or that that's my motivation for being committed to this issue?

Usually in my experience when people make shit personal, it means their arguments have run out of steam.

[1StrongBlackMan]

106. Did you forget that you typed this? ...

Also, if you've been paying attention, I happen to live in a state where consenting adults can ALREADY "get high unmolested" - and personally, I do it once every blue moon if Bob Weir is in town, but that's about it... but it being illegal never stopped me either.

Put down the bud ... it messes with short-term memory.

[Warren DeMontague]

131. Yes, like our president, I have both smoked and inhaled.

Which does not mean that my reasons for supporting legalization- AND medical MMJ laws- are because I only "want to get high unmolested".

Your "logic"- being charitable, here- is like saying that anyone who uses birth control and also supports planned parenthood only wants to do so "so they can fuck without facing the consequences".

Derp derp and did I mention derp?

And again, the fact that you are relflexively falling back on lame ad hominem personal attacks means you're tacitly admitting you've lost the argument, Jack.

[DonCoquixote]

123. there is plenty of reason totally unrelated to Medicine

or getting high unmolested to hate Debbie's stance on MMJ

It cost the taxpayers money we could be using closing down meth labs (which after all explode)
It cost more taxes in general that we could use to fund schools and roads.

and sadly, it feeds the prison industrial complex.

strong, this next statement might offend, but I think you will know it is true. for others reading, consider this statement a "trigger warning" like the kids on Campus say.

*****
*****

Our stance on cannabis was tinged with racism from day one. A major part of what feeds the prison industrial complex are a bunch of mostly black or other minority people who have been given hard, long sentences targeted against Cannabis. We have people who were not violent rotting away because they got caught (or in many cases, were planted with) Cannabis.

http://www.salon.com/2014/01/14/the_racist_roots_of_americas_medical_marijuana_policy_partner/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/14/marijuana-prohibition-racist_n_4590190.html

Even iuf people hate the idea of people getting high, we could at least revisit drug policy so that we can blunt the edges of it that are aimed like a guillotine on black and brown necks. I say this as a brown person that has seen many brown people do hard levels of time because my state wants to prove Nancy Reagan was right.

[Warren DeMontague]

132. "Heh heh Stoner put down teh pot pothead derp derp duh hh huh stoners huh pot huh heh"

"Derp ferp derp

I like winning argumens on internets with stoners herp derp"

(Paraphrasing the invitable witty, incisve response to your post)

[LiberalLovinLug]

126. what is wrong with not wanting to be "molested"?

So what even if it is only about someone wanting to get high unmolested. Is this something awful to you? How dare someone just smoke a doobie at the end of a work day in the privacy of their homes....and not have the constant stress of some a-hole cop stopping them on the way home and finding a joint, or following up a report from a nosy neighbour, or smelling the evidence...and then "molesting" the perp.

Is it also selfish and arrogant of an alcohol drinker as well to think they should be able to have a drink unmolested? Or is it just recreational marijuana users than are so selfish?

[1StrongBlackMan]

130. Nothing ...

Except framing this as related to MMJ, is intellectually dishonest.

[Warren DeMontague]

133. No, it's not.

Pot not being legal for consenting adult use, is wrong.

Putting sick people who use it to alleviate medical issues in prison, is even more wrong.

[1StrongBlackMan]

136. Yes it is ...

it is "wrong" that Pot not being legal for consenting adult use ... it is also, even more, "wrong" to put sick people who use it to alleviate medical issues in prison.

But it is intellectually dishonest to argue "what about the poor sick folks", when the concern of the arguer is about the former, and the latter is an "oh, yeah".

[Warren DeMontague]

137. You want to talk about intellectual dishonesty, you came at me with all sorts of bs about how I

"only care because I want to get high unmolested", which you pulled out of your nether region.

Then you threw some tired shit about stoners and short-term memory (because you ignored the second part of my post, up there, choosing instead to respond only to the subject line) because, again, when the argument tank is empty sometimes all there is to run on, are ad hominem fumes.

So, yes, lets talk about intellectual dishonesty.

I have elder relatives who benefit from CBD. I have people close to me with Parkinson's and other ailments which directly benefit from cannabis.

It is unconscionable to defend pot prohibition but even doubly so to defend- as DWS has done- the arrest of sick people for medical marijuana.

Those two positions are in no way incompatible.

[1StrongBlackMan]

139. Okay. Have a good evening. n/t

[AgingAmerican]

153. It's what they do

Useless discussing it with them.

[1StrongBlackMan]

161. Ignore works. eom.

[Ed Suspicious]

129. I do.

[immoderate]

70. Not because of her failures?

--imm

[1StrongBlackMan]

74. She was failing in 2012; but, she was the devil, then ...

few, if any, DUers called for her ouster, then. What changed?

[immoderate]

109. I think your count changed.

She supported Republicans is 2008. Maybe good for DWS, but not acceptable for a DNC chair. No way to excuse that. I live near her district. I have demonstrated against her for years.

--imm

[BlueMTexpat]

157. Spot on. eom

[skepticscott]

105. Outrage because someone dared to say something

is not the same as "controversy" over the truth of what was said. In fact, it is very often a way of covering up the fact that there is no simple and sensible refutation.

[Warren DeMontague]

119. I haven't seen any factual evidence to corroborate the idea that Millennial women are complacent

about choice.

I do know Millennials are, in general, statistically more liberal than both Gen Xers and Boomers, on everything from LGBT equality to pot legalization, and I strongly suspect that translates to reproductive rights as well.

I also know that as per this interview in the NY Times, speaking of Marijuana legalization, Debbie Wasserman Schultz clearly has no fucking clue as to what she's talking about regarding THAT, so why her word should be accepted as gospel on anything else is beyond me.

[passiveporcupine]

116. Agreed

I've never liked her (so maybe I am a bit biased), but her actions regarding the dem debates, and then her immediate nasty attack on the Sanders campaign when the firewall breach came up, even though Hillary did the same thing with Obama and was never attacked for it...its just too much. Now she is touting the conservative take on marijuana, in spite of the country's obvious trend to legalize it. I didn't see her thing on millenial women...that might piss me off too.

She is just so much in the pocket for Hillary, it pisses me off. And I would feel the same way if she were in the pocket for Bernie. As head of the DNC, she is supposed to be impartial. And she has not done a good job representing the DNC, and helping us bring in votes or money. The DNC does not represent the democratic party right now, and it needs to get back to it's roots, and drop this neocon centrist third-way bullshit.

I just want her gone from the DNC and I want the DNC to represent the real democratic party, which means, the people, not the money.

[mmonk]

4. No fanning required.

I know I don't belong in a party any more that abandoned me but one still holds out for hope by still grappling to get it back.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

5. She's just another ambitious pol doing a half assed job.

“History has tried hard to teach us that we can’t have good government under politicians. Now, to go and stick one at the very head of the government couldn’t be wise.” Mark Twain

[MeNMyVolt]

6. It's a way to stoke anger, which drives donations.

No fan of DWS either, but it is getting obsessive.

[Warren DeMontague]

10. "Donations" to who? The Sanders campaign?

It was a brilliant move on their part, then, to get DWS to say all that stupid stuff yesterday to the NY Times.

[MeNMyVolt]

14. Did you really need to ask those questions?

[Warren DeMontague]

19. "Need" is a funny word.

I know I havent given a fucking dime to the DNC since DWS's last idiotic go-around re: cannabis, you know, when she got all buddy buddy with Sheldon Adelson to make sure that medical marijuana patients could still face arrest and prison time for getting high.

I'll donate to the Oregon Democratic Party, which isnt run by morons.

[1StrongBlackMan]

48. LOL ...

to make sure that medical marijuana patients could still face arrest and prison time for getting high.

Really? ... I think you need to re-assess your knowledge of MMJ ...

Most patients quickly learn the correct dose, that is, the dose that does not get them high.

To a medical marijuana patient, being high is more of a side effect and generally an unwanted nuisance. If you can’t think clearly or walk straight, you’re not going to be able to work or even drive, so “getting high all the time” is nothing you’re even thinking about.

Some patients are in tremendous pain and have to take relatively large amounts of medicine. But they’re not looking to get high either (and often don’t), they just need pain relief. Many of them are eager to find and use the newer strains of medical marijuana that are more effective against pain and less likely to cause a “high”.


http://beyondchronic.com/2011/10/5-biggest-myths-medical-marijuana-getting-high/

[Warren DeMontague]

49. Semantics, that's the best you can do in defending that particular policy?

[1StrongBlackMan]

52. LOL ... pointing out the inaccuracy of your statement is NOT semantics ...

But your chose of words suggests what your agenda is ... Let's all get high!!!

[Warren DeMontague]

55. I absolutely favor legalizing, regulating, and taxing marijuana for consenting adult use.

As do a majority of Americans.

And I've never claimed otherwise.

Aside from being the right thing to do, it works.

[2pooped2pop]

7. lol another warning for Sander's supporters?

Thanks for your concern but DWS was a problem way before Clinton bought her.

[fredamae]

8. I don't believe people "Hate" DWS the person

we are loathe of her job representing the Dem Party. Since she's been chair, Dems have been unwilling to discuss the great things they were able to get done, they distanced themselves from PBO during the 2010/2014 mid terms..she has bucked PBO on foreign policy....Hundreds and Hundreds of Dems seats were lost.....

All that said, I speak only for myself.
DWS Must be Dismissed for failing to meet the minimum expectations of her job duties-gettimg More Dems elected, Holding incumbents seats.
This call for her resignation/replacement began, if memory serves in circa 2011.....Long before Sanders

[nc4bo]

11. Perfectly stated, thank you!

[Gmak]

100. Seconded!

[NurseJackie]

9. It is weird and obsessive behavior ... but, well ...

... I think they're frustrated that Bernie's message isn't resonating with more people, so instead of looking inward, it's easier to blame uncontrollable external forces. I get it. I totally understand.

But on the other hand, I also understand that it's really not doing much to actually help their candidate, so in that regard, I have no problem with it. Let 'em do what they want.

[Warren DeMontague]

13. So abc news, twitter, GQ, and jezebel, among others, are weird, obsessive and "unhinged"?

DWS says a bunch of patently stupid shit to the times- people comment- "wow, they're obsessed with her!"

[NurseJackie]

16. Ha!! :-D

[Warren DeMontague]

21. Ah, a gif from a hopelessly middlebrow network tv show that people of middling intelligence like

To watch to convince themselves that they're clever on topics they have little hope of actually understanding.

How original!

[NurseJackie]

23. Awwww....

[Warren DeMontague]

26. So, we've established that your taste in television leaves much to be desired.

Dont feel bad, my mom watches that shit too. i imagine it's quite popular among the @aol.com email set.

[beam me up scottie]

30. LMAO!

[Warren DeMontague]

37. I know, right?

I understand the quantum physics- i learn about it every week, on CBS!

[beam me up scottie]

39. Some people watch too much tv.

They don't know how to use words to communicate, it's a tragedy.

[Warren DeMontague]

42. We cancelled our cable last year. It's fucking great.

Just get HBO a la carte so as to watch GOT and silicon valley. That and netflix, is plenty.

I havent watched a network tv show for at least a decade. Seriously, life is too short.

[beam me up scottie]

45. I killed my tv years ago.

But when I moved in with my s/o I had to deal, he's addicted. Other than a few great shows like Breaking Bad and a few others I don't bother.

[NurseJackie]

31. At least I have better taste in presidential candidates. That's why Hillary has my vote. And ...

... I'll be voting for her TWICE!!

[Warren DeMontague]

35. I think you're trying a little too hard.

[NurseJackie]

36. #WhoCares

[Warren DeMontague]

40. Well, lets see- jezebel, GQ, Ana Marie Cox, Twitter, Millennial women voters, and the majority of

Americans who favor marijuana legalization, to name a few?

[NurseJackie]

58. They all think that I'm "trying too hard" ... Wow!

[Warren DeMontague]

62. They do.

Jerry Garcia, on the other hand, doesn't give a fuck what you do.

[NurseJackie]

66. HA! It appears that he and I have something in common.

[Punkingal]

54. What is she laughing about there?

Her Iraq war vote?

[cherokeeprogressive]

60. That GIF could be a metaphor for every question she doesn't want to answer. nt

[NurseJackie]

65. Laughing at her haters, probably.

She's great, and that's why I'll be voting for her!

[Punkingal]

67. If you are calling me a "hater" you're wrong. I just don't trust her.

[NurseJackie]

68. You asked what she was laughing at. I answered your question. I said nothing about you.

I trust her more than I trust any other candidate. That's why I'm voting for her.

[one_voice]

72. Jeeze Warren...I've always like to read your comments...

thought you were smart & funny. But that shit is just condescending and mean. As well as the comment before it.

My mom watches 'that shit' and she's far above a 'middling intelligence' but thinks it's funny. She's retired and has worked since she was 14 and likes funny stupid shit sometimes. Same for my dad who just turned 80 and thinks Sheldon is funny as shit.

That's my problem with **some** of the Sanders supporters...you guys think you're better than the rest of us poor schlubs that support the likes of O'Malley or Clinton.

I'll get back to watching my shitty tv show; Wentworth Prison--pretty sure that's not up to your standards either.


edited to add: I can't stand DWS.

[Warren DeMontague]

75. I have problems with that show, and the prevalence of annoying Sheldon Cooper gifs doesn't help.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.304640-Why-do-some-nerds-hate-Big-Bang-Theory?page=7

But my mom watches it, too.

[one_voice]

81. I see..

I've never watched the show. I only know the name because of my parents. I like very few sitcoms.

[Warren DeMontague]

85. Look, you're right. I'm not trying to be an asshole.

My mom's pretty smart, she watches it, she also supports Hillary.

I find certain things about Network tv annoying, but I don't mean to imply that everyone who watches a particular thing I don't like is an idiot. The primary wars here suck, and frankly it's like network tv in that it's something I really shouldn't be wasting too much of my limited time on Earth, with.

Speaking as someone on the Sanders side, I'm tired of the name-calling, the lame insults, the "neener neener" or the stupid gifs. In 6 months I've been called everything from a racist to a Rand Paul lover to a pony-wanter (not to mention a misogynist "brogressive", but that's par for the course) ... so no doubt I'm a little raw.

This thread, here, is about people trying to defend the indefensible (namely, DWS's atrocious track record and recent comments) not because, in most cases, I think even they believe in her or the things she said, but because they've decided it's about team C versus team B. Again.

I wish DWS would take a cue from Hillary, who has acknowledged the right of states to chart their own course on legalization. Hillary is bright enough to realize that running expressly against marijuana legalization is a strategically dumb move in 2016, when several states including CA are likely to have it on the ballot, AND given the fact that Colorado is a crucial swing state.

I think DWS has been in the tank for Hillary, but that doesn't even bother me that much. I suspect Hillary will probably win the nomination despite Debbie's support, wording intentional. People are pissed at her right now because she said some really stupid stuff to the NY Times.

Anyway, peace. Wanted you to know I hear what you said and I respect your opinion, which is why your criticism is something I take seriously.

[one_voice]

90. I think all of DU is raw right now...

For the record I don't think you're any of those nasty things. I've never seen you be anything but fair. I've tried to stay away from GDP for the most part. I only wade in every so often because I can't take all the name calling and finger pointing.

When I do come in it's usually to post something positive about one of the candidates. I never post anything negative about any of them. EVER! I won't add to the nastiness that's going on.

I don't like DWS. I think her entire track record is atrocious. On that we're on the same page!

I know you're not an asshole--you've always been alright with me even when we didn't agree on things. I probably shouldn't have jumped on you like that--sorry about that!

I know we both watch GoT so I will go with that meaning we're geniuses. I will leave out the fact that I also watch like Orange is the new black..lololol.

As you know I always respect what you say and enjoy your comments.

[Warren DeMontague]

107. I liked season 2 of OITNB, sort of stalled on season 3.

It's on my to watch list, though.

We actually signed up for Amazon Prime so now we can get their shows, too- I really wanted to check out "Man in the high castle". I enjoyed it even though the writing left a bit to be desired. I don't think the original PKD story lends itself to a narrative format so much, so they were trying to work with that.

[one_voice]

118. Agree with all of what you wrote...

we're gonna have to meet up in tv chat and have a serious chat about tv...

[Warren DeMontague]

134. Part of what bugs me about "big bang theory" - I have people close to me who are both

Off the curve brilliant and also deal - successfully- with stuff like asperger's.

That show treats people like that as though they are "hysterically" curious freaks of nature , who of course can't get laid.

I find it objectionable. The fact that some of the more toxic personalities on DU seem to favor sheldon cooper gifs, only confirms my suspicions about the show.

Yes, i should spend less time in GD P and more in tv chat. It would be good for my blood pressure, I think.

[one_voice]

140. Oh they shouldn't make fun of people like that. My dad..

once said that although he thought the show was funny Sheldon comes off as mean sometimes. Don't know how true that is/if that's part of what you're saying.

My taste in sitcoms is really goofy, I like the new odd couple, dr ken, blackish and a few others. I tend to be goofy so that works.

You should come to tv chat-I really do watch entirely too much tv and could talk you straight through the primaries.

[Warren DeMontague]

141. My wife and kids are running through parks and rec right now.

It's pretty funny. I see the appeal.

[randome]

77. Don't diss Sheldon!

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Birds are territorial creatures.
The lyrics to the songbird's melodious trill go something like this:
"Stay out of my territory or I'll PECK YOUR GODDAMNED EYES OUT!"[/center][/font][hr]

[uponit7771]

135. +1

[AgingAmerican]

154. Yes DWS continued fixation on wrecking the Sanders Campaign is bizarre indeed

And highly undemocratic.

[Bluenorthwest]

12. She's a drug warrior who has supported Republicans over Democrats. That's not about Bernie

It's about Debbie.

[sufrommich]

17. She's been the DNC chair since 2011.

Her policies in her district won't change whether she's DNC chair or not. My point is that these constant and increasingly vicious attacks on her have nothing to do with her past performance and everything to do with misplaced anger.

[Warren DeMontague]

29. She gave an interview to Ana Marie Cox where she said a bunch of stupid shit, YESTERDAY.

Are you honestly surprised that people are commenting about it?

[AgingAmerican]

155. How have the midterms gone under her?

Swimmingly?

[MeNMyVolt]

27. Link to said "support".

Do you have an endorsement link?

[1StrongBlackMan]

50. Turns out she didn't endorse anyone ...

she just didn't endorse the Democrat in a couple of contests, where she had a good working relationship with the republican incumbent ... in a contest where the Democratic candidate stood little chance of winning.

So in DU's "If yer not OTT fur, yer again" world that counts as endorsing the republican over the Democrat.

[Kentonio]

61. For Christs sake..

She was the head of the Red to Blue program and she refused to support Democratic candidates in Florida because they were running against Republican friends of hers. If that doesn't disgust you then you need to ask yourself some serious questions.

[immoderate]

121. Yup. Inexcusable for a DNC chair.

--imm

[berni_mccoy]

15. Lame counter because you couldn't post in the original thread. Nice way to bypass being alerted on.

DWS is a complete and miserable failure. She has destroyed the progress the party made and effectively set us back 30-40 years. If that's not enough for her to be gone, just think of the 2014 debacle or her obvious conflict of interest in this years primary.

For more info on her miserable record: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027507833

[sufrommich]

20. "because you couldn't post in the original thread"

I have no idea what your talking about.

[leftofcool]

18. I think it is creepy too but I started trashing those threads.

[Warren DeMontague]

33. Right, creepy that we dont want the chair of our national party to support jailing people for pot.

Creepy that we would appreciate she not go out of her way to alienate millennial women voters.

[Android3.14]

22. Mediocre

I'm glad that you have edged a miniscule amount from sycophant to acknowledging that a person actively engaged in anti-democratic behavior, gaming the system to favor a corporate puppet and harming the party itself is at least "mediocre".

I call that progress.

You know what's really creepy? Bribes disguised as $500,000 speaking fees.

[Bradical79]

24. This isn't a new thing...

The primaries means this stuff hits the mainstream more often, and her more recent actions and comments haven't cast her in a positive light, but people have had major problems with her handling of this job for years.

[99Forever]

25. There are a whole bunch of miserable failures I don't hate....

...I wouldn't want running the DNC. She just happens to top the list.

[djean111]

28. This is not a new thing, and for me has nothing to do with Bernie.

Maybe I see more of her crap down here in Florida, but being told I must always vote for the "D", and be loyal, and that if I want more progressives I need to start voting for them in the lower offices just pisses me off, when DWS does not always "support the "D"" and does not like having Progressives run for national office.

I would dislike DWS if Bernie had never run for President.

[tularetom]

32. Why are you trying to blame her incompetency and dishonesty on the Sanders campaign?

She's the living embodiment of the Peter Principle but if you want to blame anybody for the fact that she still has a job, blame Obama. Her continued employment as DNC chair rests solely in his hands, and the fact that she hasn't been fired after the abysmal job she has done, tells me that he is okay with her being there.

It has nothing in the world to do with Sanders, except that he is simply the latest Democrat to be victimized by her lack of vision and poor management skills.

[CharlotteVale]

34. She's not "mediocre." She's been a total failure when it comes to getting

Democrats elected.

[MADem]

38. She's not a mediocre chair, actually. She's raising money hand over fist, that is her job.

The Party Leader is a guy named OBAMA. She doesn't need to have "those kinds" of leadership skills--we're not in exile. We HAVE the White House.

Her job is to keep the money coming in, and she's doing a great job there.

I hate to say it, but I think she is being scrutinized to a greater degree than others who have held the job. It seems a little troubling to me, too. I don't want to think there are any "other" reasons for the absurd excoriation, but I can't help but think there are, and I won't elaborate, because this is DU and you get alerted on if you say too much, but you don't need to be a genius to figure out what I am thinking. Beyond that, I'll say no more.

In any event, the DWS haters are going to be disappointed. Odds are good she'll move UP in the House leadership, and sooner rather than later. She's in a safe seat and her constituents fucking LOVE her. You know who else loves her? Her PEERS in the HOUSE.

If anyone thinks that her associates, to say nothing of the DNC apparatchiks, are going to push out someone who can fundraise to beat the band, and who is likely to have a very VISIBLE future in the House of Representatives, I have a bridge for sale!!!!!

A lot of people LOVE DWS--they just don't post on DU! LOL...!

[Kentonio]

63. Raising money hand over fist?!

Have you actually seen the atrocious state of the DNC's finances?!?

[leftofcool]

92. Some of us have and they are quite good, especially since HRC is raising money

[Kentonio]

94. So they no longer have more debt than money?

[leftofcool]

110. Not as far as I know

[Kentonio]

115. That's impressive then.

As those were the reports coming out as short a time ago as November.

[MADem]

145. The 2008 and 11 campaigns ran up that debt--DWS has been paying it down.

Obama and HRC are doing some heavy lifting in that regard. Of course, if you read right wing sites instead of the FEC filings you might get a different impression.

[Kentonio]

147. Why would it take 4 years to pay off the 11 campaign?

At the same point before the last general the DNC had a big cash surplus on hand ($11m apparently), this November supposedly they had more debts than cash, a deficit of something like $2m. The Republicans meanwhile had a surplus of around $18m.

From what I understand those figures are from FEC filings, so talking about 'right wing sites' is nothing more than a distraction. Either the figures are accurate or they are not accurate, and if they are then it shows a really poor financial performance by the party leaders in terms of getting the party ready for the election.

[MADem]

143. Have you seen the money BHO and HRC have been pulling in for DNC and state parties? nt

[Kentonio]

144. As of November the DNC was supposedly in deep debt

If anyone can confirm that definitely is no longer the case, that would be great to hear.

[1StrongBlackMan]

164. Perhaps, a link to those "reports", is in order. My google doesn't seem to find any. n/t

[Kentonio]

167. Just type 'DNC debt' into google.

There are various RW sites crowing about it, but also numerous other sources talking about the FEC filings.

[MohRokTah]

43. It was creepy ages ago. eom

[bobbobbins01]

46. I for one welcome her incompetence.

We should just shut up and let the idiots run things. Speaking out just makes us creepers.

[Starry Messenger]

57. Fortunately no one outside of the blogosphere will be touched by this.

I doubt most people know who the DMC chair even is.

[Warren DeMontague]

69. I'm guessing it's one of these guys.

But yeah, outside of the NY times, Jezebel, GQ, Twitter, and "the blogosphere", no one is talking about this!

[m-lekktor]

59. yeah, I am sure DU Hillary supporters adore her and see nothing wrong with her!

[Tarc]

78. Misogyny, plain n' simple

[Warren DeMontague]

80. seriously? or snark?

either way, classic.

[DonCoquixote]

93. Misogyny?

If supporting Charlie Crist who used to be a big time abortion opponent is not misogyny, what is? It is not misogyny to point out that someone is actually very bad for women, regardless of if she happens to BE a woman.

[JI7]

88. It's part of the whole internet warrior thing

Along with control issues some have.

People who think posting on this site is activism.

[Thinkingabout]

89. She is the chairperson of the DNC, she was chairperson of the DNC became

chairperson of the DNC on April 5, 2011. This is just the manner in which the DNC operates, someone needs to be chairperson.

[DonCoquixote]

91. I will say this

As someone in Florida, that has seen her do hijinks down here, like putting Charlie Crist in the governor's race after his campaign helped put Rubio in the senate, I can say I know the woman. She is merely doing on a macro level what she has been doing on a micro level for years, and still IS.

[Cassiopeia]

95. I'm sure you would say the exact same thing

If DWS was in the tank for Bernie and doing everything in her power to thwart HRH campaign.

I'm positive you would have the same opinion.

[ejbr]

96. Thanks

Us Sanders supporters appreciate your unbiased opinion on what does or does not help his campaign.

[INdemo]

97. Oh Please ! Save it

DWS should have been tossed out for sure Nov 2014 ...So don't stir up this pot of shit again.
DWS knew about the security breech months before and just happen to find it convenient to try and pull some shit just before the debate but failed miserably.

Actually Bernie is winning and has the momentum going his way if you would take the time to check.

[paleotn]

98. 30 years ago....

...before the Republicans went to crazy town, she would be a Republican. Judging by her latest interview, she certainly thinks like old, establishment Republicans. If you love a Republican led Congress, you'll love DWS. To think otherwise is deluded and unhinged.

[NRaleighLiberal]

101. coordinated messaging working overtime today, I see.

[stupidicus]

102. indeed, creepy exaggerations are required for her defense

she's been reviled by the smarter ones for a long time, and increased their numbers with the debate schedule, all of which came before the Bernie affair, which only added to it.

All these exaggerations about Bernie and his campaign don't help the HC campaign at all...

[saltpoint]

103. From way before the current

election cycle, I've had little respect for DWS.

That she is the object of disdain by so many seems to me to be understandable and richly earned.

She is certainly no progressive. And she's got half the vision and energy of Howard Dean.

She should go.

[billhicks76]

104. 100% Wrong

She still continues to call marijuana a gateway drug that leads to heroin...a completely debunked sham theory. She is responsible for lives ruined by the drug war and the explosion of private prisons. It's obvious whose pocket she is in. She's dangerous not mediocre.

[A Simple Game]

108. So it's fine that I can get kicked off of DU for supporting a Republican but it's OK if

DWS openly supports and campaigns for Republicans when she is the head of the DNC?

Oh, sorry, just noticed your avatar, never mind.

[leftofcool]

114. Link where DWS openly supported/endorsed a Republican

[A Simple Game]

138. Are you serious? You really need a link for this common knowledge?

I'm sure you will find some reason not to like this page but here is a link, there's lots more if you really care to educate yourself about the people running this Country and having a large say over how your day to day life is to be lived.
http://downwithtyranny.blogspot.com/2008/09/debbie-wasserman-schultz-to-florida.html

[MADem]

146. Because a "blog" is a media outlet? Come on--show us where she "supported a Republican."

You can't.

All you can come up with is "Down With Tyranny BLOGSPOT"--so yeah, whatever. A free blog. And that's not "some" reason -- that is THE reason. Anyone can write anything on the internet....

[TSIAS]

142. You know the story

The three South Florida Repuke representatives she refused to campaign against. If a liberal says he will not vote for president if Hillary is the nominee, they get pilloried as traitors. DWS essentially did the same thing here.

[abakan]

111. Does it count, I didn't like her before Bernie got into the race?

I like her less now and feel she should be removed for being ineffective for the democrats and helpful to the republicans. Has squat to do with Senator Sanders.

[marble falls]

112. But not as creepy as the fauning over the's getting from some of her supporters.

[sulphurdunn]

113. If you want to know why DWS

is still head of the DNC, all you need to know is who bankrolls the Democratic Party. You can start with HRC's main sugar daddy, Haim Saben and then work your way around.

[MADem]

151. Oh, Do Go On. Come on--sketch out your full theory, now, for all to read. nt

[sulphurdunn]

163. My theory is that, like the Republican Party,

most Democrats are just toys in the same rich kid toy box, and HRC is currently their favorite Democratic Party plaything. You live in a oligarchy where those with the gold make the rules. Try and get your head around that. OKay?

[MADem]

177. In order to "get my head around that" I'd have to agree with your thesis and I do not.

But if you believe that, why are you even here? Why bother?

[sulphurdunn]

180. Because for a long time now Republican Party Politics,

the concentrated ownership of mass media and pay to play politics have been pulling Democratic Party politics to the right. The only way to break what is rapidly becoming a one party oligarchy with two wings and have a viable two party system again is for large numbers of democrats to move left. Most democrats are open to that idea. The Sanders campaign is proof of it. Maybe, if democrats can begin pulling republicans back to the left, we'll actually end up somewhere in the middle again. That's why I'm here and that's why I bother.

[MADem]

181. So, you want to throw all the "unacceptable" Democrats out of the party, and fly forward on the

tip of a left wing?

Good luck with that. I hope that isn't what you're saying, but that's how it is coming across.

I like the big tent, that includes the whole bird, thanks, anyway....I'd rather have moderate and conservative Democrats in the party who might not agree with me on every issue, but who will vote our way on the Things That Matter, than have a smaller number of purists who can only, because of their limited numbers, play the victims fighting the valiant but ultimately unsuccessful battle against stronger forces.

As for the media, pick up the remote and change the channel. Media IS a business, and it IS owned by assholes. That said, by reading/watching a wide variety of providers and taking the time to read commentary and opinion pieces, it is possible to form one's own view. Denying the worst of the lot (like the Faux tribe) your eyes-on-screen is a good start, too. It beats watching them, commercials and all, and then complaining about it AND providing a link for people to see, over and over again (oh, the outrage) --there's a lot of that here. Clicks tell a story--that someone IS watching.

If you really wanted to make a difference, IMO there are better places to do it. Opinions here are pretty much set in stone. You've less hope of changing a mind here than you do growing a half a foot overnight.

[sulphurdunn]

183. I'm not sure who these "unacceptable" democrats

you put in my mouth are, but if they're the corporatists who currently run the Democratic Party, I'd very much like to get rid of them, their fellow travelers and rank and file spear carriers.

As for media, the overwhelming majority of money spent in presidential campaigns is spent to purchase airtime on national media owned exclusively by a handful of corporations. Yes, a breadth of reading can inform opinion, it can also serve no other purpose than to reinforce it.

I've been posting here for many years. I think I'll stay, your advice notwithstanding.

Regarding the hopelessness of changing anyone's mind. That is a bit of a sweeping generalization. Don't you think? I'll keep trying.

[MADem]

184. The people who run the party include nearly half the House and Senate.

How do you think these people got elected? With happy thoughts and good wishes?

You want everyone to clear out of the Democratic apartment but you, and you're plainly a minority as represented by your voting clout in sending representatives to the legislatures. You act like your name is the only one on the lease--and that's not even close to reality.

The way to win hearts and minds isn't telling everyone who doesn't think like you to get the F out, or to call people "corporatists" in a blanket-smear fashion. This is why your reach doesn't grow--this kind of engagement.

[sulphurdunn]

189. Actually, people like me

are a significant part of the Democratic Party base. If memory serves, the only democrats who have been telling people to get the F out of the party are folks from the Rahm Emanuel wing. The utter contempt such people routinely show for the left-wing of the party will be its downfall if it doesn't change and change soon. Then again, maybe us dirty fucking hippies should leave the party. As for winning hearts and minds, weren't you just saying that attempts at persuasion are pointless?

[MADem]

190. You're the one calling us Republicans, not me. Your go-to was to name call/disparage us.

Why are you hanging out with Republicans, if they're so awful? Why are you demanding that people be like you ? Why do you insist that the Democratic "Big Tent" Party shrink down to encompass only those who take your views?

You're the one telling us how much we schmucks sitting here under the Big Tent suck and how much like Republicans we are. I think you need to look at your own attitude, if you're talking about "contempt."

Where you got the "dirty fucking hippies" comment I have no idea. Has anyone in this thread called you names like that?

The only insulting I see here is coming from you.

[sulphurdunn]

192. Let’s take a little stroll down memory lane post by post.

Last edited Sun Jan 10, 2016, 01:43 PM - Edit history (1)

I suggested that the DWS is head of the DNC and that HRC has been anointed the party’s next presidential candidate because the party has been thoroughly compromised by big money. Your response was,“Oh, Do Go On. Come on--sketch out your full theory, now, for all to read.” Being uncertain what you meant by that dare, I replied that both parties had moved too far right and the democrats needed to maybe move left to bring both parties closer to the center.

Your next post was essentially an invitation to leave DU or the Democratic Party or both, “…if you believe that, why are you even here? Why bother?" The little smiley face, waving goodbye was a nice touch. At this point, I figured you were either not getting my point, just obtuse or getting it and electing to turn it into a red herring argument. Your response was some babble about me wanting to get rid of some undefined “unacceptable democrats” and another invitation to accept the status quo or leave. My reply was that people on the left make up a significant part of the party and that their leaving would not be a good idea and should not be encouraged.

Your last post again consists of you putting more words in my mouth by claiming I insulted you by calling you a republican and a schmuck. Aside from attacking me rather than my argument, you should take a look in the mirror about the insults.

By the way, the dirty fucking hippy comment comes from Rahm Emanuel. I think he’s one of your guys.

[MADem]

194. You're the one creating scenarios, here--not me.

I did not issue you "essentially" or otherwise any sort of invitation. I asked a sincere question. If you hate us, why ARE you here? You have the gift of literacy, you can read the TOS as well as anyone else.

You created a frame there, where I'm "inviting you" to do something--when I don't even KNOW you.

So yeah--when we take a stroll down memory lane, we DO see what you're doing.

And then, you pair me up with Rahm Emmanuel, because "he's one of YOUR guys." What--do you think I'm from Illinois? Or Jewish? What? What exactly does that even mean? And "dirty fucking hippy?" Still makes no damn sense.

Watch out with that broad brush--the back spatter can make a real mess.

smh.

[sulphurdunn]

196. Brother Rahm is from Illinois,

and he is Jewish (by the way, so are DWS and so is Haim Saban). You can't really believe that is relevant to my argument; can you? Hate? That's putting words in my mouth again. Perhaps it is psychological projection and you don't realize it. What exactly am I doing? Tell me. Tell every one. You alluded to something like that in your first post. So, by all means, "Do Go On. Come on--sketch out your full theory, now, for all to read."

[MADem]

197. You still aren't making yourself clear. You're insinuating. As you do. nt

[sulphurdunn]

198. I guess we've taken this

about as far as we are going to. It's been an interesting and heated exchange that has remained within the bounds of civil discourse. Good night. Be well.

[treestar]

117. +1

It is beyond absurd at this point.

[greiner3]

120. I've been hearing calls of DWS' resignation;

Since the beginning of her 'reign'. It has become so much more vocal since she's been outed as an establishment (read Hillary) shill; President Obama's silent approval or not.

[saltpoint]

124. Concise piece on Schultz's tenure as

Chair:

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/other-races/265044-liberal-group-demands-dnc-chair-resign

[artislife]

125. Creepy is such a great adjective

It wouldn't be as effective if the "victim" was a man, however.


Well done!

SMH.

[Gothmog]

127. I agree

[libdem4life]

128. She's a loser. She's gone above her pay grade. Also, she's no Howard Dean. And that's not sexist

And it's not hate, FFS. People who whoop up Hate over Disagreement or Dislike...well, they just need a scapegoat or something similar. Time to grow up and find someone who can be effective...not divisive. And I'm not "hating"...it just isn't DWS.

[Warren DeMontague]

148. It's sexist to think that sick people shouldn't go to prison for marijuana use!

Stop with the out of control misogyny, woman-hater!

[libdem4life]

172. I'm thinking of historical events in the past when the stranglehold became undone...

Quite unceremoniously. Other cultures ... Can't let the golden bird in the hand go...so... No way she gets out of this...no way. How it will happen? Who knows, but permit me just one another allegory, she's been digging furiously...

[AgingAmerican]

152. Debbie Wasserman Schultz is the most corrupt Democrat in the last 50 years

And the most anti democratic in history.

She violated the Sanders campaigns contract with the DNC in her lust to sink Bernies campaign.

She has been greasing the skids for Hillary since before he announced. She needs to go six months ago.

[Betty Karlson]

156. DWS is revolting, but when we revolt against her it is "creepy"?

Did DINO-Debbie cry to mommy Clinton about the meanies on the left asking for her resignation?

"Hillary, I did everything you asked me and everything our corporate sponsors suggested and now those f*cking retarded pony-wanters and peaceniks Rahm mentioned: they refuse to praise me! Tell your keyboard warriors to come to my defense! If they don't, I won't be able to rig the primaries for you anymore!"

[BlueMTexpat]

158. I'm no fan of DWS.

"Mediocre" may be one of the kindest things one can say.

That said, the incessant screeching about DWS/the DNC and the "fanning of extreme hatred" you note has caused me to trash threads and to add one heckuva a lot of DU posters to my Ignore list. And yes, I also find the obsession very creepy.

It's also very stupid. Burning bridges one might need in the future means that one will have to spend a LOT of time mending and rebuilding, should Bernie be selected as the Dem candidate for the GE. That necessarily means - at least at first - less cohesion of Dems behind a candidate some of whose loudest supporters miss no opportunity to trash top Dems/Dem institutions.

DWS is definitely not one of my faves, but she was appointed by President Obama (not Hillary); DNC policies are not decided uniquely by her; the Dem candidates all agreed to DNC rules; and one simply does not change horses in the middle of the stream where one risks getting very wet/failing to make it to the other side altogether.

Where are all those non-Dem voters who will supposedly make up for this initial lack of Dem cohesion/time it will take to repair/rebuild bridges if this crap continues but Bernie somehow wins the nomination? They are a risky bunch to bet on, IMO, and many will ultimately defect to their true home: the GOP.

[Scuba]

160. Under DWS Democrats have lost 900+ state legislature seats, 12 governors, 69 House seats, 13 Senate

... seats. She'd have to do a lot better than that to be mediocre.

[LexVegas]

162. Much of it is simply rabid sexism. nt

[Freddie Stubbs]

165. Some people just need a boogie man

[randome]

166. Not only that, but it's a MSM conspiracy to keep her in place, too!

There are legitimate reasons for replacing DWS but the hyperbole and vitriol do nothing but make people discount what is being said. On DU, anyways.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Birds are territorial creatures.
The lyrics to the songbird's melodious trill go something like this:
"Stay out of my territory or I'll PECK YOUR GODDAMNED EYES OUT!"[/center][/font][hr]

[noiretextatique]

168. Hyperbolic headlines using words like "hatred" are tiresome

bashing, etc. People disagree with her strategy and strategery...that's disagreement, not "hatred." It is what's supposed to happen in a so-called democracy. So tired of democrats against democracy.

[Ferd Berfel]

171. A pitty party for the Corporatist who is helping to destroy the part is pretty Creepy.

[Warren DeMontague]

175. We don't need Millennial voters and people who support legalized pot, anyway!

derp nerp herp derp

[Hiraeth]

173. incompetent is a far cry from hatred. Haven't kept up with it. Maybe what people really mean is they

hate the job she is doing. not that they hate her personally. I know I don't hate her just wish she would do a better job helping get democrats elected.

[SoLeftIAmRight]

174. "cut it out"

...

[redstateblues]

176. Strawman scapegoat

So that when Bernie loses it won't be his fault

[baldguy]

178. Goes with the creepy extreme hatred for all things Clinton.

The creepy extreme destructive hatred....

[Cha]

179. Thank you, su~

[Hiraeth]

182. CREEPY

[Persondem]

185. The waaaaay left echo chamber strikes again. K & R nt

[Warren DeMontague]

186. pot legalization is "waaaaay left"?

What are you going to do when 34 million Californians vote for it?

[Persondem]

187. Where the heck did you get "pot legalization" from?

Here's the OP ...

"She's a mediocre chair for sure,but she's not the reason Sanders is losing or evil incarnate,nor does she rule the DNC by herself. This seemed to move into hyperdrive when the Sanders campaign was caught being where it shouldn't have been during a computer breech. This constant need for 2 minutes of hate directed at her every single day doesn't help the Sanders campaign and seems a little unhinged."

Doesn't seem to have anything to do with pot to me. Are you partaking today?

[Warren DeMontague]

188. Herp Derp. Derp Herp. And out comes the ad hominem "stoners huh huh" crap.

No, straight as a fucking arrow, TYVM.

Debbie Wasserman Schultz gave an interview to the New York Times- it's a newspaper, perhaps you've heard of it- where she not only gave a babbling, logically inconsistent "reefer madness" defense of the drug war and laws that put pot smokers in prison, she also insulted millions of Millennial Women Voters for no good reason at all.

So despite "Team C" trying to make this about Bernie Sanders or misogyny or some other hallucinatory shit (speaking of people who may not be 100% in touch with reality) the current criticism of DWS is being driven by the interview she gave THIS PAST WEEK.

[Persondem]

191. Context helps. So would a link. Get a freakin' clue buddy and learn how to communicate.

[Warren DeMontague]

193. Sure thing, chief.

http://theslot.jezebel.com/debbie-wasserman-schultzs-opinions-about-weed-are-baffl-1751420822

http://www.alternet.org/drugs/debbie-wasserman-schultz-keep-arresting-pot-smokers

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/10/magazine/debbie-wasserman-schultz-thinks-young-women-are-complacent.html?_r=0

http://www.attn.com/stories/5065/dnc-chair-debbie-wasserman-schultz-marijuana-and-alcohol

[wyldwolf]

195. Some Sanders supporters see a conspiracy against Bernie in everything

[Hekate]

199. It says a helluva lot more about DU than it does about DWS, and it's plain nasty. nt