DNC chairwoman: Walker 'has given women the back of his hand'
September 3rd, 2014
07:23 PM ET
3 years ago

DNC chairwoman: Walker 'has given women the back of his hand'

(CNN) - The chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee used domestic violence analogies while attacking Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin on Wednesday.

At an event on women's issues in Milwaukee, Florida Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz blasted Walker for his policies, saying he "has given women the back of his hand."

FULL STORY

soundoff (241 Responses)
  1. The Real Tom Paine

    Tom l, your thesis is always predicated on the idea that somehow people will behave in a virtuous manner if the government just gets out of their way. It has never, ever worked that way. Virtually every major economic crisis in the history of this country has been precipitated by letting the market " run its course", and by not using government oversight. Hamilton averted the first economic crisis in our history by taking direct action that was good for the nation, not just the billionaires. Adam Smith made it abundantly clear in " The Wealth of Nations" that the business community would confuse what was good for themselves and the nation, and could not be trusted. Regulation was touted by the founders of companies like Eli Lilly as essential for the well-being of the business community and the country, so your statements fly in the face of facts.

    September 4, 2014 12:43 pm at 12:43 pm |
  2. tom l

    How does a flat tax "alleviate lobbyists"? I guess you mean reducing the impact of lobbyists. Before you answer, I should point out that lobbyists do more than push for lower tax rates. There are lobbyists out there pushing for any and every thing. Okay, I'm ready. I'm listening. How does a flat tax "alleviate lobbyists"?
    =========
    You honestly can't be serious. Firstly, I said "alleviate" not eradicate. It is not the perfect solution but it is a vast improvement over the system today. The primary function of a lobbyist is to get govt to do something they want. And, shockingly, that entails enacting legislation that is favorable to their cause – and their cause is monetary in nature most of the time. So you get a flat tax and the lobbyists can no longer ask for "tax breaks" for the company for which they work for. Why on earth wouldn't you want to take that out of the equation? They also look for more or less regulation depending on their cause. Just read the definition of a lobbyist and tell me why you support them.

    September 4, 2014 12:45 pm at 12:45 pm |
  3. Tone

    George

    One she is an embarrassment to women. Two, the democrats are an embarrassment to people. If a republican had said this cnn would not have two paragraphs of coverage, but two websites built especially for this new event. Three, everyone knows what she was implying, grow up and become an adult. Win an election without lying and selling your soul.

    Sarah Palin has been, and still is the biggest embarassment to American women, and the republican party is the stupid party.

    September 4, 2014 12:46 pm at 12:46 pm |
  4. tom l

    Bill from GA,

    I have seen your posts and agree with some and don't agree with others. I do so love how the gang absolutely kills you when you say something that is remotely non-liberal. The funniest part is that you agree with them on 90% of issues but how dare you not agree with them 100% of the time! 😉

    September 4, 2014 12:47 pm at 12:47 pm |
  5. The Real Tom Paine

    Speaking of lacking coherent arguments, Gundy does not even bother to defend Walker's lack of a record in WI, but tries to deflect to his interpretation of reality regarding the country at large. Obama is not the topic of discussion, you hack, your hero Walker is. Come back with some real facts for once.

    September 4, 2014 12:47 pm at 12:47 pm |
  6. Rudy NYC

    smith

    @Rudy-Wow, try reading my comments. Someone lawfully defending themselves with a firearm is the topic of denial from radical gun control groups not home invasions. Another lame attempt to twist somebodys statement. As far as this taser incident I never attacked that comment unlike what you did by attacking my comment about a widow defending herself.
    ------------------------
    You should practice what you preach. I asked you if one is a political topic, then why shouldn't the other be one. You're going off into hyperspace again, dude. No one accused you of attacking the topic. You've been accused of completely IGNORING the topic, because you'd rather talk about guns, instead. Have a nice chat.

    September 4, 2014 12:48 pm at 12:48 pm |
  7. denny

    Did she mention the men in her party who are famous for TRULY abusing women? Clinton, Kennedys, Spitzer, Edwards, Weiner, Hart, Condit, to name a few. These mens' actions were not just a figure of speech.

    September 4, 2014 12:48 pm at 12:48 pm |
  8. Rudy NYC

    Fair is Fair

    Bill from GA

    Tom l – " So is Rudy a misogynist too? He categorizes women as "cuties" and "beauties" so he basically puts women in categories based solely on their looks. "

    Hey, Tom L, it's alright for Rudy cause he also likes to tell us all how good HE looks. You can't call him a hypocrite on THAT issue.
    ---–
    LMAO... yeah! He tells us he's so good looking that he has to beat back both women AND men wit a stick! It's gotta be tough being him...
    ==========================================================
    My other half is half my age. Yup, I'm one handsome devil.

    September 4, 2014 12:50 pm at 12:50 pm |
  9. Rudy NYC

    tom l

    How does a flat tax "alleviate lobbyists"? I guess you mean reducing the impact of lobbyists. Before you answer, I should point out that lobbyists do more than push for lower tax rates. There are lobbyists out there pushing for any and every thing. Okay, I'm ready. I'm listening. How does a flat tax "alleviate lobbyists"?
    =========
    You honestly can't be serious. Firstly, I said "alleviate" not eradicate. It is not the perfect solution but it is a vast improvement over the system today. The primary function of a lobbyist is to get govt to do something they want. And, shockingly, that entails enacting legislation that is favorable to their cause – and their cause is monetary in nature most of the time. So you get a flat tax and the lobbyists can no longer ask for "tax breaks" for the company for which they work for. Why on earth wouldn't you want to take that out of the equation? They also look for more or less regulation depending on their cause. Just read the definition of a lobbyist and tell me why you support them.
    ---------------------------
    I am serious. You're a joke, tom. Firstly, I said "reducing the impact" nor "eradicate". Seeing how your entire argument is based upon that totally false premise, you can understand why I dismiss your wishful thinking of how a perfect world, one where greed does not exist, should work as totally delusional.

    September 4, 2014 12:54 pm at 12:54 pm |
  10. They ought to change from the elephant to the hippo...

    Well... Given that teacher bashing has become a sport almost as popular as the Packers with Republican Governors in this state, and the vast majority of educators are women, maybe such backhanded hyperbole isn't so far off...

    September 4, 2014 12:55 pm at 12:55 pm |
  11. smith

    @Tom P-Prove you wrong? I already have. Your starting to sound like Rudy.

    September 4, 2014 12:59 pm at 12:59 pm |
  12. tom l

    The Real Tom Paine

    Tom l, your thesis is always predicated on the idea that somehow people will behave in a virtuous manner if the government just gets out of their way. It has never, ever worked that way. Virtually every major economic crisis in the history of this country has been precipitated by letting the market " run its course", and by not using government oversight. Hamilton averted the first economic crisis in our history by taking direct action that was good for the nation, not just the billionaires. Adam Smith made it abundantly clear in " The Wealth of Nations" that the business community would confuse what was good for themselves and the nation, and could not be trusted. Regulation was touted by the founders of companies like Eli Lilly as essential for the well-being of the business community and the country, so your statements fly in the face of facts.
    =====

    Thank you for not going to the extreme and saying something like I want no govt and no oversight. I don't think there should be no govt, I just think that today the balance has tipped way too far. I mean, honestly, if I'm in NY I can't make the decision on how much soda to drink? I can't decide in California if I want people to smoke in my establishment? A business should be allowed to make their own decisions – and if they want to say "No Jews" then that is their prerogative and they will have to suffer the consequences for their actions (I know that's an extreme position and not very realistic, but in a perfect world I would be fine with this). Yes, there are nefarious people out there, no doubt about it. I just think the govt is way too involved now. And I think there is way too much focus from politicians on telling people what to do with their own money – they act like it's all their own money and we're just lucky to be able to keep what we do.

    September 4, 2014 01:03 pm at 1:03 pm |
  13. Anonymous

    tom l

    I will assassinate this woman's character (or lack thereof) every day of the week. She embodies everything wrong with politics today.

    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    What are you talking about? This article isn't about the dimwitted half-term governor from Alaska!

    September 4, 2014 01:06 pm at 1:06 pm |
  14. Lisa P

    Of course, she's right about Walker. That's why Walker's sympathizers are trying to make it about how she said it rather than what she said. Walker's done nothing but harm women in Wisconsin, unless you think we had to be saved from equal pay and making our own choices about our health care and our families? Or having a union that can negotiate all aspects of our working conditions and benefits to represent us at work? Or being able to do something at a local level about commercial operations that are messing up our water and air? "Back of the hand" may be strong language, but there's no doubt that Governor Walker has been showing women in Wisconsin the back end of something.

    September 4, 2014 01:08 pm at 1:08 pm |
  15. Gunderson

    Uh, Paine,
    I don't have defend Walker's accomplishments in Wisconsin. The voters did it for me. Figure it out Paine, we have had 100 years of big liberal ideas. With the best of intentions, I might add. So tell me, which ones do you count as successes? Minus the 18 Trillion Dollar federal debt of course.

    September 4, 2014 01:08 pm at 1:08 pm |
  16. Sniffit

    "and if they want to say "No Jews" then that is their prerogative and they will have to suffer the consequences for their actions "

    Which the historical record more than proves is...drumroll please....NOTHING....no consequences whatsoever. The only people who end up suffering "consequences" when bigotry is allowed to run rampant and the controlling majority is allowed to discriminate against unpopular minority groups are...drumroll please....the unpopular minority groups. THEY are the only ones who suffer "consequences." If you can't look at the history of segregation in this country, the history of discrimination against each successive wave of immigrant ethnicities in our history, the histories of unfettered discrimination in other countries, the history of factionalism and tribalism that it creates, the extreme consequences for groups discriminated against, etc., and understand that "let them do what they want and they'll pay the price for their naughtiness" has ALREADY BEEN TRIED AND WAS A MASSIVE, HORRIFYING FAILURE, then you just. don't. get. it.

    September 4, 2014 01:21 pm at 1:21 pm |
  17. tom l

    Sniffit

    "and if they want to say "No Jews" then that is their prerogative and they will have to suffer the consequences for their actions "

    Which the historical record more than proves is...drumroll please....NOTHING....no consequences whatsoever. The only people who end up suffering "consequences" when bigotry is allowed to run rampant and the controlling majority is allowed to discriminate against unpopular minority groups are...drumroll please....the unpopular minority groups. THEY are the only ones who suffer "consequences." If you can't look at the history of segregation in this country, the history of discrimination against each successive wave of immigrant ethnicities in our history, the histories of unfettered discrimination in other countries, the history of factionalism and tribalism that it creates, the extreme consequences for groups discriminated against, etc., and understand that "let them do what they want and they'll pay the price for their naughtiness" has ALREADY BEEN TRIED AND WAS A MASSIVE, HORRIFYING FAILURE, then you just. don't. get. it.
    =====

    Why did you take out the second part of my sentence where I said "I know that's an extreme position and not very realistic, but in a perfect world I would be fine with this". And why aren't you acknowledging that our country has vastly progressed to the point where, today, someone is vilified for even a hint of racism? I know you feel the country is just a bunch of hateful, white bigots but I feel different. Since the "browning of America" is coming, as is the "Demographic Armageddon", I would think you would welcome this type of policy since those horrible human beings, known as white people, no longer will be the majority and they can get that come-uppance that you so feel they so richly deserve?

    I think the bottom line is that you have disdain and a lack of trust for your fellow American and I don't. I have disdain and a lack of trust for a growing government.

    September 4, 2014 01:27 pm at 1:27 pm |
  18. Rudy NYC

    tom l wrote:

    "... ... I mean, honestly, if I'm in NY I can't make the decision on how much soda to drink? I can't decide in California if I want people to smoke in my establishment? A business should be allowed to make their own decisions – and if they want to say "No Jews" then that is their prerogative and they will have to suffer the consequences for their actions (I know that's an extreme position and not very realistic, but in a perfect world I would be fine with this). ... ... '
    -----------------------------–
    There is no such law in New York. If you have a problem with "No Smoking" laws, then you're looking at only one side of the issue. I don't have a problem is someone wants to put up a "No Jews" sign in their business, provided that their business is not open to the general public and that they do not use United States currency to conduct their business.

    Believe it or not, that cash in your pocket really does belong to Uncle Sam. The government sets the rules on how its' currency can and cannot be used. If you do not like some of those rules, then that's just too bad. Get over it.

    September 4, 2014 01:30 pm at 1:30 pm |
  19. Tina

    Frankly, I think this "woman" needs a psychological evaluation. She does herself, her party and her cause no good with these over the top, hateful statements that attempt to associate a political opponent with abuse of women. Any woman with an ounce of decency or common sense would never associate themselves with her hate speech.

    September 4, 2014 01:31 pm at 1:31 pm |
  20. Former Democrat Progressive Communist

    If this woman is the best the Democrats have to put up as the spokesperson of the party then it is no wonder they are looking to take another shellacking at the polls in November. She belittles ALL women who have been the victim of domestic violence with her misuse of the language for political smear tactics.

    September 4, 2014 01:35 pm at 1:35 pm |
  21. Say WHAT???

    I love it when Democrats like Debbie Wasser-Schitz open their hateful, divisive moths and spew this type of hateful speech. It shows the whole country just who the leaders are of the Democrat Party and how absolutely horrible they are, both morally and politically. As this woman (using the type very loosely) is on the hook for the Democrats House seats in this campaign, I am sure she feeling rather desperate at this point. But desperation should never sink to this level of putrid political attack.

    September 4, 2014 01:40 pm at 1:40 pm |
  22. Jean Sartre

    At an event on women's issues in Milwaukee, Florida Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz finally said it like it is... I applaud her for being so forthright and open!

    "Political Correctness" has simply gone amok in America!

    September 4, 2014 01:42 pm at 1:42 pm |
  23. Here's Johnnie

    If you look real close it looks like this woman has fangs. Is there a vampire caucus in the Democrat Party?

    September 4, 2014 01:45 pm at 1:45 pm |
  24. just asking

    it is amazing anybody in here supports this type of political attack. but the democrats see the light at the end of the tunnel and know it is the train about to hit them in november. desperation makes people do and say desperate things. after so much of this kind of stupid talk, nobody believes anything the democrats have to say anymore. this just seals it even more in the minds of many independent voters.

    September 4, 2014 01:48 pm at 1:48 pm |
  25. Jeff Brown in Jersey

    Ooooooh! A woman has the nerve to open her mouth and attack a crooked, Republican Governor! Look at all the heads exploding! LMAO!!!!!

    September 4, 2014 01:52 pm at 1:52 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10