It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Democrats React: Walker's Brand of Politics 'Offensive and Wrong'

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 09:11 PM
link   
story from CNS news
By Susan Jones
June 6, 2012

Democrats React: Walker's Brand of Politics 'Offensive and Wrong'
 

Right on the heels of the Wisconsin Walker landslide, The Chairperson of the national Democratic Party, the honorable Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz has made a very strong statement.


Choice words and anger are the driving force.

Debbie is the same one that was stuttering and stammering recently when she was forced to comment on the lack of support for Wisconsin Democrats that was seemingly demonstrated by the DNC.



(CNSNews.com) - Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, chair of the national Democratic Party, says despite the Republicans' victory in Wisconsin Tuesday, Democrats "will not cede an inch in Wisconsin to Mitt Romney" in the general election.

But as CNSNews.com previously reported, Wisconsin Democrats, in the runup to Tuesday's recall election, criticized the Democratic National Committee for being slow to send resources to the state to boost the Democrat running against Gov. Scott Walker.
See related story


She speaks with force !

Around midnight, Wasserman Schultz issued the following statement on the results of the Wisconsin recall. Her statement is printed in its entirety:

“Despite the disappointing outcome of tonight’s election, there is no question that over the past year this recall effort sent a message to Scott Walker that his brand of divisive politics is offensive and wrong. Thousands of Wisconsinites mounted this effort in the face of a flood of out of state, secret and corporate special interest money– amounting to a massive $31 million war chest for Governor Walker to just $4 million on our side.

“I want to thank Mayor Barrett, our other candidates on the ballot tonight and all the passionate, dedicated individuals on the ground who held conversations with their friends, family, neighbors and co-workers about the stakes of this election. The Badger State’s progressive, grassroots tradition was on full display throughout this election, and it will remain front and center as we continue our important work to move Wisconsin forward for working families across the state as we head toward November."

"And as we turn our attention to the fall, we will not cede an inch in Wisconsin to Mitt Romney who has been behind in virtually every single recent poll and who wants to go back to the same failed policies of the past from which Wisconsin is recovering. And while we're not taking anything for granted, if Mitt Romney thinks he's going to be the first Republican to win Wisconsin since Ronald Reagan he's got another thing coming."
 



Related Threads

Spending Gap? Media Ignores $21 Million Unions Spent in Wisconsin


MoveOn: DNC Pulling Out of Wisconsin Recall ??




posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 09:13 PM
link   


Debbie Wasserman Schultz has made a very strong statement.


I do not like her and most of the things she says is offensive and wrong but hey that never stopped her, and tough luck a vote where majority rules is "wrong".

Wasn't wrong with someone was elected to the oval office.



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 09:21 PM
link   
Also thank you for linking to the story on the $21 million dollar lie from the unions........

And where does all that union money come from?



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 09:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by timetothink
Also thank you for linking to the story on the $21 million dollar lie from the unions........

And where does all that union money come from?


Not sure.

My guess is dues from workers.

But I do believe unions accept outside donations from outside supporters.

Unions may have bylaws that restrict "dues money" usage to specific things.

Good question.



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 10:04 PM
link   
Why are democrats still angry? Isn't their man in the white house? Yet they are still angry. Such an angry bunch, democrats.

I can't wait to see how they express their anger in November.



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 10:08 PM
link   
Democrats never can get the right message that sometimes their policies are JUST NOT WANTED! They always have to blame someone else for their unpopularity, and will never take responsibilities for their actions.



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 10:11 PM
link   
"The Wisconsin recall is a dry run for the November elections" Debbie Wasserman Shultz May 29, 2012

See, even a liberal can be right every once in a while.

Amazing, but true.



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 10:24 PM
link   
The democrats live in another reality...

You know whats puzzling to me .. Even when they had the senate/house/Whitecastle .. i mean whitehouse..

They still could not get anything done ... and were still mad....and yet...

"We woulda got away with it if it werent for those pesky republicans!"



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 10:25 PM
link   
I am far from a republican, but the very existence of leftist morons like her and Pelosi is offensive and wrong to me.

This creature is a poster child for the need for mental health screenings for all politicians.



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 10:58 PM
link   
reply to post by xuenchen
 


The "He only won because he had more money!" argument is very thin, only a idiot would buy that argument in a State election.

Gubernatorial elections are very different froma Presidential election. The individuals vote actually counts and does not go to a delegate.

The money donated to either candidate goes to helping to pay their staff, Media coverage such as advertisements on TV, Radio and Print. LOTS and LOTS of advertisments. That costs lots and lots of money.

People always like to tell others to "WAKE UP!"

Well, guess what? They are waking up and they're voting. Wisconsin is just the beginning.

edit on 6-6-2012 by TDawgRex because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 11:08 PM
link   
reply to post by TDawgRex
 
If he only won because of money, couldn't the same be said of Obama?



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 11:40 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


I think she was alluding to the Citizens United ruling.

Seeing as corporate America has an endless stream of cash, the political left sees itself at a major disadvantage. You will hear a lot more moaning and groaning about it for years if it doesn't become ratified or overruled.



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 11:43 PM
link   
reply to post by spinalremain
 


The Political left as you call them recieve a crap load of money from wall street. The same ones they vilify.

Now why is that?

edit on 6-6-2012 by TDawgRex because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 11:46 PM
link   
When I was 15... my first job was at Kroger... bagger.

Kroger (columbus ohio and surrounding citys) a local grocery store was/is run by a union.

I recall thinking ... WTF?!? when I was told I had to join and pay union dues. At the time I knew this was stupid as hell because I wasnt even told what for.. or what they could do for me.

Needless to say I quit..

Look .. I understand people want to be paid for hours worked and blah blah ... If your part of a union in Wisconsin ... AND

If your mad as hell right now..
Your not getting your way...
You feel like a minority....

You mmmmmmmight want to take a step back and re analyze your sitch... (situation for the dense...)



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 11:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by spinalremain
reply to post by beezzer
 


I think she was alluding to the Citizens United ruling.

Seeing as corporate America has an endless stream of cash, the political left sees itself at a major disadvantage. You will hear a lot more moaning and groaning about it for years if it doesn't become ratified or overruled.


Even you though, have to admit that corporate America provided for Obama's campaign.

To disassociate seems disingenuous.



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 11:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by spinalremain
reply to post by beezzer
 


I think she was alluding to the Citizens United ruling.

Seeing as corporate America has an endless stream of cash, the political left sees itself at a major disadvantage. You will hear a lot more moaning and groaning about it for years if it doesn't become ratified or overruled.


Who actually argued the case against Citizens United ?

Was it the U.S. Government or an agency.

Some theories say it was deliberately lost so all sides could get bigger donation money.



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 11:54 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


Sure there are corporations which have Obamas interests and vice versa.

On a whole though, only the deluded would believe that the Democrats aren't severely impacted by the ruling. Corporations being people is a GOP wet dream come true.

All the Hollywood celebs combined could not match the might of the Koch bros. even.



posted on Jun, 7 2012 @ 01:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by timetothink
Also thank you for linking to the story on the $21 million dollar lie from the unions........

And where does all that union money come from?


Here's an opinion I saw somewhere.

Unions get money from members, hire hundreds of political operatives and give them salaries to work on campaigns, then call them “volunteers” so their work isn’t reported as a campaign contribution.

tricky sneaky




top topics



 
4

log in

join