Comments (view in Forum)

  • !
    Debbie Wasserman Schultz took over as the DNC chair in April 2011 after a disastrous mid-term election. Under her leadership the Democrats in Congress did far better than even I expected in the 2012 elections. She has shown herself to be an excellent fund raiser and an effective leader. She's a very good choice for the dems.
  • !
    @PNWest - and partisan. Don't forget the non-reaching across the aisle aspect that is so clearly spelled out in the above article.
  • !
    @DerivePI She should be partisan. I applaud her for that. Trying to compromise with the GOP is what cost Obama the majority in the congress in 2010.
  • !
    I don't think she is a good representative, she has a habit of going on TV and telling bald faced lies, but if that is what the Dem. party wants to be known for, well, it's their choice.
  • !
    In the mind of a liberal, the word lie no longer applies. It is now misinformantion and that is always subject to acceptable change.
  • !
    @marine1 I had to laugh when I read your post, right, it's all smoke and mirrors with them, whatever sells is what they go with. Reminds me of the old adage of throwing cooked pasta at the wall to see what sticks. I find it very hard to believe that, other than the low information dem. voters, very many actually buy the rhetoric, but I guess if that's your party a win is a win, no matter how it's done. And Richard Nixon was castigated for following the meme that the end justifies the means, my, my, my, how times have changed, Nixon's way is now good and JFK's "Ask not what your country can do for you, rather, ask what you can do for your country" and the knowledge that tax cuts stimulate the economy, are now conservative ideals. I guess I could have been a JFK democrat, who knew?
  • !
    DWS is barely a pretty face for the Dems. And it's not like her job is "hard". She goes to events, lies to people, and begs for money. Maybe the GOP should hire some hotties to run their fundraisers.
  • !
    Well I don't know your circumstances but I would hardly call her a pretty face. Maybe if I was in Death Valley for two days without food and limited water and started seeing mirages?
  • !
    @jessejaymes I think I might be a bit older than you. I am ok with "mature" but like I said, she is barely a pretty face which is what they are going for. But I do agree with your assessment, she wouldn't be a first round pick, that's for sure.
  • !
    @RobertJHarsh I'm 20 years older than her and I can't get past that hair. What kind of 45 year old wears her hair like a 19 year old hooker?
  • View all 6 replies >
  • !
    a good public face? I would' nt have used those words... every time I see her on TV she looks like somebody opened the door into her face. I think she might be a little cross eyed or something
  • !
    No, her eyes are on each side of her head, kinda like an owl, she probably hunts prey at night too...that explains why she's so valuable to them, she's a predator! lol
  • !
    @bsking Lol...I'm bettin'. Who needs spies when you have her? She's probably up every night getting info on the republicans, they'll never let her go, she's waaay too valuable!
  • Post Removed by Moderators
  • !
    Why not keep DWS as chair? She did what counts - managed pretty solid gains for her party. Republicans are likely to keep Reince Priebus, despite failure to gain in the Senate, capture the White House or maintain the same level of majority in the House (although JC Watt might be eyeing a shot at the big chair).
  • !
    DNC is a pretty good gig. She gets to tell bold faced lies to the American public, beg for money on a daily basis, never be heals accountable for anything she or her friends do, all while making bank. It's a liberal's wet dream!
  • !
    HELL NO!This stooge looking broad is so far left that both of her eyes are in the same socket.Nothing but MSNBC material and you can forget about non partisian.
  • R Load more comments...