Tag Archives: Debbie Wasserman Schultz

Karen Harrington: More than Just the Anti-DWS Candidate

By now we’ve all heard the popular #FireDebbie meme, and conservatives and Libertarians alike long for the day when Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) no longer sits before us as a spokesperson for the Obama administration…but what do you know about the woman who just might make that happen?

Karen Harrington, businesswoman with a 30-year record of private industry success, is overcoming the DNC machine with her own innovative messaging and is now within striking distance of the Democratic darling. She is getting tremendous support nationwide (including through social media), is raking in the campaign cash, and is very likely to unseat Wasserman Schultz in this year’s election.

The most recent polling data, taken in early October, shows Harrington trailing by just 4.5% (MOE is 5%). This upward trend is happening throughout the GOP, with Connie Mack IV (also running to unseat Democratic incumbent Bill Nelson in FL), Romney-Ryan, and even Todd Akin (R-MO) beginning to see a shift in the tides. Harrington is faring well among Independents, as well (35%), which will work to her advantage since the combination of Republicans and Independents in the district outnumbers Democrats. The most promising piece of data to be extracted from this poll is that 16.1% of voters are still undecided.

Harrington’s first foray into politics was to run against Wasserman Shultz in 2010, but she was defeated by a double digit margin. A few short months ago, with Wasserman Schultz owning a seemingly insurmountable lead, it appeared she might be headed for a similar upset this year. But after a tremendous amount of hard work – and some major public missteps by her opponent – the campaign has begun to see the fruits of its labor.

Much like Mitt Romney, Karen, who identifies as a “conservative by nature,” cites her business acumen as her primary qualification for Congress. She believes that her years in the private sector have made her “fiscally responsible,” one who understands that “you have to rely on yourself to be successful.” Her ideology is as far removed from the “You didn’t build that” mantra as one could imagine.

She says there are three primary issues on which she clearly delineates herself from her opponent:

“1) [Congresswoman Wasserman Schultz] definitely supports bigger government. She supported the failed stimulus plan and has stood by that position. She has tried to convince us that it has saved us from falling off that cliff, which we’re all barely hanging on to.

2) [Wasserman Schultz] believes government-run healthcare will help all Americans have good healthcare. I’m opposed to that for all kinds of reasons: it takes away our choice, our access to good healthcare, and it is not affordable. As a business owner, it adds an enormous tax burden onto all of us. Ultimately, I believe [the Democrats’] goal is to destroy private insurance as a whole and force everyone into a single-payer system.

3) [Wasserman Schultz] believes we should punish success and raise taxes on higher income levels; I want to keep taxes at a flat level for all Americans and get this economy going. She believes jobs will be created through more government interference, and I believe it’s in the hands of the private sector.”

Beyond these issues, Harrington supports the standard GOP platform. She also supports school choice (a state-run vouchers program) in Florida, arguing that “if the public school system continues to fail our children, parents have a right to make another choice.” She advocates for a major overhaul of the 60,000-page tax code. Though she seems to favor the Flat Tax conceptually, she believes that real reform is a must for our economy, so she doesn’t rule out other options, even the FairTax. She explains, “Here we are in October and we still don’t know what our taxes will look like in January, and they expect us to grow our economy, to invest, to expand? There’s so much uncertainty. Nothing should be off the table.”

On the significance of being the “anti-candidate,” Karen acknowledges a great deal of the support she’s experienced comes from citizens who have been willing to speak with her primarily because of whom she’s running against.

“It was absolutely pivotal when we started over seventeen months ago,” she explained, “to build this campaign and make it a national race. Twitter and Facebook were tremendously important in engaging voters, even outside of the district.” While this certainly might have been what caught the attention of Americans to begin with, Candidate Karen Harrington has come into her own. She is a confident, personable, nonsensical woman who articulates her vision for America clearly.

She has been endorsed many sitting Congressmen and women, including former Presidential candidate, Michele Bachmann, and by several key players late in the game, including former Governor Jeb Bush and popular Florida Senator Marco Rubio.

She doubled Wasserman Schultz’s fundraising in the last FEC reporting period ($712K to $369K) and is hoping this trend will continue in the final weeks; the goal is to pull in those last undecided voters, as well as motivate existing Republican supporters to come out and help her unseat Wasserman Schultz.

Harrington summarized her thoughts on why she’s running for office this way: “I’m just very excited for my country. I think it’s been a long four years for all of us as Americans, so much uncertainty, and it would be an honor to serve the will of the people of my district.”

There are many ways supporters can help make this happen: Follow her on Twitter @Karen4Congress or using the hashtag #FireDebbie; check out the Obama-Wasserman Schultz debt clock at firedebbie.com; and Like her Facebook page. Learn more about her at karenforcongress.com, and of course, political messaging costs money, so she invites donations of any size to help her bring home the win in South Florida’s 23rd Congressional disctrict.

Bye Bye Debbie!

Debbie Wasserman-Schultz

Well, it appears current DNC chair Debbie Wasserman-Schultz will be shown the exit after the November elections.  As Javier Manjarres posted on his blog SHARK TANK on June 24th:

according to our source within the Democratic Party, who is also a close associate of Wasserman Schultz, the arrangements have already been made for her to leave DNC  regardless if President Obama wins re-election or not.  This same source believes that Wasserman Schultz will be forced to resign behind closed doors and then stage an press event in which she tells Americans that her job as the DNC chair was a temporary one and that she is moving on with her congressional career.

The embattled chairwoman has also fallen out of favor with President Obama with Manjarres writing:

Back in May our source told the Shark Tank that the relationship between DNC Chairwoman Wasserman Schultz and the Obama Administration was fractured and that the President “does not want her in the DNC anymore”

Apparently, President Obama had discussions with the DNC Chairwoman regarding her approach, even telling her, “Don’t forget you work for me.”

It’s not about you, its about me. – attributed to President Barack Obama to Debbie Wasserman Schultz, as per our source

 The problem that the President has is this- he can’t fire her, at least at this juncture.  If President Obama were to remove Wasserman Schultz from her post he would be weakening his own position, as it would be very hard to find someone that is both in lock-step with his agenda and willing to run cover for him as she has done.

Second, this would be a clear indication to the public that there are real problems within the hierarchy of the Democratic Party.

It’s no secret that Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz is one of the most polarizing politicians in  the country. Wasserman Schultz is also a member of Congress who represents the 20thcongressional district in Florida.(SourceObama to DWS,”Don’t Forget, You Work For Me“) (Fox News)

Ouch!

(H/T Shark Tank)

Let’s Play “Are You Smarter Than a Fifth Grader” on Capitol Hill

What the U.S. needs more than anything right now might be an amendment to the laws that determine eligibility of individuals seeking public office. Debbie Wasserman Schultz could be the poster-child for promoting this move. Her failure to grasp her own job description is just simply disgusting. Bret Baier deserves a medal for not laughing out loud at her, or otherwise losing his cool in the face of utter incompetence.

Debbie Wasserman Schultz

Medill DC (CC)


Schultz was nonplussed during her interview for a very simple reason. The process that she was talking about was obviously unknown to her. Now, her constituents should be thinking long and hard about her continuing to represent them, because if she doesn’t understand the legislative process at this point, then she’s not representing them very well. The other option is that she was taken off-guard when Baier refused to let up on the issue of the Senate Democrats not passing a budget. Schultz did mumble something about November, so maybe she really meant that the Democrats have no intention of doing their jobs as far as the budget is concerned until after the election. Either way, it is at best a matter of failing to do what they were sent to Washington to do.

But beyond Schultz, there is a sincere problem on the left when it comes to understanding the legislative process. The latest craze for the left-wing is to bash the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). According to them, ALEC is responsible for a vast right-wing conspiracy that will leave government at the mercy of business. Well, the reality is that to a certain extent, the government already is in that situation, since businesses are the greatest source of revenue, and they cause citizens to be employed, so they can pay taxes as well. But, this isn’t about economics this time.

These people would have everyone believe that what everyone should have learned in elementary or middle school about the legislative process is a lie. Bills from ALEC miraculously get printed, given to legislatures, and get passed without a single word changed. Sorry, but the only items that sometimes manage to get the nod on the floor of any legislative body in this nation without at least some changes are those cute little resolutions recognizing local people or events in a given lawmaker’s district. Even some of those end up with amendments, too though. So to think that a complex piece of legislation would make it through the “process” Schultz kept talking about without any changes is bluntly insane.

Now, perhaps these left-wing folks might be harping on this because they might have figured out by now that their precious little lawmakers might not actually be reading the bills that they vote on. One can’t blame them for coming up with that one, since their lovely Nancy Pelosi infamously said the Hill had to pass Obamacare to find out what’s in it. But that problem goes back to the left-wing’s apparent inability to understand the legislative process. Arguably, it is their own fault that they keep putting people that put the cart before the horse in Congress. It isn’t ALEC’s fault that some lawmakers apparently don’t find it necessary to actually read a bill before voting on it. There also isn’t a vast right-wing conspiracy out there trying to pass evil laws. But there are probably at least a few Republican lawmakers that already know what’s been said here, and aren’t above exploiting it. That’s why they are in office, after all!

Green Libs and Rahm

I am Bam.

I am Bam.
Bam I am.

That Bam-I-am!
That Bam-I-am!
I do not like
that Bam-I-am!

Do you like
green libs and Rahm?

I do not like them,
Bam-I-am.
I do not like
green libs and Rahm.

Would you like them
on Wall Street?

I would not like them
on Wall Street.
I would not like them
eating meat.
I do not like
green libs and Rahm.
I do not like them,
Bam-I-am.

Would you like them
in the House?
Would you like them
as your spouse?

I do not like them
in the House.
I do not like them
as my spouse.
I do not like them
on Wall Street.
I do not like them
eating meat.
I do not like green libs and Rahm.
I do not like them, Bam-I-am.

Anthony Weiner

Would you like them
as a Weiner?
Would you like them
for your deener?

Not as a Weiner.
Not as my deener.
Not in the House.
Not as my spouse.
I would not like them Barney Frank.
I would not like them they smell rank.
I would not like green libs and Rahm.
I do not like them, Bam-I-am.

Would you? Could you?
With Joe Biden?
Like them! Like them!
Mouth be widen.

I would not,
could not,
with Joe Biden.

You may like libs.
You will see.
You may like libs
Eat a pea!

I would not, eat a little pea.
Not with Biden! You let me be.

I do not like them as a Weiner.
I do not like them for my deener.
I do not like them in the House.
I do not like them as my spouse.
I do not like them on Wall Street.
I do not like them eating meat.
I do not like green libs and Rahm.
I do not like them, Bam-I-am.

A Pelosi! A Pelosi!
A Pelosi! A Pelosi!
Could you, would you,
with Pelosi?

Not with some Botox! Not with a pea!
Not with Pelosi! Bam! Let me be!

I would not, could not, as a Weiner.
I could not, would not, for my deener.
I will not like them in the House.
I will not like them dirty louse.
I will not like them on Wall Street.
I will not like them with some meat.
I do not like green libs and Rahm.
I do not like them, Bam-I-am.

Say!
With Eric Holder?
Here with Eric Holder!
Would you, could you, with Eric Holder?

I would not, could not,
with Eric Holder.

Would you, could you, with Debbie Downer?

I would not, could not,
with Debbie Downer.
Not in the House. Not on TV.
Not as a Weiner. Not as my deener.
I do not like them, Bam, you see.

Not with a Barney. Not as a Frank.
Not as a Weiner. Not with his crank.
I will not like them on Wall Street.
I do not like them eating meat!

You do not like
green libs and Rahm?

I do not
like them,
Bam-I-am.

Could you, would you,
with Michelle?

I would not,
could not,
with Michelle!

Would you, could you,
were she in Hell?

I could not, would not, with Michelle.
I will not, will not, though she’s in Hell.
I will not like them Barney Frank.
I will not like them they smell rank.
Not as a Weiner! Not as my deener!
Not in the House! Not as my spouse!
I do not like them on Wall Street.
I do not like them eating meat.
I do not like green libs and Rahm.
I do not like them, Bam-I-am.
I do not like them here or there.
I do not like them ANYWHERE!

I do not like
green libs and Rahm!
I do not like them,
Bam-I-am.

You do not like them.
So you say.
Try them! Try them!
And you may.
Try them and you may, I say.

Bam!
If you will let me be,
I will try them.
You will see.

Say!
I still hate green libs and Rahm!
I do! I hate them, Bam-I-am!
And I won’t like them as a Weiner.
And I won’t like them for my deener.
And I won’t like them in the House.
Or on Wall Street. Or as my spouse.
Or with some Botox, or with a pea.
They are so awful, bad, you see!

So I won’t eat them like a pea,
While watching Biden on TV.
And I won’t like them in the House.
And I won’t like them filthy louse.
And I won’t like them like a Weiner
And I won’t like them for my deener.
AND I won’t like them here or there.
Say! I don’t like them ANYWHERE!

I do so hate
green libs and Rahm!
Screw You!
Screw You,
Bam-I-am!

—PolarCoug (With an assist compliments of Dr. Seuss!)