This amazing scoop by Phillip Klein explains why Obama is trying so hard to quash conservative media access at the DNC.
On Monday, at a DNC training session for Jewish Democrats for Obama, Debbie Wasserman Schultz claimed that Israel’s ambassador to the United States had accused Republicans of being “dangerous” to Israel by criticizing President Obama’s record.
Phil Klein of the Washington Examiner reported:
As she [Schultz] was wrapping up her remarks, she claimed that, “We know, and I’ve heard no less than Ambassador Michael Oren say this, that what the Republicans are doing is dangerous for Israel.”
Yesterday, Ambassador Oren released a diplomatic statement forcefully denying Schultz’s allegation.
“I categorically deny that I ever characterized Republican policies as harmful to Israel. Bipartisan support is a paramount national interest for Israel, and we have great friends on both sides of the aisle.”
Alana Goodman of Commentary was curious about how Debbie would handle this.
The question now is whether Wasserman Schultz responds. She’d be better off keeping her mouth shut, but obviously that’s going to be hard to do at a convention teeming with reporters. What’s her best option here? Dig in against the embassy, and say she stands by her characterization of Oren’s comments? Make up some lame excuse for why she apparently manufactured a remark from the Israeli ambassador? Schedule an emergency root canal?
She tried to weasel out of it by blaming the messenger.
“I didn’t say he said that,” Wasserman Schultz insisted. “And unfortunately, that comment was reported by a conservative newspaper. It’s not surprising they would deliberately misquote me. What I always say is that unfortunately the Republicans have made Israel a political football, which is dangerous for Israel. And Ambassador Oren has said that we can’t ever suggest that there is any daylight between the two parties on Israel because there isn’t. And that that’s harmful to Israel. That’s what I said, and that is accurate.”
When a Democrat begins a sentence with, “What I always say….” or in Obama’s case, “What I’ve always said” – know that some desperate dissembling is under way.
She had said exactly what the conservative newspaper said she said, and luckily, Phillip Klein was able to prove it because he had recorded her statement.
Ooftah! What a despicable liar!
Daniel Halper of the Weekly Standard wonders, will Debbie be dumped?”
So: Debbie Wasserman Schultz lied on national TV. And she did so while impugning the character of the reporter (Klein) who quoted her accurately. And she appears to have been lying about what an ambassador allegedly told her in private—which she then repeated for apparent political gain.
We’re all used to politicians exaggerating, misstating, and the like. But being caught in flat out lies? Won’t the Obama campaign—which, it’s been widely reported, is none too fond of Wasserman Schultz in the first place—decide it’s time for Debbie to go?
A few things come to mind…
#1 – As far as I can see – this is only a story in the conservative media. No MSM “factcheckers” have called DWS out on the lie. Dems have no problem brazening out lies if they can keep them from being exposed to the wider public.
#2 – The entire Obama campaign is running on lies and smears…if David Axelrod and Stephanie Cutter get to keep their jobs after all the lies they’ve told, why shouldn’t Debbie? DWS hasn’t done anything any one of them wouldn’t do. She only gets thrown under the bus if this story gets wider play, which it won’t.
#3 Didn’t Michelle Obama give a magnificent, masterful speech, last night? My goodness, she sure outclassed that rich rube, Ann Romney, didn’t she?
That’s what the MSM is talking about, today. Not Debbie Downer.
I would love to be proven wrong on this.
Because the media knows that on a level playing field Barack Obama has absolutely no chance of winning reelection, this very same media is thrilled to see that the Obama campaign has launched a negative, divisive, and dishonest quest for a second term. The media wants him to win and if this is how a failed Democrat has to win, they are all for it.
But the lies!
The bald-face black and white lies the Obama campaign tells are legion and by the day growing in number, desperation, and sheer audacity.
But the media doesn’t care.
In fact, they love it.
@adamsbaldwin linked to this edifying Dr Sanity piece that explains the Democrat shame culture:
Most psychological theorists (Erikson, Freud, Kohut) see shame as a more “primitive” emotion (since it impacts one’s basic sense of self) compared to guilt, which is developed later in the maturation of the self. Without the development of guilt there is no development of a real social conscience.
Hence, we see Republicans as a group are far more likely to resign positions when their unethical or immoral behavior is exposed.
Democrats don’t tend to do this. In the first place, they will not even acknowledge a “scandal” unless it remains in the national media for an extended period of time (they hope it will go away, and if it does, then they can continue to go about their business as if it never happened). They can always count on the MSM to minimize the damage–even not to report it at all if they can.
Thus the first and foremost rule: if no one knows about their shame, then it doesn’t count and they can continue to pretend they are innocent. Just think of the likes of Charles Rangell; Chris Dodd or Barney Frank. Could a Republican politician ever recover from being responsible for the death of a young woman while he saved himself and didn’t even report the accident to the police? Yet, someone like Ted Kennedy is now a revered senior statesman on the Democratic side of the aisle. No one talks of his crime. Do you imagine Larry Craig–whose indiscretion hurt no one– could ever make a comeback like that? Not on your life.
No, because Democrats, on the whole, firmly believe that they are “better people”–i.e., more loving, more compassionate, more intelligent etc. etc. ad nauseum; they go to great lengths to avoid shame; and hence, to avoid responsibility for their behavior. For every corrupt Ted Stevens, there are at least three John Murthas, Charlie Rangells, and William Jeffersons.
They lie, they deceive, they distort. They take kickbacks and are self-righteous about how innocent they are. They vow to eliminate pork, but think all they have to do is take their name off the bill they support and they are in the clear. They wonder what the meaning of “is” is. They insist they” did not have intercourse with that woman” because rhetorical maneuvers are a key postmodern method to avoid having to deal with shame and oral sex isn’t really sex anyway. They deny deny deny, and they pretend that they are innocent victims of vast rightwing conspiracies or, as in the case with ex-Governor Blagojevich, they emphasize what “champions” of the little guy they are. They ignore facts and when that doesn’t work, they are prepared to ignore the whole of reality itself. Because the cost to their fragile self-esteem if they are discovered is far too catastrophic.
Republicans tend to be amused when they watch Democratic scandals unfold–they, at least have few illusions about human frailty. Democrats, OTOH, immerse themselves in an orgy of self-gratifying excitement and jubilation when they hear of a Republican who fails to live up to the morality he espouses. “HYPOCRISY!” they scream in delight, cheered by the fact that they can once again feel superior.
See? There wasn’t much media blowback so ditzy Deb is doubling down:
Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D., Fla.) told the Washington Free Beacon Wednesday evening that she will not be apologizing to Washington Examiner reporter Philip Klein after she falsely accused him of “deliberately misquoting” her.
“No, I definitely will not” offer Klein an apology, Wasserman Schultz said with a slight laugh as she was exiting an event meant to honor Center For American Progress founder John Podesta.
Asked if she had a message for Klein, Wasserman Schultz bristled.
“I don’t,” she said.
Members of the shame culture are not shamed as long as there are still people who believe them.