Hippocrates populate the Washington D.C. landscape, some glaringly so while others fly under the political radar. On 10/06/2009 one, oh so definitive, example popped onto this highly charge political landscape when House Speaker Nancy Pelosi thought to school Gen. Stanley McChrystal on the “line of command”.
Just a few years ago Ms Pelosi decided to launch her peace in the middle east now tour. When asked by reporters if she was in accord with the Bush Administration’s foreign policy she replied that “we have our own foreign policy”. So much for Ms Pelosi’s knowledge of the “line of command.”
No surprise to me when Ms Pelosi missteps on protocol, I expect to be regaled by her ignorance of Civics 101, acumen of the powers and authority the House Speaker wields and her inability to measure the pulse of the American electorate. Like I said no surprises coming from her. The Speaker is not the story here, her defender is.
What sprang forth from her friend and supporter Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz was not only a surprise but was highly instructive too. Just a couple of weeks have passed since the Speaker made a plea to stop the harsh rhetoric. In that simulated tearful speech she stated that this kind of hate speech could and had in past caused deaths.
The following is an excerpt from GLENN THRUSH’s Politico article NRCC hits Pelosi for Afghan remarks which includes the interview Rep. Schultz gave yesterday in response to the NRCC’s comments:
Mocking the first female speaker as “Gen. Pelosi,” an NRCC spokesman wrote, “If Nancy Pelosi’s failed economic policies are any indicator of the effect she may have on Afghanistan, taxpayers can only hope McChrystal is able to put her in her place.”
Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.), who is close to Pelosi, could barely contain her anger in a phone interview with POLITICO on Tuesday.
“I think the place for a woman is at the top of the House of Representatives,” said Wasserman Schultz.
“It’s evidence they long for the days when a woman’s place was in the kitchen. Now a woman is third in line for the presidency. … But it’s not surprising, coming from a party that’s 80 percent male and 100 percent white,” she added, referring to the composition of the House Republican Conference.
Simply put, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz has instructed the world that it’s perfectly correct to engage in sexism and racism if you are condemning others of the same transgressions.
Does the rhetoric get any harsher than calling someone a hater of an entire sex or race?
Dictionary.com defines liberal as “open-minded or tolerant, free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc.”
Perhaps during their open-minded pursuit of tolerance the Liberals have lost their way. While seeking tolerance for all they have become intolerant of opposing views and have inadvertently closed their minds the ideas not in accord with theirs or their party.
If Representative Wasserman Schultz is an example of a “tolerant liberal” then that is yet another specimen to add to the lexicon of oxymora. Liberals…there’s nothing liberal or tolerant about their philosophy unless you agree with them 100% with no deviation. Then you are free to express yourself absent any ridicule or accusations of racism or sexism.
Have you ever heard a liberal or democrat accuse another of the same cloth of sexism or racism?