« Debbie Wasserman Schultz called out by CNN's Anderson Cooper | Main | Congressman David Rivera sweats, ducks questions about federal grand-jury probe on TV »

War on Wasserman Schultz?

Has the war on women turned into a war on Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz?

The Florida congresswoman and head of the Democratic National Committee got into a spat Thursday night during a segment with CNN anchor Anderson Cooper, who challenged how she used a Los Angeles times article to characterize Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s stance on abortion.

At issue: a fundraising appeal Wasserman Schultz sent out that links Romney to the Republican Party’s platform on abortion. Wasserman Schultz downplayed her use of the L.A. Times article, saying that the point of the fundraising solicitation was to point out that Romney hasn't distanced himself from the party platform, even if he himself supports exceptions for women who’s lives are in danger or who are victims of incest or rape.

Cooper's pointed questioning drew raves in the right wing blogosphere, including News Busters, which wrote "there are some lies told by the DNC that even CNN can't let slide. Such is the case with a recent DNC fundraising email written by Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz which misquotes the L.A. Times in order to attack Mitt Romney." The National Review had this headline: "Anderson Cooper Nukes Debbie Wasserman Schultz."

Despite Republican efforts to pivot to economic issues, the discussion keeps coming back to abortion. The Republican platform committee met Tuesday in Tampa and adopted tough anti-abortion language. It was nearly identical to the language agreed to in 2004 and 2008, but Democrats used the vote to highlight what they called the party’s callous, even hostile, attitude toward women.

And it comes even as the uproar continues over Missouri Republican Senate candidate Todd Akin who said last weekend that "if it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down." Akin later said he’d misspoken, and he apologized. Despite pleas from Republican leaders, including presidential candidate Mitt Romney, the congressman refused to leave the race.

Here’s Wasserman Schultz’s explanation to Cooper:

"Well, I think that women need to know the dramatic difference between President Obama's position on a woman's right to her own reproductive choices as well as the Democratic Party's position and Mitt Romney and the Republican Party," she said. "And so Mitt Romney's words are very nice. But the bottom line is that, his campaign just directed the Republican Party platform to include the most restrictive constitutional amendment that would say to women that you would have no opportunity to make your own reproductive choices under any circumstances even in the case of rape or incest."

Expect an even feistier Wasserman Schultz in the coming weeks.The congresswoman on Sunday will be welcoming Republicans to Florida by opening a Democratic war room to attack GOP policies while the party's convention is in Tampa. The theme will be "Romney economics, wrong for the Middle Class," according to the media invitation. Limited Cadillac parking, the invitation warns. And also notes that "Medicare vouchers not accepted."


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


Even when this is spun it still sounds bad. I encourage everyone to see the video. Stunning the distances that some are will to drag their lies.


Even when this is spun it still sounds bad. I encourage everyone to see the video. Stunning the distances that some will to drag their lies.


If the Democrats can only win by acting like Republicans, there's no point to the election

Take the high road, and stick with the truth; the truth is ugly enough, and it's, well, true.


Shame on Erika Bolstad for coming to the rescue and blantantly spinning for DWS with an extremely misleading headline for this blog post not 20 minutes after her colleague Marc Caputo posted on the Anderson Cooper DWS encounter.

This story should be about the DNC and it's chairwoman misquoting the LA times. Pivoting to the Akin story exposes that you are biased in your blog post. Mr. Akins comments are reprehensible yes but what you are doing here is pretty bad too. This Blog post and your headline are just one more instance of bias on the part of members of the media.

I respect Marc Caputo and his reporting because he calls B.S. on anyone regardless of party affiliation unlike the vast majority of those in his profession.

elmer vold

DWS is one of the primary representatives of her party.
She should 1) quit stretching the truth 2) take responsibility for her actions like a mature adult 3) consider whether she should continue her current course of behavior which is undermining her party


I am proud of the Democrats. They have finally grown a spine. Swift Boating is no longer limited to Republicans. Mitt lies every day. For the past two weeks, he has been running ads claiming that the work requirement has been removed from welfare and then he brings up birth certificates. Romney had representatives on the platform committee. So either he is spineless or he is a liar. He is the worst Republican running for President in my lifetime.


I read the LA Times article and I saw Anderson Cooper's interview. Anderson was right - and, according to Wasserman-Schultz, it's OK for DEMS to lie and deceive to further their political cause. There is no controversy, there is no distortion. Wasserman got caught in a bold blatant lie and got called out. Wasserman-Schultz essentially is saying that Democrats are dumb unethical liars. As the DNC Head, she is the voice and mouthpiece for the DEM Party. If you are a Democrat and agree with her - you are a liar. If you don't agree with her, then you must be ignorant of Democrat policy and tactics. This is the same logic used by DEMS to project Akins views onto all Republicans. So - which are you - an unethical liar or just stupid?


What a poor article, that's about whether the LA Times article was misrepresented, but doesn't provide any detailed explanation of the facts, what the LA Times article said versus how Wasserman-Schultz represented it. She was wrong to say it "doesn't matter", but Romney is by far telling larger lies.

His positions have been everything from 'strongly pro-choice' to pro-exception to no-exception personhood.

Reality Checked

Debbie Wasserman-Schultz is an embarrassment to the Democrat Party and behind the scenes they are questioning whether she has become a complete albatross around their neck. More over, the "War on Women" is a ridiculous and baseless (and not unexpected) ploy to distract from the REAL issues of this election, NO JOBS, STAGGERING UNEMPLOYMENT, SKYROCKETING GAS AND FOOD PRICES, DISASTROUS HEALTHCARE PLAN, UNSUSTAINABLE EXPLODING DEBT, ETC. Obama's failed presidency is clear and ever present. It's time for the adults to take back the White House.

Mary Ann

Wasserman and the DNC are failing at their attempt to make this campaign about one issue - abortion. Why? Because their candidate has a dismal record when it comes to the economy, gas prices, unemployment, etc.

So, to rally the female vote they want to equate Feminism with abortion. If you believe in equality for women then you must support abortion. They want to make this election a one issue election but there is too much of a wake for Obama this time.

The RNC's position on abortion hasn't changed in decades and Wasserman, using Obama's tactic of saying anything, got caught with her hand in the cookie jar and refused to admit it.

Dems need to face the facts that Obama didn't deliver. He has made this nation worse, not better and has infiltrated the highest office in the land with a socialist agenda that is stripping away our freedoms. Either candidate's position on abortion is the least concern for our nation.


Wasserman-schultz is correct, what she says does not matter nor has mattered all along. How the democratic could choose her to be a leader in the party. She makes Harry Reid look intelligent.

Richard Silkes

As a supporter of President Obama and his policies, I was embarrassed by Debbie Wasserman-Schultz's refusal to admit a blunder. She could have taken the high road and made two important points: one about ethics and honesty and the other about the Republican ticket's position on abortion. With a stunning lack of candor and humility, she missed both opportunities.

Adam Andrews

Funny thing about this 'War on Women'... I never heard Debbie Wasserman-Schultz condemn Bill Maher for calling Sarah Palin a quote "C" word. Hmm, I guess Gov. Sarah Palin is not included in the 'War on Women'. Why not? No really, why not?

The comments to this entry are closed.