Wasserman Schultz Knifes Scott Walker in the Nuts...

For what she was supposedly addressing:

Wasserman Schultz was reportedly criticizing Walker for opposing a minimum wage hike and blocking a 2012 employment discrimination bill that would have benefited plaintiffs’ attorneys.

Click to expand...

its over the top and irresponsible.

Par for the course for her.

I find the language pretty off-putting. Surely there is a more reasonable, accurate way to say what she's trying to say.

Unless the guy has been known to literally yank woman around by the hair, of course.

CassandraW said:

I find the language pretty off-putting. Surely there is a more reasonable, accurate way to say what she's trying to say.

Unless the guy has been known to literally yank woman around by the hair, of course.

Click to expand...

He's a proponent of the whole transvaginal ultrasound thing - it's not hair dragging, but IMO it's very much a form of violence against women.

That said, her language wasn't helpful.

When politicians use inflammatory language, I tend to shut them out and discount them. Now, if they give me solid, accurate reasons why their opponent is an asshat, I'm all ears.

I discount a lot of politicians.

First off, this "triggering language" noise has gotten real old real quick. It's become the new and now P.C. codespeak for shutting up and shutting down debate.

Secondly, rather than rely upon a right-wing weenie like Tucker Carlson's The Daily Caller for the 411, I'll reference the original source to see what exactly it was that triggered Wasserman Schultz's "triggering language" in the first place.

Lily Adams, DNC deputy communications director, said in a statement, "Domestic violence is an incredibly serious issue, and the congresswoman (Wasserman Schultz) was by no means belittling the very real pain survivors experience."

She added that Democrats have long supported the Violence Against Women Act. Some Republican conservatives in the U.S. House sought to block reauthorization of the law in 2012-'13.

During her appearance in Milwaukee, Wasserman Schultz was joined by U.S. Rep. Gwen Moore, a Milwaukee Democrat who took the lead in the House to reauthorize the law that provides services and protections to women victimized by domestic violence. Protections were extended to gays and lesbians, women on tribal reservations, and others.

Wasserman Schultz attacked Walker's opposition to increasing the minimum wage. She also slammed Walker for signing a bill in 2012 that would prevent people subjected to employment discrimination from seeking punitive and compensatory damages in state court.

Democrats have also criticized Walker and Republicans for passing tighter regulations on abortion.

Click to expand...

Perhaps Wasserman Schultz didn't so much "knife Scott Walker in the nuts" as she gave the Koch Brothers' favorite bought and paid for political hack the a swift kick in the ass he richly deserves?

Sorry, but not really if that triggered anyone. Cowboy up.

See, I see words like "right-wing weenie", and I pretty much stop reading right there. Same with words like libtard, for the record.

CassandraW said:

See, I see words like "right-wing weenie", and I pretty much stop reading right there. Same with words like libtard, for the record.

Click to expand...

I have the same reaction when I read the words "Tucker Carlson. "

rugcat said:

I have the same reaction when I read the words "Tucker Carlson. "

Click to expand...

That sounds perfectly reasonable to me.

rugcat said:

I have the same reaction when I read the words "Tucker Carlson. "

Click to expand...

- I guess I should be glad I don't know who he is. I'm imagining he's something along the lines of Breitbart. *shudder*

As for Walker, I feel the same about him as I do about Breitbart. Could the congresswoman's choice of words have been better? Perhaps. But I understand exactly what she's getting at. Walker is part of a political group that appears determined to roll back women's rights. That is a figurative assault on women. In some cases, it’s literal as raburrell already mentioned. Mandatory transvaginal ultrasounds look a whole lot like state sanctioned rape to me. YMMV

rugcat said:

I have the same reaction when I read the words "Tucker Carlson. "

Click to expand...

Yeah, and if "right-wing weenie" is descriptive of anyone, it's descriptive of Tucker Carlson.


Wasserman Schultz, of course, is just looking for attention and has proven repeatedly that she's a classless act.


And I agree with NT about the use of "triggering language." 'Course the same thing can be said for "racial coding" and the like, as well.

nighttimer said:

First off, this "triggering language" noise has gotten real old real quick. It's become the new and now P.C. codespeak for shutting up and shutting down debate.

Click to expand...

This. So hard. Conservative pundits pretending that their criticism of her comments is out of deep concerns that abused women will suffer PTSD because she uttered the words "backhand" and "hair pulling" is disingenuous as it gets.

The majority (about 2/3rds) of minimum wage workers are adult women, not "overwhelmingly teenagers" as Scott Walker would have us believe.

From Mary Burke, Walker's Democrat opponent:

"Stephanie Wilson, press secretary for Burke, said Schultz's comments are "not the type of language that Mary Burke would use, or has used, to point out the clear differences in this contest. For the last 11 months of this campaign, and in the final nine weeks left to go, Mary is committed to pointing out those clear differences. There is plenty that she and Gov. Walker disagree on, but those disagreements can and should be pointed out respectfully."

Devil Ledbetter said:

The majority (about 2/3rds) of minimum wage workers are adult women, not "overwhelmingly teenagers" as Scott Walker would have us believe.

Click to expand...

Walker said they are "overwhelmingly for young people just starting out," not "overwhelmingly [for] teenagers." And this line from the Politifact piece is dishonest with respect to the issue:

The best estimates are that 24 percent to 55 percent of such jobs are held by teenagers and young adults.

There is no estimate out there that says 24% of minimum wage jobs are held by teenagers and young adults.

That said, Walker is wrong. Minimum age workers are not "overwhelmingly" made up of young people.

robeiae said:

Walker said they are "overwhelmingly for young people just starting out," not "overwhelmingly [for] teenagers." And this line from the Politifact piece is dishonest with respect to the issue:

The best estimates are that 24 percent to 55 percent of such jobs are held by teenagers and young adults.

There is no estimate out there that says 24% of minimum wage jobs are held by teenagers and young adults.

That said, Walker is wrong. Minimum age workers are not "overwhelmingly" made up of young people.

Click to expand...

OK then, let's put the quote within the context of Walker's statement.

"Jobs that involve the minimum wage are overwhelmingly jobs for young people starting out in the workforce. The last thing you want to do is have fewer young people (working) at a time when unemployment rates are still way too high for teenagers going into their 20s."

Click to expand...

Okay. That doesn't change anything, that I can see. Walker's claim is still incorrect and misrepresenting it is still incorrect. Point?

robeiae said:

Okay. That doesn't change anything, that I can see. Walker's claim is still incorrect and misrepresenting it is still incorrect. Point?

Click to expand...

OK, so by "Young people starting out in the workforce" Walker was not at all referring to teens, nope, even though he immediately continues with his concerns about high unemployment rates for teenagers.

Whatever, dude.

*grabs robeiae and Devil Ledbetter by the hair and yanks them back*

Devil Ledbetter said:

OK, so by "Young people starting out in the workforce" Walker was not at all referring to teens, nope, even though he immediately continues with his concerns about high unemployment rates for teenagers.

Whatever, dude.

Click to expand...

Well, I think he's clearly referring to young people, which includes teenagers as a matter of course but is not limited to them alone, as a matter of course.

Regardless, what you put in quotes--"overwhelmingly teenagers"--is not what he said. Insisting that "young people starting out in the workforce" is identical to "teenagers" is unfair imo, unless you're inside Walker's head.

So many split hairs being pulled, so little of them making much of a difference.

Xelebes said:

So many split hairs being pulled, so little of them making much of a difference.

Click to expand...

Indeed. No matter how you parse it, Walker comes across as much more concerned that young workers new to the workforce will have a harder time getting jobs than he is about adult heads of households earning a living wage. And no matter how you dice it, there are more adult minimum wage earners, the majority of which are women, than there are, er, "young" workers.

So yeah, Robovowels may be right in his nitpick on my use of quotation marks, but the point remains that Walkers's concerns are at best misprioritized.

The language is counter-productive in discussing things that aren't caveman-like. The transvaginal ultrasounds fall under the caveman category, imho, so that could be a case where it would be good use of illustrative, bold language.

It is un-PC *cough* to say, but I think sometimes activists on racial issues do it too widely, too. It dilutes the real punch of keeping those kinds of comments strictly on point.

Of course, extremists also use all kinds of over-the-top language and insults, but I tune out extremists because they are... extreme

I really need to know if we have a thread on the whole 'trigger' thing, though. It gets mocked in a blanketing way by some here, apparently, and that's just not cool. As someone who had PTSD for years over a couple of incidents, I do have some thoughts on that matter.