We don’t often have occasion to say anything complimentary about Democratic National Committee Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz. In her designated role as President Obama’s attack dog, Rep. Wasserman Schultz has made a specialty of taking cheap shots at her opponents. When not attempting to demonize Republican positions on the deficit and entitlements, she has even stooped to blame conservatives for the shooting of Gabriella Giffords. But as unfair as she has been to those on the other side of the aisle, that doesn’t justify treating Wasserman Schultz or anyone on her staff in a similar manner. And that is exactly what happened to Danielle Gilbert, a DNC staffer who has been pilloried lately for some silly pictures she posted to her personal Facebook account six years ago when she was in college. But despite reports of pressure from the White House, Wasserman Schultz has refused to dump Gilbert. To that we can only say, good for her.
It is true the picture in which Gilbert is seen kissing money and referring to herself and some friends as “Jewbags” was in poor taste. But the posting by Gilbert, who is the daughter of prominent Jewish contributors to the Obama campaign and now works as the DNC’s outreach liaison to the Jewish community, was a joke and nothing more. The existence of the photo didn’t merit a story. Nor did it justify subjecting a young woman who has done nothing wrong to the sort of humiliation that is part of being the subject of even a minor political dust storm such as this one.
Wasserman Schultz’s instinct to back her aide is laudable. As she rightly points out, it is important for young people (as well as not so young people) to understand that anything — whether innocent jokes or not so innocent behavior captured in a photo or video — they publish on Facebook or Twitter is a matter of public record and can come back to haunt them at any time in the future. But destroying the budding career of an otherwise blameless youngster over such nonsense is both unjust and unethical.
In the no-hold-barred world of political combat in which both parties and their respective journalistic cheering sections are constantly engaged in the business of embarrassing each other, it sometimes feels as if anything is fair game. Far worse things than the Gilbert photo — such as, to take just one egregious example, the unsubstantiated innuendo masquerading as investigative journalism alleging infidelity on the part of then Republican presidential candidate John McCain published by the New York Times in 2008 — easily come to mind. But politics and journalism ought to be better than that. We hope the next time a similar alleged youthful indiscretion about a politician or activist is unearthed, journalists will choose not to go down this same road. We also hope Wasserman Schultz will remember this the next time she is inclined to indulge in uncivil rhetoric herself.
Yeah. This especially holds true since the pictures were taken 6 years ago. Not an issue. That being said, would it make a difference if she'd made a tasteless joke about a group to which she did not belong?
What this article says should be the case and it sounds reasonable that it would be what Wasserman Schultz really and truly means … but she really only supported her own, and her reasons could apply to young Republicans too, but does she mean that? — considering has Wasserman Schultz ever said anything that can't be condensed into "Die, evil Republicans! All Democrats are saints that common people should be grateful for! Die, evil Republicans …"? In fact, don't Republicans (see McCain 2008) usually make the mistake of thinking the best of Democrats?
Please, if Gilbert doesn’t have the miminal good sense to take down the stupid Jewbags pics now that she’s a DNC official — in charge of outreach to Jews, whatever that means, no less — and not a college student, why would any sensible DNC chair want to keep her?
I absolutely agree with the reasoning in this article. That means when I say she should nonetheless be fired, it is so the needed balance of terror will result. Casualties of war.
LOL! Mercy? I agree with Mr. Vlasak, it's more likely DWS saw own reflection in the young woman. n nReally now Mr. Tobin, do you really think that by setting an example of graciousness that such will be returned? Or, perhaps, you're just following the Golden Rule and giving the benefit of the doubt whenever possible.
I came to make the same point as Mr. Vlasik as well. It's hardly mercy that she is giving another opportunity to someone on her own team, whose parents are major donors. Just pragmatism and self interest. n nIf she had done the same thing if she were dealing with someone on the opposite side who made a similar level of mistake, that would reflect a new maturity on her part. But given the usual tenor of her discourse, such a step on her part is very hard to imagine.
This is another case of the PC dog biting its own tail. The administration wants this young woman removed because she is an embarrassment, and she is an embarrassment because of the Orwellian nature of public discourse in this country, where legions of left-wing educated, thin-skinned buffoons have, for decades, earnestly attempted to remove all traces of irony and just plain fun from it. I wonder what the reaction to this 40 years ago would have been? Everyone would have gotten the joke and probably admitted it was (hush hush) sorta funny perhaps. (I'm not sure I agree that it was in "poor taste", actually. I mean, can't Jews make fun of the stereotypes of Jews? And if not, why the hell not!?) nBeyond that, DWS's "mercy" in this case is meaningless. She's a mean-spirited person, and this does nothing to redeem her. What I find more intriguing is how this young woman got the job. Mr. Tobin refers to her "budding" career, a career apparently the product of her parents' money. Hey – I have no problem with such favoritism, but then I'm not DWS running around condemning rich Republicans and pretending to care about the downtrodden. Why doesn't DWS fire this woman and hire an unemployed, single-parent, welfare dependent Black woman?
Then Debbie stepped in it by defending the lass on the basis of how smart she because, and I quote, she attended the London School of Economics. The L.S.E. is slightly to the left of Ceaucescu and has been the font of insane Marxist pro Arab pro Islamist lunacy for years and years, including but not limited to openly serving as a front for Mumar Kadaffy even while he was murdering his own people in the recent civil uprising. n nSometimes you just have to let your enemies stab themselves in the face.
And if the caption had read "nogger-bags"?