Debbie Wasserman Schultz, famous for making public gaffes her party pretends it doesn't notice, might be in real Democratic doo-doo this time. Washington insiders say the National Committee chair has incurred the wrath of the party's two most powerful people, President Barack Obama and now presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.
Word is, Obama wanted to fire DWS for years over a string of transgressions that embarrassed the party. In the latest, for example, she couldn’t give an answer when asked on national television what was the difference between a Democrat and a socialist. But Obama stopped short of using the hook because of the Florida congresswoman's "special relationship" with the Clintons, especially Hillary. On top of that, political observers say, she "threatened to retaliate by publicly accusing him of being anti-woman and anti-Semitic."
But now she might have crossed the line Obama wraps around her neck like a noose: She failed to support the Iran deal.
It's the talk of the town. And the press has picked up on it.
Said The New York Daily News on Sunday, "Numerous Democratic Party voices are now claiming that (Wasserman) Schultz killed a resolution which would have expressed party solidarity for Obama’s non-nuclear deal with Iran. With most Democrats in Congress planning to vote for it, that puts the DNC chair directly at odds with not only her president, but also the majority of her own party."
Jonathan Martin of The New York Times told a CNN audience of millions Sunday morning, "The Obama-controlled DNC could not pass a resolution this weekend expressing support for President Obama’s Iran deal. It’s a bit of an embarrassment for the administration seeing as how it’s his party, he appointed Debbie Wasserman Schultz, and it’s revived the sort-of latest round of eye-rolling among Democratic operatives about the state of the party.”
And Esquire magazine published a column Monday calling for her head. Charles P. Pierce wrote, "If DWS wants to oppose the Iran deal in her capacity as an otherwise insignificant member of the House minority, that's fine with me. But if, as it appears, as national chairman of the president's party, she actively campaigned against a measure designed to show the support of the president's party for a monumentally important White House policy initiative, then she should have been fired from that post yesterday."
As if the Iran deal isn't enough, she may have lost her Hillary Clinton safety net, too.
The Daily Kos reports that various low-polling Democratic Party presidential candidates have accused DWS of rigging the primary by staging only six debates. The implication is that front-runner Hillary Clinton wants it that way. But on Sunday the newspaper suggested Clinton actually wants more debates, not fewer, "suggesting DWS may be carrying out an agenda of her own that’s fully divorced from what any of the party leaders want."
Oh, yes, and in case the president doesn't get around to firing DWS all by himself, a petition is circulating on the internet to convince him. It's a long way from its goal of 100,000 signatures, but since Aug. 18, 7,448 people have signed up.
Finally, the socialist Daily Kos has printed "An Open Letter to Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Dictator of the Democratic National Committee." Nothing fancy, mind you, just straight talk: "In a year when the Democrats should have easily trounced the Republicans, retained the White House, and taken back the Senate and possibly the House, you have divided the party and are flushing both it and the country down the toilet. You are a joke, and we will all have to suffer because of you."
This time Debbie Wasserman Schultz's defenders are conspicuous by their absence.
Buzz increases that fiery political commentator and former governor of Michigan Jennifer Granholm already has been chosen to succeed her as DNC chair. Certainly more than one Washington insider is betting DWS won't go past Christmastime.
In all fairness -- same as Allison Tant in the state Democratic Party -- you have to ask yourself what's taken the Democrats so long to get to this point.
Reach Nancy Smith at email@example.com or at 228-282-2423. Twitter: @NancyLBSmith