Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (Fla.), tapped by President Obama to head the Democratic National Committee, is a hard-liner on Cuba, which means the chairwoman of the organization intent on reelecting the president disagrees with Obama on a foreign policy issue that is electorally sensitive in a swing state.Of course since both Obama and DWS are considered far to the left in most cases, these media outlets still cannot even bring themselves to properly label them.
Wasserman Schultz’s tough approach toward the Communist regime, including her firm position on the Cuba embargo, has helped solidify her popularity within Florida’s powerful Cuban-American community, but it differs greatly from Obama’s more lenient stance towards the Castro government.
If the White House thought Wasserman Schultz’s new role as Obama’s top cheerleader would, in and of itself, win over Cuban-American voters wary of Obama’s Cuba policy and put that vital swing state in the president’s column in 2012, some leading experts on Cuba-U.S. relations have words of warning for the president’s team.
Obama and Wasserman Schultz — both liberal-leaning Democrats — are usually on the same page when it comes to policy issues. But they’re at sharp odds over how best to pressure Cuba’s Communist regime, led by brothers Fidel and Raul Castro.Now it's simply dishonest to call either of them liberal-leaning. Keeping the Cuba issue out of it, is there a more unctuous, belligerent House Democrat these days than Wasserman Schultz? Every time she opens her mouth she produces cringe-inducing demagoguery about Republicans wanting to kill old people and starve people. Then Obama. What can you possibly say? The guy has been easily the most far left president in our history and yet he's got to be sold by his media lackeys as some sort of calm, reasoned centrist. Not even liberal, but just leaning liberal. It's ridiculous.
What would constitute an actual full-blown liberal to these people?