ap imageThere are simply some lies that acquire a sort of ironic majesty by their utter shamelessness, and this is one of them: "Democratic National Committee (DNC) Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) on Sunday said she scheduled primary debates with the goal of maximizing media attention for the party's presidential candidates." ...I'm actually professionally impressed.  I would have guessed that Debbie Wasserman Schultz would not have been able to say this without suffering a brain aneurysm, and never mind a mere 'keeping a straight face.' This may be the first competent thing I've ever seen the current DNC chair do, honestly.

I need hardly point out that Debbie Wasserman Schultz's statement is in fact a lie, correct? The complaints started back in September that the Democratic Establishment had deliberately choked out their own debate schedule in order to ensure that Hillary Clinton received no inconvenient debate surprises on her way to the nomination, and the viewership numbers have suffered accordingly.  As the Boston Globe (!) notes, and rather sourly: tonight's debate is probably going to be no exception, seeing as it's fighting both NFL playoff football AND a new episode of Downton Abbey.  This was not an accident. It was, in fact, a deliberate choice by the Democratic Party's own Establishment wing.

What folks should keep in mind, though, is that as it stands the Democratic Establishment may very well still be thinking that their strategy was the smart one; and that the Democratic Establishment may be very well be right, for given values of 'right.'  Hillary Clinton is, of course, a horrible candidate. But the Democrats don't actually have any good ones, thanks largely to Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid; and certainly Bernie Sanders is if anything under-performing expectations when it comes to challenging Clinton. It is pretty much impossible to believe that Sanders can duplicate Obama's technique of convincing Democratic super-delegates to abandon Clinton, which is pretty much the only way how Sanders can win the nomination.

In light of all of that... progressives who are incensed that Debbie Wasserman Schultz still has a job - and progressives should be incensed, because the GOP is honestly and truly thrilled with her work, which is not good news for the Left - should keep in mind that there's pretty much nothing that they can do about it.  Wasserman Schultz is doing her job, as her bosses see it. Admittedly, she's barely able to do her job, but she's still doing it and replacing her at this point would not be efficient of the Democratic Establishment.  So, really, progressive activists should pretty much just shut up and take their lumps, because it's too late to complain anyway and nobody likes them.

Yes, I know: that last sentence is self-serving partisan hackery.  The problem for the Left these days? Reality is increasingly also becoming 'self-serving partisan hackery' for my side.  When all I have to do is simply state the facts to make my side's point, it's bad news for the self-serving partisan hacks on the other side of the debate...