There is no question that Elizabeth Warren fired off her most successful and damning debate salvo last night when she attacked Mike Bloomberg for his caustic treatment of women. But perhaps she took the criticism too far from some on the Left by invoking the name of Donald Trump (aka, the devil incarnate).
She clearly went too far for CNN’s Alisyn Camerota, who complained that Warren was making a “hurtful … moral equivalency” by comparing the two billionaires’ dissing of women. She was right. The things Bloomberg has been accused of saying are far more demeaning.
Here, courtesy of NewsBusters, is Camerota sounding off this morning on this possible “bridge too far.” A transcript of her observations follows.
One person who wasn’t one stage as much as he has been in previous debates was President Trump. Do Democrats also take a huge risk if they compare anyone on that stage, any of their alleged allies or at some point they’ll need them, to President Trump? Is that kind of moral equivalence helpful or hurtful for Democrats? And do you think there was some danger just for the Democrats in general of Elizabeth Warren seeming to compare Michael Bloomberg and Donald Trump in terms of the moral equivalence of, for instance, their derogatory comments about women?
“Alleged allies”? You gotta love that one.
If there was any doubt in your mind about the extent to which the Left has overplayed the Trump Derangement card, this should allay it. We have reached a point where Trump could single-handedly come up with a cure for cancer, and liberals would still find some reason for dumping on him. Nancy Pelosi justified her destruction of page from the State of the Union address that mentioned a soldier being reunited with his family on the grounds that it is also contained “Trump lies.”