Ian Welsh asks a question and gives us his answer
What’s Harry Reid done for you lately? Was he there on Roberts? What about Alito? Could he bothered to even rally enough Dems to come close to a filibuster on the man who pioneered Presidential signing statements and who has perjured himself in front of Congress in the past? (Of course, since Reid is a pro-life conservative who thinks forced child birth is wonderful I wouldn’t expect him to try and stop Alito because women could lose the right to safe, legal abortions.)
Let me tell you the advice I’d give Nancy Pelosi – do one spectacular piece of theater for the netroots, once, like Reid, and you you can cruise on that and betray them when it really matters, and they’ll suck it up and kiss your butt. I’m guessing one good piece of theater is probably good for a year or so of free passes on real issues. Give them their theater, then sell them down the river.
Then Nicholas Beaudrot, who hosts Seattle’s weekly Drinking Liberally gatherings and did the leg work for Friday’s Markos-Armstrong show at the Labor Temple, offers this comment on the post: Reid’s caucus members are much more conservative than Pelosi, so she “doesn’t have the same excuses.”
Talk among yourselves.
Reid hasn’t done jack re: Medicare D(isaster). Pelosi appears to be trying, but still…
Love your title!!!
It’s a shame there are no Dems of true stature in the party anymore. If there were, then someone could step forward and announce the formation of a new party like Sharon did in Israel. Sharon left the sellouts and the extreme wingnut crazies behind and his new party prevailed in the elections only a year later.
Would that something like that could happen here. Leave Reid, Pelosi, Clinton, Biden, Kerry, and the whole DLC/NDN cabal behind to choke on their own hollow rhetoric and equivocating strategies. Would that there was a Dem of stature sufficient to pull off something so grand.
(Note; my reference to Sharon is not an endorsement of his positions or policies. I regard him as a vicious and unrepentant murderer. I cite him only because of his “stature” in Israeli politics.)
I agree with you.
I clicked thru HowieinSeattle’s entry to the posting at BOP and read it and the full thread. Interesting.
Frankly I consider it to be too kind, by a generous half.
Pelosi barely supported Murtha, she sidestepped under pressure and quickly adjusted yet again.
Reid was and is a hack. The blogs push absolute fiction to hold such a craven creature upright. He suits the republicans… and always did. Ensign and he basically have a power sharing deal in NV. This does not benefit the actual Democratic electorate. The party is fine with that sort of shit. It may be fine and in fact not rare… but when the nation is years (many years) into a critical state, sorry, NO..
Too many of the incestuous blogs sold out early, bowed to the Reid Rahm Clinton whoever wing (most of the “leading” Dems are DLC, that is not epithet on my part it is simple reality, read at ndol.com for a few weeks or months – or pay attention for 20 years) and operate as choke points.
The obeisance to Reid is utterly gag worthy. Foolish Howard went inside.
The so called friction from blogs to PElosi is, imo, that, for her faults, she is not rank and file DLC and the party would prefer a rank and file DLC/pro lifer in that position. However, they work on her long enough and likely she will repudiate what few shreds may be left. In any case, the bits of old ward level populism are not enough to be concerned about…
That is my thoughtful and considered political opinion.
As uncharacteristic as it is for me to express a measure of support for prominent pols who eqivocate more often than they stand up for principle, I have to say that I’m fairly sure Nancy Pelosi understands in no uncertain terms that her Dem colleagues affiliated with the DLC are her greatest enemies in the political arena, and that in order to defend against them she has to take positions that, (were there no DLC cabal infecting the party), she wouldn’t ordinarily have to just to keep what little liberal momentum there is going.
(I’m not trying to make excuses for her failures to step up more forthrightly and stand on principle, but rather saying that I see where defending against the viciousness of her own party’s ability to sabotage her might compel someone to behave this way.)
I agree with that as well. I have no doubt she does know that… I often catch glimpses that she is better than she is day to day. They reign her in a lot this year. pathetic. I deeply regret the strangulation hold the Clintons and their ilk have on the party.
I have long gone to her town halls (native San Franciscan) and her offices are very coherent, awake and aware. They are more than just efficient at constituent services.
Considering who else appeared to seek the Leader spot, I supported her 4 years ago and I felt she had the strength needed, if it was at all possible to corral the mess.
But the sell out is so deep, the hand holding, trough sharing and whatever else… not a lot left to say.
And the blogs run a coordinated rondele of dunking some Dems (some posters may speak and others may not), running a sort of piece work, contract jobs for certain political factions… but there is also coordinated mouth to mouth resuscitation of other Dems…
It gets old.
As you say, when you add up all the dysfunctional, petty and destructive internecine bullshit, it’s so discouraging as to be virtually paralytic. Hence my central point about breaking off a new party.
For me it’s like deciding, after your car has been in a crash, whether it make sense to try to repair it, or, if the damage is too great, to go out and get a new one.
Right now I have virtually no faith that the party will be successful at least until the DLC cabal and their toadies are exorcized finally after a few more major electoral losses. Hopefully I’m wrong, but relying on “hope” in the political arena is a surefire recipe for disappointmernt.
I don’t like Pelosi (and have actively worked against and on her since I live in her district) but a lot of the blog disdain seems to me to be sexist. She is a tough cookie — you don’t get to be Speaker as a woman without being. She is also an infuriating inside player, not our kind of pol.
As to persons of stature in the Dem party — I try to think of how many we’ve EVER seen. Maybe McGovern? Gene McCarthy? Wellstone? Currently, Feingold is giving it a shot at offering tough, moral leadership.
There haven’t been many elected Dems in modern history with the sort of stature we would admire. FDR was probably the last of the truly great ones, since Truman, who had a real chance at greatness blew it so aggressively afterwards. And Carter at least had some ethical stature, even though his naievete was stunningly counterproductive.
Clinton, (Bill, not Hill), certainly has stature as a Dem but ideologically he’s anathema to what we need to happen now as far as restoring functional sanity to government and world affairs.
And of course I think it’s far too late for him to lead a charge to the formation of a new party unless he takes his DLC pals and removes them from the real Democratic party and helps them set up on their own. (This of course would be good for real Dems everywhere, but it’s sort of the reverse example of my lament about lack of Dems with stature. I would however, regard Clinton in a good light if he were to do such a thing; similar to St. Patrick charming the snakes out of Ireland.)
Want to know why Reid doesn’t stand up to the Republicans?
He agrees with every single thing they’re doing.
This is what you get if you follow kos’ strategy. (Elect anyone who calls themselves a Democrat) It’s the obvious end-product of the strategy. So ask yourself this: why does he promote it?