Emanuel and Hoyer Blocking More Aggressive Dem Tactics on Ending War

by: Chris Bowers

Thu Sep 27, 2007 at 14:59:21 PM EDT


The Politico points out the obvious:

But it's a simple truth, whether you support the war or not: There is a lot more Democrats could do to change, or at least challenge, the politics of the war in Washington, even if they do not have the numbers to impose new policies on President Bush.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) could force a vote a day over Iraq. She could keep the House in session all night, over weekends and through planned vacations.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) could let filibusters run from now till Christmas rather than yield to pro-war Republicans.

Such tactics might or might not be politically sensible, but in their absence, anti-war lawmakers can hardly say they have done everything possible to challenge the war and bring attention to their cause.

Lawmakers over the past generation have threatened and sometimes carried out such extreme parliamentary maneuvers over less consequential matters than dying soldiers.

This is one of the reasons why the Demcoratic base is so frustrated. Republicans, for example, were willing to go nuclear in order to force their judicial nominees across. Democrats, by way of contrast, are not wiling ot go nuclear over ending the war. There is a widespread perception that Demcorats are giving up too easily, and not playing their entire hand.

The main culprits? Apparently, Hoyer and Emanuel:

Democrats, in on-the-record and on-background interviews, said they do not do these things because they would be bad politics. Democrats in the House and Senate would splinter over such extremist measures. In closed-door caucus meetings, members say, Democratic leaders like Reps. Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) and Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.) have carried the day by warning that there is no appetite for such tactics in the districts of vulnerable Democrats, upon whom the party's new majority status depends.

Maybe it is just me, but when someone is elected to end the war, I don't think their constiuents will be upset because that person is really trying hard to end the war. However, that clearly is not the way people think in what is still a very cautious party down in the beltway. To them, standing up for your beliefs and going to extra mile are apparently roads to defeat.

Chris Bowers :: Emanuel and Hoyer Blocking More Aggressive Dem Tactics on Ending War
Tags: Democrats, Steny Hoyer, Rahm Emanuel, Iraq, Congress, (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Emanuel and Hoyer Blocking More Aggressive Dem Tactics on Ending War | 21 comments
Two guys that need to be gone (4.00 / 1)
Would love to see strong, well-funded primary challengers to these guys to give them a serious gut check.
Agreed... (0.00 / 0)
In the meantime, is there any way to get Russ Feingold elected as Senate Majority Leader? He'd be far better at it than Reid.
[ Parent ]
Continuing resolutions (4.00 / 1)
FWIW, the NY Times reported that the Democrats led by Hoyer "let" Republicans in the House have their condemnation of MoveOn so they would vote for a continuing budget resolution since Bush threatens to veto Democratic budget bills.  Pathetic, if true. (Bush couls still veto and GOPers don't have to vote to sustain).

The Times is also moving in to attack MoveOn saying they should have rejected the Petraeus/Betray Us ad for not meeting the newspapers standards.  Also pathetic.

Why is the media giving the 29 percenter more credibility than Bill Clinton got when he was at 60%.  More pathetic.  What are they scared of?  Being left of the invitation lists for cocktail parties?

the media (4.00 / 1)
Why is the media giving the 29 percenter more credibility than Bill Clinton got when he was at 60%.  More pathetic.  What are they scared of?  Being left of the invitation lists for cocktail parties?

No, they are afraid of the FCC licenses being denied. They are afraid of SEC investigations and IRS audits.

Bush may only have 29%, but he has the entire federal government and he is willing to use it for political purposes.

[ Parent ]
Knock Bush Off-Balance (4.00 / 1)
Which is why impeachment would be very useful right now. Bush probably couldn't  jerk them around if Congress was impeaching him for politicizing everything. Knocking Bush off-balance would be very useful and impeachment would do that.
[ Parent ]
Chris, I would settle for one Iraq vote ... (0.00 / 0)
...a week, or one filibuster between now and Christmas.

But, given what we've seen so far this magical September, our side of the spectrum on Iraq would lose those weekly votes and lose the cloture vote because of Democratic defections, all of which would piss off the base even more.

 

So What You (0.00 / 0)
are really interested in is just a Show. You know how the Show would end but it is not the ending you are interested in - you just want popcorn and a Show.
[ Parent ]
I've disagreed with you extensively ... (4.00 / 3)
...but I never before thought you needed reading comprehension classes. What did I say? I said I'd love to see those votes, and have those filibusters, but that they would be sure to lose, based on the Democratic defections we've already seen. And that this might worsen the split between Democrats and the base. To any reasonable reader, that probably sounds as if I'm saying that having such votes might be a mistake if the idea is to shore up support among us "zealots."

One could argue, as many have done - as I have done - that putting up a fight instead of repeatedly giving Mister Bush a blank check might help the Democratic leadership improve its standing among us "zealots" even though the fight would surely to be lost given Republican intransigence in the White House and Congress.

But that's not what I was arguing in the post you responded to, quite the contrary.

The difference between you and me is not, as you have faked for months, that I impatiently support a pointless show and you support real, effective politics. The difference is that you and I don't support the same politics or policies. The difference, as made clear by your stance on the issue of residual troops, is that you were glad the votes on McGovern, the supplementals and Feingold-Reid turned out the way they did. Because their consequences, if passed, would cut against what you think should happen in Iraq.

[ Parent ]
To any reasonable reader (0.00 / 0)
who has read many posts of yours like the one below it is easy to say you were advocating for a show.

One could argue, as many have done - as I have done - that putting up a fight instead of repeatedly giving Mister Bush a blank check might help the Democratic leadership improve its standing among us "zealots" even though the fight would surely to be lost given Republican intransigence in the White House and Congress.

You didn't specifically say you were not for those votes in your post. And in fact in your last post you yourself offered the two ways it could have been interpreted. Given that one of the last posts I read of yours on the subject said 'there is nothing wrong with keeping up the fight' (I paraphrase) then it is easy to read that into your post based on those last thoughts I read of yours.

If you are know saying that pushing for additional votes to happen beyond what the Dems in congress want to hold would not be productive then we agree. That is something I have been saying for months now - same with forced filibusters. Welcome to the Reality Based Community. It takes a long time for people to come around to reality.

In your last paragraph you are lying about me again. I have never been happy we lost a vote and you can't link to a post anywhere on any site where I even suggested that little on said it. QUIT LYING. You are better than that.

[ Parent ]
Wow Talex (4.00 / 1)
You are so way off base here I don't even know how to respond.
[ Parent ]
Meteor clarified (0.00 / 0)
what he meant. We are on the same page now.
[ Parent ]
It's not just a show (0.00 / 0)
By doing it over and over, you're putting pressure on the Republicans. Pressure can make people crack. Pressure can allow people in their districts to mobilize and let their Congresspersons know that their future job security rests on a drastic re-thinking of how long we're supposed to stay in Iraq.

If you feel the end to the war is a moral necessity, this isn't a show, it's about doing every single thing you can to peel people off one by one and setting this body politic on the course to ending it as soon as possible. And it's also about making damned sure that those that want this war have amply proved it through November 2008.

[ Parent ]
blindingly wrong political miscalculation (4.00 / 1)
Our Democratic reps here are making a basic political miscalculation by not supporting the will of the people.  The Iraq war is continuing a mistake which the majority of Americans believe and understand.  Support for congress is paralyzingly low for this reason.
However, our reps are also blinded by their superior fundraising advantage believing that this will translate into overwhleming majorities next fall.  Again, they are wrong.  The GOP had massive fundraising and media and messaging advantages yet lost by the force of the will of the people.  Our party will pay a political price for this equivocation next fall.
I think, we the netroots, will succeed in helping new and more progressive Democrats win but the Democrats will fall short of a realignment victory that will be necessary to fend off a serious opposition challenge that could and likely rise in 2009 and 2010.  This can only be averted if the leadership changes course rapidly, very rapidly. 
And also from a policy standpoint, letting the war drag on for 18 months will only add to the gravity of the problem in 2009.  And the bitter, petty man that Bush is will probably do more harm than good is his final months when a Democrat takes office in 2009.  I've said it before, the showdown must occur now. 
Emmaneul did some good things to help gain the majority in '06 but it wasn't all him, the entire progressive community(blogs, radio, DCCC, etc) fired on all cylinders and it's high time they recognized that and stop acting like know it alls.
Bullshit line (4.00 / 1)
All too convenient for Dem fainthearts - and the Dem leadership as a whole - to blame Boo Hiss Steny 'n' Rahm and escape their own part in the business!

I find the idea laughable that there is a majority of Dem reps in favor of stopping the war by any means necessary (ie, send no bill) who have been stymied by the cunning of a Siamese-twin Fu Manchu de nos jours.

The reality is - my belief, soon to be tested - that even the Progs are split every which way, and that the July 19 letter is already fish-wrapping.

It's all kabuki, guys! We've ten months (and counting!) of evidence to that effect.

I wonder how many would support a prompt withdrawal even if the Man Upstairs guaranteed no political blowback.

How The Dems "Go Nuclear" (4.00 / 2)
Republicans, for example, were willing to go nuclear in order to force their judicial nominees across. Democrats, by way of contrast, are not wiling ot go nuclear over ending the war.

You know the old saying about brining a knife to a gunfight?

Well, the Dems "go nuclear" by bringing a plastic spoon to a nuclear war.

Hoyer/Murtha (4.00 / 3)
I am beginning to think that the decisive contest was Hoyer/Murtha for majority leader. It is a shame we did not support Murtha the way we did Howard Dean for DNC. Who knew it was so critical.

Isn't Hoyer supporting the hideous Wynn?

Why wouldn't Hoyer support Wynn? .. (0.00 / 0)
Both are Corpo-crats, and probably from neighboring districts(I have not looked at the map).
[ Parent ]
No Murtha, thanks (0.00 / 0)
CREW ranks him as one of the 22 most corrupt members of congress:

http://www.beyonddel...

Abscam among other things tainted his congressional career.

[ Parent ]
Murtha vs. Hoyer (0.00 / 0)
Our support would have meant nothing.  It was the caucus to decide -- and the did!

"...Murtha would also have trouble gathering support in the right-leaning wing of the party, while Hoyer is popular with the conservative Blue Dog Democrats, who see him as their champion in leadership...

http://thehill.com/l...

Plus the fact that Hoyer -- through his Leadership PAC was throwing $$$ right left and center during the election -- Murtha not so much.

AmeriPAC: The Fund for a Greater America
(Steny H. Hoyer) (D-Md)
* $916,000 *
http://www.opensecre...


[ Parent ]
Which war should we fight against? (0.00 / 0)
Scott Ritter says it's the next war we should be working to stop.
I've been holding vigils in one of these Districts, a (4.00 / 2)
new Bluedog Dem all week outside his office. The support we've received from the passing public is incredible. Honks, waves, thumbs up are 100:1 Only an occasional middle finger! His staff has heard the support for getting out all week. There may be opportunity for an independent to run and win IF he continues to hold out. Primary challenges will be next to impossible without a scandal.

So Emmanuel and Hoyer are full of it. They are the ones who gave us the Bushdogs blocking the unity of the caucus. Doesn't bode well for 2008.

Emanuel and Hoyer Blocking More Aggressive Dem Tactics on Ending War | 21 comments

© Open Left 2007

 Sign Up To Fight The Bush Dogs

Join the Bush Dogs Campaign

What is a Bush Dog Democrat

Donate to the Bush Dogs Campaign

Open Left Video Wall
Al Franken Thanks Blue Majority

FCC Commissioner Michael Copps on Pearl Jam, Net Neutrality


Rep. Solis on Global Warming and Race


Alaska Democratic Candidate Jake Metcalfe


Senator Durbin Comes to Open Left


Ben Scott Update on iPhone Hearings


Bush's Video Blog on Scooter Libby

Freepress Lobbyist Ben Scott on iPhone Politics
George Miller Answers Matt Stoller's Iraq Question

Other Great Videos
Rep. Markey Films from the Chair's Seat

Fox Attacks Global Warming

If you're confused by net neutrality, here's video by Public Knowledge explaining it. About 300,000 people have watched this, so it's very good.
 Donate to Open Left

Campaigns Residual Forces
Bush Dogs
Living Liberally
Nomination At A Glance
Net Neutrality
Blue Majority

Premium Ads

Standard Ads


Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?

Liberal Institutions
Bush Dogs
State Blogs
Search




Advanced Search

Design by Politics by Design, Powered by: SoapBlox