In this site, and many others, the strong progressive element has been pretty clear about their opinion of Reid and Pelosi and their leadership.
What’s the effect of this criticism?
Well, it’s pretty much a disaster. The criticism of Reid and Pelosi is EXACTLY what the RNC is interested in.
On the right, the RNC criticizes Reid and Pelosi for bad policies and trying to get progressive things done.
On the left, activists criticize Reid and Pelosi for ineffectiveness.
The public considers both forms of criticism to be equivalent. At this point, the Democratic Congress has a crappy reputation. This means that the Republican effort to take the House back, in particular, has been greatly aided.
To the public, criticism is criticism. The nuance is lost. There is no nuance in the criticism.
So, the question is: What is the value of the criticism of Reid and Pelosi? As many know, my attitude has always been that little or nothing would get accomplished. That we have stopped many bad Republican programs is enough for me.
- We cannot stop the war with Bush in the White House, sitting in the Bully Pulpit. Any votes against the war will be lied about, and converted into votes against the troops.
- Taxes cannot be raised with the veto in the White House.
Now it is the New Year. It is time to stop criticism of Pelosi and Reid, FULLY SUPPORT them, and work to increase the House and Senate majorities.
We can be sure of one thing: The low congressional approval rating will feature in campaigns in the summer and fall. Our progressive criticism of Congress will be used to restore Republican majorities. Those opposed to Republican majorities will cease criticism and support what can be done.
If you believe this, then fully support Reid and Pelosi. I personally want to stop the slide to the right, toward facism. It does me no good to have people in Congress with (D) after their names if they act like an(R).
Reid and Pelosi are supposedly brilliant politicians who are maintaining their positions by failing to stand up strongly for progressive issues. If they were really brilliant, they would know that the there will always be criticism on the right and there would be a lot less criticism on the left if they behaved in a principled manner. There are far more people who have given up on the system because they see it as mere gamesmanship than there are independent centrists. The beltway crowd won’t go after those voters.
So I will continue to criticize any politician that in my opinion is working against the best interests of this country and its citizens.
We shall have to disagree on this matter, dataguy.
I’m with you Kahli.
This is a progressive site. The main role of BT and other similar sites should be to push the Overton Window way over to the left. The fundie-fascists have been very successful in pushing it in the wrong direction.
Let others support the useless pandering to corporate interests and the dismantling of civil rights.
As we go to the fall, you will hear more and more that the Congress is totally unfunctional, out of step, and the metric is the popularity.
The RNC will be moving to take it back, and our criticism helps them.
if that is your intent, I don’t agree with it. If that is not your intent, you had better think carefully about the effect of your approach.
Hey dude, I always try to think carefully. The fact that you disagree, is not a sign that I’ve haven’t. You have reached a different conclusion. So be it. I cast no apsersions on your thinking.
I think the general public may be slightly wiser than you’re giving them credit for – I don’t believe the low ratings are because Joe Sixpack is seeing smoke and saying “Oh, there must be a fire.” I believe the low ratings are because the Democratic congress in ’06 was elected by promising change, a restoration of checks and balances, and accountability. Joe Sixpack wanted a counterbalance against a runaway regime. To the degree that Reid/Pelosi have not delivered on this, the customers are dissatisfied (and by this I mean Americans in general, not just the Left Wing of the Blogosphere). Whether it’s due to fecklessness or an underestimation of the challenges involved matters not to Joe Sixpack. He just sees that nothing has changed, after he had been promised change. And so he’s (justifiably, in my opinion) upset.
If we’re not to offer criticism to try and pull the political center of gravity back to the left, what are we to do? What disincentives for bad behavior are we to offer the leadership for failing to deliver on promises? I’m open to suggestions for actions we should be taking, but saying “enjoy your shitburger and be glad it’s not laced with cyanide” is not an acceptable response to what’s on the menu at the Congressional Cafe. Forgive me, but I was raised (perhaps naively) to have higher expectations than that of our elected officials.
If criticism is the worst thing they get, they should consider themselves lucky – there is a real risk that their inability to produce tangible results will result in a wholesale disgust in the political system from the progressive left that will result in us collectively saying “a pox on both your houses” and withdrawing from political involvement altogether. It’s happened before – that’s how “the ’60’s” ended with a whimper not a bang in the Ford/Carter years – folks became so disgusted that they withdrew into Eastern spirituality, and/or – convinced that the economy and ecology were on the verge of collapse – into the “Mother Earth News” lifestyle, in places like the Ozarks and Western North Carolina (re-creating Asheville, NC as the “Haight-Ashbury of the Southern Appalachians” in the process). This process went on into the early ’80’s, facilitating the rise of Reagan and the radical right. If we are to avoid repeating history, we need to see that the political process is going to respond to our demands this time. For if people decide that the only things the system has to offer are either “shitburgers” or “shitburgers with a cyanide glaze,” then heading for the woods to forage for berries isn’t an illogical response at all (Torches, Rifles, and Pitchforks are another response, but one Americans haven’t embraced since that late unpleasantness in the 1860’s, other than by unions a century ago, and urban minorities in the ’60’s-70’s).
We’re already seeing the beginnings of the line of disgusted quietist thought rising again, and it may be how the Democrats manage (yet again) to snatch defeat from the jaws of what should be an easy victory in 2008.
Very well said, KP.
If 40% of the public think the congress isn’t aggressive enough to end the war, and 20 % want the war, then that makes 60% who are digusted with Congress. Come on; depends on how you ask the question.
There are three totally different issues in that quote, and it’s criminal to confute them.
First, this is primary season. While I’m progressive, I’m not blind, deaf or dumb. I will work hard to either get more progressive Democrats running, or punish the “corporate/old school” Dems by making it expensive for them to get re-nominated. Don’t tell me I can’t or shouldn’t.
And don’t tell me there’s nothing that could have been done about the war in the past year. At any point any senator–even Feingold or Dodd–could have put a “Coburn” (stranglehold) on any bill. Reid deliberately worked around Dodd’s hold, and he caught hell for it. He had to back down. It CAN be done, and should be done. The Patriot Act CAN be defeated, by even one Senator. The Blue Dogs CAN be defeated in primaries, or forced to spend so much money that they are forced to re-examine their positions.
Come November, it’s incumbent on ALL of us to vote Democratic. That’s primarily because of SCOTUS. If we get one more reactionary right wing Supreme Court justice this country can’t recover. Don’t get prissy; pray for Stephens and Guinsberg to last the year, and make up your mind to be pragmatic.
But it’s still primary season, and it’s principle over pragmatism.
BTW, I do agree with one point the diarist makes. Be careful what you say in cyberspace. Google lives forever. Stick to policy and politics, not personality.
With a primary, its Molly take the hindmost. If you can oust a DINO toad, more power to you. There are a number of races that I support the more progressive D over the incumbent pseudo-D – IL-3 comes to mind immediately.
I mean the generalized criticism that is so often stated, that if we just “stand tall” and “vote our principles” we will prevail. That’s usually not correct. Standing tall, with a well-thought out strategy, might be helpful. A number of strategic votes and the appearance of comity when it is inevitable anyway are also important.
they don’t stand for anything. I can’t count the number of times that I have heard, “I don’t really agree with the Republicans, but at least I know where they stand”. If the Democrats won’t stand up for their stated beliefs, people assume they don’t have any. When it looks like the people will lose no matter who wins, what’s the point in voting? With the concern for our country shown by most politicians, why don’t we replace elections with football games?
been paying attention.
At least 3-4 times, the Dems have tried to implement a timetable. Either defeated by filibuster or by veto. Should they continue to try this?
Several times, they have tried to defund the war. In the last omnibus bill, no funds for the war were included in the initial bill. Individual Dems have been very concerned about this, since they KNOW that they would be held accountable for this approach. Finally, funds were put back in.
So, I do not agree with this superficial and historically inaccurate assessment. There is only so much you can do in the current situation.
A funding bill must originate in the house. If it doesn’t originate there, it doesn’t happen. If you don’t write the bill, the President can’t get the funding.
Yes, he can veto and veto and veto. But he makes news every time.
always blink. Bush knows that if he vetos once or twice, they will quit trying. Sometimes just staying in the fight is worth it. Bush gets bad press every time he vetos SCHIP or truly supporting the troops. Send it up enough times & he might get shamed into letting it pass. Give up after a veto, and they’ll never get him to compromise on anything.
This is exactly why many people don’t trust the Democrats. They don’t believe in anything enough to stand up for it.
Getting nothing accomplished isn’t a victory either–we agree on that. I had friends criticize the short term extension of SCHIP, believing it was more important to keep it as a campaign issue than to protect those kids for the next 12 months. BS. It’s still a big campaign issue.
I would not, however, fund the war. Earmark it for withdrawal and protection. Pull all funding for the Iraqui gvt. if they don’t protect their minorities. Ban permanent bases. That can be done.
I don’t agree. There are 2-3 things going on which you are not paying attention to with a comment like that.
I just can’t understand why the rush. Of course, we want to be out. But we are NOT getting out until Jan 2009, regardless of WHAT anyone wants. Why is that so difficult to understand? Bush will not do anything to get us out, regardless of what Democrats do.
We have tried 3-4 times to institute timetables, and they get defeated each time. How many more times should we try the SAME OLD FAILED STRATEGY?
We have tried, in the last budget cycle, to omit funding. Did you see that Obey vowed to not do any funding? So, why is the funding back in? Because, unlike people who post here, in Congress, they are election realists. Not funding the troops means that we lose the House. Simple as that.
I said “from blue districts” Of course, I meant 12-15 vulnerable freshmen from red districts…
I think you vastly underestimate the disgust that people have with this war!
But 2006 was a pretty unique event. If things go well from now until Nov, Iraq may not be an issue. Votes against the troops will be an issue, however.
That’s the gamble. If I were a Freshman in IN-8, or WI-8, or PA-4, or some other R+4 districts, I would NOT want to see a bunch of “Democratic surrender monkey” ads in March.
If you were a Shiite militia, would you want things to “go right” for the Republicans? I hear they are wearing martyr white again.
If the Democrats learn to speak clearly, they can describe why the death rate has gone down in Baghdad–the Ethnic Cleansing of Sunnis has been extremely effective.