Nancy shoots blanks out of gate

[cplmilt]

Murtha has a long history of serious ethical issues. He was a terrible choice for Pelosi to make especially given the "anti corruption" platform (a worthy one) the dems took.

And what does Mark Foley have to do with this? You got your mileage out of that one - time to move on no?

make up your mind on how you stand, It's tacky when flip flop in back to back posts.

I'm having a hard time envisioning a democratic party leading when their leader cannot "read the room" or convince others

Maybe she just should have appointed Murtha as a recess appointment like the republican leader would've done.

 

[Kulindahr]

I just read through this, and...

I didn't see anyone respond very directly to what Chance asked. I saw slander and insult and seventh-grade level taunts, I saw a lack of reading comprehension, I saw a confusion between what is broadcast on TV news and what people know, and I saw a certain arrogance that dismisses anything received as irritating or diminishing to 'heros'.

For some substance, from a thread about this that I started:

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/capit...d=3&pid=141263

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2006/...ss_Leaders.php

(hoping those are still good).

 

[Kulindahr]

I'm having a hard time envisioning a democratic party leading when they don't believe in their leader

I'm having a hard time envisioning a democratic party leading when their leader cannot "read the room" or convince others

I'm having a hard time believing that the JUB constituents cannot see the folly which is Pelosi putting up Murtha

Okay, Chance, take these items:

1. Pelosi was chosen Speaker "by acclaim" (according to ABC News).

2. Her choice for majority leader went down in flames.

Assume that neither one of those was a fluke -- what's it mean?

 

[chance1]

make up your mind on how you stand, It's tacky when flip flop in back to back posts.




Maybe she just should have appointed Murtha as a recess appointment like the republican leader would've done.

Why is this confusing?

Foley is a sick dude - who did a sick thing - needed to be gone asap

Don't think that's the same as taking bribes

What part of Pelosi putting up an ethically challenged man seems right to you?

Pelosi was clueless on this one - chalk it up

Think she's got a lot of support? Doesn't appear that way

 

[Andreus]

guys

one last time

democrats dont consider it a blow to the cause when a vote is cast and the leader is disobeyed or her preferences are not perfectly adhered to

we call it democracy in actiion

hoyer's election within the party is a victory for Pelosi and the party because it shows she is open to differing opinions at her table and it reflects taht the democratic method of governing is much different than what americans are used to at this point.

get with it guys... for the first time in six years americans can disagree and still be patriots

it can be a good day if you see it

 

[chance1]

guys

one last time

democrats dont consider it a blow to the cause when a vote is cast and the leader is disobeyed or her preferences are not perfectly adhered to

we call it democracy in actiion

hoyer's election within the party is a victory for Pelosi and the party because it shows she is open to differing opinions at her table and it reflects taht the democratic method of governing is much different than what americans are used to at this point.

get with it guys... for the first time in six years americans can disagree and still be patriots

it can be a good day if you see it

yup

Nancy Pelosi - the "head" of the Party - puts up an ethically challenged guy instead of her former #2 - this is construed as a good thing so says Andreus

Then her guy (who is ethically challenged and is on tape wanting to take lots of money in exchange for political favors) gets trounced 2:1

and this is a good thing for the Dems

read it again

read it again

then tell me this is a good thing

and don't cross your fingers or toes when you're doing it

 

[Kulindahr]

Bullshit. I answered. There is nothing to defend. She backed him, he wasn't accepted and she didn't use force. Should she used conservative tactics and forced people to vote her way?

I may have lost sight of substance due to your off-topic post and factual errors.

I'm still waiting to see if anyone will venture as to what the Murtha vote means.

 

[chance1]

This is why you are a phoney chance1

the thread is about pelosi and her big loss today

please stick to the thread

 

[Andreus]

the thread is about pelosi and her big loss today

please stick to the thread

it looks like its actually about us letting you know how you misinterpreted the events of the day to me...

one thing about us democrats

we are compasionate givers

 

[chance1]

it looks like its actually about us letting you know how you misinterpreted the events of the day to me...

one thing about us democrats

we are compasionate givers

One thing about the democrats - make that several things

1 - Nancy Pelosi, the "leader" has not gotten off to a good start - her judgement was weak, her ability to persude even weaker

2 - within the party, there appears to be a divide as to how to govern - moderately or not so moderately

I suspect both will be front and center for the next 2 years and that today's miscommunication will be long lasting

 

[Andreus]

dude

honestly

it looks like the dermocrats are all on the same page on this and that is all that counts. If you really think that the Dems care about what republicans think of hte way they run their party you are even further out there on the grasping at straws plank than i thought

you are the only one here who thinks this means anything

its kind of sad yet cute in a hairless chihuahua kind if way

 

[Kulindahr]

The Murtha vote means very little. The dem members of the house knew she was going to suggest Murtha for Majority leader before they casted a vote for her today. They all still voted for her. They obviously have every confidence in her abilities to lead as well as represent the party.

Politicians don't do anything without meaning -- that they have confidence in her may be one, but there's definitely a meaning to voting down her choice. It could be that they thought her foolish for selecting someone who is, as Chance put it, "ethically challenged -- and she was (the Republicans are probably crying in their Coors Light over Murtha's loss; he would have been such a nice target for them!). It could be, as was suggested, that they all would really rather have had Hoyer than her, and were sending her a message about who they'll put in her place if she messes up.

Personally I think it was a message telling her they're not just going to line up and take orders -- and in fact two of them were on a news program tonight saying she'd better understand that they're not going to just take orders. I also think it was about the ethics, and just may also have been because there were issues Murtha and Pelosi agree on that they don't want pushed, and Hoyer doesn't agree with her... but I'll admit that some conjecturing because I don't know much about where Hoyer stands on various things.

Once she's actually Speaker (there's one of you factual errors), it will be interesting to watch the dynamics between her and Hoyer and the rest; maybe that will shed light backwards.

 

[cplmilt]

1 - Nancy Pelosi, the "leader" has not gotten off to a good start - her judgement was weak, her ability to persude even weaker

2 - within the party, there appears to be a divide as to how to govern - moderately or not so moderately

I suspect both will be front and center for the next 2 years and that today's miscommunication will be long lasting

I suspect that the vote for Dem majority leader will be forgoten the first time a Subpoena is issued to the Republican leader.

 

[chance1]

dude

honestly

it looks like the dermocrats are all on the same page on this and that is all that counts. If you really think that the Dems care about what republicans think of hte way they run their party you are even further out there on the grasping at straws plank than i thought

you are the only one here who thinks this means anything

its kind of sad yet cute in a hairless chihuahua kind if way

the fact that no one thinks this is news - or has any real relevance - when all the national news orgs are covering - and all newspaper will cover tomorrow - well how do I put it - it's a JUB thing

the key word in your sentence "you are the only one here who thinks this means anything" is clearly "here" - LOL

And Andreus, you know there's only 1 dog on this board

Good night

 

[chance1]

I suspect that the vote for Dem majority leader will be forgoten the first time a Subpoena is issued to the Republican leader.

getting even vs. governing

such a dilemma

what feels good vs. what do their constituents expect

such hatred is just not healthy

 

[chance1]

But nobody knows who she is, right?

tomorrow's papers will all be about Nancy's loss

take it to the bank

smile for the cameras nancy?

"how do u feel today?"

"is the fact that your guy lost 2:1 - does that disturb u"

"do u feel you have your finger on the pulse of the democratic party?"

"is there a reason u did not support your former #2 Mr. Hoyer, a well respected colleague, for the gig?"

Nancy will get a lot of coverage tomorrow

See she is in charge now - or is she?

 

[Andreus]

getting even vs. governing

such a dilemma

what feels good vs. what do their constituents expect

such hatred is just not healthy

congressional oversight, stopping the sleaze and corruption, cleaning the house

these things are not getting even or hatred. they are one of the prime reasons they were elected. they have to do as the electorate expects and engage in real congressional oversight if they want to be re elected.

it is what america sent them to do.

it wont be their first actions, but it will happen. get used to the idea.

 

[chance1]

congressional oversight, stopping the sleaze and corruption, cleaning the house

these things are not getting even or hatred. they are one of the prime reasons they were elected. they have to do as the electorate expects and engage in real congressional oversight if they want to be re elected.

it is what america sent them to do.

it wont be their first actions, but it will happen. get used to the idea.

oversight is hard to argue with - a witch hunt is something else

america send congressmen and women to solve problems - not dig up dirt

and pelosi putting up a dirty guy for #2 - suggests she has issues with corruption herself

 

[Andreus]

you cant call it a witch hunt when it hasn't even begun.

congressional oversight is a long missing part of the american way that WILL be returning to the hill.

The days of a single party government are OVER.

 

[Zasser]

Chance,

The Democratic Party owes a great deal to Murtha. I also believe that the entire country does also, but that debate is another topic.

I am no insider, but it seems to me that the nomination for Majority Leader was nothing more than a courtesy, an honorific that no one believed would become a reality. This is politics after all.

If Madame Speaker had truly backed him, I don't think the vote would have been so lopsided. I see his nomination and her "support" as nothing more than an acknowledgement of his role in the outcome of the elections, and the new direction that our National Political Dialogue has taken - particularly with respect to Iraq.

Hoyer was the man from the start, in my opinion. Nancy would have been shooting herself and the party in the foot had she truly supported Murtha, OR openly supported Hoyer.

I think her opening act is a success. The right man is in the job, she displayed loyalty to a member who contributed greatly to her being the Speaker, and Murtha is still actively engaged in what I feel is the the primary challenge facing this country - What are we going to do about Iraq?

Just my two cents. And now a question for you. What's up with making Lott the Minority Whip? Do you think they're setting up their 2008 "Southern Strategy"? Or is he the best the party has to offer?