I'm up outrageously early on a Saturday because I'm about to head off to see Nancy Pelosi talk to the Netroots Nation. I don't attend 8:30 AM events on a Saturday lightly, so I think it's time to once again remind people that whatever disappointments they may have with the new Democratic congress and its leadership that, at the end of the day, among real liberals in Washington, DC Pelosi is by far the most powerful. And among powerful elected officials in Washington, Pelosi is the real liberal. There's a reason she's the one who shows up to an event like this even when she's not courting the base in a primary.
« Bold | Main | Some Quotes »
Friends of P
19 Jul 2008 09:22 am
Comments (14)
You insult real liberals when you call Nancy "Impeachment is off the table" "complicit with the Bush Administration in numerous offenses to the constitution" "FISA-amendment supporter" "failure to push meaningful climate change legislation" Pelosi a "real liberal".
She's in power. That's why people suck up to her and go to see her early in the morning. Don't kid yourself. The people that would get up to see Russ Feingold are the ones who want to see a real liberal.
Seriously. There's a reason Congressional approval ratings are at 9%.
She's the Speaker of the House. Not the Green Lantern. The notion that Speaker Pelosi can make lots of things happen that many Democratic Representatives think would harm their personal re-election chances is delusional. There were not votes there against the FISA bill -- and it is hard to get people to make costly votes when they are going to lose. There are not the votes for Impeachment, get it? If there were, or if there close to enough, then it would happen.
Some commentators here seem to have no idea how a legislative body works.
No, she's not. That would be Durbin.
Good comments, all.
I think she's there because the Netroots are pissed as hell about FISA, and are threatening to close their wallets right as the season begins.
And really; after what we've been promised being the f---in' majority party, and what has been delivered, I don't blame anybody for that sentiment.
You must agree that the current Democratic majority in congress has been a spectacular disappointment. As Speaker of the House, she is the ranking congressperson, the leader and emblem of that failure. Whatever her personal virtue, she needs to know that we are not happy, nor even content with the current direction being pursued by our elected representatives.
You must agree that the current Democratic majority in congress has been a spectacular disappointment. As Speaker of the House, she is the ranking congressperson, the leader and emblem of that failure. Whatever her personal virtue, she needs to know that we are not happy, nor even content with the current direction being pursued by our elected representatives.
Of the ten or so most powerful elected office-holders, she is the most liberal.
Still unhappy? Of the ten or so most powerful elected, she is the least conservative.
One of the least conservative?
She's damn good at what she does. But we liberals whine and tear down our own 'cause that's what we do.
I think there is difference between being a good agent for advancing liberals/progressive goals, and genuinely wanting to advance these issues.
She's had serious limitations in her success and compromised on issues where she should have stood firm, but there's no question she would prefer to pressured more from the left then she is currently. She feels like she has to do certain things, and some of those things really suck. The truth is a lot politicians are pressured from the right and it's not clear they don't like the pressure.
Of the ten or so most powerful elected office-holders, she is the most liberal.
Still unhappy? Of the ten or so most powerful elected, she is the least conservative."
That would (still) be Durbin.
She's going to back the upcoming war in Iran, despite any rhetoric about "Congressional authorization". When push comes to shove, she will vote for authorization.
Anything else you need to know?
Comments closed August 02, 2008.
| 
Heads in the Sand
Define "real liberal". It's the careless and divisive use of terms like this that has done much to split Democrats into clashing factions and reduce our effectiveness as a party. Your casual "real liberal" denigration of others comes close to just replaying Karl Rove's "extremist" or "socialist" attacks on people who disagree with him. What constitutes a "real liberal"? And why should you assert that people who disagree with Pelosi are not "real liberals"
Posted by morzer | July 19, 2008 9:32 AM