home

Pols Are Pols . . . GOP Edition

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Other Politics
Posted on Tue Aug 04, 2009 at 10:21:32 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

The Red State heads are exploding today:

Sotomayor: Qualified, mainstream Judicial confirmation hearings weren't always ideological witch hunts.

By Pat Toomey

. . . If I were a U.S. senator, I would vote for her confirmation, because objective qualifications should matter more than ideology in the judicial confirmation process.

(Emphasis supplied.) Once Specter became a Dem, giving Toomey a clear field on the GOP slate in Pennsylvania, his rush to the Center was inevitable (just as Specter's move left is a result of a primary challenge by Joe Sestak.) This is the reverse of Charlie Crist's run to the right in Florida, an inevitable consequence of the challenge from the extreme right by Florida state senator Rubio. Pols are pols . . . Oh BTW, and primaries are, as always disciplining functions for pols. Whether the primary is successful or not.

Speaking for me only

< Can Obama Fight? | Tuesday Morning Open Thread >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Pols Are Pols . . . GOP Edition | 12 comments (12 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Therefore, Lets Challenge The Blue Dog Dems (none / 0) (#1)
    by john horse on Tue Aug 04, 2009 at 10:50:24 AM EST
    . . . primaries are, as always disciplining functions for pols. Whether the primary is successful or not.

    I couldn't agree more with BTD.  If the primary serves as a disciplinning function for pols, whether successful or not, then why are liberals so scared of challenging the blue dog dems?  Time after time the blue dogs have worked against the things that I believe the Democratic Party stands for.  This time they are cooperating with the Republicans in sabotaging the public option for health care reform.

    If anything challenging the blue dogs will improve our posture by removing the knife that keeps getting stuck in our backs.

    Maybe because (none / 0) (#2)
    by jbindc on Tue Aug 04, 2009 at 10:52:38 AM EST
    More people in this country are politically "in the middle", and there are more middle of the road  - conservative Dems in this country than way leftie liberals?

    Parent
    Need some credible challenger (none / 0) (#4)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Aug 04, 2009 at 11:00:54 AM EST
    for that.

    Which blue Dogs are you thinking of?

    Gene Taylor can't be beat. And won't be effected.


    Parent

    How About Congressman Allen Boyd? (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by john horse on Tue Aug 04, 2009 at 12:47:37 PM EST
    State Senator Al Lawson is term limited and has indicated an interest in running against Boyd.  

    I think Boyd is vulnerable on social security since he was the only Democrat to publicly support privatization after Bush came out for it.    

    Lawson might actually be able to win the primary.  The 2nd Congressional district has a liberal base in Tallahassee (2 universities - FSU and FAMU) and Gadsden county is predominately African-American (Al Lawson is African-American).  Lawson's state district overlaps much of Boyd's congressional district.  

    I'm not naive about the 2nd.  I understand that a Democrat will have to tack center or right in order to win.  The district was carried by John McCain by 54%.  My problem is that without a countervailing force the blue dogs will only tack to the right.  So even if Lawson doesn't win a strong primary challenge might shake things up.  The blue dogs might actually start supporting Obama and the Democratic leadership instead of sabotaging their plans and betraying our values.  That would be a change I could believe in.
     

    Parent

    Good one (none / 0) (#11)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Aug 04, 2009 at 12:49:17 PM EST


    Parent
    From what I've read (none / 0) (#12)
    by andgarden on Tue Aug 04, 2009 at 02:11:12 PM EST
    a) Lawson isn't that liberal and b) he would probably lose the district anyway. Gore tied, Kerry lost, and Obama was blown out.

    Parent
    Has to be a district (none / 0) (#5)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Aug 04, 2009 at 11:06:00 AM EST
    where a more liberal candidate would have a chance of winning, though.  In a lot of districts, Blue Dog is the best we can hope for.  Blue Dogs are Blue Dogs not so much because that's what they believe but because that's what gets them elected and keeps them in office.

    Parent
    Not all of them (none / 0) (#6)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Aug 04, 2009 at 11:15:05 AM EST


    Parent
    And if the liberal ... (5.00 / 3) (#7)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Aug 04, 2009 at 11:34:54 AM EST
    and center of the party were doing a better job the Blue Bogs would have more impetus to move left on important issues.

    The Blue Dogs aren't the problem.  They're just a scapegoat for the liberal and centrist wings ineffectiveness.

    Most Dem Pols have an amazing ability to lose an argument they've already won.  And blaming the Blue Dogs for that is just plain silly.

    Parent

    Well (none / 0) (#8)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Aug 04, 2009 at 11:38:52 AM EST
    they are part of the "problem" such as it is.

    But I do not look to them for solutions.

    Parent

    A very minor ... (none / 0) (#9)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Aug 04, 2009 at 12:04:07 PM EST
    problem at best.  Something akin to the role of passengers in traffic accidents.

    Maybe, possibly, in some cases ... but they're not holding the wheel.

    Parent

    Amazingly (none / 0) (#3)
    by andgarden on Tue Aug 04, 2009 at 10:55:33 AM EST
    Toomey has run as a centrist before. One upon a time, he was pro choice. (But then, so was Rick Santorum).

    Pols Are Pols . . . GOP Edition | 12 comments (12 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment