I thought I’d continue the tradition of bloodthirsty late night posts, in this case combined with junior high journalism class:
WHO: Tom Daschle of South Dakota
WHAT: should resign as majority leader, or be voted out
WHEN: at his earliest convenience
WHERE: in the Capitol building
WHY: 1. Because with the exception of Jeffords’ party switch (yay Jim!) he has been a, yes, miserable failure, as a party leader. He let himself get branded as an obstructionist without managing to obstruct very much. Except for the judicial filibusters, he has been completely ineffective at enforcing party discipline on key votes.
2. Because he’s willing to sell our environmental policy for an ethanol subsidy. He is further from my position on the energy bill than the Wall Street Journal, the National Review, and a decent sized group of Republican senators:
“A spokesman for Daschle, Dan Pfeiffer, said the South Dakota senator will vote for ending debate on the bill, overcoming a filibuster, as long as senators are given time to adequately debate the legislation.
“There is a lot of legitimate concern about the bill on both sides of the aisle … (but) he will support it because of ethanol and other provisions in the bill on energy efficiency,” Pfeiffer said. ” link
3. Because this was his response to the gay marriage ruling:
“Sen. Tom Daschle of South Dakota, the Democratic minority leader, said he disagreed with the Massachusetts decision. “I believe that the Defense of Marriage Act that we passed in Congress is constitutional,” he said.
Daschle said he expected the court decision to become political grist. “But I believe that the issue is as clear as can be,” he said. “We passed the Defense of Marriage Act by an overwhelming margin on a bipartisan basis. The law still stands today, and I think it would under any court scrutiny.”
I know he’s from a red state, facing a tough re-election. I know people who’ve worked for him and elsewhere on the hill love him. That makes this a bit more understandable, but it doesn’t change the conclusion. There are plenty of good, experienced Democrats who will not be forced to choose between their re-election and their party. Durbin might be my favorite. Schumer would do nicely–he’s not much of a statesman but he’s good at what he does. Maybe Reid, maybe Dodd, maybe Biden–there’s no shortage of alternatives.
easier to do this in comments than update the post.
This is Dick Durbin’s response. Durbin represents Illinois, the state that produces more ethanol than any other. Compare and contrast:
“It is the single-biggest corporate giveaway that I’ve seen since I’ve been here,” Durbin said. “What’s outrageous is that the victims are families whose homes are uninhabitable because the water in the shower and the tub and the sink and the glass is dangerous. Those poor families have nowhere to turn because of this bill.”
….
“But they can’t give me enough ethanol to make me forget what they’ve done when it comes to these outrageous polluters,” he said.”
http://www.pjstar.com/news/regional/b1c3uskp050.html
It would certainly be a start Katherine. Then you gotta go get Pelosi.
Did you hear her latest? She’s gonna oppose the Medicare bill? Forget the merits for a sec (I don’t like the bill either). Let’s say she wins and the bill dies, W goes on the campaign trail and says
1. I’m the national defense guy
2. The economy is cookin’
3. I tried to fix this prescription drug thing, but the Dems blocked it. I need all you AARP folks to help me by getting me an even more Republican Congress.
Let’s say she loses, then Bush is the hero who pushed this through over the objections of the Dems.
Pelosi is giving Bush his coattail issues.
Of course, I could be wrong.
It’s possible, spc67. On the other hand, there’s a lot of bitching on the part of AARP members (and others) over its endorsement of the bill, along with accusations of AARP being bought by the insurance industry. So it’s hard to know which way things’ll go.
But anyway, if your #1 and #2 pan out, I suspect #3 won’t matter.
Reid won his last election by less than 1000 votes, according to a Kos poster, so scratch him.
“Sen. Tom Daschle of South Dakota, the Democratic minority leader, said he disagreed with the Massachusetts decision. “I believe that the Defense of Marriage Act that we passed in Congress is constitutional,” he said.”
Someone ought to whisper in the Senator’s ear that DOMA has precisely nothing to do with the MA decision, unless a gay couple from MA gets married and tries to have it recognized in another state.
As for Pelosi, I’d bet that Harold Ford Jr. will get more votes than he did last time for House Minority Leader if he runs again–maybe a lot more.
Oh, why don’t we stop kidding ourselves and let Our Cruel Empress the Junior Senator from New York be minority leader? Everybody wins – she’s a committed party person, she’s charismatic and a good fundraiser, and best of all, it’ll ensure that she never, ever, ever runs for President.
In all seriousness, the minority leader should be left-of-center but not too much so, a blue stater, a good fundraiser, and not too ambitious. John Corzine comes to mind. Plus he has the added advantage of a beard.
I wonder how long it will take before the press realizes that DOMA is the real difference between the major democratic candidates when it comes to gay rights. Honestly, it’s probably better for Dean if they don’t catch on, but geez can these guys be slow….
It would be Highly Irregular for a freshman Senator to become majority leader, wouldn’t it?
If we’ve got a fighter in the Senate I might prefer Ford to Pelosi in the House, but first things first. His time will come.
Katherine,
As a lifelong Republican I have always been impressed by Tom’s integrity, honesty and ability. I see no reason for a change. I believe that giving Pelosi more face time and a prominent position as speaker at the next convention will have a beneficial effect on total turnout. If Sen. Clinton could follow her, the impact would be significant.
The Democratic Party leadership is in good hands. McAuliffe has a firm grasp on the tactical tools necessary to achieve victory in ’04. Stick with the tried and true and you’ll never have a regret.
RDB, Glad to see you support hiring the handicapped.
Handy-capable please, they are liberals after all.
“The Democratic Party leadership is in good hands. McAuliffe has a firm grasp on the tactical tools necessary to achieve victory in ’04. Stick with the tried and true and you’ll never have a regret.”
RDB, it’s not sporting to hunt when you’ve baited the fields. ]:-)
Hmmm, RDB, much as I appreciate your assistance, I’m guessing that turns of phrase like a beneficial effect on total turnout and McAuliffe has a firm grasp on the tactical tools necessary to achieve victory in ’04 are offered with less than the bestof intentions towards our fine party…