<p>No Murtha for you.</p>
<p>Yup. They went with the liberal rather than the moderate/conservative, who had standing relationships with the Pentagon.</p>
<p>I always like Mini’s analysis.</p>
<p>Nice spin, but when a leader loses a big vote she is diminished in stature.</p>
<p>Barrons, Pelosi has plenty of political capital to spend. Lots. So, don’t worry about this at all.</p>
<p>Not true. It shows the Dems aren’t scared to battle it out. No lock step. Hallelujah!!! Debate and dissent return to their rightful spot in Washington.</p>
<p>Once you get past Iraq the Dems have little mandate to do much of anything. After all, that’s what they ran on. People will not want a major overall of healthcare, immigration, or much of anything else. Maybe they get the increase in the min wage as many areas are already well above the fed minimum with state and local laws–not to mention supply and demand pushing up wages well above the min.</p>
<p>^ Actually, the mandate, if there was one, was probably twofold: Change the course in Iraq (to what? well, that remains to be battled out - good), and that Americans are sick and tired of Congress not paying attention to their needs.</p>
<p>barrons, if you analyze the data, immigration was a big loser for the Republicans - they lost a lot of the Latino vote that they had gained because of their anti-choice position. I’m not sure about health care, although I think the business world is starting to get on board with a single payer health care system, simply because they cannot complete with global companies where employers don’t have to pay for health care as part of their compensation package. </p>
<p>Nice spin, though.</p>
<p>“barrons, if you analyze the data, immigration was a big loser for the Republicans”</p>
<p>I respectfully disagree. I think the success of some ballot iniatives make immigration a mixed bag.</p>
<p>If the dems allow full amnesty it will be just as big a loser for them. What is their position anyway?? I think they just ducked while the some Reps took the heat for saying something.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Talk about spin! This was a SECRET ballot - Pelosi doesn’t know who to assign to latrine duty. Wait for public votes that result in independant thought before you make that claim.</p>
<p>and the republivan mandate was what exactly</p>
<p>we have to fix perscription drugs programs, college loans, funding for schools, tax breaks for the rich, ethics, voting machines, etc etc etc</p>
<p>after the republiican mess, the people have spoken</p>
<p>imagine that</p>
<p>and gosh the republlicans had a SECRET ballot, what is your point</p>
<p>what is bigot lott gonna do</p>
<p>I think immigration is one issue that still needs a lot of hammering out. There are both Democrats and Republicans who side with the amnesty, and there are others on both sides who are against it.</p>
<p>Personally, even this old liberal opposes amnesty. I’m not at all sure how we would “round up’” 12 million people and send them somewhere, but I don’t think they should be rewarded for breaking the law either. </p>
<p>The bottom line is that we have to go after the people who employ them. As long as there are jobs here there isn’t a fence tall enough to keep them out.</p>
<hr>
<p>FF- Don’t work yourself into a frenzy hoping the Democrats will screw up and act like Republicans. That isn’t going to get this country anywhere.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, other than the war, Murtha is one of the most conservative northern members of the Dems in Congress, the one with closest ties to the Pentagon and the military, and among the most conservative on social issues. </p>
<p>The guy they choose is a liberal on just about everything. </p>
<p>As to what the Dems stand for, darned if I know. </p>
<p>Stay the course.</p>
<p>
You don’t really need me to explain it to you, do you?</p>
<p>Call Lott all the unwarranted and nasty names that you want, but you should be very happy that he is in his position - he has proven that he can work with the opposite side of the aisle to get things done (unlike Reid the obstructionist).</p>
<p>Maybe the dems were serious about “draining the swamp.” Let’s see what happens now with Alcee Hastings.</p>
<p>I suspect that the vote was not really related to ethics - it’s just that Hoyer is infinitely more qualified than Murtha who until he found his voice on Iraq was just a fly on the Dem caucus room wallpaper and was best known for his having escaped Abscam. Hoyer has always had a more leadership-oriented personality.</p>
<p>Yes, it will be interesting to see what Pelosi does about Hastings.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>My gut says that the whole thing was an orchestrated and highly choreographed dance. Pelosi knew Hoyer had the votes when she endorsed Murtha.</p>
<p>IMO, taking the hit in the media for a “soundbyte-level” loss was a small price to pay for a more important objective: demonstrating to the House members that Nancy Pelosi remembers colleagues who are loyal. It also keeps Murtha in her hip pocket, which is a good thing since he can be a bit of a loose canon.</p>
<p>My guess is that the whole thing was discussed ahead of time by Hoyer and Pelosi. It was a piece of theater.</p>