Spineless

I’m not surprised by the fact thatCongressional Democrats won’t be voting to rescind the Bush tax cuts for people with polo ponies BUT I’m still horrified. They’ve raised spinelessness to dizzying new heights: they refuse to do something popular out of fear of the Tea Party.

There are some times that you should bring something to a vote on the floor knowing that you’ll lose that vote but gain politically. Instead, the House has allowed its fear and loathing of the Senate to trump political common sense. Yes, the House does the heavy-lifting on many bills that the Senate either kills or allows to languish BUT this should have been a no-brainer.

Living in formerly purple, now red, Louisiana, I’ve been less critical of the Blue Dogs than many. Not this time: they’re driving the bus in the House and their strategy is duck and cower. They’re convinced that the mean old teabaggers will leave them be if they assume the fetal position. Fat fucking chance.

—–

7 thoughts on “Spineless

  1. MichaelF says:

    [pound head on desk in frustration]…
    I’m beginning to wonder if it’s even worth it to have Blue Dog Democrats. Let ’em caucus as a third party or even with the Rethugs, though the latter have veered so far to wingnut territory they probably wouldn’t let them.
    Yes, there are all sorts of advantages to being in the majority, but I still wonder if it’s worth it to have a block of people who amount to a virtual fifth column.

    Like

  2. DB says:

    What a bunch of gutless wonders. Barack is going to be faced with the crazies soon enough and delaying a vote on tax cuts for the wealthy won’t make a damn bit of difference.
    I suggest he lock himself up in front of the TV with the movieGlory and listen to Morgan Freeman over and over:
    And all this time I keep askin’ myself, when, O Lord, when it’s gonna be our time? Gonna come a time when we all gonna hafta ante up. Ante up and kick in like men. LIKE MEN!
    I like Barack, but he won’t fight for anything. Nancy Pelosi’s balls are twice the size of Barack’s.

    Like

  3. Adrastos says:

    Yeah you rite, DB. I agree about the Speaker. She’s the real reason to hope Dems hold the House. She fought to bring her caucus along but they had the Senate as a convenient excuse. Sigh.

    Like

  4. hoppy says:

    The reason the Democracts look so spineless, compared to the Repubs is simple. Several years ago the Repub Party purged all of the moderate and liberal members of their Congressional delegation. That left a monolithic party, with every member committed to voting however the “leadership” dictated.
    The Democratic Party has never done anything even close to this. Years ago this party was about half racist southern gasbags, and half city liberals. That was sufficient to keep Democrats in charge of Congress for many years. Then LBJ jumped ship and demanded and got civil rights bills passed. As a result the southern gasbags became Repubs, and the South became a lock for the Repub Party. But, the Democrats never did attempt to “purify” the party, set up a list of common beliefs that all Democrats had to hold. So, even now, there is a far too big group of Democrats in Congress, and as voters, who are in fact indistinguishable from the old moderate Repubs on almost all issues of importance. It isn’t true when we call our party progressive.
    We do have lots of progressive party members and Congressmen, but nowhere near enough for a majority in Congress, nor enough to elect a similarly inclined Democratic President. Until this changes, we must remain wimps, because that’s all we can be.

    Like

  5. aimai says:

    This is a bit backwards. If no vote is held the tax cuts for the supperrich simply evaporate–they are, in fact, reppealed. The problem is that though not holding a vote simply leaves the expiration date in place (first of the new year) it actually leaves the expiration of the taxes in place for *everyone.* At issue was Obama’s attempt to get the House and the Senate, while he still holds them, to continue the tax cuts for the middle class (everyone getting under 250,000 a year. That was, in a sense, a continuation of “tax cuts for everyone” since *everyone* got that tax break on income up to 250,000 dollars. For the rich,all income abaove 250,000 would have gone back to being taxed at Clinton rates.
    This was a smart political move for the Dems to make: that is, it would have been if they’d taken it. The idea was to strenously advocate and pass a specifically Obama “middle class tax cut” that the Dems could have taken ownership of before the midterms, and also to put the Republicans on the defensive as they insisted on giving tax cuts to millionaires.
    So, naturally, they fumbled it. By holding no vote they have demonstrated to the public that in effect the Dems can’t get anything done, so why bother to elect them? It actually puts us on a better footing, taxwise, since we really need the money from the scheduled tax increase. Its just incredibly stupid politics.
    aimai

    Like

  6. pansypoo says:

    maybe it will neuter the waverers.

    Like

  7. jimintampa says:

    Reminds me of the Gary Larson cartoon showing a microbiology professor being mugged by a Petri dish of bacteria from “a bad corner of the incubator.”

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: