« What About The Government "Bailout" Of Foreign Automakers? | kgb999's Blog | Android Market expansions on the way. »
A totally off-topic note about blue dogs.
I've noticed Blue Dog Democrats are viewed with roughly the same level of disdain as Joe Lieberman and head lice.
Up here in Idaho, we worked our butts off to unseat one of the worst examples of GOP idiocy ever to darken the floor of congress. Minnick doesn't have much wiggle room with a skeptical electorate who see themselves generally as conservative.
I know he will piss a bunch of you off from time to time. But as you find yourself inevitably cursing our "blue dog", please remember - it used to be Bill Sali.
Don't forget to also celebrate the (hopefully many)things he does that you like ... those times are the difference between "might as well be a republican" and the real thing.
Up here in Idaho, we worked our butts off to unseat one of the worst examples of GOP idiocy ever to darken the floor of congress. Minnick doesn't have much wiggle room with a skeptical electorate who see themselves generally as conservative.
I know he will piss a bunch of you off from time to time. But as you find yourself inevitably cursing our "blue dog", please remember - it used to be Bill Sali.
Don't forget to also celebrate the (hopefully many)things he does that you like ... those times are the difference between "might as well be a republican" and the real thing.
Advertisement
Here, here... as long as Minnick can demonstrate (1) party loyalty and (2) 4 oz of less hatred than Sali, I will champion him all the way.... if he's nothing more than Sali-lite, God help him because I won't. What I need to see from Minnick is an effort to bring Idaho into the 20th century -- the 21st century is too much to hope for... an example of what Minnick could do is sponsor anti-hate crimes legislation considering Idaho is one of the worst states when it comes to hate crimes... Otherwise, ID remains a boil on the ass of decent Americans. You did good work; however, that doesn't mean I'm going to support the continuation of bigotry from ID. The 2008 electoral delineateds the bigoted from the unbigoted states... Your task is to remove ID from the bigoted ranks and turn it to the civilized ranks of American states.
December 7, 2008 1:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think Sali was unique. Not even Simpson (our other GOP rep) is bad enough to be called Sali-lite.
As to "bigoted" ID, at least we resoundingly defeated our version of Prop 8 a couple of years back. It wasn't even close. And we sued the bajezus out of the Aryans in Hayden (who moved in from CA BTW) and ultimately burned their compound to the ground.
I didn't realize we led the nation in hate crimes though, that's not cool. Is that documented or just an impression you have? I'd be interested to see where the incidents are occurring.
Not saying it's perfect, but the last 5 years amongst Idahoans hasn't felt like a study in bigotry for me. It more seems like we fight in isolation because American progressives have been playing zero-sum politics since Clinton; and we're on the zero side.
December 7, 2008 12:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey man ... I checked the FBI hate crime statistics. There were 32 states with more hate crimes than Idaho in 2007. Including Colorado, Maine, Pennsylvania(by far the worst), Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Oregon.
December 8, 2008 12:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't know anything about Minnick so I won't judge him, but I do know about blue dogs. Blue dogs make the term "party loyalty" a joke because they push the party so far to the right that the only thing the party can ever agree on are policies to the right of Richard Nixon. Blue dogs prevent the Democratic Party from having any brand more inspiring than "the other party" or "Republican-lite". Note, I don't say "opposition party" not because Democrats are no longer in the opposition but because they never were in the opposition to the Bush disasters because the blue dogs went along. Yes they did. And in going along the helped to make the Democratic Party complicit in the global our internal mess. They didn't oppose Iraq. They didn't oppose Wall Street.
December 7, 2008 8:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
I am using "blue dog" as a generic term for a democrat who is more conservative than the traditional left-wing democrat might like. I didn't realize that there was an official "Blue Dog Caucus". I don't know that he's literally joined the "Blue Dogs". If Minnick operates as part of a group of democratic obstructionists - I'm going to be in his office bitching so fast it'll make your head swim.
A lot of it is going to depend on the democratic priorities. Something like anti-hate legislation (as suggested by another poster) would be easy for him to vote in favor of. The "free choice act" is going to be very difficult. Abortion is the one wedge issue that still has teeth up here. If the democrats hold off on that battle until 2011 it will really help this new crop of representatives solidify their seats and be in a better position to help.
That's why parties have whips. The trick is to pass the legislation and still allow caucus members to cross lines on issues of concern to their constituents so they can be reelected. In a perfect world, the legislation passes and Minnick(or whoever) gets credit for bucking the party in favor of constituent's wishes. Then when the important stuff comes up they have some political capital built up to vote for something unpopular with voters.
He is almost certainly going to piss you off sometimes. But unlike Sali, he'll also do a lot of good.
December 7, 2008 1:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Blue Dog Coalition has its own web page and own agenda.
December 7, 2008 6:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, I figured it out after I posted. Up to this point I just thought "blue dog" was an odd sleight that you had to be in-the-know to get.
So far, I've already given Minnick a bad rep he might not even deserve (talk about shooting yourself in the foot). He's not currently a member.
December 7, 2008 11:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree bluebell. And I can't get excited when the Dems win seats in blue dog states because it they will still be voting for the repub platform more often than not.
December 7, 2008 5:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
You know, one of the reasons I started posting here is because I was hoping for support and encouragement trying to get Minnick elected.
It's been bizarre having everyone say essentially: "Thanks, but we'd have preferred if you hadn't bothered."
Ahh well, fortunately the conversation here is great. I still love the place.
December 7, 2008 11:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Please don't compare Lieberman to head lice. Head lice are far less objectionable, and you can get rid of them with one shampoo.
December 7, 2008 10:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
And there is apparently no getting rid of Lieberman shy a half-ton of dynamite!
December 7, 2008 11:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not all Blue Dogs are created equal and yes, most of them are better than the Republican alternative. But one thing I do object to is that the Blue Dogs very often hijack the party from their minority position. The rest of us are expected to compromise with them... I don't see them compromising with the rest of us.
December 7, 2008 10:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
It becomes irrelevant that they're better than the Republican alternative when their chief is to enable the Republican alternative and make any progressive alternative impossible. They foreclose conversation and alternatives. They begin with compromise and end with capitulation. So while you might say that their beginning argument is better than the Republican argument, you end up with the Republican argument. When one side starts the argument at center-right and the other at far-right, the compromise is a right wing solution.
December 7, 2008 11:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, all too often that's how it happens.
December 7, 2008 11:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think the main issue is devotion to the Democratic Party. I know I have some conservative ideas along with progressive/liberal ones, and don't mind a Big Tent accomodating some variations on theme.
However, there should also be some support for Party, and many of the outrages of the Blue Dog Democrats are not for conservative values, but for politically partisan anti-Democratic initiatives. Votes for spying and a complete lack of oversight on the war while tossing (previously) absurd amounts at the Pentagon to wage it while voting to reprimand private citizen groups for speaking up is simply not conservative values, and the glee with which some of the Blue Dogs have thumbed their noses at the Democrats does not make them liked within party.
That said, some progressives have a my-way-or-highway attitude about the war and other issues, and I don't think we want a line-item "approved votes list" as a litmus test for party membership. There are variations from region to region but there are some basic uniting principles.
December 8, 2008 2:55 AM | Reply | Permalink