Say What, Rahm?
Posted in: 2008 Election
I’m not saying Jean Shaheen should not enter the race here, but I think Bowers has a larger (and very good) point:
[T]o be perfectly frank, I feel like Shaheen is one of the many, many Democrats who first helped lead the party into simultaneous minority and pro-war status back in 2002-2003, but who is now capitalizing on the favorable electoral stage that was prepared mainly by the progressive movement during four years of intense guerilla warfare against conservatism from 2003-2006. While the Jean Shaheen’s and Rahm Emanual’s of the party were supporting things like the Bush tax cuts, the pre-emptive invasion of Iraq, and legislation to support Terry Schaivo, it was the netroots who were doing the bulk of the heavy lifting in opposition to Republicans. I feel like they are capitalizing on what we rightfully earned, and both dissing us and preparing to destroy all of our work in the process. They are pretenders to the new Democratic majority.
And right on cue — while everyone was looking at all the medals on Petraeus’s chest, Rahm Emanuel decided that pursuing criminal contempt against Josh Bolten was well, just not that pressing:
House Democratic leaders have decided to postpone a vote on a criminal contempt resolution against White House chief of staff Joshua Bolten and former White House counsel Harriet Miers for several weeks, and possibly longer, according to top lawmakers and aides.
Pelosi decided to delay a vote until at least late September, and possibly into October. Democrats said they are not yet ready for such a vote because they have not briefed lawmakers on what it would mean and how the controversy would play out, both legally and politically.
“I don’t think anything is going to happen on that for a while,” said House Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel (Ill.). “When you decide to do that, you have to make your best case. You want everyone to understand what’s happening and why.”
Emanuel said Pelosi and other top Democrats have not begun those consultations yet — and he was unsure when they would.
Rahm supported the war and didn’t want Democrats to talk about it during the last election. He thinks immigration — which desperately needs addressing as a matter of conscience and has the added benefit of splitting the Republican party into little splinters every time it comes up — should not be addressed until a new President’s second term. After the last election people said the thing they care about most is seeing corruption addressed, and as Kagro X noted, Nancy Pelosi said the most important thing about gaining majority status was getting subpoena power. Now Rahm has decided to render that limp and useless as well.
Rahm then has the arrogance to run around and crow about orchestrating the Democratic victory in 06 as if my dog could not have done a better job, considering all the money he dumped into loser races and the way he ignored those that probably could have inched to success had they had just a little bit more help from the DCCC.
I think we’re all a bit tired of cleaning up Rahm’s messes (watch the YouTube above and remember, this is the guy who’s in charge of Democratic messaging for the House). And yes, it is irritating to watch them all ride in and take advantage of a favorable electoral stage that was set in the wake of their open hostility to those who were doing all the heavy lifting to set it.
Return to: Say What, Rahm?