The “Never Takes Responsibility for Anything” Wing

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Matt Yglesias

One of the most frustrating things about self-described "centrist" Democrats is their general unwillingness to face up to the fact that they've been the dominant faction in the Democratic Party for decades. Jimmy Carter was a different kind of Democrat, a southern moderate. And Bill Clinton was a southern moderate in the Jimmy Carter mold. So was Al Gore. John Kerry hailed from a different New England liberal political tradition, but in 2004 ran straight out of the moderate playbook—support for both beginning and continuing the war in Iraq, incrementalism on health care, no serious cap and trade agenda, etc.

I think Barack Obama's campaign sort of broke with that mold, as does Speaker Pelosi in the House, but the reality is that the pivotal members of the House are moderate Blue Dogs and the pivotal members of the Senate are moderates like Mary Landrieu. Consequently, governance in the Obama era has been determined by what moderates like Mary Landrieu are willing to do. Which is fine as far as it goes, but it means that if voters don't like the results Landrieu doesn't get to complain that someone else screwed things up:

Other centrist Democrats said the results in Massachusetts could become a blessing in disguise by forcing Democrats to rein in their legislative agenda and focus on less expansive policies than the health care overhaul now teetering with the loss of the Democratic majority's crucial 60th vote.

"The loss in Massachusetts should serve as a wake-up call to the wing of the Democratic Party that wants the federal government to overreach and overspend," said Senator Mary L. Landrieu, Democrat of Louisiana. "We need to get back to the basics."

You can easily imagine an alternate universe in which the Senate Democratic Caucus took an oath of party loyalty, that all 60 Democrats would vote for cloture on all leadership-supported bills, allowing measures to pass with just 51 votes. Had that happened, we would have gotten a bigger, more liberal-friendly stimulus. And the Senate would have finished up with a more liberal version of health reform some time ago. And the Senate probably would have passed some other liberal stuff in the meantime. Had that happened, and had the voters been displeased with it, then it might make perfect sense for Landrieu to complain about some non-Landrieu "wing" of the Democratic Party.

But in the world that exists, the only "wing" that matters is the Mary Landrieu wing. They decide how much stimulus we get. They decide their can't be a public option. They decide their needs to be a months-long quest to get Chuck Grassley to offer "Republican cover" for a health care vote. Either the strategy is working better than the alternatives, or else it's the Landrieu wing that needs to change things up. But defeats can't be the fault of the people who haven't been in the driver's seat since the seventies.

http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives...ything-wing.php

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

ne-9qmbDl8Y

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Where's YOUR substantive opinion in that post, Stevie? Did I miss it?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Where's YOUR substantive opinion in that post, Stevie? Did I miss it?

I save my substantive opinions for when I'm engaged in an intelligent discussion. If you've got something intelligent to say about Matt Yglesies' piece, I'll be happy to reply.

Edited January 22, 2010 by Galt's gallstones

[Sofiyya 1,687]

I save my substantive opinions for when I'm engaged in an intelligent discussion. If you've got something intelligent to say about Matt Yglesies' piece, I'll be happy to reply.

YOU didn't have anything intelligent to say about the piece. You just posted it without comment. So, it's another wait for a cold day in hell . . .

When you consider the title of the thread, you could at least take responsibility for an opinion that's not someone else's. Just sayin'

Edited January 22, 2010 by Sofiyya

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

You ARE allowed to post articles without comment. There's nothing wrong with that.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

You ARE allowed to post articles without comment. There's nothing wrong with that.

I agree, there is nothing wrong with that, but when asked what you think about your own posting and refuse to comment until an "intelligent" response is offered from someone else is whack.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I agree, there is nothing wrong with that, but when asked what you think about your own posting and refuse to comment until an "intelligent" response is offered from someone else is whack.

I don't engage in political discussions with hairdressers.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

I don't engage in political discussions with hairdressers.

Oh, so now you're superior to working class hairdressers. Your transformation to leftist elitism (and intellectual avoidance) is complete.

Edited January 22, 2010 by Sofiyya

[Sofiyya 1,687]

BTW, I wasn't asking for a political discussion. I was only asking for your opinion. My guess is that it hasn't been issued to you by the DNC yet.

[Niels Bohr 72]

Politics are idiots.

[Susita 175]

I agree, there is nothing wrong with that, but when asked what you think about your own posting and refuse to comment until an "intelligent" response is offered from someone else is whack.

But what about all the other posters that post political articles in OT and don't comment, they just wait for everyone else to go on about it.

That's like 99% of them. Are they wiggity whack as well?

Politics are idiots.

oh, Niels.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

But what about all the other posters that post political articles in OT and don't comment, they just wait for everyone else to go on about it.

That's like 99% of them. Are they wiggity whack as well?

oh, Niels.

Maybe, but Steven is the only one who refused to comment on his own posting when asked. As far as I'm concerned, the thread can die without a comment about the article and it's no skin off my teeth.

Is there an inference that asking for an opinion from the OP about what they posted is an imposition? Is that why there is a need to defend him?

[Susita 175]

Nope just askin'.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Nope just askin'.

Ditto. That's all I was doing, too.