Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

More House Dems fleeing (and bashing) Obama and Pelosi

Little by little, we're starting to see more House Dems running ads distancing them from President Obama and Nancy Pelosi -- and even directly taking them on. Some of the spots bash the Obama/Dem agenda in ways that echo GOP talking points.

Here, for instance, is a new spot from Blue Dog Dem Jason Altmire of Pennsylvania, which not only trumpets his vote against health reform, but also proclaims his willingness to "stand up" to Obama and Pelosi:

And here is a new spot from Blue Dog Dem Bobby Bright of Alabama, which trumpets his vote against the "massive government healthcare" bill, and proclaims that he's an "independent conservative":

Meanwhile, a Republican sends along video of a new ad that Blue Dog Dem Glenn Nye of Virginia is running, proclaiming his vote against the health care bill and his willingness to go "against his own party." And Dem Rep. Joe Donnelly of Indiana has run spots blasting Obama as part of the "Washington crowd" and hitting "Nancy Pelosi's energy tax."

Dem leaders have signaled to individual lawmakers that it's okay for them to do what they have to do in order to establish distance from the Dem leadership in Washington. But this is a dicey balancing act. While doing this may help Dems survive in tough districts, it gives Republicans who want to nationalize the elections fresh ammo to push their larger message that the Obama/Dem agenda is politically toxic and has failed.

By Greg Sargent  |  August 25, 2010; 3:04 PM ET
Categories:  2010 elections , Climate change , Health reform , House Dems , House GOPers  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The Cheney-ization of the GOP, part II
Next: Happy Hour Roundup


"More House Dems fleeing (and bashing) Obama and Pelosi"


Posted by: JakeD2 | August 25, 2010 3:11 PM | Report abuse

Thanks for the short list of names of Blue Dog Dems I will not be feeling sorry come Election Night.

Gutless weasels.

Posted by: bmcchgo | August 25, 2010 3:12 PM | Report abuse

Attributed to Reagan: "The person who agrees with you 80 percent of the time is a friend and an ally — not a 20 percent traitor."

via The Corner

Posted by: sbj3 | August 25, 2010 3:14 PM | Report abuse

It's really starting to sound like you're rooting against the Democratic Party, Greg.

I'm sick of pointless negative posts like this one. Weak. Later.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 25, 2010 3:14 PM | Report abuse


Don't let the door hit you on the way out ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | August 25, 2010 3:17 PM | Report abuse

One thing this election cycle is providing me is more Democrats I could vote for. If they were in my district/state.

Yay, conservadems!

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 25, 2010 3:18 PM | Report abuse


In Florida, where Democratic registrations outpace Republicans by more than 600,000, and independents are likely to make up 18% of the electorate, this race will be won by turning out the same Democratic base that just entrusted Kendrick with the party's nomination.... President Obama remains extremely popular with Democrats - 84% job approval in the latest Quinnipiac poll - and Kendrick is the only candidate willing to stand with Obama.


The math does not add up for Florida's elected Republican Governor....With universal name recognition, Charlie Crist abandoned his Republican primary fight against Marco Rubio. Only 39% of Democrats supported Crist at a time when Kendrick was completely unknown beyond his district, a number that will be a high-water mark for him running against a Real Democrat. ... With Republicans coalescing around a Tea Party candidate, and Democrats with Kendrick, the math does not exist to elect Charlie Crist. With an expected turnout of 43% Democrats and 40% Republicans, Kendrick needs to win 75% of registered Democrats and just 17% of the registered Independent vote to secure 35% of the vote total. 35%-40% is all that is needed to win in a three-way race.


"This is a race between Kendrick Meek, a real Democrat, and two life-long conservative Republicans, and I think the contrasts are going to be made very clear," Dyk says.

To drive that point home, Meek's staff just forwarded reporters an e-mail sent by Crist's campaign in the fall of 2009, which headlines this quote from the Governor: "It's hard to be more conservative than I am on issues - there's different ways stylistically to communicate that -- I'm pro-life, I'm pro-gun, I'm pro-family, and I'm anti-tax."

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 25, 2010 3:19 PM | Report abuse

That will work for them, just a well as it is has worked for Blanche Lincoln.

Here is a tip for those idiots. If the voters are looking to support someone who is completely against Obama and Pelosi they will vote for your opponents, and not you. Trying to get to the right of Far Right will only turn off your own base, Idiots!

Posted by: Liam-still | August 25, 2010 3:23 PM | Report abuse


Has any non-Blue Dog done this yet?

It's not exactly out of the norm for Blue Dogs to take pot shots at their own party come election time. It's expected even in a normal political climate, much less during this polarized time. It's hardly worthy of another "Dems in Disarray" piece.

It won't matter, anyways. The Blue Dogs are going to be decimated on election night - and good riddance to bad rubbish.

ConservaDems are the most spinless politicians in the country.

Posted by: TheBBQChickenMadness | August 25, 2010 3:25 PM | Report abuse

"Gutless weasels."

Precisely. Protecting their hides for this election cycle. Watch these Judas Dems come scurrying back into the fold in 2012.

Posted by: filmnoia | August 25, 2010 3:30 PM | Report abuse

"But this is a dicey balancing act. While doing this may help Dems survive in tough districts, it gives Republicans who want to nationalize the elections fresh ammo to push their larger message that the Obama/Dem agenda is politically toxic and has failed."

Greg, considering the diversity of Congressional Districts across the nation, I'm not sure why it should come as a surprise that people in some districts will need to run against any President/their leadership. Presidents/Congressional leadership will inevitably poll differently in districts.

Just as sure as some will need to run against Obama, some will strongly embrace him. [I'm sure we won't hear very much about those districts though, since it's not as sexy.] This phenomenon is not unique to 2010. The same happened with W. Bush, Clinton, H.W. Bush, Reagan, Carter, and on and on and on. [Hint: for as long as there are historical records on midterms, you will find this phenomenon in politics.]

Surely you understand that tremendous heterogeneity of opinion can exist across the 435 districts located across the nation? If you don't, perhaps you should seek historical context before writing hyperbolic (and pessimistic) posts like this one.

Posted by: associate20 | August 25, 2010 3:33 PM | Report abuse

This isn't a problem if the people that are using this tactic truely mean what they say.
Blind party loyalty helps no one excep the party elite. That's why I want to scream whenever I hear about "the party line". These politicians are there for us, not their party.
Yes, this applies to R's as well.

Posted by: Bailers | August 25, 2010 3:34 PM | Report abuse

Kevin: "One thing this election cycle is providing me is more Democrats I could vote for. If they were in my district/state."

Yeah, I'd push out my 'R' for a conservaDem any day.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | August 25, 2010 3:35 PM | Report abuse

Who cares?

They are politicians, if distancing themselves from Obama helps them win elections I say go for it.

I seem to remember Republicans doing the same thing in 2006 and 2008. But my memory could be faulty.

"I am not a member of any organized party — I am a Democrat." Will Rogers, 1935

Posted by: nisleib | August 25, 2010 3:36 PM | Report abuse

associate, and Ethan, I reserve the right to make the point that Dems don't help the party's cause by legitimizing the opposition's talking points.

This is not "pessimistic," or "rooting for Dem failure," or "hyperbole." I'm simply pointing out the downside of doing this.

Posted by: Greg Sargent | August 25, 2010 3:37 PM | Report abuse

"But this is a dicey balancing act. While doing this may help Dems survive in tough districts, it gives Republicans who want to nationalize the elections fresh ammo to push their larger message that the Obama/Dem agenda is politically toxic and has failed."

Just to be perfectly clear, even if Obama was at 65% national approval rating, he would not necessarily poll well in all districts, and every candidate would lovingly embrace him.

These races are polled by district, and national approval ratings/standings have less bearing than district ratings on how a Congressperson runs for reelection/election.

Just as a 65% national doesn't guarantee great ratings in every district, a 45% national (according to RCP) doesn't equate to sub-50% ratings in every district.

Posted by: associate20 | August 25, 2010 3:42 PM | Report abuse

Apparently, this wasn't the "Change" they were looking for.

Pass the popcorn!

Posted by: luca_20009 | August 25, 2010 3:43 PM | Report abuse

I don't think I said it was necessarily a bad idea for the candidates themselves. In fact, I said it could help them in tough districts. I was simply pointing out the downside of doing this.

Posted by: Greg Sargent | August 25, 2010 3:46 PM | Report abuse

Greg Sargent is no Howard Kurtz (This is not a compliment).

It's unfortunate that you, Greg, can not be more objective. You would certainly garner more respect, but you choose page views over integrity.

If an echo chamber is what you want, then continue. Just please don't call yourself, ever, a journalist. You.are.not.

Posted by: popopo | August 25, 2010 3:47 PM | Report abuse

Your blog Greg. :)

I don't have to like (any or all of) it.

It does strike me as pessimistic to point out something that happens every cycle as new or news or controversial, especially given the already dismal (if false) conventional wisdom about the Democratic Party.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 25, 2010 3:55 PM | Report abuse

"associate, and Ethan, I reserve the right to make the point that Dems don't help the party's cause by legitimizing the opposition's talking points.

This is not "pessimistic," or "rooting for Dem failure," or "hyperbole." I'm simply pointing out the downside of doing this."

Greg, I don't dispute your right to make the point you've made. I simply disagree wholeheartedly with your making the point without proper context.

By treating this as a phenomenon unique to the currently climate of 2010, you are, in fact, giving credence to the Republican argument. Their argument has less credibility when considered in historical context, which demonstrates that some candidates in districts where the President/national party doesn't rate well will run, in some way, against their party leaders.

And to go a step further, this tactic has already proved effective in holding seats; it has been employed in some of the special elections -- most famously in PA-12, where Critz ran against healthcare, etc.

Posted by: associate20 | August 25, 2010 3:59 PM | Report abuse

When the Dems retain their majority and pick up a few more seats in the process these people should be marginalized!

Posted by: roxsteady | August 25, 2010 4:02 PM | Report abuse

Vandalism at Madera Islamic center called hate crime
Posted at 10:59 AM on Wednesday, Aug. 25, 2010
By Eddie Jimenez / The Fresno Bee Share

Vandalism to a Madera Islamic center and signs found on the property are being investigated as a hate crime, the Madera County Sheriff’s Department said today.

A brick was thrown through a window Friday and three signs were found at Masjid Madera, 16634 Road 26, during two other incidences since Aug. 18, said Erica Stuart, Sheriff’s Department spokeswoman. Two of the signs were found on the center’s property Tuesday afternoon.

The signs read “No Temple for the God of terrorism at Ground Zero. ANB,” “Wake up America, the Enemy is here. ANB” and “American Nationalist Brotherhood.”

Posted by: suekzoo1 | August 25, 2010 4:03 PM | Report abuse

@Greg: I have to agree with your more defensive commentors. Dems always run against their own party's signature legislative "accomplishments." Indeed, 2010 is just like any other off-year election and all the polls and prognosticators saying otherwise should just be ignored.

Posted by: sbj3 | August 25, 2010 4:16 PM | Report abuse

Hideous. Thanks Sue.

The temple I attended was desecrated when I was about 12 years old. Swastikas and messages like "Jews go home" in spray paint all over the synagogue.

This is obviously far worse, but religious intolerance of any kind is simply unacceptable.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 25, 2010 4:18 PM | Report abuse


I thought that you were leaving?

Posted by: JakeD2 | August 25, 2010 4:19 PM | Report abuse

"I'm sick of pointless negative posts like this one. Weak. Later."

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 25, 2010 3:14 PM

Posted by: JakeD2 | August 25, 2010 4:22 PM | Report abuse

I guess since these Blue Dogs chose to vote against HCR when they had the chance, it would be sort of dumb for them to now campaign differently. They're Blue Dogs for a reason. I'm glad I don't have to decide if I should vote for one or not as they haven't exactly made my top ten list. We'll see what the voters decide. I don't suppose they'll be getting any progressive money bombs though. /s

Posted by: lmsinca | August 25, 2010 5:08 PM | Report abuse

I can't feel sorry for these clowns and when they get trashed in the midterms, they will gt what they deserved - The Dems and many Americans fell for Obama's lies, and now both regret it...but it is too late. The GOP tsunami is only a few more than 60 days away!

Posted by: Realist201 | August 25, 2010 5:15 PM | Report abuse

Ims, I know for progressive Dems and/or liberals, it's hard to appreciate the Blue Dogs.

But, wouldn't it be better to have Tarryl Clark (who says she would be probably join the Blue Dog caucus) instead of Michelle Bachmann? At least Tarryl is not wacko, and would vote with the Dems part of the time.

I know I'd like a Blue Dog to vote for. As it is, my formerly moderate 'R' rep has moved far to the right because he was being primaried. His Tea Party opponent lost big, which was great. But the Dems are running a very liberal candidate, one who I really like, but who has no chance of winning.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | August 25, 2010 5:23 PM | Report abuse

I really hope the people from these districts don't fall for this crap. These blue dogs may have voted against health care, against the stimulus bill, against the bailouts, and against cap & trade...but guess what, these destructive bills still passed! The problem here is that these blue dogs don't set the agenda, Queen Pelosi and King Obama set the agenda. As long as these blue dogs are in office, Queen Pelosi and King Obama will continue to have the power to pass their agenda. If the people from these districts re-elect their blue dog reps, then they will get exactly what they deserve in the next Congress...more reckless legislation.

Posted by: conservativemaverick | August 25, 2010 5:25 PM | Report abuse


Toomey Lies About Death Tax (In Effort to Support the Richest People in America)

It's literally all he knows:

1) LIE.

2) Redistribute Wealth from the Middle Class to the Wall Street Establishment

Toomey is a shill.


Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 25, 2010 5:28 PM | Report abuse

sue, I didn't say I wouldn't vote for a blue dog, just that it would be a tough decision. I've been working against my Republican rep, Ken Calvert, for years. You may have heard of him. We almost got him in 2008 and we're hoping to get it done this year. Luckily, we have a progressive candidate, so I don't have to decide.

Believe me, I know what this election means, but I've been through a lot of important elections and sometimes it's really hard to pick the lesser of two evils.

Posted by: lmsinca | August 25, 2010 5:30 PM | Report abuse

I have to agree with most here Greg.

Democratic members of Congress who run against Democratic party principles and ideals don't deserve to be supported by Democrats and WHEN they lose their elections I won't feel the least bit sorry for their miserable failures as Congress critters.

Rahm Emanuel bites the Democratic Party in the ass one more time.

Posted by: kindness1 | August 25, 2010 5:38 PM | Report abuse

"The GOP tsunami is only a few more than 60 days away!"

And then what? And I'm not being snarky....I'm being entirely serious.
What's the plan? Because from everything I've read/seen/heard from Repubs their plan solely consists of "obstruct the Dems".

Once they're in power, how are they planning on getting people back to work? Tax cuts? Companies are flush with cash right now....they don't need more cash, they need more demand. And besides, with all the complaining about the are they planning on paying for them? And along those same lines, how exactly are they planning on taking care of the deficit? Are you going to go with the infamous "belt-tightening"? Or are you one of those who thinks that cutting taxes will magically make our deficit disappear?

Posted by: schrodingerscat | August 25, 2010 5:39 PM | Report abuse

All, Happy Hour Roundup posted:

Posted by: Greg Sargent | August 25, 2010 5:42 PM | Report abuse

schrodingerscat - You raise some interesting questions about what the GOP will do.

I'd guess that, like Darrell Issa alluded to, they will attempt to solve all the countries problems by launching numerous high profile investigations of Obama's private parts.

It worked during the Clinton years, right?

Posted by: nisleib | August 25, 2010 5:45 PM | Report abuse

Greg Sargent being the Obama pecksniff and toady that he is, brings you this news in hand-wringing, abject horror.

Posted by: screwjob21 | August 25, 2010 5:55 PM | Report abuse

"And then what?"

It doesn't even matter to these fools.

They're playing a totally different sport, one with no rules and no winners, just losers.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 25, 2010 6:00 PM | Report abuse

Don`t be fooled by these charlatans.There isn`t one of them who won`t cheerfully reinstall Pelosi as Speaker.The "Blue Dogs" have voted for the Stimulus and many supported Obamacare.Those who didn`t had received approval from Pelosi and Hoyer because they had enough Democrat votes to pass Obamacare without them.There is no such animal as a "Blue Dog"!

Posted by: bowspray | August 25, 2010 6:00 PM | Report abuse

Just shows the lies, er, I mean lengths, they will go to to get elected/re-elected.

Posted by: r_leever | August 25, 2010 6:12 PM | Report abuse

So this story is about a handful of Bluedogs distancing themselves for local reasons. Unfortunately, the headline and the writing makes you think this the behavior of hordes of Democrats. Not true. Why must the writer and the WaPo lie.

Oh, the Blue Dogs voted no just like the Republicans. There is nothing new in this story.

Posted by: pbarnett52 | August 25, 2010 6:13 PM | Report abuse

They know the ship is sinking, and rather than drown, they are jumping overboard. Ask yourself the question, would you want these two clowns anywhere near you at election time? Ther woirld knows that Obama is a certified fake, and Pelosi is a certified moron.

Posted by: jemvbcnyc | August 25, 2010 6:25 PM | Report abuse

It's a tactical decision. Might even be a smart one in more backward districts.

Posted by: CalD | August 25, 2010 6:47 PM | Report abuse

My Blue Dog Dem Congressman voted against health reform, and the number one reason I am voting for him again in November is to help make sure Nancy Pelosi keeps her job.

So this distancing tactic is not necessarily going to be completely least not with voters like me.

If the House wasn't in play this fall, I would be sorely tempted to "accidentally" forget to cast my ballot in the House race when I go to the polls. Fortunately, I have alot of enthusiasm for my Senator who is also up for re-election in November.

Oh, and by the way, are one of my favorite journalists. Your blog is what brought me back to reading the Washington Post.

Posted by: elscott | August 25, 2010 7:04 PM | Report abuse

"Ther woirld knows that Obama is a certified fake, and Pelosi is a certified moron. "

Just some friendly advice: be very careful about calling others "morons" when you have a difficult time making it past "Ther woirld".

Posted by: schrodingerscat | August 25, 2010 7:10 PM | Report abuse

doesn't matter what they say now...
it's about what they did...
and they have to pay for it...
relieve them of the responsability of caring for us...
vote them out...

Posted by: DwightCollins | August 25, 2010 7:22 PM | Report abuse

And right after the election you will all be as cozy as two peas in a pod.

Lier's each and every one.

Is this the best we can get for our country---maybe we should outsource our political party's.

Posted by: PennyWisetheClown | August 25, 2010 8:30 PM | Report abuse

as much as I don't agree with most of the blue dog dems stances, I do admire a Party that isn't all about lockstep, toe the party line alswys, sign pledges and oaths kinda cr*p. with 130,000,000+ voters, there is bound to be diverse views, usually tied to a specific geographic area. so we all know blue dogs are mostly from the Red States, so why the big surprise everyone? like another poster said, these Dems voted aginst HCRBill, etc... why would they change their view now, and be called flip-floppers?

Posted by: katem1 | August 25, 2010 9:07 PM | Report abuse

Unprincipled slims. Vote the lot of 'em out.

Posted by: logicprevails | August 25, 2010 9:34 PM | Report abuse

Dems are starting to think:
"My God, What Have We Done?"
Remember November.

Posted by: PreferenceForTruth | August 25, 2010 10:05 PM | Report abuse

Exuberant with the end of the BushMcHitler regime, we forget the first rule of progressive subversion: you boil the serfs SLOWLY.

Posted by: happyacres | August 25, 2010 10:41 PM | Report abuse

Dems believe in accountability from their political leaders. Not like republican sheeple.

Posted by: bmr5 | August 26, 2010 12:14 AM | Report abuse

Greg, could you investigate whether they are receiving money from the DCCC?

Because I saw Tarryl Clark on the Ed Show and she said they hadn't given her a cent. So I'm wondering if they are funding the blue dogs but not the progressives.

Posted by: solsticebelle | August 26, 2010 12:19 AM | Report abuse

The Obama Depression has begun. CNBC, and other organizations, now predict that the DOW will sink below $5,000 by 2012, and that unemployment will exceed 10% by that time as well. In 2011 much of the impacts of ObamaCare will begin to kick in and you will see many medical equipment manufacturers declare bankruptcy because of it. Also a little known feature of ObamaCare is to eliminate the tax deduction for R&D beginning 01/01/2011. This will chill innovation in America and push more teck companies off-shore.

No amount of Obama lying and Bush bashing will change the facts that Obama is anti-business and is killing America's economy. Come 2012, there will be no place for Obama to hide.

Posted by: mike85 | August 26, 2010 1:02 AM | Report abuse

"Dem leaders have signaled to individual lawmakers that it's okay for them to do what they have to do in order for them to establish distance from the Dem leadership in Washington. But this is a dicey balancing act."

Yes, it certainly is a dicey balancing act. When trying to figure out the current thinking of Democratic members of Congress, a growing number of American voters are wondering how many of them are quietly demanding their party leadership to explain exactly how they allowed an individual who was clearly given only the most cursory sort of vetting to become their 2008 presidential nominee.

There is a fast increasing national awareness that virtually the entire paper trail of Barack Obama's existence continues to remain deeply hidden away under a tight shroud of secrecy.

The current president's original typewritten long form birth certificate, school records, SAT and LSAT scores, college and law school admission records and grade transcripts and thesis papers, medical records, passport history and other relevant records and documents have all never been released or allowed to be subjected to any sort of scrutiny, despite several years of repeated requests for disclosure by numerous individuals and non-traditional media organizations.

The Obama 2008 campaign and subsequent administration have to date spent a considerable amount of money on legal fees, estimated to be easily in the millions of dollars, to fight Freedom of Information Act filings and other requests to examine this material.

On his first full day in office, January 21, 2009, the current president signed Executive Order 13489, effectively prohibiting the release or disclosure of any of his personal records and papers without his specific authorization.

This comprehensive degree of secrecy is unprecedented in modern American political history. Every presidential candidate since Thomas Dewey in 1948 has willingly released such records and documents upon serious request, in some instances directly to the campaigns of their rivals, thus acknowledging that the process of running for president should be the toughest job interview on the planet. The current president is the sole exception. Virtually his entire paper trail continues to remain deeply hidden away.

The mainstream media has given Barack Obama a remarkable free pass on this basic issue of personal transparency and accountability. In their eagerness to "make history" by covering the campaign of the man whom they were clearly interested in helping to become the first black president, the mainstream media failed in their primary national responsibility to cover significant events with thoroughness and objectivity.

Barack Obama's true origins, past associations, idealogical convictions and ongoing relationships are matters of great importance to a fast growing number of Americans of all political persuasions who just want to know the truth.

What is being hidden and why are they hiding it?

Posted by: FlashHarry | August 26, 2010 1:54 AM | Report abuse

I hope the libertarians are elected and run America into the ground.

I wish they had allowed the banks to fail and a depression had ensued, with 25 percent unemployment.

America has become such an ugly, bigoted place I know longer represent it and I will never come back. Sports is the only thing that keeps me interested in the country of my birth.

America is entering a long age of decline.

I mean, Sarah Palin? I've met appliances smarter than her.

Posted by: dmblum | August 26, 2010 2:51 AM | Report abuse

Are you looking to file for bankruptcy? Compare your bankruptcy options and information

Posted by: lincolnhorsey | August 26, 2010 3:51 AM | Report abuse

This is the problem with the so-called Democratic party. Any bozo is welcomed with open arms, be he a ferocious necon, fiercer and morereactionary that the most rabid reactionary Tea party Rep. No need to name names, the list is endless, presided by Corrupticut Rep. Lieberman.

As long as the Dems let their house open to all winds, I don't really count on them for any sustainable answer to the mess we're in.

They rather confuse things more than anything.

Posted by: bekabo | August 26, 2010 4:27 AM | Report abuse

Obama threw many a Democrat under the bus to achieve his goals (just ask Stupak). They might return the favor at the 2012 convention. Hillary and Bill smell blood in the water.

Posted by: Chippewa | August 26, 2010 6:09 AM | Report abuse

If some Democrats want to survive November they had better start listening to the American people. Pelosi, obama and Reid are incompetent and they have divided thsi country more than ever. Their wacked out far left policies are destroying our country and causing alot of anger. The only way to stop them is to flip the House for starters and then inititate some investigations into Obamas shady background. Pelosi can be removed as speaker and Angle can beat Reid if we help her... As for you Kendrick Meek fans - he hasnt got a chance in Florida...hes too much like Obama and we are damn sick of the Obamas and their arrogance and incompetence.

Posted by: JUNGLEJIM123 | August 26, 2010 6:12 AM | Report abuse

Just more examples of politicians doing and saying anything to get elected.

Unfortunately, we find the current direction of the GOP appealing to our hidden weaker, immoral, bigoted and selfish side.

Posted by: citizen4truth1 | August 26, 2010 6:14 AM | Report abuse

Greg Sargent just cannot believe that ANY non-Repub would be saying anything bad about his hero, Bee-Rock Obama.

Posted by: BillyBob7 | August 26, 2010 6:25 AM | Report abuse

Here are some things I would like:

a) an end to all purely elective abortions after the first trimester. Only emergency abortions allowed after that.

b) Let the Bush tax cuts die, but replace them by a 10% surcharge on everyone making more than $100,000. Also, a 10% cut phased out over three years, on all social programs.

c) Work for a single payer plan, but make sure that SERIOUS cost controls are built in. The American health system is like a Cadillac which runs only sporadically. What Obama did was to say, "Everyone has a right to ride in this Cadillac." That is insane.

d) The US out of Afghanistan and Iraq. No attack on Iran. Try to talk to them instead. If Israel has 100 nuclear weapons and is constantly talking about bombing Iran, Iran is totally justified in wanting to defend itself.

e) Do NOT build a mosque or "Islamic" center at Ground Zero. A monument of reconciliation, devoted to all religions including Islam is fine. But not one mainly for Muslims.

Do you have something to say which will appeal to independents like me?

Posted by: rohit57 | August 26, 2010 6:37 AM | Report abuse

So what good does it do that a Blue Dog democrat is in place? Being a democrat in itself adds to the majority of the democrats in congress. Better that the Blue Dog were a Republican if any good is to come of this farce.

Posted by: KWVeteran | August 26, 2010 6:43 AM | Report abuse

I mean, Sarah Palin? I've met appliances smarter than her.

Posted by: dmblum

If she is so stupid, how come she is such a problem for the Democrats?

Oh, because Republicans are stupid!

Thanks for the explanation. :)

Are you aware of the fact that some of the "stupid things" attributed to her were actually said by Tina Fey?

Tina Fey is a Democrat and Palin is a Republican. How can Democrats be so stupid as to confuse the two?

Posted by: rohit57 | August 26, 2010 6:47 AM | Report abuse

They can run, but they can't hide.

Mmm, mmm, mm.

Posted by: wmpowellfan | August 26, 2010 7:10 AM | Report abuse

Sounds like the rats are fighting for a spot at the railing, if not yet jumping overboard.

Posted by: OttoDog1 | August 26, 2010 7:20 AM | Report abuse

The democrats are eating their own in order to stay alive.

Posted by: ahashburn | August 26, 2010 7:29 AM | Report abuse

Boy the Dems must really be in panic mode about the November mid terms. You've got extremely liberal Greg Sargent writing an article on the Democratic party's civil war between the national party leaders and the so called blue dogs, which is truely amazing because Greg is ususally a big time shill for the Democrats. And in addition you've got all the hard core liberals that comment on this blog attacking Greg for writing something that's negative about the Democrat's prospects this fall. The heresy. Strap in folks it's going to be a bumpy ride all the way to November.

Posted by: RobT1 | August 26, 2010 7:33 AM | Report abuse

The REAL problem, of course, is that the so-called "mainstream" IN GENERAL is NOT actually very "MODERATE"!

The self-designated "middle" HAS FOR MANY YEARS NOT actually come to grips with the many FAILURES of MANY things --- that a great many people have come to regard as "normal", but which in reality ARE ANYTHING BUT!

They may have DITHERED AND BLATHERED occasionally about the LONG-STANDING shortcomings of, say, the whole health care "industry" --- but under so-called "CONSERVATIVE" (MIS)"leadership", NOTHING WAS EVER ACTUALLY SERIOUSLY UNDERTAKEN TO EVEN ATTEMPT to deal seriously with the situation! The MANY MILLIONS of UN"covered" (including even a great many CHILDREN, who CERTAINLY could not have been thought of as being somehow PERSONALLY responsible for their situation!), have LONG been BASICALLY COLLECTIVELY IGNORED by the society as a whole. Folks evidently preferred instead to devote resources and money to other supposedly more "PRODUCTIVE" endeavors such as (for example) (1)building up the whole elaborate, very wealthy GAMING "industry" --- just LOOK at all those lovely CASINOS! --- and (2)going off on MILITARISTIC TOOTS in places like "Iraq"!

So they just kept on "kicking the can down the road" until somebody came along and has now at least TRIED to actually do something more intelligent --- and now they squawk loudly about the "disruption" to their precious little "ECONOMY" that results from any kind of potentially MEANINGFUL change --- when THEY THEMSELVES have LONG FAILED to actually deal with the real problems!

BRILLIANT, people! Many things that you HAVE done (as per revelations thrust under your noses by say, among others, Wikileaks, have SURELY been God-awful). But more generally, "we" actually DESERVE what is now unfolding --- because of the many, many things that "we" HAVEN'T done!

Posted by: BirdsAbound | August 26, 2010 7:36 AM | Report abuse

Pelosi and Obama threw the younger democrats under the bus in the last 18 months. Unless there're from a dark dark blue state, they are at risk. Under Pelosi's leadership they drifted far away from the hearts of the American people. Shame on Pelosi and Obama.

Posted by: richard36 | August 26, 2010 8:20 AM | Report abuse

The Democratic party has always consisted of left leaning, right leaning, and moderate members. In other words, they were a broad tent. We ought to get the term "Blue Dog" label out of our vocabulary. They are just more conservative Democrats but certainly not Republicans.

Posted by: browneri | August 26, 2010 8:25 AM | Report abuse

It is the USUAL Democrat scam of running as conservative but THEY always vote for whatever the communist who have taken over the Democrat Party order them to do.

If the WashPost would actually report news then it's LEFTIST readers would not be so shocked with the utter and complete rejection of their ideas and policies this November.

But keep on peddling the DNC sop to your out-of-touch leftists, it will make the shock even funnier to behold.

Posted by: LogicalSC | August 26, 2010 8:46 AM | Report abuse

Two people who deserve far better treatment than they are getting are Obama and Palin.

Obama is an extremely nice man, honest and intelligent. To be sure, he is more liberal than the Republicans like, and less liberal than the left wants. But he is what he is, and he has done far better than anyone else might have done. We should be glad that we have him as president.

Another person who deserves to be treated better is Palin. She too seems to be a very decent person. Of course she is right wing, that goes without saying. But she NEVER compared Muslims to Nazis. Soon after the election which she lost, she was in Taiwan speaking to a business group.

She referred to Obama as "Our president". A small touch, but graceful.

OK, she did not go to Harvard and she is not Harvard material. But the brickbats she is getting are entirely out of proportion. They do not make me lose respect for her - they make me lose respect for the Democrats.

If the average Republican could bring himself to treat Obama better (just talk about him with respect - don't have to agree with him), that would be nice.

And if the average Democrat could bring herself to treat Palin better - and again treat her with respect without agreeing with all her positions, that too would be nice.

And we would all be living in a more civilized country.

Posted by: rohit57 | August 26, 2010 9:04 AM | Report abuse

It is all a smoke screan to get relected. Once relected they will vote for Obama and Pelosi. I am represented by a "blue dog". A better description would be a "lying SOB".

Posted by: jdonner2 | August 26, 2010 9:18 AM | Report abuse

But, Why is The Anti-Christ Obama Destroying America. If you truly want to know what is going on; Then you will have to accept these things as the TRUTH. Once you understand the following things; All things will be understood. So I tell you Obama is Satan on Earth, Lawless One, or what ever else you want to call this Demonic Figure. His words describe him, He is a False Hope, If you listen to him you will love him. He carries a Bow without an Arrow. He will conquer all through his speech, his false hoods will capture all who sit and listen to him.
2 Thessalonians 2:11-12
11And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie, 12 that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

Posted by: makom | August 26, 2010 9:19 AM | Report abuse

In the last 40 years we were building up to today and the economic crash with the following american failure. Now people running for office are trying to claim that they had nothing to do with causing this. And put a distance from this fact.

Oddly, after WWII we were the big winners but that time is becoming more distant and the competition with us is increasing. With this adjustments are being made that makes life more difficult as our standard of living decreases.

It looks like no more free lunch and government promises are about to be voided. That is what happens when to many promises are made. The goverment gives and the government takes away. And the politicians head for cover.

Posted by: artg | August 26, 2010 9:29 AM | Report abuse

I use to be a Dem, after Obama gave Bush Co. a get out of jail free card that was it for me. I not supporting them this term, I'll stay at home.

Posted by: t-one | August 26, 2010 9:39 AM | Report abuse

"Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it".

It's 1994 deja vu, all over again!

And I thought Democrats were so smart.


Posted by: battleground51 | August 26, 2010 9:45 AM | Report abuse

Hypocritical, lying arrogant slims. Knife in the back today, kissy-face tomorrow.

Remember in November!

Posted by: JAH3 | August 26, 2010 9:56 AM | Report abuse

I think a lot of Dems (and that other party, too) are missing in all this business about the Distancing Blue Dogs is the "silver lining": to the extent that the Blue Dogs may be successful in their tactics, it means that voters aren't voting for Republicans, who are the "real" opposition. From a Dem point of view, it's still better to have a handful of unreliable Blue Dogs retain their seats and keep the House Democratic than it is to have people voting for whack-job Republicans, and consequently loosing the House and/or Senate. No, I don't much care for the Blue Dogs, either... but given a choice, it's still the lesser of two evils. And some rightwing nut job winning that seat is clearly the worse evil. So a reluctant "more power to ya" to the Blue Dogs, since I don't have a third choice more to my liking.

The size and scope of the symbolic image of "keeping" or "loosing" the majority in the House far outweighs the importance of whether this or that Dem bolted the party line, or is dissing Pelosi, or whatever. Republicans tend to execute their RINOs, but by and large we Dems tolerate them. (Sometimes too much? Maybe. But better than kicking them out, when you're in a knife fight with insane Wingnuts.)

Posted by: curmudgeon6 | August 26, 2010 10:00 AM | Report abuse

better than kicking them out, when you're in a knife fight with insane Wingnuts.)

Posted by: curmudgeon6
You should send this to Osama bin Laden who will then say, "My work is done, Americans are killing Americans. What more do I need?"

Posted by: rohit57 | August 26, 2010 10:07 AM | Report abuse

It is amazing the extent to which politician will go to get elected. The real question here is..."will they keep their promises once the polls close!

Posted by: Bockscar | August 26, 2010 10:29 AM | Report abuse

Silly Dems.

Why are they not running on stimulus ? closing Gitmo ? building a mosque at Ground Zero ? amnesty ? Obamacare ? BIG Government ?

The reason is simple... a majority of Americans OPPOSE all of the above.

To be a Democratic politician.. requires a skillful dancer... campaign as a moderate centrist or as a conservative... than govern from the Left until voters wise up.

Posted by: Petras123 | August 26, 2010 10:44 AM | Report abuse

It's too late an they are a dollar short. Turncoats. I will not be satisfied till our country gets rid of all of the Democrats an Rupublicans for they only care only to become multi millionaires an billionaires. They can't identifie with every day average Americans. They continue rob from the good an honost hard working Americans. Lets not forget the baby boomers have made them all rich beyond comprehention, that was not how it was supposed to be. We have to completely eradicate the Whole Government Process, start from a clean slate. No one priveledge an millionaires or billionaires can be in office.

Posted by: JWTX | August 26, 2010 10:50 AM | Report abuse

It's too late an they are a dollar short. Turncoats. I will not be satisfied till our country gets rid of all of the Democrats an Rupublicans for they only care only to become multi millionaires an billionaires. They can't identifie with every day average Americans. They continue rob from the good an honost hard working Americans. Lets not forget the baby boomers have made them all rich beyond comprehention, that was not how it was supposed to be. We have to completely eradicate the Whole Government Process, start from a clean slate. No one priveledge an millionaires or billionaires can be in office.

Posted by: JWTX | August 26, 2010 10:50 AM | Report abuse

It's too late an they are a dollar short. Turncoats. I will not be satisfied till our country gets rid of all of the Democrats an Rupublicans for they only care only to become multi millionaires an billionaires. They can't identifie with every day average Americans. They continue rob from the good an honost hard working Americans. Lets not forget the baby boomers have made them all rich beyond comprehention, that was not how it was supposed to be. We have to completely eradicate the Whole Government Process, start from a clean slate. No one priveledge an millionaires or billionaires can be in office.

Posted by: JWTX | August 26, 2010 10:51 AM | Report abuse

Why are many Democrats such elitist snobs??

They never want to do that which they are elected to do.

They have a pre-formed ideology and try to force fit it to America once they have fooled enough gullible voters into electing them.

If the Democrats would merely govern from the middle-right, they would be a permanent majority again.

But they don't and they keep getting clobbered by the American electorate every few years.

Maybe they enjoy the pain.

That's pretty weird.

Posted by: battleground51 | August 26, 2010 10:57 AM | Report abuse

I watched the campaign ad of Jason Altmire & the one thing that struck me as odd was the comment on the video about Jason Altmire looking out for our jobs is just a plain lie! JASON ALTMIRE IS JUST LOOKING OUT FOR HIS JOB .

Posted by: jrs6776 | August 26, 2010 11:26 AM | Report abuse

Yesterday, a Japanese politician was quoted as saying that Americans are "simple-minded". And despite that statement being a broad stroke on the "collective", I must agree with him. Obama, who appears to be the only adult in the room when it comes to a reasonable, though imperfect, vision of an America of tomorrow, told his caucus that "good policy is good politics". Unfortunately, such a principle, not only takes a good objective understanding of its merits, but also a level of faith to overcome the "appearances" of the unknown. This level of political understanding is not for the simple-minded, nor for those who operate in fearful selfishness.

The same can be said for those dems who are running for the hills on the Islamic Center. They just don't get that it's "the rule of law" that gives them standing, not their retreatment from the "ignorant herd"!

Posted by: D-0f-G | August 26, 2010 11:57 AM | Report abuse

Not enough Electrons to spell out 'democrats'? or, are you going to go all the way: Dems and Pubs??

Posted by: freddiano | August 26, 2010 12:23 PM | Report abuse

It's actually Obama who should be moving away from the loathesome Pelosi and Reid. Though actually better executive leaders than Obama, they are awful in the PR department.

Posted by: 54465446 | August 26, 2010 12:39 PM | Report abuse

How ironic that it is the Blue Dogs, so assiduously courted by the Whitehouse and Congressional leadership, that are deserting the party. There must be a lesson here somewhere.

Posted by: Adam_Smith | August 26, 2010 12:45 PM | Report abuse

How dare these rogue democrats have the audacity to break rank and think for themselves. Don't they know that politics is only about party loyalty and solidarity and not about reasoned representation of their constituents? Idealistic idiots!

Posted by: faudel | August 26, 2010 12:56 PM | Report abuse

No wonder people hate politics. We are descending into a kind of secular tribalism, where the lefties line up on one side (the dems) and the right lines up on the other side (the repubs). What use to be a broad (and bi-partisan) middle ground has been destroyed by 24/7 Internet/cable/media smack-downs where you're either against "us" or for "us". We've dumb-down the debate where everybody is either a stand-up guy or a traitor or moron or worse. The terrible economy has nationalized this mid-term election. Yes, it's still "the economy stupid" and that is why the Dems are going to take a bath this November.

Posted by: deacon777 | August 26, 2010 12:59 PM | Report abuse

These seem to be the only Democrats the DCCC and DLC are willing to support. Democrats who DON'T trash Obama, Pelosi and Reid need not apply for financial support. I don't know where the DNC comes down on this. I think Rahm's strategy has beaten Howard Dean's.

Posted by: Acharn | August 27, 2010 5:58 AM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.

characters remaining

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company