Democratic House Officials Recruited Wealthy Conservatives

[Donnachaidh]

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/090607J.shtml

Matt Renner writes for Truthout, "According to Democratic candidates who ran for House of Representative seats in 2006, Rahm Emanuel, then head of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, took sides during the Democratic primary elections, favoring conservative candidates, including former Republicans, and sidelining candidates who were running in favor of withdrawal from Iraq."

[Double T]

1. One party system with two different names.

It is ONE BIG DEN of corporatist thieves.

[jgraz]

2. Most of us know by now that Rahm is not on our side

I really hope someone from the left can mount a primary challenge to that corporate warmonger.

[mod mom]

30. I agree with you about Rahm. Just think of how he treated Howard Dean.

They are recruiting wealthy Republicans to support their corporate agenda.

[wyldwolf]

3. yep, we should have run Kucinich types in North Carolina's 11th district!

:eyes:

[Nite Owl]

4. It sheds light on Pelosi's

lack of spine. Her majority was co-opted by Emmanuel and his recruiting of Blue Dogs thus tying her hands.





While Emanuel is given credit for turning power over to the Democratic Party in the House of Representatives, the majority is fractured.

Many of the candidates that Emanuel helped elect have joined with a group of self-styled conservative Blue Dog Democrats and have cast key votes with Republicans and stymied Democratic efforts to end the occupation of Iraq and the Bush administration's warrantless wiretapping program.

Thirteen of the Democratic members of the House elected in 2006 joined The Blue Dog Coalition; a group that, according to its spokesperson, has no official stance on withdrawal from Iraq or the president's warrantless wiretapping program. However, 30 out of 47 of the Blue Dog members broke with the majority of Democrats and cast votes in favor of the recent Protect America Act, a bill that greatly expanded the power of the executive branch to spy on Americans. The caucus also broke with the majority of Democrats when 40 of the Blue Dog members voted to continue funding the occupation of Iraq without a timetable for withdrawal.

In an interview shortly after his election, freshman Blue Dog member Tim Mahoney told the Charlotte Sun, a local paper from his district, that he attended a meeting with Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and told her "The president should be free to maintain troops in Iraq, if the purpose is to thwart terrorism."

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/090607J.shtml

[Greyhound]

19. So they have figured out that so few Americans pay any attention to

what they do, they can just switch to the popular party of the moment and get elected, even though they don't support anything the party stands for.

[Totally Committed]

20. Bingo!

A gold star for you!

TC

[Nite Owl]

21. So exactly right! n/t

[reprobate]

35. I was ready to let Pelosi off the hook too, until I read that SHE appointed

Emmanual to the post. People don't suddenly switch and become criminals overnight. She MUST have known what he would be up to.

In effect he turned the party over to the repugs. at the very least he fractured what was about to turn into party unity.

Now here's the question. If she appointed him, does she have the power to replace him? If there were to be a fight over this surely she would have the support of the majority of Dems.

And now we know why KKKarl retired from DC politics. He job there was finished after gaining control of congress for the foreseeable future. His bloody pawprints are all over this debacle.

[tsuki]

5. Great read. Thanks.

[Hydra]

6. Astonishing

Rahm used us and our outrage to put his cronies in place, and in effect, destroyed our victory.

Dean must be livid. I know I am.

[demnan]

7. K&R

In my own District we had a grass roots campaign by a new candidate opposed to the war. He got no money from the DLC but still got 44% of the vote against a powerful and rich Republican incumbent.

[OHdem10]

8. No disrespect intended, but we must remember and

if we do not remember, we must learn: DLC Democrats and
Blue Dog Democrats are Conservative Democrats. Many are
the same as the old time Southern Democrats.

It is natural therefore they will recruit like minded
colleagues.

I am not bashing the DLC and Blue Dogs--just stating
reality.

Their conservatism is not as fanatical as some GOPers.
Conservatism is conservatism. Why do they find it easy
to triangulate or join the GOP in votes.???Think about it.

[Clark2008]

29. That's actually not true and we need to fight that misnomer.

DLCers are corporation lovers. One can be a moderate to conservative Democrat without giving away the farm to corporations.

[karynnj]

9. The DNC and others (such as Kerry) identified and supported candidates as well

often for districts that Emanuel had labeled "unwinable".

In many cases, even the more conservative candidates were the best we could get and they do support the Democratic agenda on some points - even if they are bad on the war. They also did give us the majority in both houses, which gives us the ability to exert oversight and have more control over legislation.

Some of the webroots favorites of new Congress people are themselves conservative - such as Webb or Tester. Both, of whom are infinitely better than the men they replaced (Allen and Burns).

[rinsd]

10. I am sick of whining over Tammy Duckworth who was a damn good candidate.

All from the perspective of sore loser Cegelis campaign manager and supporters.

[Hydra]

12. I think it's quite relevant

If Rahm lost us a seat by trying to stack the deck in his favor.

No insult to Duckworth, but apparently she picked the wrong sponsor.

[madfloridian]

17. So was Cegelis, so was Lutrin, so was Schneider

Two of those are in my state. They were shuffled out by Rahm so he could put his guys in.

[eridani]

24. Yes, and she could have run in the district where she actually lived

Instead of blowing a really huge sum of money on a primary to defeat Cegelis, they could have supported both in the general election and gotten two for the price of one.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steve-cobble/if-you-want-a-friend-in-w_b_17880.html?view=screen

Despite Cegelis' role in helping Hyde-the-impeachment-man decide to give up, Hillary Clinton did a quarter-million-dollar fundraiser for Cegelis' opponent. John Kerry, who had so much trouble deciding whether he was for or against the Iraq War, was so sure he knew what was best for IL-6 that he did 2 mass email fundraising solicitations for her opponent, raising a couple hundred thousand. Obama did TV ads. Rahm conducted the orchestra. 11 very attractive mailings were sent out to regular primary voters. A couple Daleys chipped in a few dollars more. I could go on, and on, because essentially the entire Democratic Establishment--and even quite a few progressive groups that should have known better--helped stomp on Cegelis.

The Big Boys raised and spent close to a million bucks to intervene in a primary against a principled progressive woman. With all that, they only managed to eke out a win by a whopping 1,100 votes last Tuesday.

Which means that with $50K more, so that she could have run some last-minute radio ads, Cegelis could have won.

Which means the Big Boys could have then given her half of that million, to run against the Tom DeLay aide this fall. And since her successful opponent doesn't even live in the district, they could have given her opponent the other half-a-million they raised to run in any of 3 GOP-held Congressional Districts in that same immediate area, one of which (IL-10) was carried by both Gore & Kerry, and another of which is held by Denny Hastert, the #3 man in the impeachment succession and the front man for the Republican mob; or in 2 more districts which are only one CD over from her house. In all 5 of these districts Bush was held at 55% or below in both 2000 and 2004, the same ballpark as in IL-6 (where Bush took 53% both years).

In other words, we could be running Cegelis in IL-6--with adequate funding--and her doesn't-live-in-the-district opponent could run in any nearby district--also with adequate funding.

Wouldn't that be better for the whole "team" trying to take back the House?

[progressoid]

11. "Emanuel is given credit for turning power over to the Democratic Party in the House of Rep..."

That statement only holds true in certain parts of the party. :eyes:

[wyldwolf]

22. No, it's only considered not true in one little corner of the party

:eyes:

[sampsonblk]

25. Rahm is a scumbag

We won because the GOP F-ed up everything they touched, and tried to sell the public a load of horsecrap. If we do the same thing, we will be out also. And it will be well-deserved.

[wyldwolf]

26. yet a winning scumbag.

[Totally Committed]

33. .

TC

[tkmorris]

27. Wait, you SUPPORT Rahm?

You actually like these kinds of tactics? Really?

[wyldwolf]

28. do I like running candidates that can win in red districts? You bet.

[Totally Committed]

32. .

TC

[Totally Committed]

31. Nominated for this week's B.O. Award:

B.O. = Body Odor? Barack Obama? --- No...




TC

[wyldwolf]

34. Show us any place else but the netroots where Emanuel is viewed as not winning the house.

[madfloridian]

13. More on the Mahoney/ Lutrin/Rahm/ Foley deal.

About Rahm and Tim Mahoney

I am glad to see someone else covering this. Lutrin was treated miserably.

From part of an interview at FDL:

"Suddenly there was a new DCCC point person, John Vogel, and he had no idea who Dave was. Rushing called and suggested Dave talk to someone named… Tim Mahoney. Dave did. And Mahoney offered him an intricate bribe to drop out of the race and run against Republican Bill Young in FL-10 instead. Dave Lutrin never had a single conversation with Rahm Emanuel. But Emanuel's paw finger prints are all over this operation. It's the way he worked in district after district, everywhere in the country, seeking to find business-friendly, quasi-Republicans who would soft-peddle their opposition to the war in Iraq and never mention "impeachment." Many of us have experienced first hand Emanuel's tactics in CA-11, FL-13, and IL-06 to name a few. Scared of career-ending retribution, virtually no Democrats have been willing to go on the record about DCCC practices that are at variance with internal party rules. Dave has no such fears. Please help me welcome Dave Lutrin as our first Blue America guest of 2007."

[madfloridian]

14. Thank you for the article. Stuff I did not know about Jan Schneider

and how she was forced into getting out. I thought I knew all about it as we supported her and like her...but this part is brand new.

"Schneider became concerned about possible interference from the DCCC during the 2006 primary because, according to Schneider, Jennings had a very wealthy Democratic contributor on her side. Frank Brunckhorst III, a well-known donor to both the Democratic Party and to powerful Democratic members of Congress from Florida, accompanied Jennings to the Democratic National Convention in 2004.

Schneider sat down with Emanuel in 2005 to address her concern that Jennings might get preferential treatment from the DCCC during the primary. According to Schneider, Emanuel told her that the DCCC's policy was not to choose sides during primaries. On May 26, 2005, Emanuel wrote a letter to Schneider reiterating the policy of the DCCC: "You expressed concerns about the DCCC getting involved in party primaries. While our preference is to avoid having them, our policy is to remain neutral," stated the letter, signed by Emanuel.

Schneider claims that Emanuel broke this policy during the 2006 primary race. "Emanuel caused the Schneider campaign to be removed from the DCCC website and circulated solicitations for contributions to Democratic candidates indicating that there was no primary in the Florida 13th," according to a memorandum Schneider prepared."

[Totally Committed]

15. .

TC

[stimbox]

23. Nice sticker!

[slipslidingaway]

16. K&R thanks....

we need to keep troops there to support our national interests :(

[Totally Committed]

18. kick

:kick:

TC