"Pelosi's Decision to Back Murtha Raises Questions About Her Credibility"

[Leopolds Ghost]

Washington Post, front page, above the fold, numerous unnamed Democrats attacking Pelosi for her endorsement of Murtha, saying it would "take the party back". The Post makes it sound as if Murtha's candidacy is completely unexpected and unprecedented, counting on its readers not to know anything about the fact that he has been in the running for months now.

The Post studiously ostracizes, banishes, and does not even speak about (even to oppose) the names of politicians who come out against the war, against unchecked development, against mandated for-profit multi-payer health insurance (e.g. Hillarycare or Masscare), against untrammeled free trade and multinational corporate governance, against social security privatization, or against various other conservative hobby-horses the Post has endorsed. Any one of these issues is enough to make a public figure disturbingly liberal in the Post's eyes. In Murtha's case, he only came out against one of those issues.

Of course, the newspapers in New York (except the Times) are busy pimping Rudy Giuliani. I guess unlike Murtha, he has no skeletons in his closet.

[TomClash]

1. He's got nothing but skeletons in his closet

Please, Lord, let Rudy get the nomination. Please.

[lcordero2]

11. it would be too good to be true

The ACLU, AFL-CIO, NAACP, and the NRA will have a field day with him.

[acmavm]

2. The Post is a republican rag anyway. It's not going to give the

dems credit, or not pitch a bitch about everything for the next two years.

Why anyone even cars what the WP says is a puzzle to me. If this is a surprise, than you haven't been paying attention.

[cali]

3. It sure ain't liberal but

that's hardly the point. You're about to witness a real firestorm of criticism, and frankly, it's partly of Pelosi's making. She emphasized a zero tolerance for corruption, and then endorsed Murtha for ML. Murtha has been named by CREW as one of the 20 most corrupt members of the House, and one of only four dems on that list. Although cleared in the ABSCAM case, the tape of the sting is not reassuring. I have a lot of admiration for Murtha re his stance on the war, but appearances do count, and if Pelosi's choice gets knocked out, she's gonna sustain some serious damage to herself right out of the starting gate. It may be unfair, but that's politics.

[WCGreen]

5. ABSCAM was over 20 years ago.....

[cali]

10. ABSCAM is not why Murtha's on CREW's

list. It's because of his steering military contracts to his brother, and other issues. The ABSCAM tape is unfortunate, because old or not, it's on tape, and it doesn't play well.

[Leopolds Ghost]

7. Yes, you SHOULD worry what the Post thinks -- Beltway Dems consider it the left end of the spectrum

And that is reflected in the (unnamed) "numerous Democrats" who ALL OF A SUDDEN are upset about corruption when it comes to Murtha (but not when it comes to DLC, or Hillary's gigantic presidential slush fund, or for that matter the congressman from New Orleans -- what a time for that jerk to run again, in the wake of Katrina when New Orleans needs a people's champion!)

Do the Blue Dogs complain about that? No, because they don't feel threatened by corrupt inner-city politicos -- they set them up with nice gerrymandered districts and thereby stripped the CBC / civil rights veterans of power -- and Hillary is "one of them" (Blue Dogs that is).

They will oppose anyone on the anti-war netroots, even millionaires like Dean, Lamont and the MoveOn guys, because war is good for business, free trade is good for business, open borders are essential to labor market liquidity, etc.

[nuxvomica]

13. Murtha didn't make CREW's top 20

For the record, he was one of the 5 "dishonorable mentions", though with Hastert and Sherwood in that group it's nothing to crow about.

[acmavm]

15. Don't get me wrong, it's not that there maybe could have been

better choices for the post. There are. But my point is that anyone that was chosen is going to come under a constand hail of criticism, just like Pelosi did EVEN BEFORE the election.

I think that she was kind of between a rock and a hard place on this one. Murtha has been out front all the way against the bush** admin on Iraq. He's said things (while true) that no one else had the guts to say, he's taken stands where no one else had the guts to take a stand.

All I can say is look of good old John McCain. They talk about running his ass for President (some factions of the republican party). He was up to his neck in covering for Charles Keating and influence peddling, no two ways about that one. While this in no way justifies any corruption by any elected official or representative, it does kind of take the luster off of the WP's self-righteous bitchfest.

[luckyleftyme2]

4. HEY HE'S THE MAN

THIS TIME KARL ROVE AND COMPANY WILL NOT PREVAIL. Murtha is the man that they fear most.
He'll go to the people,he was a driving force in getting the vote out.At a time of great despair in this country brought on by the right;he was the voice of sanity.
So naturaLly the few boys on the right that don't realize they just got their butt whipped and their run of corruption is over will try to divide us. DON'T FALL FOR IT,THEY (THE RIGHT)
WANT TO DRAG ON IN IRAQ!
THE REASON:YUP U GUESSED IT MONEY!
SO STICK TOGETHER AND STUFF IT UP THEIR BUTTS.
THE INVESTIGATIONS AND IMPEACHMENT WILL START IN JANUARY!

GO PELOSI WE GOT FAITH IN YA !

[Skidmore]

6. My thoughts exactly.

Also, people, do you want these wars to end or not. Murtha put himself othere and took all sorts of abuse for speaking the truth at a time when no one else in that body would. We need Murtha now. He's a conservative Dem yes, but he's also one who will not force his beliefs on the people if they say otherwise.

I support Jack Murtha and Nancy Pelosi because they understand that we need to keep our eye on the ball.

[Leopolds Ghost]

8. This is a war of corrupt big-city "progressives" against liberal and conservative "populists"

For control of the caucus.

SO-CALLED "progressives" mind you. I.e. they call Hillary "progressive".

When will these guys ban New Jersey dems like Corzine from the leadership?
Not in our lifetime. Ergo, they are hypocrites. New Jersey corruption definitely rivals Texas corruption.

[EST]

9. In early 2005, senator Carl Levin returned from an Iraq trip

with an idea that had been lurking in my own brain. This was a bit before the thinkers at DU started converting more of the shakers to the not so obvious truth - then - that we were the prime cause of the violence in Iraq.

This was before Murtha became the champion of redeployment.

Sen. Levin noted that the single biggest problem in that benighted country was that they'd become too dependent an the US military and that we needed to give them a nudge in the direction of self government by letting them know that the ball was in their court; that we should come up with a departure plan.

At that time I advanced that notion here at DU and was severely chastised for it.

Shortly after that, Murtha advanced his ideas about over the horizon redeployment and that idea became quite popular.

Before that time, Murtha was known, at least by me, as being pretty much a republican with a "d" after his name. His only claim to fame up to that time was his extraordinary commitment to the military and now his taking up the sword for getting out of Iraq.

I do not consider his being right once as adequate justification for his elevation in the house and unless there is something Pelosi knows that we don't, that position should not go to Murtha or Hoyer.

[KharmaTrain]

12. To The Victor Goes The Spoils...

Does Murtha have conflicts of interest? We'll surely find out in the next days and weeks ahead. If there's some dirt, be assured Rove has it and would use it. He would have tossed it in the recent election when Murtha was originally targeted by the RNC back in the days when those goons were dreaming of gaining, not losing, seats.

Murtha's credentials with the military is a breath of fresh air for both Democrats and the country. He is no liberal, but that's not what is needed here. He is the yin to Pelosi's yang...the moderate to conservative balance to Pelosi that defangs the right wing's meme of how the Democrats have taken this country on some leftward bend.

It was Murtha that finally got the corporate media to wake up to the fiasco that was going on in Iraq and stop playing cheerleader. Damn right the Repugnicans want to keep him from any leadership role...as his respect in the military far surpasses those of this regime and will force them to make the hard choices as to how we get out of this mess...and not to stonewall it.

Supposedly in this country, you're still innocent until proven guilty...that is, of course, if you're not a Democrat. Then trial in the corporate media is sufficient to cast guilt by innuendo. But if you're a Repugnican, you can committ war crimes that result in the loss of hundreds of thousands of lives and that's seen as been a "patriot".

The major goal for the Democrats in the 110th Congress is to accomplish things. It's not to pick endless fights with boooosh. It's doing the job they were elected to do...from finding a way out of this ugly war to fixing medicare to restoring veterans benefits to raising the minimum wage. No one person will speak for us, and a good leader is one who can facilitate the agenda along. With his reputation and respect...even among Moderate Repugnicans, Murtha can be the conduit to get a lot of these goals accomplished that Democrats can use to further isolate Repugnicans and gain more seats in '08.

[Onlooker]

14. Murtha is important to the Democrats

He's a war hero and he's anti-war. He commands a lot of respect among people who are key to ending the war. Liberals alone cannot end the war. We need people like Murtha and people in the military to support us. Murtha may not be perfect, but he's awfully important to ending the war on Iraq.