Steny Hoyer Attacks His Democratic Base

[babylonsister]

http://www.democrats.com/steny-hoyer-attacks-his-democratic-base

Steny Hoyer Attacks His Democratic Base
Submitted by Bob Fertik on September 18, 2007 - 11:10am.


Nancy Pelosi is the "Speaker of the House," and is therefore supposed to speak for all House members, Democrats and Republicans. By her very title, she's not supposed to be excessively partisan - although former House Speaker Newt Gingrich certainly never behaved that way.

But one step down the Democratic hierarchy from Pelosi is a fellow named Steny Hoyer. And what is his title? Majority leader. By his very title, he's supposed to be the ultimate partisan in the House, just like his predecessor Tom DeLay.

Well apparently Hoyer despises the voters who put Democrats in the majority and gave him his title - namely the Democratic base.

"I know the base is mad at us – and I’m mad at the base." When he tossed that off, I inquired "Because.....?" He basically said the base has unrealistic expectations in terms of ending the war, and the Dems can’t de-fund it because doing so would anger the moderates they need to win more seats in ’08. (I must be delusional in thinking that the 70% of the public opposed to the war includes some independents – that’s obviously not the thinking in Hoyer-land).

According to our latest poll, 73% of Americans want Democrats to use their spending power to bring all troops home within a year. That includes 86.5% of Democrats, but that's apparently not enough for the "Majority Leader."

It also includes 78% of Independents, and 52% of Republicans. Is that enough for you, Mr. "Majority Leader"?

If not, exactly what percent of voters have to demand an end to the war before you will provide the "Leadership" to represent our will?

[Warpy]

1. Hoyer sounds like a light switch mentality

whose only options are funding ON and funding OFF.

What people want is for funding to be tied to a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq.

If that's too subtle for Hoyer, then the base needs to remove him and replace him with someone who can manage to think in something besides an on or off mode.

[Beelzebud]

2. This is why a lot of us were against him being leader...

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

3. He's Right.

Many do have quite unrealistic expectations about ending the war, almost to the point of delusion. I can understand completely where he's coming from.

[aquart]

5. So can I. A really poor grasp of statistics.

It isn't the moderates he fears. It's the rightwing media monopoly spin.

[mod mom]

7. Yeah-there's a lot of money to be made in war!

:mad:

End the war-NOW!

[RiverStone]

16. If Murtha had been appointed Majority Leader

I assure you, the Dems would have taken a greater stand to end Shrub's immoral war then Hoyer has.

And having unrealistic expectations to stop the war is entirely different then the expectations Democratic voters had that our Reps would least take action to end it.

To clarify: I did not think the Dems could end the war easily (with so many on The Hill still marching in lockstep with Shrub) but on principal alone, history demands that Dems at least put to record their attempt to cut off funding (without a firm time-line) and enter Articles of Impeachment on to the House floor for a vote.

Win or lose - I expected TONS more from the promises made prior to the election of 06. Action may not equal results, but it at least shows We The People that those Dems we elected in force give a shit about what we are passionate about - ending the damn war!

Just a few have walked as advertised...Kucinich, Feingold, Murtha, maybe Kennedy...anyone else?

[tritsofme]

19. The majority leader is not appointed

He is elected by the majority caucus, of which a strong majority supported Mr. Hoyer.

[demodonkey]

4. Hoyer caved in to Special Interests and messed up HR 811 too. The bill is...

...still much needed and worth supporting, but it was a much stronger bill until Hoyer held it up for FOUR MONTHS while he caved in to special interests and took away some of its protections.

So if you have to throw your vote down a paperless electronic voting machine in 2008, Hoyer is one of the main people you will have to thank.


A former constituent of John Murtha, who would be a GREAT Majority Leader

[TZ]

14. Yes Hoyer messed up Maryland so muich

that they now have a liberal governor vs. conservative, a LARGE democratic majority in the state legislation and nary a Republican to been seen in Montgomery Co or PG county his home base in the state even with those paperless voting machines here in our blue state. FYI -Hoyer's voting record is far MORE liberal than John Murthas. With the exception of the war vote Murtha is one of the more conservative members of congress. Hoyer might say stupid things every now and then (and living near his district I am very familiar with that) although he has some merit in what he is saying.
Getting sick of this attitude that the moment a dem says anything that doesn't agree 100% with everyone's beliefs on how things "should" be we need to get rid of them.
Yeah, alienating true allies is really gonna work...Sheesh. They don't get more liberal in congress than Mr.Hoyer no matter what one "thinks".

[rudy23]

6. That base, including the 73% who want to end the war, are represented by about 5% of DC

Democrats did not win a majority in '06, the Neolibs are the ones who gained the most power.

[movonne]

8. This is exactly why the DLC wants him in there...this so called

moderate position is not what we want..they did not want Murtha in because of his anti-war stance...and also they did not want Lamont in for the same reason..they are real happy with the blue dogs that they put in..

[cascadiance]

9. "Moderates" translated REALLY means "our corporate sponsors"!

True "moderate" voters should be insulted. They get affected by the bankruptcy bill just as much as we do, etc., etc.

This B.S. spin shouldn't be allowed to continue!

[Rosa Luxemburg]

10. our corporate sponsors

now there's a point!

[superkia]

15. Too bad no one listened to Kucinich in 2002 about the war.

He voted against it and said that the war was for oil. So great to know that the rest of our PRESIDENTIAL candidates went along with a war for oil and continued to fund it as more live were lost. Now we sit in a crucial time in our country and if the media is right, we will be electing one of the enablers of this shit. Lets put another one in power that cares about money and power more than they do about innocent people dieing? If we don't want to be bitching in 4 years about our country, I suggest we vote for the candidate that has been standing up for us all along, Dennis Kucinich. I know everyone says an honest politician for the people is unelectable but I want change, not the same downward spiral of our country.

[burythehatchet]

11. This is precisely the reason I no longer identify myself as a Democrat

I have never voted for any other party, but would welcome a progressive political party.

Steny is like every other delusional, jackass, moron, "middle way", whore who think they have the market on pragatic strategy cornered. I will guarantee you that if Republicrat Hillary is the Dem nominee we will be beated like rented mules.

My only remaining hope is that orgs like MoveOn continue to shine the bright light of truth on the asshole, shit-for-brains Democratic leaders and the idiots that follow their twisted logic.

[mark414]

12. Steny Hoyer needs to remember that his job isn't to get elected, it's to do OUR bidding

[robinlynne]

13. " to win more seats in 08". That is the goal. period. Who gives a f.... about the war?

[mmonk]

17. Who are these undefined "moderates" out there

of which they can't do very much because they need them in the future for more seats? The future is now unless we're going to rig the voting apparatus.

[Cha]

18. So, what's hoyer's agenda?

And too bad he's mad.