Fine Young Cannibals

In which the Kos Kiddies continue their efforts to eat their own, and thus hand the House back to the GOP.

Pushing Back on Bush Dog Democrats: Step One

I'm hearing more and more frequently a sense of rage with the Democratic leadership in Congress. From failing to stop the war to expanding Bush's wiretapping authority, the swing vote of conservative Democrats in the House are forming an effective conservative majority that is enabling Bush to govern as he wishes. The polls show that this is a very bad political move for Democrats. Congress has an 18% approval rating, from Democrats, and 60% of all voters strongly disapprove of Bush's new wiretapping authority.

Editorial note: Most voters don't even know what that "new authority" is. Even the "newspaper of record" seems to be having serious trouble reading the rather plain language of the bill. Anyway, to continue:

And so, you may have noticed a lot of chatter about 'Bush Dog' Democrats over the past few days. That's not an accident. We've been working to identify the group of conservative Democrats in the House who are holding back progressives from being able to effectively govern. These are concentrated in two main caucuses, the Blue Dog Caucus and the New Democrat caucuses. Blue Dogs consider themselves heirs to the Southern conservative wing of the party, and tend to vote for socially restrictive policies and a hawkish foreign policy. The New Democrats tend to be more partisan, but often are key to passing important pieces of right-wing legislation, such as the Bankruptcy Bill. In the last few years, these two caucuses have expanded their numbers, and the Blue Dogs have become the swing vote in the House allowing for effective conservative control of the Congress. We want to put a stop to the embrace of conservative values among House Democrats, and make sure that when Democrats are elected, they act like Democrats.

Because, of course, all Democrats are merely clones of the Kossian ideal, robotic "progressives" who regurgitate the nutroots agenda regardless of what the actual voting constituents they must answer to might want. As in the majority of actual district voters they must convince to return them to office. In any case, one does have to wonder how the Democratic Party is supposed to keep a majority in the House if the self-proclaimed cognitive elite insist on punishing those who give the party that majority. There seems to be a small mathematical disconnect there.

Criticizing the people we just elected, people who may even be nice to us personally, is never easy. And shifting away from raw partisanship, which was necessary from 2002-2006, towards the idea that we need good Democrats and not Bush Dog Democrats, is going to take some slight adjustments. We're going to be told that we are jeopardizing candidates in swing districts, that we are hurting the possibility of retaining the majority. We're going to be told we're bad Democrats.

None of that is true, and it is loser talk.

Ah, there's the solution! Just stick your fingers in your ears and sing "Lalalalalala!" really loudly, and the voters won't notice! Pay no attention to those swing voters behind the curtain!

Were I actually a party animal, a true running lackey dog of the GOP, this is the point where I would offer to do my best to cheer Stoller and crew on, to encourage them, to back their to the hilt their plan to hand the House back to the GOP. All while quietly doing my absolute best to run GOP moderates against the battered targets of the Divine Flame of Kosville.

But when Rove left the White House someone switched off the mindrays, and I noticed that the cash and dancing girls I was promised have yet to materialize, so I think I'll just watch, and point, and laugh.

Previous: Blue Dogs Barking

[H/T: Glenn Reynolds for the pointer to Cadillac Tight.]