ARE PROGRESSIVES GIVING THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY A FREE RIDE?

Politically, I self-identify as a progressive first and foremost. And I always vote for the Democrat, sometimes with severe reservations. As a kid I was happy to discover that the Democratic Party and I shared a lot of ideals and values, even though the Democratic Party big tent also included-- and was often dominated by-- all kinds of racist and reactionary southern neanderthals like John Stennis, John Sparkman, Herman Talmadge, as well as horribly authoritarian monstrosities like the abominable mayors of NY and Chicago, Beame and Daley. Still, whatever the Democratic Party was in practice, there was always the hope that the vision of the party would ultimately be the enduring vision of Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt, not the embarrassing lapses like Howard Cannon and James Eastland.

I've come to expect that whenever I bring up the news of the Inside-the-Beltway Democratic power elite being estranged from and at odds with the Democratic rank-and-file (or grassroots), I will be attacked by good people desperate to see Republicans voted out of power. And, believe me, I'm not unsympathetic to that wish. Sympathetic-- but still not willing to settle for a Democratic Party of Liebermans and Zell Millers.

I love the way Nancy Pelosi votes. I loved that she stood up to Gephardt and refused to support the unprovoked, illegal and catastrophic attack Gephardt and Lieberman were determined to make at least look bipartisan. And I was happy to see someone that progressive and liberal elected Minority Leader-- in line to become the first woman Speaker of the House after November. But I've been having second thoughts-- not about her positions, but about her effectiveness as a leader. There doesn't seem to be any there.

Her deputy is a "moderate" corporate-oriented Democrat, Steny Hoyer (D-MD)-- with an 82.76 ProgressivePunch score (as opposed to Pelosi's far more progressive 93.5 score). I kind of felt she had no choice but to accept people like Rahm Emanuel and Steny Hoyer as part of her leadership team. She's not in a position of strength but in a position of weakness, a position that constantly sends confused and confusing signals out to voters as to what Democrats are all about.

When Louise Slaughter, a member of the House Rules Committee, was attacked by partisan Republicans for her "America For Sale" report on corruption in the House, not only did no Democrat stand up and defend her, but Pelosi actually backed down like a cowardly cur and took the report down from the Democratic Leader's website.

So am I surprised that his colleagues are not exactly rushing to support America's most courageous Senator, Russ Feingold? I mean, I wasn't expecting much from the likes of Lieberman, the Nelsons, Pryor... but I'm not even hearing any support for his call for Bush's censure-- at least not so far-- from Kennedy, Leahy, Durbin, Boxer... Are these people kidding? How out of touch with Democratic grassroots are they? Perhaps they'd be more comfortable getting behind right-wing creep Wayne Allard's accusation that Feingold is "siding with terrorists." We need to watch our elected representatives-- and we need to tell them what we think about Feingold's proposal.


WEDNESDAY MORNING UPDATE: HUGE SUPPORT FOR CENSURE

These are all Democratic senators who came out in favor of censuring the president. Unfortunately, they all came out against President Clinton (blowjob) but not (yet) for censuring Bush (high crimes and misdemeaners): Daniel Akaka, Max Baucus, Byron Dorgan, Dick Durbin, Dianne Feinstein (sponsor), Daniel Inouye, Jim Jeffords, Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, Herb Kohl, Mary Landrieu, Carl Levin, Joe Lieberman, Blanche Lincoln, Barbara Mikulski, Patty Murray, Jack Reed, Harry Reid, Jay Rockefeller, Chuck Schumer, and Ron Wyden.