Who-- No, WHAT-- Comes After Pelosi?

 

If next Tuesday comes and goes and Shahid Buttar hasn't pulled off the biggest political upset of 2020-- you can help him do that here-- Pelosi is almost definitely headed back to the speaker's chair, as what Politico calls "may be the most powerful congressional leader in modern U.S. history." I don't mean to quibble and I'm not certain how they define "modern," but Sam Rayburn (1940-1960 with two brief interludes) and Tip O'Neill (1977-1987) in the House and Lyndon Johnson (1953-1961), Mike Mansfield (1961-1977) and Mitch McConnell (2007-present) in the Senate have been pretty impactful and historically powerful. But Heather Caygle, John Bresnahan and Sarah Ferris wrote that "In the 22 months since she’s returned to the speaker’s chair-- an enormous achievement in itself-- Pelosi has centralized power in an unprecedented way. It’s due not just to her own maneuvering, but to a variety of circumstances: a chaotic president, a paralyzed Senate, and a national health emergency that’s spurred the most serious economic crisis in decades." Yep, that and a too big of a tent congressional party-- to the point of near dysfunction-- that no one else could probably hold together for more than a month.

It helps that she's had Trump as an adversary-- and a non-entity as minority leader-- but she has been successful in placating a progressive wing and the Republican wing of her own party-- the New Dems and Blue Dogs-- and in balancing the needs of the spineless careerists (and incrementalists) with the serious reformers and idealists. There are rot gut conservatives, devotees of the status quo and real life socialists in that tent and somehow Pelosi has kept the whole structure from the inevitable collapse.

But Politico's point is more along the lines that "Pelosi will no longer be the party’s leader if Biden wins the White House on Nov. 3, but her influence may only grow. If Democrats also win the Senate, the incoming president is expected to rely heavily on the Democratic agenda passed by the House that’s been blocked by Trump and Mitch McConnell during the last two years. On everything from health care to climate change to money in politics, the markers laid down by House Democrats may prove every bit as important as the policy goals Biden laid out during the campaign. Yet Pelosi also faces questions about her own future. In order to win over a handful of skittish Democrats following the party’s landslide victory in the 2018 midterms, Pelosi committed to serving only two more terms as speaker. That would make the next Congress her last after 20 years in power, and this upcoming election her final appearance on the ballot, unless she goes back on her commitment."

Pelosi, 80, is expected to easily secure another term as speaker in January-- very likely without even a challenge, according to interviews with a dozen House Democrats.

...Even with all of her success, some Democrats have quietly begun considering a post-Pelosi era. It’s a topic that no lawmaker will discuss publicly for fear of backlash from the speaker-- the oldest person to hold the office-- though such discussions continue quietly inside a caucus where roughly 80 percent of Democrats have only served under Pelosi’s leadership.

Nearly a dozen Democrats are clamoring for one of their caucus’ few open leadership posts in January, a perch that many hope could position them for bigger roles in case of a potential exodus by the troika of Pelosi, Hoyer and Clyburn in the next cycle.

“I think people are starting to think what’s the team going to look like two or four years from now,” said Rep. David Cicilline (D-RI), who is running to be assistant speaker, the No. 4 spot in leadership.

“I think people are beginning to think who will be the next generation of leaders in the Democratic Caucus,” he said. “I think that’s kind of natural.”

There are still Pelosi critics, including roughly a dozen Democrats who opposed her second tour as speaker in 2018. But it’s not even clear how many would vote against her now.

“In the last go around, there was some opposition,” said Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-CA), a longtime Pelosi friend. “There was a lot of talking, but there wasn’t any candidate.”

Eshoo said it’s possible that some of the incoming Democrats from swing districts may stage some sort of opposition to Pelosi next Congress. But Eshoo said it would not weaken her ability to govern.

“Every single one of them will have received her considerable support, monetarily and otherwise,” Eshoo said. “She always says, ‘Just win.’”

“Our confidence in the speaker is high,” added Rep. Katherine Clark (D-MA), another member of Pelosi’s leadership team seeking a higher post next year.

While Pelosi is firmly ensconced in the speaker's chair, there is speculation about possible successors whenever she does leave. The list includes Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (NY), the Democratic Caucus chair; Intelligence Committee Chair Adam Schiff (D-CA), a major player in Trump's impeachment; and Rep. Karen Bass (D-CA), whose national profile rose during the police reform debate, among others.

I suppose Caygle, Bresnahan and Ferris are speaking to different people than the ones I speak with, but I have been told in no uncertain terms-- and by Democrats willing to do it-- that if Pelosi tries to shove PAYGO down the Democrats' throats again-- and she will-- that there will definitely be a progressive challenger to her reelection as speaker. Good, there should be. That tents, in fact, needs to collapse if there is ever going to be a breakout from this country's miserable status quo.

And, although Cheri Bustos and the DCCC have carefully recruited and supported a cadre of careerist non-leaders for the class of 2021, there are a number of independent-minded candidates likely to win House seats a week from today, despite the party establishment. Several have told me they may only have one term to accomplish their goals in-- due either to gerrymandering or to the probable 2022 anti-blue wave-- and that they don't plan to use those two years playing nice with a party establishment that is not much more than just better than the Republicans, at least in terms of the systemic reform that these candidates are motivated by.

Why Exactly Today's House Democrats Never Fail To Disappoint

Last cycle, Pelosi's dreadfully corrupt-- as in just like a GOP pay-to-play outfit-- SuperPAC, the House Majority PAC, spent $72,107,669, very little of it supporting progressives and almost all of it supporting New Dems and Blue Dogs from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party. These were the 26 candidates who got the most help-- over a million dollars from Pelosi (and not counting the money the DCCC spent in these districts). The letter grade after their name is from ProgressivePunch of their voting records so far:

• Harley Rouda (New Dem-CA)- $3,805,387-- F
• Kim Schrier (New Dem-WA)- $3,208,288-- F
• Gil Cisneros (New Dem-CA)- $3,165,740-- F
• Andy Kim (NJ)- $3,082,713-- F
• Josh Harder (New Dem-CA)- $2,953,370-- F
• Debbie Mucarsel-Powell (New Dem-FL)- $2,623,646-- D
• Antonio Delgado (D-NY)- $2,623,610-- F
• Colin Allred (New Dem-TX)- $2,584,185-- F
• Anthony Brindisi (Blue Dog-NY)- $2,524,001-- F
• Tom Malinowski (New Dem-NJ)- $2,456,302-- F
• Sean Casten (New Dem-IL)- $2,274,909-- D
• Katie Hill (New Dem-CA)- $2,093,513-- F
• Mike Levin (D-CA)- $1,926526-- C
• Elissa Slotkin (New Dem-MI)- $1,813,501-- F
• Susie Lee (New Dem-NV)- $1,645,841-- F
• Betsy Dirksen Londrigan (IL)- $1,571,733-- Lost
• Mikie Sherrill (Blue Dog-NJ)- $1,559,959-- F
• Haley Setevens (New Dem-MI)- $1,461,966-- F
• Lauren Underwood (D-IL)- $1,436,761-- F
• Cindy Axne (New Dem-IA)- $1,385,313-- F
• Dana Balter (NY)- $1,362,961-- Lost
• Abigail Spanberger (Blue Dog-VA)- $1,333,500-- F
• Katie Porter (D-CA)- $1,289,315-- F
• Dean Phillips (New Dem-MN)- $1,273,983-- F
• Steven Horsford (New Dem-NV)- $1,165,611-- F
• Jason Crow (New Dem-CO)- $1,078,673-- F

So far this year Pelosi's SuperPAC had raised-- as of the February 29 FEC reporting deadline-- $45,987,776. They handed out $2,500 to 43 incumbents who claim to be in danger. Almost all of them are terrible members of Congress. One example happens to be Jeff Van Drew, who was a Republican-lite Blue Dog at the time and soon after getting the check got rid of the "lite" and "Blue Dog" and officially joined the Republican Party. One of the things most of them have in common are grotesquely conservative voting records. These are the 42 who are still-- as of this writing-- in the Democratic Party, again with their ProgressivePunch voting score.

• Colin Allred (New Dem-TX)-- F
• Cindy Axne (New Dem-IA)-- F
• Antony Brindisi (Blue Dog-NY)-- F
• Matt Cartwright (D-PA)-- A
• Sean Casten (New Dem-IL)-- D
• Gil Cisneros (New Dem-CA)-- F
• TJ Cox (New Dem-CA)-- F
• Angie Craig (New Dem-MN)-- F
• Jason Crow (New Dem-CO)-- F
• Sharice Davids (New Dem-KS)-- F
• Antonio Delgado (D-NY)-- F
• Abby Finkenauer (D-IA)-- F
• Lizzie Fletcher (New Dem-TX)-- F
• Jared Golden (D-ME)-- F
• Josh Gottheimer (Blue Dog-NJ)-- F
• Josh Harder (New Dem-CA)-- F
• Jahana Hayes (D-CT)-- B
• Katie Hill (New Dem-CA)-- F
• Kendra Horn (Blue Dog-OK)-- F
• Steven Horsford (New Dem-NV)-- F
• Andy Kim (D-NJ)-- F
• Conor Lamb (D-PA)-- F
• Susie Lee (New Dem-NV)-- F
• Mike Levin (D-CA)-- C
• Elaine Luria (New Dem-VA)-- F
• Tom Malinowski (New Dem-NJ)-- F
• Ben McAdams (Blue Dog-UT)-- F
• Lucy McGrath (New Dem-GA)-- F
• Debbie Mucarsel-Powell (New Dem-FL)-- D
• Tom O'Halleran (Blue Dog-AZ)-- F
• Chris Pappas (New Dem-NH)-- C
• Katie Porter (D-CA)-- F
• Max Rose (Blue Dog-NY)-- F
• Harley Rouda (New Dem-CA)-- F
• Kim Schrier (New Dem-WA)-- F
• Mikie Sherrill (Blue Dog-NJ)-- F
• Elissa Slotkin (New Dem-MI)-- F
• Xochitl Torres Small (Blue Dog-NM)-- F
• Abigail Spanberger (Blue Dog-VA)-- F
• Haley Stevens (New Dem-MI)-- F
• Lauren Underwood (D-IL)-- F
• Susan Wild (New Dem-PA)-- F

The grades in red indicate that the member might as well join DCCC fave Jeff Van Drew in the Republican Party-- since they vote with the GOP so often. You may have noticed that none-- as in not one-- of the progressive freshmen is on the list, even though several have difficult and challenging reelections.

Pelosi's PAC also spent $5401,839 trying to help the right of center candidate, Christy Smith, in the CA-25 primary.

This week, the PAC booked $51 millions in TV ads for the November election, again, primarily going to conservative incumbents from the Republican wing of the party and almost entirely ignoring progressives (with the exception of Matt Cartwright).

• Minneapolis: $6,756,785 (not for Ilhan Omar, who is facing an avalanche of dirty money, but for two conservative New Dems, Angie Craig and multimillionaire Dean Phillips)
• Philadelphia: $6,130,195 (for protecting Andy Kim, Madeleine Dean and possibly Chrissy Houlahan and Mary Gay Scanlon)
• Atlanta: $4,485,505 (primarily to protect Lucy McBath and for whichever Democrat wins the GA-07 primary)
• Detroit: $4,456,640 (not be helping to protect either Rashida Tlaib or Andy Levin, but just conservatives Haley Stevens and Elissa Slotkin)
• Las Vegas: $3,493,525 (Susie Lee and Steven Horsford)
• Miami: $3,290,080 (Debbie Mucarsel-Powell and possibly Donna Shalala)
• Cedar Rapids: $2,241,105 (Abby Finkenauer)
• Houston: $2,205,190 (Lizzie Fletcher)
• Boston: $1,965,310 (Chris Pappas)
• San Antonio, Texas: $1,622,480 (challengers Gina Ortiz Jones and Wendy Davis)
• Des Moines: $1,410,695 (Cindy Axne)
• Portland: $1,313,085 (Jared Golden)
• Wilkes-Barre: $1,401,735 (Matt Cartwright)
• Dallas: $1,128,300 (Colin Allred)
• Norfolk, Va: $1,116,650 (Elaine Luria)
• Phoenix: $1,106,115 (Tom O'Halleran)
• Richmond: $1,095,275 (Abigail Spanberger)
• Pittsburgh: $1,014,970 (Conor Lamb)
• Harrisburg: $975,620 (challenger Eugene DePasquale)
• Lansing: $913,735 (Elissa Slotkin and possibly wretched Blue Dog challenger Gretchen Driskell)
• Omaha: $895,940 (Cindy Axne)
• Quad Cities: $845,760 (open blue seat)
• Bangor: $751,650 (Jared Golden)
• Rochester, MN: $486,915 (challenger Dan Feehan)
• El Paso: $202,546- (Xochitl Torres Small)
• Fargo: $200,580- (Colin Peterson)
• Mankato: $122,515 (challenger Dan Freehan)
• Presque Isle: $89,760- (Jared Golden)
• Ottumwa, Iowa: $40,920- (open blue seat)

You know what's amazing about this list? Pelosi was a founding member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, along with Bernie, and-- I shit you not-- long, long ago was actually a progressive and used progressives to build her power base. She is now literally an anti-progressive and nothing progressive will ever happen in the House until she retires or... whatever.

Mitch McTurtle-- The Personification Of Death Itself

Every year, Morning Consult puts out a national survey of all 50 states to determine how their residents feel about the states' two senators. And every year Bernie is the most beloved and McTurtle is the most detested. This year's survey, out this week, was no different: Bernie #1, McTurtle #100.

Thinking about the 2020 elections, these are the seven senators who will be facing the voters next year with bad approve/disapprove ratios:

• Mitch McConnell (R-KY)-- 36% approve, 50% disapprove
• Thom Tillis (R-NC)-- 34% approve, 33% disapprove
• Martha McSally (R-AZ)-- 35% approve, 35% disapprove
• Cory Gardner (R-CO)-- 35% approve, 35% disapprove
• Dick Durbin (D-IL)-- 37% approve, 35% disapprove
• Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-MS)-- 38% approve, 37% disapprove
• Joni Ernst (R-IA)-- 40% approve, 37% disapprove

Last week, the unpopular McTurtle was campaigning in front of a small group of right-wing Kentucky fat-cats when he boasted how he would continue gumming up the system next year-- if he's reelected-- to make sure no progressive legislation passing by the House is voted on in the Senate:

"If I'm still the majority leader of the Senate after next year, none of those things are going to pass the Senate. They won't even be voted on. So think of me as the Grim Reaper: the guy who is going to make sure that socialism doesn't land on the president's desk."

CBS News reported that "before referring to himself as the personification of death, McConnell, the White House's most powerful ally on Capitol Hill, accused Democrats in Congress and those running for president of endorsing a fringe, far-left agenda that will imperil the American economy. 'You pass the Green New Deal and Medicare for All, you have fundamentally changed this country, fundamentally changed it into an unproductive place with significant unemployment and huge problems,' McConnell said, noting that some of his colleagues in the Senate who are running for president, like Sens. Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris and Cory Booker, have vouched their support for both proposals. McConnell said progressive platforms are being touted by most mainstream Democrats, not just 'some young woman from New York who just got elected to Congress,' presumably referring to freshman Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who represents parts of Queens and the Bronx. 'It's much broader than that,' McConnell said."

Not much new there. When haven't conservatives smeared progressive proposals to help working families as "socialism" or "communism" or whatever nonsense popped into their minds? Versions of McTurtle from the 1700s on have fought tooth and nail to prevent progressive ideas from taking hold. A decade ago, Mike Lux did a great book about it, The Progressive Revolution, in which he laid out many of the progressive initiatives that entailed winning bloody battles (sometimes literally) against conservative opponents. These are the battles we won against the McTurtles of American history:

• The American Revolution
• The Bill of Rights and the forging of a democracy
• Universal white male suffrage
• Public education
• The emancipation of the slaves
• The national park system
• Food safety
• The breakup of monopolies
• The Homestead Act
• Land grant universities
• Rural electrification
• Women’s suffrage
• The abolition of child labor
• The eight hour workday
• The minimum wage
• Social Security
• Civil rights for minorities and women
• Voting rights for minorities and the poor
• Cleaning up our air, our water, and toxic dump sites
• Consumer product safety
• Medicare and Medicaid

Yes, Republicans referred to the dozen or so final ones as "socialism" and used the same scaremongering McTurtle uses about them today when they fought them back in the day. Today Trump and McTurtle aren't content blocking new progressive proposals, they are working actively to roll back the fruits of progressives victories going back over a century.

As repulsive and corrupt as the DC Democrats are, they are basically what stands between us and the conservative vision of America that includes none of that progress. Look, I went to high school with Chuck Schumer; believe me when I tell you I despise him far more than you do. But Friday he was correct when he said that McTurtle has turned the Senate into "a legislative graveyard... Leader McConnell ought to allow debate and amendments immediately-- which Democrats would welcome-- on commonsense, House-passed bills on democracy reform, combating the gun violence epidemic, health care, and so much more... On getting anything done to help the American people, Leader McConnell and the Senate Republicans in the first 100 days get an 'F'."

Earlier Friday, Pelosi-- who has plenty of flaws and shouldn't be speaker-- also took on McTurtle's decision to play the Grim Reaper. In a letter to House Democrats, she blasted McTurtle's approach to making himself into an obstacle to all progressive legislation:

In our first 100 days, the House was busy passing vital bipartisan legislation that addresses the issues that matter in the lives of the American people.

The House has sent the Senate legislation that has strong bipartisan support across the country, consistent with our For The People agenda. We urge Senator McConnell to take up the legislation as soon as possible.

• H.R. 1 – the For The People Act to restore confidence in our democracy;
• H.R. 8 & H.R. 1112 – the Bipartisan Background Checks Act and the Enhanced Background Checks Act, commonsense gun violence prevention measures;
• H.R. 7 – the Paycheck Fairness Act, to ensure that women receive equal pay for equal work;
• H.R. 1585 – Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act, a strong improvement and long-term reauthorization of VAWA;
• H.R. 1644 – the Save The Internet Act to restore vital Net Neutrality protections.

In the coming weeks, we will be taking action on:

• The Protecting People with Pre-existing Conditions Act and other legislation to lower health costs by reducing prescription drug prices;
• H.R. 9 – the Climate Action Now Act to preserve the Paris Climate Accord and lay the foundation for more action;
• H.R. 5 – the Equality Act to end discrimination against LGBTQ Americans;
• H.R. 6 – the American Dream and Promise Act to protect Dreamers, TPS and DED recipients.

Our progress For The People stands in stark contrast to the inaction of the GOP-controlled Senate. The Republican Senate needs to wake up, and vote on these urgently needed bills immediately. If they don’t like our bipartisan bills, then they can pass their own version and we can go to conference.

Leader McConnell has declared himself the “grim reaper” of these House bills to make progress for working families. We will show him that these bills are alive and well with the American people. The middle class and America don’t want the Senate to be a legislative graveyard for so many of these important issues-- they want action.

Midnight Meme Of The Day!

by Noah

Oh, how I long to hear Donnie Sleazeball call "Nancy" Mommy!

Maybe House Speaker Nancy Pelosi isn't my favorite politician but I have to give credit where credit is due. She used her larger hands and her facial expression to invent the Fuck You Clap. It will now be forever known as such. She should trademark it. It doesn't even matter if it was deliberate or just perfect timing of the camera shutter, perception is the key and perception is reality. Perhaps it was just her soul asserting itself and taking control. It says so much more than shouting "You lie." The fact that this photo went so instantly explosively viral with so many captions means that it defines the night; more than Donnie's bullshit plea for unity after he spent his whole pre-speech luncheon insulting his political rivals, his usual litany of lies, and even his calls for an end to people investigating him. Oh, poor little Donnie!

Two more thoughts: A friend of mine commented that the photo of Speaker Pelosi applauding Trump reminds her of a lousy husband wanting extra credit just for taking out the trash. Now if only the Speaker would obey her oath to defend the Constitution and take out this particular bag of trash.

Will The Republican Wing Of The Democratic Party Pick The Next Speaker?

A few days ago, Barbara Lee called me from Longview, Texas, where she was campaigning for BETO. But we wasn't calling about BETO; she was calling about a progressive woman running for the House who needed a little extra financial push. She seemed surprised when I told her that the candidate had just gotten a million dollar little extra push from Nancy Pelosi's SuperPAC, House Majority PAC. That was curious for both of us, since the candidate is anything but a favorite of the DCCC, where corrupt right-of-center staffers-- who are motivated by personal greed and uncontrollable hatred of progressives-- have worked especially hard to undermine her campaign. But Nancy seemed to take matters into her own hands just 2 weeks before election day. And a candidate that Nate Silver gives just a 20% chance is now a 50/50 race.

Yesterday, writing for Politico, Rachel Bade and Elena Schneider reported on how Pelosi is working to win the speakership for herself again-- "quietly courting Democratic candidates who threaten to block her path back to power." Most have "kept her at arm’s length throughout the campaign season."

The California Democrat’s efforts-- from nudging her donors toward candidates, to appearing at private fundraisers for House hopefuls who can't be seen with her publicly-- are focused on the Democrats in competitive races who are most likely to win. While it’s too early to say whether she would have the 218 votes to claim the speaker's gavel should her party claim House majority, Pelosi has clearly made inroads.

Of the 43 Democratic candidates in districts that Politico rates “lean-Democrat,” “likely-Democrat” or “toss-up”-- the swath of GOP-held seats most likely to flip-- only 11 have said they would not back Pelosi for speaker. Of those 11, only four would confirm that they would vote against Pelosi on the House floor next year.

Indeed, while much of the narrative surrounding candidates and Pelosi over the past year has focused on dozens of hopefuls who have called for her to step aside and vowed to oppose her for the speakership, a closer examination of those most likely to win on Nov. 6 reveals that the number of anti-Pelosi absolutists is relatively small.

To ease her path, Pelosi has raised $6.7 million for “Red to Blue” candidates trying to oust GOP incumbents. She’s set up phone-banking and texting operations for one California House candidate who hasn’t clarified a position on her to lead the caucus. And she’s sent more than 30 of her staffers out to toss-up districts-- including places where candidates have distanced themselves from Pelosi on the trail.

“There’s a charm offensive underway, and there’s a real effort on [Pelosi’s] part to reach out to these campaigns and offer help, even to those who seem to be distancing himself or flat out rejecting her,” said a senior Democratic aide. “They know what the political reality is.”

Added another Democratic operative working on House campaigns: “She’s endearing herself to these candidates and she’s building relationships with them, laying that groundwork. But her primary objective is flipping the House.”

Four especially filthy Blue Dogs-- each an arch conservative with positions more in line with the GOP than with the Democratic Party-- are determined to elect a much more conservative leader of the Democratic Party-- Conor Lamb (PA), Dan McCready (NC), Paul Davis (KS) and racist Trump-like xenophobe Abigail Spanberger (VA). Very few progressives who want Pelosi out-- Mark Pocan is an exception-- are willing to elect a conservative and the only members pushing themselves forward for the job are from the Republican-wing of the party, like Seth Moulton (New Dem-MA) and Kathleen Rice (New Dem-NY). If a progressive were to jump in, that might change things, but most progressives feel a sense of loyalty to her beyond what she deserves.

Most of the party’s contenders in “toss-up, “lean” and “likely” Democratic districts fall into three categories on the Pelosi question: Embrace her, decline to weigh in until after the election or call vaguely for “new leadership.” Multiple Democratic leadership sources-- and even some of Pelosi’s critics-- believe she could win over candidates who have not said specifically they'll vote against her on the House floor.

Multiple senior Democratic sources also noted that some candidates haven’t specified what they mean by not supporting Pelosi. A vote against Pelosi in caucus-- a secret-ballot election in which she would need a simple majority of Democrats to win the nomination for speaker-- is one thing. A vote against her on the House floor, when she’d need 218 votes and likely could afford only a small number of defections-- is another thing entirely.

These sources expect some candidates who have bucked Pelosi on the campaign trail to vote against her in caucus, then back her on the floor. After the 2016 election, more than 60 Democrats voted against Pelosi behind closed doors, but only four followed up by opposing her on the floor.

Some senior Democratic sources are also already discussing the possibility of trying to persuade some Pelosi opponents to skip the vote. That would give Pelosi a bigger buffer, while allowing these candidates to say they never voted for her.

[Fake] Democrats such as McCready say that wouldn't fly with them. But other candidates in “toss-up,” “lean” or “likely” Democratic seats, who have come out against Pelosi, have not specified whether that would mean voting against her on the House floor. They include: Mikie Sherrill [Blue Dog] and Jeff Van Drew [Blue Dog and NRA candidate] of New Jersey, Jared Golden of Maine, Gil Cisneros [Republican pretending to be a Democrat, ironically with Pelosi's help] of California and Jason Crow [New Dem] of Colorado.

Jersey Blue Dog Jeff Van Drew will be the House's new Kyrsten Sinema

Van Drew suggested recently that he’s open to negotiation. While the candidate running for an open New Jersey seat said “Pelosi will not have my support as leader in the next session,” he recently signed a letter vowing to back the candidate for speaker who promises to make certain changes to House rules.

Some anti-Pelosi House Democrats believe the incoming class of lawmakers, fresh off campaigns in which they've touted themselves as change agents, would band together and oppose her. But others are skeptical that the incoming freshmen would stand up to Pelosi and throw the caucus into chaos after Democrats just won the majority.

Pelosi has been leader for more than a decade for a reason: She knows how to win people over, with flattery or arm-twisting. Among her current tactics is using her fundraising prowess to build chits with candidates without drawing the attention of their Republican opponents.

Pelosi has personally donated to more than 25 of those candidates most likely to win. And she’s personally called or had her staff reach out to candidates with encouragement and praise.

The Pelosi-aligned House Majority PAC has also spent millions on ads helping these candidates in “lean” and “likely” Democrat as well as “toss-up” districts. Many of those candidates have embraced Pelosi outright or have called for “new leadership,” but stopped short of saying they would vote against her.

Democratic hopefuls Andy Kim of New Jersey and Anthony Brindisi [Blue Dog and NRA candidate] of New York have both called for new blood. "It’s time we have new leadership on both sides of the aisle in Washington to get the job done,” Kim said this summer. Brindisi struck a similar tone, saying earlier this year: "I believe it's time for new leadership on both sides of the aisle."

But both have accepted money from Pelosi’s PAC. House Majority PAC spent $3.1 million to help Kim and $2.2 million to boost Brindisi.

Neither candidate would say whether they'd buck Pelosi on the floor if they win and Democrats are in the majority.

Spoiler: Nancy Pelosi will cut a deal with the caucus to retire in April (after passing PAYGO). And everyone will get ready to welcome Christine Pelosi-- more progressive and way more in touch with the party's base than mom-- to Congress.

How Cruz Plans To Win: Turning Out The Klan

I wouldn't bet the house on it, but I've thought from the very beginning that Ted Cruz would be the Republican candidate to face Bernie or Hillary. More recently, I came to realize that the GOP ticket would likely be Cruz/Fiorina. Last week I started getting the impression that I'm no longer alone in this assumption. George Will, for one, entertained the notion in a column he wrote for the Washington Post, referring to what Cruz has been up to as an audacious "base plus" strategy, which refutes assumptions about the importance of independent “swing” voters. Will defends him against critics who "say his plan for pursuing the Republican nomination precludes winning the presidency. Jason Johnson, Cruz’s chief strategist, responds: 'I’m working backward from Election Day,' because Cruz’s plan for winning the necessary 1,236 convention delegates is an extrapolation from his strategy for winning 270 electoral votes." Other campaigns are worried that whites-- particularly racist whites-- have stopped voting in big enough numbers for the GOP's racist agenda to be successful. Cruz doesn't see it that way, not at all. In the last 5 elections, from 1996 onward, white turnout declined from 82.5% to 73.7%, while Hispanic and black votes case increased by 4 and 3 points, respectively. Cruz isn't worried.

All presidential campaigns aspire to favorably change the composition of the electorate. Cruz aims to substantially reconfigure the electorate as it has recently been.

Between George W. Bush’s 2000 election and his 2004 reelection, the turnout of non-Hispanic whites increased by an astonishing 10 million. Barack Obama produced a surge of what Johnson calls “two-election voters.” In 2008, the African American voting rate increased from 2004 while white voting declined slightly; in 2012, African Americans voted at a higher rate than whites.

Nonvoting whites, especially those without college experience, are among Cruz’s principal targets. His geniality toward Donald Trump reflects the Cruz campaign’s estimate that perhaps one-third of the Trumpkins have not voted in recent elections. If so, Trump is doing downfield blocking for Cruz, beginning the expansion of the 2016 electorate by energizing people whose alienation from politics has made them nonvoters.

Cycle after cycle, says Johnson, the percentage of true swing voters shrinks. Therefore, so does the persuadable portion of the electorate. Cruz aims to leaven the electorate with people who, disappointed by economic stagnation and discouraging cultural trends for which Republican nominees seemed to have no answers, have been dormant during recent cycles.

Consider Pennsylvania, which has voted Democratic in six consecutive elections and which James Carville described as Pittsburgh in the west, Philadelphia in the east and Alabama in between. Cruz’s aim, says Johnson, will be “to improve on Romney at the margins in the Philadelphia suburbs,” do three points better than Romney (5.5 percent) among African Americans (with many “two election” voters staying home with Obama gone) and to locate and motivate many previous nonvoters in Pennsylvania’s “Alabama.” In 2012, Obama became the first Democrat since George McGovern in 1972 to lose the Pittsburgh metropolitan area.

Whites without college experience include disproportionate numbers of nonvoters whose abstention in 2012, according to the Market Research Foundation, produced Obama’s Electoral College victory. The Cruz campaign’s substantial investment in data scientists serves what Johnson calls “behavioral micro-targeting,” changing behavior as well as gathering opinions. If a person drives a Ford F-150 and subscribes to Guns & Ammo, he probably is conservative. The challenge is to make him a voter by directing to him a package of three- or four-issue appeals tailored to him.

Cruz has county chairs organizing in all 172 counties in Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada. National Review’s Eliana Johnson reports that through the second quarter, Cruz had raised more “hard” dollars than any of his rivals, and super PACs supporting him have raised more than all but those supporting Jeb Bush. Jason Johnson describes the delegate selection process as follows:

Of the 624 delegates at stake on March 1, 231 are from Cruz’s Texas and Georgia, where Cruz inherited Scott Walker’s entire operation. With Oklahoma, whose closed primary will be especially conservative, these three states have 274 delegates, almost a quarter of the number needed to nominate. Eighty-seven of the 155 delegates allocated on March 5 will be from Louisiana and Kansas. On March 15, when winner-take-all primaries begin and 367 delegates will be allocated, Bush and Marco Rubio will compete for Florida’s 99 delegates, while Cruz is well-positioned for North Carolina’s 72 and Missouri’s 52 (Cruz’s campaign manager, Missourian Jeff Roe, has run many campaigns there).

Whenever this cycle’s winnowing process produces two survivors, they might be two young, Southern, first-term Cuban American senators. Rubio would be the establishment choice. Cruz, with his theory of the election, would not have it otherwise.

I'm pretty certain, Cruz is also the candidate either Clinton or Bernie would prefer to go up against. When Cruz, not to mention his low-info racist voters hear someone-- this year's economics Nobel prize winner, no less (and author of The Great Escape: Health, Wealth and the Origins of Inequality)-- going on, as Angus Deaton did (via Paul Krugman) that "there is a danger that the rapid growth of top incomes can become self-reinforcing through the political access that money can bring," they shrug it off entirely. As they would shrug off the rest of what Deaton said: "Rules are set not in the public interest but in the interest of the rich, who use those rules to become yet richer and more influential...To worry about these consequences of extreme inequality has nothing to do with being envious of the rich and everything to do with the fear that rapidly growing top incomes are a threat to the wellbeing of everyone else."

Alexandra Pelosi explained what George Will was getting out far better than Will did himself on this video she made in Mississippi for Bill Maher's show 3 years ago. This is the Ted Cruz army they;re talking about. Is this really what America is about today? Is this what's going to propel Ted Cruz into the presidency (beyond the GOP nomination? This:

Boehner's Already Low Popularity Takes A Hit But Is He Vulnerable?

Boehner knows he can count on Steve Israel for a free pass again

The GOP smear machine went to work on Pelosi many years ago and systematically turned her into a symbol of loathing for the right-wing/Fox News/hate talk radio base. They did their worst to turn her into a divisive figure, an untrustworthy "other" and put millions and millions of campaign dollars into tying all their electoral targets to her. Democrats had done something similarly with Tom DeLay, the difference being that DeLay is a convicted criminal, a zealot for the interests of plutocrats and an unhinged extremist. Pelosi is a politician with better than average ethics and a slightly left-of-center, but very much mainstream, ideological bent. For all the accusations the GOP is always whining about in regard to "politics of personal destruction," Democrats don't do it very well-- and not nearly as well as Republicans do.

But a new Rasmussen survey shows that Boehner is now the least-liked congressional leader, "with just 31 percent of voters holding a positive opinion of the Republican leader and more than half-- 51 percent-- saying they view the Ohio congressman unfavorably." And despite all the GOP propaganda spent to demonize her, Pelosi is 8 points more popular than Boehner. Democrats haven't had much of a hand in this. Boehner bumbled and stumbled into it pretty much all himself.

Boehner's slipping popularity likely comes from voters' wariness with Republicans as the deadline to reach a debt deal approaches.

In a Pew Research poll released earlier this month, 53 percent said they would blame the GOP if the crisis was not resolved, versus just 27 percent who said they would blame Democrats.

But Boehner has also lost favor with some conservatives after removing four Tea Party freshmen from their preferred committees for breaking with leadership on key votes. That's led to some Republicans suggesting that Boehner could be vulnerable in a vote to retain his gavel next month.

Even though Boehner has failed to rally his caucus when it's come to the Grand Bargain he and Obama are putting together, and despite the machinations of a few Republican extremists, most congressional observers feel that Boehner's hold on the Speaker's chair is fairly secure.

The House Republican conference refused to deliver the votes to pass the Ohio lawmaker's “Plan B” tax bill to prevent much of the fiscal cliff, sapping the Speaker of leverage in the climactic days of his year-end negotiations with President Obama and Democratic leaders.

But conservative critics of Boehner’s approach said in the aftermath of the defeat there had been no discussion of ousting the Speaker, and they fully expected him to be reelected by the House during a formal floor vote on Jan. 3 at the opening of the 113th Congress.

“This was not a vote of no confidence in the Speaker,” freshman Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-S.C.), an opponent of Boehner’s Plan B legislation, said in an interview. “This was a legislative defeat, not a personal defeat.”

Another vocal critic of the Speaker’s proposal, Rep. John Fleming (R-La.), said: “He is my Speaker, and I support him.”

Boehner has watched bills fail on the floor several times during his two-year tenure, but none of those losses appeared to be as wrenching for the Speaker as what happened on Thursday night. After leaders assured reporters they had the votes throughout the day, Boehner abruptly canceled the vote shortly before 8 p.m. and led his members in an emotional prayer before dismissing them from the Capitol.

A source close to the leadership operation said that Boehner is "still in good standing with the members," and that he has not been calling lawmakers to ensure their support for him on Jan. 3.

Even though pulling the bill may have weakened his leverage at the negotiating table with Democrats, several conservatives told The Hill that Boehner helped himself in the conference for not forcing them to vote on a tough bill.

In the 4 years Pelosi sat in the Speaker's chair, she never once brought a bill up with first having the backing to pass it. Not once-- and her majority was never as big as Boehner's. Steve LaTourette (R-OH), a mainstream conservative who's retiring from Congress largely because he's disgusted with how extreme fascists have infiltrated the House GOP and can prevent effective governance, thinks Boehner's speakership is safe. “It’s like saying the superintendent of an insane asylum should be discharged because he couldn’t control the crazy people. That’s nuts.” Boehner claims he's not worried about it-- but, you may recall he also claimed all last week that he had the votes to pass Plan B.

Boehner is personally well-liked by most House Republicans, and even some of the most vocal conservative critics of his strategy over the last two years have said they sympathize with the difficulty of his position.

Another reason for Boehner’s job security is that there are few viable alternatives in the House GOP conference, and Boehner has worked deliberately to keep in close counsel with the handful of members with the stature to challenge him. After reports of discord in 2011, Cantor has worked in lockstep with Boehner in recent months and backed his concession to Obama since the election, first on new revenue and then on higher tax rates for millionaires.

Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), the 2012 Republican vice presidential nominee and a favorite of House conservatives, has maintained a lower profile but signed on to Boehner’s Plan B and defended it on the House floor Thursday. Shortly after the election, the Speaker invited Ryan and two other influential committee chairmen to join daily leadership strategy sessions on the fiscal cliff.

...One conservative House Republican, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said the only way Boehner’s position is likely to be in serious jeopardy is if he agrees to raise the debt ceiling in a fiscal-cliff deal with Obama without significant concessions on spending cuts and entitlement reform from the president.

“If he gives away the debt ceiling, he’s in trouble,” the member said.

So will the Democrats take advantage of Boehner's unpopularity and try to defeat him in 2014? NOT. A. CHANCE. Once Pelosi gave Steve Israel the nod to keep running the DCCC, Boehner knew he would be completely safe and the DCCC would give him, Cantor, Ryan, McCarthy and the rest of the top GOP leaders "get reelected free" passes again. It's the way Israel rolls. In 2010 when a sharp, dedicated, independent-minded West Point grad and Iraq War vet, Justin Coussoule, ran against Boehner, the DCCC not only didn't support his long shot bid, the DCCC went out of its way to humiliate Coussoule and make sure that he and other Ohio Democrats got the message that a challenge to Boehner will not be welcomed by the corrupt Beltway Democratic Establishment. In 2012... no one ran against him-- just the way Steve Israel wanted it.

Meanwhile Establishment DC Republicans are blaming Boehner's failure to get Plan B passed on the heavily-financed, neo-fascist elements inside the GOP that have more and more been able to call the shots for the once mainstream party.

Asked why GOP leaders didn’t have the votes, deputy whip Rep. Mike Conaway (R-Texas) told The Hill, “You've got to ask Club for Growth, Heritage Action and all those guys who bullied members of Congress into voting against their own best interests.”

Too many House Republicans were just scared to death of primaries financed by sociopaths like the Koch brothers, sons of one of the founders of an American Nazi Party offshoot, the John Birch Society. They fear the ability of deranged right-wing extremists to rile up the Fox mob/teabaggers than they worry about Boehner disciplining them, the way he showily tried to make examples of Justin Amash (R-MI), Walter Jones (R-NC) and Tim Huelskamp (R-KS) two weeks ago. And they fear the fascist mob more than they fear the ability of Obama to make good on his threat to turn the American people against the GOP malefactors and obstructionists.

Heath Shuler Was One Of The Blue Dogs To Hang On So He Thinks He Should Run The Democratic Caucus Now

The crap Rahm left behind when he scurried off to Chicago

Although over half the Blue Dogs were wiped off the face of the political map on Tuesday-- a silver lining to an otherwise grim day-- almost half the Blue Dogs are still in office... and as eager as ever to serve their corporate masters and pull the Democratic Party further and further away from the principles and values that have made the party the party of ordinary working families.

One of the worst of the Blue Dogs not swept away Tuesday-- an inveterate homophobe, immigrant-basher, anti-Choice C Street fanatic and all around reactionary shill is failed football player Heath Shuler, Rahm Emanuel's "greatest hit." Shuler was one of the 40 Democrats in the last session who voted more frequently with the GOP than with the Democrats when it came to the contentious, substantive issues that the House took up. His Progressive Punch score was an atrocious 36.13 and only 3 Democrats with lower scores, Jason Altmire (Blue Dog-PA- 34.96), Mike McIntyre (Blue Dog-NC- 33.61) and Dan Boren (Blue Dog-OK- 26.50), survived the national repudiation of Blue Dogism on Tuesday.

But even with so many of his right-wing colleagues gone, Shuler is still clamoring for a leadership post within the now far less conservative Democratic House caucus. In fact, yesterday, he threatened to run against Nancy Pelosi if she decides to remain as party leader. He also vowed to recruit conservative candidates like himself to run in 2012 in the seats where conservative candidates like himself were defeated earlier this week. He, like many of the corporate crooks he pals around with in Congress, has demonized Pelosi and tried to paint her as a "polarizing figure" because she insisted on standing up for ordinary working families while Shuler and his cronies worked behind the scenes for the Wall Street bankers and Big Business. As we saw Wednesday, almost every single Democrat who ran as an anti-Pelosi candidate was defeated.

Some in Washington feel Shuler, who is incredibly ambitious for someone with so little to offer intellectually and who only managed to hang onto his own seat by 54%, is just trying to make Steny Hoyer, always the Blue Dogs' and corporate America's cat's paw inside the party, seem less unacceptable to the caucus. At the same time, another extremely right-wing Blue Dog (and Hoyer buddy), Utah reactionary Jim Matheson, who barely survived the general election (51%) after being seriously primaried earlier in the year, is stamping his feet and demanding Pelosi resign. Matheson, who feeds at the same corporate trough as the Republicans, is widely considered one of the more corrupt, self-serving Democrats in Congress and, like Shuler, he never could understand why Pelosi was always pushing all that ethics stuff on the caucus. You might want to make your way over to Daily Kos today and sign the petition telling Nancy Pelosi you want her to stay on as Democratic House Leader.



Another Boehner Boy Blue Dog Snarls Impotently In Pelosi's Direction

After Bobby Bright (Blue Dog-AL), Travis Childers (Blue Dog-MS) and Gene Taylor (Blue Dog-MS) were flushed down the toilet Tuesday, one piece of crap that the voters missed was Oklahoma's anti-family reactionary, Dan Boren (Blue Dog-OK). Today, as expected, Boren, who famously voted against Obama when he ran for president, said he wouldn't vote for Pelosi to be House Democratic Leader. “I cannot in good conscience support Nancy Pelosi as Leader,” Boren said. “I intend to support a more conservative Democrat alternative.” Pelosi, widely considered one of the greatest Speakers in contemporary American history, would never appeal to a dedicated servant of the corporate special interests like Boren.

Nancy Pelosi may be moving out of her spacious office in the Capitol, but the woman who broke the marble ceiling to become the first female speaker of the House has already moved into the ranks of the most effective legislators in history.

"While right now she is overshadowed by this thumping, she's going to rank quite high in the pantheon of modern speakers" of the last 100 years, said Norman Ornstein, a congressional scholar at the conservative American Enterprise Institute. Only Texas Democrat Sam Rayburn, the longest-serving speaker in history whose parliamentary maneuvers cleared the way for passage of civil rights and social legislation in the 1960s, ranks higher.

...[H]istorians and nonpartisan political observers who take the long view say Pelosi stands out among the 52 lawmakers who have held the job set forth in Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution. And not just because all the others were men.

"The last Congress in particular has been remarkable in its productivity-- in both the number of bills enacted and their scope-- and Pelosi shares much of the credit," said Matthew Green, a political scientist at Catholic University of America and author of "The Speaker of the House: A Study of Leadership."

Many speakers shepherded through big bills: Democrat Tip O'Neill guided major energy legislation though in 1978, and Republican Dennis Hastert twisted arms to create a new Medicare prescription drug benefit. But few, Green said, have passed more legislation than Pelosi.

Other speakers have taken a back seat on major legislation on their watch, Green added. John McCormack presided in the 1960s when Congress enacted Lyndon Johnson's historic Great Society program, but it was the president who wrote and lobbied for most of the bills, not the elderly speaker. In contrast, Obama took a mostly hands-off approach to health care reform, leaving it to Pelosi and others in Congress to work out the details.

Pecora Commission Redux?

You probably never heard of the Pecora Commission (unless you're a LaRouche nut)-- at least not until Nancy Pelosi said she wants to model a new legislative commission after it last night. It's a good idea. The original 1932 commission, which was established by the Senate Banking Committee, was charged with figuring out why the stock market crashed in 1929, leading to the Great Depression, and what Congress could do to prevent it from happening again.

When it was first established, the GOP was still the dominant political party, and the commission was widely viewed as a way to whitewash its own responsibility for the Depression. In the 1932 elections, the GOP was destroyed at the polls, losing 101 seats in the House and 13 seats in the Senate. When the Pecora Commission reconvened after the election there were only 35 Republicans left in the Senate, a number that was further reduced as the party continued espousing right wing ideology and obstructionism-- as they are doing today-- and by 1936 there were only 25 Republicans left in the Senate and 88 in the House. The new chairman, Florida Democrat Duncan Fletcher, fired the incompetent Republican staffers and the commission got rolling in a serious fashion.

Wall Street disgraced itself at the hearings, declaring it knew better what was right for the country than voters did and the public realized that the grand captains of industry were just pumped up highway bandits intent on looting and plundering. It came out, for example, that the wealthiest Americans, like J.P. Morgan, paid no income taxes and that the entire financial system was gamed on behalf of a few multimillionaires. The Commission's work helped open the public's eyes to what Republican economics really meant and the Democrats were able to pass a broad array of new regulations to keep the avarice and greed of the banksters in check. Obviously Wall Street fought the reforms with all its considerable might-- and never stopped.

The Pecora Commission didn't predict that the banksters would rise again and spend $2.2 billion in bribes-- and even more in lobbying-- to game the system in their favor again. Nor could the Pecora Commission do anything to prevent politically-illiterate voters and dittoheads from electing Hoover and Coolidge-like candidates (and worse)-- venal and corrupt deregulators from Phil Gramm to George Bush-- and all the human detritus between. The existence of the garbage in our political system is a function of a purposefully and systemically corrupt campaign finance regime and of a poorly educated (to describe it in the kindest possible terms) electorate. The fact that the level of ethics and political leadership among the champions of working families also leaves something to be desired, has shackled us to successive governments dedicated to serving special interests at the expense of society and, especially, at the expense of working families and the middle class. The work of the Pecora Commission was eroded under Reagan and Clinton and the then obliterated and buried under Bush. The elimination of the Glass-Steagall Act was just the shining jewel in the crown of the deregulatory mania that is the true heart and soul of the GOP.

And the result: another Republican Party-caused depression. Which brings us back to last night's declaration by Speaker Pelosi to initiate a new Pecora Commission. She acknowledged that "the American people are demanding 'discipline and accountability' after the multibillion-dollar federal bailouts, [and] promised Wednesday to create a legislative commission with broad oversight to investigate the causes of Wall Street irregularities and their full costs to taxpayers."

"They investigated what happened in the markets," including conflicts of interests and irregularities that set off such devastating effects on the U.S. economy, she said. When the commission issued its findings during the administration of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, "they had tangible recommendations," she said, which helped generate widespread public support for major banking system reforms and new securities laws.

Pelosi said she discussed the matter with Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner on Wednesday and will raise the matter with her colleagues in the House of Representatives next week. She said her actions have been sparked by the observation that, no matter where she travels in the United States, she hears concern about financial irregularities.

"People are very unhappy with these bailouts," particularly multimillion-dollar bonuses paid out to executives of failing firms like American Insurance Group, or AIG, that have received federal bailout funds, she said.

"Seventy five percent of the American people, at least, want an investigation of what happened on Wall Street," the speaker said to applause.

"We're going to have a commission ... even if it is only in the House of Representatives," Pelosi pledged, saying it would allow Americans "to have a clearer understanding of how we got here-- and the risk that's been taken by the taxpayers in all this."

"That's what we would do with this commission, is to make sure it does not happen again." she said.

She said the move coincides with legislation she soon will send to President Obama on financial institution regulation and reform, "so we have transparency ... discipline and accountability to the American taxpayer."

Don't expect the Republican Party to take this laying down. They're planning more tea parties and there are even rumors that Alaska may join Rick Perry's secession movement; maybe Glenn Beck will even renounce his American citizenship if Congress tries to rein in the banksters.

RICKIE LEE JONES HAS A MESSAGE FOR NANCY PELOSI ABOUT FATHERS AND SONS

Yesterday Robert Parry wrote an essay for ConsortiumNews called G.W. Bush Is A Criminal, Like His Dad.

Watching Attorney General Michael Mukasey evade the obvious fact that waterboarding is torture-- and the reluctance of Democrats to press him-- I was reminded of how the first President Bush got away with an earlier batch of national security crimes.

Indeed, one of the common questions I've been asked over the years is-- if the evidence really does show that the Reagan-Bush crowd was guilty of illegal dealings with Iran, Iraq and the Nicaraguan contras-- why didn't the Democrats hold those Republicans to account?

For people who have posed that question, I would suggest that they watch the Senate Judiciary Committee's Jan. 30 hearing with Mukasey. Everybody in the room knew what the unspoken reality was, but nobody dared say it: George W. Bush authorized torture, which is a crime under U.S. and international law.

However, if the Attorney General-- the highest-ranking law-enforcement officer in the United States-- recognized the obvious, he would have to either commence legal action against President Bush or send a referral to Congress for the initiation of impeachment proceedings.

If such a referral were sent to Congress, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi would have little choice but to permit the start of impeachment hearings in the House Judiciary Committee. A wide range of Bush's illegal actions would then begin spilling out, provoking a political crisis in the United States.

...on the most sensitive issue to Bush-- his assertion that he possesses unlimited presidential powers that let him violate criminal laws and ignore constitutional protections-- Mukasey was as much in lock step with the administration as his predecessor, Alberto Gonzales.

The failure of Congress do do their constitutional duty in 1992 and 1993 when they found out the Reagan-Bush campaign had contacted the Iranian mullahs directly-- treason-- and orchestrated the "October Surprise" to win the presidential election and help their right wing terrorist goons in Nicaragua, has emboldened Bush II.

A Giuliani ad in the NY Times on December 6, 2007 reminds us-- although he meant it in another context-- that when you let tyrants get away with a little, it only guarantees they will want more:

"The best way you deal with tyrants and terrorists, you stand up to them. You don't back down."

Congress didn't deal with them in the early 90s and look what we've had to deal with because of that. Pelosi is refusing to do her job now. Itr's not funny. Her reprehensible political calculous is part of the coverup and she should be prosecuted for dereliction of duty.

Rickie Lee Jones, on the other hand, has very much done her duty-- and more. Rickie can't put impeachment back on the table but in 2003 she released a song, "Ugly Man," that was a little ahead of its time-- a a LOT ahead of Nancy Pelosi. Rickie is just finishing a string of gigs in the heart of Pelosi's congressional district.

She decided to do two California residencies, one in L.A. and one in San Francisco. Monday she starts in L.A. for a total of four nights at the Echoplex in Silverlake, 1822 Sunset Blvd-- February 4, 11, 18 and 25. She's already done 3 shows at the Cafe du Nord in San Francisco and her last night there is Tuesday (February 5)-- a night California Democrats will make history. I put a little video clip together that makes the point. Enjoy: