Where do yours place?

National Journal’s rankings are out for Congress.  See where your representatives place in the scheme of things.

Advertisements

What’s in a label?

An interesting take:

Is Reid a Progressive?

Is he a Liberal?

Is he a Conservative?

I think, if you’re honest with yourself, you’ll have to admit that Reid is a Conservative. There’s a joke about Clinton that runs as follows: “best damn Republican President of the last 50 years.”

Replace “Republican” with “Conservative” and you’ve got the truth of it. I mean this is the man who pushed through NAFTA at the cost of universal healthcare, and the man who gutted welfare. He wasn’t a liberal or a progressive, he was a very competent conservative, of the sort that no longer finds a home in the Republican party.  Reid is a man in the same mold. He won the minority leader position because so are most Democratic Senators. Liberal Senators, let alone Progressive Senators, are in a minority in Congress.

This is an important thing that progressives and liberals need to understand. The Democratic party is a coalition between Conservatives and Progressives/Liberals.

Good points.  As Matt Stoller at MyDD observes:

The Democratic Party is a vehicle to use to improve the country.  It is not an end in itself. 

Well…the same could be said for any party, not just the Democrats.  But the larger truth here is that BOTH political parties are themselves coalitions with many parts.  I don’t think it’s necessarily a good thing that parties be too ideologically pure.  It leads to too many kooks in positions of power, and of fanaticism in lieu of good government. 

Once upon a time you didn’t necessarily know if one was conservative or liberal just by party affiliation.  That’s less the case now.  But even at that…these people calling Hillary and Reid “conservative” shows how far off the center they really are…

What’s in a label?

An interesting take:

Is Reid a Progressive?

Is he a Liberal?

Is he a Conservative?

I think, if you’re honest with yourself, you’ll have to admit that Reid is a Conservative. There’s a joke about Clinton that runs as follows: “best damn Republican President of the last 50 years.”

Replace “Republican” with “Conservative” and you’ve got the truth of it. I mean this is the man who pushed through NAFTA at the cost of universal healthcare, and the man who gutted welfare. He wasn’t a liberal or a progressive, he was a very competent conservative, of the sort that no longer finds a home in the Republican party.  Reid is a man in the same mold. He won the minority leader position because so are most Democratic Senators. Liberal Senators, let alone Progressive Senators, are in a minority in Congress.

This is an important thing that progressives and liberals need to understand. The Democratic party is a coalition between Conservatives and Progressives/Liberals.

Good points.  As Matt Stoller at MyDD observes:

The Democratic Party is a vehicle to use to improve the country.  It is not an end in itself. 

Well…the same could be said for any party, not just the Democrats.  But the larger truth here is that BOTH political parties are themselves coalitions with many parts.  I don’t think it’s necessarily a good thing that parties be too ideologically pure.  It leads to too many kooks in positions of power, and of fanaticism in lieu of good government. 

Once upon a time you didn’t necessarily know if one was conservative or liberal just by party affiliation.  That’s less the case now.  But even at that…these people calling Hillary and Reid “conservative” shows how far off the center they really are…

Less than a mountain

A lot of people have been writing about the US Ports/UAE connection.  You’ll have to forgive me, but it seems to me there’s less there than meets the eye.  Yes things deserve scrutiny, but the dockworkers in the trenches are and will remain US union workers.  And US customs, the Coast Guard, etc. who traditionally are responsible for security and entry aren’t going away.  And port protocols aren’t exactly secrets to begin with.

Frankly, what’s more interesting is what the story reveals about the White House and its standard modus operandi – deny, threaten, entrench, and basically flail about impotently. 

And of course there’s the issue that there may be some under the table maneuvering going on wrt UAE, trade agreements, etc., and that type of corruption also needs to be exposed if that’s truly the case.

But most of all, why on earth is the White House acting so surprised and put out over this?  After five years of screaming “the sky is falling” and finding terrorist operatives under every bed, are they surprised to find resistance at turning over any aspect of American security to middle eastern interests?  It’s a quagmire of their own making.

Others blogging:

The Reaction

The Carpetbagger Report

Kos

Kevin Drum

Michelle Malkin

Pam Spaulding

Americablog

UNCoRRELATED