Didn't she already openly admit this?
Link (new window)

Only "reportedly," I guess.

Let me be the first to say "Fark the blue dogs."

Is the on vacation ?

If this thing isn't a colossal give-away to the health insurance industry, the seats will be fine.

Look at the corporate whores at WSJ pointing fingers.

Why wouldn't she? What's the point of having 258 Democrats if you can't actually pass anything you want because you might lose some of them?

The political tides shift all the time. Democrats will lose the majority eventually, no matter what. The idea is to use the time you have in power to do what you think is best for the country. When LBJ accurately said he'd lost the south for a generation after signing the Civil Rights Act, his boldness to do it anyway was something to emulate, not a warning never to sign controversial legislation again.

Right-wing concern is concerning.

If the elections earlier this week taught us anything it is that running away from Obama's policies (like Creigh Deeds did) is political poison for Democratic candidates. 2010 is going to be a base election, and the party that can motivate and bring out its base is going to be the one to win races.

The fact of the matter is that the self identifying Democratic base outnumbers the self identifying Republican base by 50%. The Democratic base supports the Obama policies by a ratio of 4:1. A candidate that campaigns to that base, motivating them and getting them out to vote will win their race. A Democratic candidate that moves away from the Obama policies will have a hard time bringing that base out to vote for them, and as a result they will lose.

If you want current proof, look at the approval polls for Blue Dog Democrats. Their resistance to the Obama policies is doing nothing to build support in their districts. Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) is likely to lose her seat, because she is growing increasingly unpopular with Democrats in her home state over her lack of support for Health Care Reform.

If Democrats want to win in 2010, they stay with Obama. If they want to lose, then they just need to run further away from him.

/2012 will be a different story, because the independent voters tend to be a more significant factor in presidential election years.

And I might add, the last time Democrats had a large advantage in the House, their seats were sacrificed precisely because "liberal government health care" didn't pass. The House was viewed as ineffective and the party that actually had ideas and looked like they had the backbone to pass them were voted in.

I'm quite sure Pelosi is aware of that lesson.

Dorgan is getting kind of unpopular here in ND. His reelection is starting to look more and more uncertain.

well duh. welcome to the machine.

EvilEgg: If this thing isn't a colossal give-away to the health insurance industry, the seats will be fine.

That's a pretty big "if."

Well, maybe the Blue Dogs should act like Democrats and stop opposing everything. The "financial watchdogs" are opposing a deficit neutral plan, but didn't say shiat when we tossed $3 trillion into a desert.

we (that is the Republicans) are working to unseat Democrats in every district that we have a snowballs chance of competing. We will not be kinder to a "blue dog".

Besides, it's all theatre, Pelosi can allow a bunch of Democratic representatives to vote against this bill and go back to their districts with their "principaled stands." Horsefeathers, I say.

You mean the "liberal health care" that 60% of Americans support? Those goddamned liberal Americans?

Seriously...can we please gerrymander a new country along the coasts? Whoa...not so fast there, Virginia and North Carolina. Our border stops just short of you. Enjoy dinners with South Carolina, Alabama and Oklahoma.

/also, we're keeping Vegas

IrateShadow: Let me be the first to say "Fark the blue dogs."

Why is it so difficult to believe that someone should represent their constituents?

"A lot of Democrats are getting a sneaky suspicion Mrs. Pelosi is willing to sacrifice their seats on the altar of liberal government health care"

Won't you please think of the congressmen? Great argument WSJ.

Of course she is. She knows that in the long run this will ultimately give Democrats and the federal government power and control and that's all she, Obama, and Reid actually care about.

I'm certainly willing to sacrifice their seats.

The Dems won't be in power forever. We need to get things done while we have the chance. I'll trade scores of Blue Dogs seats in order to make sure people don't die in the US because they lack health insurance. Why does this surprise anyone?

rwhamann: IrateShadow: Let me be the first to say "Fark the blue dogs."

Why is it so difficult to believe that someone should represent their constituents?

Because the stands they take don't represent their constituents. They go on and on about fiscal responsibility and yet oppose every proposal that's actually fiscally responsible. They almost unanimously opposed the robust public option that reduced the deficit by $85 billion more than the one that ended up in the bill, but they all supported Bush's trillion dollar tax cuts that weren't paid for at all.

What they are are corporatists.

randomjsa: Of course she is. She knows that in the long run this will ultimately give Democrats and the federal government power and control and that's all she, Obama, and Reid actually care about.

Yeah, I can understand why you might be very upset with the "give the voters what they want, then the voters keep voting for you" strategy. Being a member of the party that only gives the top 2% what they want you're probably not used to that.

Racht: Why wouldn't she? What's the point of having 258 Democrats if you can't actually pass anything you want because you might lose some of them?

The political tides shift all the time. Democrats will lose the majority eventually, no matter what. The idea is to use the time you have in power to do what you think is best for the country. When LBJ accurately said he'd lost the south for a generation after signing the Civil Rights Act, his boldness to do it anyway was something to emulate, not a warning never to sign controversial legislation again.

Amen to that.

If you sit around with your thumbs up your butts, you're going to lose your job anyway, so just get MOVING on this stuff.

randomjsa: Of course she is. She knows that in the long run this will ultimately give Democrats and the federal government power and control and that's all she, Obama, and Reid actually care about.

Translation:"Arff! Arff! Arff!"

Whargarbl Street Journal.

I bet in 2 years the WSJ will be as bad as World Net Daily.

Racht: And I might add, the last time Democrats had a large advantage in the House, their seats were sacrificed precisely because "liberal government health care" didn't pass. The House was viewed as ineffective and the party that actually had ideas and looked like they had the backbone to pass them were voted in.

I'm quite sure Pelosi is aware of that lesson.

the WSJ has been careful to omit this piece of history.

the reason Obama's numbers have been falling is because of all the negative media attention the corporate media had been giving this healthcare debate. they've tried to pronounce this thing dead for months now.

rwhamann: IrateShadow: Let me be the first to say "Fark the blue dogs."

Why is it so difficult to believe that someone should represent their constituents?

Which "constituents" might that be? The corporations? The small but vocal tea baggers? Or the majority of Americans that want to see good health care reform with a public option?

randomjsa: Of course she is. She knows that in the long run this will ultimately give Democrats and the federal government power and control and that's all she, Obama, and Reid actually care about.

Unlike the altruistic, flag-waving, country-lovin', Real American, freedom-lovin', liberty-fellatin', mavericky, tea-baggin', God-fearin' Republicans.

They don't want to be congressmen, the President, Governors, city councilpeople, school board members...they HAVE to be. To SAVE America. The power that comes with it disgusts them, along with the government they so desperately don't want to be a part of. What sacrifices they make to keep running year after year.

GOD BLESS YOU, REPUBLICANS!!!!111

Howie Spankowitz: You mean the "liberal health care" that 60% of Americans support? Those goddamned liberal Americans?

Seriously...can we please gerrymander a new country along the coasts? Whoa...not so fast there, Virginia and North Carolina. Our border stops just short of you. Enjoy dinners with South Carolina, Alabama and Oklahoma.

/also, we're keeping Vegas

Um, Virginia, North Carolina, and Nevada all voted for Obama.



Didn't Bush talk about a mandate with only a fraction of Obama's electoral plurality?

rwhamann: IrateShadow: Let me be the first to say "Fark the blue dogs."

Why is it so difficult to believe that someone should represent their constituents?

I can't speak for all Virginians, but Sens. Webb and Warner will lose my vote if they don't vote for it. If I wanted to be represented by a Republican, I would have voted for Gillmore and Allen.

Damn it! I hate it when politicians are willing to lose power in order to act on an issue!

Who's paying for old people's medicare? Surely not the retirees themselves.

What else do you expect from the Democrat party? Their slogans range from "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few" to "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need".

Shaggy_C: What else do you expect from the Democrat party? Their slogans range from "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few" to "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need".

What's the Republicans?

"fark you, I got mine"?

The destruction of the Democrat party is such a beautiful thing to watch.

good luck on saturday.

Racht: The idea is to use the time you have in power to do what you think is best for the country.

Your idealism is touching.

When LBJ accurately said he'd lost the south for a generation after signing the Civil Rights Act, his boldness to do it anyway was something to emulate, not a warning never to sign controversial legislation again.

What was the estimated 10-year price tag for the Civil Rights Act?

randomjsa: Of course she is. She knows that in the long run this will ultimately give Democrats and the federal government power and control and that's all she, Obama, and Reid actually care about.

And once the minority Republicans get a hold of this power (which for now they claim to abhor), won't that be fun.

The parties' bases have something in common: strident demands that money and power be given to government...then they're surprised and outraged that the other side (but only the other side, obviously) is corrupted by it.

CaptMacMillian: What's the Republicans?

"fark you, I got mine"?

Every little snowflake is special and should be allowed to trample other snowflakes if that's what they want to do.

If Obamacare™ TeddyCare™ Health Care Reform Health Insurance Reform with a Public Option Competitive Option Consumer Option was popular to the American Electorate, it would have been passed before the August recess when President Obama demanded it.

Doing the right thing >> Power.

A failure to get health-care passed will be a loss of my vote.

Put up or get out.

Racht: Yeah, I can understand why you might be very upset with the "give the voters what they want, then the voters keep voting for you" strategy. Being a member of the party that only gives the top 2% what they want you're probably not used to that.

Apparently things need to be explained to you in a way you will understand them.

Giving voters "what they want" has absolutely nothing to do with it. If she were interested in that, she wouldn't be doing things that by her own admission is making people vote against Democrats.

It's funny really, to watch liberals talk. They're 'certain' a majority of the people support this government run health care plan but they're so certain of this that their leadership openly admits it will cost them seats.

It's all about power and control over every aspect of your life. It saddens me that so many people are so eager to say "Yes, please take away some of my freedom".

GameSprocket: Damn it! I hate it when politicians are willing to lose power in order to act on an issue!

Yeah, seriously, shouldn't this get the tag? Doing what you believe in even if it costs you your job? Ask yourself: in 20 years when Republicans love universal health care (like they now love Medicare), will it have been politically expedient to peg insuring the working poor as "liberal" rather than "compassionate conservatism"?

It's 435 people who want to keep their jobs and they're all hoping to look good on their next performance review.

Pelosi is just the director of the Marketing department, and you know what kinds of asshats work in marketing.

Emrick: I'm certainly willing to sacrifice their seats.

The Dems won't be in power forever. We need to get things done while we have the chance. I'll trade scores of Blue Dogs seats in order to make sure people don't die in the US because they lack health insurance. Why does this surprise anyone?

I am pretty much in the same boat. Plus it is better to run on a record of having done something than to appear before the voters and tell them we were too afraid of losing our position of power to actually accomplish anything. If all the D's do is avoid conflict, they just make themselves all the more targets for the R's. The D's need to regain the initiative and move forward.

Lumpmoose: Um, Virginia, North Carolina, and Nevada all voted for Obama.

Reading comprehension is an underrated skill.

soy_bomb: If Obamacare™ TeddyCare™ Health Care Reform Health Insurance Reform with a Public Option Competitive Option Consumer Option was popular to the American Electorate, it would have been passed before the August recess when President Obama demanded it.

More like if the American Electorate actually voted on bills it would have passed decades ago.

"Sacrifice"?

The point of being an elected official is not to get re-elected, but to improve the nation, even if it means "costing you your seat".

Shaggy_C: What else do you expect from the Democrat party? Their slogans range from "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few" to "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need".

Wow. And I thought that Jesus was FOR those things, as opposed to being against them.

Gulper Eel:
What was the estimated 10-year price tag for the Civil Rights Act?

The CBO didn't exist then, but my guess would be close to 0. Which is significantly more costly than the -$100 billion HR 3962 will cost us.

THX 1138: Shaggy_C: What else do you expect from the Democrat party? Their slogans range from "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few" to "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need".

Wow. And I thought that Jesus was FOR those things, as opposed to being against them.

I'm not sure they've ever actually read that "bible" book.

randomjsa: It's all about power and control over every aspect of your life. It saddens me that so many people are so eager to say "Yes, please take away some of my freedom".

Taking away your freedom to do what?