Bayh's Centrists Have No Agenda

by Josh Orton, Thu Mar 26, 2009 at 08:12:12 AM EDT

He says so himself:

"We literally have no agenda," Bayh shot back. "How can they be threatened by a group that has taken no policy positions?"

So what's the point? If Bayh refutes the notion that his caucus of self-appointed moderates disagrees with Obama's agenda, then why tie a ribbon around yourself?

Does anyone think there's anything here besides an attempt to stay somehow relevant? The Washington political media loves this type of posturing, but is there substance?

Tags: Evan Bayh (all tags)

  • 14 Comments
  • 0 recs
  • Share
  • Permalink

Comments

14 Comments

Shadow_head_small
I think they DO have an Agenda

I said in a diary the other day, these "moderates" are closer to the political philosophy of Ronald Reagan then to Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

They are children of the 70s, 80s and 90s, and are stuck in that center right mode.

My take is, the country IS ready to move left after 40 years of Reaganism has proven to be an utter failure for the vast majority of the population.

But, Bayh, and the rest of the Mod-a-dems (kind of like the Octa-mom) are simply to the right of where the country wants to go.

To Senator Bahy, it seems, elections shouldn't have consequences after all.

The question for him and his cohorts is, why now?

Where was this camaraderie  during the Republican years?

How do these folks think they would have been treated if this was the Newt Ginrich era, and they were moderate Republicans, playing "the Super Majority" concept...

Newt would have had them knee-capped, the RNC would have cut off their funding, hell, Tom Delay would have threatened their first born.

Those ruthless bastards acknowledged no obstacle  to move the country to the right, but Evan wants to be the anchor to keep us there, and not allow the natural trajectory of the country to move left.

by WashStateBlue 2009-03-26 08:35AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: I think they DO have an Agenda

I agree with much of what you say, but look where the Republican party is today with their past "kneecapping" tactics.  The days of the liberal or moderate Republican are history and their party is pretty much a regional party of white southern males.

So yeah, there should be some consequences for blue dogs who try to hold the democratic agenda hostage.  But let's not make the mistake of the Republicans and drive them from the party.

by mtnspirit 2009-03-26 08:59AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
There has to be a middle ground....

I certainly am not advocating Tom Delay as a role model.

But, these folks ARE the minority in the Senate Caucus.

Yet, if you saw the opening bit on Rachel Maddow's show last night, it seems their intent it to take a Democratic Majority and turn it into a tie, basically undo the elections in effect and turn a Democratic majority on it's head.

If that is their intention, should there NOT be any consequence for them?

They are, in effect, advocating for the Republican agenda.

And, you know, what the Republicans will do.

They will allow Evan to water down the bills, THEN they will vote against them anyway.

It's a win-win for them.

Weaker bills mean less effective, meaning more chance Obama fails, meaning they get a double win?

by WashStateBlue 2009-03-26 09:23AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: I think they DO have an Agenda

I doubt they will flee. They know they have more ability to get press traction by being a "rebel" in the democratic party than a minor part of the Republican party.

The republican party is where they are today because the bad ideas won out. If the moderates have good ideas, then they should explain clearly why they are better ideas than what Obama proposes. To oppose mostly the liberal parts of the spending bills in a kneejerk fashion without explaining why the long term benefits of such bills are not good enough shows me that they are just on a power trip and that they really do not put much value on social programs compared to the costly programs they did not oppose in the past. If they can't explain with clarity,  and they

by Pravin 2009-03-26 10:54AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: Bayh's Centrists Have No Agenda

You know, a moderating influence is needed when a country takes too many steps to one side of the fringe. Which side has that been - the RIGHT. And the way to do that is cater to the side that has been underserved badly for many years. And what side was that - the constituents of the liberal side. So why are moderates still trying to act as protectors of the right by making sure the country doesn't veer left? Aren't they pretty much taking sides when they do that? By veering left, the country doesnt become leftist, but it just provides some balance. Issues such as education, health care, and programs for the poor have been ignored for too long. I do not say that it should be a permanent top priority, but it should be one right now.

They have an agenda. It is to be the conservatives lapdog so they can appear "reasonable" to them despite the fact that the so called lefty wing of the party (Feingold) actually win out on the race for winning ideas in the last 8 years.

Forget ideology. Based on supporting ideas that worked/failed, who has been more right in the last 8 years - Bayh/Lieberman or Feingold/Dean?
Simple meritocracy that people on the right and left understand.

by Pravin 2009-03-26 08:49AM | 0 recs
97250_45
Re: Bayh's Centrists Have No Agenda

 Bayh and his cabal can kiss my rosy red ass. I hope they were watching the President's webinar today and come to the realization that supporting his agenda and budget will benefit their political ambitions more than throwing in with the Party of No. If not, I will contribute to their Democratic replacements with gusto.

by QTG 2009-03-26 08:55AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: Bayh's Centrists Have No Agenda

Good!  I'm glad he's on the defensive now!  Any way we can primary him to make him more nervous?

by LordMike 2009-03-26 09:00AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: Bayh's Centrists Have No Agenda

bayh just wants to be in charge of something.  he bayhled from his prez bid, will never hold leadership, passed up again for veep, this is probably his only chance.

by Doug Tuttle 2009-03-26 09:20AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: Bayh's Centrists Have No Agenda

I am just glad they are responding to pressure.  Obviously they are concerned about being portrayed as obstructionist.  Good!  Keep up the pressure on these bozos.

by candide 2009-03-26 09:28AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: Bayh's Centrists Have No Agenda

Couldn't one ask the same thing about the Republican Party, Sen. Bayh?

by mcc 2009-03-26 10:16AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Actually, they have an agenda

The republicans Do have an agenda

1. Call for Tax Cuts

  1. Wail about "Socialism, destroying the Republic"
  2. More Tax Cuts anyone
  3. Ignore the last 8 years, blame Pelosi-Obama-Soros-the ACLU-The Media- for the economic melt.
  4. Maybe some Tax cuts would help?
  5. Kneel and Kiss Rush's Papal Ring
  6. Can I get a big Shout-Out for Tax Cuts?

by WashStateBlue 2009-03-26 10:22AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: Bayh's Centrists Have No Agenda

So if they have no agenda, are they accusing the majority of Democratic politicians who haven't signed on as having some weird agenda? Do they think that their group is more capable of supporting proposals on merit alone compared to the "ideologically tainted" democrats?

WHAT IS THE POINT, FERRIS BUELLER's DAD AKA EVAN BAYH? You are as clueless as the lookalike  character in the movie that drives cluelessly as his clever son passes him by.

by Pravin 2009-03-26 11:03AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: Bayh's Centrists Have No Agenda

They're not moderate; they're muddled.

by bobgr 2009-03-26 11:14AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
The Apple Fell a Long Way From the Tree

If Birch were dead, he'd be rolling over in his grave.  What a disappointment Evan has become.

by Deeg 2009-03-26 03:15PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads


----------- myDD - skin -----------