Oh, Please!
I find it very interesting that Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House for the 110th and 111th Congress is under attack for the disastrous midterm election, yet Harry Reid's leadership position in the Senate is apparently quite secure. Many of the important bills which she "rammed" through the House (according to the Republican Party) languished in the Senate under Reid's timid leadership. She did her job well as Speaker of the House. He, as Senate Majority leader, eh, not so much. Yet she is being attacked by her own party and by some major news outlets and being urged to step aside.
Amazingly, the "center left" editorial board of the Los Angeles Times holds the same opinion I do. Nancy Pelosi didn't cost the Democrats control of Congress. Barack Obama did.
One cogent argument for Pelosi to step down posits that she did a poor job of selling Democratic policies to the electorate. Yet Pelosi, the first female speaker, has been extraordinarily effective as a legislative leader and fundraiser, shepherding through historic reforms amid solid GOP opposition. Getting such legislation passed is her job — drumming up public approval for it is not. That role properly falls to the Democrats' spokesman in chief, President Obama.
Obama himself has acknowledged this, saying the election taught him that leadership isn't just about passing bills but "making an argument that people can understand." Judged solely by her record, and not by GOP attacks trying to paint her as either a Leninist or the Wicked Witch of the West, Pelosi deserves to stay on as her party's leader. [Emphasis added]
I would only add that not only did President Obama not articulate convincing arguments as to the accomplishments of the Democrats during this difficult times for the country, he also failed to actually lead in crucial fights for the badly needed change he promised, preferring to compromise before the real battles even began. As the editorial noted, the electorate didn't vote against Nancy Pelosi's leadership skills, they voted for an improved economy, jobs, and secure housing, things which the Democrats promised in 2008 and failed to deliver. That failure wasn't Pelosi's; it was Reid's and Obama's.
All of the boys in the blue column should take a hint from Pelosi's style. They should grow a spine.
Amazingly, the "center left" editorial board of the Los Angeles Times holds the same opinion I do. Nancy Pelosi didn't cost the Democrats control of Congress. Barack Obama did.
One cogent argument for Pelosi to step down posits that she did a poor job of selling Democratic policies to the electorate. Yet Pelosi, the first female speaker, has been extraordinarily effective as a legislative leader and fundraiser, shepherding through historic reforms amid solid GOP opposition. Getting such legislation passed is her job — drumming up public approval for it is not. That role properly falls to the Democrats' spokesman in chief, President Obama.
Obama himself has acknowledged this, saying the election taught him that leadership isn't just about passing bills but "making an argument that people can understand." Judged solely by her record, and not by GOP attacks trying to paint her as either a Leninist or the Wicked Witch of the West, Pelosi deserves to stay on as her party's leader. [Emphasis added]
I would only add that not only did President Obama not articulate convincing arguments as to the accomplishments of the Democrats during this difficult times for the country, he also failed to actually lead in crucial fights for the badly needed change he promised, preferring to compromise before the real battles even began. As the editorial noted, the electorate didn't vote against Nancy Pelosi's leadership skills, they voted for an improved economy, jobs, and secure housing, things which the Democrats promised in 2008 and failed to deliver. That failure wasn't Pelosi's; it was Reid's and Obama's.
All of the boys in the blue column should take a hint from Pelosi's style. They should grow a spine.
Labels: 111th Congress, Election 2010
posted by Diane at 3:38 AM
1 Comments:
More and more, Obama reminds me of the little kid who tries to keep his parents or siblings from fighting, trying to keep a peace that isn't really there. It doesn't keep the parents from divorcing or keep the family together -- it just delays the conflict and doesn't solve the problem.
Post a Comment
<< Home