Blue Dogs, please don’t be fooled

December 9, 2006

The Hill reported this week that the president would host a meeting with leaders of the conservative Blue Dog and New Democrat coalitions, in order to discuss areas of “mutual cooperation.” The get-together, which happened yesterday at the White House, hasn’t generated much in the way of media attention, but I found one local news report about Rep. Mike Ross’ (D-Ark.) take on the meeting.

Congressman Mike Ross and other centrist Democrats met with President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney for the first time on Friday.

While the meeting was productive, Ross says it came several years late. He serves a co-chairman of the Blue Dog Coalition, a group of Democrats with fiscally conservative ideas.

Ross says Bush is receptive to the concerns of Democrats, including those regarding the Iraq war, earmark reform and alternative fuels. To Ross, Bush “really appeared to me he’s speaking from the heart.”

Well, of course he seemed to be speaking from the heart. He usually appears to be speaking from the heart — right up until he blows off anyone who dares to disagree with him.

Bush is “receptive to the concerns of Democrats, including those regarding the Iraq war”? Does anyone actually believe this?

I’m not picking on Ross; he’s not a bad guy and he acknowledged that the meeting should have happened years ago. The reality is, Bush didn’t bother chatting with right-leaning Dems before, because a) they’re Dems; and b) he didn’t need them. Now that Dems in the majority, Bush is ready to speak from the heart. Yeah, right.

Please tell me the Blue Dogs can see through this transparent charade.

Bush/Cheney? Receptive to Ds? Right. They’re just playing the divide and conquor game they’re so good at, but given the Nov elections, on a different field.

Some House Dem caucus estimates, lifted from John Nichols’ 11/12 column at the Nation:
Blue Dogs predict 44 members
New Democrats hope to break 50
Progressives are looking for more than 70 members

  • What gets my goat (where did that expression come from?) is the hubris of the Bush administration believing its policies involved conservatism. Bankrupting us beyond anything known historically to create yet another cult of personality around our “wartime president” … conservative? Trashing the hundreds of years old basis of our civil liberties … conservative? Denying the electorate and nearly half of their representatives any voice at all in government … conservative? Appointing unqualified hacks and boobs to the Federal courts … conservative? Selling off our national parks and other resources (and failing to pay for upkeep of the rest) … conservative? Spitting on earned military medals which offering Medals of Freedom to feckless idiots … conservative? Cutting veterans’ benefits … conservative? Using federal money to promote superstitious beliefs and practices … conservative? Undermining the FDA, EPA and other agencies designed to provide at least a minimum well-being … conservative? Dividing the electorate into the national equivalent of the Bloods and Crips … conservative?

    C’mon, Blue Dogs, get real: defend your principles sure, but don’t give these Bush Crime Family creeps the time of day. Their conservatism has more in common with Adolf Hitler and Benedict XVI than it does with Alexander Hamilton or George Will.

  • To Ross, Bush “really appeared to me he’s speaking from the heart.”

    What’s all this touchy feely stuff from Bush and conservative leaners?

    I was reading about the Wesley Snipes tax cas today and wondered how Uncle Sam would do in an audit by the IRS. If Bush and them keep using the government for their own purposes, the US might lose its non-profit status.

  • CB – you could have also used the headline “Bush, Cheney try their hand at trianguation.”

  • When Republicans controlled the House, they treated the Blue Dogs like dirt. They refused to permit Blue Dog amendments to be debated on the floor (probably they feared that some might actually pass). For the most part, Texas liberals survived the DeLay gerrymandering. However, Blue Dogs such as Charlie Stenholm, Jim Turner and Max Sandlin did not.

    Now Republicans want to deal with the Blue Dogs without even offering an apology for the actions of the past. The Blue Dogs should keep in mind the moral of the fable, the “Scorpion and the Frog.”

  • Please tell me the Blue Dogs can see through this transparent charade.

    Individual Democrats should get crushingly depressed by how the Republicans have screwed up their lives. Then other Democrats should blame them for not being able to do as well as they should.

  • Steve

    Blue Dog Democrats do want to be fooled.

    They have bipartisan credentials to sustain and polish and that’s way more important than anything so crass as reality or facts or American soldiers dying for no good reasons.

  • If I thought Bush were competent at anything, this might worry me. But he isn’t, so fear not – this attempt at divide-and-conquer will come to nothing. ‘Mutual cooperation’ means ‘servitude’ to Bush, and I doubt the Blue Dogs are willing to be his servants.

    • Comments are closed.