Home / Blogs / LSekhmet's blog
Evan Bayh says "it's time" for incumbents to go.
This Yahoo article makes clear why Senator Evan Bayh (D-IN) is about to retire; he is tired of the partisanship, gridlock, and pointless politicking going on at the expense of the American people.
Here's the link:
Here's a relevant quote:
Bayh blamed the current atmosphere of intense partisanship on the need for Senators to constantly campaign to be reelected to another six-year term. Citing his father, a popular liberal Senator in the '60s and '70s, he noted that "back in the day they used to have the saying: 'You campaign for 2 years and you legislate for 4.' Now you campaign for 6!" He noted that the need for constant fundraising made it nearly impossible to focus on passing legislation.
The writers of the AP article, Andrew Golis and Brett Michael Dykes, summed up an appearance Bayh made on MSNBC this morning as:
Flatly denying any possibility that he'd seek the presidency or any other higher office, Bayh argued that the American people needed to deliver a "shock" to Congress by voting incumbents out in mass and replacing them with people interested in reforming the process and governing for the good of the people, rather than deep-pocketed special-interest groups.
When a dedicated public servant such as Evan Bayh says it's time for all incumbents in both parties to go, there's an even bigger problem brewing in Washington, DC, than we had previously considered.
It's highly unusual that a public servant says even in private that everyone needs to go -- that gridlock, partisanship and politicking have gone too far and have interfered with the people's business. But it's even more unusual when a politician says the same thing (that gridlock, partisanship and politicking have to go) publicly -- because that's an indictment not just of his own party and the other party, but of how we're attempting to govern, period. That, in essence, is Bayh's problem. We can't get anything done because no one wants to really do the work -- they'd rather just posture and pontificate and argue. This is why we're in major trouble.
Bayh said today that the system is irretrievably broken -- the language used by a divorcing couple, mind you -- and that there is no way anyone who is currently there can fix it, because they're all out of touch (and perhaps out to lunch as well) because of the mindless machinery that makes House members go from vote to fundraiser and back again, and Senators likewise.
I never thought I'd hear such difficult honesty from _any_ politician; it's refreshing to hear it, but it's also a sign of how desperate and dire our circumstances have become.
(crossposted at Alegre's Corner)
ShareThis
- LSekhmet's blog
- Login to post comments
After years of the standard, "spend more time with my family" BS, hearing Bayh give an open and honest assessment was wonderful.
Civil Discourse - ERA - A Mother President - Women's Rights - Primary Reform
Btw, I just tried to edit it to make it match _exactly_ my AC article (I remembered to put "cross-posted at Partizane.com" this time at the bottom.), but it won't let me do it. :-(
I think Bayh is plenty frustrated, and my hunch is that he can't stand the DNC just like the rest of us. I don't think he cares much for the RNC, or any of the other "alphabet soup" letters that comprise our broken duopolistic system.
I call what Bayh said "difficult honesty." ;)
There's no excuse for this, DNC. You screwed the pooch; time to pay the piper.
and besides, my editor keeps us thinking
Civil Discourse - ERA - A Mother President - Women's Rights - Primary Reform
You know me, NH -- always in "editor mode." Plus, I wanted things to match exactly -- and I found after comparison that they didn't, quite. (Close, but no cigar, as the old saying goes.) ;)
I don't know if folks are just dispirited tonight, or are enthralled by the Olympics, but I thought Bayh saying that all the incumbents need to go would be a bigger draw. A/C has _zero_ comments. And so far, it's just you and I who've talked about this big story _here_ (Partizane.com, home of the Hope Bong!) -- not just that Bayh was honest, but saying it publicly and very, very loudly was memorable. I mean, this guy has to go back to the Senate and face his colleagues -- all of whom he's said need to go, thank you -- for the next ten months until his year is up. That takes courage.
There's no excuse for this, DNC. You screwed the pooch; time to pay the piper.
I wouldn't worry about Bayh. I'm sure he doesn't need to work anyway.
I do think the Olympics are taking most of our attention and that's a good thing. We need distraction sometimes and these two weeks can be so much fun. And so sad too.
Civil Discourse - ERA - A Mother President - Women's Rights - Primary Reform
I agree with you -- there's the thrill of victory, the agony of defeat -- and the much worse agony of that poor Georgian luger dying needlessly on a dangerous course. :-(
There's no excuse for this, DNC. You screwed the pooch; time to pay the piper.
for leaving the Dems in the lurch. There is no time now to find a replacement candidate. That was just really impulsive of him. It looks like he's trying to be all noble, but he waited until the last minute to drop out, and then dropped out.
Also, I wish he would say more about the fundraising. I read an article in 2004 of four retiring senators, and they all said the fundraising had just gotten exhausting.
Because they feel they can pick the best nominee this way?
I understand your frustration with this, Cat. But I think he did say the fundraising was too much. It was the lead quote in Yahoo's article.
There's no excuse for this, DNC. You screwed the pooch; time to pay the piper.
long time no talk!
Cat, I'm always glad to chat. :-) I just wish my health would allow me to write more blogs; now, I need to have a really strong idea in order to get past the low energy and other health problems with which I am beset. (Or is it "which beset me?" Whatever.)
I just said at A/C that I know Bayh has more than one motive in doing this; he's a professional politician, after all! But it is noteworthy he did this in this way. He's trying to tell the other Dems something, and my hunch is that it's to run away from Obama, and run away from the Congress, if you want to win. Tell 'em how angry and frustrated you are with the gridlock in Congress, and say you will work in a bipartisan way (even though that is a buzzword now, it doesn't have to remain so) to fix the real problems -- but you are upset with the lack of leadership from the White House and you're upset with your own Congressional leadership and you demand changes.
This is the only way any incumbent can win with this mess. And Obama will have to be like G. W. Bush and realize that if he wants a Dem majority, he'll have to put up with being put down by his own -- he'll hate it, but if he doesn't agree to it, he'll have a Republican majority most likely in the House because people are furious and want all incumbents _gone_, and most third parties just don't have enough money or organization to compete with the two big monster parties.
There's no excuse for this, DNC. You screwed the pooch; time to pay the piper.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0210/33085.html
By announcing his plans so close to the state’s candidate filing deadline, Bayh all but ensured that top Democratic Party leaders in Indiana alone would select his successor. And the timing of the entire episode — which Republicans have vigorously protested against — also appears to be advancing Democratic interests in the conservative-minded southern Indiana district now held by Rep. Brad Ellsworth, a leading Democratic prospect to replace Bayh.
Since no Democrat was able to collect enough signatures to qualify for the primary ballot Tuesday, the party nomination for the seat Bayh has held for the past two terms falls into the hands of a state party apparatus that is firmly within Bayh’s grasp.
“Evan Bayh is not naïve, and he is aware of the political calendar,” said Edward Treacy, Democratic chairman of populous Marion County. “I’m sure Sen. Bayh was well aware of the need for the party to have as much input as possible. He knew what he was doing.”
It’s now up to the state Democratic Central Committee, a group of 32 party leaders loyal to Bayh, to choose a candidate to run in his place. And sitting atop the deliberations will be Bayh’s close political ally, Indiana Democratic Party Chairman Dan Parker.
Civil Discourse - ERA - A Mother President - Women's Rights - Primary Reform
I think the Indiana grassroots Dems got shafted here, and I don't like that -- but I still think Bayh's trying to send a message to the other Dems still planning to stay in the Senate (and House) if they manage to get re-elected.
I never doubted for one minute that Bayh had multiple motives with this; he's a career politician, and a very good one, after all, and that's what politicians do.
There's no excuse for this, DNC. You screwed the pooch; time to pay the piper.
is super-secretly planning on primarying Obama in 2012. No, really.
I can't quite figure Bayh out. It does seem like burning bridges politically to say the problem is ALL of Congress. And all politicians, even good ones, usually have some sort of positioning or something behind their public statements. Maybe he really IS just tired (I doubt the 2012 thing is it).
But I'm still pretty disturbed by the way he's casting this as a lack of bipartisanship, because I think the Democrats have mostly used the bipartisanship rhetoric as cover for 1) doing nothing; or 2) moving center-right/right. Because even with a Dem Congress and President, the Democrats haven't really fought for anything the least bit liberal or even left-leaning.and been thwarted by partisanship. Far from it, they can't fold fast enough. It's not the fighting that's the problem, it's the fighting over big fat nothingburgers that's the problem.
I don't really know what to make of it other than what I've already wrote. It is simply unheard of for a sitting politician to blame everyone else for doing nothing, and say, "That's why I'm getting out." So I give him points for that.
But as for the timing, it appears Indiana's Democratic Party is just fine with appointing a candidate (they say "picking the best candidate," but that's "just words"). What really gets shafted here is the Indiana grass-roots Dems, who don't have enough time to pick _their_ candidate. (I trust the Indiana version of the DNC as much as the national version -- ZERO.)
There's no excuse for this, DNC. You screwed the pooch; time to pay the piper.
It's lack of leadership.
you put it in a cogent nutshell:
"Democrats have mostly used the bipartisanship rhetoric as cover for 1) doing nothing; or 2) moving center-right/right"
That about covers it!
Didn't find this till today or I'd have commented sooner. I'm one of those who was glued to the Olympics last night.
There has been some speculation that Bayh may run again for his old seat as Governor of Indiana. I find that more likely than a primary challenge of Obama. We heartlanders can stand only so much of the bigtime and then we need to go home to recover our perspective.
Bayh says he likes executive work but flatly rules out a run for the presidency in 2012. That leaves the executive mansion in Indianapolis. By all accounts he was a roaring success in the four terms he served.
If Bayh runs for Gov. in Indiana, more power to him. I'm sure he can do a lot of good that way.
I was glued to the Olympics later in the evening; I am a big figure skating fan and enjoyed watching Johnny Weir (my favorite skater, by far), Jeremy Abbott (he's so pretty when he skates, but he has nerve problems in big competitions; he's in 14th, I think, and I felt so sorry for him), and Stephane Lambiel of Switzerland (really pretty skater, great spins). (I don't like Lysacek. I don't know why, except I find him to be awkward and graceless. I also think his attitude toward other skaters is nearly as toxic as Plushenko's, who admits he tries to psych other skaters out. I hope Weir will be on the ball for that tactic and not fall for it, as he skates second to last on Thursday and understands Russian, besides.)
I'm glad you saw my post today, and that you enjoyed it. :-)
There's no excuse for this, DNC. You screwed the pooch; time to pay the piper.
There's so much going on right now in the political world, it's taking time for me to digest what Bayh said in relation to everything else that's going on. Maybe there's a big anti-incumbent sentiment but there's more to it than that. People are trying to deal with the realization they were sold a bill of goods and now they're waking up to the fact they've been had. We're being lied to on a daily basis. The recession is over! Uh, no, not really. Everything said in the 2008 campaign was a lie, along with practically everything the president said since he took office.
The millions of voters in the tea party movement are almost as much anti-GOP as they are anti-DNC. They're mostly centrists and conservatives who are against progressives in either party. They're Dems, Indies, and Pubs who have had enough of representatives who don't represent them. That's why they're angry. Any politician who voted against the will of the people in their district is going to be replaced in November.
It may not have seemed possible before Brown was elected but it's possible the Dems could lose both the House and the Senate.
People are very angry now, and I think most people could run against their representatives and win -- if I had the money, say, I could run against Feingold (even though he's far better than most of the Senators and I have no real dislike of him save his '08 support of Obama over the far better qualified HRC) because 1) I am poor, 2) I am honest, 3) I know the system is broken and 4) I dislike Obama's politics and policies and am not afraid to say so. (Pity I am poor and have bad health, right?)
I think, unfortunately, that Paul Ryan is safe in his seat for the House because he's a Republican, he's angry with Obama, and he's been one of the Republicans who has most been in the news favoring what he calls "fiscal responsibility and restraint" but I call "cut Social Security and Medicare to the bone, and forget about expanding Medicaid, too, even though many are out of work and need social services more than _ever_ and we're in a recession." So running against _him_ wouldn't get me anywhere; it'd be either run for Governor of WI (our Gov. is retiring) or run against Feingold if _I_ wanted to run. ;) (I guess for Feingold's sake it's good I _can't_, huh? 0:-))
And Feingold would normally be a safe seat; he's done what his constituents want, mostly. He's been ethical and responsible; he talks with constituents and goes to every county in Wisconsin once per year to talk with his constituents and hear what's on their mind -- he's done this since he took office eighteen years ago, and I applaud that. But if _he's_ in trouble, what with his principled opposition to the Patriot Act, and being one of the most ethical members of the Senate, imagine how bad off the others are!
And that's basically what Bayh's saying. "If you want to win, run against Obama. Run against the Congress. Say you are fed up with Congressional leadership, because it stinks. Complain about the lack of leadership coming from the President." The unspoken corollary to all that, mind, is that Obama _must_ understand that if he wants a Dem majority to work with in _either_ branch of Congress, he has to consent to being put down over and over again -- and I don't think his ego can stand that.
I fully expect the House to be lost. I know Reid will be voted out in Nevada unless election fraud on the grand scale occurs, and even then, his constituents will find a way to drag him from office. It is likely that if the Dems have _any_ majority in the Senate, it'll be by maybe one vote -- including the two "independents" Bernie Sanders of Vermont (Socialist) and Joe Lieberman (very conservative Dem, highly beholden to special interests at this point).
Bayh is a realist. He knows what's going to happen, and he's sounding this cry _now_ because he expects other professional pols to understand what he's saying-- which probably isn't even one fifth as much as he _wants_ to say (though it's quite noteworthy as it is, what he _did_ say) -- and try to save themselves any way they can.
Thanks for enjoying my work, Ron. :-)
There's no excuse for this, DNC. You screwed the pooch; time to pay the piper.
Sorry to hear you're poor and in bad health. That sucks.
How to increase wealth:
Wait for the market to drop over the next 6 weeks and then buy some shares of a good stock or two. There will probably be a huge rally in May that could last through much of the summer. Sell late July or early August. Wait for the market to implode again and then buy again.
The way to improve health:
Avoid iron and iron-rich foods. It's best to be borderline anemic. No problem for pre-menopausal women but men and older women should give blood to reduce iron levels. Iron causes arterial irritation that causes plaque deposits to form.
Take antioxidants but not E. Look into Alpha Lipoic Acid. HowStuffWorks "How Alpha Lipoic Acid Works" Also, Coenzyme Q10 and an oil soluble version of C called Ascorbyl Palmitate.
I agree about Feingold. He was always about my favorite Senator until he supported O. Now, he's just another bone-headed progressive who is now part of the problem, not the solution. Anyone who supports the policies of the president is going to have a hard time come November.
What's the big story about Bayh? He'll be just fine and handle things on his own to talk about the Olympics. Anyway, Mardi Gras and Fat Tuesday are upon us, and anyone wondering what are some typical dishes or foods to eat during this time can look into paczki. Paczki is essentially the Polish term for donut – as a form of donut is a typical dish for Fat Tuesday, or Shrove Tuesday (Fat Tuesday is a European tradition – people would indulge in sweet and fatty foods before Ash Wednesday and Lent, French and otherwise, when they would fast – there isn't anything special and American about Mardi Gras or Fat Tuesday, at all) but if you don't have a bakery on hand, or don't want to get payday loans to order some – you could just get a jelly donut. (Ich bin ein Berliner!)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/02/17/idaho-tea-party-speaker-h_n_466261.html
I know, I know. The Tea Party movement is nothing more than a collection of rational-minded patriots concerned about government expansion. If one of them happens to support murdering a sitting U.S. Senator, they're just "the fringe". A fringe "featured speaker" at one of their latest Tea Party gatherings. In the threatened Senator's home state.
advocating taking Clinton into a locked room and having her never come out.
Threats of violence against politicians, and esp. against women, are horrific and should be condemned. But they are by no means a unique aspect of the Tea Partiers. What was it Sandra Bernhard <a href="http://www.nydailynews.com/gossip/2008/09/19/2008-09-19_sandra_bernhard_issues_gang_rape_warning-2.html">said about Palin?</a>
Few enough Democrats were concerned about threats of violence against either woman (to the contrary, they were largely cheered) at the time.
If you go to Layla's link and watch the video there, it shows a woman making a comment with a big smile on her face. IOW, it wasn't a serious threat, it was all in fun and the crowd knew it just as anyone would who watched that clip.
It's interesting to watch the Left squirm as regular people come out and exercise their Constitutional rights. These are just good, normal, average Americans who have had enough. They are who were once called the silent majority but now, they're silent no more.
I'm going to put up a post soon about the tea party movement.
That is so off base. There is no non-serious, "fun" way to threaten a sitting U.S. Senator in a public speech with lynching. Ron, if a Democrat or a liberal/progressive had said the same thing about Scott Brown in a public forum, you would be all over it right now. And you would be right to do so.
Pubicly advocating the assassination of political figures one disagrees with is not exercise of one's Constitutional rights. You know better.
He's the one who said someone should beat Hillary back in 2008. You like to quote that hate site, The Huffington Post, so here ya go: Keith Olbermann's Idea For Beating Hillary: Literally Beating Hillary.
Layla, what you're trying to do is tar an entire movement that involves millions of people with one comment made by a woman in jest. That's very wrong. It's generally a bad idea to joke about such things but to try to brand a movement the way you're trying to do is just plain wrong.
Exactly, what about him? A media personality who has said stupid, hateful, and yes, threatening things throughout his career in the media. And this was one of them. And it should be condemned. And it was. Repeatedly. The very Huffington Post article you cite condemns what he said. Thoroughly. And he apologized the next day.
Somehow, I don't suspect Patty Murray will be getting an apology anytime soon. If she were to even bring it up, Tea Partiers would probably condemn her for "tarring an entire movement that involves millions of people with one comment made by a woman in jest."
"Hate site"? Puh-leeze. No no, sir, Stormfront is a hate site. Huffpo is a bloated political/entertainment aggregator, just like the Drudge Report, which I imagine you visit too. Both occasionally post actual news. This was one of those occasions.
Sorry that HuffPo does not agree with your political philosophy, Ron. That disagreement does not morph it into a "hate site".
Overuse of words like "hate" drains them of all meaning over time. If you want to learn more about what actual hate sites and groups look like, I suggest you visit the Southern Poverty Law Center for their ongoing investigation of actual hate groups.
http://www.splcenter.org/?ref=logo
I say again: if a Democrat had said the same thing about a Republican official, all the smiles and giggles in the world would not have allowed you to accept that it was only "in jest".
It is escaping me where that quote came from. I do remember something like it from 2008, but I can't remember who said it. But from your description of it being a "national mainstream media figure", it does not sound like it came from a political figure, but rather a media personality. While that wouldn't make it any better, it would make it less relevant to your attempt to place your rebuttal in a "Democrats say bad things like this too" frame. If it turns out that a Democratic politician actually said that publicly, then you've got something.
Threats of violence against politicians are certainly not unique to the Tea Party movement. But they are uniquely prevalent in their screeds and gatherings, more so than any other recent political movement. The constant apocalyptic rhetoric mixed with the regular urgings to grab your guns and head to Washington, to the actual bringing of weapons to their gatherings, and those of the politicians they offer threats to--these are not normal features of other current political movements. They are a regular feature of the Tea Party movement.
Please offer some specific examples of where Democrats "largely cheered" threats of violence against Hillary Clinton or Sarah Palin. A handful of noxious performance artists like Sandra Bernhard saying stupid and disgusting things does not make for Democrats "largely cheering" such vile statements.