Pelosi: 'Let the healing begin'

[Amianthus]

Thursday, November 16, 2006
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California, called for peace among her Democratic colleagues Thursday after current House Minority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Maryland, defeated Pelosi ally Jack Murtha, D-Pennsylvania, for the No. 2. leadership post.

"Steny came out a big winner today," Pelosi said after the elections. "It was a stunning victory for him. We've had our debates; we've had our disagreements in that room. And now, that is over, as I said to my colleagues, as we say in church, let there be peace on Earth and let it begin with us. Let the healing begin."

The race for House majority leader became increasingly divisive after Pelosi publicly endorsed Murtha for the position. Though her endorsement frustrated many Democrats who thought she was creating unneeded divisiveness amongst the caucus, Pelosi maintained she was proud to support Murtha.

"I was proud to support him for majority leader, because I thought that would be the best way to bring an end to the war in Iraq," Pelosi said. "I know that he will continue to take the lead on that issue for our caucus, for this Congress, for our country. So I want to salute Mr. Murtha for his leadership."


-- CNN Ticker Producer Alexander Mooney
Article

[sirs]

Pelosi's early moves worry Democrats

November 16, 2006
BY ROBERT NOVAK Sun-Times Columnist

As the new House majority caucus prepared to pick its leadership today, Democrats were trying to make the best of the inevitability of Nancy Pelosi as the party's first speaker in a dozen years. They have put out the word that she was really not serious in endorsing Rep. John Murtha for majority leader. How much effort she has exerted for her longtime ally is irrelevant, but she has actively solicited votes this week.

The damage to her was irrevocable when she wrote her colleagues last weekend urging them to pick Murtha over Rep. Steny Hoyer. Associates of Hoyer say her letter stunned him, and he was not alone. While Pelosi had made clear she would vote for Murtha, the public endorsement was unexpected. Although Pelosi's apologists had emphasized that this was not a public campaign but a pro forma endorsement, she began actively campaigning for Murtha on Tuesday. Even before that, the letter was taken seriously within the Democratic Caucus, including by Hoyer and his close associates. A speaker's written word cannot be taken lightly.

This is a no-win situation for Pelosi.

If Murtha wins today, she will be accused of personal vindictiveness in derailing Hoyer, who is more popular in the caucus and better qualified for leadership.
If Murtha loses, as is much more probable, she will be seen as bumbling her first attempt to lead the new Democratic majority.

Pelosi's mistake confirms longstanding, privately held Democratic apprehension. Their concerns do not reflect the Republican indictment of her as a reflexive San Francisco liberal. Some of her most trenchant congressional critics are on the left wing of the party. These colleagues worry that her decision-making may be distorted by personal considerations.

Hoyer is the most accomplished Democratic legislator in the House, widely respected on both sides of the aisle. He, not Pelosi, would be preparing to be speaker had he not lost to her in a 2001 contest for minority whip, thanks to nearly complete support from her huge California delegation. That put Pelosi ahead of Hoyer on the leadership escalator. While Hoyer would win a secret poll of the Democratic caucus as more qualified, Democrats cannot turn aside the first female speaker.

It was assumed Hoyer would get the second position of leading a Democratic majority -- until Murtha announced his candidacy. Never before in his 32 low-profile years in the House did anyone imagine Murtha seeking any leadership role. He has been a backroom distributor of federal pork who disdained public exposure, in the headlines only as an unindicted co- conspirator in the 1980 Abscam scandal. Murtha became an unlikely hero of the left last year when he called for withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq.

With Pelosi and Hoyer working amicably the last two years, the speaker- to-be was expected to keep hands off the majority leader's race. Since the Nov. 7 election, she had exhibited restraint, in public utterances and in quietly handling the ambitions of Rahm Emanuel. As chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, Emanuel was architect of the 2006 victory. He coveted the third-ranking post of majority whip, but that put him on a collision course with the Congressional Black Caucus' candidate, James Clyburn. A ruinous competition was averted when Pelosi brokered a deal whereby Emanuel agreed to replace Clyburn as House Democratic Caucus chairman.

But Pelosi's personal pique was evident in opposing her rival diva from California, Rep. Jane Harman, as chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. In line to replace Harman was Rep. Alcee Hastings, who was impeached as a federal judge on bribery charges.

For a party that effectively emphasized a Republican climate of corruption in the recent campaign to consider placing Murtha and Hastings in its leadership astonishes a wide range of Democrats. They do not believe Murtha can defeat Hoyer, but the imminence of Hastings stuns them. Well-placed Democrats have told Pelosi she cannot permit this. What they hesitate to contemplate is what lies ahead based on Pelosi's performance before she has taken the oath.


http://www.suntimes.com/news/novak/137929,CST-EDT-novak16.article

[yellow_crane]

Boy, there you go.

All this hosanna about victory, and the first thing out of the chute, we have Murtha getting et tued by his democratic cohorts

Americans, without Murtha, would still be sitting in their fear, thinking nothing could be done about this insane war because, as with other extant daisychain corruptions,  none of their elected nobles would make the needed confrontation.

I would have thought that since the voters in America spoke pretty plainly, and everybody seems to agree that the number one issue was Iraq, and the single voice that led and sustained that charge was Murtha, they, like Pelosi, would like to see Murtha in a prime position to make actual change. 

Instead, Democrats in congress had a voice of their own.  They shunted him away from that prime perch.  They wanted him weaker.

Murtha is the William Wallace of this election, ignoring the nobles (sitting Senate and House) and drawing together the clans (dem, repub, ind voters), spilling out of the glens.

Iraq was the number one issue, but it only became that when somebody confronted the Whitehouse about the war.  The war was there, costing lives daily and costing 8 mil daily.
But I didn't hear anything beyond the murmur of munching from the sitting Democrats.

The WHite House, I would imagine, is quite happy to see Murtha voted down, while deep in its bowels, Dr. Strangerove squeals in ejaculatory glee as Murtha is is eaten by his own.

Without Murtha, we would not have had the election we had.

The elections were about Iraq, and getting out.  Murtha didn't convert any American voters to be against the war, he singlehandedly galvanized American voters who had already become against the war when he singlehandedly confronted the DC establishment about the war.

He turned the tide and united the clans by simply fighting back, out loud.

Murtha's voice was the real, and not the neocon, pentagon voice.  But it wasn't Biden or Hillary who did any confronting the Whitehouse over the war, nor was it Biden's buddy joe, whose other buddy gave him a public kiss. 

Appears Joe and and Biden and all their buddies are not as sure about taking on the Whitehouse as are Murtha and the majority of American voters.

By rejecting Murtha, the Democratic Congress weakens the effort to wrest out of the hands of these dangerous incompetents the reins of this runaway war itself.

That is not what the voters voted for.

And rushing into this vaacum will be the always timely Bush Family butler, Baker.