Now, Team Hillary Goes After Speaker Pelosi

They went after Barack Obama, and he proved more popular and more resilient than Team Hillary. They went after Howard Dean, and he didn't cave. They went after Bill Richardson, and he didn't give in. Now, they have come for our Speaker, Nancy Pelosi.

Hillary Clinton's big donors see their dreams of a Senate confirmation hearing and a post as Ambassador to the Bahamas dying before their very eyes, and so they are making threats. Senator Clinton's fundraisers, indignant that after all of these years of effort on behalf of Bill and Hillary they may not become overnight guests in the Lincoln Bedroom, and irate that all their money may not buy them a plum foreign assignment in the next administration, told Howard Dean that he had better find a way to get Florida and Michigan seated at the Democratic Convention -- or else they'd pull their money from the Democratic National Committee.

But their ploy didn't work.

Then, James Carville famously branded Bill Richardson a "Judas" for letting his conscience come before his jobs.

Bill Richardson laughed.

And now, the same fat cats who took on Howard Dean, and failed, are going after our good Speaker, Nancy Pelosi. They are once again threatening to pull their money from the Democratic National Committee. The reason this time? Speaker Pelosi said that the superdelegates should follow the will of the people and that the superdelegates should pick the nominee who has the most votes and the most delegates.

To those whose dream is gladhanding at the Atlantis Resort, this was an outrage! They immediately fired off a letter to Madame Speaker. They wrote:

"We have been strong supporters of the DCCC. We therefore urge you to clarify your position on super-delegates and reflect in your comments a more open view to the optional independent actions of each of the delegates at the National Convention in August."

In other words, the donors, the money people, believe they are more important than the hundreds of thousands of people who have made small donations to the candidates. They believe that their money buys them a greater say in our democracy than the say that you have and that I have.

Are they right? I guess that Hillary Clinton has told them that they are indeed correct.

Now, the big $$$ people expect that they will roll over Nancy Pelosi. They will wave wads of cash at her, and hope that their threats cause her to encourage the superdelegates to pick a candidate, without paying heed to what the people want.

Speaker Pelosi is tough. I look forward to her response to those who seek to bribe her.

The Speaker won't be the last Democrat threatened by a desperate group of people, clinging to the last vestiges of a presumed power. After Senator Obama, Chairman Dean, Governor Richardson and Speaker Pelosi, Team Hillary will come after anyone who dares see things objectively. They will come after anyone who has the gall to speak up. They came for them. They'll come for me, too.

Is this the future of the Democratic Party? Is this what we want? If this is how Senator Clinton's team deals with their fellow Democrats; how would a President Clinton ever get anything accomplished in a bipartisan way?

Back in the early '90s, Senator Clinton told Jim Cooper, the Congressman from Tennessee with a health care proposal that was more moderate than hers, that she would crush him and he would regret ever speaking to her. She told Bill Bradley that she would demonize anyone who stood in her way on health care. She icily dismissed Daniel Patrick Moynihan's questions about her program.

Let's remember, Jim Cooper, Bill Bradley, and the late Senator Moynihan are and were Democrats. Hillary's plan went down in flames. So did the Democrats in the 1994 elections.

Can we really take eight more years of the Clintons in the White House?

The Obama campaign, and all good Democrats, should follow the wisdom of Dalton, bouncer at the Double Deuce: Dalton said, "Be nice until it's time not to be nice."

Democrats, it's time to send a message to Team Hillary, the team that is trying to take down the Democratic Party. It's time not to be nice.

Comments

[Halsey]

Is this or is this not the madness of the Clinton "machine". I cannot get my pea brain around how THEY became so powerful. The Machiavellian tactics they use...the psychotic NEED for power..the NEED to win...at any cost. What I see, especially with Bill C's comments..­about McCain..is that if Hilary can't get the nod..they truly truly WANT McNuts to win...he'l­l be a one -termer...­(duh!)...a­nd then Hilary will step in and save us all...such hubris...p­athologica­l...and embarrassment to me as a registered Democrat..­..her brand of politics..­well..I liken it to radical evangelical christians­..who have tried to take MY religion..­MY belief in the loving spirit of Jesus..and turn "HIM" into a nutcase hoping for armaggedon.

Both "sects"...­have kidnapped my two passions..­democracy.­.and love and service..t­urned them into vindictive ideologies­... and I won't stand for it...

[RedBirdy]

Is it me, or am I living on a different planet? The last time I checked there were more primaries, and more voters waiting to have their voices heard. Also, the last time I checked, neither Clinton or Obama will have reached 2025 without the help of superdelegates. If I know one thing about my party, is that they hate their losers. And if they feel that Clinton is unelectable, they will support Obama and vice versa. What is the point of having superdelegates, if they just echo the views of pledged delegates? Makes no sense. Furthermore, Hillary may not have a chance to catch up with Obama in pledged delegates, but she still has a chance to get ahead with the popular vote. I don't see why both candidates can't just fight the good fight until the end. I was an Obama supporter before Iowa Caucus, and when I thought he was gonna lose to Hillary, I still wanted him to go all the way. This Clinton Machine crap needs to end. I don't think its about power, I think it's about 2 individuals who really think they can change this country. I see nothing wrong with that. I just happen to support Clinton. Obama's surrogates especially Pelosi have turned me off to him. I think they all feel he is just the obivious choice and Clinton should step aside. If he was the obivious choice, he would have reached 2025 , but some of us don't support him.

[jbatch]

As and Edwards supporter and therefore someone who came to the Obama /Hillary drama as a neutral, let me explain why it must end.

If Hillary were not running a scorched earth, Karl Rove like campaign, I'm quite sure no one would have a problem letting things continue, even if her ability to win at this point is next to nil.

But she is running a Karl Rove campaign. And it shows she's is willing to sacrifice this Party and it's principles at the altar of the only thing that matters to her -- herself in the White House. Her need for power is pathological.

She and Bill even seem willing to advance McCain above Obama -- presumably so she can make another run in 2012 . McCain. The nut job who says we're going to be in Iraq for 100 years and that there will be more wars ... the guy who seems ok with bailing out Wall Street, but not main street; the guy who called Bush's tax cuts irresponsible, and now embraces them. If she would do even the slightest thing to give such a man a pathway to the White House, then it is clear she has no values.

No Democrat who cares about the values this party represents could possibly believe there's anything to be gained by letting this go on as it has been.

Her scorched earth I-don't-ca­re-about-a­nything-bu­t-hillary campaign is what has people calling for this to end.

[AnninCA]

So do we call Move-On.org the Obama "machine."­?

[vickic]

Move-On.org is made up of millions of ordinary people's voices, not 20 or 25 extraordinarily rich people's voices. So what if Move-On is helping everyday, ordinary people get their voice out there.

[nazgul]

No, it's a progressive issue workhouse. Like most progressives, progressive blogs, progressive organizations, MoveOn can recognize a non-progressive leader and her campaign in its midst...

[Titonwan]

Wow. I don't think putting down Move-On.org was your wisest rant. (:o

[Independent voter]

No. The members of moveon have seen what a piece of work clinton is and have rejected her BS.

[indc]

It is not like they helped the Democratic Party much... there were massive loses when he was in the WH... they have a mythology, political old money, and a willingness to be vicious to anyone who they perceive as in their way... they are cowardly, bullies... why isn't Chelsea fighting in Iraq on a second or third tour.. she thought this war was such a good idea for years, let's help Chelsea find a recruiting office and not take the attitude that the war is none of her business, why she could be a Bush girl !!

The Clintons are bullies... as well as liars, thieves, and a low-life family. tax returns, WH papers, earmarks, donor lists... we need to see what corporate and foreign interests they have sold us out to and for how much.

[priscianusjr]

I think I am beginning to understand "how THEY became so powerful." The Clintons put themselves into a position where they could sell out the Democratic Party to the Republicans without the Democratic voters understanding what was going on. After all, we don't expect out leaders to be leading us into an abyss. The main difference between Bill Clinton and his political ally Joe Lieberman is that Clinton has, or had, charisma. Being in that position made the Clintons a trememndous power in American politics of the 90s. It wasn't until the emergence of Howard Dean in 2004 that the whole thing began slowly to unwind. Because rank and file Democrats began to understand that something was seriously wrong with the internal workings of the Democratic Party. The playing out of this 2008 campaign is showing us more and more clearly what has been wrong with the party. The Clintons and the Clintonistas are now losing their power day by day as the Democratic rank and file begins to understand what they have done to the party and that this cannot be allowed to continue. The fact that Speaker Pelosi is standing up to them is a very welcome development.

[Whinger]

It seems obvious that the Clinton machine actually believe they can bully and intimidate the Democratic senators into sidelining democracy and nominate the runner up.
This is the neocon mentality, shock and awe, coercing the weak to comply or pay a price.

[RedBirdy]

Screw Pelosi. I am still waiting for her to deliver on the promises that won the dems the majority and made history with her position as first woman speaker of the house, in 2006. Where is all the progress in Iraq, and calling out the current administration? Worry about that Nancy. I am so sick of Nancy Pelosi. Just stop it, and come out as an Obama supporter. And while you're at it, put impeachment back on the table. I guess it was ok for Hillary to support her when she was on her way up and making history, but I guess it would have been to much to ask for that in return. Nancy, you are one of the few reasons I am NO LONGER AN OBAMA supporter.

Hillary '08

[sef2121]

I agree. As soon as she took impeachment off the table, it was one disappointing thing after another from this Congress and the Speaker. Who cares if you don't have the votes...ma­ke a statement to the world and the American people that we are unhappy! Four thousand Americans dead, countless more Iraqis murdered and displaced, human rights violations, I could go on, but no, the Repugs can impeach Clinton for getting a bj and the Dems got nuthin' on Bush? What twisted world is this? Oh yeah, I forgot how SPINELESS my own party is! I swear that the Dems just want to lose in November so that they can have something to complain about. What would all the liberal sites (and I proudly count myself as a liberal) do if the Dems actually DID something? Actually stood up for something? They wouldn't know what to write! Hillary Clinton is a workhorse and will get shit done! She is DETERMINED on health care, Iraq, middle class, and especially America's children. If she got elected, she would make massive inroads and for once the Dems would have nothing to complain about. But no-Pelosi and the others are pushing her out so that McCain can be the next prez and they will continue to have something to bitch about. Sooooo pathetic!

[kempis]

The donors were correct: the superdelegates are supposed to vote according to their own independent assessments of what is best for the party. That's why they exist. Otherwise, we only need the delegates. It makes no sense to have "superdelegates" who merely echo the delegate vote.

Pelosi is wrong. The donors are right. And Clinton supporters have every right to challenge Pelosi, who is so obviously for an Obama candidacy that she may as well go ahead and declare it.

[williams411]

So the super delegates should just completly ignore the voice of the people, huh?. I love hillarybots, they know damn well if the tables were turned they'd be seeing things differently. Its not against the rules for the superdelegates to vote for hillary, but if they want to keep the party from imploding then they will vote for the canidate with the most pledged delegates

[kempis]

And I just love Obamites! They're as fun as Moonies!

Look up the history of how and why the Democratic party instituted superdelegates. Spin aside, and right or wrong, the party's intent was to have them serve as an independent body. I don't know that I like that idea, personally. Personally, I think popular vote should determine the nominee--and all states should vote. But facts iz facts. Pelosi's preference is not aligned with the facts. If we don't like those facts, then we need to lobby the DNC to do away with the superdelegates in the future. But the FACT is that not only they but also the pledged delegates are free according to Democratic party rules to vote according to their own judgment.

[RButler]

Rules are rules. That's what the Obama campaign tells us unless, of course, they don't like the rules. I'm waiting for them to call the rules 'racist'. They've labeled everything else 'racist'.
Wait. I've got it. The rules are 'racist' cause they were written by the white man. OK. It's off to the races, so to speak.

[SayonaraSnot]

And most sane people would argue that voting with the will of the people is what's best for the party.

[fatmo]

This super delegate thing is really working good, we have lost just about all the elections since it started. if they should have the right to over ride the people why not dump the primaries and caucuses and let the elite tell us who we should vote for.

[Schnitzel]

It's interesting that the Clinton campaign suddenly didn't see things that way after Bill Richardson - a superdelagate - decided to endorse Obama. So which is it? The Clintons can't have it both ways. If the Clinton camp want superdelegates to be able to "vote according to their own independent assessments of what is best for the party" it certainly looks as if the Clintons themselves be out of the race sooner than they think.

[lvdragonlady]

The whole election process needs a total overhaul. All we have to do is go to a 'popular' vote - winner/loser and that is it. No more primaries, no more causcuses, no more super delegates, just the peoples vote.
The electorial college was an excellent idea when there were 100's or 1000's of miles between everyone and communications took months.
This is the electronic age, we get news as soon as it happens. Let get rid of the dumb **** and let the peoples votes count like they should.

[nighttimelady]

Everyone MUST go to the DCCC website and donate. You can donate as little as $1 if you have a credit card or debit card. The Democrats will match your donation so a $1 donation becomes $3. A $10 donation becomes $30. We MUST show those dirty low down “RICH donors” that the Democratic Presidential Nomination is NOT FOR SALE!!! You must make your donation by March 31, 2008 for the donation to be matched. I just gave $10. Obama campaign is my main concern. We must support Nancy Pelosi so she can tell those “rich” slugs to shove it………..

GO MAKE YOUR DONATION!!

NEXT Go to Moveon.org and sign the petition.

[leftLibertarian]

I'd rather wipe my butt checks with a dollar than donate it to the spineless Democratic party.

After all the evidence that the Bush Administration purposely lied about WMD, the criminals Bush and Cheney are still waging war in a country that was never a threat to America.

The DP = spineless cowards.

[lvdragonlady]

It would take one to recognize one .........w­elcome to the club 'left'.

[PennP]

nighttimelady, giving the DNC money will not clean it up. The Party HAS been for sale--that's the point the big donors are inadvertently and crudely making by trying to strongarm Pelosi. The DNC, as currently constituted and run, is a key part of the problem with the party. It represents its own interests, not ours. Until a reformer is elected who'll facilitate the kind of change that will restore a modicum of pluralism to the Party, I have no reason to fund it. I'll continue to donate to Barack Obama's campaign, and trust that he will continue to coattail good people into office as he did Bill Foster. As the Party cleans up, I will support it. If it does not, I won't.

[lvdragonlady]

Already signed the petition there.

[Pippilin]

I signed the petition too, but no way the DCCC is going to get a nickel out of me. Have you all
forgotten how Rahm Emanuel and his goonies gave money/support to less progressive, more corporatio­n-friendly Dems in the 2006 primaries? Alot of really great candidates lost those primaries because of DCCC interference.
I'll start considering a donation when Mr. Emanuel exits the scene.

[DeanLowe]

This is no different than Obama supporters telling super delegates that they might have primary challengers if they didn't endorse Obama.

[kempis]

Absolutely.

This is just another trumped-up, "OMG, Hillary's competing for the nomination!" pseudo-scandal. One thing this nomination has hammered home to me is that people on the left side of the blogosphere are just as prone to hysteria and scandal-mongering and outrageous bias as the freepers and littlegree­nfootballe­rs.

[johnhummel]

You're totally right - for local constituents to be telling their elected officials they won't vote for them if the will of the voters are not met - that's *totally* the same as telling the House Speaker that superdelegates should be encouraged to vote along the lines of the popular delegate vote.

I mean - the gall of these people, telling their elected officials what they expect them to do! Why, next thing you know, they'll actually be saying they have something called "the vote" and exercising it to elect leaders who act in the way they desire!

Right - we got that now. Democracy bad. Thanks for the tip, Dean.

[AnninCA]

Or even worse, when they bullied the AA Clinton superdelegates through racial pressures. *Yikes*

I recall some ugly stories about people even contacting Super Delegates mothers!!!!!!!

[GiggidyGeshmoygen]

if you support pelosi's statements and oppose the transparent attempts by clinton fatcats to intimidate and strong-arm the democratic process, go to

http://pol.moveon.org/democracy/

and sign MoveOn.org's petition in support of pelosi's statements regarding the democratic process

[DownwithFearMongers]

The Clintons are playing divide and conquer.

[Independent voter]

No - the clintons are playing destroy anything that gets in the way of their power lust.

[Sloane7]

If you want to cheer on Nancy Pelosi, you can email her at: http://speaker.house.gov/contact/
It's good to let her know Obama supporters appreciate her not letting the Clintons try to intimidate everyone. Contributions to the DNC are good too!

[MrDeadeye2U]

Thanks for the Link,

I donated earlier today to show the DCCC that they don't need these High Dollar Thugs.

Here's the link https://dccc.org/page/contribute.

I am reminded of the scene in Goodfellas where they esentially say that once they get into the guys restaurant they milk it for all it's worth and when there's nothing left to steal then they just torch the place.

They feel that once they contribute to the party that they own it and that it exists as their own little cash cow (kinda like current administration mortgaging our country to enrich their cronies). As a matter of fact Clinton 1 has priors for that type of behaviour (Lincoln bedroom, dubious pardons, etc.).

Please tell them that they're wrong and to take a hike. This is our Democratic Party and they are not invited.

[MrDeadeye2U]

In retaliation to to Hillary Clinton and her supporters attempts to extort the most powerful elected female official in the nation, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-CA, and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee I have donated $100 to the DCCC.

https://dccc.org/page/contribute.

I ask everyone to join me in Denouncing and Rejecting these tactics by making your own contribution and thereby telling these rich fat cats to hit the road and they are no longer welcome in this party. We don't want their money or their influence. They seem better suited to the GOP anyway.

[Sloane7]

I've really been liking Nancy Pelosi. The ironic error the Clintons make is they are slamming the very Superdelegates they are trying to persuade. Or threaten. Hmm.

[radlib1]

Someone recently compared Hillary Clinton to Tonya Harding trying to have someone "knee cap" her opponent -- in this case, Barack Obama -- in order to win at all costs. From hers and Bill's political tactics, I'd say that seems like a fairly apt comparison.

Now, they're after Nancy Pelosi because, in her personal opinion, the superdelegates shouldn't overturn the will or the votes of the properly seated and elected delegates. That's her opinion. She didn't say they had to, only that they should respect the votes of the duly elected delegates. And now Hillary's "fat cat" donors are trying to muzzle Nancy Pelosi and are threatening to cut off their donations to the DCCC. I say good riddance to bad rubbish. The Democratic Party should not be held hostage or bribed by Hillary's "fat cats." They represent themselves and Hillary's and their own interests and not the "true" America's.

Personally, I think that Hillary is Machiavellian enough to want to sabotage Obama in this election cycle and have her good friend, the irritable, elderly and rapidly senile, John McCain, elected. That way, she can come back in 2012 and run for President again. Call me cynical, but that's the only way I see this "fight to the bitter end" with Obama playing out. Hillary knows she won't win, but she still wants to cripple Obama. That may be sick and psychopathic, but then, so was Tonya Harding.

[lisakaz]

They call it "rough wooing."

[mickeyrat]

as in Henry Tudor's attempt to force the Scots Lords Regent to accede to the marriage of his son Edward, later Sixth of the name, to the infant Mary, Queen of Scots.

[Cuneo]

I couldn't agree more that the time to be nice is over. I've been all over the blogs and reading how Clinton supporters are sore over the treatment they have been receiving and that this is leading them to threaten to not support Obama in November. Well, boo hoo hoo. This is war at the moment and until they surrender they should catch hell and get used to it. Upon Clinton's withdrawal and endorsement of Obama we're gonna change gears completely and be real dam civil. Until then expect the incoming fire to increase. Every small slight and every backhanded tactic will be deflected and thrown right back at them. Because the future of the party and the country are at stake, and we won't trust Clinton to competently control either.

[alexfugate]

I also agree that the time for being nice is over. it was over for the candidates as soon as they announced their candidicay. And its been Obama supporters crying like babies because Hillary isn't being nice. I'm an Obama supporter, but denouncing Hillary for not being as nice as possible in an election is retarded. Does anyone really think the Republicans won't attack whoever the Dem. nominee is??? If you can't take a little flak and negative publicity then you have no chance of winning an election against the Republicans. If Obama comes out the nominee he will be that much better of a candidate for knowing how to deal with attacks, as anyone who hopes to be president needs to know. Bill Clinton knew how- Gore and Kerry didn't. Gore and Kerry had more people agree on all major issues with them and still couldn't win.They were both afraid to fire back and it cost this country dearly.

[lvdragonlady]

Excellent post and I totally agree.

[McHenry]

Hillary is a combination of Glenn Close and Arnold;Fatal Attraction and The Terminator. She will never stop before the National Convention. And even after she has lost her most pressing concern will not be how to help the Democrates win in the fall with Obama as the standard bearer but rather what she must do to secure the nomination in 2012.

[BrooklynLager]

It's such a stupid threat, because a) they are in effect threatening the DCCC, which is mostly controlled by Hillary Clinton's folks, and b) their influence comes from their donations. They won't cut off their nose to spite their face.

It's the reason that the letter provoked not fear, but guffaws.

[Henry2008]

We, Hillary's Democrats, are going to send you a message.

[BrooklynLager]

What exactly is wrong with what Nancy Pelosi said?

[alexfugate]

I don't agree with attacking Speaker Pelosi, however all those that say the democratic thing to do is nominate whoever has the most pledged delegates seems to forget that that isn't really democratic either. Whoever, gets the most popular votes from the ENTIRE country would be the democratically elected nominee, otherwise its just a different type of gerrymandering. Sen. Bayr interestingly pointed out who would have more electoral votes if the nomination election was identical to the general election. Sen. Clinton would have more electoral votes. However, the general election is gerrymandered one way and the nomination process a different way. What's wrong with what Speaker Pelosi said was that she didn't say the nominee who gets the most popular votes should be the nominee, but who gets the most delegates and thats just another way to get around democracy.

P.s. I support Sen. Obama and I think he would still have the lead in both pledged delegates and the popular vote if all states counted. But his current stance on this controversial issue will kill him in Mich. and Florida come general election, then we could be stuck with another 4 years of war, recession, and welfare to millioniares but not those who need it.

[Cuneo]

What message would that be? Prepare for Mutually Assured Destruction?

[CarbonDate]

Their message is, "Look, we run this party, so don't be getting all uppity with your ideas about nominating whomever you choose. We chose your candidate for you last year. Okay? LAST YEAR. This was supposed to be wrapped up on Feb 5, and we're really unhappy about you not voting the way we told you to. Sit down, shut up, and do what we say or we'll get another Republican elected. Okay? You can take the scraps we throw you from the table or you can go hungry. It's up to you."