[bdsm homer simpson]
Mmmm . . . backlash . . .
[/bdsmhs]
And what’s the derivation of the name “Steny,” anyway? Wiki says that’s his real and complete first name; neither Wiki nor his Congressional bio explain its origin, though.
It’s Maryland; we have pockets of Southern here that pop up every once in a while.
As for the “what does it mean” stuff - I have my interpretation, but as a Republican, I doubt anyone here will do more than sneer.
Murtha’s been in office for longer than Steny Hoyer has, so it’s not just about “career politician vs. new face”. The difference is, Murtha has never been associated with the Congressional Leadership, while Hoyer has, for twenty years now, been one of its members (up to and including Minority Whip).
Three years ago, if I said “Congressman Murtha”, even avowed political junkies here would have replied “Who?” So why the sudden move for this allegedly corrupt, heretofore unheralded member of Congress to sudden jump forward and be the prime choice for Congress’ #2 spot? Simple - he stood up to Bush and called for immediate evacuation from Iraq.
Pelosi’s selection of Murtha plays well to paint her as agreeing with the immediate pullout from Iraq, as there’s little other reason to have picked Murtha. Hoyer’s selection by Democrats sends a public message that they want to see if there’s a better, more pragmatic solution to Iraq. As much as 'luci and others will rail against letting the war continue on even a day later, selecting Hoyer is going to send the message to most Americans that the Democrats are interested in finding real solutions, not just cutting and running. Given that Democrats lost in '04 and '02 mostly due to the conventional wisdom that Democrats would turn the country over to Osama bin Laden, this is a very good thing for Democrats.
I’m not sure how good it is for Pelosi, though. Her #2 is now someone she has publicly campaigned against and complained about, and his selection certainly doesn’t make her look like she has leadership of the party. But we’ll see - it’s certainly nothing she can’t bounce back from.
If only there were any real solutions! 
Bingo. The whole Washington debate about Iraq is definitely kabuki. Victory, real solutions, cut and run. Bull. It’s do we want to leave in an orderly retreat, or with our tail between our legs?’
Most Americans will derive very little in the way of a message from this leadership battle. It’ll quickly be supplanted in their minds by substantive actions.
Hoyer is of Danish descent. His name is a version of the Danish name “Steen”, which means rock.
Or the name ‘Sten’ (same origin and meaning; from the Old Norse word ‘steinn’).
So the new House majority leader’s name is “Rocky?” I’m feeling a little better about this now.
Not much, really – IMO this was primarily an attempt to get some headlines by painting Pelosi and the Dems in a negative post-election light.
If Murtha had won, the media would have focused on his ABSCAM background.
If Hoyer had won, the media would have focused on the upset as signs of a “divided” Democratic party.
(And, sure enough, that’s how the media is spinning the results. Never mind that Lott got elected Senate Minority whip by one vote, yet there’s no talk about “divided” Congressional Republicans…)
Much ado about nothing much.
I just watched CBS news, and apparently it means that the Democrats are doomed to endless warfare between the new crop of ‘conservative’ house members and the “very liberal” holdouts from the past.
With the Liberal media pushing this truth, it’s obvious that Dem’s election blowout is already beginning to backfire. :rolleyes:
So, the backlash has already begun? I knew it!! 
The press always exagerates shit like this. It has nothing to do with liberal or conservative bias-- it’s got everything to do with ratings. No one would watch if they came out and said: *Eh, no biggie. *
Gee, then why not double the ratings by playing up “divisions” in both parties?
The Post did have an article today about the moderates and the conservatives in the Virginia Republican party blaming each other for the VA Senate loss.
And just after the elections, there were a bunch of stories about how economic conservatives were blaming the party’s loss on focusing too much on gay marriage and abortion.
And, actually, before the election, David Kuo’s new book, which talked about how the administration paid lip service to evangelicals while at the same time ignoring them and privately mocking them, got a lot of press.
Sure, but the point is that both parties are having “splits” over their Congressional leadership (with the Republicans having a closer, and more fracturous, divide) at the same time, but only the Democratic one is some sort of news-worthy crisis. It’s like having a child abduction in Chicago and a child abduction in Miami and giving national media coverage only to the Miami one. Don’t make sense.
What division? There is no GOP equivalent of a Speaker of the House who endorsed a 2nd in command who didn’t win. In fact, it’s quite unusual for a Speaker to endorse a Majority Leader candidate in the first place. Backlash at 11. 
When Bush was pushing his immigration reform, we heard plenty about how the GOP was divided. Sorry, rjung, but there isn’t conservative bias in the press. There’s bias towards making money, and you make money by having exciting news. “Dems all hug each other” is a yawner.
Not if it’s foreplay, dude!
They’re starting to pay more attention to the Lott thing now, and to the GOP’s other choices. The Republicans are just a less interesting story right now. They went with all the same old guys, really.
Yes.
Moderation is the key to long term political success for the Democrats and it’s the best thing for the country. Murtha would have been a lightning rod.