Blue Crab Boulevard

Personal Vindictiveness

Robert Novak, in today's Washington Post analyzes Nancy Pelosi's endorsement of John Murtha over Steny Hoyer. He calls it a mistake as well as an indication of the personally vindictive style of the presumed speaker-to-be.

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 could have avoided this dilemma by standing aside as Newt Gingrich, then the presumptive speaker, did when he voted for his ally Robert Walker as majority whip but did not ask members to oppose Tom DeLay.

Pelosi's mistake confirms long-standing, privately held Democratic apprehension about her abilities. Such 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.

Take together with the information that is already circulating about her decision to pass over Jane Harman for the chair of the Intelligence committee and instead to give the post to Alcee Hastings, Democrats themselves are getting nervous. It is beginning to look a bit like a tyrannical side of Pelosi is emerging.

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

For a party that effectively stressed 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 to happen. What they hesitate to contemplate is what lies ahead based on Pelosi's performance before she has taken the oath.

While I doubt very much that there will be an insurrection at this point, there is a scenario where Pelosi could be beaten out for speaker. Under House rules, the entire chamber votes for the speaker, not just the Democrats. If all the Republicans and only about 15 or so Democrats voted for someone else, Pelosi could be defeated. Like I said, I rather doubt it will happen.

But you can bet there are some Democrats thinking seriously about it right about now.

Politics | Gaius November 16, 2006

By Arlo, November 16, 2006 @ 8:26 am

Feds Probe a top Democrat’s relationship with AIPAC (Jane Harman)
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1549069,00.html

Obviously, its not just personal pique that Ms. Pelosi doesn’t want Harman for Chair of that committee.
By Gaius, November 16, 2006 @ 8:36 am

Yup, use an unsubstantiated media report to obscure the fact that Pelosi plans to install one of the very few people ever tried, convicted and removed from the Federal bench for official corruption in Harman’s place.

Arlo, really, your dumping of talking points is becoming tiresome.
By TC@LeatherPenguin, November 16, 2006 @ 10:26 am

The funny thing about Pelosi/Hastings is that she voted to impeach the guy back then, as part of an overwhelmingly Democrat House. So now she’s going to have to sell the notion that, back then, he was far too legally and ethically compromised to remain on the bench, but now should be allowed to head the Intelligence Committee–where he’ll be privy to all sorts of things that many, many people would love to know, and would be more than willing to pay whatever it cost to gain access to said intelligence.

“Why, Nancy, do you think he’s suddenly immune to such temptation? He was willing to sell out the Constitution for a piddling 150K back then; you think he’s turned choirboy in interim? Prove it. Because if you can’t, the case can easily be made that you are pandering to the Congressional Black Caucus to gain political points and are willing to risk the nation’s security in the process.”
By Anchoress, November 16, 2006 @ 11:15 am

Sometimes you read this stuff and you just wonder who has what goods on who?
By Arlo, November 16, 2006 @ 11:53 am

I heard on one of the show’s that Hastings will become Chairman of another committee; forget the name of the person who would chair the Intelligence Committee.

Obviously, the Republicans are the ones who will have big internal fights because they messed up so bad. Go back to the late spring and the media was talking about Republicans picking up seats in the House and Senate and now, it looks like Republicans will become a regional party in the South unless they figure out how to deal with this problem of having glommed religion onto their party.
By de, November 16, 2006 @ 12:19 pm

What is Pelosi’n net worth?
By mokus, November 16, 2006 @ 12:45 pm

Nancy Pelosi and the Politics of Personal Vindictiveness:

149 to 86, the adults in the Democrat Party saved Pelosi from herself. The GOP would’ve had a field day kicking ABSCAM John Murtha around. The Culture of Corruption tag would have dogged the John and Nancy show every day for two years at least.

Pelosi may not know it now, but she owes Steny Hoyer big time. Now, how she deals with Jane Harmon will show if she’s capable of learning from her mistakes.