Nancy Pelosi convinced rebellious progressive Democrats to support her speakership by promising not to serve more than four more years. She’s almost 79 years old. It’s not like much of a give! And it’s not very promising for progressives.
Nancy Pelosi Gets a Speakership By Agreeing to Just Four More Years. How Many Years Does She Have Anyway?
9 Comments. Leave new
Don’t worry, Ted, she’ll croak soon enough from the strain of dealing with the younger radical Congresspeople while dealing with all the pressure to have Trump “hung from the neck until dead” because as we all know, she’s a go-along-to-get-along perpetual “middler” – actual real politics will destroy her.
I can’t but wonder, Ted, if it was Ms Pelosi herself, who by this time has almost certainly come to the realisation that you can’t take it with you when you go, who pushed for that Four More Years, or rather if was not her cotery of sycophants and hangers-on, whose positions depend upon her hanging on till death do [them] part. I believe the term for that is partinost….
Henri
I presume the last sentence means “And it’s not very promising for progressives … OUTSIDE of congress.
The speaker’s post is determined by caucus election every new congress, i.e. every two years. So the very first “revolutionary” move by the new “rebellious” Dem progressive wave was to grant Ms Pelosi her speakership for both this and the NEXT congress? (Assuming Dems hold the house.)
In having thus immediately neutralized itself, the “new” progressives have convincingly proven themselves to be every bit as politically flaccid as their predecessor Dem “progressives.”
Did Ms Ocasio-Cortez top it all off with a few particularly touching and heartfelt words of appreciation and adoration for pappy Bush?
But falco, without Ms Pelosi and her entourage, who will protect the poor vulnerable United States from those dastardly Russians ? After all, it’s these latter, not, as the naive among us might be led to believe, Republican politiicans, who really prevent, e g, Black voters from casting their ballots in US elections….
Henri
Hi Henri,
Who, indeed, as the next generation of “progressives” has just shown, we can expect just as much “protection” …. “going forward”?
Ms Pelosi, like the voluminous corps of HRC-bots over which she presides, uses the play-act of protection from the Russkis precisely to obscure the fact that she/they have sold themselves to help create the real threat to the populace … government of, by and for the predatory capitalists.
This anti-protection certainly applies to the suppression of Black votes that has been publicly known to be occurring since the mid 1980’s, right about the time she was first elected to congress. But to the claim that she-who-would-be queen suffered record low Black-voter turn out, I’ll restate my response when that article you linked was cited a couple days back:
>The Black community has long been clued-in to its cynical, p/matronizing manipulation by the Clinton grifter duet and didn’t need no stinkin’ Russkis to wise them up.<
I'd suggest a higher proportion of Russkis realize that than does HRC-bots.
I’ve said it before. “Compromise” is when you give half of what you deserve to someone who doesn’t deserve it. Pelosi’s age isn’t the problem, it’s that her ideas are old. Worse, her ideas don’t work (at least for the people). Identity politics has kept the left divided into a mass of splinters for decades. Wages and jobs are in terrible shape. Healthcare is a money funnel into the pockets of big business (thanks, Obamacare). And climate change is just about at the tipping point. The policies of the past four decades are a testimony to rampant incompetence.
As for four more years… The only way I can get a positive spin on it is to think that the Progressives are playing her. First, it’s quite possible she’ll just drop dead before then. Second, the Progressives might simply force her hand over and over. If she blocks X, they’ll block Y, Z, and Q: a complete suicide dive. Third, in two years, they may simply reneg on the deal.
Sanders, who is already being ignored by the mainstream in favor of Kamala Harris, who has as much chance of winning as I do, is the only good long-term candidate. He gets his one term or two. By then, there’s a sea of younger progressive candidates who will have accumulated power at the lower levels. But running of these fresh newcomers will simply devolve into another Obamastate of inaction and corporate protectioneering.
And after the wholesale theft of the process last time by war criminal-befriender Hillary Clinton and her dNC cronies, I think a lot of the progressive voters simply won’t accept anyone except Bernie.
COMPROMISE, n. Such an adjustment of conflicting interests as gives each adversary the satisfaction of thinking he has got what he ought not to have, and is deprived of nothing except what was justly his due.
– Ambrose Bierce
Not only is she the choice of the “progessives”, but she is also the choice of Trump.
She is a real unifier of both Republican and conservative Democrats.
There goes the impeachment of Trump, which was never to be more than a “get out the vote” ploy.
Best to disappoint the Democratic Party true believers early so they will have time to rationalize away the party’s betrayal, setting them up for the coming betrayal of 2020.
> And it’s not very promising for progressives.
Even though there’s still more cloud than sliver lining, it’s at least a nod to the New Wave, an acknowledgement by the establishment that Things Must Change. Another hopeful sign is Hillary trying to re-define herself as a progressive.
GOOD NEWS: Our Message Has Been Heard. That doesn’t mean change will happen overnight – but we have started to move the mountain, now we need to keep pushing.
DISCLAIMER: I’m not in favor of Pelosi taking the gavel, nor do I want Hillary to take the nomination. I’m merely looking at that silver lining.