Democratic Duo Brings Bravado to Party

[wyldwolf]

At midsummer, when House Republicans announced nationwide hearings to showcase their hard line against illegal immigration, the chairmen of the Democratic House and Senate campaign committees quickly took up the gauntlet. They assembled reporters and news cameras to promote a report documenting a decline in border enforcement actions under the Bush administration.

"If congressional Republicans want to make immigration the centerpiece of their 2006 campaign," said New York Sen. Charles Schumer, alongside Illinois Rep. Rahm Emanuel, "we've got three words for them: Make our day!"

Such bring-it-on bravado from the Democratic duo has been making for bad days for the beleaguered Republican majority in this midterm-election year. These two high-energy partisans with their sharp elbows and tongues, and no apparent need to be loved, are just what Democrats need to end their exile from power. "We haven't had that kind of Rove-ian ruthlessness in the party -- to do or say anything to win -- in a long time," says party consultant Jenny Backus.

That suggests just how Democrats have come to see them: As a counter, finally, to President Bush's so-called architect, Karl Rove, melding policies and politics for electoral gain. On the party's election-year message, Mr. Schumer has worked closely with Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada. While House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi tapped Mr. Emanuel for his job, their relationship has been more strained given his assertiveness and her liberal instincts. For more than a year, Democrats debated what platform to have for 2006, or whether to have one at all. Mr. Schumer was among those mostly content to bash Mr. Bush. "For us to put out a big range of ideas gives Republicans a target and gets the message off George Bush," he said in an interview as deliberations progressed.

But Mr. Emanuel, a former adviser to President Clinton, wanted an agenda. Paul Begala, a friend from their White House days, says, "We all learned under Clinton, it's just not enough to indict -- you have to offer an alternative." (Mr. Clinton has told audiences Mr. Emanuel was "my Karl Rove.")

When Mr. Emanuel appeared last October on NBC's "Meet the Press," host Tim Russert challenged him, "What are the Democratic ideas?" Mr. Emanuel rattled off five -- college aid, health care, a bipartisan budget summit, energy alternatives and a national technology institute. The "New Direction" agenda that Democrats announced last month roughly mirrors those points.

http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB115949068340177496-AclK0Nm6n8I976zSioeqGprol7g_20070929.html?mod=tff_main_tff_top

[KoKo]

1. A little more from the article about how anti-war and the party's loyal

liberal base feels about this:


Quote from article:

Yet both men's drive to win has at times left fellow Democrats feeling run over. In their determination to elect more Democrats from moderate and conservative districts, they have antagonized some of the party's loyal, liberal blocs: antiwar liberals, women's groups, civil libertarians and -- by their tough talk on immigration -- Hispanic groups.

[wyldwolf]

2. and a little more about how some of those you mentioned finally get it

In suburban Chicago, where the Democratic nominee is an Iraq veteran and double amputee Tammy Duckworth, 68-year-old Alice Doyle, a volunteer for a Duckworth rival in the primary, says, "I was so mad that Rahm Emanuel and the boys in Washington had chosen her." Now she concedes, "Tammy probably has a better chance" in the historically Republican district.

After Mr. Schumer helped recruit Pennsylvania state Treasurer Bob Casey Jr., an opponent of abortion rights, to challenge Republican Sen. Rick Santorum, feminist leader Kate Michelman confronted Mr. Schumer and, as a Pennsylvanian, weighed running against Mr. Casey. "I do not question his own commitment to women's rights and equality," she says of Mr. Schumer. "I do question the tactics from time to time." Still, she came to agree that by running, and splitting the Democratic vote, she would only help re-elect Mr. Santorum.

[KoKo]

4. um...I countered quote from the article you didn't like to hear?

Is that why there might have been an attack? :eyes:

[wyldwolf]

5. um...I countered quote from the article you didn't like to hear?

what attack? :eyes:

[welshTerrier2]

3. Deval Patrick on immigration

last Monday, i watched the gubernatorial debate in Massachusetts ... here's my write-up on the debate: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=158&topic_id=10028&mesg_id=10049

not included in that write-up were a couple of positions Deval Patrick, the Democrat in the race, took on the immigration issue ...

he said that he supported allowing illegal immigrants to remain in public schools and that he also supported allowing illegal immigrants to obtain driver's licenses because he wanted to know exactly who was driving around on Massachusetts' roads ...

here's a multiple choice question for you about Patrick's positions:

a. Patrick is dead on the money (this is where the national party needs to be) because it will win support among various nationalities
b. it's fine for Massachusetts but not fine nationally (i.e. we can't speak with one, national voice if we hope to win)
c. his positions are wrong and are not politically viable nationally
d. other - please explain

the focus of my question is more on politics than on the issue itself ... ultimately, the question is asking: what stand on immigration do you believe is best for the Democratic Party? should it be determined on a candidate-by-candidate basis or should there be a clear, nationalized Democratic position?

in fact, having asked that, what exactly is the Schumer/Emanuel position on kicking illegal immigrant children out of public schools? the bushian "Make our day!" (aka "bring it on") doesn't speak to the details ...