mountain bed Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 The BLUE DOGS...many of you have probably heard of them. Or, as Rep. Ross (AR) calls them, the "Democratic Fiscally Conservative Blue Dog Coalition". Now boasting a membership 44 strong in Congress,they're going to have considerable clout in the 110th when it comes to close votes. Their mantra is "pay as you go" & "balance the budget". Who wouldn't agree with that ? Lets look a little further... A number of previously Republican seats in the House were lost to Blue Dog Democrats (including a couple right here in Indiana). In addition to fiscal conservatism, many Blue Dogs take a very pro-military stance and fall on the conservative side when it comes to issues like a woman's right to choose. A lot of distance between them and so-called 'San Francisco values'. So...what are they? Republicans in Democrat clothing ? The best chance we have to dig ourselves out of the spiraling debt that threatens the security of our country ? A great name for a football team ? Any opinions on the Blue Dogs would be appreciated... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
anodyne Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 pay as you go rather than loan spending is a good idea. militaristic priorities in a post-cold war world is not. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 Kirsten Gillibrand (New York) Listed as a blue dog on Wikipedia. (Still love her, though.) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tweedling Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 Sounds good but I'm not sure what to think.... I'm sure they will show their true colors eventually. Good and Bad. The spiraling debt is a horrible thing but I do not think it's what is truly threatening our security. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 Sounds good but I'm not sure what to think.... I'm sure they will show their true colors eventually. Good and Bad. The spiraling debt is a horrible thing but I do not think it's what is truly threatening our security. It's the terrorists, right? Or bears. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 It's the terrorists, right? Or bears.Fear itself! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
owl Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 It still amazes me how the Dems, even when they're in power, manage to create divisions among themselves- unlike the Republicans who somehow always remain largely a solid force. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Basil II Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 we need at least three more viable parties...two is too polarizing anymore.... -Robert. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 It still amazes me how the Dems, even when they're in power, manage to create divisions among themselves- unlike the Republicans who somehow always remain largely a solid force.Liberalism and the attitudes of the people who hold such ideas is not conducive to maintaining unity, as a loyalty to principles will often outweigh a loyalty to colleagues. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ikol Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 Except most "liberals" aren't actually liberal. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
owl Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 Liberalism and the attitudes of the people who hold such ideas is not conducive to maintaining unity, as a loyalty to principles will often outweigh a loyalty to colleagues. This is true. It remains, however, the Democrats' predictable weakness- not only when they're challenged by a huge force like the united Republicans (as we've seen in recent past), but also when they actually have the power (like now). Sigh. It really is too bad that the Republicans want to destroy America. Otherwise, their unity would be admirable. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 Except most "conservatives" aren't actually conservative. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ikol Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 I agree. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 I agree. Thought you might. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Derek Phillips Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 It still amazes me how the Dems, even when they're in power, manage to create divisions among themselves- unlike the Republicans who somehow always remain largely a solid force. Tell that to Lincoln Chaffee, Olivia Snowe, Orrin Hatch... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
owl Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 Where's Lincoln Chaffee these days? (I did like him.) There will always be exceptions, but it seems to me that the Republicans do a better job at maintaining unity compared to the Dems. Is that a mis-statement? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
caliber66 Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 Where's Lincoln Chaffee these days? (I did like him.) In December 2006, Chafee announced that he was accepting a fellowship to serve as a "distinguished visiting fellow" at Brown University's Thomas J. Watson Jr. Institute for International Studies. The university planned to have Chafee lead a student group studying U.S. foreign policy. He's also been making the talk show rounds. He was on The Daily Show, and I heard him on NPR also. Dunno what else he has planned... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
owl Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 I actually meant "...And what happened to Lincoln Chafee when he disagreed with the party?" but I'm glad that he's doing good things at Brown. I think he's a pretty good guy. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
caliber66 Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 I actually meant "...And what happened to Lincoln Chafee when he disagreed with the party?" but I'm glad that he's doing good things at Brown. I think he's a pretty good guy.Well, Bush actually campaigned for Chaffee against Steve Laffey, his Republican opponent in the primary up here. He was voted out not because people were fed up with his politics, but because he's a Republican, and Rhode Island voters didn't want to perpetuate the Republican majority in the Senate simply because Linc Chaffee is a good guy. Had he jumped to the Dems, or likely even just disaffiliated with the Republican Party and gone independent, he would still have his seat. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
owl Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 That's true. I'm sure it didn't help that he had a Republican opponent, either, though. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mountain bed Posted January 11, 2007 Author Share Posted January 11, 2007 Where's Lincoln Chaffee these days? (I did like him.) There will always be exceptions, but it seems to me that the Republicans do a better job at maintaining unity compared to the Dems. Is that a mis-statement?I think you're spot on. I often wonder though if they're better at maintining unity or secrecy ( at least in regards to the current Admin.). Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Derek Phillips Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 I think you're spot on. I often wonder though if they're better at maintining unity or secrecy ( at least in regards to the current Admin.). I think it's mostly just an image projected by the media and perpetuated by conservative talkingheads who love to describe the Democratic party in disarray. Fact is, the Dems vote in blocks just as often as the Republicans. Sure, there's debate leading up to votes--as there should be--but the Democratic party is failry unified when comes down to voting. There's as much debate among minority (read: Centrist) Republican factions before votes as there is among the various factions of the Democratic party. Fact of the matter is it depends on party leadership as to what gets done and I think the Republican leadership have proven themselves a better opposition force than a governing body. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
owl Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 It's definitely perpetuated by the media in some ways, I'm sure of that. And maybe it's tough to actually make a comparison because the Dems haven't had both houses in quite a while. Anyway, let's hope you're right. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mountain bed Posted January 11, 2007 Author Share Posted January 11, 2007 Since the Blue Dogs are all about reducing Government spending but also are for a strong military this whole idea of cutting off the funds for Bush's war puts them in a very precarious position. The next few days are going to be real interesting in the Capitol. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jenbobblehead Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 Where's Lincoln Chaffee these days? (I did like him.) There will always be exceptions, but it seems to me that the Republicans do a better job at maintaining unity compared to the Dems. Is that a mis-statement? he just bought a house in Providence proper and i'm thinking of grooming him to be on the board of my non profit. He's quite a good egg, and frankly, i'm happy to have him back in Providence where I'm sure he'll do a world of good even if he's not a senator anymore. Maybe we'll see a run for Governor from him in three years.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.