January 17, 2005
Roemer and the Big Tent
By Jim Dallas
Tim Roemer's fussing about litmus tests. Personally, I wish the focus was on Tim Roemer's votes on Bush's tax cuts, his position with a right-wing libertarian think-tank, etc. were taking priority over his position on abortion.
Our senate minority leader and many members of Congress are opposed to abortion-on-demand, which I'm perfectly fine with that. In fact I thought we were going to get some peace from the old pro-life canard that Democrats are excluding anti-choice people from power. If we're going to have litmus tests, how 'bout one that makes some sense, e.g. sticking with the New Deal consensus?
Posted by Jim Dallas at January 17, 2005 11:48 AM
| TrackBack
The issue shouldn't be ideology- the DNC Chair has no role in setting policy positions for the party. It isn't important. I don't care about Roemer's positions, particularly since my candidate of choice is Martin Frost- almost as conservative as Roemer.
The issue is guts. Taking on the task we have in front of us- rebuilding a failed and broken party to take on a well-oiled Republican juggernaut- will take guts. And Roemer doesn't have them, Frost does. Roemer got drawn into a district more Democratic than his old one, but when a GOPer who had almost beat him before announced, Roemer got scared and ran away- refused to run. He's a pansy. Martin Frost on the other hand, had only GOP-glutted districts to choose from and stood tall, fought like a motherfucker and did better than he should have. He has guts, and Roemer doesn't.
Other candidates have guts too. It took a lot of guts for Simon Rosenburg to side with Dean when he knew it would piss off other New Democrats. It took guts for Dean to run for president in the first place. It took guts for Donnie Fowler to run for DNC chair as such a young guy. But Roemer is a coward and is far and away my last choice for DNC chair.
I agree the debate on Roemer ought to be over the other issues, but what those other issues amount to is incredibly indicative of what I think the debate really is among the DNC candidates: whether they are capable of, or at least have an understanding of the need for a transformation of the party's charter ... instead of adapting to the prevailing winds (and casting "safe" votes on the Clinton budget, for example), we need to more aggressively challenge the other side's worldview (and the inconsistencies within it).
I see nothing about Roemer that indicates he either understands that or possesses the ability to affect it.
Speaking of which ...
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/1/17/121759/358
nothing wrong with roemer. many dems are pro-choice while they themselves are anti-abortion
Hi,
Could you explain to me what Roemer's troubling votes are on the Bush tax cuts? I went back to the House voting record for when this was all being debated back in the spring of 2001 and this is what I found:
3/8/01: Voted NO on H.R.3: Economic Growth and Tax Relief Act, passed 230-198
3/28/01: Voted NO on H.Con.Res.83: Congressional Budget for Fiscal Year 2002, passed 222-205
3/29/01: Voted YES on H.R.6: Marriage Penalty and Family Tax Relief Act, passed 282-144
4/4/01: Voted NO on H.R.8: Death Tax Elimination Act, passed 274-154
5/2/01: Voted YES on H.R.10: Comprehensive Retirement Security and Pension Reform Act, passed 407-24
5/16/01: Voted NO on H.R.1836: Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act, passed 230-197
5/17/01: Voted YES on H.R.622: Adoption Tax Credits bill, passed 420-0
Everything here seems to check out fine for me. Am I missing something? Thanks
