Oct 23 2006
Democrats Throw Their Best National Security Voice Under The Bus
The patience of the liberal movement is running out. If there ever was a signal to America that a Democrat led Congress would be a disaster it is the fact their strongest, most senior voice on intelligence, Jane Harman, would be rejected as the leader of the House Intelligence Committee:
Representative Jane Harman has gained national prominence as the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, but even her supporters now concede that she is unlikely to become chairman if her party wins control of the House.
Standing in her way is another California lawmaker, Representative Nancy Pelosi, the Democrats’ speaker-in-waiting, who would have the power to pick the leader of each committee. The relationship between the two has soured in recent years over political rivalries and policy disputes, and Congressional officials on both sides of the divide say Ms. Pelosi would most likely look elsewhere to fill the Intelligence Committee’s top job.
…
The question of Ms. Harman’s future reflects in part the struggles the Democrats have encountered in developing an identity on national security issues, which for years have been the party’s Achilles’ heel.
One only needs to know that Jane Harman voted for the Homeland security agency, and Pelosi voted against it, to understand the problem here. The Patriot Act, which applies the same legal tools to terrorism that exists for organized crime and drug lords, was supported by Harman and opposed by Pelosi. Pelosi will remove Harman from consideration because she is not liberal enough. Harman supported removal of the threat posed by Saddam, Pelosi opposed safe gaurding the country. Even inside the Democratic party the purge of the ‘impure’ will go forward if Pelosi is Speaker and third in line to succeed the Presidency. The blacklisting of Harman is a clear indication that the Dems want full and complete surrender in the war on terrorism. Otherwise Harman and Lieberman would be icons of the Democratic strength on national security. Right now they are embarassments to be neutralized by far left radicals.
If Representative Jane Harman is their best national security voice, I would hate to see their worst.
I’m with you Perdogg, but I don’t think it was always that way. Jane Harman used to make sense, but like all other moderate Dems she is being FORCED to “see the light” Pelosi’s way!
Carol
Pelosi plans on putting Alcee Hastings as head of House Intelligence Commitee. That is like putting O.J. in charge of the DAs office.
Charlie Rangle; House Ways and Means Commitee(defund the war!)
Henry Waxman; Government Reform Committee(wiretaps are illegal)
John Conyers;Judiciary Committee(subpeona/impeach)
How can a reasonable person look at these Dem’s records and not be afraid….very afraid.
There is a difference which Strata hasn’t learned between
“conservative” and “authoritarian” Bush-cultist.
Ken,
I have learned you are just a liberal clown who thinks he is being coherent! If I was such a Bush cultist why won’t I become a Republican? I know Ken, it’s not fair to ask hard questions of you. Keep inside your fantasy world and I will try not to bother you again.
Strata–Your effusive praise for Bush, also expressed again on Thursday, kind of confirms my characterization.
There was a “Republicans for Kerry” group last election, probably had a few Kerry-lovers in its ranks also.
More importantly, latest polling shows the Dems have captured the
“trust on keeping us secure” issue from the GOP. Result of a
failed war, empowering Iran and increasing jihad ranks by leaps and bounds throughout the world.