While Evan Bayh often manages to embarrass himself, he's achieving new lows on Rachel Maddow's show tonight. His obsequious plea for JoeMentum is utterly nauseating.
Bayh's argument is as follows:
- JM might quit if he loses his chairmanship, allowing a GOP gov to name his successor;
- JM might not quit, and, if a fit of pique, vote w/ the Goopers on critical legislation.
Lemme get this straight, Evan. the Dems are supposed to let a man who will allow personal pique to dictate his voting record chair a vital committee. We've all heard the saying that justice is what the judge ate for breakfast. Here, the senator's votes will be based upon who plays nice w/ him.
I wonder how this concept will work in practice. What if JM feels snubbed by a Dem senator on the day of a critical vote. Will that change his mind? Will each party be outdoing the other w/ the gift baskets that they send to his Senate chambers on the eve of close votes? Will Salazar, Nelson, Bayh, Carper, et al go out to JM's house and mow his lawn and detail his car?
I always thought that it was understood in DC that, while the politics of personality often hold sway, no one admits that fact in public. Regardless of what they do in private, our solons are, in public, all supposed to be motivated by their view of the national interest. Bayh appears to have unwittingly violated that understanding.
JM's basing his votes on whether or not he keeps the Homeland Security chairmanship is no different than MOC's basing their votes on their golfing junkets or their ski vacations. The very concept is contrary to the ideals that shaped the Obama campaign. It should also be contrary to the way in which our party utilizes its new-found majority.
Bayh and those who are joining him in his sorry effort are undermining the core beliefs that are supposed to be taking office on 1/20/09. They also allow JM to hold the caucus hostage for the next 2 years. Who says that JM will be satisfied w/ getting to keep his chairmanship? Who says that, once that concession is not granted, he will not seek others down the road?
JM has no leverage left in the current situation. It is hard to see him voluntarily giving up a seat that he fought so hard to keep just 2 years ago. It is equally hard to see him joining the powerless minority party on the other side of the aisle knowing that doing so would virtually guarantee his defeat in 2012.
Let him suffer the consequences of his actions.