So the Rockefeller/Hoyer wing of the Democratic Party is all set and ready to "compromise" with the Bush/Cheney/Rove Executive that treats its Legislative co-equals as second-class citizens on telecom amnesty. Fortunately, it appears that Senators Reid and Durbin are opposed to this capitulation; hopefully they and their backbone-enhanced colleagues can use that spine to overcome the compromise-prone jellyfishes who believe that bipartisanship is a one-way street leading to cover-up of GOP crimes.
But lest this issue--and others such as the nature and scope of Karl Rove's subpoena testimony--simply become a power struggle within the Democratic Party between the squishy centrists and those with the courage of conviction, it seems that it might be worth asking why the division exists in the first place. In other words, what exactly is the Rockefeller/Hoyer wing afraid of?
Much has been made of the ideological divisions in the GOP, reflecting their own battle between centrists advocating bipartisan compromise, and those demanding a harder ideological line. So-called "RINOs" are not welcome in today's Republican Party; indeed, the Movement Conservatives made a point of primarying out just about anyone that didn't fit the mold of an individual falling somewhere between Genghis Khan and Vlad the Impaler on social and balance of powers issues, while emulating the most ardent followers of Ayn Rand on economic issues. This ideological purity crusade in the Republican Party has led to their becoming increasingly regionalized as the "Southern Party"--a situation which, if the Democrats play it right, could led to decades-long Democratic dominance pending the current realignment, all the way until the next realignment after this one.
Presumably, the Rockefeller/Hoyer wing of the Democratic Party is afraid of similar "extremism" creeping into the Democratic Party--though what exactly is "extreme" about defending the Constitution is a little beyond me. Presumably, they are afraid that the Democrats will be seen as similarly partisan and out-of-touch if they were to pursue justice against the telecoms (and, by extension, Bush/Cheney) and against Karl Rove. No doubt they are afraid that Republicans will call such actions as enforcing subpoenas and demanding accountability under the law for major corporations a "partisan witch hunt". No doubt they fear that such actions would be seen as failing to jibe with Barack Obama's promises of a "new tone" and "new politics." And, if you look at these issues from a purely political, short-term point of view and dissociate them from the moral and legal imperatives and long-term ramifications they present, this argument may even seem convincing.
But it's not. The difference between GOP off-the-rails extremism, and Democratic toughness on constitutional issues, is the support of the American people.
Republicans have been marginalized by their own asshattery precisely because they have been attempting to ram through an agenda that clearly does not have the support of the American Public.
We as Americans don't want our social security privatized. We don't want the religious wackos in charge of the public schools. We don't want to have our Medicare and college aid stripped from us. We kind of like drinking clean water, and breathing clean air, and sunbathing on clean beaches. We like having freedom over our own bodies and freedom in our bedrooms. We like being guaranteed a decent wage in exchange for hard work. We don't like our brave soldiers being sent to die for no reason. We don't like torture. We do like being able to pay for healthcare. These are American values that the GOP extremists have been attempting to undermine through deceit, subversion, and intimidation.
On the vast majority of issues, ideological Democrats simply do not have this problem. As Americans, we love our Constitution. More importantly, when it comes to the two issues on which the Steny Hoyer wing want compromise--Karl Rove's subpoena and telecom amnesty--we have the support of the American People.
Americans simply don't like Karl Rove.
And Americans hate the telecom immunity plan almost as much as they hate the telecoms.
It may be naive of me, but I kind of thought that one of the most basic rules of politics is that if the people are in favor of your position and against the other guy's position, you run with that all the way to the ballot box and never let up. But then, what do I know? I'm just a blogger. Presumably, if I were smart like Steny Hoyer, I would know to be more afraid of David Brooks' and Bill Kristol's editorials than of the American People.
I guess they really know whom to be afraid of.