Hoyer is HORRID! Connected to HAVA and "K Street" and *

[texpatriot2004]

Hoyer is the wrong person for the job. This is bad news for the war and bad news for the Democrats.


http://democraticwhip.house.gov/in_the_news/articles/index.cfm?pressReleaseID=818

<snip>

"Hoyer was the principal House Democratic sponsor for the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) election reform legislation aimed at improving the election system after the 2002 election scandal in Florida. Hoyer calls HAVA "the most important civil rights legislation since the voting rights act of 1965."

<snip>

and there's the Hoyer "K Street" connection

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2943646

And the Blogs for * wanted Hoyer

http://www.blogsforbush.com/

<snip>

"And now wouldn't you know it-- Nancy Pelosi, the liberal's liberal-- (and soon to be House Speaker), is endorsing Jack Murtha over Steny Hoyer to be the next Majority Leader of the House of Representatives."

<snip>

If all that isn't bad enough, Hoyer is apparently back-stabbing Democrats already. He released the very old video about "Murtha's baggage" and his "ethical problems" - with Democrats like Hoyer, who needs enemies.

Plus, it makes Madam Speaker look bad and gives fodder to the Corporate Media whores.

[TahitiNut]

1. It's the best Congress money can buy.

:shrug:

[Greyhound]

11. That sums up the whole problem, thanks for being so succinct. n/t

[Lone_Star_Dem]

21. That's what it appears to be shaping up to be.

I'm not thrilled by this at all. Having said that, I'd love for history to prove how wrong my feelings right now were.

[texpatriot2004]

25. Apparently nm

[skipos]

2. Not in my opinion. I prefered the more progressive candidate.

And even though this is 20 years old, it still bugs me:

Amoroso: Let me ask you now that we're together. I was under the impression, OK, and I told Howard what we were willing to pay, and I went out, I got the $50,000. OK? So what you're telling me, OK, you're telling me that that's not what you know....

Murtha: I'm not interested.

Amoroso: OK.

Murtha: At this point, you know, we do business together for a while. Maybe I'll be interested and maybe I won't.... Right now, I'm not interested in those other things. Now, I won't say that some day, you know, I, if you made an offer, it may be I would change my mind some day.

[helderheid]

3. No no, the worst person would be a Republican. I'm disappointed but at least we're in power.

[atreides1]

9. Being in power...

....won't matter if the new guys play the same game as the old guys!

[helderheid]

22. I am as progressive as they come but can say there IS a difference

[SharonRB]

4. I absolutely agree with you

I still can't believe Hoyer is the only one in addition to Murtha who was up for it.

[texpatriot2004]

27. If not Murtha then surely they could do better than Hoyer nm

[SharonRB]

61. That's my feeling.

There must have been someone else they could have gotten.

[dogday]

5. It's done, lets get with the program

and belly up to the bar and start tackling some issues for the people... Maybe this will leave Murtha with more time to end this war from his end... I know he will fight for it....

[Greyhound]

16. Yep, STFU and get your ass in line. I'm so happy we've learned our lesson so well. n/t

[dogday]

19. I don't believe that is what I said

I said he was elected by Democratic process. I wanted Murtha, but that is all water under the bridge, the vote is a done deal... We need to start to work on the issues instead of all the in-fighting.. I don't know that there was a lesson to learn except that they voted by a Democratic process... Always have and I hope we always will.....

[Beelzebud]

6. Is Hoyer for getting out of Iraq, or is he Republican Lite? That is my only question.

[texpatriot2004]

38. He's Republican Lite alright nm

[stopbush]

7. Great news for the war, great news for the Ds.

We all have our opinions.

This story will be dead by tomorrow. Had Murtha won we'd be watching that fucking ABSCAM video
throughout the holidays.

[Bucky]

8. Is Hoyer pro-war? I know he and Murtha were both pro-graft, pro-lobbyist, pro-establishment.

In the end I suspect Murtha lost not over Abscam or Iraq or ethics, but over how conservative he is on social issues.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

10. I'm On The Record As Favoring A Third Candidate

But how can a guy with a 95% ADA rating be bad


http://www.adaction.org/ADATodayVR2005.pdf

[Dyedinthewoolliberal]

12. I have a question........

when did we ever, truly, really care who the Speaker was? It has always been the job of the elected officials to make that call. I think this is a non-issue, though to be sure the folks at Faux will try to create something. Let's not give anyone a reason to think it is an issue. It is not...... :shrug: IMHO...

[texpatriot2004]

23. It's out of my hands but I can have an opinion nm

[ronnykmarshall]

13. WE'RE DOOMED!!!

DOOMED I TELLS YA!!!!!

IT'S OVER!!

WE'LL NEVER GET ANYTHING DONE!!

THE REPUBLICANS WILL TAKE BACE THE HOUSE AND SENATE IN 2008!!

WE'LL LOSE THE WHITE HOUSE AGAIN!!!

THE EVIL DLC AND THEIR DRONE NANCY PELOSI HAVE DESTROYED THE PARTY!!!

IT WAS ALL PART OF 'THE PLAN' ALL ALONG!!

ROVE WON AGAIN!!!!

:eyes:

Have I covered all the DU talking points?

[Lex]

17. LOL!

You got it.

[NYCGirl]

28. You forgot:

IT'S DIEBOLD'S FAULT!

[OzarkDem]

67. I don't know about Rove

but this guy could do a lot of damage to Dem progress in Congress.

[in_cog_ni_to]

14. Fucking sucks. WHY did the Democrats win the election? BECAUSE

THE PEOPLE want us OUT of Iraq! What do the FOOLS do? They vote against the one man who called for that to happen. I-AM-PISSED!

[texpatriot2004]

15. Exactly nm

[VelmaD]

33. oh spare me

Murtha was not the only person in the Democratic party calling for us to get out of Iraq. He wasn't even the first.

[in_cog_ni_to]

51. Where did I say he was the only one?

:eyes:

Hoyer refused to sign onto Murtha's Redeplyment resolution. Of the 2 men, Murtha is much more likely to FIGHT the repukes and the WH.

[VelmaD]

52. you said it in post 14

"They vote against the one man who called for that to happen."

[w4rma]

75. the one man of the two. (nt)

[longship]

18. Please do not prejudge this.

Let's see what happens here before we condemn it. Remember "assume" makes an ass out of you and me.

As many people here have observed, both Murtha and Hoyer have baggage. That's why I had no dog in this hunt. I'm sure that Hoyer will be fine as leader, just as Murtha would have been.

I'm sure Murtha would thank you for your support. But I'm also sure that he will be now supporting Hoyer.

We are in the majority. Please relax and enjoy our victory.
Thanks. :-)

[in_cog_ni_to]

20. Doesn't Hoyer want to "stay the course" in Iraq? He refused to sign onto Murtha's

redeployment plan. I'm afraid this is just going to be more of the same.:(

Anyone know what Hoyer's Iraq plan is?

[longship]

24. Relax and watch what happens.

No Democrat will be "staying the course" on Iraq or anything remotely like that.
Let them sort it out, then judge the results. No matter who is majority leader, there will be many dogs in the hunt.

In the meantime, positive engagement on the issue would be a good tactic. Write your congresscritters about how you feel. Write LTTEs. Etc.

[texpatriot2004]

54. Murtha's "baggage" was old news; Hoyer's isn't nm

[Skidmore]

26. Then Pelosi's first order of business is to get him

in line.

[texpatriot2004]

29. We'll see nm

[Junkdrawer]

30. Hoyer on Iraq:

Hoyer, by contrast, has cautioned against moving too quickly in Iraq, telling MSNBC-TV on Monday: “You can transfer authority to the Iraqis ... but we need to do so in a way, hopefully, that will not create greater carnage.”

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15702545 /


That's different than the Bush position how? :shrug:

[GOTV]

31. What's wrong with HAVA?

I guess I don't know that much about it but I thought it was a positive thing.

[texpatriot2004]

34. The Hack America's Vote Avt did nothing for the people. You

should do some research on it and see for yourself.

[GOTV]

43. That's why I'm asking....

... to get some info.

[texpatriot2004]

46. I did my own research you should do your own as well nm

[GOTV]

48. Why? This ain't a classroom and we're not being graded here

What's with that? Is the answer a state secret or something?

What damage would it do anyone to let me know what you know of, if anything, on the subject?

[texpatriot2004]

62. For starters, you could go over to our election reform forum nm

[GOTV]

64. And that's why I should do my own research instead of asking a question?

[BlueCaliDem]

36. Everyone thought HAVA was a good thing...

...but then 2002, the California Recall, the 2004, and now even the 2006 elections began exposing the huge loopholes which all seem to benefit Republicans.

Voting machine companies, all Republican-beholden, have easily flipped elections over to Bush, and Republicans, and provisional ballots are not being used as they are supposed to (some aren't even counted until weeks after the election; after the public is given a "projected" winner of a race).

Add to the above, the fact that Bob Gates, who is set to replace Rumsfeld, was an important person who was lobbying hard for HAVA, and you quickly understand that HAVA ain't what it was sold to the American public.

Like Arnold Schwarzenegger is quoted saying {paraphrasing here}: "I admire dictators and tyrants. They are smart, and strong, and most people aren't smart enough to govern themselves and need them to lead them."

[GOTV]

45. It seems to me, from the wikipedia article...

... That HAVA was a good idea, implemented poorly.

[natrat]

56. yea real good-voting machines that can be verefied..real good nt

[GOTV]

58. But HAVA does not call for that....

... the fact that many machines are not verifiable is an implementation detail.

HAVA does not require machines to be unverifiable. Having electronic voting machines would be helpful if properly implemented. The machines should be open source and produce verifiable paper trails of course but the fact that they are not was not mandated by HAVA.

At least from my brief read that's how it looks.

[EFerrari]

78. And yet HAVA shoved these insecure machines that use

SECRET code and count our votes in SECRET down our throats.

It's not an implementational detail but a basic threat to our democratic process.

Worse, HAVA creates the illusion of access and security when in fact, it enables voter suppression and exclusion on the front end of the process (registration) and then forces the states to vote on machines that have proven security issues. I think they're still looking for those 18K votes in FL 13 (is it 13 or 3?) where the race was decided by a few hundred votes. Thank HAVA.

[aquart]

70. Uh, not me.

I knew it was a scam from the second they started lying about the hanging chads.

But, then, I'd also already guessed that NO legislation from this bunch was good legislation.

[EFerrari]

77. It's like all of Bush's plans with the Orwellian names.

It's a mess from top to bottom. For one thing, it redefines qualified voters as voters who are in the mandated state voter registration base.

It mandated electronic voting machines all over the country.

I call it the "hinder American voters" act.

[BlueCaliDem]

32. And sorry to say...This morning, Steny Hoyer is chosen as Majority Leader...

...149-86.

I guess it's still all about money, money, money (it's a public secret Hoyer was calling in markers with his fellow Democratic reps), and only time will tell whether or not we, the Liberals and Progressive in the Democratic Party, were once again only important for our votes only to be thrown to the wayside regarding progressive policies for ALL AMERICANS...and not, as our new Speaker of the House so succinctly calls it "the privilege few".

[VelmaD]

35. By the way, Murtha is not...

repeat NOT a liberal. He is just about the most socially conservative Democrat in the House. Electing him Majority Leader would also NOT have been a victory for liberals and progressives.

[BlueCaliDem]

37. And yet, San Francisco Liberal Pelosi lobbied hard for Murtha, NOT Hoyer.

Strange huh?

Add to that that it was "not progressive nor liberal" Murtha who fought so hard to have San-Fran Liberal House Speaker-Elect Pelosi win Minority Leader over Hoyer.

I guess, in addition to you, K Street is giddy Hoyer won.

[VelmaD]

39. Frankly, I didn't like Hoyer or Murtha

As I stated in several threads yesterday...I would have prefered a third option and I cannot believe these 2 choices are the best the party could come up with.

[texpatriot2004]

40. I backed Murtha but you were right to support a 3rd option nm

[BlueCaliDem]

47. Murtha is the LESSER of "two evils"...not only because Pelosi, who does shares our ideals...

...trusts him more than Hoyer, but contrary to Media-Belief, Murtha ain't nearly as corrupt, and self-serving as Hoyer, nor does Hoyer's record prove he's anywhere near "progressive"---unless it's "progressing" his own, selfish political career, even if it hurts the Democratic Party.

Here is a piece by David Sirota who personally knows Steny Hoyer from his days in Congress:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-sirota/hoyers-campaign-to-under_b_11848.html

As Sirota says, these are undebatable facts, that although Hoyer projects himself as more liberal, his votes, and his personal vendetta against Pelosi are anything but!

[texpatriot2004]

49. Agreed! nt

[VelmaD]

50. yesterday I posted links...

to the voting records of Hoyer and Murtha.

Hoyer:
http://www.ontheissues.org/House/Steny_Hoyer.htm

Murtha:
http://www.ontheissues.org/PA/John_Murtha.htm

Go read those and then come back and tell me exactly how Hoyer's votes are less progressive.

Like I said, I didn't support Hoyer, but I consider a lot of Murtha;s positions outside the party mainstream.

[BlueCaliDem]

55. Maryland is more Liberal. Pennsylvania, more Conservative.

it's understandable that Murtha is more conservative than Hoyer, and they vote this way representing their constituency, but I can't get over the fact that, in spite of his huge African-American constituency, Hoyer voted FOR the credit-card drafted "bankruptcy reform" bill, (while Murtha did not) that effectively destroyed the ONLY Federal law that really protects the consumer, and hurt the less fortunate in our country, while Murtha voted NO on it, according to your links.

However, as I've tried to explain in my post, based on the investigative reporting by David Sirota, and based upon San-Fran Lib House Speaker-Elect Pelosi preference for conservative Murtha, Hoyer can't be trusted, and he's already all but proven this as fact when he allowed that old grainy video tape from TWENTY-SIX years ago about John Murtha with FBI Agents hit the media to discredit a fellow Democrat.

That was just dirty...Rovian even. I never saw Murtha try to slander, and slime Hoyer in the media and he was given every chance to do so, and had so much to choose from, but John Murtha has got too much class for that.

Murtha didn't stoop to Hoyer's low-Rovian level. Not even ONCE. For that alone, he should be highly commended.

[rinsd]

71. Either support your claim that Hoyer released the tape or drop it

"However, as I've tried to explain in my post, based on the investigative reporting by David Sirota, and based upon San-Fran Lib House Speaker-Elect Pelosi preference for conservative Murtha,"

Do you know why Pelosi supported Murtha?

"Hoyer can't be trusted, and he's already all but proven this as fact when he allowed that old grainy video tape from TWENTY-SIX years ago about John Murtha with FBI Agents hit the media to discredit a fellow Democrat."

He allowed?

"That was just dirty...Rovian even. I never saw Murtha try to slander, and slime Hoyer in the media and he was given every chance to do so, and had so much to choose from, but John Murtha has got too much class for that."

BS he attacked Hoyer's Iraq position on TV. Hoyer hasn't said boo to the media. Murtha in a pure amateur hour campaign has been taking dirty laundry out the to the media.

"Murtha didn't stoop to Hoyer's low-Rovian level. Not even ONCE. For that alone, he should be highly commended."

You know what is truly rovian to claim somone is guilty of an attack that they have nothing to do with. Even more rovian is your unsourced BS that Hoyer was behind the ABscam tape. And even more rovian than that is pretending the ABscam was the only ethical issue Murtha had.

[BlueCaliDem]

72. It's like telling YOU to support your contention that Hoyer's camp DIDN'T send the Abscam...

...tape. What a stupid argument.

And just for the record, after checking his notes ON TELEVISION, Chris Matthews said so on Hardball yesterday when grilling Murtha on his show when Murtha made mention of some person in the Hoyer camp releasing the tape to the media to "swiftboat" him.

Today, Wolf Blitzer too mentioned it on his earler show after it was made known that Hoyer won, and if there'd be "bad blood" between the two congressmen because of it.

"Do you know why Pelosi supported Murtha?"

Take your pick. There are several "reasons" mentioned--all hearsay, and "rumor" by YOUR lofty standards--but it doesn't undercut the FACT that Nancy Pelosi is a LIBERAL, yet she supported conservative Democrat Jack Murtha.

"He allowed?"

He sure as HELL didn't do a damned thing to stop it, now did he? If he did, please make reference to it---other than AFTER winning the position, that is.

"BS he attacked Hoyer's Iraq position on TV. Hoyer hasn't said boo to the media. Murtha in a pure amateur hour campaign has been taking dirty laundry out the to the media.

Bull! Murtha pointed out the difference between them BOTH having voted for the resolution, only Murtha apologized publicly for it, and has been fighting like mad to change America's opinion of this illegal, and incredibly stupid war while Hoyer, beholden to AIPAC, never did, or has, has he? Naw...Hoyer's too busy setting up a new and improved K-Street project of his own to even bother. You call that attacking. I call it speaking truth to power.

"You know what is truly rovian to claim somone is guilty of an attack that they have nothing to do with.

Turning the tables here, support your claim or drop it.

"Even more rovian is your unsourced BS that Hoyer was behind the ABscam tape.

Both Blitzer and Matthews checked their sources, and affirmed that it was indeed someone from Hoyer's staff that released the 26 year old tape to the media. Got a problem with that, take it up with them. No one refuted this claim, and no where has this claim been debunked.

"And even more rovian than that is pretending the ABscam was the only ethical issue Murtha had."

No, what's Rovian was releasing a grainy tape to the media to discredit an opponent who was NEVER indicted, and even EXONERATED of any wrong-doing sending the media into a feeding-frenzy and giving them the ammo they so desperately seek to completely undermine, and make ridiculous the Democratic Party's credibility on ethics.

Isn't that Rove's job? Hence "rovian".

Look, your favorite WON. He won using an underhanded, destructive tactic Rove himself would give a smile and nod of approval for, but he won. And that's all that matters, right?

[rinsd]

79. I want links

You made the claim. Back it up. I saw it on TV doesn't count.

[BlueCaliDem]

81. Hoyer's camp smeared Murtha by releasing to all media...

...the private conversation Murtha had with the Bluedog Democrats that Murtha thought the new ethics plan set forth by Pelosi was "crap".

However, after having reviewed the Hardball transcripts, nowhere did Matthews nor Murtha accuse the Hoyer camp for releasing the ABSCAM video that had been leaked to rightwing rag The American Spectator early in September of this year, according to other blogs.

So to the Hoyer's fans: I apologize for misunderstanding the rapid exchange between Matthews and Murtha, and for making the accusation that Hoyer's was behind the release of the ABSCAM video, although the sources are still unknown.

Here's the part where I misunderstood the conversation, and wrongly thought Matthews was citing a source that the ABSCAM video was released by the Hoyer's camp, when the Hoyer's camp, instead, leaked to the media Murtha saying that Pelosi's plans for improving the ethics in congress was crap.

"MURTHA: What I said was, it’s total crap, the idea we have to deal with an issue like this, when—and it is total crap that we have to deal with an issue like this when we’ve got a war going on and we got all these other issues -- $8 billion a month we’re spending—

MATTHEWS: So when this came up in the Blue Dog meeting the other night, you felt that that was a ridiculous—you thought that wasn’t the right issue to be talking about right now.

MURTHA: Exactly. I—what I’ve been trying—

MATTHEWS: And that’s really what you meant when you said total crap, because this is all over the wires as if—it sounds to me like you’re saying, I think all this goo-goo, good government stuff, is a joke.

MURTHA: And I wonder—

MATTHEWS: Do you think that? You’re laughing; do you think it’s a joke?

MURTHA: No; I wonder who said that. That’s what I’m laughing about.

MATTHEWS: Oh, you’re wondering about which person it was—

MURTHA: I wonder—it was, I think, somebody that may not be in my camp.

MATTHEWS: No, it is—it was identified as a Steny Hoyer person, in fact, in one of the other wire services."

Read the full transcript here:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15737141

Hoyer did play "rovian-tactics" by deliberately releasing a private conversation Murtha had with the so-called "bluedog democrats", but there's NO EVIDENCE that Hoyer, nor anyone in his camp, were the still unknown source that delivered the 54 minute long "ABSCAM" video to The American Spectator.

[Individualist]

59. but, but the DLC cheerleaders will tell you this is a good thing.

:puke:
:puke:
:puke:

[BlueCaliDem]

74. Yeah well, maybe those DLCers need to reconsider which party they...

...really want to support since the DLC is hard at work to destroy the Democratic Party, and make them a minority in a Republican government to time indefinite!

I mean, Hillary's unasked for response rebuking Kerry while even Matt Dow<sp?>, and other Republican leaders defended Kerry by coming on air to say that Kerry would never say a bad thing about the troops, and understood he was just botched a joke!

That didn't stop Harold Ford Jr., Lieberman NOR Hillary from publicly rebuking Kerry perpetuating the lie that he was criticizing the troops when they should know better!

Well, I guess it's in their best interest to ensure Kerry's so damaged that he can't make a second run for the WH in 2008.

Bravo to the DLCers! They've succeeded in making the Democratic Party look weak, and disorganized, and leave it to the media to run with this lie.

Great job.

[SouthernBelle82]

41. This is nothing new

Nothing new. Hoyer's been doing this for a while now. I think it all started when Pelosi beat him. Check out my post about Hoyer from David Sirota.

[texpatriot2004]

42. I saw that post, it's good nm

[MarkTwain]

44. Uh... No, it's not...

.. a bad day for the war nor is it a bad day for Democrats.

He was the far lesser of two evils.

Murtha is severely challenged and compromised both ethically and legally. He was a train wreck waiting to happen for us.

This will all work out fine. Except for maybe some of our own Keyboard Commandos here at DU, the battle will be forgotten in two weeks. Pelosi and our fine class of Democrats will now turn to the work of putting a big old stop sign at the gate of 1600.

Besides, the fact that it wasn't even close should tell people something about the internal "regard" for Mr. Murtha.

[texpatriot2004]

53. Who knew of him until recently? nm

[Roxy66]

57. Do you know their voting records? Do some research!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2733911

This is a very good source if you want to make an informative decision!

[Emit]

60. Hoyer: "Bush deserves respect" (re: Colbert)

Remember this?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=2260216



Also, I've read in the past he has strong ties to AIPAC, and I think Hoyer's sister was the president of AIPAC last year -- she's the one who said the Franklin/AIPAC spy scandal was "outrageous, as well as baseless." Her name is Bernice Manocherian.

From the link above-thread on his voting record, he seems progressive/liberal, but his record on Iraq and Israel/ME is hawkish and pro-war -- sounds like Lieberman to me.

[texpatriot2004]

65. Yes, you're right, he does have ties to AIPAC even put Israel

before New Orleans.

[rinsd]

63. Hoyer is backstabbing? Jesus the lies are piling up

"If all that isn't bad enough, Hoyer is apparently back-stabbing Democrats already. He released the very old video about "Murtha's baggage" and his "ethical problems"

Hoyer didn't release shit, CREW & TPM did. Retract that immediately or be considered a liar.

[OzarkDem]

66. He's already trying to set the Dem agenda via the news media

I don't like the way this guy operates, not at all.

He's already announced that "changes are on the table for Social Security" including raising taxes and increasing the eligibility age....

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15719985/

Now he's ignoring Iraq?

Mr. Hoyer, you're not in charge and you had better listen to what the voters want or they will show you the door.

[rinsd]

68. Hoyer is in no danger from his voters

His election record is ridiculous, he pulls in 65%+ in 11 out of 13 re-election campaigns including 2 races where he ran unopposed by Republicans.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steny_Hoyer#Election_history

He also just trounced Murtha is what was supposed to be a close vote.

Hoyer is who the people of his district want and who the Democratic Congresspeople want.

[jsamuel]

73. yeah, doesn't make him right

[texpatriot2004]

69. He's not to be trusted IMHO nm

[w4rma]

76. He said **what** about social security? He says that gutting it is *on the table*?!

This guy should not be anywhere near a leadership position.

[texpatriot2004]

80. What did he say about Social Security? nm