usually the stuff novak writes turns out to be completely not true, so i wouldnt put much stock into this anyway.

We probably shouldn't tell Howie.  We all know how he loves Rahm Emmanuel.

Rewarding failure is the only thing the Versailles Dems seem to have in the way of an ideology.

Still, it's Robert Novack speaking.

Frankly, I'm not sure I'd get bent one way or the other.  My guess is that Emanuel's ego and need to win is more powerful than any negative incentive that may exist.  

Personally I've come to the conclusion that the guy is a creep but he does seem pretty smart and wants to win.  Sad to say it but Pelosi is just the opposite and has been more than a bit of a disappointment, she should go anyway.

Unless you're saying he would sabotage the election, it's a rather silly charge. Just because he's "in charge" of the DCCC doesn't mean he's entirely responsible for the democrat's success or failure, come on. And on top of that Pelosi's "We won't ever impeach bush" talk certainly isn't motivating the base.

I'm not a huge fan of Pelosi, but I think Rahm would be worse (especially if he fails in Nov). But who instead? Who is the ideal Speaker/minority leader? Murtha? Waxman? Can't wait to hear.

This sounds like DLC bullshit spin. Pelosi is doing a fine job keeping the caucus together and the House has rules that make life miserable for the minority. A woman speaker would be the most powerful women in US history and Pelosi is well placed to achieve just that role. This sounds like a trial balloon rumor started by the worst of Hillary Rodham Clinton's backers.

Rahm Emmanuel would be the same kind of tool in Congress for President Hillary Clinton that Bill Frist is to George W. Bush. I'm for a strong Congress as a check on the Executive, even it that Executive happens to be one I support. I continue to support Rep. Pelosi as leader and ultimately Speaker.

[quote]As Chair of the DCCC, Rahm Emanuel is in charge of recapturing the House.[/quote]

I'm not so sure that all of the DCCC sees that as its goal.  Perhaps Rahm, and some people that are backing him, see as his foremost goal to maintain the current leadership machine of the party.  And to win elections, too.

If we fail to retake the House this fall, neither Emanuel nor Pelosi should be leader. I can't say that I've thought of who'd be a better choice. But I am so tired of weak-willed Dems like Pelosi, Emanuel, Hoyer et al that I could scream (and often do, at my computer).

For me, this isn't about ideology. I'm sick and tired of the progressive v. liberal v. centrist narrative. Can't we just get along and worry about beating the true enemy- Bushie, Frist and Lieberman?

What 'incentive system' would you expect from people who treat Dem voters the same way Bush treats the press - with utter contempt? The sooner we recognize this contempt, the better off we'll all be. Dem voters, like me (once), like to make fun of all the crazies who perpetuate their own misery (Republicans, religious bigots, the media, etc.), but in the echo chamber that is the Dem blogosphere, we are unable to recognize our own complicity in and irrelevance to the system.

Or, 'failure' is relative to one's status. Failure for Pelois/Emanuel is getting booted from office and being unable to land a lucrative bribery gig on K street. Failure for the rest of us is more boring stuff, like losing our homes, our health care, our freedom, etc.

I don't love Rahm Emmanuel.  In fact, he gives me the creeps.  But the Democrats who stand to take over chairmanships in the House are some of the worst of our Party.  Starting at the top, I'm not crazy about Pelosi being Speaker.  Working our way down, we find a bunch of guys who are sleazy, dishonest, and on the wrong side of a lot of important issues.  It's almost as if the scum rose to the top.

This is going to be an issue the GOP makes hay with in November.  With the Media in full anti-Dem mode the GOP might not need this issue at all, but I'd feel a lot better if there weren't so many stinkers ready to step up if the Dems take the House.

Only if being the House Minority Leader is a reward.  I'm no big fan of Emanuel (my congressman, holding the esteemed Rod Blagoevich seat), but maybe the position is sufficient punishment for his sins.

The more I think about this, the more I think the whole article is a provocation, designed to get Dems fighting amongst ourselves before the election has been held.

The comment makes sense though given Rahm's careless disregard of Dean and the netroots in the Congressional midterms.

Rahm wants to stick Dean with the blame for any failed chance to retake the House/Senate, consolidate his own power in the process and pave the way for Hillary.

But Emanuel has already made his case that if the Dems fail to take over the House in this election it will be Howard Dean's fault.  Because Howard has "squandered" so much of the DNC's money on "useless" organizing in "useless" states during "useless" times.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con tent/article/2006/05/10/AR2006051001927. html

Emanuel wins if he wins and he wins if he loses.  Nobody ever said the man isn't smart.

Carolyn Kay
MakeThemAccountable.com