Tully at Stubborn Facts has a great post on the amusing spectacle of watching the Democrats eat their own.
The nutroots are greatly disappointed that so many of the newly-elected "blue dog Democrats" (also called "Bush dog Democrats") are so red. That is, they are conservative and won't line up and march with San Fran Nan on every issue. So, what do the nutroots propose? Why, threaten 'em!
And so, you may have noticed a lot of chatter about 'Bush Dog' Democrats over the past few days. That's not an accident. We've been working to identify the group of conservative Democrats in the House who are holding back progressives from being able to effectively govern. These are concentrated in two main caucuses, the Blue Dog Caucus and the New Democrat caucuses. Blue Dogs consider themselves heirs to the Southern conservative wing of the party, and tend to vote for socially restrictive policies and a hawkish foreign policy. The New Democrats tend to be more partisan, but often are key to passing important pieces of right-wing legislation, such as the Bankruptcy Bill. In the last few years, these two caucuses have expanded their numbers, and the Blue Dogs have become the swing vote in the House allowing for effective conservative control of the Congress. We want to put a stop to the embrace of conservative values among House Democrats, and make sure that when Democrats are elected, they act like Democrats.
What does a Democrat act like? Like the KOS Kids, of course! Be just as whacked out to the left as possible and the KOSsacks will love ya. Of course, you won't have a snowball's chance in hell of being re-elected, since your constituents are generally conservative, but don't let that bit of logic stop the moonbats. No, they demand absolute fealty to the far Left of the Democratic Party. And if threats don't work, just work hard to get the Bush dogs defeated and pray that the person who wins the election is farther to the Left. Not that that's likely to happen in conservative districts.
One of the difficulties of being in the majority is trying to garner enough votes for any given issue while preserving your majority. In the old days, Democrats came in all stripes from yellow dog to blueblood. You had the Ted Kennedys and the Phil Gramms, and they disagreed about a lot but worked together on other things. But after Ronald Reagan's victory, politics in Congress changed. Liberal Democrats became more hard-lined against their conservative brethren and many of the conservatives (like Gramm) jumped ship and became Republicans.
Then Republicans had the same situation. There were conservative Republicans and some Republicans In Name Only. We've seen what happened when we abandoned even the RINOs.
If the KOS supporters think threatening or ousting their conservative politicians is going to be good for the Democrats, they aren't paying any attention to history or politics. The far Left needs the Bush dog Democrats to retain their majority and control the legislative agenda. But to do that is going to mean acknowledging that the country is more conservative than San Francisco and that, as deliciously tempting as the red meat of immediate troop withdrawal may be, it's both impractical and illogical. But if the nutroots want to destroy the Democratic majority, I won't stop 'em.