Hard to fault the members of the House on this account:
By now you’ve read reams of stories about how House Dem leaders are smoking mad at the White House because Robert Gibbs suggested that Republicans could take back the House.
In a closed-door meeting yesterday, House Dems vented about their frustration. And it’s true that they’re angry with Gibbs for needlessly giving Republicans a recruiting and fundraising boon.
But there’s a more important story here underlying these tensions. What’s really driving the anger is that House Dem leaders feel like they’ve done a whole bunch of heavy lifting to pass jobs-related measures — while the Senate and the White House have effectively dithered. And, crucially, it’s House Democrats who are likely to pay the price at the polls this fall over this failure
I know there are those out there who think more theatrics and forceful antics from the WH would cure the problem (assuming they actually care and are not still mired in some bullshit internal debate about the deficit- that Obama, Summers, and others have stumped for UE benefits extensions suggests to me otherwise), but I lay most of the blame on the Senate. If the Senate rules were not so ridiculously undemocratic, UE benefits and job creations bills would have passed months ago. Add in you have jackasses like Ben Nelson (and I forget where I read this), whose state has low unemployment and who basically does not give a shit about the Democratic party, as he will be able to play the same role he plays now should the Republicans take back the Senate- the centrist hold-out who gets to be queen for a day every time the majority wants to pass a bill, and it becomes even more untenable.
If I were a Democrat in the House I’d be pissed, too. Without question, they’ve been the most responsible and pro-active part of the government on every issue to come before them, and they are the ones about to get pasted in the mid-terms. I’d be screaming bloody murder, too.