Before he was mentioned as a possible Senate successor to Barack Obama, before he helped lead the Democrats back to power in the House, before he was even elected to his first term as the congressman from the North Side of Chicago, Rahm Emanuel was telling friends that he had one goal in life: to become the first Jewish speaker of the House.
But the No. 4 man in the House Democratic leadership has become a victim of his own success. As chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, Emanuel helped lead the Democrats back to the majority in 2006. That victory put the speaker’s gavel in the hands of Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), and she’s not likely to give it up any time soon.
Emanuel - who is both ambitious and impatient - may not be able to wait. In early June, conservative columnist Robert Novak wrote that Pelosi was “reported to be privately talking” about Emanuel as a possible successor for Barack Obama if Illinois’ junior senator is elected president.
Emanuel and Pelosi flatly denied the rumor, but it has sparked a new round in one of Washington’s favorite parlor games: What does Rahm want now?
The now part is easy to answer, Emanuel says.[..]
“I’m not interested in the (Obama’s) seat,” Emanuel said several weeks ago. “I enjoy my job in the House, and I am not interested in going to the Senate.”
But if Obama’s seat becomes available and Emanuel doesn’t jump, it will serve only to raise the questions all over again: What does Rahm really want, and what is his timetable for getting there?
Emanuel won’t say, and other Democrats are not eager to make pronouncements about the political outlook of their sometimes volatile colleague - at least not publicly.
But the private consensus among Democratic members, even among those who count themselves as critics, is that Emanuel is on the path to the speaker’s chair. Emanuel will have to do some fence-mending to get there, especially with some black and Hispanic Democrats he has offended over the years. But that obstacle is not seen as insurmountable for someone who, as chairman of the DCCC, gets the lion’s share of the credit for ending the GOP’s control of the House after 12 years. Read on…
No Trackbacks To “Speaker of the House Rahm Emanuel?“
Lord help us…
Another spineless speaker that would roll over for a corrupt and lawless executive. Yea, that’s what we need.
o boy
our very own newt gingrich
is this the best the Dems have? What a disastrous party.
Don’t we have enough dual citizenship representatives in Government.
Dems retook the house in ‘06 despite this guy’s efforts.
A recurring nightmare.
Gee, what an improvement that would be…
Too bad no Dem’s goal in life is to to have a spine…
Nicole I was ashamed of you until I ralized the italcized text was the Politico quote.
Emanuel helped lead the Democrats back to the majority in 2006.
What a laugh. His hand pciked candidates lost 2 out of 3 races. He actively worked against the mostly progressive Shea-Porter in NH CD1. If it wasn’t for Rahm the Dems would have another 5 to 10 House seats this Congress.
“Don’t we have enough dual citizenship representatives in Government.”
good god damn point^^
with very few exceptions, ALL incumbents need to be sent home.
He is a punk. Leadership is NOT his strong suit. As my dad would say, “he couldn’t poor piss out of a boot if the instruction were written on the heal”.
DLC types bore me. My new criteria is: no netroots endorsement, buh bye.
rahm emmanual is simply a corporate puppet. and would be an indicator of where the party wants to go in the future.
if the democratic party is dumb enough to place the person least likely to being change to the party then they deserve the failures that will follow.
“…get’s the lion’s share of the credit…”
Huh, silly me. I thought that it was Howard Dean who did that. Rahm wass a late comer to the 50 state strategy and publicly critisized it.
You’ve to love this psuedo-DLC rivisionist history.
i didnt think the dems could pick a worse speaker of the house after “impeachment off the table” pelosi.
Amen to prior posts in Rahmie babie! Pelosi is the worst Demo Speaker to date and Rahmie would make her look like Sam Rayburn in comparison.
I hope Jan Schakowsky decides to run for Obama’s seat. She’s the real deal. She holds the seat from what is maybe the most liberal congressional district in America (except for San Francisco, perhaps) and has no fear. At least not yet.
Amen to sending a great number of the encumbents home. We need new leadership period and Obama is a good start.
So who should we get behind? Seriosuly, who has leadership, voting record, sway in Washington, and is not owned by corporate America? Generate a list and get a movement going.
My Rep., Betty McCollum, has a voting record to make a progressive drool over, but I have not heard her be central to any struggle in the house. I would put her up above any of those other folks.
Tim Walz is awesome too, has a decent progressive record, but as the highest ranking NCO EVER in Congress or the Senate, he has the leadership. But this is only his first term, going on 2nd
So disappointed in the Dem’s lately.
I will never vote democrat again if he becomes speaker. We need to get a primary challenger and throw his corporate whoring ass out. If he runs the show then they are exactly the same as Republicans. Corporate whores. No more, no less.
Your article almost implies this is a positive thing. Shame on you Nicole.
Sorry I have nothing intelligent to add but does anybody else think that guy looks just like an older version of Nathan Petrelli from Heroes?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nathan_Petrelli
That’s Bullshit, we can thank GWB for our wins in 2006, his toxic policies have paved the way for us to win in 2006 and now in 2008. If GWB isn’t in the tank then we would be looking at the Republicans and their permanent majority. Thanks for nothing RE! Frankly I still feel the medias obsession with covering every speck of democratic dirt and looking at every Dem policy under a microscope, while at the same time giving the Republicans a pass on everything under the sun could still cost us the 2008 election, couple that with the Dems propensity to eat their own instead of sucking it up for the good of the country and the party, and we have President J. McCain for a few years followed after his death of old age in 2010 another 8 years of whoever they pick for VP. Thanks for nothing CNN, MSNBC et al.
This election would be over if they gave Mcsame 25% of the scrutiny they give Obama, well I guess thats what happens when they bend over backwards trying to prove that they are “fair and balanced” which means give the lies as much coverage as the truth. Like Colbert once said, sometimes the fucking facts are just liberal, get over it!!! Fuck I’m hating this shit, every fucking day it’s the same thing, leading questions , leading story titles teasers and innuendo, then they trot out the facts for 2 seconds at the end and say, wow , well we’ll continue to have this debate. Unfucking believable.
The little weasel tried to steal credit for the 2006 fifty state strategy that gained more seats than his narrow minded plan when he led the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC). Howard Dean deserves the credit not this backstabbing prick.
Pelosi would never let it happen.
Robert Wexler would be a much better choice.
Samson- @ 14:
His DLC credentials make him the logical choice of a party that is already there. The dems are just one of two capitalist parties. They don’t give a shit about you.
He’s more than somewhat of a polarizing figure in IL politics…I could imagine him running, but it would certainly not be an easy trip for him to the Senate…
http://liberalretort.blogspot.com/
Pelosi should be stripped of the chair for obstruction of justice. Rahm would be an even bigger enabler and should _NOT_ be considered for such an important role. Just imagine what our country would feel like if Pelosi actually upheld her oath to the Constitution and impeached this corrupt administration last year… we need to clean the House.
never liked that guy.
It’s almost as if the Republicans could control the media (??) and they publish stories like this to start Rahm thinking “Yeah, I could be the Speaker..my precious…” because they know that Rahm would bend over faster and easier than Gumby (no offense to the real Gumby, but he *is* made of clay)
Whooo’s Hooooouse….Rahm’s Hoooooouse…..!
That guy is a putz…..
Leadership @ 12:
ROFLMAO! Your dad got anymore gems like that?
Why is every democrat to hold a position of power a DLC sellout? The money that god damn good from their corporate overlords? Oh yeah, dumb question.
That is the only explanation for these idiots confusing anything in the repuke, corporate fascist agenda, as pallatable to the American people.
I think Wexler, Biden, or my favorite, Russ Finegold would be better than Rahm.
No!
Litabell @ 34:
2 of the 3 you named are in the Senate. Wexler, Waxman or Kucinich wouls bring back the rule of law.
Litabell @ 34:
“Check me if I’m wrong, but…” Feingold and Biden are Senators. Speaker of the House originates in the House of Representatives, i.e., a Congressman
Geez…
I actually like the idea. When the Democrats roll over for the Bush administration they do so very half assed, why waste precious resources writing such strong and brave letters? I like this guys enthusiasm for being a corporate sellout. No half assed back stabbing to the general public, do it openly and proud! Make it seem very “centrist” and objective, which is codeword for not offending entrenched interests. It isn’t like it is going to matter who is in charge anyway, if they weren’t a sellout or if they didn’t lick the boots of entrenched interests they wouldn’t be considered anyway.
Thats interesting… I thought it was people such as myself that talked republicans into voting for the democrats to end the Iraq war were the ones that did this… But after their betrayal I guarantee I wont do that again. In fact is was all the lies they told to get me to help get them control of congress and then the flip flop afterwards and things like giving Bush more power more money and (taking impeachment off the table) is what drove me to finally say screw it and opened me up for the upcoming Republican debates where I saw Ron Paul and immediately started supporting him instead.
The one thing positive about Rahm is that he plays to win, something many of our democrats don’t do.
He disagreed with the 50 state strategy, he wanted to focus more money on specific districts where pickups were more likely. A lot of people agreed with him on this, so it wasn’t just him. And he DOES deserve a lot of credit for the pickups, Dean had less to do with getting congressmen elected than Rahm as chairman of the DCCC. The guy backed some losers, but he recruited a lot of people to run, worked like crazy, fundraised etc.
He’s a bit of a centrist for my tastes, but I get the sense that he wants Dems to win more than almost anyone out there and is willing to put in the work to make it happen.
purge_not_surge @ 29:
Yuh, he plays to win, but for whom?
Hard to do worse than Nancy, but I think this would qualify.
Umm, I’ll take Robert Wexler please. Rahm is just another corporate sell out Dem. Spineless and paid for.
Or better yet, Kucinich please!
He would also be the first 9.5 fingered speaker of the house. Finally real power for people who have lost parts of their fingers.
c @ 40:
Uh, “plays to win” sounds like a Rethuglican’s idea, why even bother with someone who puts party before country when we could choose a TRUE LEADER who will put the US Constitution and this country first?? We do have a few… (Kucinich, Wexler, Waxman..) and sadly, only a few.
JUST SAY *NO* to 1/2-assed leaders.. PURGE THE COMPLICIT INCUMBENTS
I can just imagine the negative campaign ads against Wexler: “would YOU support a cocaine addict?”
cg @ 47:
Link?
richard @ 41:
Yes, I understand but I disagree that politics should trump justice. If there was ever a time to remove a president, this was the one. Her choice in removing impeachment as an option is, in my opinion, unlawful and goes against her oath to uphold the law.
BTW - impeachment proceedings would allow investigations so even if a derelict 1/3 did not vote for it, the additional hearings would shed some more light on the criminal activites (it isn’t hard, just turn the light on and look in any direction)
Pelosi should be stripped of the chair for obstruction of justice. Rahm would be an even bigger enabler and should _NOT_ be considered for such an important role. Just imagine what our country would feel like if Pelosi actually upheld her oath to the Constitution and impeached this corrupt administration last year…
Do you understand that impeachment requires a 2/3 vote of the Senate to convict so there has NEVER BEEN A CHANCE that Bush could be removed? I know it’s an unpopular position on this forum but the Speaker’s decision not to go forward on a impeachment guaranteed to lose was a good practical and political decision.
Requiring 2/3 vote did not stop the Republicans from impeaching Clinton in the House. The fact that the dems made no effort to vote on impeachment shows their complicity in the crimes.
speaker ?? no