If the Dems had a revolution, would the media cover it the way they covered the Kerry filibuster?
Dems Need A Newt Of Their Own
The Party Can't Have a Revolution Without the Revolutionaries
By Elizabeth Wilner and Chuck Todd
Sunday, February 19, 2006; Page B05
Back in 1992, seven upstart Republican freshmen forced real change in the House of Representatives.
Egged on by a more senior revolutionary, Rep. Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.), these feisty newcomers exploited the House Bank and Post Office scandals unfolding on the watch of a longtime Democratic majority. The GOP lawmakers even posed for a poster, a macho black-and-white group shot. "The Gang of Seven," the caption read. "We closed the House Bank. We're changing Congress. Join the fight."
Today, as a lobbying scandal plays out on the watch of the Republican majority in Congress, the question is: Where is the Democrats' Gang of Seven? Why isn't some spirited group of junior House Democrats capturing the public's imagination and sinking its teeth into the spreading Jack Abramoff mess? And where is the Democratic equivalent of Gingrich?
In Congress, reform often comes from the back bench. Junior members have the least to lose and the shortest -- and thus usually the cleanest -- records. These unlikely agents of change are often change's biggest beneficiaries. Five of the members of the Gang of Seven still serve in Congress. One, John Boehner (Ohio), just became the House majority leader; one, Sen. Rick Santorum (Pa.), could conceivably become the Senate majority leader (provided he gets reelected); and one, Rep. Jim Nussle, may win election as governor of the swing state of Iowa.
more...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/17/AR2006021702477.html