The Blue Dogs are crying today. "Congressin' is hard!"

Politically vulnerable Democrats say Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other House leaders aren’t offering them the protection from tough votes that they did in the last Congress. Conservative Democrats fear that dozens of members could be swept out of their districts in the midterm election next year, and that fear has been intensifying in recent weeks.

Yeah.

You're not getting the protection from tough votes that you did in the last Congress because... it's not the last Congress anymore. Last Congress, Democrats had a very narrow majority, and a crazy idiot for a president, who was vetoing everything you passed. This Congress, you have a much bigger majority (you know this, because you had to expand the Blue Dog Caucus in order to remain relevant, because without doing it, you couldn't credibly threaten to block bills you didn't like), and a Democratic president who will actually sign things.

That's what people in politics call a "different situation." That's actually the term most people use, whether they're in politics or not.

Winning your race is your responsibility. Governing when you get there is actually what's expected, fellas.

If you can't handle both, why would anyone want to spoon feed it to you?

There are a couple other points in the article worth highlighting, too. And maybe we'll come back to some of them separately later on.

This one, for instance:

Leaders have allowed members to vote against leadership on procedural votes with impunity. Republicans specifically targeted vulnerable freshman Democrats with procedural moves called "motions to recommit" on contentious matters, like guns and national security.

I've been talking about that one for years.

And this one:

Many centrists credit Rahm Emanuel, now White House chief of staff, then a congressman from Illinois and a member of leadership, for pushing Pelosi to protect vulnerable members. As the former head of the House Democrats’ campaign arm, Emanuel had recruited many of them to run in the 2006 election that gave Democrats the majority. "Rahm could say, ‘Nance, I’m the guy who delivered the House.’ He had a special ability to talk to her," said a senior Democratic aide.

Rahm Emanuel. The man who built a majority that couldn't be used for anything. This was actually why I was so excited to see him become White House Chief of Staff. Because it would get him out of the House. It's also how I knew he'd likely be offered the job and take it, even before we knew who the Democratic nominee was going to be. Rahm's interest in the institution of the House is in the numbers, not in the accomplishments themselves, except insofar as they can be used to generate better numbers. He never really cared, it seemed to me, about doing the things the House actually has to do once it's won. So it's no wonder he built a majority that feels the same way.

And no wonder "health care reform" has become a "pass anything and declare victory" game.