Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., is the Democrat’s version of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales — “a continuing embarrassment thanks to his amateurish performance,” David Broder wrote in a column in Thursday’s Opinion pages. Reid has stuck his foot in his mouth many more times than just when he said that “the war in Iraq is lost.” “The Democrats deserve better and the country needs more than Reid has offered as Senate majority leader,” Broder wrote.
Posted by Patrice Hein
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Regular on Let immigrants run
- Politico on Too many exemptions
- XXX on Open thread 11/23
- XXX on Let immigrants run
- BlueJay on Let immigrants run
- Monkeyhawk on Let immigrants run
- Chrisfrommactown on Let immigrants run
- BlueJay on Let immigrants run
- Monkeyhawk on Too many exemptions
- JWink on Too many exemptions
44 Comments
Reid didn’t stick his foot in his mouth, he stuck it up Broder’s ass. Broder doesn’t like that, so he’s trying to strike back.
Try as he will, it’s not working.
Not so there Ed. CNN, Fox, MSNBC, all the major networks thought that Harry Reid stuck his ffot in his mouth.
Remember that Reid just 6 months ago was saying no to withdrawl and timetables. Now it is 6 months later and he is clearly using it to political advantage.
His respons to critics?
“he (Broder) doesn’t like me, never has.”
He (Cheney) is an atttack dog and I don’t respond to somewone with less than 9% approval on polls.”
Yeah that is a good leader of the senate, and reflects the values of the Democrats.
He is the Democratic “Gonzales”.
Soon both will be radioactive”!
When bottom feeders like Tyler Durden beging shrieking hysterically, on cue, one senses who desperate the True Believers have been for a distraction, if not for some actual good news.
Great to see that the Wingnuts and the mainstream DC press are finally coming out of the closet and going public with their civil union. They should thank Harry Reid for giving them something to bleat about.
Shame that it’s all based on the shared stink of desperation between a DC press corps that carried water for a dishonest administration and, well, the hapless defenders of that same “Administration.”
The press is up to its necks in having enabled the lies of this Administration and the disastrous consequences of the invasion and occuption of Iraq. By going after Reid, they forestall the reckoning of their collective responsibility, and put off the assumption of their collective guilt.
But as usual, when the Wingnuts got nothin’, they’ll assert some false equivalence. Where would Wingnuts be without “they did it too!” as a way of justifying their own misdeeds? But they are flexible; after all, in this case, it’s Harry Reid they’re going after rather than Bill Clinton.
Tell you what, Wingnuts: when Harry Reid is called to testify before a Senate Panel on his misuse of a major nonpartisan component of the justice system, and repeatedly says that the dog ate his homework, you can compare him to Gonzales. Until then, try to keep your hysteria under control.
Oh, and by the way,
“Numerous media outlets reported that Harry Reid said that “the war is lost”, but they did not report Reid’s further comments that “the war, at this stage, can only be won diplomatically, politically, and economically.” Later that day, in a Senate speech, Reid reiterated his stance, advocating a “political solution”.”
http://politics.netscape.com/story/2007/04/20/media-reports-reid-said-war-is-lost-failed-to-note-further-comments
Way to go with the accuracy, Dean of the Washington Press Corps!
Oh, and still one more thing. The KAKE news poll asks whether respondents support the troop withdrawal legislation. The response? Wichita viewers support it 51.1% to 48.9%.
Sounds like Reid is speaking for them, and Broder isn’t.
Yeah public policy by poll from a TV station, that’s how we should run our nation. Our founding fathers are rolling in their graves.
Democrats without a clue or a plan are not wanted in American Politics, this includes Reid. Just saying diplomancy and blah blah doesn’t get it.
Let’s hear a plan, everyone has been asking for one for as long as the Democrats have been whining. They haven’t come up with a plan yet, just more lip flapping.
Republican,
Ever heard of the Iraq study group?
Also, nice job ignoring the dinner in my post above and jumping on the confection at the end. Didn’t your mother warn you that dessert will spoil your appetite? It also makes you fat.
The Iraq Study group wasn’t the Democrats plan – Try again though. Like I said, a whole lot of lip flapping from the Democrats, but no plan.
Reid? You Dems can have him.
He is the Rose O’Donnell of the Senate.
Republican,
Duh–like the ISG wasn’t a bipartisan plan that was endorsed by Democrats AND Republicans.
The larger point here is that Republicans have steadfastly refused to even have the discussion that could lead to a workable plan. So your blaming of Democrats is as dishonest as it is cheap, Republican. One-sided plans, formed without bipartisan consensus, are what precipitated the lies and doubletalk that led to this disaster. For you to now denounce Democrats for not having a plan of their own, while at the same time resisting the honest, bipartisan discussion of what got us to this point that would be NECESSARY for a real plan going forward, means that your criticism is dead on arrival.
You’re the cheapest of the cheap, Republican: you just want partisan talking points to bitch about, rather than anything resembling a real process or a real solution.
DING DING DING DING (creak) DING DING DING!
Yes, folks, it’s been awhile: that’s the “Joe Williams is (at this moment) the biggest idiot on the WeBlog” bell.
While CF2K politely bit his own tongue when Joe William sang the praises of Donald Rumsfeld and even Dick Cheney, he can be silent no more. But now, jumping on the Hate Reid media attack bandwagon wins Joe Williams…a ring of the bell!
DING DING DING DING DING DING DING!
Bush says a time table isn’t an option.
If that is all Democrats want, they aren’t going to get it.
So they really need to set aside their political grandstanding and do something about a real solution and process.
The difference between Reid and Gonzales?
KS Senator Donald Betts was standing on the podium with Harry Reid during his “the war is lost” statement. He hasn’t been at any press conferences with Gonzales.
CF2k! Is that the best limp wrist wussy response you got?
LOL! What a shame! The real face of the Democratic Electorate.
Joe Williams,
While I agree that it is excellent theater to have the President veto a bill funding the war, it takes two to create a “real solution,” much less to engage in a “real process.”
If the President were serious about “process,” he wouldn’t have funded the last five years of war using emergency supplemental bills. If he were serious, the war would actually be in the budget. It isn’t, and he isn’t.
So spare us the talk of a feckless Congress and a serious President. That isn’t the case. What is the case is a petulant child in the Oval Office who refuses to work with the Congress, and who expects them to do his bidding, no questions asked.
Given that this is the game the President has established, namely, the game of Chicken, it’s hardly fair to criticize Congress, but not the President, for playing.
Joe Williams,
As for my “response,” I’ll let the Senate Democratic Caucus speak for me.
“We, the members of the Senate Democratic Caucus, contest the attack on Sen. Harry Reid’s leadership by David S. Broder in his April 26 column, “The Democrats’ Gonzales.”
In contrast to Mr. Broder’s insinuations, we believe Mr. Reid is an extraordinary leader who has effectively guided the new Democratic majority through these first few months with skill and aplomb.
The Democratic caucus is diverse, and Mr. Reid has worked tirelessly to make sure that the views of each member are heard and represented. No one ideology dominates the caucus, so that a consensus can be reached and unity achieved. It is hard to imagine a better model for leadership.
Because Mr. Reid has the support of members of the caucus, is a good listener and has an amazing ability to synthesize views and bring people together, the Senate has accomplished a great deal during his time as majority leader. Armed with his years of service in the Senate and with a mastery of procedure, Mr. Reid has led the chamber with a slim majority and a minority that is, at times, determined to stop legislation with which it disagrees.
In the first 100 days alone, we made great strides under his leadership on long-neglected legislation concerning stem cell research, the Sept. 11 commission’s recommendations and the minimum wage, to name three. In addition, under Mr. Reid’s leadership, we have fulfilled our obligation, left uncompleted by last year’s Republican-led Senate, to fund the federal government. He has accomplished all of this in the face of stiff opposition and with a commitment to giving ideas full opportunity for debate.
Finally, in this age of scripted politicians speaking only to their base or claiming that they “don’t recall” anything, the fact that Mr. Reid speaks his mind should be applauded, not derided. His brand of straight talk is honest, comes from the heart and speaks directly to the people.”
THE MEMBERS OF THE SENATE DEMOCRATIC CAUCUS
Washington
This letter was signed by Sen. Reid’s 50 colleagues in the caucus.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/26/AR2007042602254_pf.html
“Bush says a time table isn’t an option.”
Then let Bush hold a bake sale to fund his never-ending war. I’m sure you will be the first to contribute.
Reid is a traitor. In any other time, in any other country this man would have been jailed, tortured and or executed.I don’t think the latter are appropriate but I do think that he should spend considerable time someplace where he can reflect on what kind of damage he’s done.Someplace quiet, isolated and uncomfortable. Maybe a island in an ocean somewhere, tropical in nature, small, owned by an ally of ours. A place where the only conversation he’d be able to indulge in are with goats and those whose intelligence he impugned and whose mission and lives he endangered by giving aid and comfort to our enemies.
seanmahair,
Big talk, small brain. Saying all those fancy words must make you feel brave and important.
seanmahair – in that case Gonzo should prosecute him. I would love to see that – it would force a lot out into the open.
But we know the Bush administration will not do so – THEY DON’T HAVE THE GUTS!
Damn, the republicans in kansas must REALLY be afraid of Senator Donald Betts. They’ve started whining about him on every thread.
Smear much? Switfboat much?
Hehehehehe. Dems? Are you taking notice?
I wonder why the republicans all wet the bed thinking about him?
Corporal Tyler Rock – commenting on Reid from a soldier’s point of view:
[quote]“the truth is that we have done much more for the people in iraq than is posted to the people. ramadi was a terrible place in the beginning of this deployment (september). now the police in ramadi are doing patrols everyday and coming back with many, many IED’s and other explosive ordinance. the civilians are coming to us and telling us where the insurgents are. that should scream to the people back home that the iraqi’s want our help. they dont want insurgents in the area. all the insurgents are, are thugs and gangs. just in larger scale and more weapons. they terrorize the people to get what they want and the people are fed up with it. we dont “just blow things up”. we care about the people here. we want these people to live as free as we do back home. thats why we are here. if we didnt care then why would we be working so hard to rebuild what is destroyed. we give them water. we give them food. and we respect their way of living.
with the other topic. my opinion is what i already stated in the email to pat. i am a marine in iraq that isnt getting the support from a senator that should support his fellow americans. when was the last time he was here. what does he know about us “losing” besides what he wants to believe. the truth is that we are pushing al qaeda out and we are pushing the insurgency out. we are here to support a nation.”[end quote]
http://www.patdollard.com/
———————–
And more from the soldier:
[quote]“all the guys agree with me here. like i said. hit me up when you want some more stories of the shit we have done that the reporters dont tell. its funny. when they were here they wouldnt let them come out to where we are. they told them that it was too dangerous. isnt that the point? no one sees the things that the average joe marine sees. these Iraqi Soldiers get really heated when you talk about saddam. like start spitting on the ground and showing the bottoms of their feet. apparently a lot of them were forced into serving under him when he was in power and they were beat and treated like shit. thats why most of them voluntered to fix the problems of iraq. and most of them know more about american politics then the artsy fartsy college kids they say we are the ignorant ones that have nothing better to do in life than join the military.”[end quote]
“Ever heard of the Iraq study group?”
Yeah CFK, and the study group DOES NOT agree with this Senate Resolution either. The Harry Ried Take on the ISG report is incorrect. The Patreaus Plan IS what the ISG wanted, and what the Democratic Leadership is trying to stop.
Get a Clue there guys before you post.
Oh, and thanks for the personal attacke in liue of actual intelligent argument.
“Big talk, small brain. Saying all those fancy words must make you feel brave and important.”
Back at you there idito CF2K
Tyler – the ISG called for two things that Patreus is not doing: (1) talking to iraq’s neighbors and (2) FORCING the maliki government to reform itself.
I watched Patreus on Charlie Rose last night. While I liked a lot of what he said I was still left wondering. He acknowledged that they have royally FUBARed this thing; why should we now believe they will do better this time around?
Patreus and Bush both say the success of their ’surge’ should be evident by summer. Given that ‘fact’ then it would seem to follow that the ARI can then take over the fighting. With that and the ‘fact’ that the ARI outnumbers the dead-enders by about 100-to-1 then there should be no problem with a US troop drawdown.
What the GOP is really worried about is George Tennet talking. His new ‘tell-all” book is highly critical of VP Cheney in the run up to the invasion of Iraq. Reid is only providing the distraction to the real issues. Let’s not feed this fire and watch the GOP and White House squirm with the allegations in Tennet’s book. He stated that there were no discussions on other alternatives in place of all out war.
Tenet will be on 60 Minutes Saturday. Should be fun!
OOPS!
SUNDAY!!!!!
Joe! Williams! is! the! Howdy Doody! of! WE! Blog. Or was it Doofus?
Tyler Durden,
Being a conservative must be great: you get to make stuff up and pretend you’re right.
The Petraeus Plan is NOT what the ISG called for. What’s Recommendation #1 of the ISG? For the U.S. to launch a comprehensive New Diplomatic Offensive. What’s recommendation #3? The creation of the Iraq International Support Group, involving ALL countries that border Iraq. What’s recommendation #8? Dealing with Iran and Syria, without preconditions. The Petraeus Plan aka the “Splurge” does these things how, precisely?
An increase in military personnel isn’t even mentioned until Recommendation 39, and then only in the context of Iraqi effort at national reconciliation and the effort to train Iraqi Army units. Given that the first has never happened and that the second is not a stated goal of the “Splurge,” it’s tortured “logic,” of the sort we’ve come to expect from Taylor Durden, to assert that the Petraues Plan is what the ISG “wanted.”
http://www.usip.org/isg/iraq_study_group_report/report/1206/iraq_study_group_report.pdf
At best, Tyler Durden is simply wrong. At worst, he’s a liar.
“The Petraeus Plan is NOT what the ISG called for.”
Part of it is. THe ISG did NOT cay withdraw and did NOT require Timetables. You need to get your facts straight ther idiot!!!
Secondly, the ISG did articulate the diplomacy is needed, but did not asy to eliminate the US Armed presence in Iraw. The Dems and ZHaffy Reid are talking abou that as well.
Third the ISG stated that a “rapid withdrawl”, or “Phased depolyment” would be disastorious for the US and Iraq.
Guess the Dems only pick and choose what part ot the ISG they want tofollow, and forget about all the points in it.
Guess you missed this part of the ISG report you idiot:
“As redeployment proceeds, military leaders should emphasize training and education offorces that have returned to the United States in order to restore the force to full combatcapability. As equipment returns to the United States, Congress should appropriate sufficientfunds to restore the equipment over the next five years.”
Further from the ISG, they do support the surge that Pres. Bush is doing:
“Further, adding more American troopscould conceivably worsen those aspects of the security problem that are fed by the view that theU.S. presence is intended to be a long-term “occupation.” We could, however, support a shorttermredeployment or surge of American combat forces to stabilize Baghdad, or to speed up thetraining and equipping mission, if the U.S. commander in Iraq determines that such steps wouldbe effective.”
Guess you missed this one as well:
“RECOMMENDATION 18: It is critical for the United States to provide additional political,economic, and military support for Afghanistan, including resources that might become availableas combat forces are moved from Iraq.”
How is the witholding of money support the ISG?
You are the liar and post things out of contest there.
CF2K is the flipping loon that cannot read, or only sees what he wants to see.
I fully disagree with dialouge with Syria and Iran until they stop supporting Hamas and Hexbullah.
Oh and BTW, in the ISG “redeployment” is the “surge” it is in 3 instances in the ISG report. Which the Surge is supported.
Economic funding fro 5 years further.
The Dems want to cut that off and add timetables. NOT in the ISG!!!!
Tyler Durden,
When you make a list, which things go where? Do more important ones go first, or later?
Looking at the ISG report, then, it’s obvious where the emphasis fell: on diplomatic and economic efforts. The military initiatives were subordinate to those. Such is not the case with the current “Surge.” It bears little resemblance to the overarching rationale advanced by the ISG.
The ISG sees military power in the context of a larger set of initiatives: the Surge does away with those initiatives but keeps the military power. The two plans both use military power, but in ways that are incomparable.
We call this “interpretation,” Tyler Durden, and you’d be well advised to make us of it when attempting to connect a later policy like the “Splurge” to an earlier set of recommendations.
“Looking at the ISG report, then, it’s obvious where the emphasis fell: on diplomatic and economic efforts.”
EXACTLY Ahole, ECONOMIC DOES come first, …
SO WHY DO THE DEMOCRATS WANT TO WIGHOLD FUNDING??????
IDIOT!!
“”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”
“Such is not the case with the current “Surge.” It bears little resemblance to the overarching rationale advanced by the ISG.”
IT was EXACTLY addressed in the ISG just as I posted from the QUOTE taken from the ISG!!! No interpertation needed. It stated exactly what I posted.
“The ISG sees military power in the context of a larger set of initiatives: the Surge does away with those initiatives but keeps the military power. The two plans both use military power, but in ways that are incomparable.”
Only in your goofy self deluded mind that posts something like that contradicts itself!!!
The surge of troops was clearly stated and supported by the Baker Hamilton ISG.
You don’t acknowledge it. But it is clearly stated, even if you do not like it.
Looser and liar!!
“SO WHY DO THE DEMOCRATS WANT TO WIGHOLD FUNDING??????”
Earth to Tyler – they just passed a huge funding bill and sent it to Bush.
Tyler Durdan,
Letters on a page don’t equal meaning: context does. To the contrary: interpretation is VERY MUCH needed.
Your accusation to the contrary, I ABSOLUTELY acknowledge the increase in troops recommended by the ISG. Do you not know how to read?
However, the “Surge of troops” (sic) in ISG was conditional upon a number of other things happening. None of these has happened or is going to happen, yet the number of troops still is increased. That makes the two troop increases TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.
Mayble you’re too stupid to be able to understand the argument I’m making. Or you’re just a liar, and you see the difference but pretend you don’t. Either one is possible. But in any case, you haven’t addressed the distinction I’ve made, while allows the distinction to stand.
And, as Ben quite rationally points out, the Senate has voted to APPROVE a funding bill and has sent it on to the Executive.
Your panties, Tyler Durden, are decisively wadded up in a spot I will have the good taste not to mention. Your hysteria belies your claim that the “Surge” rests on solid policy ground.
“And, as Ben quite rationally points out, the Senate has voted to APPROVE a funding bill and has sent it on to the Executive.”
Right, but the thread was about what REID said the bill and the ISG was about, and you guys do not agree with him and you all disagree with the ISG.
NONE of you are on the same page at all.
The only page you are on is the “I hate Bush” page.
End of stroy, idiots all.
A military officer’s take on Iraq:
http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2007/05/2635198
A failure in generalshipBy Lt. Col. Paul Yingling
Time for the BushBots to Swiftboat another soldier.
To every Republican on this thread:I submit to you that if this President’s name were Clinton, you’d have been in convulsions for the last 4 years over what has happened with this screwed up war.
You people are completely politically tone deaf. 60% of the American people want us out, and support the Dems in getting us out.
Remember November? Your (my former) party got thrown out on it’s a** because of its simpleton incompetence, and more of the same isn’t going to get it done.
Sheesh. It’s like trying to reason with 2nd graders.
TR you are obviously not even a Republican, you are just daying you are one. A common left winger blogger MO. What an idiot!
Oh, and Ben, why do you guys listen to ONE Lt. CoL., but ignore 100,000 troops that want to complete the mission? How come you listen to this one guy and ignore all the military leaders and Gen. Patreaus?
That is the definition of Slective Hearing.
Tyler–I was a registered Republican for 25 years, ever since I was eligible to vote. I worked in my GOP House rep’s local constituent services office. I never voted for a Dem for a national office until 2004. I listened to Rush Limbaugh ever since he went on the air in 1988.
But sometimes a person has to evaluate whether their party stands for what they want. In my opinion, the GOP no longer represents the values of the party I joined in 1979. There are plenty of other traditional Republicans who feel exactly like I do.
It’s called Country before Party, Adolf.
For the record, I now consider myself to be Libertarian.
What we have here is: “Failure to communicate.”
The “Plan” is to bring the troops home so they will stop becoming dead.
Bush and his bunch are too stupid to understand that concept.
I’m not.