"Liberal Media" advocating the resignation of Reid as Majority Leader?  I cannot determine when I have ever heard this as a general media outcry, and Reid has been at his job for more than 4 years now (although, of course, the job became more powerful 2 and a half years ago).  The media cannot possibly like the fact that Democratic bills and ethics reform and oversight responsibilities all die on Reid's desk.  He doesn't grant the media unprecedented access, and he CERTAINLY isn't media-savvy or charismatic.  Why do they not blame him for any of this?

  Reid caved on Joe Lieberman.  He caved on any number of 4th amendment issues.  He caved on Roland Burris.  He doesn't seem to be liked by ANYONE on either side of the aisle other than (maybe?) just enough politicians on the Hill to get backroom deals done which squash progress.  Why would even THESE Conservative Democrats like Reid--doesn't a universally disdained do-nothing Senate increase the likelihood that the Senators will lose upcoming elections?   And he is obviously no friend of the Republicans (unlike Lieberman)--they trash him every chance they get, and he never gets any Republican votes on these issues.

Republicans at this point are probably rabid and fatalistic enough at this point to actually, literally filibuster all legislation that comes through the Senate.  They have nothing to lose--anyone who still votes Republican is going to vote Republican REGARDLESS of what these clowns do--they can't damage their brand anymore (not by being obstructionist, anyway).  But a strong Democratic Senate Majority Leader would have said from Day 1:  "Go ahead!  Filibuster everything if you dare.  We'll run your dramatic interpretation of Marcel Proust on a constant loop for the American people.  And when you stop, we WILL pass these bills with 51 votes.  We are the MAJORITY!"  A good leader would say to the 7 or 8 ConservaDems who disagree with the legislation "Go ahead!  We'll pass the bills, and you can then go tell your Conservative constituents that you didn't vote for the bills we passed.  Your hands were tied by that mean Senate Majority that didn't let you kill the bill.  And then DARE THOSE PEOPLE to vote instead for the lunatic Conservative jackass who'll have no more power than you do and who has shown he has no ideas and cannot govern.  And if we lose your seat to that Republican, who cares?  We've already lost YOUR vote on these issues, so now we'll just lose his."

Harry Reid is a major reason that Obama's poll numbers are dropping.  He is a major reason that Democrats stand a chance of getting hammered in the mid-terms and beyond.  He is a major reason that a small handful of Republicans and DINO's continue to have lockdown control over the government and the debate.  This is the last straw.  Why don't the at least 40 Democrats who are on board with this Health Care Reform platform demand his replacement?  They can do it without him losing his seat in 2010 to some Conservative Ensign apologist as Michael Steele dances in the streets over having unseated the Majority Leader. 

by Milltycoon on 07/24/2009 01:05:28 AM EST

...it just makes me feel nauseous.

Reid is afraid he's going to lose his election, so he's running to the right just as far and as fast as he can.  I still don't understand how that creep got elected majority leader.  He would make a fabulous Repugnantcan.

by EveningStarNM on 07/24/2009 01:16:26 AM EST

[ Parent ]

Did you not read my post before cherry-picking one line so you could trash Liberal policies?

My post was about how Conservative Democrats ARE blocking this legislation.  Ergo, they are joining with Republicans to "silently filibuster".  We don't have 60 votes when Lieberman is a guaranteed vote for the Republicans.  Or when Nelson or Bayh or Baucus or Landreiu or Tester or McCaskill or Specter are LIKELY votes for the Republicans.  Or when Kennedy and Byrd are too sick to vote consistently, or when Franken was held up by the Minnesota courts for 8 months.  There hasn't been anything resembling 60 votes on even party-line issues thus far.

So yes, Hugh, when Democrats refuse to support bills that the rest of their party are supporting, that means that the Republicans essentially HAVE 41 Senators.  Harry Reid, as my post clearly pointed out, should force those not interested in pushing these bills to ACTIVELY filibuster, not "silently" filibuster.  

My post was not one that blamed the 40 Republican Senators for the failure of this bill.  I expect them to be useless hypocritical scum who would rather stay in power than see America get better.  I DID blame a Democrat for this.  I DO NOT NEED TO BE CONDESCENDED TO BY YOU.  Enjoy the fact that it is the Democrats' fault currently that the country will not be getting badly needed reform, and take your f*cking disingenuous insults to another thread. 

by Milltycoon on 07/24/2009 07:41:18 AM EST

[ Parent ]