Those of us in the blogosphere continue to bemoan the fact that our elected representatives in Congress are just not getting the job done. Pelosi fails to do this. Reid can’t get that done. What’s wrong with this bunch of panty-waist Democrats that we sent to Washington to do our bidding …to take out the policies of that bastard, Bush? We empowered them and now they tell us they don’t have the votes. What’s wrong with this bunch of losers?
Tag: Harry Reid
Nov 15 2007
Democrats on Torture: Feckless is as Feckless Does
The latest demonstration of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s feckless leadership was the 53-40 kabuki vote late on November 8th to confirm Michael B. Mukasey as Attorney General. Mukasey had refused to regard the abusive technique called waterboarding to be torture and therefore a prosecutable criminal act. Mukasey understands whom he is supposed to shield.
Democrats quickly announced the intention to introduce legislation outlawing waterboarding. But why? As Evan Wallach pointed out in The Washington Post on November 4th, numerous legal precedents prove that waterboarding already is illegal and prosecutable.
Are Democrats, having caved on Mukasey’s confirmation, now about to make yet another strategic blunder by proceeeding with this legislation?
WARNING NOTICE: Reflecting on this question and exploring the links below may lead to severe loss of equanimity and cause political activism or emigration to a still-civilized country.
Nov 12 2007
Make Every Vote Count. Make ’em Count, and Make ’em Hurt.
If you haven’t looked at lordradish’s diary Peter Welch (D-VT) gets an earful about the war. People are pissed., definitely check it out. In it, I gave pause for a moment when I got to this point:
Welch wanted to clarify his voting history on Iraq. I don’t have the specifics on what he said. He laid out his history on the votes on Iraq so far, and why he voted the way he did on them. Two things… he did clarify one point about something that I don’t think many people know. Voting to allow a vote on something is not the same as voting for something. There was a particular vote that Welch voted to allow to the floor, only to vote against the actual measure itself. Some had misconstrued voting to allow a vote as a support of the bill itself.
Emphasis mine.
The point is an excellent one — we need to track the votes, and accurately discern the nature of them, if we are to have any credibility when holding pols responsible.
There’s more…make the jump.
Oct 22 2007
Twilight of the Bushites
Aus des Rheines Gold ist der Reif geglüht.
Watching a DVD of the New York Metropolitan’s version of Richard Wagner’s Götterdämmerung (or Twilight of the Gods [TOG]) the other day, I was struck at how prescient the otherwise reactionary composer was in anticipating the destruction of the voracious classes. (One should not find it odd that in Wagner one finds mixed the most progressive and the most reactionary of views and trends, as in this he is the exemplar of the age, which mixes reason and progress with vile reaction, destruction, and mass murder.)
Dick Cheney, who is Alberich in my analogy with Wagner’s opera, was on the stump beating war tom-toms against Iran during a 35-minute talk at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), which The New York Times calls “a research organization”. In reality, WINEP is a well-known right-wing pro-Israel lobby. While praised by liberal dreamboat Al Gore as “Washington’s most respected center for studies on the Middle East”, according to Right Web:
Oct 20 2007
24%
Sometimes, a number is so stunning that all you can do is stare.
24%
Look at it.
Think about it.
Less than one-fourth.
The most unpopular president ever.
According to Reuters:
Bush’s job approval rating fell to 24 percent from last month’s record low for a Zogby poll of 29 percent.
Down five percent. In one month.
Down five percent, in one month, from the previous record low!
The mind reels. The mind stumbles. The mind falls down.
The national telephone survey of 991 likely voters, conducted October 10 through October 14, found barely one-quarter of Americans, or 26 percent, believe the country is headed in the right direction.
The poll found declining confidence in U.S. economic and foreign policy. About 18 percent gave positive marks to foreign policy, down from 24 percent, and 26 percent rated economic policy positively, down from 30 percent.
You know what’s worse than being a president with a record low 24% approval rating? Being an opposition party that is incapable of opposing a president with a record low 24% approval rating.
It’s embarrassing.
It’s humiliating.
Considering the real life consequences, it’s also disastrous.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi spent part of yesterday running from her Democratic colleague, Rep. Pete Stark. Stark said bad things about Bush.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid spent part of last week running from his colleague, Sen. Chris Dodd. Dodd tried to stop a bad Bush policy.
Pelosi and Reid did not spend much time running from Bush.
They did not resolve to stop his war.
They did not resolve to stop him from torturing people.
They did not resolve to stop him from indiscriminately spying on the American people.
They did not resolve to force him to comply with subpoenas.
They did not resolve to force him to comply with laws, national and international.
The elected leaders of the Democratic Party are afraid to stand up to a president with a 24% approval rating.
The elected leaders of the Democratic Party are afraid of being criticized for standing up to a president with a 24% approval rating.
Perhaps that’s why Reuters also reported this Zogby poll result:
A paltry 11 percent gave Congress a positive grade, tying last month’s record low.
Paltry. That’s a good word for it: paltry.
Congress always polls poorly. But this is a record. A record of paltriness.
11 percent!
They’re less popular than Bush.
They’re less than half as popular as Bush!
It’s clearly not from opposing him, because they clearly haven’t.
Maybe it’s time they tried something different.
Maybe it’s time they tried opposing him.
For real.
Because if you can’t stand up to a president with a 24% approval rating, what can you stand up to? What can you stand for?
Oct 20 2007
NYTimes Disses Dems
With Democrats Like These …
Every now and then, we are tempted to double-check that the Democrats actually won control of Congress last year. It was particularly hard to tell this week. Democratic leaders were cowed, once again, by propaganda from the White House and failed, once again, to modernize the law on electronic spying in a way that permits robust intelligence gathering on terrorists without undermining the Constitution.
. . . There were bright spots in the week. Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon managed to attach an amendment requiring a warrant to eavesdrop on American citizens abroad. That merely requires the government to show why it believes the American is in league with terrorists, but Mr. Bush threatened to veto the bill over that issue.
Senator Christopher Dodd, the Connecticut Democrat, said he would put a personal hold on the compromise cooked up by Senator Rockefeller and the White House.
Otherwise, it was a very frustrating week in Washington. It was bad enough having a one-party government when Republicans controlled the White House and both houses of Congress. But the Democrats took over, and still the one-party system continues.
Oct 19 2007
If This Is True . . .
Link:
Tim Starks of Congressional Quarterly reports that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) plans to bring the Senate’s surveillance bill up for floor debate in mid-November. That’s despite the hold that Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) plans to place on the measure . . .
then Harry Reid can go fuck himself. I will never want to hear another fucking word about how hard Harry Reid is trying. This is unprecedented.
Say it ain’t so Harry, cuz if it is . . .
Sep 20 2007
Is Harry Reid Ready to Fight?
Is Harry Reid ready to fight for those who fight for us? Is Harry Reid ready to fight for the Iraqi people? Is Harry Reid ready to fight for what’s best for the United States and the world? The Huffington Post’s Sam Stein seems to think so:
For the past few weeks, a cadre of close consultants advising Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-NV, was split over how to approach the looming legislative battles on Iraq.
Those in favor of giving Republicans an opening for compromise outnumbered those who believed such a deal would fail politically. The former argued that “progress” on Iraq – in this case passing drawdown legislation even without a firm exit date – was preferable to passing nothing at all.
And we’ve all been expressing our feelings about that, just a bit.
Those in favor of giving Republicans an opening for compromise outnumbered those who believed such a deal would fail politically. The former argued that “progress” on Iraq – in this case passing drawdown legislation even without a firm exit date – was preferable to passing nothing at all.
Reid’s been holding regular meetings with:
-former advisers to President Clinton, Paul Begala and Stan Greenberg
-adviser to Senator Dodd, Doug Sosnick
-adviser to Senator Obama, Jim Margolis
-his own pollster, Mark Mellman
-his own advisers, Stephanie Cutter and Susan McCue
Their advice?
According to several sources, the majority of these consultants were touting the efficacy of a compromise with Republicans on Iraq legislation as recently as last week.
And Reid made a serious effort to recruit Republicans. We know how that worked out. How many times do Democratic leaders need to be told to ignore the advisers and follow their instincts?
This past Monday, Reid’s tactics changed.
Let me repeat that:
This past Monday, Reid’s tactics changed.
We’ve all been desperately waiting for that. And this:
According to party insiders who spoke to the Huffington Post, there is now almost complete unanimity among Reid’s circle that this is the best way forward.
Sep 13 2007
They Must Know We’re Here
Maybe it’s just a coincidence. Maybe. But there’s good news from the Democrats, today, on a few different fronts.
First, and a hit tip to Granny Doc, the Associated Press is reporting:
Former Virginia Gov. Mark Warner intends to run for the Senate next year, Democratic officials said Wednesday, assuring his party a competitive race for a seat long in Republican hands.
Warner scheduled an e-mail announcement of his plans for Thursday. The seat is currently held by Republican Sen. John Warner, who recently said he will retire at the end of his current term after 30 years in office.
This should be as close to a gimme as the Democrats will get, next year. Only Jeanne Shaheen, if she runs against Sununu in New Hampshire, should be as easy a pick-up. This would also mean two Democratic senators from formerly deep red Virginia.
But the news gets even better.
From Reuters:
Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid vowed on Wednesday to block former U.S. Solicitor General Theodore Olson from becoming attorney general if President George W. Bush nominates him to replace Alberto Gonzales.
Congressional and administration officials have described Olson as a leading contender for the job as chief U.S. law enforcement officer, but Reid declared, “Ted Olson will not be confirmed” by the Senate.
“He’s a partisan, and the last thing we need as an attorney general is a partisan,” Reid, a Nevada Democrat, told Reuters in a brief hallway interview on Capitol Hill.
Olson is very smart, and very connected, and his wife was murdered by the 9/11 terrorists, for which he deserves great sympathy, but he’s also a very sleazy man. Read a book about the actual right wing conspiracy that actually did hound the Clintons, and you’ll read about Ted Olson. He wouldn’t be the complete lapdog attorney general that Abu Gonzales was, but he might actually be worse. Because he can think for himself. And there is no reason to think he would be any more an honorable or professional attorney general than was Abu. Kudos to Senator Reid!
And then, there’s the sudden tough talk about Iraq…
Sep 09 2007
How to be a more effective irrational pressure group
This is, obviously, prompted by my discussions with Armando on the role of the netroots. I’m happy to see this debated on Big Orange. I would not pursue this effort because I think it’s doomed to fail, but for those of you who think that defunding is attainable — rather than just something to support for (ugh) Overton Window-sliding reasons — I’d love to see this happen, because I think it’s the way you could truly be most effective. YMMV. And yes, the title is provocative, but meant affectionately.
This diary is not affiliated with any candidate or campaign.
And take a look at how to celebrate Constitution Day, Sept. 17, here.
People have got to learn the word “exogenous“: “an action or object coming from outside a system.” If you don’t understand the concept, you will not be much of an activist.
Politics — from within the system and outside of it — is largely about finding the levers of power. Think about that analogy of a lever for a moment. A lever is something you can grasp, exert force on, and change something. If you exert something on something that you can’t grasp or exert force on, you’re not going to change anything.
Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are not exogenous in the Iraq debate. The fire we aim at them is misplaced. More below.
Sep 06 2007
Harry Reid: Republicans Agree Senate is Where to End Iraq
Mr. Reid, I know you are tired of getting these letters, but I offer you a ray of hope tonight. I offer you validation from the Republicans in their Presidential debate this evening. When you are looking for justification for bringing a plan to end the mistakes of the Iraq War to the Senate floor, look no further than presidential hopeful, Mike Huckabee and Ron Paul.
Now, truth be known, my guy in this fight is Ron Paul. And he, as I am sure you know, is against the war. Always has been. Well, tonight he got into a tangle with Huckabee as to if it is time to end this war. Huckabee, though a decent man, was using the old “you break it, you bought it” stance. Paul, as you know, is strict on the Constitution and wants out.
Let’s see how this played out:
Aug 31 2007
Senator Reid: It’s Not A Compromise, It’s A Capitulation
Dear Senator Reid,
Who was it that, in February, said:
This war is a serious situation. It involves the worst foreign policy mistake in the history of this country.
Oh. Right. It was you.
Who was it that, in February, also said:
There can be no purely military solution in Iraq.
And:
At a time when President Bush is asking our troops to shoulder a larger and unsustainable burden policing a civil war, his failed policies have left us increasingly isolated in Iraq and less secure here at home.
Oh. Right. That was also you.
And who was it, in July, who was reported to have said:
…he now saw ending the war as a moral duty, and even if the Senate again falls short… would turn again and again to Iraq until either the president relents or enough Republicans join Democrats to overrule Mr. Bush.
Yes. Again. You.
So, what has changed? Why are you now saying you will “compromise” with the Republicans, not to actually end the word, but to just put some meaningless babble into the next bill that will continue it? Could it be all the good news that’s recently come out of Iraq?