Harry Reid needs to take his baby moms advice. Seriously, you want a majority leader who's going to hold the president accountable. But after watching Reid get waxed by Blago, I don't think he's the guy to do it.Reid, who lambasted the GOP-led Congress for being a rubber stamp for President Bush, indicated that he will not bow to the Obama administration.
Reid stated, "I don't believe in the executive power trumping everything... I believe in our Constitution, three separate but equal branches of government."
"If Obama steps over the bounds, I will tell him. ... I do not work for Barack Obama. I work with him," he said.
« Prop 8 and blaming the blacks | Main | What Israelis Think » We don't believe you, you need more people...07 Jan 2009 12:00 pm
Harry Reid flexes:
Comments (24)Comments on this entry have been closed. |
Today's Headlines From The Atlantic |
The Beautiful Struggle: A Father, Two Sons, and an Unlikely Road to Manhood 
Copyright © 2009 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
TNC:
Are you sure you don't have that backwards?
What I've watched unfold, over the past few weeks, is a very different spectacle. A Senate Majority Leader so determined to show his strength, so eager to demonstrate his independence and integrity, that he went and picked a fight he could not win. Harry Reid can't keep Burris from taking his seat for the very simple reason that Burris was legally appointed. He had the choice of acknowledging this now, or waiting for the courts to smack him around.
The problem with tough guys is that they never know which fights to pick, and which to avoid. I don't doubt Reid's toughness; it's his wisdom that has me worried.
Good points. Very good points.
It was/is an embarassing mess that no one looks too willing the help Reid extracate himself from.
His dramatics are due to the fact that everyone knows he's owned by Obama and he's pissed off about it. So he goes and takes a swing at little ol Burris to feel better who turns around and owns him too! The MTP I don't recall moment was the pinacle of "shook".
With 82% approval rating he can't possibly move hard against Obama and hope to get re-elected.
I agree with 'Cynic.' It's tough to beat the Constitution. Reid didn't get played by Blagojevich, per se; he just didn't have the law on his side.
I do. You'll notice Reid only flexes when his potential opponents are Democrats, people who won't shoot back with both barrels because Reid's on their side. The past 8 years when we had an executive branch trumping everything and actually needed some toughness from Reid he laid down and showed his belly like a yellow dog. He'll talk big, but he'll abandon any principle and roll over the second he believes anyone will really fight him. That's the main reason the 60 seat number doesn't matter at all. Even if they had the numbers they aren't breaking a filibuster when just one GOP Senator willing to hit him hard is plenty to bring out the coward in Reid.
I used to teach martial arts and one thing I learned pretty quickly is that some can take it to the next level and others just go through the motions. We used to call the former "killers." Some people are killers and some people aren't. Reid is no killer. Obama is even though he doesn't look like it. Rahm is a killer - so is Hillary. Reid will get steamrolled.
I have read some things that Reid isn't exactly a shoo in for his reelection bid. Not sure when he is up, but I wonder if there will be grassroots movement to run someone in the primary.
Not sure if this is good or bad for Reid, but Howard Dean said he was performing very well.
SeanH writes: "The past 8 years when we had an executive branch trumping everything and actually needed some toughness from Reid he laid down and showed his belly like a yellow dog."
I hold Reid in slightly higher regard than I do Joe Lieberman. Very slightly. If the Dems get their act together they'll name another leader. Why stick with this proven loser?
What Cynic said is exactly why Reid handled this so poorly.
The smart play would have been to stay out of it and say the issue was in Illinois hands, it was up tothe courts in Illinois to resolve the legal issues before the Senate got invloved.
The problem is that awful Blago nominated a decent and honest guy to be Senator. O, the treachery !
Worse yet, the decent and honest guy is black, totally screwing up the post-racial, down with Bobby Rush narrative. Perfidious Treachery!
What is this, some sort of post-modern French novel where you can't tell the good guys from the bad guys?
This shows us why Blago must be impeached and driven from public office and sent back to Serbia. If he cannot act appropriately and meet everyone's reasonable expectations of behavior, then he can't play. It's just too confusing for the rest of us.
I agree that the best thing to do with Burris would have been to state that he is, in himself, a legitimate and acceptable Senatorial pick, but that the situation with Blagojevich casts an unfortunate cloud over him. If Reid had any sense, he would have seated Burris provisionally, but stated that it was up to the legislators of Illinois to decide whether a special election should be held, and that Burris would be free to put himself in as a candidate. Whoever won that election would then be the replacement Senator. That way, the will of the people could be expressed, Illinois could have a Senator chosen by them and not by Blagojevich, and Burris would be allowed to prove his mettle.
As for Reid's recent posturing, he strikes me as a weak and confused little man trying to prove how tough he is by going after "easy" targets. Didn't work too well for Clinton (and we remember how Reid went along with the shenanigans in Nevada) and it ain't going to work for Undeadly Harry.
Can a creature without a spine flex? Or has Reid had a backbone transplant while we weren't watching? I suspect Harrikins is about to discover that Obama knows more about how to fight than our invertebrate Senate Majority Leader has ever dreamed possible.
Just off topic, TNC, I am not sure if the Atlantic do have a war correspondent--if not so, you guys could negotiate that with Joe the Plumber who just got a contract as war correspondent in Israel. I am really sorry for real journalist like you and few others. It is becoming a joke this days. My last word: YELLOW JOURNALISM.
I agree with the criticisms of Reid--he's certainly not my favorite guy--but who would be some good choices to replace him in the Senate, who wouldn't regularly piss off half the caucus? It's slim pickings, I think.
A silver lining of the Burris–Blago flap is that it’s a sideshow that diverts the SCLM from areas where they do more harm, such as foreign policy and the economy.
TNC,
Hey buddy, loved your article on Michelle Obama, but did you know the Atlantic is pushing it under the umbrella "The End of White America"?
If the Atlantic really thinks White America is over, they should tell their human resouces staff. As far as I can tell, the entire company (Alantic, CongressDaily, National Journal etc.) employs less than five minorities in editorial positions
Harry Reid simply needs to stay away from fights he cannot win, namely all of them. He's about as fear inducing as a loud fart. Actually strike that. About as fear inducing as a soft and muddy fart. Just as effective too.
Ironic:
Click through. That's the headline for a story by Hua Hsu, which takes a somewhat different angle than TNC did.
Reid is a wet noodle. The question of who should replace him is a good one. DiFi and Rockefeller aren't exactly making themselves look very good, either. Biden, Hillary, and Salazar are gone. Who has the stones for this position? I guess I'd pick Feingold.
Word to the last sentence. As to replacing him I think it has to be Durbin everyone else is to ignorant or dirty.
Obama got waxed by Blago just the same. Who decided to reject Burris by the way, Obama or Reid? People like to blame Reid for anything going wrong; see Lieberman.
At least I know where Lieberman stands on Iraq. Reid's spent the last two years claiming to be against the war and yet doing nothing to stop it. The Bush Administration got whatever it wanted from most of our beloved Democratic Senators. It is the Senate with the Constitutional power to make war, thus they bear ultimate responsibility for Iraq. Oversight has been a joke. Missing billions, failure to provide body armor for the troops, no one held accountable. The leadership in the Senate sucks. These are the people who gave us the Patriot Act and who gave Ted Stephens a standing ovation.
Reid started caving on Burris last Sunday when before he went on a morning show after he read the headlines about his conversations with Blago about who was unelectable in Ill and they all happened to be Black which by the way was the same rationale used by the Clintons about Obama. (This conversation was probably leaked by Blago, but that does not make it untrue, take a look at Reid's weak sauce push back.) That made barring the Senate door to Burris completely untenable. He surely thought that this conversation was taped by the feds. And by the way, talking to gov's about this sort of thing is the job of the head of the DSCC not the Senate majority leader. I hate name calling, but Reid really seems to be a complete blockhead. Tough is never enough, you have to be tough and smart.
The problem is that when Reid stakes a claim to acting independently from Obama, we can be dead certain that this will not mean Reid going above and beyond Obama to chart any kind of progressive or liberal path. Reid's announcement, if it means anything, means an intent to undercut Obama by caving to the Republicans, breaking from Obama to the right. Reid's willingness to stand up for principle of any kind historically has only arisen under certain very specific circumstances...