It’s beyond doubt that yesterday Democratic Senate minority leader Harry Reid basically pushed in Bill Frist’s nose. When that sort of thing happens, what do you do about it? Yesterday we saw four basic strategies.
First, whine about the mean guy who hit you:
“Never have I been slapped in the face with such an affront to the leadership of this grand institution.”
That shouldn’t be the move of choice for a party whose image depends on projecting strength.
Alternatively, you can claim that you had planned to push in your nose yourself so the whole thing was unnecessary.
“Roberts angrily responded that his staff had been hard at work on the second phase of the investigation and had hoped to conclude that work next week – something he said that Democrats knew.
Pardon me for doubting Roberts’s sincerity.
You could try threats. I know something that would really blow the Senate apart – Bush could nominate an extremist and then Frist could invoke the nuclear option! Wait…
Actually, it’s not clear what the Republicans can threaten Reid with that they haven’t in fact already done. Frist, in a second go at a credible response, has one idea:
“This is an affront to me personally. It’s an affront to our leadership. It’s an affront to the United States of America!” Turning sorrowful, he vowed that “for the next year and a half, I can’t trust Senator Reid.”
In a stunning revelation, Frist also announced that he will no longer let Barbara Boxer crib his math homework.
Sometimes it’s best to merely pretend like nothing happened at all. In schoolyard terms, that’s the smart move when it turns out that the quiet, scrawny kid who doesn’t hang out with anybody has a brown belt in judo. He won’t go around the school bragging about breaking your forearm and it’s not like he goes out of his way to pick fights, so maybe in a while things will reset to the way they were before you pissed in his bookbag. Which, for my money, probably describes fairly well the way the Republicans feel about the Democrats right now.
Cue Fox:
CNN is all over Harry Reid’s move to force the Senate into closed session. Half a dozen correspondents are talking about it, and Jack Cafferty just unleashed a broadside about the need to find out once and for all whether we were lied into war.
But I keep flipping over to Fox and they’ve got nothing. What’s up with that? Isn’t this their kind of story?
Here’s the trouble with that strategy. If people saw that scrawny kid break your arm, your aura is busted and scrawny judo boy might start to grow a possee of his own. In that case the only way for alpha kid to set things right is to engineer some catastrophic, career-ending humiliation for the new guy. That is to say, Harry Reid. Watch your back, judo boy.
***Update***
Title changed because you know it’s so much cooler this way.
Vladi G
Careful what you wish for. Maybe if Frist hadn’t taken the unprecedented step of campaigning against the former minority leader, that wuss Daschle would still be in charge. Chickens coming home to roost, bitch.
Slide
From my purely partisan perspective, when I heard Frist say how he got “slapped in the face” I must admit I had a huge smile on my face. Yeah, admit it Dems, don’t you love that Frist got slapped in face? Don’t you think he deserves it? Now, trying to place myself in the position of a Republican partisan, how would I have reacted to that slap comment? With dismay I would imagine. Frist repeatedly demonstrates he is not a natural politician. He made Reid’s victory all the more sweet by his comments.
Matt
Drudge had nothing about it on his site by about 11pm last night, either. A sure sign that “ignore” is the tactic of choice.
Vladi G
I’d probably want to punch him in the face if he was standing in front of me.
Jill
This action is long overdue. Both parties agreed to “Phase II”. The delay ends now. The American public wants to know and it is their right to know.
p.lukasiak
Tim, I think you may have watched “My Bodyguard” one too many times….
*****************
I think that Reid’s “stunt” was intended to send a message to Frist above and beyond the obvious “you ain’t gonna change the subject” one.
First and foremost, Reid was giving Frist a taste of what he can expect if the Democrats filibuster Alito and Frist persues the “nuclear option.” Not only can the Democrats “shut down” the Senate, they can do so in a way that is to their political advantage.
Personally, I’d like to see Reid take this a step further, and start filibustering the “budget reconciliation act” until funding for a few GOP pork projects (with the primary focus on the Alaskan “Bridge to Nowhere”) are defunded. That particular boondoggle is an extreme embarrassment to the GOP, yet they can’t defund it because one of Alaska’s Senators has promised to resign if its funding is cut.
The Dems message has to be “we play by the rules — the GOP changes the rules when they don’t get what they want.”
Jill
It is hypocritical for Frist to feign outrage. Reid used a legitimate rule of the Senate. If there were “gentlemanly protocols” that were ignored that boat sailed when Frist broke the “gentlemanly protocol” of campaigning against a fellow leader in his home state, i.e., Daschle v. Thune.
Jorge
I am constantly amazed by how Reid’s shrewdness. He has been landing plenty of shots on the powers that be. From Social Security on down he’s shown a real knack for politics.
By the way – As much as I like your brown belt in Judo analogy, this isn’t some quite kid that is going to be happy as long as you leave him alone. This is a brown belt in Judo that is looking to take Frist’s job and control of the playground. I think it might be time for Frist to man-up a bit.
Jorge
I am constantly amazed by Reid’s shrewdness. He has been landing plenty of shots on the powers that be. From Social Security on down he’s shown a real knack for politics.
By the way – As much as I like your brown belt in Judo analogy, this isn’t some quite kid that is going to be happy as long as you leave him alone. This is a brown belt in Judo that is looking to take Frist’s job and control of the playground. I think it might be time for Frist to man-up a bit.
bs23
I can’t imagine this is real surprise to someone like Rove, though. He’s the master of raising the stakes, and he’s probably wondering why the Dems haven’t tried it themselves. David Mamet had an awesome op-ed in the LA Times a while back making the point that in politics, as in poker, if you don’t raise, you’ll never win.
Otto Man
As much as Frist looked like a crybaby yesterday, Ted Stevens would really outdo him if the Dems did that. When Coburn (in a rare moment of sanity) tried to move against the bridge funding and reallocate it to New Orleans, Stevens basically said he’d take his ball and go home if they did that. The shot of him screaming “No!” like a three-year-old was priceless.
croatoan
This was a stunt? I thought that Frist’s doing a medical diagnosis by videotape and an emergency legislative session to pass federal legislation that applied only to Terri Schiavo were stunts.
Geek, Esq.
This was the Dems acting like an opposition party.
Trent Lott’s comeback continues . . .
kenB
As I recall, the defeat of the Coburn amendments was, unfortunately, a strongly bipartisan effort. The Dems didn’t do much there to lay claim to be the party of fiscal restraint.
Davebo
Frist was priceless yesterday. To see such a
steadfast and strong leader cry like a three year old because he was outfoxed at his own game was perfect.
Let’s hope Reid doesn’t let up and a true opposition emerges finally. At some point they are going to have to take the hit for rolling over like puppies on the war resolution, and rightly so.
But it is wise to show at least a little back bone first.
Steve S
Frist is a weak leader, as evidenced by his response. That’s funny.
I wonder if perhaps Trent Lott isn’t leaking some ideas over to Reid. From his book we know he’s not at all happy with Frist, and he may view this as payback time. Lott’s a bastard and I would not be surprised.
The Heretik
Old dog Harry Reid found to know a trick other than rollover. Teaches Frist walk the dog. Woof.
TallDave
Yeah, admit it Dems, don’t you love that Frist got slapped in face?
LOL I can’t help but laugh at the Dems. Yeah, keep “punching” Republicans. That’ll win over the moderates and swing voters.
Where are the Dem’s ideas? Earth to DNC: These tactics might elicit a lot of cheers from the Kos Krowd and howls of anger from the Ann Coulter right, but you’re not going to win elections on a platform of “Republicans suck!”
The GOP will simply rope-a-dope you guys just like they did in 2004. All through the summer Kerry was ahead. The GOP sat back and mostly took it. Then they held the RNC convention and broke through with a positive vision of America. Bush never trailed after that, was re-elected, and the GOP picked up seats.
Pug
Frist’s most priceless comment of the day was when he said the Democrats have no ideas and no convictions.
Bill Frist should not talk about convictions. Convictions seem to be a Republican problem at the moment. Frist may end up with convictions of his own.
demimondian
Great point, TD.
We don’t need them. That’s what Gingrich proved in 92.
“Bu-but what about _The Contract With America_?”, you splutter, nonplussed.
None of the proposals in the Contract was ever enacted into legislation. Not a one. Gingrich was hoping to reach back to Roosevelt’s Hundred Days, and discovered, instead, that he’d won on the strength of the deep discontent of the Clinton tax increases when he tried to hold the United States government hostage to it. The public turned on him, hard and fast.
You can win by letting the other guy lose, you know. Sometimes, that’s the right — or, in this case, the Left — thing to do.
John S.
TallDave-
Where are the Republican’s ideas – that work? Seems like everything they touch turns to shit.
Earth to RNC: You’re not going to win elections on a platform of “We may be corrupt and intellectually bankrupt, but at least we aren’t Democrats!”
Pug
What exactly was that “positive vision of America”, Dave? That if you don’t vote for Bush your children will get blown up?
Or was it Bush’s platform of Social Security reform?
p.lukasiak
LOL I can’t help but laugh at the Dems. Yeah, keep “punching” Republicans. That’ll win over the moderates and swing voters.
Damn, Doug, I don’t know how you keep track of all the various ridiculous personas you adopt!
ppGaz
Priceless …. and true.
Now if we can rid of old guard Dems who rode this horse for years: “We may be corrupt and intellectually bankrupt, but at least we won’t fuck with your Social Security!”
Both parties are in dire need of new ideas. My hunch is that the Dobson Era is, uh, in its last throes. But, he’s done a heckuva job.
Tim F.
You say that like it’s a bad thing.
TallDave
So, to sum up all the replies, you have no ideas other than “the GOP sucks” and are going to lose again.
LOL you lefty commenters are great. You never disappoint me.
TallDave
demi,
Yes, the public turned on Newt and elected a Dem House majority… when did that happen again?
LOL Another voice from the “reality-based community.”
demimondian
Hey, John…
This guy’s out of line. If TD wants to question the facts, that’s fine — I can pull out poll numbers. But the _ad hominem_ comment at the end of the post is an attempt to queer the thread. Would you be good enough to remind people of that in some future front page posting?
jg
Did they ever say they were the party of fiscal restraint? Thats a republican claim, at least it used to be. Dems always went wild with cash but at least they had the cash to spend, repubs use credit.
KC
You know, I don’t think Reid cares about the consequences. I think he knows that the Republicans will get all the weapons in their considerable media arsenal out to smear him, but I don’t think he cares. Honestly, I think he has had it with the Republicans’ congressional imperiousness.
Ancient Purple
The Democrats don’t need to do anything to win over moderates and swing voters. Between Iraq, the Social Security debacle, an indicted Scooter Libby, Alito, tax cuts for the rich, etc., the Republicans are doing a fine job of pushing moderate and swing voters over to the Democrats.
Steve
Haha, yeah, the campaign and the Republican convention were all about a positive vision of America. Never mind Zell Miller and those Swift Boat guys.
Over on RedState, there is one guy who is 100% convinced Bush was elected because of Health Savings Accounts. The moral is that everyone takes away from an electoral victory exactly what they want to take away. When your guy wins, it confirms that everything you believe has just been approved by a majority of voters.
I don’t blame the GOP for trying to spread the narrative that moderates hate it when the Dems fight back, but let’s not confuse that self-serving meme with reality.
RA
The proper reaction to this hissey fit is that the report that was due out in a week will be delayed because of the hissy fits of the Democrats. In fact the report will be put on hold until Judge Alito gets an up/down vote.
Yes, we should all hope and pray that the Democrats try to filibuster Alito. Then we can rid the country of the only tool the Democrats have left. Its time to stop treating the Democrats with respect. They are irrelivant and should be treated as such.
On the senate floor Republicans should take the floor and say “blah, blah blah … blah blah blah, blah blah!” Then both sides will have been equally articulate. LOL
Doug
Not that anyone who says it actually cares about the truth, but for what it’s worth: The Democratic Agenda.
But, at the moment, that’s back burner stuff. Don’t step forward with your ideas until the other guy is finished beating himself up.
ScottC
So it’s OK to have the Iraqi constitution to protect the Sunni minority against the tyranny of the majority but it’s also OK to use every trick in the book to marginalize the Democrat Congressional minority in favor of as Tom Delay put it, “a permanent Republican majority”.
Jorge
Talldave is using a fairly successful Republican talking point. He is deflecting the conversation away from the failures of the Republican agenda and exposing the fact that the Dems right now are not proposing a strong counter agenda.
Now, considering that Bush only won 51% of the vote in 2004, I wouldn’t be so quick to assume that the Democrats pointing out what a mess the Republicans have made over the past year isn’t enough to get the Dems a few seats in both houses next year. However, as a Dem, I believe that come next spring we are going to need to launch a serious policy initiative if we want to make darned sure to capitalize on the Republicans mistakes.
However, now isn’t really the time to roll out that initiative. All that would happen is that it would be defeated – making the Dems look like losers – or Bush would co-opt and corrupt any good ideas that came out.
As far as Bush presenting a new vision for America during the RNC costing Kerry in the polls – well, I remember Kerry slipping for all of August because of the Swiftboat attacks. Let’s not forget that by the week before the RNC convention Bush was winning most polls by 1-3% points. And guess what? That was the final margin of victory. Bush did get a boost after the convention but he promptly lost that gain when Kerry dismantled Bush’s supposed vision during the debates. It was that 1-3% margin that the swifties got him that won the election
RSA
What strikes me most about this uproar is how petty the Republican responses seem to be: “You didn’t warn us first!” “You just don’t respect me!” “I don’t think I’ll be able to trust you in the future. . .” You’d think, for a Senate leader who wasn’t too full of himself, he’d be able to downplay the maneuver a bit better as a maneuver, substance aside.
Ancient Purple
Do you think it would be too much to ask of you to read what Pat Roberts said?
There was no report being submitted next week. Roberts was claiming that his investigation in Phase II would be completed next week. The report would come afterward.
But that wasn’t the Democrats’ complaint. They wanted a thorough investigation, not one that was being handled solely by Roberts.
Gosh, a thorough, bi-partisan investigation. The horror!
Stormy70
Even Howard Fineman admitted nothing was discussed about National Security in the closed session yesterday. The Democrats had to admit it when the capital security force wanted to bring in sweeper dogs. They had to own up, and confess they weren’t really talking about secret National Security stuff. That is why it’s not worth covering a second day.
ScottC
Where did you get this?
John S.
Nutshell TallDave: I didn’t read your responses because I don’t care what you have to say. You people that don’t think like me are all poopy-heads.
Thanks for the
informed commentaryhot air.Barry
And the line of “it’d be done next week anyway” is one that I’m not dumb enough to accept, RA. They got rolling on this soley because Reid put their ball in a vise.
Kathleen
“Where are the Dem’s ideas?”
I am pretty sure that “thorough investigation of pre-war intelligence” is an idea, Tall Dave. Just because it is an idea you are afraid of…
Oh, and by the way, you used up your entire quota of “LOL” in this thread. Don’t make me come back there.
Mike in SLO
RA Says: “Its time to stop treating the Democrats with respect. They are irrelivant and should be treated as such.” He believes as Tom Delay does in a permanent Republican majority. It is this mind-set that most scares me. It is the Sovietization of America. I loathe both parties for a variety of reasons, and that’s why I’m not a member of either, but the fact remains that the two party system has served our country well for over 200 years. A one party state can’t help but decay into a Soviet style of governing. We already see Party priorities placed before the Country’s priorities, and this is what is so troubling to many of us Independents. I fear neither party can win back the Independents and Moderates until they both learn to work together. You may hate it, but compromise is what has made this country great.
Stormy70
He was on the Laura Ingram show today.
Bob In Pacifica
The Republicans have such total control of Washington that it’s hard to give a coherent statement of Demo positions without referencing Republicans, and there’s damned little chance that TallDave is going to take his fingers out of his ears anyway.
But, for example, the Democrats could say,
“We are for a real energy policy, where conservation and new alternatives are rewarded, not more taxcuts for fatcat energy buddies of the Bushes and Cheney.
“We stand for education and healthcare for every man, woman and child in our country, not cutting benefits for most Americans while a very few corporatists rake in huge profits.
“We stand for a strong, expanded Social Security and pension protection that ensures that Americans in the future won’t spend their final years in poverty, not for cutting benefits for most Americans while a very few corporatists rake in huge profits.
“We stand for a strong, expanded Homeland Security, which recognizes that security means protection of our citizens, whether endangered by foreign enemies or by natural disasters, not for cutting programs that benefit and protect most Americans while a very few corporatists rake in huge profits.
“We stand for a strong military, not to wage wars based on lies for the benefit of a very few corporatists who rake in huge profits while our sons and daughters die in a war that was unnecessary and has left us, as a nation, weaker.
“We stand for the rights of every individual American to live her or his life in freedom, that each American can hold whatever religious beliefs he holds without interference from the intolerant.
“We stand for the equality of all.
“We oppose torture in the name of our country.
“We believe that government can and does work, and has worked when it is led by people who believe in America and its people, not hypocrites who don’t think that government works except as another source of booty for their cronies.”
Something like that.
Bob In Pacifica
RA, put down the pipe. There are people who can help you.
Wait, that program was cut, too. Never mind.
Bob In Pacifica
Mike, where is SLO? It sounds like such a rational place.
Stormy70
Additional dog site in the Washington Post.
Bob In Pacifica
Stormy, the purpose was to discuss why the Administration and their Republican coverup artists had been BLOCKING the investigation of the prewar intelligence. It was at least POSSIBLE that the Republicans may have shared some of the intelligence. If it was dramatic, or a stunt, well, it got Frist’s attention.
Stormy, you understand why some people might want to look at pre-war intelligence, right?
Darrell
Translation: “WAAAAHHHH! John, make Tall Dave stop. He makes me feel so stuuupid”.
demimondian, Bill Frist, both whining like little bitches. Frist should have low-keyed it, instead of giving us the “he insulted my honor, I cannot trust Reid again for another 1 year, 2 months” type stupidity
Vladi G
Sorry, but Stormy is FAR too stupid to take anything she interprets from a live interview at face value. Without a written transcript, I wouldn’t believe that moron if she told us that the Pope said amen.
Mike in SLO
Bob,
San Luis Obispo. Indeed, an isolated paradise on the Central Coast smack dab in the middle of LA and San Francisco with the absolute best weather in the nation. Cal Poly University is located here, a mostly conservative voting population with a strong liberal underbelly — all kinds: conservatives, liberals, hunters, tree huggers, farmers, technophiles, new-agers and traditionalists all peaceably co-existing, perhaps due to our fantastic wines! Seriously, this place is a perfect combination of small town atmosphere with big city ammenities and an excellent arts community. After living most of my life in LA and the Bay Area, I finally discovered the joys of the “SLO Life” 6 years ago. I will never leave. Pacifica is a beautiful place as well, though. If you’ve never been to the SLO area I’d encourage you to take a drive down the 101.
Darrell
Uh moron, she also cited the same claim about the dogs from the Washington Post. God you are an idiot
Kimmitt
This I disagree with — the Democratic Party is in pretty good shape on policy; it just needs to find a goddamned backbone.
I am really looking forward to Senator Clinton’s enormous pile of cash not being enough to carry her hyperpositioned self through the primary.
Vladi G
Wait, Stormy was dumb enough to think they were actually discussing actual intelligence yesterday? Wow, she’s dumber than I thought.
And Darrell’s simply a serial liar. Tell us again, Darrell, who did Plame list as her employer when she donated to Gore? That’s my favorite lie of all.
Theseus
Here is a great post from Bullmouse re: the Dems.
DougJ
You are so right. And that’s the second time today. Well, you know what they say about stopped clocks ;)
Darrell, don’t you think they should have left Lott in? He seems like a much better leader to me.
Krista
It was very dumb of him…made him look petulant. It also made him look damned hypocritical. It’s not like the Republicans have always remembered to play nice over the last 5 years…
ppGaz
What about Lott’s wife? Remember her?
(sorry, had to).
InsultComicDog
Ha. Frist shows his true character – that of a whiney weasel.
MC
RE: The Democrats “have no ideas” motif
I read an interesting take on this a couple weeks ago. Basically, the gist is that part of the reason the GOP has such a large agenda is because it is designed in opposition to the agenda that the Democrats passed over the last half-century in post-New Deal power. For instance, the Republican charge is, “What is the Democrat’s plan for Social Security?” Social Security IS is the Democratic plan; they don’t need an agenda item because the program, the way they want it, is already enacted. Democrats charge that the GOP plan to “save Social Security” is to dismantle the program into private accounts thereby eliminating any future problems with funding – it doesn’t “fix” the Democratic program, it only eliminates the problem by removing the source – not a true corrective action from the Dem perspective.
There were a lot more examples about this – “What is the plan to fix y?” In a lot of these Republican agenda items, for Dems, the question isn’t an alternative plan, but is there really a problem? Of course, there is a Democratic plan to correct some things that people don’t like to hear, so they don’t vocalize it, but it’s “raise taxes”.
How will the Democrats address growing deficits? Raise taxes – again, the “problem” the GOP sees with raising taxes isn’t acknowledged as a problem by the Dems. They don’t view it as restrictive to economic growth or an undue burden on individuals, since they view tax cuts as tax shifts to higher state and local income tax.
Anyhow, the point of this article was the Federal Government runs a lot like the Democrats want it from over 50 years of power. They don’t have a big agenda because they got most of what they wanted.
The Disenfranchised Voter
And since when have conversations about National Security always involved the use of “sweeper dogs”?
How can you be so inept at logic to think “no sweeper dogs”=”no national security talk”? Seriously, what is wrong with you?
Must be that good ol’ Freeper logic I’ve been hearing about.
Theseus
Here’s my probelm with this statement. It’s not that I fundamentally disagree with many of the left’s agenda, especially social, over the last 50 years. For the most part, I don’t, BUT I am increasingly sympathetic to conservative positions. Why? Simple. Because I’m not so sure anymore that the solutions that were adopted 50 years ago for solving the problems of 50 years ago within the context of THAT particular environment and time are necessarily applicable to today’s problems, environment and context.
Simply put, things change, people change, priorities change, economic circumstances change, societies change. Solutions to problems, whatever they may be, should reflect some of that change. That to me is the ultimate irony of many of the solutions that “progressives” propose. They don’t seem very “progressive” or forward-looking. JMHO of course :)
Kimmitt
Three years is an eternity in politics. If Americans had long memories, Republican presidential candidates would never get elected. The Democrats are already defined as the antiwar Party; mere House and Senate votes on the issue will not change that definition.
Rusty Shackleford
Look at Frist’s response and comments made by folks like TallDave and all you see is empty partisan rhetoric.
For a party that has no power – no Prez, no Senate, no House and now no Court – I think the Democrats have been doing pretty good. Republicans know they are in deep sh1t if a real investigation into the lies that led us into Iraq ever gets going. With the leadership of the Republican Party making regular visits for mugshots it isn’t too much longer before the Americans in the middle say enough is enough, let’s try the Democrats again.
Give ’em hell, Harry!
MC
IMO, the weakness in the agenda’s of both parties is that neither of them is forward-looking or asking the right questions. For example, the Social Security “plan”. I have a private retirement account, it’s called my IRA and I surely don’t need another with the government. The real question and the real debate should have been, “Do we still need the government to be involved in retirement planning?”, not some alternative solution to a program that was enacted to solve a problem in 1930s. There is certainly a problem with Social Security and the Dems aren’t doing the country any great favor by fighting for the status quo, but the GOP isn’t helping by swapping out one program for another without questioning the necessity for the program in the first place.
p.lukasiak
The question is not what people believed in 1998 when we didn’t go to war, or even in October 2002 when Congress authorized the president to go to war ONLY if all alternatives were exhausted (yes, Democrats expected that meant war, because that Saddam would not co-operate with inspections.) Bad decisions can be made on bad/incomplete information.
The question is why Bushco deliberately lied about intelligence, especially on Saddam’s nuclear capabilities and Iraq’s (non-existent) ties to 9-11 and bin Laden. Condi Rice went on TV and said flat out that there was no other use for the aluminum tubes but in centrifuges — when literally ALL the experts recognized that the tubes could be used for rockets, and most of them thought that was their intended purpose. Why did the administration consistently lie about an Iraq-bin Laden connection, when the intelligence community was saying that there was no connection?
Perhaps most critically, the UNMOVIC and IAEA inspections process demonstrated beyond any doubt that the intelligence analyses — and claims by the administration — were dead wrong in every instance where those claims and analyses could be checked out. Why did the administration continue, in the face of this evidence, to continue to spin, exaggerate, distort and hype the “evidence” that Iraq represented a “grave and gathering threat” to the United States.
Congress, and the American people, wound up supporting this war because they were afraid not to do so. That fear was based entirely on the distortions and lies of intelligence information by the Bush administration. Questions weren’t raised, and debate did not occur, because the invasion of Iraq was presented as so critical to the security of the USA that no one cared if we had a plan to deal with post-war Iraq (just like no one cared that there was no Marshall Plan after the attack on Pearl Harbor.)
Those are the real issues, and those issues demand examination. The Democratic Party isn’t going to be held responsible for authorizing a war as a last resort when it can be proven that Bush was lying about the need to go to war.
People like me have a right to be, and continue to be, angry at the Democratic Congress for being duped by Bush, because we weren’t duped by him. But the majority of Americans who were duped along with Congressional Democrats aren’t going to hold those Democrats feet to the fire—anymore than they are going to blame themselves for being duped. They are going to blame the liars and con men who took advantage of their fears in the post 9-11 environment.
jcricket
And it’s about damn time. Democrats have two choices:
Capitulate the debate up front because they might lose. This guarantees they lose (and lose face).
Fight by presenting their case to the press/public and using any left-over means (like Rule 21) at their disposal.
They won’t always win on the immediate issue, but that’s almost besides the point. Part of it is just about showing what you’re willing to go down fighting for. Moreover, recent history (see Social Security) shows that Dems will win more often than they think, if they stick together.
Remember, poll after poll shows the American public solidly (55-60%) on the side of the core Democratic agenda (see Terri Schiavo, Iraq, the Plame outing, health care, energy policy, abortion, etc.).
Dems should pick their battles (as Reid seems to be doing), but not be afraid of the caterwauling from Frist, Delay, Rove, etc.
jg
Its because of lobbyists and special interests groups. Government should concern itself with issues that will keep us strong well into the future, not listening to clowns that think we need to make sure Paris Hilton inherits tax free.
The Cavalry
Reid’s attack was classless. It showed guts, but I think the rhetoric was just too strident for most Americans. The trouble with being a northeastern party is that what passes for moxie in New York is considered rudeness in Iowa.
Tim F.
Cavalry,
If the midwest can stomach the GOP for five years, plus six under Clinton, then they can stomach Reid. That is all.
The Cavalry
The Senate is based on decorum. These kinds of cheap stunts may get short term publicity — this one sure has — but it’s of a piece with Clinton’s renting out the Lincoln bedroom (though not as bad). It does not bring honor to the body, that much is for sure.
Steve S
Cavalry,
Reid is from Nevada.
I’m from Iowa. I don’t regard it as rudeness. Those of us from Iowa appreciate honesty. Nothing Reid said or did was dishonest. He wants the truth of what happened, even if we find out that it is not a pleasant truth.
demimondian
And what passes as moxie in Iowa is seen as unspeakably aggressive in Seattle.
Steve S
Lincoln Bedroom?
I don’t get it. Why is it ok for Bush to do this, but under Clinton it was wrong?
You’ve just identified yourself as a partisan hack. You’re going to bash Democrats no matter what they do.
Sojourner
The Senate lost its decorum several years ago when the Repubs decided they were above its rules. How funny to hear a Repub supporter complaining about Clinton’s actions. The Repubs long ago lost the moral highground. But in their fantasy-based world, they can be whatever they want to be. Outing CIA agents becomes a form of patriotism. Pathetic.
Tulkinghorn
But Clinton let TACKY PEOPLE sleep in the Lincoln Bedroom. That is what was so offensive to right-thinking Americans.
Bob In Pacifica
Mike in SLO, I spent two weeks with the Army Reserves in Camp Roberts back in the 70s. I did make it to SLO for a day trip and it was wonderful.
I’m not sure if he’s still there, but the guy who was the Postmaster down there a couple years ago had been a vocalist in my punk rock band for about a week back around 1980. Just tell him Bob from Sunset Finance Station says you’ll find my package.
Bob In Pacifica
MC, most people need Social Security. Sorry, but you’ll have to develop a national policy that has a wider sample.
Bob In Pacifica
Tulkinghorn, Bush let tacky people sleep in his ass.
Tulkinghorn
Well, I am just not going to clutter up my beautiful mind with that image, thanks much.
Larry
http://nitpicker.blogspot.com/
As lawmakers raced between the chamber and Frist’s office, reporters surrounded Frist chief of staff Eric Ueland. “It was a nonstop rant to build up to a political stunt!” Ueland said of Reid. As he leveled these charges, Ueland turned in a 360-degree circle so that all the journalists could hear him.
“You’re spinning!” one of the reporters observed.