Demand Harry Reid's Resignation!

[mr715]

It is clear that Senator Reid is leading the party into oblivion! We have a sizeable minority and yet we still managed to prevent cloture on John Bolton's confirmation.

How could this happen? Well I think its self-evident. Harry Reid is plotting the destruction of the Democratic party so that we can invade Syria and leave our nuclear waste there. My evidence? BILL FRIST VOTED WITH THE DEMOCRATS!

I mean, its OBVIOUS that Harry Reid is the worst Democratic leader in Senatorial history.

1 - He managed to unify the Democrats more strongly than in the last 30 years. That can mean only one thing. He's turning the party into Republican-lites!

2 - We got a compromise that would preserve Senate rules and prevent the destruction of the filibuster.

3 - Bolton ain't gonna be U.N. Ambassador. He's so loved, its clear that democrats will lose big for not confirming this paragon of morality.

Sarcasm? A bit.


Harry Reid is awesome. And I liked Daschle. But Reid blows him outta the water.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

1. Nice sarcasm, but the party was actually quite unified during the

Reagan years...if anything, Bill Clinton should STFU since he managed to destroy it.

[babylonsister]

3. Where was

Clinton mentioned? :shrug:

[RoyGBiv]

6. Huh?

Or did I miss a sarcasm roll check?

Unifed during the Reagan years? I'm sorry, but that notion just blows me away.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

15. We had the house, senate, most state governments and

were able to over ride vetos...fast forward to today

[RoyGBiv]

20. That doesn't mean unified ...

It just means Democrats, in all their variations, held elected positions, many of them by default due to incumbency. The key word in this sentence is "variations."

The 80's was the decade of the so-called Reagan Democrats. The election cycle of 1980, according to some historians and political scientists, marks a shift in political coalitions like those that occurred in 1933 and at various times before. A coalition shift is a huge schism involving economic, social, and political elements, but it all boils down to one main aspect. It was a time of deep changes and disunity in *both* parties, with the momentum at that time shifting in favor of the Republicans as the dust began to settle.

Unity within the Democratic party at the beginning of the 80's was almost non-existent and faded throughout the decade, no more perfect an example of which is the fact they were unable to bring down Reagan or his cronies during Iran-Contra and subsequently stood watch as George the Elder turned that disaster into actual political capital, grasped the reins of power, and joyously threw us headlong into this mess in Iraq. I cannot emphasize enough how bizarre this is and just how clearly it demonstrates the 80's Democratic party effectively did not exist as a viable opposition. It would be like Nixon emerging from Watergate more popular than ever and appointing Gordon Liddy as his successor. (Ironically, this is all connected in various ways and seems to have happened in a round-about way.)

Clinton destroyed it? Clinton inherited it and actually did much to attempt to turn Democrats away from the path of self-imposed destruction. (This is not intended as an agreement with some of what he did, just an observation that he tried.) He obviously didn't succeed, but it's difficult to blame one man for a half-century or more of decay when his own influence as a party leader did not begin until the crashing plane was 30 feet off the ground.

[Writer]

25. Right-o. I keep wondering if those Dems who bash Clinton...

were any older than 10 when Clinton was president... just curious.

If not, I digress...

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

41. I was in my late 30's

He may have done good for himself, he destroyed the party

[Writer]

53. I disagree. n/t

[RoyGBiv]

60. How so?

Upon what evidence do you base this assertion?

[RoyGBiv]

61. Same here ...

I wonder the same thing myself at times, not in this particular case, but in others.

I don't generally see it as an age thing, though. It's usually either lack of memory or an inability or unwillingness to draw historical comparisons. Some degree of ignorance is usually involved.

The Clinton years provided an opportunity for a Democratic revival, but that didn't happen despite his efforts.

[CAcyclist]

42. Right on

The most unified the Democrats ever were in my memory was when Clinton was in charge. I certainly don't agree with a lot of the rightward things he did, but I really admired him for calling the Republicans' bluff over the budget. That was great.

[tritsofme]

36. You idealize our coaltion back then

Reagan with the help of Southern Democrats pretty much controlled the floor of the House for a good part of his term.

He controlled the Senate at intermediate periods.

Rarely did we over-ride vetos, whether we had that many Democrats or not.

Democrats may have been large in number, especially in the House, but our Coalition was weak and fractioning. The last time we really held cohesive majorities in Congress was the mid 1960s.

It was so bad that both Carter and Clinton both held rather large majorities in both Houses of Congress and couldn't get anything done.

[wyldwolf]

52. untrue

The Republicans won control of the Senate in 1981 and retained it for six years.

[wyldwolf]

51. historical revisionism?

The Democratic party began unraveling in the late 60s.

Ted Kennedy led a faction in revolt at the DNC convention of 1980 because he was a sore loser.

The Dems were turned out in 1994 because they had lost touch with the American mainstream.

Clinton had nothing to do with it.

Wanna debate it?

[babylonsister]

2. I think you need this all over the place:

:sarcasm:
Having said that, Reid is very meek but packs a whallop!

[ginnyinWI]

45. that's a good metaphor

since Reid used to be a boxer! :)

I love to see Harry Reid in action: speaks softly, but there's the power of truth in what he says.

[AuntiBush]

4. Please. He's doing the very best job possible, respectfully.

[mr715]

5. Yes I know

But hes Pro-Life and therefore worse than Hitler

[bigendian]

8. Mr., Mr.

You one funny guy!

[evlbstrd]

10. Worse than Hitler?

Good lord.

[mr715]

23. Its Sarcasm

no text.

[evlbstrd]

26. Sorry, this thing seemed to be going all over the place.

And i'm trying to talk with my wife and kids at the same time. Sometimes they understand.

[saltpoint]

7. I was ready to grab my sword and defend Harry's name & --

-- then I read the rest of your post and saw where you were going.

Yeah. I'm stickin' with Harry, too.

He's a good man.

[CTLawGuy]

9. if you liked Daschle,

you and I will never see eye to eye.

[LittleClarkie]

27. I did too, as a person and a Senator who cared about Native Americans

Just not as Minority Leader. I think he was too nice.

[CTLawGuy]

31. I was only referring to him in his capacity as minority "leader"

[benddem]

11. the reason frist voted

the way he did is a parliamentary procedure. He will be able to introduce the measure the next time. He couldn't do that if he voted for Cloture.

[mr715]

24. I know

My post is a joke

[suigeneris]

34. Ah, thank you very much. nt

[Erika]

12. Reid, Pelosi, and Dr. Dean have put the GOP on the defense

They are doing a great job. Anyone who doesn't think the democrats don't have strong leaders are not living in reality.

[babylonsister]

16. Amen! I'm feeling a bit of faith

that's been a long time coming. I think our party is doing great! Add Boxer, Clinton, Kerry, Dodd, Kennedy, Biden, Byrd, et. al., to the mix!

[Erika]

18. and as we are building the GOP is crumbling

I would not be surprised to see some like Voinovitch turn democrat. The right wing hate radio talk shows today has done nothing but to laugh at him for showing emotion about his strong feelings and opinions against Bolten.

The GOP has been poisoned by the infiltration and power of the radical few and it's very obvious.

[babylonsister]

19. I've seen people on DU laughing about Voinovich.

I also thought he was very genuine in his hurt about our country, something that some people are so without faith that they can't see it. I am not religious, but this man moved me. I think he felt like I do; please don't destroy the UN by voting an idiot/bully or worse in!

[suigeneris]

35. Uh, but... Never mind :D nt

[Singular73]

13. Reid is truly a breath of fresh air

He is one of the few that gives me real hope for this party.

If we cooperate with the centrists, we shall be back in power very soon.

[Erika]

14. We are the centrists and mainstream GOP are realizing it

They know they must divorce themselves from the right wing radicals who hijacked their party. They are the ones in a bind.

[AlCzervik]

17. Reid has really surprised me, everytime i hear him

"Speak softly but carry a big stick" always come to mind. He's not perfect but i think he's done a really good job so far.

[politicasista]

21. What's with the hating on good dems?

[Pacifist Patriot]

48. I don't know. Every time I express my admiration of a Dem...

I can count on at least one person jumping all over me for being a mindless party follower who can't think for herself and I'm told that party loyalty is a bad thing.

ETA: I'm taking your question seriously but I know full well the OP is sarcastic. And quite funny I might add.

[Stand and Fight]

49. Nothing like actually READING THE WHOLE POST... n/t

[elshiva]

22. Hahhah! You are a good egg, hon!

Blessings!

[politicasista]

28. I agree. Misread your post the first time.

:thumbsup:

[Gothmog]

29. Reid is doing a great jib

I have been very pleased so far

[Spiffarino]

30. I was worried Reid was a DINO when he got the job

But oh, how wrong I was. He's as scrappy as they come and we need a lot more like him.

[saracat]

32. So the Bankruptcy vote was okay with you? And

we got a compromise we probably didn't need on the filibuster! I still think we could have won without it. But nothing will make up for the Bankruptcy Vote . Add to the fact he is anti choice and I can't ever be thrilled with Reid .Sorry. I want Durbin for Minority Leader.

[LuPeRcALiO]

33. that bankruptcy vote makes me wonder

how hard he'll fight to raise the minimum wage and to fend off SS privatization.

Did Durbin vote against it?

[saracat]

37. Yes.

[Idioteque]

57. At least he voted against cloture!

After cloture, it was destined to pass. What Reid did was better than what Lieberman did (Yes on cloture...No on passage).

[JackDragna]

38. I'll go for the serious part of this post.

Reid is a gutless, spineless sycophant to GOP interests, just like the rest of the Democratic Senate. Their principled "stands" on issues like the filibuster just give them an opportunity to give the GOP everything it wants while saving enough face to pretend to be interested in being an opposition party. A real leader would have stuck to his guns and not let the filibuster be curtailed by such ridiculous rules. Down with Reid, down with Lieberman, down with Kerry, down with every Democratic senator who capitulates with this madness.

[mr715]

40. Ahh a Kucinich guy? Or mayhaps a Nader worshipper

Sorry but I humbly disagree.

Lets take a look at the filibuster.

No compromise - the filibuster is gone with a 51 to 49 vote. End 'o story. Every single Bush judge gets in. Executive department retains all power. End of any 2 party state.

Compromise - filibuster retained and the democrats gain ground.

[JackDragna]

54. I love how you have to characterize me..

..to defend your own indefensible position. What "compromise" are you talking about? The one that allows Republicans to bring back the nuclear option at any time? The one where we promise not to filibuster unless "extraordinary circumstances" arise? What are extraordinary circumstances? Would Republicans ever accept such circumstances apply to any of their nominees?

Most of Bush's judges are getting in anyway. This way, the Republicans both humble the Democrats and avoid the firestorm from invoking the nuclear option. We haven't gained anything.

If you think the nuclear option would have ended the two-party system, you haven't been paying attention. The Democratic capitulation for the war, for bankruptcy "reform" and everything else is where the two-party system died. The majority of our party is now a bunch of Republican-lites, all too eager to show just how patriotic they are. The furor over the judges was their chance to show some backbone and instead they retreated from confrontation.

[mr715]

55. Tell me

What would happen if there was no compromise.

We would have NO filibuster and no recourse. And we would have perceived as having lost the battle.

Now we can still filibuster.

If Frist tries to use the nuclear option, there will be more pressure on him


Set. Match.


The democrats are doing spectacularly.

[JackDragna]

56. We have the filibuster in name only.

When a party agrees to only use something that has been congressional perrogative since virtually the beginning of the government in limited situations, it might as well not exist. You are expressing the essential difference between the Democratic Party and Republican Party right now. The Democratic Party is interested in maudlin compromise, in protecting the last vestiges of power they have left in the federal government. The Republicans are interested in getting everything they can. A deal like this would never be accepted if the Republican party did not get the vast majority of what it desired.

We CAN still filibuster, but as DeWine said, the Republicans can still break out the "constitutional option" if they feel Democrats are filibustering unfairly. We have gained nothing, except to allow some of the most draconian, backwards people ever nominated to circuit courts take the bench. We could have filibustered Bush's nominees, but instead we turn back in the spirit of compromise.

Set, match, indeed. The Democrats are an utter, complete failure.

[BigBearJohn]

39. Good technique

[Obviousman]

43. oh man, i was so ready to blast you

lol

[Adelante]

44. Love Harry

Remarks by Senator Harry Reid

“The Use of Power: An Agenda for Reform”

National Press Club
Washington, DC
Thursday, May 26, 2005

-snip-

Americans want us to bring people together, to focus on what we owe to one another, and the responsibilities we share.

And Americans want their agenda – their jobs, their health care, their security – to get back on the front burners of the nation’s agenda.

Americans are coming to realize this Republican Congress is out of touch with the real problems of working families and that the agenda the Republicans are advancing is at odds with what people in this country really care about.

We Democrats have something better to offer. A reform agenda that will cleanse Washington…give power to the people – not special interests…and make sure that everyday Americans and their concerns get back on the Congressional calendar.

Strengthening our national defense. Rebuilding our economy. Providing families with affordable health care. Making America energy independent. Securing our retirement. That’s our agenda. That’s America’s agenda. But the Republican Congress has put all this and more on hold. I hope that now we can finally turn to the people's business.

-snip-

http://reid.senate.gov/record2.cfm?id=238272

[mzmolly]

46. You sound like many of the posters here.

;)

I though you'z serious.

[ElectroPrincess]

47. Naw, because those that counter the Democratic Leadership in the

Senate are obviously traitors and should be made fun of by starting a thread. You know? To show how centrist and self-righteous we all are as compared to most of the "others" at DU. :sarcasm:

No, I'm imperfect, in that, I love my Country more than any political party and when I see misbehavior, I'm going to comment. Guess I'm weird that way? Well, NO, I'm just a mainstream, run of the mill Independent and/or Democrat.

Heil "Freedom of Speech" and "Questioning Unbridled Authority" :P

[applegrove]

50. I hope that Harry inspires like people to run.

[mvd]

58. He's been better than Daschle

As he's done more with the little he has. The compromise was a little success technically, but I think the mood it set - with Bush being vulnerable to the "moderate" Repukes - is important. I'll give Reid a B+ so far (bankruptcy bill vote set him back a bit.) If he can stop Bolton and another bad judge or two, he'll go to at least an A.

[Ksec]

59. Reid is proving himself quite well

I had questions but hes answered them all and then some. I thought he might be weak, boy was I wrong.