February 11, 2005
CAN'T HARRY FIGHT FOR HIMSELF?:
Democrats Go on Offense to Defend Reid (Charles Babington and Brian Faler, February 11, 2005, Washington Post)
Senate Democrats watched in dismay last autumn as their longtime leader, Thomas A. Daschle, fell to steady attacks by national Republican and conservative groups. Yesterday they said they won't let it happen to Daschle's successor, Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.).Each of Reid's 43 Democratic colleagues, plus a Democratic-leaning independent, signed a letter to President Bush, urging him to halt the "counter-productive attacks" against Reid by the Republican National Committee and the National Republican Senatorial Committee. Top Democrats released the letter at a Capitol news conference, in which they fired back at the GOP for a fourth straight day.
The problem isn't the attacks themselves but that they are indeed productive. No one has faced fiercer partisan criticism over the last few years than Tom DeLay, but because Democrats misapprehend the political climate they've been ineffective. Tell people what Senator Reid believes and they'll disapprove. Tell them what Congressman DeLay believes and they support him. Posted by Orrin Judd at February 11, 2005 11:40 AM
Each and every day Reid looks more and more like the Duke of Plaza-Toro and less like the partisan alley-fighter he was advertised to be.
Posted by: Bart at February 11, 2005 11:49 AMIf Reid doesn't want the criticism, he had no business running for the position in the first place, though his more enfeebled look on TV could prove a bit of an asset, if he comes across as an object of pity for the beating he's taking from the mean Republican National Committee. (Daschele, though perpetually deeply disappointed, never had that I'm-going-to-keel-over-any-day-now look Harry displays).
DeLay has benefitted from the GOP's control of both the White House and both houses of Congess, since it allows him to limit his public presence and let others who come across better on TV to be the public image of the party. With the Democrats, Reid has to be the public face of the party, unless he wants to default to the visually scary Nancy Pelosi or the rhetorically scary Howard Dean, and he's going to have to live with what that entails.
Posted by: John at February 11, 2005 12:27 PMHarry's come-on was that he would be less confrontational than Tom. Then the caucus decides to full tilt and fight over everything -- Bush's election, Rice, Gonzales, etc. Harry doesn't want to be counter attacked. Aww, poor baby.
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at February 11, 2005 12:56 PMpeople who talk tough -- aren't. reid and kerry are cut from the same wimpy cloth
Posted by: cjm at February 11, 2005 1:07 PMIf you read the 6-23-03 story on Reid in the L.A. Times, you will find that he's a gangster in good standing in Vegas and not the Mr Peepers he appears.
Posted by: ed at February 11, 2005 1:26 PMI lived in Nevada for most of this guy's career and never really figured out what he stood for. He has always struck me as wimpy cypher. He seems to try to take enough positions from the right to get elected in a red state, but I have never felt he actually believed anything he said. He could be some crazy Clinton family uncle that they have kept hidden away out of shame.
Posted by: Pat H at February 11, 2005 1:26 PMThey thought Reid had the street cred to win over the moderates.
He doesn't.
Posted by: Sandy P at February 11, 2005 1:30 PMWeak Reid.
Posted by: Luciferous at February 11, 2005 2:02 PM