Time For Nancy Pelosi And Harry Reid To Go

[Purveyor]

In politics, there’s nothing harder than realizing that it’s time to go.

People who have made their careers as Beltway politicians start to think they’ve become indispensable to Washington, when in fact it’s Washington that has become indispensable to them. And so they can’t or won’t recognize when the moment has come to move on to other things.

For Democrats Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, that moment has arrived. With the Democrats’ midterm losses, the two 74-year-olds should announce that when this session of Congress ends, they will relinquish their roles as leaders of their respective Democratic caucuses.

It’s not a matter of chronological age alone, mind you. One can certainly be an effective leader in his or her 70s. Look at Jerry Brown. Elected governor again at 72 to a job he had held for eight years as a young man, Brown — who just won a (second) second term at 76 — has proved to be an active and able force in California. He reminds one a little of William Gladstone, England’s “old man in a hurry,” whose last stint as British premier ended when he was 84.

But let’s be honest. Physical age is, and should be, one consideration. Political age is another. Both Reid and Pelosi are tired faces, stale voices, entrenched presences in Washington.

more...

http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2014/11/11/time-for-nancy-pelosi-and-harry-reid/qHRxXc3pMsuhwqifD9Y3rJ/story.html

[gordianot]

1. There needs to be new faces and at least some ideas.

[RoverSuswade]

2. Alan Grayson for House Minority Leader

and Al Franken for Senate Leader.

[cascadiance]

4. Jeff Merkley for Senate Minority Leader!

He had the right idea on reforming the filibuster that Reid kept from happening (and kept us from passing much legislation that could have been helpful). Putting him in charge will help us make sure that the people's work gets done, not the Third Way's!

[bananas]

3. Fuck no - and why are you quoting an anti-union asshole?

http://massbuildingtrades.org/boston-globe,-scot-lehigh-reveal-true-anti-union-colors-election-coverage

Boston Media, Scot Lehigh Reveal Anti-Union Bias in Election Coverage

Last week, The Boston Globe published a provocative Scot Lehigh column, “Unions Need To Retire Tired Tropes,” in which he criticizes unions for objecting to the way they are portrayed in the media. He called the article his “post election thoughts on silly rhetoric.”

<snip>

Cynically, Lehigh then challenged me to show examples of the union bashing he and other members of the Boston media have made famous. The Globe itself published a column by Joan Vennocchi -- “Why The Union Bashing?” [10/17/13] -- which highlights these types of attacks, but that is not what I was referring to.

While The Boston Herald has the integrity to attack labor without hiding its disdain for workers and their unions, the attacks in the Globe and other media outlets were more indirect, which in a way is more sinister. The argument goes like this: “We don’t hate unions, but here is a list of why they’re terrible and responsible for all our problems.” They set up a straw man, knocked it down and tried to tie it around Walsh’s neck like a millstone.

Walsh’s union career is fair game for journalists, no question. What isn't fair (or responsible) is the way the media attempted to turn a well-rounded candidate like Walsh into a one-dimensional puppet defined by a single issue. The same can be said of their treatment of John Connolly's education focus. The difference is that one (labor) was framed as a negative while the other (education) was framed as a positive.

It's ridiculous for Lehigh to suggest that unions are forbidden from calling these obvious biases into question.

<snip>