Is Harry Reid a silly old man?

[UCmeNdc]

Is he a naive, silly old man that that just bought some swamp land in Florida from the GOP?

[JDPriestly]

1. Yes.

[condoleeza]

2. Yeah, he is, he needs to go bye bye and just retire n/t

[MrSlayer]

3. No, that's laughable.

He's doing the bidding of his masters. He's not naive or silly or senile or stupid. He did exactly as he wanted to do.

We need to stop this charade. There are a few good ones, very few, but nearly the whole of the government is bought and owned. Yes, "our side" too.

We don't have a side.

[UCmeNdc]

4. Mitch McConnell and Harry Reid did make a deal

Why hasn't any media made any on the record interviews with Mitch McConnell about this deal?

[Samantha]

22. That is what I thought all along

I think in order to get the GOP to back off from the fiscal cliff threats, McConnell demanded payment via not compromising the filibuster as is. And Harry had no choice but to agree. He is graciously taking the flack for this so President Obama does not have to. That is just my personal thoughts on the matter.

In Washington, DC politicians to have to give something in order to get something, and the GOP did not back down on its fiscal cliff threats FOR FREE.

Sam

[blkmusclmachine]

6. DEMs use GOP instransience as cover to enact right-of-center agenda.

[Myrina]

17. ^ for the win

Bingo!

[graham4anything]

5. No. Harry knows how the game is played, and how TO play the game

with the dems NOT assured of holding the senate, 10 steps later, this will be seen and Harry at that time will again be called a genius.

The question I always ask in threads like this-
why are these type (anti-democratic candidate thread) always started by someone with under 1000 posts? and almost always anti-democratic party?

leading to multiple both party are the same responses

matters little in my answer as my answer is a resounding NO to the rude question

BTW, what does age have to do with this?
and also, why the slur on Florida, where many GREAT democratic voters live and work hard.

In fact, there are MORE democratic voters in Florida, than there are republicantealibertarian ones.

So why slur age and Florida. Kinda is insulting to so many people.

IMHO

[MADem]

7. +1,000 !!!!

I agree with everything you've said, and I also think the ageist sentiments in this OP are hurtful, disruptive and make DU suck.

This OP is uncivil and doesn't contribute to good discussion. The poster should consider deleting this train wreck of a thread.

[former9thward]

20. If the Republicans took the Senate ...

What is to stop them from changing the rules? Nothing. This agreement is good for this session of the Senate (two years) and that is it.

[graham4anything]

21. You can't knock down all the dominoes, until they are all standing in place

I stick by my prediction that one of the bad 4 on the court will retire during the term of the 44th president, and so will Kennedy.

Until that change in the court comes

and the odds of the repubs ever getting 60 are slim and none. But the odds of them NOT getting 51 are not something I would lay my money down on at this time.
2014 is dicey.
2016 is easier.
The two years between 14 and 16 are needed for many things.

one can't worry about them changing the rules, as that is out of our hands
one can worry about what would happen if they only needed 51 for everything

slow and steady wins the race

again, people are wanting instant 100% gratification and that logic gets nothing.

because using the logic you are using, nothing stops them from just overturning everything if they gain control anyhow.

But one needs to dot every I, cross every T and vote for WHOMEVER the democratic party puts up, or that that will caucus with them.
In every district and every state.
Then they won't come back,

then one gets another 10%, and another, and another and another.

[treestar]

8. No

I think when we don't get what we want, we find someone to blame. But the votes have to be there for anything. And I don't think Senators can be forced to vote one way or the other. People are always blaming Harry as if he should have the power of blackmail over other Senators.

[BlueMTexpat]

9. No.

But this is certainly a silly post.

Harry knows how to play the game.

[stultusporcos]

10. Harry is just another whore of the 1%, he has given the finger to the people

he might as well be in the GOP now.

Just another POS Corporate Whore that is in the Democratic Party prentending to represent the people.

[dmosh42]

11. Harry is just the choice of the senate Dems to be their leader, and he's doing their bidding.....

Any watching of CSpan in the senate, listening to the lofty speeches, and then reading actual voting records will have anyone coming away with the idea that these are not people driven by convictions. Most are a slimy bunch who will bend in any direction, and who follow the cash flow in their decisions on how to vote. The only group that is lower in the cesspool are the Republicans.

[Kablooie]

12. No. But he is the proud new owner of the Brooklyn Bridge.

[CBHagman]

13. I'm getting damned sick of DUers disparaging people by age.

There's no virtue in being born one year or another. Creativity is not attached to one group and not another.

And like it or not, with experience can come wisdom.

So discuss the merits or lack of merit of Reid's actions, but leave age out of this, please. I think most of us here at DU would listen to a Bernie Sanders or a Tom Harkin...and without making cheap shots at his age.

And remember that Harry Truman is considered a late bloomer, politically speaking.

[AverageMe]

14. Not a silly old man, but a wise old man

We live in a real world, a world where the Republicans may very well control the House until 2020, win the race for president in 2016 (eight years of Democratic president) and have fewer Senate seats up for re-election in 2014 then the Democrats. The Democratic leaders knew they may very well need the filibuster in four years to protect the gains that have been made under Obama.

[Paladin]

15. Worse: He's An Ineffective Old Man.

He and Pelosi couldn't rubber-stamp Dubya's edicts fast enough, and our country will be paying for it for generations to come.

[Proud Public Servant]

16. LBJ was the exception, not the rule

Historically, the Dems in the Senate have not chosen strong partisans or transformative figures as their majority leaders. Does anyone imagine that Tom Daschele would have come out with more than Harry? Or George Mitchell? Do you think Robert Byrd would even have tried? I've never been a fan of Harry Reid, but he's not a unique problem; he's a symptom of the gentility of the Senate (note that neither Ted Kennedy nor Hubert Humphrey -- our greatest postwar senators, along with LBJ -- were ever elected majority leader).

[Third Doctor]

18. I bet once the Repubs take back the senate

they will enact a similar plan that the Dems just backed away from or they will do away with the Filibuster all together. They don't seem to have a problem with party unity on the floor. So Reid and the Dems that would not vote for this change has hamstrung a policy that they just ran on for whatever reason and really hurt Obama's agenda. From a voter/supporter stand point what's the point in fighting to keep a Dem President and to keep a majority in the senate when they will give effective power to the minority?



We had two Senators from California whose seats are not in danger that would not support reform. Why? It's because they are being lobbied by the same people that rule the Republicans. I'm not buying this possible none existant opportunity to fillibuster as a reason not to act on policy. A certain amount of Dems don't want to enact the policies their platform supported and we know why right?


Oh and on Reid? I don't think he is fully to blame on this but as leader he does share some responsibilty. He got up and madea public statement about reform and then either failed to or didn't want to get the votes for it. Another gentlemen's agreement with the turtle? That same turtle just boasted about how he beat the liberals so that was a real great deal I'm sure.

[stultusporcos]

19. The Moderate and Conservatives Dems and the Republicans have a common

enemy, Liberal and Progressives.

That is what this was all about those that back corporations over people will always unite against those that support the people.

Regardless of party.