Tonight's 'Daily Show' reminded me just how low my standards have become.

[leftist.]

Seeing John's footage of Reid et al (and to be fair, I really DON'T like Harry Reid) on the floor of the Senate reading straight from pieces of paper reminded me that WOW I really would like to see a liberal - ANY liberal - stand up and speak from the heart. To me it would mean SO MUCH, and it would sever this idea I have that any member of Congress speaking is just saying what they think "their" people want to hear so as to fill their time and get on with other things. I'm sure that's being naive about modern day politics but man I wish I could watch just one person talk to us all without constantly stopping and looking down at fully prepared statements.

It takes me back to before the 2004 Presidential Election when all I really wanted at that point was a representative of the country I live in NOT handing out cowboy hats to foreign leaders.

[babylonsister]

1. Next!

:popcorn:

[Tarheel_Dem]

2. Is this an organized attack on Sen. Reid?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=3387100

[leftist.]

5. lol no, but I see your point.

I don't like Harry Reid and I haven't tried to hide that ... but I'm not part of any attack on him other than sitting here tonight drinking and thinking man I wish someone else were in charge in the Senate.

:)

[zalinda]

6. You know, you might be on to something

I just commented on someone's rant on the all night session as bull shit, and calling for third party candidates. Yes, he had a low post count. Something tells me that there's fear in the air.

zalinda

[leftist.]

12. Hey don't pick on the low post counts.

We are just quiet is all :) I've been reading DU on a daily basis since October, 2001 (and can prove it if need be) and posting since Fahrenheit 9/11.

[napi21]

3. I hear ya, but don't judge HArry by that. That's the way

fillabusters are done. LONG AGO when a fillabuster meant that that ONE speaker would speak for MANY HOURS, they used to read recipes, books, anything that would keep them talking!

I would like a much more agressive leader than Harry too, but he comes up with some pretty good things too.

[leftist.]

10. I hear you.

I'm hard on him, I know. I really DON'T like the guy and I wish it were someone else. I didn't mean to turn this into Reid-bashing; I really wanted to touch on how politicians rely on words someone else wrote for them nowadays. But I may have messed it up.

Thank for your post none-the-less :)

[Bjornsdotter]

17. Like Feingold?

He would be my choice, instead of Reid.

Cheers

[leftist.]

20. I've said previously that I'd like it to be Richard Durbin.

Feingold would work IMO as well. Anyone but Reid. I don't know what it is about him that gets at me so much lol.

[bigtree]

4. Reid DID speak from the heart, as he has MANY times before

you need to get your news from somewhere other than a comedy show.

The points he made were significant as he blended his comments with the business of asking for unanimous consent for a vote on the amendments he had in front of him and outlined the other Democratic efforts which had been obstructed. Stewart's ridicule didn't have any concern with all of that, but I think it's a mistake to dwell on theatrics and posturing to the disregard of substance.



July 18, 2007

Washington, D.C.—Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid spoke on the floor of the U.S. Senate today after Republicans refused to allow an up-or-down vote on the Levin-Reed amendment to the Defense Authorization bill, which would have reduced U.S. combat forces in Iraq by transitioning the mission away from policing an Iraq civil war to limited counter-terror, training and force protection operations.

After Republicans signaled that they would block all efforts to change course in Iraq, Reid temporarily lay the bill aside and asked for consent to move to the Homeland Security Appropriations bill. However, continuing their obstructionist tactics, Republicans again blocked Democratic efforts to begin debate on this bill and make America more secure. Following are Reid’s remarks as prepared for delivery:



“This has been a long week and it is only Wednesday. We have now been in session continuously for two days. On Monday I submitted a simple request for consent to proceed to an up-or-down vote on the Levin-Reed Amendment to the Defense Authorization bill. As I have stated, this amendment provides a clear, binding and responsible path to change the U.S. mission and reduce our combat presence in Iraq. It honors the sacrifices of our troops, reflects the will of the American people, and lets us rebuild and refocus our military on the growing threats we face throughout the world.

“Regrettably, Republicans chose to block this amendment. They chose to deny the American people an up-or-down vote on a bipartisan amendment. They chose to continue protecting their President instead of our troops – no matter the cost to our country. In contrast, my Democratic colleagues came to the floor throughout the night to make our case – and I am proud of what they have said and done.

“We have spent two days showing America that we will not back down, that we will keep fighting, that if President Bush and his allies in Congress refuse to budge, we will continue to show them the way. How could we possibly shrink from this fight? As we speak, many of our 160,000 men and women serving in Iraq are wrapping up another day of war on foreign sands. For them it was yet another day caught in an intractable civil war – Sunni versus Shia, Shia versus Sunni, Shia versus Shia, Sunni versus Sunni – with our troops caught in the crossfire.

“The high temperature today in Baghdad was about 115 degrees, and our troops were wearing about 100 pounds of equipment. This was the 1,583rd day of this war. They have served us each and every day with courage despite being taken to war falsely, prematurely and recklessly. They have served us each and every day with courage despite a President who still lacks a plan for success. They have served us each and every day with courage despite too many here in Congress who remain unwilling to change course.

“Those 160,000 troops deserve more. They and all Americans deserve a debate and votes on legislation that will finally provide them the strategy to honor their great sacrifices. As we have just seen, a bipartisan majority of the Senate supports the Levin-Reed amendment. A bipartisan majority of the Senate supports a binding new policy that would responsibly bring the war to an end so that we can return our focus and resources to the real threats and challenges our country faces.

“Yet a Republican minority blocked a vote on the bipartisan amendment that would deliver that new course and chose to stand behind the President and his tragic failure. So, I am filled today with a mixture of pride and regret. Pride for my colleagues – Democrats and Republicans – who have risen to this crucial cause and given the American people the debate they deserve. Yet regret for my colleagues who have blocked the will of the people and the majority of the Congress.

“I believe the will of the people must be heeded and I believe this critical vote must proceed. In an effort to make progress on this issue and this bill, I will therefore request unanimous consent to move to a vote on the four Iraq amendments to the Defense Authorization bill outlined yesterday morning in my letter to Senator McConnell. My consent request is eminently fair. It would provide up-or-down – yes or no – votes on three other bipartisan Iraq amendments in exchange for the same on the Levin-Reed amendment. Under my proposal we would vote on these Iraq amendments: (1) Levin/Reed, (2) Lugar/Warner, (3) Salazar/Alexander, (4) Nelson/Collins. In addition, I also indicated in my letter I am prepared to agree to up-or-down votes on other amendments as well.

“I am disappointed to see that Republicans have once again chosen obstruction over progress. I understand that Senate rules allow for the minority to filibuster the will of the majority, but that is not the tradition on this bill and it should not be the path that is chosen given the stakes involved. But because Republicans continue to block votes on important amendments to the Defense Authorization bill, we can make no further progress on Iraq and this bill at this time.

“Progress is also blocked by two other troubling realities:

* More than 300 amendments have been filed and we have not been able to get a finite list of amendments for consideration.
* Majority and minority staff of the Armed Services Committee have been unable to work in a bipartisan manner to clear large numbers of routine amendments due to the objections of one or two members on the other side of the aisle. The Chairman and ranking member have been able to clear amendments in this fashion for as long as I can remember. But not this year and not with this handful of dedicated obstructionists.

“For these reasons, I have temporarily laid aside the Defense Authorization bill and have entered a motion to reconsider. But let me be clear to my Republican colleagues – I emphasize the word “temporarily.” We will do everything in our power to change course in Iraq. We will do everything in our power to complete consideration of a Defense Authorization bill. We must do both. And just to remind my Republican colleagues – even if this bill had passed yesterday, its provisions would not take effect until October. So we will come back to this bill as soon as it is clear we can make real progress. To that end, I have asked the Democratic Whip and Democratic Manager of the bill to sit down with their counterparts to work on a process to address all outstanding issues related to this bill so the Senate can return to it as soon as possible.

“In the meantime, we will continue to work with our Republican colleagues who are saying the right things on Iraq but aren’t yet committed to voting the right way. We will get there. As W.E. Gladstone once said, “You cannot fight against the future. Time is on our side.” In this case, time and the American people are on our side. The Levin-Reed amendment would have allowed us to rebuild our badly overburdened military and return our focus to the real security threats posed by Al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations. As the new National Intelligence Estimate makes clear, these growing threats demand our attention.

“President Bush likes to say that we must fight the terrorists in Iraq so that we do not have to fight them here at home. But we all know that there was no Al Qaeda force in Iraq prior to the war. And as the President’s own intelligence experts admit, the war has only stoked the flames of terrorists and made us more vulnerable to attack. These experts concluded in the National Intelligence Estimate that the threat to our homeland is growing as al Qaeda has regenerated its capacity to launch attacks.


“At the risk of sounding like a broken record, this is extraordinarily discouraging. First they prevented us from acting on the 9/11 Commission’s recommendations. Then on changing the course in Iraq. And now this. We have all seen and heard the reports that our intelligence community has concluded Al Qaeda strength has grown to its 9/11 levels and the Homeland Security Secretary’s statement that he had a ‘gut feeling’ we were at greater risk to be attacked this summer by terrorists. In spite of all of this, we have just seen the latest example of Republican obstruction to slow or prevent Senate consideration of bipartisan legislation that would make America more secure.


http://democrats.senate.gov/newsroom/record.cfm?id=279224&

[leftist.]

8. Ouch. Don't be rude.

No one here gets all their news from a comedy show. Notice that I'm actually here at DU :)

I watched what I could find of Reid online, so admittedly I did not see every single word he said. What I did see was a lot of him reading from a piece of paper, as all the representatives do. Not just glancing down to find a place, but straight up reading from a piece of paper.

I also don't like Reid, but I don't want this to be Reid-specific. They were all doing it.

[blogslut]

7. You watch too many movies

You don't think it's possible to speak from the heart while using notes? Have you ever spoken before the public?

[leftist.]

9. Yes, I do it in my line of work. It's probably why I'm more critical than others ...

.. so I apologize if I sound extreme. You don't think it's becoming more prevalent in politics though, over the last 30 years? To speak straight from a piece of paper? I watch too much CSpan and all I see are old men staring at pieces of paper all day and all night.

[EFerrari]

11. I used notes for every class I taught -- not because I wanted to

cheat my students but because I was so busy, I wanted to make sure to remember to share what was important with them.

Speaking from the heart should, in the best case, be coordinated with speaking with your brain. These aren't mutually exclusive choices and they sometimes involve notes. :)

[leftist.]

14. I agree with you, I promise I do, and I think I even stated that notes were fine ...

However I can't be the only one watching speech after speech with these guys just staring at paper and barely looking up. That's not "just looking at notes". It's straight reading from paper.

[EFerrari]

15. I have called it "CSPAN Theater" and meant it. They're obviously playing

to the audience.

On the other hand, what the hell else can they do? lol

[blogslut]

13. I think the floor of the senate is a completely different venue

...than say, a pulpit or a classroom or a seminar. In my years on stage I memorized reams of lines. I improvised in many settings. I even taught classes and have given a good share of speeches. If I were a Senator, who has to speak on a kajillion different topics, all day, every day of the workweek, I'd want my damned notes and I would be thankful for my speech writers.

[leftist.]

16. You are probably right.

I didn't think I'd irritate so many people by saying that, in an effort to really retake the direction of this silly Iraq War, in a series of overnight speeches maybe someone could stand up and say something that at least comes across as meaningful rather than stand in front of a microphone and just read something off a piece of paper that someone wrote for them. That is part of (to me and to me only) what makes this whole "let's stay the night" show seem contrived.

And believe me I don't want it to be.

[EFerrari]

18. Kerry didn't read much. (I tried to stay up and listen but kept

drifting in and out.) He was pretty clear for someone whose thoughts sort of explode on him and get too complicated to articulate in a linear way. And he was obviously speaking from personal knowledge and out of a great deal of thought.

[blogslut]

19. Well, of course it was 'contrived'

It was planned. It was organized. Your logic escapes me.

You want from the heart with notes? Watch Mary Landrieu. She was stumbling. She was nervous. She even used props. But she gave one of the most amazing and inspiring speeches of the bunch:

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/07/18/thank-you-senator-landrieu/

[leftist.]

21. I watched your link and I agree with you :)

It was a pretty shoddy display.

[blogslut]

22. No, you don't agree with me

I think she was wonderful.

[leftist.]

23. OMG Sorry, I messed up.

So so sorry ... no sarcasm smiley at all, and I even edited it to put sarcasm in it!!! I blew that post completely. I do thank you for the link though :)

[blogslut]

24. I think some smileys are available

only to paying members.

Until you pay for a DU membership, I suppose you can delineate a sarcasm post thusly:

</sarcasm>

[leftist.]

25. Hehe, fair enough.

I've donated in the past, I promise! I did mess my post up though. In my (somewhat weak) defense, I did state in some other post somewhere that it was late in the morning and that I was drinking ... granted, that's a poor excuse, but I do enjoy a bit of a drink and some late night DU posting.

ps/apropos - thank you to the admins for the spell check feature :)

[countmyvote4real]

26. It’s the turn of the screw. And it’s slow because it’s the Senate.

Despite MSM reports to the contrary, Reid’s strategy finally converted the LIEberman succubus from Maine who is up for reelection next year in the fight of her life as a US Senator: Susan Collins. (You just know there are going to be some serious make up sessions there to repair that breach.) She will probably recant her vote, but either way she IS history as a Senator representing Maine. On the other hand, Olympia Snowe is not up for reelection next year and yet she managed to cross over before Collins. So, who would you toss?

Anyway, back to the issue at hand. The Democrats do not have an overwhelming majority in the Senate. And the rules of the Senate do provide great power to the minority. (I will be the first to say it’s sad and regrettable that the Democratic minority did not do all in their power as a minority to block the SCOTUS nominations of Roberts and Alito.)

I was not up all night waiting to see the heartfelt speeches. I wanted to be, but they weren’t happening when I was awake. I did get to see a very factual and logical presentation from Senator Menendez (NJ-D). It made perfect sense to me. I don’t recall if he read from notes. I was still mesmerized by his facts and logic.

You must understand that the modern day Republican has much more allegiance to their party than their country. So, if Reid managed to knock off only one at this stage when MSM reports that it will ultimately come down in September and thereafter, then he managed to have a modestly successful “stunt.”

We know who the real obstructionists are. Dems did not play that game as deftly as they should have when they were the minority party. It’s all in the history books for those that research or vote on facts. This was a victory as far as I can tell.

[leftist.]

27. Good post! You made me take a second look at it.

Thank you for taking the time to reply. I hadn't considered the fact that so many Senators in vulnerable positions are up for re-election in 2008, that Democrats do stand to hold a significant majourity afterward (provided they don't mess it up, hope hope), and that - my opinion of Reid and whether I thought this was a silly stunt or not aside - Reid may have actually helped the party even more with respect to 2008 by putting votes on the record.

Thank you again for the post :)