Majority Leader Reid Blasts WaPost Editors: 'Eager cheerleaders for the Bush administration'

[bigtree]

Thursday, July 26, 2007; Page A20

The Senate on Iraq: No 'Phony Debate'

On reading the July 21 editorial "The Phony Debate," it became clear why The Post's editorial writers have been such eager cheerleaders for the Bush administration's flawed Iraq policies -- the two share the same disregard for the facts en route to drawing dubious conclusions.

The editorial was an inaccurate commentary on the nature of the Senate debate, the reality in Iraq and the president's stubborn adherence to failed policies.

Your editorial wrongly asserted that "a large majority of senators from both parties favor a shift in the U.S. mission." While a majority of the Senate voted again last week for a plan that would keep U.S. forces in Iraq for counterterrorism and troop protection and launch a diplomatic effort to help stabilize the region, Democrats were joined by only a handful of courageous Republicans -- far from a majority of Republicans and not enough to break the Republican leadership's filibuster. And if the president truly supports changing course, as your editorial implied, he needs to do much more than tell us "it's a position I'd like to see us in" -- he must drop his irresponsible veto threats and tell Republican leaders to stop blocking votes on proposals to carry out this change.

Finally, it was disingenuous to assert that Democrats are using Iraq to stir voters' passions; the American people are sufficiently disappointed on their own. Three-quarters of Americans recognize that the war is going badly, three out of five support further funding only if it includes a timetable for transitioning the mission, and nearly all expect their president to work with Congress to do something to change course.

HARRY REID

U.S. Senator (D-Nev.)

Washington


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/25/AR2007072502086_pf.html

[EFerrari]

1. Go, Harry!

K&R

[senseandsensibility]

2. kick

I'm glad he's fighting back.

[ShortnFiery]

3. Well, that's a waste of energy. BTW is Harry Reid's wife still and active Lobbyist?

If so, why is he our Majority Leader?

[bigtree]

5. He's our Majority Leader because our Democratic caucus elected him

along with the majority of our Democrats in the House.

give 'em hell Harry!

[ShortnFiery]

12. Because he does NOT fight when it counts, IMO, Harry Reid needs to NOT be our Majority Leader. nt

[rpannier]

15. Unfortunately for you

The entire Democratic Senate caucus, including Sens Feingold, Boxer, Leahy, etal disagree with you.

[pscot]

6. Put a sock in it

Ried is doing the best he can with a razor-thin majority. You need to learn to distinguish your friends from the enemy.

[ShortnFiery]

11. Oh stop with the hyperbole, Reid's known for nepotism, especially in Nevada.

And his wife should not have special privileges to Lobby our US Congress just because ole' Harry was able to pull strings to have existing lobbyists "Grandfathered."

Harry Reid needs to be unseated because he's IMO, both gutless and useless when it counts. :thumbsdown:

[Kagemusha]

7. Even if you think he's a rotten majority leader

this is not a waste of energy. And frankly, I'm no fan of his. But this, calling out a hideously inaccurate editorial, is proper behavior.

[ShortnFiery]

13. Oh so all this "sound and furry" aimed toward one M$N Newspaper's Editoral Board will change things.

Please don't insult our intelligence. :shrug:

[Kagemusha]

14. Did I claim it will change things? Did I? No, I did not.

I said it was the right thing to do. If for no other reason, than to be seen to do it by us here. That's showing some leadership.

Leadership he has been woefully lacking at many other times during his tenure for which I, for one, haven't been shy about criticizing. But I won't sneer when he does something right, even if it's a drop in the bucket.

[blondeatlast]

20. Your opinion isn't shared by the Demoicrats in the Senate and appears to be in the distinct

minority here.

If you've got nothing better to do, tilting at windmills is a good hobby, so have at it.

[babylonsister]

4. Great! Harry Reid callling a paper like the WP out? Pretty perfect! nt

[bleever]

8. Exactly. nt

[DeSwiss]

9. He should've ended his letter with a....

....PS: cancel my subscription.



K&R

[Lasher]

10. Well done!

I wonder what counter the WaPo could possibly have to that?

[John Q. Citizen]

16. All right Harry! More hints at using the power of the purse:

"....three out of five support further funding only if it includes a timetable for transitioning the mission,..."

I hope he insists on this.

[SpiralHawk]

17. Washington Post is a republicon propaganda outlet

No integrity, no honor -- as lame and anti-American as the Washington Times.

[annabanana]

18. It's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't around here isn't it.

While there is ALWAYS more that he could do, I am glad that he is not just "letting it slide" as has been the habit in the past.

[Warren Stupidity]

19. "a timetable for transitioning the mission"?

The gobbledy-gook and double-speak from the Democratic wing of the War Party continues unabated. We are once again being used.

[Toots]

21. What was it that Clinton said about picking fights with those that buy ink by the barrels.

Records have to be set straight though and I hope Reid's letter gets printed.

[bigtree]

22. kick

:kick:

[Cha]

23. Fookin' Aye, Harry!

The sooner we get rid of corporatemediawhores for our noise the better and faster our country will begin to HEAL.