In Defense of Harry Reid ... at DU? You've got to be kidding.

[Buzz Clik]

Reid has been the target of DU ire since he became Senater Majority Leader for his "lack of leadership". He actually says something that shows lack of leadership, and we're defending him?

Well, okay.

[KharmaTrain]

1. The Enemy Of My Enemy Is My Friend...

Rachel nailed it last night when she differentiated between Reid's stupid remarks (of over a year ago...and it's only news now??) and Lott. She said accurately that Lott's statements represented racism (saying that segregation would have made the nation better) vs. Reid whose remarks were racial...a big difference that the corporate media is willingly ignoring to create yet another "poutrage".

I don't think it defending Reid...and I've been very critical of him; hoping that someone challenges him for Majority Leader next year, but I have little tolerance for shitstains like Cornyn and Mikie Steele and the rest of the racist GOOPers trying to make hay out of this thing. It flies in the face of their corrupt party's outright racist policies. It's the usual hypocrisy along with a compliant corporate media that doesn't fact check, gladly lets spinners take things out of context and pushes the right wing talking points without even a thought.

[blondeatlast]

7. Sums it up nicely. I'm defending an unfair attack on Reid, not the man himself. Big diff. nt

[Buzz Clik]

11. Unfair? No, not at all. You just don't like the source of the criticism.

[blondeatlast]

15. I have been a pretty solid Reid supporter all along.

I don't care for hypocrisy.

I'm glad that even the virulent anti-Reid DU contigent can see through the media circus and stupid political gamesmanship this dust-up is.

[Buzz Clik]

It would be nice if this marked a turning point:

Let's start criticizing Reid for the things he does that deserve criticism, and let's ignore the rest.

[blondeatlast]

17. Wow--you're quick. Sorry, just edited my post. nt

[Buzz Clik]

19. Sorry. I'm trying to catch up before I actually start working. (Curse the thought!)

We seem to agree...

[Buzz Clik]

9. Trust me -- I don't think Reid's remarks even begin to approach the idiots on the right.

I just find it funny that we attack Reid endlessly until he actually does something incredibly stupid.

[trumad]

2. Well--- over this I will not join the Right Wingers shouting for his ouster...

I find it hilarious how they feign outrage over supposed racism.

[pnwmom]

6. We finally agree on something. n/t

[Buzz Clik]

10. Okay, whatever. We want his ouster for not ... being ... Democrat enough? I don't even know.

:shrug:

[elocs]

3. So, in this specific circumstance you really cannot understand how DU would support him?

I don't believe it is really difficult to ken.

[Buzz Clik]

12. I think Reid should be supported on this, especially considering the degree of the attack.

My amusement is that DU -- famed for hating Reid 24/7 -- suddenly is shocked that the media are running with this.

[cali]

4. It's not rocket science. He's being unfairly attacked in a slimy way from the pukes

the right thing to do is to defend him against the lies. Some of us are able to make distinctions.

[Captain Hilts]

5. Stop being logical. nt

[Buzz Clik]

13. He most certainly is NOT being unfairly attacked. Reid's comments were insensitive at the very best.

My problem with the right's attack on Reid is the rank hypocrisy: they defend their hideous bigot endlessly because they are simply stating the truth, but Reid should be bounced for saying something far less disgusting.

I also have a problem with DU and Democrats in general tearing into Trent Lott for similar comments and then defending Reid -- it's still hypocrisy when we do it.

[cali]

16. you have to be, uh, not too sharp to think that the comments made by Lott and Reid were similar.

Let me explain it in really simple terms:

Lott was, by saying that Thurmond would have made A good President, endorsing the extreme racism that Thurmond represented. And make no mistake, it was extreme. Reid was explaining why Obama had a chance with white voters. The reason is rooted in racism, but that does NOT make Reid a racist anymore than Biden is a racist for his similar comments.

[Buzz Clik]

18. Lott uttered no racist comments at Thurmond's birthday party. His comments were racist by inference.

Reid's comments were similarly indirect, perhaps even more direct.

Those who criticized Reid for lack of leadership but now defend this poorly conceived comment are being inconsistent. Those who criticized Lott but defend Reid are being hypocritical. It's that simple.

[cali]

21. no, not at all. shame you can't make the obvious distinction.

Sandy Banks had a really good piece explaining it in yesterday's LA Times. I suggest you read that.

[90-percent]

8. my comment

The Republican attack on Reid is unfair, untrue and unjust. Why wouldn't everyone on DU support him in this case? Do we have people here that are against fairness?

A good thing about this is that it appears that Harry by and large is a decent man, albeit aggravating in his Senate Majority role.

-90% Jimmy

[Buzz Clik]

14. The degree of the attack is unfair, especially coming from the right.

But, it's ridiculous to endlessly attack Reid for not being insanely liberal enough, and then to defend him breathlessly when he make a rude, knuckledragger-like comment that should offend the sensibilities of any liberal.

Hypocrisy. Plain and simple.

[customerserviceguy]

20. If Reid had indeed chosen different words

how would that make what he said any less stupid, or contemptuous of America? Do we, as an electorate, need an African-American to have lighter skin and a Harold Ford speaking voice to elect a black person as President?

What Harry said was as insulting to me as a Caucasian-American as it was to my brothers and sisters of color.

[hileeopnyn8d]

22. You may find it insulting

but enough studies have been done that prove what he was saying is correct.

[Buzz Clik]

25. William Shockley quoted studies that people of black African descent are intellectually inferior.

Was he being racist or scientifically accurate?

[Nye Bevan]

23. Some people here are still defending John Edwards

and what he did -risking Palin becoming VP because he couldn't keep his pants zipped up- was many times worse than Reid's ill-advised comments. Some DUers will reflexively defend any Democrat, against anything.

[pipi_k]

24. I don't particularly care for Harry Reid, but I don't think what he said was outrageous

Not in the least.

He was only stating an obvious fact...that if Barack Obama had been a tad bit darker and spoke like one of the plantation slaves in "Gone With The Wind", he would have been pretty much toast in the election, never mind the primaries.

And it seems to be mostly Republicans who are getting their panties in a twist over what Reid said, probably because it diverts the inner guilt they feel but won't acknowledge. Way easier to get pissed off at someone who unmasks the truth than to admit that truth even exists.

Kind of like what happened when Bill Cosby came out against some black parents who are fine with their kids talking and acting like living stereotypes of the "uneducated black". The parents didn't like that...he was only telling the truth, but it was easier for them to lash out at him than admit that they had either lost control of their own kids, or didn't care.