Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Harry Reid survives -- for now

1. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (Nev.) appears to have weathered the initial media storm caused by his admission that he had referred to President Obama as "light skinned" and lacking a "Negro dialect" in a conversation with reporters. Calls for Reid's resignation came solely from Republicans on Sunday including Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele, himself in considerable hot water over impolitic comments, and National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman John Cornyn (Texas). Democrats -- from the White House down -- rushed to Reid's defense, arguing that he had chosen his words poorly but that his record over a lifetime in public office made clear his commitment to civil rights. The story can now advance in only one of two ways: either there are more revelations of past controversial statements on race by Reid, which seems unlikely, or some high profile Democrat(s) breaks ranks to call for him to step aside. Reid spent the weekend working the phones to ensure that no member of his own party makes such a statement and undoubtedly will continue to do so in the next 48 hours or so. While Republicans spent the weekend comparing Reid to Trent Lott, the Mississippi Republican forced to step aside as majority leader in the wake of controversial comments on race in 2002, Lott was hung out to dry by his own party the White House and several of his colleagues who had ambitions of their own. Reid has avoided that fate to date and neither Sen. Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) nor Sen. Dick Durbin (Ill.) -- the two men likely to fight for the majority leader slot if and when Reid leaves -- seem at all interested in pushing the Nevada Democrat into a premature retirement.

2. The book where the revelation about Reid's comment appeared -- "Game Change" by Time magazine's Mark Halperin and New York magazine's John Heilemann -- is filled with other nuggets about the 2008 campaign sure to interest political junkies. Among them: 1) Prior to deciding to run for president in 2008, Obama huddled with retired Gen. Colin Powell, who ultimately endorsed his candidacy. In his conversation with Powell, Obama wondered why the general had decided not to run for president in 1996 ("It was pretty easy," said Powell. "I'm not a politician.") and sought his insight into how the issue of race might play out in the campaign. 2) Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman (I) was asked by Steve Schmidt, the manager of Sen. John McCain's presidential campaign, to pray with former Alaska governor Sarah Palin in hopes of setting her mind right amid the struggles of preparation for her vice presidential debate with then Sen. Joe Biden. Lieberman cited the teaching of Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik, telling Palin: "This is your moment to make it really count for something." 3) Jim Wilkinson, a longtime GOP operative, voted for Obama for president after McCain suspended his campaign in September to return to Washington to deal with the economic crisis. "It just wasn't what a serious person does," Wilkinson told the authors. 4) Obama, at entertainment mogul David Geffen's home for a fundraiser in February 2007, got a sneak peek at Maureen Dowd's New York Times column in which Geffen lambasted Hillary Clinton and insisted she couldn't win. "I hope it doesn't cause too much trouble," Geffen told Obama. "Trouble for whom," the then Illinois Senator joked.

3. As the White House plans to turn its attention full force to the economy and job creation this week, Richard Trumka, the head of the AFL-CIO, will deliver a speech in Washington today laying out the challenges before organized labor. "The voices of America's working women and men must be heard in Washington -- not the voices of bankers and speculators for whom it always seems to be the best of times, but the voices of those for whom the New Year brings pink slips and givebacks . . . the roll call of an economy that long ago stopped working for most of us," Trumka will say, according to excerpts of his strongly populist remarks obtained by the Fix. Trumka is expected to cast the 2010 midterms as a choice between "continuing the policies of the past or striking out on a new economic course for America." Unions, as one of the backbones of the Democratic base and the party's turnout operation, always play an influential role in elections but with segments of the ideological left growing disenchanted with the president and polls showing an intensity gap between the two parties' bases, organized labor may matter even more come November.

4. In 51 days, Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) will face off against Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R) in what is widely regarded as the pre-eminent primary in the country in 2010. If he wins that race, he may well pivot to run for president in 2012, according to a lengthy look at Perry by Texas Monthly's Paul Burka. "His travel schedule, speaking engagements, and television appearances in recent months give every indication that he and his team of advisers are looking beyond Texas to national politics," writes Burka. Perry's place in the race would be on the far ideological right; he has made states rights his signature issue and regularly floated the idea that Texas could secede from the union if the federal government continued on its current course. Perry was one of the earliest adopters among elected Republican officials of the tea party movement -- fully embracing it to the point where, if that loosely affiliated group did have a preferred candidate heading into 2012, Perry might be their guy. "The fact is that no Republican has so ably surfed the wave of populist anger that has swept through the party in the past year," Burka writes -- and he's right. (The only other contender for that distinction was South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford before he blew up his political career with the admission of an extramarital affair with an Argentine woman.) While rejecting Perry's politics has become a favorite parlor game in Washington, never forget the decidedly conservative, anti-government makeup of the people who choose the Republican presidential nominee every four years. And, remember that there is no clear favorite in the 2012 field or even a real sense on whether some of the major players -- former governors Sarah Palin and Mike Huckabee, former speaker of the House Newt Gingrich -- make the race at all. Fluidity rules and, given that, writing off Perry is a mistake. ALSO READ: Robert Draper's massive Perry profile from a last month in the New York Times magazine.

5. Isaac Baker, one of the stars in the operative world during the 2008 presidential campaign, has inked a deal with AKPD Message and Media, the firm started by White House senior adviser David Axelrod. After serving a stint as a national spokesman for Clinton's presidential bid, Baker joined Obama's general election campaign as communications director in the swing state of Ohio. Baker stayed in Ohio after the election, advising Lt. Gov. Lee Fisher who is running for the state's Senate seat. "Isaac has excelled as a spokesman and strategist in state and presidential politics," said John Del Cecato, one of AKPD's partners.

By Chris Cillizza  |  January 11, 2010; 6:15 AM ET
Categories:  Morning Fix  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Steele calls on Reid to resign
Next: Harry Reid, Massachusetts Senate Special and "Game Change"

Comments

"Of course, yopu have to consider just what happened BECAUSE of LBJ's work with the Republicans like Ev Dirksen to get the Civil Rights Bills Passed."

So 80% of the GOP was thrown out? And I see that correct minded men like Byrd have been tossed and are now Reps.

Posted by: Obaama | January 12, 2010 10:46 AM | Report abuse

Like I care if you buy it. Once again, our gracious host has asked us all to simply ignore / shame those who won't leave after being banned:

"A note on the banned commenters:

I have been banning people both by username and IP address but have noticed a desire on the part of some [ChrisFox8/ GoldandTanzanite/SeattleTop and Noacoler] to use proxy servers to come back with different, unbanned IP addresses.

The truth is that if they want to go to those lengths, I can't do much other than keep banning them.

But, I keep wondering: Why, if they hate the blog so much, do they go through so much trouble to keep participating?

Chris"

Posted by: Chris_Cillizza | January 5, 2010 8:34 AM

Posted by: JakeD | January 12, 2010 9:27 AM | Report abuse

First of all, I was born in 1931.
 
==
 
I don't buy it, Jake.  Let me tell you why.
 
I'm 55.  I was born in 1954.  I vaguely remember the Cuban Missile Crisis and the Kennedy-Nixon election.  I first voted for McGovern.  I remember the 60s; the Chicago riots, the war protests. 
 
I use famililar words in awkward ways, I use antiquated grammar sometimes, my speech was shaped by "Get Smart" and "Lost in Space." 
 
I show my age.
 
You say you're 77, moreover you say you served in Korea, graduated Summa cum laude from Stanford Law. 
 
Sorry, Jake, but my BS meter is flashing three times per second bright red. 
 
Take the millitary service.  Men who have been in combat are forever changed by it.  It's not a trivial experience for anyone.  Yet as much as you talk about yourself -- who you and your wife voted for, the money you send to right wing politicians, the meals, the golf, the yachting .. you never say anything about life in the Army and in war.  Does not jibe.
 
And then there's your writing.  Not only does it show none of the anachronisms of someone who's lived long enough for his language to change, but you write like a person of early years.  Your idea development is just plain absent, your logic is entirely untutored, and to top it off you write like a teenager who does a lot of instant messaging and texting.  Smilies and LOLs.  Does not jibe.
 
If you were 77 you would have grown up reading Raymond Chandler, you would remember a very grim childhood in the worst of the Great Depression, you would know who William Jennings Bryan was without raciing to wikipedia to fake up some knowledge.
 
"Does not compute, Will Robinson!"
 
And it really doesn't take a lot of familiarity with your lying about verifiable facts on here to conclude that probably everything you've mentioned about yourself is false.  Certainly your education claims, frankly your logic is worse than a bright sixth grader's.  You don't even have a high school grasp of science.
 
I do not believe you are 77 years old, nor that you have attended college at all.  I believe this to all be invention to lend credence to your nasty writing. 
 
"If it doesn't gel then it ain't aspic."
 
You'd never write something like that.  You've never heard it.  You're too young to know old sayings like that.

Posted by: Noacoler | January 12, 2010 3:29 AM | Report abuse

Gomers still whining about "political correctness."  Never fails to get them all torqued up.  "PC," as in "tyranny thereof."
 
Boo hoo, can't call a black man a ni66er anymore, how oppressive.  Boo hoo.  Family doesn't invite you to holiday dinner anymore 'cause they're ashamed of you.  Boo hoo.  Lost your job for calling your officemate a "queer," girlfriend left you, wife divorced you, 'cause you're a racist jerk, WAAAAAAAAAAH.
 
World's not changing back no matter how much you cry.

Posted by: Noacoler | January 12, 2010 1:29 AM | Report abuse

This time it's true

Posted by: Noacoler | January 11, 2010 11:47 PM | Report abuse

I love the DNC plan to respond to the Reid flap. Attack Republicans as 'racists' for voting against the NAACP's preferred positions on issues. Complete with talking-points for the lap-dog media to regurgitate.

So, we have now arrived at a point where if you are anything short of a pure-bred left-wing socialist, you must be racist.

Democrats are funny when they are exposed as hypocritical and two-faced. This Reid matter will be yet another occassion for Democrats and the media to reveal their stunning double-standard when it comes to the measure of forgiveness they are willing to afford those who broach the decoram of hyper political correctness.

Forgiveness which is measured, not according to the sincerety of your apology and steps taken to show repentence, but according to which political party to which you happen to belong.

Posted by: dbw1 | January 11, 2010 10:35 PM | Report abuse

Noacoler:
"The last GOP stronghold is the rural south, the last GOP demographic is white-haired old bigots. By 2012 the GOP base will be notably smaller due to deaths from old age. GOP identification Mong the young is insignificant. That screaming you hear from the baggers is from their circling the drain."

This sounds very similar to a lot of what was written by leftist wacko's during 1993.
Keep saying the GOP is dead. Will only make the eventual tide-swing back to the right look all that more impressive...and left-wingers all the more out-of-touch.

Posted by: dbw1 | January 11, 2010 10:26 PM | Report abuse

Another demographic change over time that is going to hurt the GOP a lot .. dunno why I haven't seen this in the MSM but I was reading a Vietnamese paper that reported 29% of Americans regard religion as "out of date." The idiom is "lỗi gian," means "mistake of time." Love it.

I'm sure that most of the 'baggers are fundamentalist Christians who believe in the Rapture, handling snakes, rolling in the aisles .. not just believers, but believersin biblical innerancy and a theonomy instead of a democracy.

If these are unfamiliar terms, "losers" covers it pretty well.

Posted by: Noacoler | January 11, 2010 9:27 PM | Report abuse

Md83: they are going away. The last GOP stronghold is the rural south, the last GOP demographic is white-haired old bigots. By 2012 the GOP base will be notably smaller due to deaths from old age. GOP identification Mong the young is insignificant.

That screaming you hear from the baggers is from their circling the drain.

Posted by: Noacoler | January 11, 2010 9:03 PM | Report abuse

A column followed by a bunch of revisionist trash. Sure, Lott didn't say what "problems" we have, but Reid didn't say why Obama couldn't be elected if not for the African-American exceptionalism required of any black Dem(see Michael Steele for opposite). Nice try goopers, but I know you shriveled old white racists were the flag waving southern dem KKK in Johnson's era. Go away, you offend any thinking individual...

Posted by: md83 | January 11, 2010 8:52 PM | Report abuse

So far as the Lone Star state goes with the communist party in charge and the biggest criminal mafia government ever in the history of the U.S. sprouting from that red star state. The Texas Rangers better do some serious ranging before this country lets that bag of tricks back into the White House. I wouldn't see anyone else worth mentioning in the No.4 column.

Posted by: kimkimminni1 | January 11, 2010 8:35 PM | Report abuse

That's because only ONE of said persons has been banned from here repeatedly.

Posted by: JakeD | January 11, 2010 8:18 PM | Report abuse

My file on Chris Fox is MUCH larger than my file on Chris Cillizza.

Posted by: JakeD | January 9, 2010 10:34 PM

Posted by: Noacoler | January 11, 2010 8:08 PM | Report abuse

Our gracious host has asked us all to simply ignore / shame those who won't leave after being banned:

"A note on the banned commenters:

I have been banning people both by username and IP address but have noticed a desire on the part of some [ChrisFox8/GoldandTanzanite/SeattleTop and Noacoler] to use proxy servers to come back with different, unbanned IP addresses.

The truth is that if they want to go to those lengths, I can't do much other than keep banning them.

But, I keep wondering: Why, if they hate the blog so much, do they go through so much trouble to keep participating?

Chris"

Posted by: Chris_Cillizza | January 5, 2010 8:34 AM

Posted by: JakeD | January 11, 2010 7:56 PM | Report abuse

"I am out of CC for a while, and invite reasonable people to join me."

Where?

Posted by: shrink2 | January 11, 2010 6:59 PM | Report abuse

Take note Cillizza you lone star putz, the trolls you protect like a mother hen are driving off the very best posters here. You happy?

Pretty soon it'll be just Jake, zouk, and 37th.

Way to go.

Posted by: Noacoler | January 11, 2010 6:57 PM | Report abuse

ceflynline:

Hopefully you stay away for longer than just a week.

Posted by: JakeD | January 11, 2010 6:22 PM | Report abuse

Reid's comments refer to the prejudice that Reid has fought against and which was strong in the country prior to Obama's election. There are many of us who felt that the country was lucky that Obama's speech did not have one of the African American intonations since that might have added fire to the bias. His mixed race features and color were also a benefit for the same reason. This is a fact of the election and should not be twisted into some kind of character assassination. This is not to say that these aspects were WHY Obama was elected, but they were a factor.

Posted by: mennenster | January 11, 2010 6:10 PM | Report abuse

"Johnson turned to the GOP to get Civil Rights passed, because of racist Dem Congressmen, like it or not, regardless of your spin. So hang'em high, or show hypocrisy. Or maybe just deflect criticism by calling Reps racist. Posted by: Obaama"

Of course, yopu have to consider just what happened BECAUSE of LBJ's work with the Republicans like Ev Dirksen to get the Civil Rights Bills Passed.

The republicans ran virtually every republican who sided with the Dems out of the Party within about six years. They were just pro civil rights then, the term RINOs didn't come up till later, but every one faced opposition from Conservative Republicans that drove them out of office.

Meanwhile, all the Democrats who stood against the Civil Rights Bill either changed parties, and became Republican big Wigs like Thurmond, Lott, et all, or they eventually went with their party on civil rights, or they stayed boll weevil Democrats, and either way eventually got unelected. The Democratic Party of 1972 and later was pretty much devoid of southern WASP members, and was pretty much devoid of southern, AND WASP members.

So your proofs of Democratic racism mean about nothing, forty-five years on from your base line.

Let's try to deal with which party has been racist since, say, 1972, George Corley Wallace, and all of history SINCE that watershed.

But I am out of here for your response, and given the control JD and friends, (you included) seem to have, for the next week or so, I am out of CC for a while, and invite reasonable people to join me. Since there are no controls on the trolls, I am off to more reasonable climes.

I MAY be back eventually

Posted by: ceflynline | January 11, 2010 5:29 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: leapin | January 11, 2010 5:08 PM | Report abuse

Just as soon as YOU quit bugging me.

Posted by: JakeD | January 11, 2010 4:54 PM | Report abuse

Yes, PLEASE just leave (since you've not taken the hint over being banned repeatedly).

==

Jake, if and when I leave it will be my own decision and at my own moment, not yours, and not Cillizza's.  Since the moderation around her is so arbitrarily and inconsistently applied, I don't respect it enough to honor it as I would in a forum where it applied to posters on both sides of the ideological divide, which it doesn't.

Speaking of banning and rules, we're supposed to post about topics, not about other posters.  A little of the latter is inevitable, especially when posters such as yourself distinguish themselves by lying repeatedly, but the point is to talk politics.  Nobody is interested in reading your playground dramas.  Nobody.  So why don't you just grow up?
Now clip this with your little grade-school scissors and add it to your "Chris Fox file."

And quit bugging me, I don't care a bit what some lying troll in San Diego thinks of me.

Posted by: Noacoler | January 11, 2010 4:46 PM | Report abuse

"Jake I don't know you except your not too bight [SIC] remarks on here, so I am not gong [SIC] to say you are a racist. If you can explain why anyone supporting Thurman's [SIC] 1948 campaign is not racist I will listen."

First of all, I was born in 1931. Second, Lott was NOT supporting the segregationist platform, per se. In fact, he admitted that his "poor choice of words conveyed to some the impression that I embraced the discarded policies of the past. Nothing could be further from the truth, and I apologize to anyone who was offended by my statement." That goes directly against your point.

Now, assuming that you will truly "listen" I have explained this several times already, so please forgive me if I give you the short version:

If Thurmond had been elected President, there would have been no desegregation of the U.S. Army per Truman's Executive Order 9981. Lots of advances by Truman would have been lost. On the other hand, maybe some mistakes by Truman would have been avoided. Who knows how Thurmond would have handled the Korean War (he might have even dropped nukes)? Needless to say, even if everything in the Cold War abroad had turned out much the same, race relations here at home would have been dramatically different. Either the Civil Rights Act doesn't even get passed with blacks further oppressed and/or the Second Civil War breaks out. Note that I am not saying (and neither did Lott) that everything would have been "better". He said we wouldn't have "all the same problems". You add that all up, and it is CLEAR that is exactly what would have happened with Thurmond being elected, maybe different problems but not the SAME problems.

Let me know if you have any other questions.

Posted by: JakeD | January 11, 2010 4:34 PM | Report abuse

How about an article on
the similiarities between,
2010 and 1984, Chris?

Posted by: simonsays1 | January 11, 2010 4:14 PM | Report abuse

Racism has nothing to do with your perceptions of people, or even how
you react and treat them. Everone
knows, democrats caint be racist.
them is just da facts.

Posted by: simonsays1 | January 11, 2010 4:12 PM | Report abuse

I'd like to hear what exactly Obama & Co have done for black folks.

Posted by: Obaama | January 11, 2010 3:45 PM | Report abuse

Senator Reid's comment was not racist at all. It was a statement of fact. Trent Lott's statement was racist without question. Other comments were undoubtedly made regarding Sen. Obama's outstanding education, eloquence and other qualifications for the office of president.

In contrast, Sarah Palin was chosen after very little research, according to the same book, and was recruited because she's a woman. GOP chairman Steele was chosen because of his color to make it appear the GOP represents African-American interests, which clearly they don't and seldom do.

Americans should be thankful every day that McCain-Palin weren't elected. Nevadans should be very grateful Sen. Reid represents them and is fighting for the great need for health care reform in America. They should vote for their own best interests, which would be for Sen. Reid.

Posted by: BettyW1 | January 11, 2010 3:41 PM | Report abuse

Jake D...
Reid's observation was not racist but he did not use politically correct language. Lott clearly was racist. He did call for segregation in his support of Strom Thurman's 1948 Presidential bid. The only real issue that Thurmond ran on was segregation and denying rights to blacks in the south. Clear and simple if you supported Thurmond's 1948 campaign you are for segregation. He was just politically correct not to mention segregation. For someone over a half a century later still support that position is a racist. Jake I don't know you except your not too bight remarks on here, so I am not gong to say you are a racist. If you can explain why anyone supporting Thurman's 1948 campaign is not racist I will listen. I really think because that campaign was before you were born and your study of history is almost non-existent that you are just ignorant as to what Lott was saying. So Jake I don't think your a racist ... I just think you are ignorant.

Posted by: bradcpa | January 11, 2010 3:23 PM | Report abuse

danders5000:

Are you an American citizen?

Posted by: JakeD | January 11, 2010 3:18 PM | Report abuse

"How about some Pollack jokes?"

Famous director/producer walks into a bar.

Bartender: What's your name, stranger?
Director/producer: "Tootsie."
Bartender: Where you coming from?
Director/producer: "Out of Africa"
Bartender: Why so glum?
Director/producer: "They Shoot Horses, Don't They?"
Bartender: Yeah, things were better before ...
Director/producer: "The Way We Were."

Posted by: mnteng | January 11, 2010 3:00 PM | Report abuse

I'll bite: what did Lott's resignation have to do with then (because he writes in his book that was the ENTIRE cause)?

Posted by: JakeD | January 11, 2010 2:39 PM | Report abuse

"there are other reasons why he could have argued thurmond would have been a good president besides his stance on civil rights."

Thurmond's stance on civil rights was the ONLY reason he ran for president in 1948. He ran ONLY because southerners thought Truman was moving too fast on civil rights. There was NO other reason for Thurmond's candidacy.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | January 11, 2010 2:39 PM | Report abuse

How about some Pollack jokes?

Posted by: Obaama | January 11, 2010 2:29 PM | Report abuse

Lott's resignation had little to do wwith his remark at Strom's birthday party. It was weeks afterward and the controversy died down in three days.

Funny how this one is being sustained by people who say far far uglier racist remarks every day.

Posted by: Noacoler | January 11, 2010 2:27 PM | Report abuse

CHRIS CILLIZA SUCKS!

Posted by: danders5000 | January 11, 2010 2:22 PM | Report abuse

Five columns in a row over a non-story. Hit counts up as 2-digit IQ trolls show up in boxcar loads. And to think that trees are being felled to print this bilgewater.

I need to find a better blog.

Posted by: Noacoler | January 11, 2010 2:20 PM | Report abuse

CHRIS CILLIZA SUCKS!

Posted by: danders5000 | January 11, 2010 2:19 PM | Report abuse

Five columns in a row over a non-story. Hit counts up as 2-digit IQ trolls show up in boxcar loads. And to think that trees are being felled to print this bilgewater.

I need to find a better blog.

Posted by: Noacoler | January 11, 2010 2:16 PM | Report abuse

The then-head of the racist GOP, GWB, appointed the most racially diverse cabinet ever.

Condi is coming for yous. She'll eat your babies.

Posted by: Obaama | January 11, 2010 2:13 PM | Report abuse

I need to find a better blog.

Posted by: Noacoler
--------------------------------
Try Keith Olbermann's.


Posted by: leapin | January 11, 2010 2:10 PM | Report abuse

Yes, PLEASE just leave (since you've not taken the hint over being banned repeatedly).

Posted by: JakeD | January 11, 2010 2:06 PM | Report abuse

Call yourself a truth squad and tell nothing but lies is the GOP way.

Posted by: lindalovejones
----------------------------------------
C'mon yourself. Check out the 7 lies of BO (video readily available on the net.)
The statists take lies, in the name of the state, to a new art form.

Posted by: leapin | January 11, 2010 2:05 PM | Report abuse

Five columns in a row over a non-story. Hit counts up as 2-digit IQ trolls show up in boxcar loads. And to think that trees are being felled to print this bilgewater.

I need to find a better blog.

Posted by: Noacoler | January 11, 2010 2:04 PM | Report abuse

May I repeat this one.. I vote it as the best post of this thread..

================================
The Ku Klux Klan is outraged that an old Mormon made a possibly racially insensitive remark about a man they hate because he's only half white? Now, that's entertainment.

Posted by: matthewjblack | January 11, 2010 9:15 AM | Report abuse
=======================================
Now all of a sudden these folks care about racism towards blacks. Not the case in a million years, just political tit-for-tat. And yes im tickled to death....

Posted by: wise_pharaoh | January 11, 2010 2:04 PM | Report abuse

i dont hink trent lott should have gone, especially since he made that comments at strom thurmond's birthday party, and there are other reasons why he could have argued thurmond would have been a good president besides his stance on civil rights.

since lott was unfairly pushed out, i dont think reid should be expected to step down either.

Posted by: dummypants | January 11, 2010 2:01 PM | Report abuse

Five columns in a row over a non-story. Hit counts up as 2-digit IQ trolls show up in boxcar loads. And to think that trees are being felled to print this bilgewater.

I need to find a better blog.

Posted by: Noacoler | January 11, 2010 2:00 PM | Report abuse

TO: leapin who wrote:
“Go for it - The liberal ways of destruction when they can't counter factually, Destroy and name call.”
____________

Oh please, stop with the lies already! Carl Rove, Rush Limbaugh, and Dick Cheney brought lying, name calling, insults, and false outrage akin to devil worshiping to the GOP, and Republicans have been living on insults and lies ever since.

Call yourself a truth squad and tell nothing but lies is the GOP way.

Posted by: lindalovejones | January 11, 2010 1:57 PM | Report abuse


Would Harry Reid be in trouble if he said that Obama doesn't speak JIVE ???

Where is the line here???

Posted by: 37thand0street
-----------------------------------------

The line will not be drawn, for progressives, until there is a statement that causes the D constituents to escape the plantation that they have created and enforced for the last several decades.

Posted by: leapin | January 11, 2010 1:56 PM | Report abuse

Would Harry Reid be in trouble if he said that Obama doesn't speak JIVE ???

Where is the line here???


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | January 11, 2010 1:50 PM | Report abuse

Man, $549? Even the GOP leadership conference in New Orleans is only about $200 and a hell of a lot more star-studded.

Also, it's in New Orleans, so you can be sanctimonious by day and decadent by night. Bet you can't do that in Nashville.

Posted by: DDAWD | January 11, 2010 1:44 PM | Report abuse

More funny:

A message to all members of Tea Party Nation

Friends, over the last 36 hours, our site has been attacked by liberals. They have joined en masse, coming on the site to offend, disrupt and interfere as much as they can. They have uploaded inappropriate content, sent us obscene messages and even uploaded pornographic images.

We are taking steps to correct these problems.

We want to take this opportunity to thank those who have become members of Tea Party Nation in the last few days. Before our site was assaulted, our growth had been phenomenal. Our precautions are going to slow our growth, but ultimately will keep TPN the site that you want it to be.

Visit Tea Party Nation at: http://www.teapartynation.com/?xg_source=msg_mes_network

I say go for it...

Posted by: drindl
-----------------------------------------
Go for it - The liberal ways of destruction when they can't counter factually, Destroy and name call.

Posted by: leapin | January 11, 2010 1:44 PM | Report abuse

Some of you on here are shameful: it is only the dark-skinned Negroes that Harry Reid has trouble with, he is okay with light-skinned Negroes (as long as they - the light-skinned ones - don't also employ the Dark Skinned dialect)

Posted by: Phil6 | January 11, 2010 1:43 PM | Report abuse

I meant "a week from tomorrow".

Posted by: JakeD | January 11, 2010 1:39 PM | Report abuse

The Boston Herald reports that if Brown actually wins tomorrow, MA Democratic Secretary of State William Galvin will delay certifying the race for at least 10 days or until February 20. That would let appointed-Senator Paul Kirk cast a 60th vote for Obamacare. Note how Galvin certified the prior change in law / Kirk's appointment to the U.S. Senate on the SAME DAY it was signed into law, rather than to wait the customary 90 days. MORE HYPOCRISY!!!

What will happen if Democrats pass their health care bill by denying to seat a duly-elected Republican? My prediction: Firestorm. National firestorm.

Posted by: JakeD | January 11, 2010 1:31 PM | Report abuse

"My boy Barry is a light-skinned Nîgra"
-- Harry the horse's asp Reid

Posted by: screwjob2 | January 11, 2010 1:27 PM | Report abuse

"My boy Barry is a light-skinned Nîgra"
-- Harry the horse's asp Reid

Posted by: screwjob2 | January 11, 2010 1:27 PM | Report abuse

'
Yesterday I wrote about the propensity of conservatives (and those who think like them) to get overstimulated by terrorist violence, imagine that they are being personally singled out for the next attack and react as if they are warriors bravely protecting the homeland from the invaders when they are really just sitting around the bar bullsh*tting about what they'd do, by God, if one o' them terrists tried to take what's theirs. It's Walter Mitty stuff, driven by the rush of non-stop war porn on TV.'

how true....

Posted by: drindl | January 11, 2010 1:25 PM | Report abuse

You gotta LOVE Jake Tapper pointing out Obama's hypocrisy:

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/01/to-err-is-human-to-forgive-divine.html

Posted by: JakeD | January 11, 2010 1:22 PM | Report abuse

Racist Reid will not be re-elected by Nevada in November. He's on his way out whether or not he steps down for being the racist he is.

Posted by: mock1ngb1rd | January 11, 2010 1:22 PM | Report abuse

The Massachusetts Senate election is right around the corner, and many of the GOPs 2012 presidential hopefuls have weighed in on behalf of Republican candidate Scott Brown. Tim Pawlenty is pushing for him. Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney's got his back, too. All of which is causing Democrats to ask, Where's Sarah Palin?

"She's one of the more vocal personalities representing the right wing of their party, and it's interesting that she's nowhere to be found in this race," said one top Democratic strategist.'

Yes, where is palin -- MIA, as usual?

Posted by: drindl | January 11, 2010 1:20 PM | Report abuse

More funny:

A message to all members of Tea Party Nation

Friends, over the last 36 hours, our site has been attacked by liberals. They have joined en masse, coming on the site to offend, disrupt and interfere as much as they can. They have uploaded inappropriate content, sent us obscene messages and even uploaded pornographic images.

We are taking steps to correct these problems.

We want to take this opportunity to thank those who have become members of Tea Party Nation in the last few days. Before our site was assaulted, our growth had been phenomenal. Our precautions are going to slow our growth, but ultimately will keep TPN the site that you want it to be.

Visit Tea Party Nation at: http://www.teapartynation.com/?xg_source=msg_mes_network

I say go for it...

Posted by: drindl | January 11, 2010 1:18 PM | Report abuse

Again, Trent Lott was not "advocating racism" (at least no more than Harry Reid was advocating racism ; )

Posted by: JakeD | January 11, 2010 1:17 PM | Report abuse


'
What's most amazing about the Reid controversy is that (so far) Joe Lieberman has resisted the impulse to mount a podium and exercise his role as the Official Pious Blowhard of the United States Senate.'

oh, don't worry, he'll get to it..

Posted by: drindl | January 11, 2010 1:16 PM | Report abuse

Btw, wasn't it Biden who called Obama 'clean'?

Posted by: Obaama | January 11, 2010 1:16 PM | Report abuse

LOL, drindl. Saying that "if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years" is not "endorsing racism". I think it's fair to say that the problems of racism would have been WORSE. In fact, Sen. Lott said in his apology that his "poor choice of words conveyed to some the impression that I embraced the discarded policies of the past. Nothing could be further from the truth ..."

Posted by: JakeD | January 11, 2010 1:16 PM | Report abuse

Talking about racism does not make you racist; advocating racism does.

I think this is probably the best explanation of the difference between Reid and Lott. It's amazing how many different chatters are being led around by the nose on this one.

Whenever one of their side is brought down by corruption or racism, they have to then spend the next three decades looking for superficially similar circumstances that might allow them to take their revenge.

At root the problem is that for the GOP, politics simply do not matter, it is all about their side vs. the opposition. Having no principles themselves, they can't imagine that principles might drive the decisions of anyone else. So they see the removal of Lott as nothing more than the Democrats managing to astutely exploit an unfortunate remark. They simply can't get the idea that anyone might have been genuinely offended by Lott's racist views.

A lot of the media shares the same blindness. They could not understand why the Clinton impeachment failed, because like the GOP they could not see the difference between lying about a blow job in a trumped up court case bore no relation to Nixon's crimes. There are
days on which I feel sympathy for the economic circumstances that the Web has created for the establishment media, and then there are days when I look at the lousy job they did and my sympathy evaporates.

Posted by: drindl | January 11, 2010 1:15 PM | Report abuse

teabagger are by and large simple saps and tools who will be used by the professional republican class to further their own big business agenda.
Posted by: drindl
------------------------------------------

Free lunchers are by and large simple saps and tools who will be used by the professional democratic class to further their own big statist government agenda.

Posted by: leapin | January 11, 2010 1:14 PM | Report abuse

What's most amazing about the Reid controversy is that (so far) Joe Lieberman has resisted the impulse to mount a podium and exercise his role as the Official Pious Blowhard of the United States Senate.

Posted by: douglaslbarber | January 11, 2010 1:13 PM | Report abuse

"I was just watching DC Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton on Fox explaining why Sen. Reid should stay right where he is.

Norton explained that there's a rather elemental difference between describing American racial attitudes in archaic and embarrassing language and endorsing racism. But she also made the subsidiary point. People are going to interpret Reid's comments in the context of a strong record on civil rights and anti-discrimination -- just as they interpreted Lott's comments in terms of a long record of support for neo-segregationist politics and white supremacist groups in his home state."

Posted by: drindl | January 11, 2010 1:12 PM | Report abuse

teabagger are by and large simple saps and tools who will be used by the professional republican class to further their own big business agenda.

Posted by: drindl | January 11, 2010 1:10 PM | Report abuse

mellwood1:

I did not intend to "put down" you or anyone else.

drindl:

I would pay $549.

Posted by: JakeD | January 11, 2010 1:10 PM | Report abuse

It hasn't been lost on members of the Tea Party Patriots that the Tea Party Express -- which is run by a group of well-connected GOP consultants and who the Patriots already view as a group of astroturf parvenus -- will be at the convention. Perhaps even worse: though Phillips has said that Tea Party Nation isn't working with the Republican party, one activist told TPMmuckraker, with disapproval, that organizers had voted to invite RNC chair Michael Steele to speak. Skoda said he did not know whether such a decision had been made, but that he would support the idea. The RNC did not say whether Steele has received an invitation.

"The Tea Party Movement is about to be hijacked," wrote one activist in an online comment recently. "TeaPartyNation.com orgaziners are hard lined GOP who use the proverbial veil of 'conservatism' to attract supporters."

Stublen echoed that suspicion. "I think what we have in the movement is the GOP trying to take control, and a lot of the groups are trying to fight them on this," he told TPMmuckraker. Stublen described the convention as "too GOP" and Phillips as "too politically connected."

Posted by: drindl | January 11, 2010 1:08 PM | Report abuse

Indeed, one conservative activist who has organized Tea Parties with several local groups told TPMmuckraker that even though she lives in the Nashville area, she still can't afford to attend. "To me its not worth it," said Toni, who blogs at Bear Creek Ledger and asked that her last name not be used. "I'm not gonna throw my money around for that."

"The Tea Party I know never had $1000 to pay for anything," another conservative activist told TPMmuckraker.

The high cost may be driven by the speakers' fees that organizers are shelling out. One activist who is familiar with organizers' plans told TPMmuckraker that Palin is being paid $100,000, much of which is said to have been raised by wealthy local donors. That figure could not be confirmed.

The convention's prime organizer, Nashville criminal defense lawyer Judson Phillips, founded Tea Party Nation, a for-profit company that runs a networking site for activists. Phillips, a former local prosecutor, didn't respond to several requests for comment, but he told Politico that the convention was intended to make a profit so that Tea Party Nation can "funnel money back into conservative causes" through a 527 group it plans to set up.

Mark Skoda, another of the activists behind the event, told TPMmuckraker that the fees were required to pay for the event's costs. He added that Tea Party Nation had urged volunteers to have their local Tea Party group sponsor their attendance -- an idea that Stublen derided as inconsistent with the concept of personal fiscal responsibility that the movement professes. Skoda declined to comment on Palin's fee, citing "the non-disclosure of speakers contracts."

Lurking beneath the concerns about the price-tag are vaguer fears. First, that Phillips and his allies are using the convention to boost their group's resources and its profile within the movement.

"The tea party movement is a grass-roots movement; it's not a business," one skeptical Tennesee Tea Partier declared to Politico.

"Who are they and what do they stand for?" another conservative activist asked TPMmuckraker, describing Phillips as "someone who is trying to make a grab."

Perhaps even more unnerving to some activists, though, is the prospect that Tea Party Nation may be co-opting the movement -- which prides itself on its independence and authenticity -- on behalf of a professional political class with ties to the GOP.

Posted by: drindl | January 11, 2010 1:07 PM | Report abuse

Jake D

You are simply trying to feel smart by putting down others. But, it is you who are wrong. Of course, blacks have voted predominantly Democrat in the past 40+ years. My comment is on the numbers – the turnout – for 2008. Any “black effect” Obama had was greater in the black electorate.

The apparent “blackness of Obama” probably had a large part to play in the record turnout of 2008. From the Pew Research Center, a record 131 million people who voted in November's presidential election. The largest increase in participation was among black eligible voters. Their voter turnout rate increased 4.9 percentage points, from 60.3% in 2004 to 65.3% in 2008, nearly matching the voter turnout rate of white eligible voters (66.1%). Overall, among all racial, ethnic and gender groups, black women had the highest voter turnout rate in November's election -- a first.

This smashes the previous record for black eligible voter turnout of 58.5 percent in 1964; the post-Voting Rights Act turnout high was 57.6 percent in 1968. Nearly all (95%) black voters cast their ballot for Democrat Barack Obama. This far exceeds the 84% of the black vote Clinton received in 1996. Meanwhile, among white eligible voters, the voter turnout rate fell slightly, from 67.2% in 2004 to 66.1% in 2008.

The black vote failed to materialize for the Democrat side in our recent state-wide elections in Virginia resulting in a Republican sweep. In 2009, the black percentage of the electorate fell by a quarter to 15% from a 20% level in 2008.

So, it was Obama's "blackness" that was a greater factor than his apparent "whiteness." As for Harry Reid, he is just a sad old man - like many members of the U.S. Senate - who would serve us much better in the old persons' home.

Posted by: mellwood1 | January 11, 2010 1:05 PM | Report abuse

this is TOO FUNNY...
'In the latest sign of rancor in Tea Party circles, a convention billed as an effort to bring together conservative activists from across the country is being attacked by some leading Tea Partiers as inauthentic, too tied to the GOP, and -- at $549 per head -- too expensive for the working Americans the movement aspires to represent.
Posted by: drindl
-------------------------------------------
Not “rancor” just a disagreement. What is funny is that disagreeing with a bi-racial president on his agenda is “racism” according to progressive elitists.

Posted by: leapin | January 11, 2010 1:04 PM | Report abuse

Lott was hated by most of his party, Reid is not. Lott wanted the 'good ole times when blacks knew there place', hardly what Reid inferred.

Reid is needed for the Dems and Obama to get their agenda through, they also know that he's toast next election. Smart politics is what is playing, not race. Though the GOP want it to be, yea, from the big tent party.

Posted by: PatrickNYC1 | January 11, 2010 1:02 PM | Report abuse

this is TOO FUNNY...

'In the latest sign of rancor in Tea Party circles, a convention billed as an effort to bring together conservative activists from across the country is being attacked by some leading Tea Partiers as inauthentic, too tied to the GOP, and -- at $549 per head -- too expensive for the working Americans the movement aspires to represent.

The National Tea Party Convention, scheduled for early February in Nashville, grabbed headlines after announcing that Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann would appear as speakers, Palin as the keynote. According to a message on the convention's website, the event "is aimed at bringing the Tea Party Movement leaders together from around the nation." But organizers are a long way from unifying the notoriously fractious movement.

Tea Party Patriots, which helped put together a September rally that drew tens of thousands to Washington, view the confab -- which is being held at Nashville's swank Opryland Gaylord hotel -- as the "usurpation of a grassroots movement," according to Mark Meckler, a leader of the group. "Most people in our movement can't afford anything like that," Meckler told TPMmuckraker, referring to the price tag. "So it's really not aimed at the average grassroots person."

Robin Stublen, a Tea Party Patriots volunteer, echoed that view. "This convention is $550 dollars," said Stublen. "How grassroots is that?"

Posted by: drindl | January 11, 2010 12:57 PM | Report abuse

Jaked: Different remarks, different standard.

Pls move along. You're clogging the board with your irrelevant nonsense.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | January 11, 2010 12:56 PM | Report abuse

(cont.)

Senator Tom Harkin

"Democratic Sen. Tom Harkin of Iowa issued a blistering condemnation Thursday night of controversial remarks by Republican Sen. Trent Lott, saying it is 'shocking' that the White House has not urged Lott to step down as the incoming majority leader. 'Or is this a not-too-subtle message to closet bigots and Southern white supremacists that their true political home is the GOP?' Harkin asked in a prepared statement. . . . Said Harkin: 'Senator Lott may utter apologies and explanations, but where is his outright condemnation of exactly what Strom Thurmond stood for -segregation and white supremacy?' Harkin added that 'it's in unguarded moments like these we see past the polished veneer.'" (Jane Norman, "Harkin Shocked GOP Is Willing To Keep Lott As Majority Leader," Des Moines Register, 12/13/02)

Senator John Kerry

"Sen. John F. Kerry yesterday demanded that Senate GOP Leader Trent Lott resign his powerful leadership post for making racially charged comments praising Sen. Strom Thurmond's segregationist 1948 presidential campaign. 'I simply do not believe the country can today afford to have someone who has made these statements again and again be the leader of the United States Senate,' said Kerry (D-Mass.), wading into a national controversy as he prepares his 2004 White House bid." (Andrew Miga, "Kerry: Lott Must Resign," Boston Herald, 12/12/02)

Then-IL State Senator Barack Obama

"Illinois Senator Barack Obama (D-13th), who hosted WVON's Cliff Kelley Show, challenged the Republican Party to repudiate Lott's remarks and to call for his resignation as senate leader. 'It seems to be that we can forgive a 100-year-old senator for some of the indiscretion of his youth, but, what is more difficult to forgive is the current president of the U.S. Senate ..." "Trent Lott Agrees To Meet With Black Caucus," Chicago Defender, 12/12/02)

Posted by: JakeD | January 11, 2010 12:47 PM | Report abuse

Koolkat you'd better explain to him what "passive voice" means. Remember you're talking to a guy who doesn't know what "objective fact" or "scientific method" mean and who believes in the supernatural.

Posted by: Noacoler | January 11, 2010 12:47 PM | Report abuse

Koolkat you'd better explain to him what "passive voice" means. Remember you're talking to a guy who doesn't know what "objective fact" or "scientific method" mean and who believes in the supernatural.

Posted by: Noacoler
-----------------------------------------
I also believe in the supernatural. BO, Pelosi and Reid can add millions to government run healthcare, provide great customer service, for less cost.

Posted by: leapin | January 11, 2010 12:44 PM | Report abuse

(cont.)

Then-Senator Joe Biden

"'What he said was insensitive as hell; it's very offensive,' said Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., who read about the furor after returning Tuesday from a trip to the Middle East. 'Race is serious stuff. It's not something you kid about.'" (Erin Kelly, "Del. Lawmakers, Civil Rights Leaders Condemn Lott's Comments," Gannett News Service, 12/13/02)

Senator Evan Bayh

"Democrats, who had spent much of the last two weeks criticizing Lott's statement, praised his decision to resign and pledged to work with the next Senate Republican leader. 'There is a standard for all of us in public life that must be met, and his ability to lead was severely damaged. The American people expect and deserve leaders who share their values,' Democratic Sen. Evan Bayh of Indiana said in a statement. 'As we move forward, I hope we can use this unfortunate incident as a springboard to continue the civil rights progress that we have made over the last forty years.'" (Craig Linder, "Ceding To Controversy, Lott Says He Will Not Be Majority Leader In Next Congress," States News Service, 12/20/09)

Senator Barbara Boxer

'His apology does not take away the sting of his divisive words, nor the pain inflicted on millions of African Americans under segregation,' she said." (Edward Epstein, "Bush Calls Lott's Remark 'Wrong,'" The San Francisco Chronicle, 12/13/02)

Senator Russ Feingold

"Sen. Russ Feingold Thursday called on Sen. Trent Lott to resign as GOP leader over comments Lott made last week about Strom Thurmond's pro-segregationist 1948 presidential campaign. 'Given the tragic history of race relations in this country, and the role the 1948 campaign played in it, his statement was especially hurtful,' Feingold, D-Wis., said in a statement." ("Feingold Calls On Lott To Resign As GOP Leader," The Associated Press, 12/12/02)

Posted by: JakeD | January 11, 2010 12:43 PM | Report abuse

Koolkat you'd better explain to him what "passive voice" means. Remember you're talking to a guy who doesn't know what "objective fact" or "scientific method" mean and who believes in the supernatural.

Posted by: Noacoler | January 11, 2010 12:37 PM | Report abuse

koolkat_1960:

The allegation re: Hillary Clinton is in a book called "Game Change". You may have heard of it recently? I finally found some of "Dingy" Harry Reid's statements re: Lott.

"As closely as I've worked with him, I don't know how in the world I could condone, support or understand his statements,' said Reid, the Senate Democratic whip. 'I think what he said is not good for America; it's repugnant what he said.' 'If Republicans think it's best for Democrats to keep him there, maybe they'll get rid of him,' Reid said." (Tony Batt and Jane Ann Morriso, "Ensign Continues To Back Lott As Majority Leader," Las Vegas Review-Journal, 12/17/02)

"Sen. Harry Reid said Republican Senate leader Trent Lott's decision to relinquish his post Friday came as no surprise. 'He had no alternative,' the Nevada Democrat and Senate minority leader said. 'Senator Lott dug himself a hole and he didn't dig it all in one setting. He dug it over the years. And he couldn't figure out a way to get out of it.'" ("Nevada Lawmakers Not Surprised By Lott Resignation," The Associated Press, 12/20/02)

Do you also think these are from "private citizens"?

Senator Debbie Stabenow

"Sen. Debbie Stabenow, a Democrat, described Lott's comments as 'outrageous' and 'completely inexcusable.' 'Those kinds of comments have no place in our society and should be repudiated by every American,' Stabenow said in a statement. 'At this point, the Republican caucus in the U.S. Senate needs to think long and hard about the kind of values they want their leadership to represent.'" (Katherine Hutt Scott, "Mich. Delegation Members From Both Parties Criticize Lott Remarks," Gannett News Service, 12/14/02)

Senator Mary Landrieu

"U.S. Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., said she doubts a censure motion would ever reach the Senate floor, but would vote for such a measure if it did. 'I think the remarks could not have been more hurtful and more direct and more out of place,' Landrieu said. But the Senate doesn't ordinarily censure members for distasteful speech, she said, reserving that rebuke for 'actions.' Landrieu said it's up to Senate Republicans to decide whether Lott should give up his leadership job. 'I can tell you if a Democratic leader said such a thing, they would not be allowed to keep their position,' Landrieu said." ("Bush Condemns Remark, Accepts Lott's Apology," The Advocate [Baton Rouge, Louisiana], 12/13/02)

Posted by: JakeD | January 11, 2010 12:36 PM | Report abuse

Day three of this manufactured controversy. Day three of dull witted Gomers singing on unison. Day three of the same posts over and over.

Bring back Froomkin and chuck this shuck.

Posted by: Noacoler | January 11, 2010 12:33 PM | Report abuse

"Exactly, WildWilly. The HYPOCRISY is that Democrats won't hold one of their own to the same standard."

Sorry jaked, but for a "Stanford Law grad" your logical skills are simply lacking.

Since what Reid said was nothing like what Lott said, there is no reason for Dems to hold Reid to the same standard.

"Hillary is also alleged to have said that the country faced "a terrible choice" between Obama and Republican nominee John McCain.

Really, jaked, can you provide some specifics as to who alleged this? Your use of the anonymous passive voice is pathetic. For a Stanford Law grad to display such weak debating skills is mind-boggling.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | January 11, 2010 12:29 PM | Report abuse

Exactly, WildWilly. The HYPOCRISY is that Democrats won't hold one of their own to the same standard.

Posted by: JakeD | January 11, 2010 12:21 PM | Report abuse

It's a DOUBLE STANDARD. No question about it. Liberals are hypocrites, but that's old news.

Posted by: mock1ngb1rd | January 11, 2010 12:17 PM | Report abuse

"Under pressure from Senate colleagues, and having lost the support of the White House, Lott resigned as Senate Republican Leader on December 20, 2002...In a book written after the incident, Lott described what he called a betrayal by the White House and his colleagues in the Senate..." - SourceWatch

Posted by: WildWilly1111 | January 11, 2010 12:17 PM | Report abuse

"One of the revelations of the 2008 campaign is how condescending the Clintons are towards blacks. From Hillary's "he's not ready" and "hardworking whites" to Bill's "fairy tale" and "coffee" and "Jesse Jackson" bits, it is clear they simply did not EVER view blacks as equals."

I ended up voting for Obama over Clinton. A lot of that was because of the comments Bill made in South Carolina. And yeah, both of them were very impolitic regarding the issue of race. That being said, it's ridiculous to think that Bill Clinton thinks of blacks as those whose status in the world is as coffee fetchers for whites.

Posted by: DDAWD | January 11, 2010 12:15 PM | Report abuse

Not to mention clean and articulate.

Hair plugs.

Posted by: Moonbat | January 11, 2010 12:15 PM | Report abuse

WildWilly:

"(Reid) was wowed by Obama's oratorical gifts and believed that the country was ready to embrace a black presidential candidate, especially one such as Obama – a 'light-skinned' African American 'with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one,' as he later put it privately ..."

Posted by: JakeD | January 11, 2010 12:13 PM | Report abuse

Hillary is also alleged to have said that the country faced "a terrible choice" between Obama and Republican nominee John McCain. I wonder who she and Bill voted for?

Posted by: JakeD | January 11, 2010 12:12 PM | Report abuse

That's funny Obaama. Like facts ever got in the way of liberal chanting.

Hope hope.

Posted by: Moonbat | January 11, 2010 12:11 PM | Report abuse

Harry Reid's comments aren't even good enough for some good jokes.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | January 11, 2010 12:10 PM | Report abuse

Why is it Democrats can get away with issues of color but Conservatives and everyone else get nailed to the cross? Remember when Bill Clinton, Al Gore used black dialects as they campaigned? Even Hillary Clinton used the black dialect in reading a hymn from Selma?
Never heard a word from the NAACP, Jackson, Sharpton or the Black Caucaus say anything about their pretending to be black. Clinton's our first black president! But if the rest of us did that we'd be told to leave office. Hypocritical isn't it?

Posted by: 45upnorth | January 11, 2010 12:09 PM | Report abuse

WildWilly:

That statement by Lott is not as bad as Reid's statement.

gbooksdc:

Don't forget the revelation that Hillary WANTED Dems to push the Obama drug stories.

Posted by: JakeD | January 11, 2010 12:08 PM | Report abuse

"I want to say this about my state. When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We're proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years either." - Trent Lott

Posted by: WildWilly1111
-------------------------------------------
Isn't the party of Thurmond, the party of KKK Byrd? The party of George Wallace? The party that finally allows blacks through the school house door but for decades offers them failed school systems?

Posted by: leapin | January 11, 2010 12:06 PM | Report abuse

"Not quite as bad as when Bill Clinton said of Barack Obama that, “a few years ago, this guy would have been getting us coffee”.

Posted by: jahoby"

Pretty obv that was about Obama's status as a freshman Senator.

Posted by: DDAWD | January 11, 2010 11:37 AM
__________________________________________

Simply put, no.

One of the revelations of the 2008 campaign is how condescending the Clintons are towards blacks. From Hillary's "he's not ready" and "hardworking whites" to Bill's "fairy tale" and "coffee" and "Jesse Jackson" bits, it is clear they simply did not EVER view blacks as equals. (In a radio interview, Bill Clinton basically said that his civil rights bona fides were to the point where you could not even QUESTION whether he viewed blacks as less than equals; that sort of arrogance leads to the condescension he has displayed.) You could be close to them if you were willing to suck up to them, but really share power? No. That's why the Clinton Administration was so challenged when it came to giving blacks _senior_ cabinet level posts.

The person who should resign is Hillary, after she distances herself from her husband's latest gaffe.

Posted by: gbooksdc | January 11, 2010 12:05 PM | Report abuse

Johnson turned to the GOP to get Civil Rights passed, because of racist Dem Congressmen, like it or not, regardless of your spin.:

By party (yes/no)
The original House version:
Democratic Party: 152-96 (61%-39%)
Republican Party: 138-34 (80%-20%)

Cloture in the Senate:
Democratic Party: 44-23 (66%-34%)
Republican Party: 27-6 (82%-18%)

The Senate version:
Democratic Party: 46-21 (69%-31%)
Republican Party: 27-6 (82%-18%)

The Senate version, voted on by the House:
Democratic Party: 153-91 (63%-37%)
Republican Party: 136-35 (80%-20%)

Of course no Dems are racist :rolleyes:

Did Reid speak wrongly? No, except by his own public definition, where one cannot recognize reality because it interferes with their campaign rhetoric.

So hang'em high, or show hypocrisy. Or maybe just deflect criticism by calling Reps racist.

Posted by: Obaama | January 11, 2010 12:03 PM | Report abuse

"The question is, does this double standard extend to the mainstream media and from the evidence I have seen the answer to that is a resounding "No!" Anyone who watches the media and is honest with themselves should be able to see that if anything, the republicans end up getting an easier time from the media."

Apropos of this story, why did it take so long to surface if the conversation was with mainstream reporters before the election? Instead of invoking commentators who must compete in the open market for an audience as examples, the fact that line reporters and editors kept this story buried for so long is much more troubling.

Posted by: jaxas70

Posted by: edbyronadams | January 11, 2010 12:02 PM | Report abuse

"I want to say this about my state. When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We're proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years either." - Trent Lott

Posted by: WildWilly1111 | January 11, 2010 12:01 PM | Report abuse

Although Harry Reid's staements were somewhat distasteful, his reasoning was correct. Many white people are more comfortable with "articulate" light-skinned Black people. Reid only expressed why he thought white America would find Obama electable and not be limited to being just a "Black candidate." The hypocrisy is that the closeted racist white republicans, the Uncle Tom minstrel showman Negro Michael Steele and political harlot witch Lynne Cheney are so upset by Reid's remarks. The truth is that those hypocritical Republican slugs and their house Negro are only seeking to gain political advantage from what Harry Reid said about then candidate Barack Obama. They could care less about any sensitivity or lack thereof pertaining to the millions of Black people in this country who know exactly what Reid was talking about. Millions of white peole who feel the same way as Harry Reid so poorly stated,nevertheless voted for President Obama. Skin tone and color has always and will always be an issue affecting Black people in America and worldwide. Get over it !

Posted by: ellislawoffice
------------------------------------------

The racism exhibited by plantation owning NeoCom Statist Destructionist Party.
They haved owned the politcal and educational systems of cities and states for decades thatare utter failures. The party with the power keeping minorties down for decades.

Posted by: leapin | January 11, 2010 12:00 PM | Report abuse

LOL!!! You mean "some unelected private citizens" like Michael Steele? As I stated in the other thread, I do not know if Sen. Reid said anything about the Trent Lott controversy, but that would be relevant as well.

Posted by: JakeD | January 11, 2010 12:00 PM | Report abuse

Re: political shows:

'A new idea recently surfaced for television’s longest-running show: What if “Meet the Press” fact-checked what its stream of political guests said and ran the results online later in the week?

The suggestion by New York University journalism professor Jay Rosen kicked around Twitter and the blogosphere with such force that the show’s host, David Gregory, said in a statement to POLITICO that it was a “good idea” and his staff is “going to talk about it.”

Change comes slowly to the venerable shows that grip the attention of a small but committed segment of TV watchers every Sunday morning. And taking risks almost never happens, or why would ABC be negotiating with Ted Koppel, who at age 69 made his reputation covering Henry Kissinger and the Iranian hostage situation, to replace George Stephanopoulos as the host of “This Week”?

The shows are particularly ripe targets for critics who see them as the epitome of insider Washington and conventional wisdom. James Wolcott, writing in Vanity Fair last year, for example, described watching the show that Stephanopoulos recently vacated to be “like receiving an engraved invitation to apoplexy.”

“With occasional exceptions, the Sunday shows come across as geriatric and insular, having long been eclipsed and upstaged by Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert, Bill Maher, MSNBC and much of the Web,” New York Times columnist Frank Rich, a frequent critic, said in an e-mail to POLITICO. "

What a great change this would be -- if republicans were actually forced to tell the truth. They would just have to keep their mouths closed.

Posted by: drindl | January 11, 2010 12:00 PM | Report abuse

I was unaware that Mayor Giuliani misspoke like that (I'm sure he did not intend to deny that 9/11 happened -- that is, after all, what made him the most famous -- so, you are correct to assume that I would not consider it a "lie").

Posted by: JakeD | January 11, 2010 11:58 AM | Report abuse

Yes, jaked, I'm sure some unelected private citizens called for Lott's ouster. No Democrats in the Senate did so. Next irrelevant point?

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | January 11, 2010 11:57 AM | Report abuse

FORCE = FORCED

Posted by: JakeD | January 11, 2010 11:55 AM | Report abuse

"And, I think you mis-quoted: "no domestic terrorist attacks SINCE 2001 until when Obama took over ..."


Sorry, jaked, but you're simply wrong, or lying. The full quote is easily available:

“We had no domestic attacks under Bush. We’ve had one under Obama,” Giuliani said.

Nothing about "since 2001." But of course, he'd still be wrong even if he added that. But he didn't. What he DID say was a disgraceful lie. And even someone like you should call him out on that. But you won't.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | January 11, 2010 11:54 AM | Report abuse

Note how Lott was FORCE OUT even after he repeatedly apologized.

Posted by: JakeD | January 11, 2010 11:54 AM | Report abuse

Note how Lott was FORCE OUT even after he repeatedly apologized.

Posted by: JakeD | January 11, 2010 11:54 AM | Report abuse

You liberals must be releived to get the subject off all your policy and legislative failures and focused instead in your leadership and personality failures.

You will have to keep juggling these all year.

Posted by: Moonbat | January 11, 2010 11:52 AM | Report abuse

koolkat_1960:

Jesse Jackson and Al Gore were not Democrats at the time?! LOL!!!

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/12/09/lott.comment/

Civil rights activist Jesse Jackson called for Lott to resign, and former Vice President Al Gore told CNN that the comment was "racist."

Issuing one of the harshest rebukes Lott has received to date, even from Democrats, Gore said Monday in an interview on CNN's "Inside Politics" that Lott should apologize for his comments or face censure by the Senate.

jaxas:

In addition to Lott, I can think of Don Imus as well. Rush WAS forced to resign from his NFL gig too.

Posted by: JakeD | January 11, 2010 11:52 AM | Report abuse

jaked: The only people who "forced Lott out" were Republicans. Democrats did not meddle in intra-party affairs. Too bad Republicans have to open their pieholes now. Actually, it's not too bad -- the focus is now on the voting records of the loudest bleaters.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | January 11, 2010 11:49 AM | Report abuse

Today’s NeoCom Statist Destructionist Party – Owning failed city and state governments and educational systems for decades that define real racism even more than Scary Reid’s remark.

Posted by: leapin | January 11, 2010 11:48 AM | Report abuse

What Trent Lott said was that the US would be better if it were segregated, essentially, a sentiment I'm sure many here today agree with.

Posted by: drindl | January 11, 2010 11:47 AM | Report abuse

Although Harry Reid's staements were somewhat distasteful, his reasoning was correct. Many white people are more comfortable with "articulate" light-skinned Black people. Reid only expressed why he thought white America would find Obama electable and not be limited to being just a "Black candidate." The hypocrisy is that the closeted racist white republicans, the Uncle Tom minstrel showman Negro Michael Steele and political harlot witch Lynne Cheney are so upset by Reid's remarks. The truth is that those hypocritical Republican slugs and their house Negro are only seeking to gain political advantage from what Harry Reid said about then candidate Barack Obama. They could care less about any sensitivity or lack thereof pertaining to the millions of Black people in this country who know exactly what Reid was talking about. Millions of white peole who feel the same way as Harry Reid so poorly stated,nevertheless voted for President Obama. Skin tone and color has always and will always be an issue affecting Black people in America and worldwide. Get over it !

Posted by: ellislawoffice | January 11, 2010 11:45 AM | Report abuse

Keepitforreal:

Had Trent Lott actually said it would have been "much better" maybe you would have a point.

Posted by: JakeD | January 11, 2010 11:42 AM | Report abuse

'Game Change" -- the book and movie -- as cheesy as it gets:


“A long analysis of the demographics of the electorate is not going to get you an HBO movie,” Fineman said. “But the tawdry psycho-drama of the Edwards’s and a racist crack by Harry Reid will.”

Heilemann, a staff writer for New York magazine, and Halperin, formerly at ABC and now at Time, are consummate insiders, and the roll-out of the book reflects that — a veritable drumbeat of blog items and newspaper stories that culminated Sunday night with a segment on “60 Minutes” in which Anderson Cooper interviewed not only them but also Steve Schmidt, the former McCain campaign strategist and an obvious source, who described many of the incidents recounted in the books.

For anybody who dislikes establishment journalism — its coziness with sources and its obsession with process — this book takes it to new levels. And even before it hits the book stores, “Game Change” has its detractors, mostly those who question the news value in behind-the-scenes tidbits from the campaign, as well as the reliance on anonymous sources to reconstruct many events.

“Just when you think the news cycle can't get any stupider, Mark Halperin publishes a book,” Christopher Hayes, Washington editor of The Nation, wrote on Twitter.

Posted by: drindl | January 11, 2010 11:41 AM | Report abuse

The brouhaha over Reid's statement is ridiculous. He merely said in private the kind of remarks made all the time in private. Was it a bit backward? Yes. Anachronistic? Yes. Racist? No. The black community for quite some time debated whether Obama was "black enough" to be the first black president. The fact of the matter is, the first black president had to be someone like Obama. Someone who walked the same walk and talked the same talk as white Americans. It helps that he had a white mother from Kansas. It helped that he went to elite schools. It helped that he didn't carry the baggage of the civil rights era the way that someone like Jesse Jackson does. The majority in this country had to feel comfortable with him. And the fact that he could "turn on and off," the "Negro dialect," is the story of most professional black folks lives.

Further, what Reid said is not at all similar to the racist remarks that forced Trent Lott to step down from his Senate majority leader role. Saying that Obama is palatable to whites is far different from saying this country would be a much better place if Dixiecrat, segregationist candidate Strom Thurman had won, and this country maintained the era of Jim Crow.

Finally, Sen. Joe Biden said something quite similar while Obama was running. He called him the first viable African American candidate because he was "articulate (not a compliment for black folks, btw)" and "clean." He too backtracked and Obama accepted his apology and chose him to be his running mate.

Posted by: Keepitforreal | January 11, 2010 11:38 AM | Report abuse

Actually the way a person speaks does matter. It is part of an overall impression. Usually a first impression. Anyone here ever hear Mississippi Gov Haley Barbour speak?

Posted by: mpw101 | January 11, 2010 11:37 AM | Report abuse

"Not quite as bad as when Bill Clinton said of Barack Obama that, “a few years ago, this guy would have been getting us coffee”.

Posted by: jahoby"

Pretty obv that was about Obama's status as a freshman Senator.

Posted by: DDAWD | January 11, 2010 11:37 AM | Report abuse

jakeD: I am aware, indeed.

Posted by: jahoby | January 11, 2010 11:36 AM | Report abuse

jahoby:

Agreed (but Bill Clinton is not the current SENATE MAJORITY LEADER either). You are aware that Trent Lott was forced out for even less?

Posted by: JakeD | January 11, 2010 11:34 AM | Report abuse

Not quite as bad as when Bill Clinton said of Barack Obama that, “a few years ago, this guy would have been getting us coffee”.

Posted by: jahoby | January 11, 2010 11:34 AM | Report abuse

Not quite as bad as when Bill Clinton had said of Barack Obama that, “a few years ago, this guy would have been getting us coffee”.

Posted by: jahoby | January 11, 2010 11:32 AM | Report abuse

Not quite as bad as when Bill Clinton had said of Barack Obama that, “a few years ago, this guy would have been getting us coffee”).

Posted by: jahoby | January 11, 2010 11:32 AM | Report abuse

It would be WONDERFUL if you actually ignored every slimy and racist worm that comes crawling out from under its rock for this and every other thread.

Posted by: JakeD | January 11, 2010 11:32 AM | Report abuse

Koolkat, you don't mean Jose Padilla and his dirty bomb, the LAX 7/4/2002 shooter, Lyman Faris, the Virginia Jihad, Richard Reid, the lackawana Six, Assem Hammoud and Hudson River Bomb Plot, the Portland 7, and the Sears Tower Plot, do you? Other than that there were just those 4 airplanes on 9/11.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | January 11, 2010 11:31 AM | Report abuse

OOh, I'm scared, Jake. Shaking in my boots. I see zouk is still here. Now, excuse me while I scroll past you the rest of your life.

Posted by: drindl | January 11, 2010 11:26 AM | Report abuse

koolkat_1960:

It does give me a morning jolt. And, I think you mis-quoted: "no domestic terrorist attacks SINCE 2001 until when Obama took over ..."

Posted by: JakeD | January 11, 2010 11:26 AM | Report abuse

"My boy Barry is a light-skinned Nigra"
- Harry the horse's ass Reid.

Posted by: screwjob2 | January 11, 2010 11:26 AM | Report abuse

Dems are Racists. Dem policy, the big Govt policy, is and has always been designed to enslave minorities to secure their votes and increase their own power. The more on the Govt dole, dependent on the Govt the happier the Lib Dem party is. The fewer that pay Fed tax the better. And one has to wonder why minorities obediently, year after year, vote for the party of DECEPTION. They really have to ask themselves how the Deceptive have benefited them all these years and all the Billions on dollars Re-Distributed via Govt entitlements. Not very much one would conclude. But you can bet the likes of Harry and Barry and all the usual Deceptive suspects are smiling as they spread the wealth.

Posted by: jas7751 | January 11, 2010 11:26 AM | Report abuse

drindl:

Careful with the ad hominem "personal attacks".

Posted by: JakeD | January 11, 2010 11:24 AM | Report abuse

here's something else that someone, uh, forgot to mention:

"The Congressional Black Caucus plans to issue a new statement Monday, defending Reid and brushing back Republicans.

“Senator Reid’s record provides a stark contrast to actions of Republicans to block legislation that would benefit poor and minority communities — most recently reflected in Republican opposition to the health bill now under consideration,” CBC Chairwoman Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) said. “I look forward to Senator Reid continuing to serve as Majority Leader to guide this important agenda through the Senate.”

“There are some Republicans who are trying to use this for political advantage,” said a source close to the Reid camp. “If Senators [Jon] Kyl, [John] Cornyn and others want to have an open and honest debate about race — and if they want to discuss their records on issues of importance to the African-American community — we welcome that dialogue. But we are not going to stand idly by while hypocritical Republicans take swipes at Senator Reid, distorting his record of achievement and their own record of failure.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0110/31340.html#ixzz0cJzzqYSa

Posted by: drindl | January 11, 2010 11:24 AM | Report abuse

"Martin Luther King was a Republican because he rejected democrats' racism."

MLK was NOT a Republican, numbnutz. This is another myth spouted by rightwingnuts.

Sort of like "no domestic terrorist attacks under Bush."

You people must think everyone else is as ignorant as you are.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | January 11, 2010 11:22 AM | Report abuse

Everything slimy and racist worm comes crawling out from under its rock for this thread, I see. Nice going, Chris.

Posted by: drindl | January 11, 2010 11:20 AM | Report abuse

Obaama, how long are you conservatives going to peddle this deceitful claim that it was the GOP who passed civil rights? To be sure, Civil Rights was passed with a considerable number of republicans. But those republicans would never be able to pass muster with this version of the GOP.

Indeed, the conservative democrats in the south were rigidly opposed to the civil rights bill being pushed by Lyndon Johnson and the liberal democrats and supported by liberal republicans. So please, don't employ this Limbaughesque deception to deceive people into believing that it was the conservative republicans who dreamed up the idea of Civil Rights.

In point of fact, Abe Lincoln himself would not be able to pass the tea party purity test.

Posted by: jaxas70 | January 11, 2010 11:20 AM | Report abuse

For you folks who are interested in races with national implications, as Bsimon points out, #4 -- Kay Bailey Hutchinson vs. Rick Perry is the race to watch.

Four years ago, Governor Perry was regarded as a cipher who barely beat folk-singer Kinky Friedman and three other entertaining, but only moderately sophisticated foes in what should have been
an easy reelection bid.
Today, he is construed as being the hottest dark horse in the GOP presidential field. (Of course that dubious designation was also given to Senator George Allen prior to his own Harry Reid moment and Governor Mark Sanford prior to his ill-advised excursion to Argentina.)

Seriously, folks: watch this race closely. Kay Bailey Hutchinson is an extremely skillful legislator who knows how to win elections. If Perry beats her (and Houston's popular mayor in the general election), Palin, Huckabee and Barbour (the current gubernatorial stars of the right) are going to struggle to keep their Tea Party supporters from defecting en masse to him.

Posted by: Jay20 | January 11, 2010 11:20 AM | Report abuse

"Btw, you libs should check on just who got the Civil Rights act passed, in spite of Dems adversity. Subtle hint: the GOP."

Not so subtle response, numbnutz: The GOP of 1964 was full of people you fringies would now call RINOs. As if Jacob Javits would be welcome in the GOP of 2010. He was more liberal than most Democrats.

Such people are to be applauded for their actions, but they have NOTHING in common with the southern, conservative, racist GOP of 2010 beyond the party name.

LOL what a clown you are to post such irrelevant nonsense.

People like you must think black people are stupid, since almost all of them vote Democratic. How racist of you.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | January 11, 2010 11:19 AM | Report abuse

The democratic party was founded on slavery. Martin Luther King was a Republican because he rejected democrats' racism. reid is the perfect face of their party.

Posted by: ItsOver2 | January 11, 2010 11:17 AM | Report abuse

There is much to admire about Barry. Such as loyalty. 20 yrs with the same Radical Rev/ Mentor in his Racist Hate America Negro Liberation Church. Over 20 years. Truly outstanding!

Posted by: jas7751 | January 11, 2010 11:13 AM | Report abuse

C'mon now, of course he survived. The only way he suffers is if other Democrats turn on him and that won't happen because Democrats possess no objective standards for behavior or speech.

The more interesting and troubling aspect of this story is why the "reporters" kept it quiet for so long. That speaks to a tribal loyalty to the Democratic party by those who are supposed to report news without bias.

Posted by: edbyronadams | January 11, 2010 11:12 AM | Report abuse

Please moonbat, spare us all of your glib claptrap about evidence in support of ideas. The truth is that you conservatives have been well schooled by the master in the art of projection of your own human foibles on the bugbear of "liberals".

Look. Limbaugh teaches this nonsense on his puerile radio show. Whatever his own greatest moral failings--from his low, mean character to his heaving drinking, from his drug addictions to his "doctor shopping to acquire them, from his gross cowardice (his deceptive medical condition of colloidal reflux) to keep out of military service during the Vietnam war) to his faux swagger (close insiders know that he is beset by doubts about his own social skills), from his pretense at being a "harmless little fuzzball" to his deep and abiding hatred for anyone who doesn't look, think, act, walk, talk and smell like him, Rush Limbaugh is a walking testament to all of the very things he hates.

But chief among his foibles is one that is shared broadly by the conservative mindset in general--a preening, self-adoring moral conceit that there is only one legitimate political philosophy for America--his. And theirs. That arrogant conceit comes out in the form of a bitterness that we have not seen in the political jungles since the Nazism of the 20s and 30s in the last century.

Posted by: jaxas70 | January 11, 2010 11:10 AM | Report abuse

With Harry's poll number in NV plummeting Barry would probably prefer Harry retire so as to replace him with another phony Dem. Like they did with Dodd. But now with this disingenuous out pouring of support for him they are stuck with ol Harry. Harry, the face of the Dem party. LOL!


Posted by: jas7751 | January 11, 2010 11:10 AM | Report abuse

RE #2 --

Something else from the book you really ought to mention -- much more relevant than anything you cited:

In September 2008, then-Alaska governor Sarah Palin raised eyebrows when she appeared to link the invasion of Iraq to the Sept. 11 attacks, telling “an Iraq-bound brigade of soldiers that included her son that they would ‘defend the innocent from the enemies who planned and carried out and rejoiced in the death of thousands of Americans.’” The McCain campaign claimed at the time that Palin “was referring to al-Qaeda in Iraq, a terror group that formed after the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 and claims to be allied with the global al-Qaeda organization.”

But in an interview with CBS’s 60 Minutes last night, New York magazine’s John Heilemann, who is a co-author of a recently released book on the 2008 campaign, said that Palin “regularly” claimed during the campaign “that Saddam Hussein had been behind 9/11.”

Posted by: drindl | January 11, 2010 11:08 AM | Report abuse

I thought it would be obvious to everyone that there is more to racism than hating black people. But Americans are silly.

Chinua Achebe once wrote an essay stating that he believed "Heart of Darkness" to be a racist book, even though Conrad wrote it to expose the atrocities committed on Africans.

How to not be a racist: Look upon people with indifference and no assumptions or preconceptions. Let every interaction with a person independent of all other information shape your opinion.

You bet Harry Reid is a racist! Wake up, people.

Posted by: Wallenstein | January 11, 2010 11:07 AM | Report abuse

Btw, you libs should check on just who got the Civil Rights act passed, in spite of Dems adversity. Subtle hint: the GOP.

Posted by: Obaama | January 11, 2010 11:06 AM | Report abuse

If nothing else, the Lib Dems know how to pander (ie Negro dialect) to their gullible constituency.

Posted by: jas7751 | January 11, 2010 11:04 AM | Report abuse

*"When Trent Lott stepped down from his perch as majority leader he did so not because of intense media scrutiny or pressure or from demands from democrats. He was pressured by the GOP who already had a good deal of heartburn with Lott's propensity to negotiate with democrats.*"

So the GOP has more internal respect for blacks then the Dems? 'We need Reid, let's let it go'. Oh brother. If the larger black community had any sense they'd play the two sides off the other. As it is they're only taken for granted and given lip service.

Posted by: Obaama | January 11, 2010 11:01 AM | Report abuse

Jas7751, when it comes to hypocrisy, politics is an equal opportunity paradise. You may think that condemning Reid for his transparently racist comments gives you on the right some moral leg up on the issue of race but, nothing could be further from the truth.

What makes conservative hypocrisy even greater than the predictable liberal reaction here is that at least, liberals have the saving grace of a legislating history to remedy some of America's moral failings in the past as regards the treatment of not only blacks but red and brown peoples as well.

You can have a great deal of fun dribbling nonsense from the corners of your frothy mouth about hypocrisy but the far greater hypocrisy is this conservative pretense that you are outraged at Reid's comments when in fact, if he had been a conservative, you would be defending him this morning.

Harry Reid is a good man. His opponents are not good men,. They are cruel, deceptive, even evil. They will pretend to be outraged at this episode when anyone with even a modest collection of brain cells within their head knows that the next time Michelle Bachmann or Glenn Beck says something vile about Barack Obama, you will be on this blog full throatedly and all too conveniently defending their right to free speech.

Posted by: jaxas70 | January 11, 2010 10:57 AM | Report abuse

The best thing about charges of racism for libs is that like most of thier ideas, it needs no actual evidence. It is a secret thing that only the real kooks can spy in an adversary. If displayed by democrats, it was a joke or the guy had a good heart. If perceived in any way, including disagreeing with anything a black man thinks, then the discussion is immediately terminated and the lib wins.

In the days of endlessly repeating lib failure, you can see why this method is so essential to liberal theology.

Repubs are racist because they think everyone should be treated the same, even different colored people. Dems think that rules need to be indexed to every identity.

Posted by: Moonbat | January 11, 2010 10:57 AM | Report abuse


Reid's comments are refreshing. It is long overdue that a leader of the Dem party would speak honestly about the most obedient base of his party. More should follow Harry's leadership on this. Wouldn't be a surprise if the Congressional Negro Caucus honored Harry with some Humanitarian Award for his honesty. Reid, Schumer, Durbin, Franken, Kain, Axlerod, Emanuel, all the usual Liberal suspects, need to step forward and be candid concerning their base of voters. How they really feel about them. Come out of the shadows Dems....

The Truth Shall Set You Free!


Posted by: jas7751 | January 11, 2010 10:56 AM | Report abuse

bsimon @1031 -- I don't think you will find any takers for your bet.

In the meantime, the Grand Old Party of Nothing tries to keep the media and the government off the road and in the ditches of class and race war.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | January 11, 2010 10:55 AM | Report abuse

I knew that the Beltway media would salivate over this -- would try to keep this non-story alive. The racists come crawling out from under the rocks to spew their venom -- voila- lots of hits!

Harry Reid has become the Emmanuel Goldstein of the Teabagger Party and at least once a day every loyal bagger has to observe a Two Minute Hate with him as the object.

Posted by: drindl | January 11, 2010 10:54 AM | Report abuse

Well come on jas7751! If being an "old fart racist" were grounds for keeping someone out of Congress, most conservatives would have to resign immediately.

Loo. For me, actions trump words. Reid certainly has lived up to his reputation for having a "tin ear and a heart of gold". I would bet you that the vast majority of African-Americans in this country would easily forgive Reid far more quickly than you conservatives for whom your fealty to fundamentalist Christianity is just another blockfiller on your way to political office.

People aren't stupid. They know where conservatives stand on the issue of race. They employ convenient, deceptive little euphemisms condemning "quotas", Affirmative Action, and race base preferences to skillfully achieve the same aims they once used lynchings and church burnings to get.

The truth is that when it comes to any sort of equal rights for minorities or any sort of assistance to elevate them to the same opportunities whites take for granted, conservatives just say no.

If there is one word that encapsulates conservative dreams, aspirations and hopes, it is the word "No!" with an exclamation point.

Posted by: jaxas70 | January 11, 2010 10:47 AM | Report abuse

How embarrassing it must be to be a part of the Liberal Hypocrisy and defend it. Now that is one tough assignment.

Posted by: jas7751 | January 11, 2010 10:43 AM | Report abuse

Blacks are useful idiots for the Democrat Party and have been since LBJs Great Society. The Dems have enslaved Blacks with Govt Entitlements (Wealth Re-Distribution) for generations. The Black Community has to ask themselves how that has worked out. While Blacks continue to obediently vote Dem those Political Hacks make their false promises and grow their base. Pitiful.


Posted by: jas7751


Blacks are still slaves, yet now their "Masta" is the democRAT party, and the last thing the "Masta" can afford, is to see the slaves break free from the chains and leave the plantation.

Posted by: cschotta1 | January 11, 2010 10:43 AM | Report abuse

Somehow the kooks on this blog will interpret that it is repubs who are racist, ignoring all evidence.

No wonder this is the most hated congress, the fastest sinking president, the biggest failure of an agenda. The lib leaders are arrogant and clueless.

Posted by: Moonbat | January 11, 2010 10:43 AM | Report abuse

jaxas70. You hit the nail on the head.

Posted by: trep1 | January 11, 2010 10:39 AM | Report abuse

If being a moron and saying dumb things were disqualifying for democrats we would have no

VP
Speaker of the House
and certainly spineless jello courage Reid.

Posted by: Moonbat | January 11, 2010 10:36 AM | Report abuse

Jaked and a number of other conservatives are having a field day bloviating about a perceived "double standard". And they are right--if they are claiming that democrats are using a double standard. Of course they are. They are a political party trying to survive a midterm election!

The question is, does this double standard extend to the mainstream media and from the evidence I have seen the answer to that is a resounding "No!" Anyone who watches the media and is honest with themselves should be able to see that if anything, the republicans end up getting an easier time from the media.

When Trent Lott stepped down from his perch as majority leader he did so not because of intense media scrutiny or pressure or from demands from democrats. He was pressured by the GOP who already had a good deal of heartburn with Lott's propensity to negotiate with democrats.

The oddest thing about all of this is that the media is far more sympathetic to republicans on these racial issues than they are democrats. Aside from Trent Lott, how many prominent conservatives who have made outrageously racial comments about Obama have been called on to resign? Indeed, transparent racists like Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh have actually benefited from their bigotries. Michelle Bachmann and Virginia Fox in the House have made repeated racial comments and other outrageously bigoted comments and are presented by the media in almost comical references and no one has called for their resignations from anything.

Look. I am a media watcher and if anything the media ends up most of the time parroting outrageously vile talking points from the right wing of the republican party. It is almost as if jaked and his ilk are not even watching the mainstream media but rather are just accepting the croakings of their favorite talk radio toads Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck.

Posted by: jaxas70 | January 11, 2010 10:32 AM | Report abuse

shrink2 writes
"Michael Steele survives -- for now"


The timing could not have been better, for Steele. The oddsmaker in me says that he will go before Reid.

Posted by: bsimon1 | January 11, 2010 10:31 AM | Report abuse

Re #4: it is shocking to me that a man who suggests his state seceede from the union is considered a viable Presidential candidate.

Posted by: bsimon1 | January 11, 2010 10:27 AM | Report abuse


Beside the fact that Reid is an old fart Racist, they Dems are actually proud of him, admire him and after this continue to support him? What a joke the Dem party is. Simply an embarrassment.


Posted by: jas7751 | January 11, 2010 10:26 AM | Report abuse

Blacks are useful idiots for the Democrat Party and have been since LBJs Great Society. The Dems have enslaved Blacks with Govt Entitlements (Wealth Re-Distribution) for generations. The Black Community has to ask themselves how that has worked out. While Blacks continue to obediently vote Dem those Political Hacks make their false promises and grow their base. Pitiful.

Posted by: jas7751 | January 11, 2010 10:22 AM | Report abuse

It is so refreshing that we can all now call a Negro a Negro and drop the silly Afro American moniker.


Posted by: jas7751 | January 11, 2010 10:19 AM | Report abuse

JakeD: saying that McCain lost by less than he would have lost if Palin hadn't been on the ticket is not really high praise, since he and Palin still got routed.

Hey, but if it gives you a morning jolt, take it and run with it.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | January 11, 2010 10:07 AM | Report abuse

reason5:

You're OK with the blatent double standard between Dems and GOP?!

Posted by: JakeD | January 11, 2010 10:03 AM | Report abuse

While a right leaning blog wallows in yet another day of race baiting (what Fox finally shifted away from the soft on terror line?), a left leaning blog (Ezra Klein) has a link to perhaps the first of many articles on the jobs associated with the health care stimulus package.

To me, this is the only good reason for support of this bill, we have to have a new job driver that is (a) not consumer spending driven and (b) will shift the focus of American productivity and consumptiom to something sustainable and which can not out-sourced.

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2010/01/new_jobs_health.html

Posted by: shrink2 | January 11, 2010 10:02 AM | Report abuse

Portland1:

Exactly.

mellwood1:

Your logic fails in that every Democratic President since Lyndon Johnson has gotten the vast majority of African American vote. Obama fooled a lot of white women too.

Posted by: JakeD | January 11, 2010 10:00 AM | Report abuse

I don't think Harry Reid should resign. I don't think Reid is a racist or anything like that. I do, however, think Reid is a liberal leading this nation into an obvlivion of debt and government control of life. He doesn't want to answer to the people of Nevada, but now he must. I think Reid will be another gift for Republicans in 2010. It should help in states where the black vote will really matter: Illinois & North Carolina for example. In North Carolina, Richard Burr, aside from being labeled Republican, is fairly well liked in the black community. Also, in Ill, with Giannoulias as the nominee beating out Cheryle Jackson Kirk could use this to pick off some of the black vote to win. This may play a spot in other races too, but those 2 states immediately come to mind. So stay Democratic majority leader Reid, stay!

Posted by: reason5 | January 11, 2010 9:58 AM | Report abuse

AndyR3:

I actually agree that neither of them said anything that was deserving of stepping down, but do you see the double standard here? Lott's comment was NOT worse than Reid's, but only one is forced out. That's what I'm upset about.

bradcpa:

Lott did NOT say that segregation was better, just that we wouldn't have all these same problems today. Since I agree with that, I guess I am a "racist" too. The problem with your logic, though, is that makes Reid a "racist" who should be forced out of office immediately.

Posted by: JakeD | January 11, 2010 9:56 AM | Report abuse

If Steele and RNC have any sense they will call out everyone of the five faced libs who are now making nice with each other over caustic race comments from Sen. Crupt er…I mean Reid. They will save every scrap of film and print with quotes from GOB senators & Rev. Al and others of his ilk that show them playing down Reid’s comments.

In the future, if a conservative makes any stupid comment about race that is even close to the offensive language Reid used and the libs scream for blood (and being two faced hypocrites, they will) Steele and the RNC should trot out all of their files on this sordid episode to call them out again.

At that point they should point out that libs:

1) Don’t really care about race issues and just use this race card as a political lever when it’s expedient or…
2) They do believe in racial injustice but are two faced bas terds who apply it only to political opponents.

Posted by: Portland1 | January 11, 2010 9:52 AM | Report abuse

Reid is wrong.

Obama is not some black man with enough "white" speech and mannerisms to allow whites to vote for him.

Obama is a white man with enough "black" features and faked mannerisms to get a record number of blacks to vote for him.

It was the blacks, not the whites, who were fooled by Obama.

Posted by: mellwood1 | January 11, 2010 9:49 AM | Report abuse

so Obama was making more snide comments about HRC... what else is new-

it's obvious he has issues with women, unless they're there to lick his boots

Posted by: tru-indy | January 11, 2010 9:42 AM | Report abuse

Let's examine Obama's platform


- Transparency - complete disaster Obama gets an F


- Bipartisanship - Obama has spent the entire year NOT working with the Republicans on a health care bill - Obama could compromise and get a solid bipartisan bill together, but he doesn't want to - Obama gets an F

- Post- Racial - Obama gives Harry Reid a pass on racist comments - Obama here is being motivated by his PARTISAN links to Reid - not anything post-racial, or even fair


Again Obama gets an F

Terrorism - Obama INTERRUPTS AN INTERROGATION OF A TERRORIST as he was telling us about future terroist attacks - to give the terrorist a lawyer who tells the terrorist to "remain silent"

That is grounds for EXPULSION, FORGET ABOUT GRADES.

The stimulus bill is a complete disaster - the website that was supposed to keep track of the jobs has so many errors they have quit - they cant even get the zip codes right.

Obama has been a complete disaster.

I don't know what to say -


Let's just hope we don't get attacked from Yemen again - because it doesn't seem like Obama is going to be very effective in that area.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | January 11, 2010 9:41 AM | Report abuse

Whether people like it or not what Reid said is the truth. If not why did Time magazine darken O.J. Simpson's face? It is well know that light-skinned Negroes are seen as less threatening - let's don't pretend we don't know our own history.

Lott said that if segregation had remained and the rest of the country had followed our lead.... Which means that the country should have denied people their rights.

Apples and oranges but actually more like comparing two different food groups.

Posted by: rlj1 | January 11, 2010 9:33 AM | Report abuse

Once again Steele and the Republicans just do not get it. There is a huge difference between Reid and Lott other than a Democratic or Republican leader. The difference is between expressing a political reality in a politically incorrect way and a racist comment express in a politically correct way. This is why I am convinced that many Republicans if not racist just don't get it .... at all. What Reid said was not the correct language but the concept has been explored in even Spike Lee films. What Reid did was to complement Obama in being able to transcend certain stereo-types white people have. Now lets explore the comment that got Trent Lott in trouble where he said that if Strom Thurmond's unsuccessful 1948 presidential campaign had been successful "we would of not had the problems we have had today". What does that mean? Clearly it means out country would be better off without the civil right legislation of the 50s and 60s. Thurmond's 1948 campaign was based on platform exemplified by this quote from Thurmond himself "I wanna tell you, ladies and gentlemen, that there's not enough troops in the army to force the Southern people to break down segregation and admit the nigra race into our theaters, into our swimming pools, into our homes, and into our churches." Michael Steele would not be chairman of the Republican party today if Thurmond had won that election. The two set of remarks are in no way comparable. If you think so you probably are a redneck and likely a racist. PS... I think the only reason why Steele is able to hang in there is his race. That is another example of Republican racism.

Posted by: bradcpa | January 11, 2010 9:29 AM | Report abuse

Can this administration be having more trouble one year in ???

- The terrorism policy is in shreds - Obama just spent two weeks trying to pretend that he is not soft on terrorism.

- The health care bill should not have been first on the agenda - it has produced a "slow drip" and a "slow erosion" of support for Obama.


- The economy keeps on getting worse - Obama, which no business or economic experience, really does not know what to do.

- NOW the racism issue comes up again, and this time Obama looks like the hypocrite -


If Obama can't be tough on Reid's comments, Obama is nothing but a hypocrite - this is not leadership it is PARTISANSHIP.

Every part of Obama's platform, Obama has committed FRAUD against.

Oh well.........


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | January 11, 2010 9:28 AM | Report abuse

Chris, I wanted to ask this in your live Q&A last Friday, but wasn't able to. I'm curious about how all these retirements are being portrayed in the media, including your column. 2 Democrat senators are retiring, which is a sign of problems for the Dems, yet *6* Republican senators are also retiring. 10 Democrat representatives are retiring, and 1 switched over to R, and this is a sign of major defections and unease in Dem circles, but *14* Republican representatives are also retiring.

It's almost as thought there's a story out there that everyone assumes is true, that Dem's are nervous and in trouble. And then facts are used to underscore that story, whether it's true or not. There are more Repub retirements, but the story is how nervous Dems are. Can you address this in a future entry?

Posted by: Dr_Bob | January 11, 2010 9:28 AM | Report abuse

Liberals have long taken African American voters for granted and why not? Obama can oppose and defund voucher programs and agitate for illegal alien amnesty--two policies that have devastating consequences for African American taxpayers--and still get 97% of the AA vote.

Obama deserves to wear a bright shiny HYPOCRITE tag due to his earlier politically expedient calls for the firing of Imus, Lott etc. You know he is in trouble when he has to use Al Sharpton as his pointman to save Reid. Pathetic.

The Republicans deserve plenty of ridicule too for their contiuing forebearance with uber-incompetent RNC Chairman Michael Steele whose only excuse is that he rarely uses a teleprompter.

Posted by: NAuchi | January 11, 2010 9:28 AM | Report abuse

...Texas’ high-school graduation rate is among the nation’s lowest..."

Well yeah but their high school football programs are fabulous!

"...I think I understand why abstinence only education is not effective..."

Lets ask former governor Palin about "home schooling" and abstinence.

Posted by: shrink2 | January 11, 2010 9:18 AM | Report abuse

The Ku Klux Klan is outraged that an old Mormon made a possibly racially insensitive remark about a man they hate because he's only half white? Now, that's entertainment.

Posted by: matthewjblack | January 11, 2010 9:15 AM | Report abuse

Politico has another poll stating that Brown is leading in Massachusetts -


Even if Brown loses, this is telling.


The country is TELLING OBAMA TO ABANDON THE HEALTH CARE BILL - HOW MUCH LOUDER COULD IT BE - A POLL IN MASSACHUSETTS WITH A REPUBLICAN LEADING FOR TED KENNEDY'S SEAT ?????


Posted by: 37thand0street | January 11, 2010 9:12 AM | Report abuse

Thanks for the link to the Draper piece CC. It was well worth the time.
The most interesting paragraph to me was the following:
Today’s Super-America looks a bit different. Its Hispanic population is both the state’s fastest-growing and its most impoverished. Texas’ high-school graduation rate is among the nation’s lowest, and its percentage of residents who lack health insurance is the highest. And as The Austin American-Statesman recently reported, “More government money has been spent on the cause of sexual abstinence in Texas than any other state, but it still has the third-highest teen birth rate in the country and the highest percentage of teen mothers giving birth more than once.”

I think I understand why abstinence only education is not effective. Teens are not staying in school, so they do not get the benefit of anstinence only wisdom. ;)

Posted by: trep1 | January 11, 2010 9:07 AM | Report abuse

For a party that loves to call the republicans racist, the democrats really have a great deal of racists at the top of their party.


Obama brought his children to a racist church for years.


Obama gave that racist church $20,000.

So, who should resign ???

There is a big difference between comments in the context of trying to complement someone, and taking actions to associate oneself over a long period of time with a racist organization.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | January 11, 2010 9:05 AM | Report abuse

While the political media is awash in self-flagellating trivia... the story of the century goes uncovered -- except for HERE:

U.S. GOV'T USES CBS NEWS TO COVER UP MICROWAVE CELL TOWER TORTURE OF 'TARGETED' AMERICANS?

• Steve Kroft "60 Minutes" report on "electronic fence" along Mexican border reveals U.S. Homeland Security "department-wide re-assessment of the entire program."

• Does the "entire program" also include the nationwide network Homeland Security cellular "torture towers" already operational in virtually every community in America...

...being used to physically attack and physiologically and neurologically impair unconstitutionally "targeted" American citizens -- as first reported at links below?

• A government-wide cover up that makes Watergate look like just another black bag job?

Poynter.org (Groups -- Reporting): "U.S. Gov't uses CBS..."; "U.S. Silently Tortures Americans with Cell Tower Microwaves"
http://nowpublic.com/world/u-s-silently-tortures-americans-cell-tower-microwaves
http://nowpublic.com/world/gestapo-usa-govt-funded-vigilante-network-terrorizes-america OR NowPublic.com/scrivener

Posted by: scrivener50 | January 11, 2010 9:01 AM | Report abuse

Wow......! Even more damaging racists remarks from other Democrat politicians.....who knew?

Of course the POST is going to "Whitewash" these racists remarks being made by Democrats........yep....goes against all the sterotyping of the GOP for the last several decades......:

"One of the enduring mysteries of the 2008 campaign was what got Ted Kennedy so mad at Bill Clinton. The former president's entreaties, at some point, backfired, and the explanation has never quite emerged.

I've finally gotten my hands on a copy of Game Change, in which John Heliemann and Mark Halperin report:

[A]s Hillary bungled Caroline, Bill’s handling of Ted was even worse. The day after Iowa, he phoned Kennedy and pressed for an endorsement, making the case for his wife. But Bill then went on, belittling Obama in a manner that deeply offended Kennedy. Recounting the conversation later to a friend, Teddy fumed that Clinton had said, A few years ago, this guy would have been getting us coffee."

That's Bill Clinton telling Kennedy that Obama would have been us coffee....

POST = report the "news" our close down our left-wing political paper........

Posted by: allenridge | January 11, 2010 8:53 AM | Report abuse

It's a good thing Jeffrey Dahmer wasn't a democrat senator.

Posted by: ADNova | January 11, 2010 8:50 AM | Report abuse

Wonder why we are so polarized?
Some people blame the anonymity of the internets.

Not these folks. Some interesting ideas with heavy political implications.

http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/10/a-nation-of-hunkered-down-homebodies/

It is a lot of reading, but evidently, most people here are either retired or have jobs with a lot of down time between periods of intensity/insanity.

Posted by: shrink2 | January 11, 2010 8:40 AM | Report abuse

Michael Steele survives -- for now

Posted by: shrink2 | January 11, 2010 8:34 AM | Report abuse

Republicans are held to one standard, when it comes to racial comments, by the liberals and the media. i.e. Trent Lott and George Allen.

The Democrats are held to a different standard by the liberals and the media. i.e. Harry Reid, Bill Clinton, Jesse Jackson Sr and Al Sharpton.

This is why the masses view the media with great disgust! They know a double standard when they see it.

Posted by: mwhoke | January 11, 2010 8:33 AM | Report abuse

How about a remake of "Dumb and Dumber" starring Harry Reid and Rod Blagojevich? More at: www.eightfits.blogspot.com

Posted by: Baxter24 | January 11, 2010 8:25 AM | Report abuse

I dont' think Reid should step down, nor did I think Lott should have been forced to step down either. Both of their comments were insensitive, but in no way do I think they are racist.
Frankly this will be a blip in the road and will be forgotten by this wednesday.

I would also expect that any job creation plan that Obama unviels will focus on increasing Union jobs. The Unions are going to take a hit with their members when the healthcare bill passes, and their leaders will need something to bring to their members to ease that hit. Interestingly, the idea of taxing 'cadillac' plans wasn't really on the table until many of the unions (UAW etc) took over their healthcare plan financing. Now that the union has to pay directly for healthcare premiums they would love to eliminate these cadillac plans. And the best way to do that is to tell their members that they can either have increased taxes from thier healthcare plan, or they can accept a regular package and pay no increases in taxes. In the later scenario the union will save millions in costs every year.

Posted by: AndyR3 | January 11, 2010 8:06 AM | Report abuse

The language used by Harry Reid in describing then-candidate Obama was unacceptable. But the fact remains that it is hardly the worst thing uttered by a member of Congress and is not even close to comparable with Trent Lott's open wish for a return to segregation and Jim Crow.

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by: parkerfl1 | January 11, 2010 8:02 AM | Report abuse

#4 is the best intro to KBH v. Goodhair you non-Texans will ever see. Both the Burka and Draper links are worthwhile, but the Draper link is a must read for the interested.

The Draper link cites Bainbridge's 1961 classic, "The Super Americans", a long time fave of mine, that should be added to the list of great American political non-fiction we have been assembling elsewhere.

Paul Burka has been saying for awhile that there are signs that Rick thinks he is presidential. Goodhair is a legend in his own mind, but he actually makes more sense as a CFG and social conservative than the others in that dual category.

I will add one bit of news: Ms. Medina, the gun toting TEA candidate in the R Primary, has made the cut in the debate at 7% in the polling. She may be the deciding factor in the primary, and that would help KBH.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | January 11, 2010 7:58 AM | Report abuse

Wow, Reid's a racist.

Posted by: eriksorenson | January 11, 2010 7:23 AM | Report abuse

Reid survived for now; Obama needs him to get the health care scam passed. But come November Obama will have the last laugh. When Reid calls the White House seeking a job after he's voted from office, I have this image of Obama dressed like the Soup Nazi saying, "No cabinet post for you!"

Posted by: Chippewa | January 11, 2010 7:08 AM | Report abuse

Trent Lott didn't resign as Majority Leader right away either. Regardless of what Obama says, I can't imagine the majority of African-Americans accept the premise he won only because he wasn't "too black". We'll see.

Posted by: JakeD | January 11, 2010 6:44 AM | Report abuse

Of course Reid survives (for now) due to the utter hypocrisy of the Democrats (who did call for Lott to step down). And 60 Minutes won't touch this of course. Instead, they unleash everything on the "real" threat to the Republic: Sarah Palin.

The comedy show aka 60 Minutes spent almost as much time on the one asinine "revelation" that Palin was concerned she would call Joe Biden “O’Biden” which is already dealt with extensively in the Gov's book (starting on page 289), as it does the ENTIRE campaign of Hillary Clinton and far more than the whole campaign of Obama.

Finally, the kicker came last night when Schmidt admits at the end of the interview that Palin was good for the ticket, but he says so in such a convoluted way and Cooper spins it in such a negative light that I am quite sure that at least half the viewers thought he meant the exact opposite.

Posted by: JakeD | January 11, 2010 6:40 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company