What the hell, I’ll jump on it.

People say some pretty harsh things about Harry Reid. Stupid. Lazy. Servile. Corrupt. Cowardly. From a reference above: “You know, I don’t think Harry Reid is all that smart.” Lambert asks: “Has Bush gotten so deeply into Harry’s head that Harry knows he’s licked before he starts?” Pretty harsh. Absolutely understandable that people are frustrated and angry – and frightened – about the current state of affairs. What I don’t understand is the expression of all this in the direction of Harry Reid.

Harry didn’t grow up rich, he didn’t come from privilege. His parents were working people; his mother took in washing to supplement his father’s wages as a hard rock miner, and neither of them graduated high school. He went to the two-room elementary school in Searchlight, NV and then to the small high school in nearby Henderson. A group of local businessmen raised the money to send him to college at the University of Utah, and after graduating he paid his own way through George Washington Law School by working nights for the Capitol Police. Harry married his high school sweetheart and they are still together, living back in Searchlight. If he’s a Plutocrat, there are no signs of it.

Reid is a Mormon, and leads a simple, clean life. He doesn’t drink, smoke, use drugs, lie, cheat, steal, chase women or little boys and he doesn’t proposition strangers in bathrooms. He is adamant that Mormonism and being a Democrat are not only compatible but the only correct choice, that being a Republican isn’t possible for a good Christian and that Mormon leaders who preach otherwise are wrong. If he’s an authoritarian or admiring of or cowed by authoritarianism, there are no signs of it.

Reid is unfailingly soft-spoken and polite. His calmness and his hesitant, diffident way of speaking give the impression of someone who can be easily intimidated, but that is far from the truth. He was a skinny kid and took his share of pushing around until he learned to box in high school, and then he didn’t get pushed around anymore.

If Harry Reid is a coward there isn’t any evidence of it, and IMHO a man would be a fool to say it to his face.

From Bob Fertik as cited above:

“Schultz: But you could say we’re not bringing this to the floor, the funding’s over, correct?
Reid [very slowly]: Yes, we could do that, yes.

When you listen to Reid here, it’s as though he never once thought about his power to keep Iraq funding off the floor.

Schultz: Why don’t you do that, the American people want you to do that?
Reid: Ed, it’s a situation where we have to do what is right… I say that Feingold and Reid are right.” [emphasis Fertik’s]

When I hear Reid on this tape, it sounds as though he’s trying to be very patient with someone who thinks they’re springing some kind of trap by stating the obvious and Reid doesn’t want to sound as contemptuous as that kind of puerile tactic deserves – but I may be projecting as much as is Fertik.

Reid is committed to turning around the Iraqi occupation, but not as some Lone Ranger High Noon exercise in political brinksmanship. Reid wants the BlueDogs, and a goodly number of Republicans, to agree to join with the Democrats to reign in BushCo. That is, as he says, “…what is right.” One person acting with his own power to thwart the will of both the Executive and the Congress would be, well, authoritarian, actually, and Reid won’t do it. Using authoritarian tactics to combat authoritarianism is wrong, no matter how righteous the cause. If the current Congress won’t do what’s right, then Americans need to elect a Congress that will. (For those who believe that the whole of government is part of some sinister cabal that can’t be managed by the people through civil means, we should take that conversation off line – don’t you think?)

So what’s Harry’s plan, you ask? Build a consensus large enough to override Bush’s veto. (Yeah, I know, blah blah consensus blah blah bipartisan blah blah, but you asked and that’s the answer.) So, you might then ask, how’s that going?

Slowly, to be sure, but it is going. Harry and Nancy nearly had enough votes to override on the S-CHIP bill. (The last vote would have been closer than it was but for Pete Stark going off on Bush’s character, which turned the topic into a condemnation of Bush – something the House is not willing to engage. That’s why, as Stark explained on the local radio, he had to give a convincing apology on the floor; without that apology, no Republicans at all would vote for S-CHIP.) Vote in the Senate was 67-29.

It appears that the override votes are there, however, for the Water Projects bill Bush vetoed on Friday. It passed the Senate 81-12 and the House 381-40. Both houses will vote again this week, and the hope is the override majorities will hold. There are other bills in the pipeline that will also have overwhelming majorities, enough for more veto overrides. The plan is to show Republicans that they can stand up to Bush and not suffer repercussion from their constituents, and then hold that consensus to pass Reid-Feingold.

From Reuters:

“’When we override this irresponsible veto, perhaps the president will finally recognize that Congress is an equal branch of government and reconsider his many other reckless veto threats,’ said Reid.”

And that’s the plan.

First, the gop ain’t gonna abandon the Chimp for some kind of consensus that gives the dems even the appearance of a victory. In that way the gop is far more organized and far better disciplined than the Dems. The gops (which reminds me of the little bunches of goo that i rub outta my Dixie-belle’s eyes most mornings) would FAR rather see the country fall than that they should lose a vote and ’dishonor’ their ’leader.’ If we have learned NOTHING by this time, 7 years into this phuquing tragic travesty, it must be that.

next, the congress notwithstanding, the chimp will NEVER ’recognize’ the separation of powers. the overthrow of that maxim was and still is the prime directive of the bushevik fascisti, and the gops in Congress are also committed to that plan.

Reid may have physical courage. But physical courage is not a particularly useful attribute on struggles like these. He’s got the tools to bring the fucking regime to its knees, and he won’t use ’em.
Why? Remember the Iron Law: People with power WITHIN any institution will sacrifice that institution’s power as long as they themselves suffer no diminution of power WITHIN the institution.
end of story, call it what you want…

Me? A Quick Study, But A Slow Learner

More like a pair of cement shoes that sinks your argument.

Bada-bing, bada-boom, baby.

Harry’s not as stupid as DeLay, but he’s just as owned.

No Hell below us
Above us, only sky

The donor list for Reid reflects the principle independent economic interests in the state, and is pretty much the same as for John Ensign, the junior Republican and far less than many major politicians.

The Mob was long ago displaced in Nevada by state-chartered multinational criminals corporations. Still plenty of extralegal organized crime residuum but that’s true everywhere. In Nevada the State itself runs prostitution and gambling along with alcohol, and the high percentage of citizens carrying weapons keeps a limit on the protection racket. That leaves drugs and those are mostly now controlled by Mexican and Columbian interests. The days of Nevada being infested by guys whose middle name is “the” are long over.

Point of fact, it was during Harry Reid’s tenure as head of the Nevada Gaming Commission from 1977 to 1981 that the Mob began to lose its grip on gambling, a period we from way out West remember very well. Reid’s honesty and vigor resulted in numerous death threats to him and his family, including a bomb planted in the family car. One mobster on the wrong end of an investigation tried to bribe Reid, who went to the FBI and set up a videotaped sting. When the lowlife actually offered up the cash, Reid lost his temper and jumped him – he tried to strangle a mobster with his bare hands. Like every Gaming Commissioner in the history of Nevada Reid was accused of corruption, but the FBI and Nevada state investigators turned up nothing. If there’s corruption around Harry Reid, no one has ever been able to prove it.

I don’t agree with Reid about everything, but I don’t have any doubts about his character and I’m damn certain he’s not afraid of George W. Bush.

if it weren’t for the clusterfuck on the FISA Reform Bill in August.

Every time I hear one of those fascists on the Judiciary Committee say “Protect America Act” I think, Harry, goddammit, you passed that bill.

Still appalling, and it moved us all that closer to the abomination of retroactive immunity for the telcos.

We. Are. Going. To. Die. We must restore hope in the world. We must bring forth a new way of living that can sustain the world. Or else it is not just us who will die but everyone. What have we got to lose? Go forth and Fight!—Xan

One of the weaknesses of being honest is the tendency to trust other people. That FISA extension was done in a big hurry by staff, a handshake deal where the White House staff promised congressional staff that there were no surprises and then, well, there were ’cause the WH staff lied. Dunno if you saw Reid on the telly after the problems came out, he could barely speak, more sputter than coherence, but the deed was done.

Sometimes, decent people screw up.

…and then, well, there were ’cause the WH staff lied.

The WH staff lied? Oh my Gawd! Who could have ever have forseen something like that happening?

Yup…by Jeebis, i remember my first beer too.

*

No? Because such thought is unthinkable?

Hence, “irrational”? And “myth”?

You’ve mythed out on something, sir.

Your complacency is endemic and will end this nation. I’ve something of a memory, too. FISA wasn’t Harry’s first capitulation to his owners, and it won’t be his last or his most criminal either.

No Hell below us
Above us, only sky

So Harry Reid joins the class of 2007. That’s the theory?

A little late, I think, to discover that Bush can’t be trusted. I’d say 7 years too late, but then again, I’m a dirty fucking hippie.

Personally, I don’t buy that theory, because I can’t believe Reid is that naive. He’s complicit, just like Nance. The fact that immunity for the telcos is even on the table is down to this bill, and I imagine that’s the bank shot they had in mind. That, and immunity for their own criminal actions as a result of whatever they were shown, and accepted, as members of the Gang of Eight.

We. Are. Going. To. Die. We must restore hope in the world. We must bring forth a new way of living that can sustain the world. Or else it is not just us who will die but everyone. What have we got to lose? Go forth and Fight!—Xan

Could be as you all say. Just seems way to dependent on too many feedback loops and interdependencies, far too fragile to sustain. Maybe I’m naive, maybe old Harry really is part of some vast criminal conspiracy, maybe from knowing and observing someone for decades I’ve grown too, what was it, oh yes, complacent. Maybe. But I doubt it.

KB, I never called you “irrational”; perhaps you have confused me with someone else. “Myth” referred to the idea that the mob runs Nevada or Harry Reid, your suggestion, just not the case. If Nevada can be said to be controlled by a criminal enterprise then so is everything else in the country, indeed the whole western world. I’ll grant you that’s an arguable construct, if tortured, but it is one with which I disagree.

Class of 2007, no, didn’t say that either, don’t think Harry likes or trusts GWB now nor has he ever. The FISA debacle was a screwup, my opinion. No less, but no more.

“Your complacency is endemic and will end this nation.” Oh, yeah, you caught me, that’s been the endeavor of my life, bringing down the nation through complacency, the Revolt of the Layabouts. Really, attacking character over disagreements, one might think there’s a lack of substance on the side that does so.

If there’s any evidence that Harry Reid is other than what he appears to be on the surface, please present it. I haven’t seen anything here, or elsewhere, beyond speculation.

Either Reid is a master of parliamentary procedure — as he certainly showed during the Frist Era — capable of nurturing the slow but sure master plan that you outline above, or he isn’t.

I think Reid is such a master*. But then, somehow, the guy who masterfully deked Frist and Bush on a host of parliamentary points when in the minority turns around and fumbles the ball on the “Protect America Act,” gutting the Fourth Amendment?

“Stampeded” or no, Reid passed a Republican-drafted abomination. (And don’t even go to the Process Dodge; I know the rules are complex. That’s why we’ve got master Parliamentarians like Reid to navigate them.)

Reid’s on the gang of 8, right? He had to know this was a critical bill, not like naming a post office or something.

So, I don’t buy the Incompetence Dodge “screw up” theory on FISA. I’ve defended Reid a lot here, and that move completely lost my trust.

Also, bringiton, I wish you’d stop with the “cabal” and CT stuff; it’s not our brand of foil. Check out Shystee’s post on emergent conspiracy.

NOTE * The question of Bush getting inside his head is another thing entirely. Being mindfucked isn’t the same as being cowardly.

We. Are. Going. To. Die. We must restore hope in the world. We must bring forth a new way of living that can sustain the world. Or else it is not just us who will die but everyone. What have we got to lose? Go forth and Fight!—Xan

I’m reasonably familiar with the properties of emergent behavior, both theoretical and applied. The approach can be useful but is not without its limits. Mathematica was brilliant, while A New Kind of Science was a circular, self-referential masturbatory waste of paper that served only to establish that mathematicians practicing science is too often like hippos wearing tutus. My opinion, application of emergent behavior theory to humans is an unacceptable stretch on less than a societal level and probably even then.

I re-read Shystee’s post and remain confused as to how it is to be interpreted. From the summary – “But is it not a conspiracy if it wasn’t proposed and agreed upon in a sit-down with all the players present? The theory of Emergent Conspiracies would say it is a conspiracy.” – it would appear that the term ”conspiracy theory” is indeed applicable when “emergent conspiracy” is employed. I fail to see how Shystee’s discussion provides a distinction but if you feel it is so, I will try to find a way to be more discerning in future.

What about

“Harry’s not as stupid as DeLay, but he’s just as owned.” and “FISA wasn’t Harry’s first capitulation to his owners, and it won’t be his last or his most criminal either” and “He’s complicit, just like Nance.” and “immunity for their own criminal actions as a result of whatever they were shown, and accepted, as members of the Gang of Eight.”

might have led me to think there was some consensus here that Reid is indeed part of a criminal conspiracy? Well, maybe I was too aggressive at connecting dots.

That being said, not everything I write is directed at just the other writers here but also at the readership. There are many viewers of Corrente who are influential in their own right, and some of them have different brands of foily than are here. When I’m addressing you specifically, Lambert, I try to use your name unless the context is obvious. If I offer a descriptor in general discussion that doesn’t apply to you, please assume I directed it elsewhere.

There have been things offered here that are “indications”. To me they fall well short of “evidence” but that is indeed my interpretation, the tipping point may be different for others. We have a difference of opinion, that’s all, and I can respect other people’s concern without either submissively agreeing or calling them out as destructive to the national interest, or directing obscenities at them. I appreciate it that you can do the same, Lambert; would that others could do so as well.

I wrote:

“He’s complicit, just like Nance.”

Yes—Because it simply is not credible to me that Reid, a master of Parliamentary procedure, could have let the abomination that is the [cough] Protect America Act pass in a fit of absent-mindedness or abstraction. This is not the sort of “screw up” that players at Reid’s level make, particularly with a piece of legislation everyone knows is critical. So, yes, Reid is “complicit” is gutting the Fourth Amendment. I fail to see how that is CT in any way.

And I wrote:

mmunity for their own criminal actions as a result of whatever they were shown, and accepted, as members of the Gang of Eight.

Sure, that’s speculation—and it would be irresponsible not to speculate. But many have put forward the idea that one reason the Bushistas are pushing for im[m|p]unity so hard is that, just like the telcos, they know they’ve broken the law. Now, intelligence matters are always murky, but it is surely not beyond the realm of possibility that Bush—like the criminal he is—showed the Gang of Eight just enough of what he was doing so that “if I go down, you go down.” Again, I don’t think that’s particularly CTish—it’s more like Kremlinology.

For much of this, there can be no “evidence”—for there to be such evidence, the Village would have to be a much healthier political system than it is. Unfortunately, the system is too sick to produce the sort of evidence that I think you are demanding. But we can’t wait until a Truth and Reconciliation Commission to meet your evidentiary standard. We need to make decisions now.

So, failing transparency, we fall back on model building—and I remind you that even the most paranoid, foily model of what would happen under Bush—at least that I could create—has fallen far short of what actually happened. At this point, I think the burden is on those who imagine the best, rather than those who fear the worst. Surely this would apply to the Democrats as well. Decision-making under uncertainty, eh?

Or perhaps “conspiracy” is simply shorthand to dismiss the idea that the wise leaders of the Democratic party are never actuated, individually or collectively, by motives to which we are not privy?

We. Are. Going. To. Die. We must restore hope in the world. We must bring forth a new way of living that can sustain the world. Or else it is not just us who will die but everyone. What have we got to lose? Go forth and Fight!—Xan

We disagree on what the indications mean, no more, no less. I’ve been trying to keep the focus on Reid; the character and intentions of whole of the Democratic leadership? Big topic, let’s try another time.

We agree the BushCo are a criminal conspiracy, and nothing would suit me better than to see them all locked up for life and all their assets forfeited. You’re the one, Lambert, arguing for mercy; I want vengeance. A pipe dream on my part? Maybe, but it keeps me entertained in my complacency.

The scope of BushCo’s criminality? Certainly unanticipated, by even the most cynical (and maybe thus the inability of Reid to anticipate everything bad every time is understandable, if not forgivable?) and in all likelihood it is far worse than we know today. Assuming we ever get real investigations, there will be more rocks with more scorpions underneath than can be counted.

Did George let Harry have a peek at something dirty and then turn around and use it successfully as extortion? Not likely. If Harry could be intimidated by a punk like GW he’d have folded in front of one of the real threats, like a bomb in his wife’s car, and he didn’t.

So maybe what, in terms of import we’re at 60/40 agree/disagree? Not bad, actually, and thanks all for the conversation. I’m done here unless someone wants to punish me further. Have to run over now to defend my position on another thread, as soon as I pick the rest of the grenade shrapnel from this one out of my butt.

“Negotiating with himself.”

I notice that Shumer and DiFi did just the same thing on Mukasey. “This is the best we’re going to get.” Well, if that’s what they believe, they’re licked before they start, aren’t they?

We. Are. Going. To. Die. We must restore hope in the world. We must bring forth a new way of living that can sustain the world. Or else it is not just us who will die but everyone. What have we got to lose? Go forth and Fight!—Xan

BIO,

I think Lambert is correct when he says you’re dismissing “emergent conspiracy” as “conspiracy theory”, ie an imaginary construct with no truth to it.

Just because there is no publically available evidence to make a case in a court of law of criminal conspiracy between elected officials and the corporations that sponsor them, doesn’t mean that there isn’t something very fishy going on.

Washington is like a black box to those of us outside the beltway, we only see the input and the output. We can only make the most logical, informed opinions based on the evidence that is available to us.

With Reid and the current Dems, their output simply does not match their stated intentions. You say “Reid is committed to turning around the Iraqi occupation”. Really? Why are we still in Iraq with no end in sight?

There are many excuses, like the Process Dodge, dealing with the inscrutable inner workings of the Black Box.

The other fallback is the Cult of Personality, parodied below:

“Harry and Nancy are Good People, they have Integritude and many other fine personal qualities.

Best of all, they really really want the same policy outcomes you do, it’s just that - for a number of vague and shifting reasons - they can’t get it done.

Don’t say bad things about them!”

It’s as if someone needs to defend their honor. That’s not my job. I don’t see why it would be yours, BIO.

I really wouldn’t care if Harry Reid were cruising bathrooms for anonymous sex with goats, or partying in a hot tub with hookers every Saturday night.

As long as he passed legislation to get us out of Iraq, restore our Constitutional Rights, and maybe Universal Healthcare.. I could pretty much forgive anything that wasn’t grossly illegal or caused harm to an unconsenting adult (or goat).

The Corporate Media is the one concerned with “personality” and “integrity”. All I care about is policies that affect me and other citizens in this country. Period.

As Molly Ivors wrote last weekend:

I know, MoDo, I lived there. I live there still, and let me tell you, we don’t really care, up here, if someone is a “real feminist”—we care if they will represent our interests.

And I say this, as you must know, as a long-time defender of Harry Reid.

We. Are. Going. To. Die. We must restore hope in the world. We must bring forth a new way of living that can sustain the world. Or else it is not just us who will die but everyone. What have we got to lose? Go forth and Fight!—Xan

If you choose to misread what every one on this blog has to say about the granfalloon that thinks it rules a nation and world it doesn’t really understand, then so be it.

Admittedly, plurality of opinion does not strengthen the veracity of our argument.

The emergent conspiracy model, based on unenlightened self-interest, is one the best working hypotheses for human affairs I’ve encountered on my long strange trip through the 20th century into the 21st.

We all basically know what you believe, BIO.

I find your statements typical of well educated people trying as hard as possible to believe in the mainline American Dream as presented to you by the Party you feel to be correct.

We just wish you’d take the time to read what we’ve written and understand where we’re coming from, instead of reading what we write here in discussion and continually bemoaning how incomprehensible you find it.

What we’re asking is that you stop believing and start looking.

There is absolutely nothing unanticipated in Bush’s criminality sir.

In fact, it is entirely predictable, and the reason the Constitution was written in the first place.

No Hell below us
Above us, only sky