HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Video & Multimedia (Forum) » Rachel Maddow: Harry Reid...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 05:50 PM

Rachel Maddow: Harry Reid, 60 is the new 60

&feature=youtu.be

Another excellent piece by Rachel Maddow.

30 replies, 3820 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 30 replies Author Time Post
Reply Rachel Maddow: Harry Reid, 60 is the new 60 (Original post)
NorthCarolina Jan 2013 OP
Stuart G Jan 2013 #1
Kablooie Jan 2013 #16
sulphurdunn Jan 2013 #2
Stuart G Jan 2013 #3
sulphurdunn Jan 2013 #7
JDPriestly Jan 2013 #17
bonniebgood Jan 2013 #4
sulphurdunn Jan 2013 #6
2pooped2pop Jan 2013 #5
BainsBane Jan 2013 #8
Stuart G Jan 2013 #9
Lionessa Jan 2013 #10
jjewell Jan 2013 #11
dreamnightwind Jan 2013 #20
Marr Jan 2013 #12
jjewell Jan 2013 #13
NorthCarolina Jan 2013 #21
dreamnightwind Jan 2013 #23
NorthCarolina Jan 2013 #24
dreamnightwind Jan 2013 #25
DarthDem Jan 2013 #28
Demo_Chris Jan 2013 #14
supercats Jan 2013 #15
underthematrix Jan 2013 #18
blackspade Jan 2013 #19
KansDem Jan 2013 #22
MADem Jan 2013 #26
KansDem Jan 2013 #29
MADem Jan 2013 #30
Iwillnevergiveup Jan 2013 #27

Response to NorthCarolina (Original post)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 05:54 PM

1. Harry is a fucking liar, and Rachel proves it...she doesn't say that, but I do....nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stuart G (Reply #1)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 09:56 PM

16. He's a fucking politician. If he wasn't a fucking liar he couldn't be a fucking politician.

They are the same thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NorthCarolina (Original post)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 06:10 PM

2. It's not just that Reid

suckered and then sold out the party base so much as it is admitting that most of us knew deep down that he was going to do it all along and are not really as surprised as we feign.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sulphurdunn (Reply #2)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 06:12 PM

3. I must say I was suckered by him..

I am not going to lie..I thought major changes were going to be made. On this anyway, because it means so much to getting things done. We know now, how hard that is going to be. What will be any different as Rachel says..? I don't think so..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stuart G (Reply #3)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 07:30 PM

7. That's OK

we all were or allowed ourselves to be. This is such a monumental betrayal, however, that it boggles the mind. The leadership of the Democratic Party has again handed the Republicans minority control of the Senate after swearing not to. It means that Obama will be able to propose all the right PR legislation he wants and it will go nowhere again, and no one will be held accountable for any of it because Senators won't have to vote on it, and because the House Republican majority is gerrymandered deeper than ticks on a neglected dog and don't care. That's exactly the way both parties want it. Anyone who hasn't figured out their being played after this never will.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sulphurdunn (Reply #7)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 10:06 PM

17. Oh, a few things will pass. Slimy things like cuts to Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare,

things like that, things that wealthy people like so many of these senators view as frivolous.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NorthCarolina (Original post)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 06:16 PM

4. I am not surprised and I didn't forget. Maybe a lot of

people missed it or forgot it. After the 2008 Election and the height of President Obama's popularity
the repubs accuse Harry of listening to/or agreeing with Obama. Harry's response was quote
" I don't work for the President"
It was his stone that sent out (the hatred) how he really feels about Obama. IMO, Obama is closer to Bhoner than Harry in personal likes or dislikes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bonniebgood (Reply #4)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 07:00 PM

6. In 2008 the Dems

controlled the White House and both Houses of Congress. Their list of reforms is about as long as Reid's middle finger.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NorthCarolina (Original post)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 06:58 PM

5. Harry talks a good talk about all he is going to do.

As long as the republicans have the power, that is. Once he has any, the talk mellows.

Just trying to keep getting elected. I'm afraid he is becoming a poster boy for term limits.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NorthCarolina (Original post)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 07:31 PM

8. I knew I smelled a rat when they delayed the vote

People told me no, the first day of the Senate can last forever. Well it didn't, and Reid caved again. What I want to know is if he ever intended on changing the rules or if he was just blowing smoke the whole time?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #8)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 07:47 PM

9. Maybe blowing smoke..Rachel shows SIX TIMES WHEN READ SAID MAJOR CHANGES WOULD BE MADE

i watched it again..yes six times. and..."no handshake agreements"..for number 7..So what does that say about Harry Reid??

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NorthCarolina (Original post)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 07:47 PM

10. We should just call Washington DC "Liarville"

 

The Democrats lie to get in office, and the Republicans both before and after being elected.

Seriously it's getting hard to tell the good guys from the bad anymore, they are almost all in line for the lying-est liars of liarville award. And if there isn't such a thing, there should be.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NorthCarolina (Original post)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 08:54 PM

11. Harry Reid is an absolute lying fucking disgrace.

I hope he enjoyed sticking the knife in Obama's back and in the prospects for progressive change during Obama's 2nd term.

With the House lost until after the 2020 Census due to GOP gerrymandering post 2010 election cycle, we really needed the Democratic Senate to keep the GOP in check.

Thanks a lot Harry. You should be impeached.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jjewell (Reply #11)

Mon Jan 28, 2013, 04:25 AM

20. What makes you think that?

"I hope he enjoyed sticking the knife in Obama's back and in the prospects for progressive change during Obama's 2nd term."

I assume Reid and Obama are pretty much equally inclined to enact progressive reform, meaning I think neither of them has any interest in progressive reform whatsoever.

Also, did Obama put any energy into having the Senate end the filibuster abuse? Not that I'm aware of. It's a serious question, not a rhetorical one, if you have any info on Obama's position on this issue I'd be interested to learn where he stands on it.

I hope I did not come across as being rude, not my intention, I was surprised to read your take on this and am wondering if there is something I have missed, or if we just see it differently.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NorthCarolina (Original post)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 09:04 PM

12. C'mon, this is so unfair!

He promised to change it BEFORE the election, when the Democratic Party establishment needed to energize voters. He only did his 180 after WINNING the elections.

C'mon! Reid and his corporate toady colleagues need to have an excuse for not passing any progressive fiscal policy, you know! Where's your party loyalty, huh??

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #12)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 09:38 PM

13. Well, the word is Reid didn't have enough Democratic votes...

... to invoke the "nuclear option". He needed 51 votes, and only had 47 or 48. If this is the case, the Majority Leader, (with a 55 vote caucus), should announce specifically which members of the Democratic caucus refused to go along with real filibuster reform.

The answer to that question would also address the current location of "party loyalty"...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jjewell (Reply #13)

Mon Jan 28, 2013, 08:34 AM

21. The names of those Democrats blocking reform were released,

much to Reid's dismay. These Senators were Mark Pryor, Max Baucus, Patrick Leahy, Joe Manchin, Dianne Feinstein, and Barbara Boxer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NorthCarolina (Reply #21)

Mon Jan 28, 2013, 02:14 PM

23. Now that's an odd bunch. Boxer?

Especially Boxer. I should call her office, she's one of mine, and see why. Maybe they fear the effects of this when Dems eventually become a minority party in the Senate. Still, I don't get it. Republicans were all set to use the nuclear option against Dems not so very long ago, and Dems were filibustering (is that a word?) far less frequently than what the Republicans are doing.

So, what's really going on here? I have a hard time believing Boxer is an outlier on the wrong side of this issue. If so, time to replace her with someone who represents our interests. I'm guessing there's more to it. If I find out I'll post back here, or if anyone can save me the trouble, please explain.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dreamnightwind (Reply #23)

Mon Jan 28, 2013, 05:38 PM

24. I think it really comes down to this,

if the filibuster were restored, returning the Senate to a simple majority vote, it would be far too easy for the Progressives (the ones I usually just refer to as the regular Democrats) to muster the 51 votes and pass Liberal/Progressive legislation through the Senate that the nation has been clamoring for. The bunch above represent a more conservative bent within the Democratic Party, and this was a means to prevent the more Liberal faction within the party from gaining any real traction, and worse, public exposure. Of course they could rely on the fact that such legislation would be derailed in the GOP House, but they would still have to contend with a public becoming witness to Liberal/Progressive ideas, that they agree with and have been waiting for, being passed in the Senate. It would make it quite difficult for our Conservative New 'Dem' friends to continue convincing a predominantly left of center public that they are really center-right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NorthCarolina (Reply #24)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 01:48 AM

25. Thanks for your response

I would easily believe it, but I'm fairly familiar with Boxer, and consider her to be one of the more liberal members of the Senate. Far from perfect, but I wouldn't expect such motivations from her (preventing Progressive policies from getting serious discussion to protect New 'Dem' policies). I'll see if I can make time to call her staff, this doesn't make sense to me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dreamnightwind (Reply #25)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 03:41 AM

28. Yes! I'm With You

While the rest of that list, save Leahy, is the usual group of fake Dems and the mostly useless DiFi, I was and still am baffled by Boxer's stance on this. I'm another of her constituents and she did NOT do this to block liberal legislation, a ridiculous suggestion. If you get any answer from her office, could you please post here or PM me? I've been thinking of writing a letter asking her for an explanation. Thanks if you have time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NorthCarolina (Original post)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 09:45 PM

14. Time for a recall.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NorthCarolina (Original post)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 09:51 PM

15. What A Waste

of two years of Obama's last term. Absolutely nothing of consequence will get done. I suggest the Dems should not bring up ANY legislation of importance at all until 2014. Not one thing. Because if they do it will never get passed, not gun control, not immigration reform, not anything. If they can hold the senate in 2014, then they need to remove Reid as majority leader and elect someone who is a progressive. Only then will things change. As far as I'm concerned the senate is now on a two year sabbatical. There is no reason I can see to even show up until 2014. Just stay home and raise money for your next election Dems, seriously!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NorthCarolina (Original post)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 11:44 PM

18. I wish my world was as either or as Rachel Maddow's but

it's not. I assume they got something else for the deal. We'll just have to wait and see what it was.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NorthCarolina (Original post)

Mon Jan 28, 2013, 12:46 AM

19. Fuck.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NorthCarolina (Original post)

Mon Jan 28, 2013, 12:53 PM

22. Yet, he'll still pull his $193,400-a-year salary...

...with all the perks and benefits.

Nice work if you can get it...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KansDem (Reply #22)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 01:54 AM

26. No blame for Feinstein, Boxer, Pryor, et. al? It's all down to Harry? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #26)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 10:14 AM

29. Rachel Maddow's report was directed at Harry specifically...

He's the Majority Leader of the Senate. Call it "backpedaling," "hypocrisy," "out-and-out fibbing," whatever, but he simply isn't doing what he said he would do, as Rachel pointed out.

Other senators may also be culpable, but Harry is their leader.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KansDem (Reply #29)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 12:24 PM

30. Had Rachael gotten the word about the holdouts when she crafted that bit?

You can't "do" when you don't have the votes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NorthCarolina (Original post)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 02:01 AM

27. Well, it's past time

for Reid to be primaried. A handshake? With McTurtle? Really? McTurtle is going to have a tough re-election for all the mess he's caused in the past. Why would Reid want to follow such a loser? He's also going to be AWOL on the assault weapons ban. He might as well switch parties now. I am beyond disgusted with him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread