Why is MoveOn Thanking Sen. Harry Reid?

[and]

MoveOn is asking people to thank Sen. Harry Reid who

"stood shoulder-to-shoulder with Sen. Boxer and spoke out against an 'insidious form of disenfranchisement' that "continues to taint our electoral system.'"

http://www.moveonpac.org/boxer_reid /

Why should we thank Reid?

When the vote came, Senator Barbara Boxer was the only senator who voted "No."

Reid and the other cowardly senators who voiced their dissent but voted "Yes" during roll call (or didn't even attend the session) don't deserve any thanks.

Senator Boxer is the only senator who deserves our deepest gratitude for her courage - not the Senate minority "leader" or any other senator.

[democracyindanger]

1. Because MoveOn gets it.

Good grief.

[autorank]

2. THANK YOU SENATOR REID!!!! THANK YOU

This thread lacks coherent thought and logical argument. We thank Reid for sanding with Boxer in the debate; we than him for not strong arming her to back off; we thank him for being a new type of majority leader, one who speaks up in support of righteous causes.

Tried to figure out what part of the country your from but scant information.

I find this type of talk highly divisive!

[spooky3]

26. love your pic of Harvey Keitel.

[Webster Green]

3. Politicians are stuck with having to play the game of politics...

I sure wouldn't label those who stood with boxer as cowards, even if they chose not to vote against the Ohio electoral ballots.

There will be other battles to fight.

[knight_of_the_star]

32. They stood for principle

I'm willing to bet if they thought they could have overturned the electoral results, they would have voted with Boxer, but they gain much for standing on principle and not blowing their ammo on a vote that would only hurt them. Boxer can make such a move because she just got re-elected in a state that loves her.

[moggie12]

4. Because there is such a thing as being practical

It is not the mark of coward but of the need to choose your battles wisely. We are in a war with the GOP and tactical decisions are necessary.

[autorank]

10. What our Senators did was excellent. Boxer + the fellows.

This wasn't a wimp-ass debate. These guys teed off and kicked some ass. Good for them. If everybody had said no to Ohio, that would have been great. Short of that, Boxer's protest was great and the Senators standing with her kicking some Repuke butt were what was needed.

I'm proud of Boxer, the House members (particularly Conyers), and everybody involved.

The interesting thing, think about it, is this:

There hasn't been a lot of negative press. Not much press in general but the CM (Corporate Media) has not trounced Boxer nor have they done this to Conyers. This was supposed to be such a huge embarrassment, "oh golly, we'll embarrass ourselves." Didn't happen. We can only go up and the professional liars on the other side are on video as saying idiotic things like Ohio has a great voting system, etc. Great commercials in 2006.

[moggie12]

13. GOP is scared to make too much fuss

We played our cards well under the circumstances -- we raised the issue of election reform in a principled way. By not alleging fraud (of which I honestly think we had no "proof"), we are putting them on the defensive. They (Fox, GOP in general) are being quiet because they're afraid: If the Dems somehow manage to get their act together, they'll "win" the fight for true election reform. We've got the PR advantage in the fight: How can Republicans argue against proposals that would do away with Americans standing in line for three hours to vote??

I'm on my soap box again but we need to FIGHT the Republicans hard on the election reform issue: It's a winner, for many, many reasons (I already have two posts in this "politics" forum trying to raise this issue and get everybody to focus on it -- and I may do more!!!)

[autorank]

16. Right, the Repukes are stepping lightly on this one.

I saw one Ohio House member talk about what a great system they have there without partisanship, my God! It's on tape. What a total lie.

I think the ***VOTING RIGHTS*** issue is both essential and a winner. Start with voter suppression, for which there is abundant proof, and demand an investigation for "fraud", where there are serious questions (proved in my opinion, but that argument over "what is proof?" is secondary to the larger issue).

The main point is fair voting systems, verifiable, and open to all! That is THE winning and uniting issue, and it's ours by history.

[moggie12]

19. well said

Ohio looks to me like the "poster child" for all that is bad about our voting system. Expose it factually and in a non-partisan-looking way and it will give us what we need. My preference, however, is that we not frame the issue around "vote suppression". I'd rather frame it around "people having to stand in line for 3 hours to vote". It's one of those "sound-bite" phrases that people immediately understand and identify with -- Americans HATE standing in lines (will be particularly effective with the millions who had to do exactly that this past November). Plus, "vote suppression" makes people start thinking about Jesse Jackson. He's a wonderful man, but he's got no public relations savvy at all -- in his public statement the other day he focused on the "five million felons" denied the right to vote. Yes, that's an important issue, of course, but to highlight it?? As soon as many Americans hear the word "felons", their brains snap shut!

[medeak]

5. and I thank Reid for this:

Media Release just out from Reid's office:

For Immediate Release

DATE: Thursday, January 06, 2005

CONTACT: Phil Singer

Lawmakers Demand President Bush STOP Paying
Journalists to Promote Administration Policies

Reid, Lautenberg, Kennedy Also Ask President If His
Administration Has Paid Other Journalists to Promote
other Policies, including Social Security Privatization

WASHINGTON, DC – In light of alarming news that the Bush administration paid a popular conservative radio commentator and columnist almost a quarter of a million dollars to skew his reporting to promote the No Child Left Behind Act, United States Senators Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ), Edward Kennedy (D-MA) and Harry Reid (D-NV) sent a letter to President Bush today demanding that he recover the money paid to Armstrong Williams, citing federal laws that prohibit such activity. In addition, the lawmakers also asked President Bush to disclose any payments to other journalists to push Administration policies, including President Bush’s decision to privatize Social Security.

In news reports today, it was revealed conservative pundit and commentator Armstrong Williams was paid $240,000 to promote President Bush’s No Child Left Behind Act on his syndicated radio program and in addition, to urge other pundits to routinely hype the law during their own appearances on other programs.

In their letter to President Bush, the Lawmakers cite federal laws that prohibit taxpayer funds from being spent by the Executive Branch for “Covert Propaganda”.

“In addition to the illegality of these actions taken by your Administration, we believe that the act of bribing journalists to bias their news in favor of government policies undermines the integrity of our democracy. Actions like this were common in the Soviet Union, but until now, thought to be long extinguished in our country,” wrote the lawmakers in their letter to President Bush sent today.

These revelations regarding Mr. Williams are the latest – and most disturbing – in a series of actions by your Administration to manipulate public opinion through covert propaganda. On May 19, 2004, the GAO found that your Administration illegally spent taxpayer funds on covert propaganda by paying Ketchum Incorporated to produce fake news stories promoting the image of the new Medicare law.

The links below are examples of syndicated columns published by the Tribune Media Company from Armstrong Williams in support of the No Child Left Behind Act.

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/Armstrongwilliams/pr ...

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/Armstrongwilliams/pr ...

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/Armstrongwilliams/pr ...

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/Armstrongwilliams/pr ...

[shance]

6. I heartily agree. They rooted her on from the sidelines.

No Democrat should ever have to stand alone.

We should not overtly praise individuals for acting as they should. It rewards mediocrity. And Reid in my opinion, didnt even rise to the occasion as a Senate leader should in my opinion.

A true Democrat would have grabbed Boxer's hand, stood beside her and said this one is ours.

[medeak]

8. she did not stand alone...

Reid was sitting right next to her through hearings...he made statement that he supported her.

[shance]

17. Standing is an ACTION, not a word, and actions speak louder than words.

n/t

[autorank]

11. Only one Senator can object per state. That's the rule.

Therefore, the multiple good fellas who took her side in the debate didn't wimp out on protesting Ohio, they protested by supporting her in the debate. The made a SEPARATE decision to vote to certify since they based this on the disparity in vote totals (which I totally disagree with) and also Kerry's statement that his "ace" legal team (yeah, like "Ace Ventura") said the state was unwinnable even with the fraud.

If you want to keep harping on Boxer and the Senate Good Guys but adopt this motto: Some Democrats never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.

Thank you BOXER, CONYERS, HOUSE DELEGATION.

Thank you Senators Reid, Lautenberg, Clinton, Weyden, etc.

BTW. When we turn out 2000 demonstrators (bless every one of them, a little self serving since I was there), we can't expect the earth to shake. The e-activism was great. We needed people in the street. Had we 10K-20K, we would have got a lot better look on the Senate vote. Had we 50K + marchers, it would have blown minds and we would have had every one of those senators, I'll bet!

[shance]

18. You're putting words in my mouth I never said.

I may not agree with you Auto that Senators Clinton, Reid, Weyden should be rewarded when they in fact took no risk. They essentially said Good Luck to Boxer in my opinion and waved from the stands.

Thats not commendable in my opinion. And Auto my friend, I have the option to disagree with you.

The activists, myself included are what is taking this country back. On that we can AGREE.

Boxer and Conyers have shown true loyalty to this cause and to their constituents and Americans at large. Loyalty and dedication and leadership we can all be proud of.

The other Senators fell short in my opinion and tried to play both sides as to avoid risk. They seem to know very little in loyalty, however, they seem to place a very high priority in staying safely ensconced in non commital stances. Im sure all of us could fall victim to that perspective and do from time to time. However I don't think it deserves praise especially when they took no risk and let Boxer stand alone.

[autorank]

20. shance, We're cool. No intent to put anything in your mouth...haha

I dearly wanted a bunch of the "fellows" and Hillary to vote with Boxer. A little oral history...At the Lafayette Park Rally, a seemingly reliable source said that Boxer would make the objection with the support of the Senators who ended up debating on her side (including Reid, Obama, Dodd, Clinton, Lautenberg and Weyden). Everybody took that to mean they would vote with her against certification. You can imagine the sense of exhilaration at the thought of Reid et al all voting with Boxer. Well, you know Capitol Hill politics, "support" meant a "letter of memorandum" supporting her (I'd like to see that if it's around) and "support" in the debate but not the "vote." Yikes.

In any event, I'm looking at the glass as half full on this one. I agree with you, it would have been better government AND politics for them to vote with her given the tepid response of the Repukes and the general stupidity of the press in their lack of coverage. I just about feinted on Friday morning when I saw the Washington Post front page without a mention of this unique event (I never buy it but figured on that day I would just for the headline).

cya

[KittyWampus]

27. You Obviously Weren't Listening & Are Deafened By Your Prejudice

"They essentially said Good Luck to Boxer in my opinion and waved from the stands."

That is such bullshit. They said a hell of a lot more than that.

The whole debate was PLANNED A HEAD OF TIME.

But your need to have others perform to YOUR personal desires is more important than acknowledging what those Senators did.

[KSAtheist]

7. During Dub-Dub-Two...

The kamikazes had a lot of "moral courage"...and what did it accomplish? Their cities still lay in ruin...they still lost...what's the point?

[cyclezealot]

15. And more ruination is on its way under the chimp.

But, methods used to steal an election must be revealed to the public...A logical start for the first battle to regain our democracy.

[medeak]

9. did you watch cspan?

and hear Hillary, Kennedy, Obama and others make the most elequent remarks without any notes?

It was historic and I'm proud of them all. This is totally out of line.

[hilster]

12. Re: Reid

All we needed was the one senator to sign in order to hear their statements and arguments. The fact that more than six other senators stood up with Boxer to speak about the fraud is priceless. It was obvious that even if all the Democrats voted in favor of the objection it still wouldn't pass, that is why we're called a minority. Reid should be thanked because he was one of the senators that spoke in the objection's favor.

[autorank]

14. Totally persuasive argument. Thanks for the post.

[moggie12]

21. Excellent point

I also thought it was wonderful that 10 Senators -- in addition to Boxer -- stood to argue for election reform. I've written each a letter thanking them. For the record it was: Reid, Durbin, Stabenow, Kennedy, Wyden, Lautenberg, Clinton, Harken, Obama, and Dodd.

[sandnsea]

22. Moveon is a DLC plant n/t

[and]

23. Thanks. That's the info I was looking for. n/t

[Telly Savalas]

33. LOL n/t

[genius]

24. I don't think they realize we won the election. It's not enough to fix

voting. I don't know if this will be anything close to a democracy in 4 years. The Earth could also be destroyed by then: no big deal to some people.

[Goldeneye]

25. ...

[KittyWampus]

28. The Dancing Banana- YIPPEE!!!

[Goldeneye]

29. dang...I was just seeing if it would work

didn't think anyone would notice. I'm glad you like it though.

[BlueInRed]

30. I think support should mean "vote in support of"

I'm sorry, but I don't think Reid deserves a thank you. Not blocking the way for Boxer or giving her a verbal pat on the back isn't good enough. Even if he stood with her, he voted the opposite way.

I'm tired of our elected officials thinking that speaking out one way and voting the other way is "supporting" an issue or person. Talk is cheap, actions are what matter. It's the typical political ploy -- trying to have it both ways -- I support it, but I oppose it.

It's time to demand that our elected officials put their votes where their mouths are. Supporting an issue should mean you actually VOTE in a way that supports the issue.

[moggie12]

31. But,

1) Reid didn't see "smoking gun" proof of fraud. What he saw was an election system ripe for manipulation and in need of an overhaul. He spoke up and said he's in favor election reform.

2) Since he didn't see "smoking gun" proof of fraud, voting against certifying the vote would have been inconsisent. He wasn't trying to have it both ways: He didn't see fraud, so he didn't vote against certification.


Edited to add Sen. Boxer's statement. It's an eloquent speech. She clearly believes there was vote suppression but she doesn't allege "fraud" in so many words.

http://www.thegreenpapers.com/G04/EC-Boxer-20050106.pht...

[BlueInRed]

34. then there's no need to thank him

as he was willfully blind to clear cut, court quality evidence of fraud if he didn't "see" a smoking gun. These problems were nothing new; the leadership has been aware of them for a long time, but didn't think it politically expedient to take them on until the Greens and Libs and CBC forced the issue. Then they hid behind Boxer's skirt.

Also, my point is broader - people don't get to take credit for supporting a proposition if they don't vote to do so. This is a widespread problem, not in the least limited to Reid and the others who spoke, but then voted the other way. This kind of thing is what people have come to expect of politicians and why the independents as so are attracted to straight talkers.

Boxer could have just stated her opinion and also not have signed the protest. But she was willing to go to the mat for the proposition. That earns her a huge thank you in my book. Trying to have your cake and eat it too earns a politician no points for guts; it only earns points in playing politics.