Log in

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Reid: doublespeaking democratic dumbass

this rant is derived from three articles, Reid Cautious On A Lieberman Decision, Obama steering clear of Dems battle over Lieberman, and The Senate Majority Leader on Stevens.

i guess i have to admit my brother is right. these assholes in washington are really all on the same team, it's just a game they play on the stupid electorate that they pretend differently. witness the following:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) on Sunday signaled he was ready to forgive Connecticut Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman, an independent who caucuses with Democrats, days after the two held a private meeting in the Capitol.

great. the rest of us aren't.

"He is a senior member of the Senate," Reid said on CNN's "Late Edition," reminding viewers that Liberman would become chairman of the Armed Services or Environment and Public Works committees if "something happens to the chairman."

um, this is supposed to make us think having him in that position is a good thing? personally, i don't want a known traitorous sellout one step away from giving control to the Republicans he serves. if i'd wanted reds running things i would have voted for the red team in the first place.

More personally, Reid said he "would not be majority leader but for (Lieberman's) vote."

um, your personal debt to Lieberman is not a valid reason for putting him in positions of power he has proven himself unworthy to be trusted with.

Reid said he and Lieberman would continue to discuss the latter's standing in the Democratic caucus.

i.e.: you're not going to do anything meaningful to punish Lieberman, just make meaningless doubletalk in the press until the public forgets about it. well, most of the public, anyway.

"I think a lot of this is very private stuff but Joe Lieberman has done something that I think was improper," Reid said. "If we weren't on television, I'd use a stronger word of describing what he did."

private stuff?! i don't think appearing in public and slandering the blue presidential ticket AT THE RNC counts as private. just more deceptive doubletalk from a man who is refusing to do what is in the best interests of the party and the public for personal reasons.

from the look of things, we can't count on Obama helping things turn out right either.

President-elect Obama is steering clear of getting involved in one fight on Capitol Hill: whether Senate Democrats should remove Joe Lieberman as chairman of an important committee.

"What happens on the House and Senate, on chairmanship is their business," Obama's incoming chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, said Sunday. "But the business of what we have to do when we get sworn in is focusing on what the American people care about. Priority one is the economy."

um, yes, so perhaps putting a known obstruction to progress on the economy (Lieberman having made his feelings about such things clear when he backed team McCain) so close to a position of being able to block it would be a STUPID THING TO ALLOW?

and here's more Reidian bullshit:

"He didn't support us on military stuff and he didn't support us on Iraq stuff. But you look at his record, it's pretty good. He comes from one of the most liberal states in the country. ... Joe Lieberman is not some right wing nut case. Joe Lieberman is one of the most progressive people ever to come from the state of Connecticut," Reid said.

um, as the war is a direct CAUSE of the economic issues the blue team claims is Job One, that he didn't support the blue team on solving it would seem fairly important? he may not be a nut case, but he's a disloyal embarrassment to the party and to the state of Connecticut, which you have just slandered by stating that Lieberman is the best Connecticut has ever offered in terms of progressive politicians.

and for the icing on the cake of duplicitous donkey dung, we have the following regarding Reid and the (mis)appointment of Inouye:

CNN’s John King: You’re the Democratic leader of a new Democratic government. Do you want a committee chairman who stood up for a man moments after he was convicted of federal corruption charges?

Mr. Reid: The other way of looking at that, do you want a guy on that committee who is loyal to his friends? Dan Inouye, who we all know is a very close personal – they are like brothers.

um, no, i don't want someone who is loyal to a unrepentant lying bribe taking felon as chairman of the most powerful money-allocating committee. again, i don't give a damn about your or Inouye's personal loyalties. you were elected to serve the public interest, not play your back-room mutual back-rubbing games.

Lieberman has publicly betrayed his party in the most blatant and damaging way possible and he must be removed if the blues are to retain credibility. The same can be said for not putting a man who endorses criminality so long as it's a friend doing it, and is well known as a master of earmarks and pork projects (and even defended for being so by his supporters in his home state) as head of the appropriations committee. Obama's refusal to get involved doesn't bode well for him having any real effect on the waste he claims he was going to get rid of. clue: allowing a known pork barrel stuffer to be in charge of the money is a very poor way to start and the public is watching.

if the blues think they're going to stay in power when they sell out the voters so very soon after election, they are in for a routing come 2010. i know i've given my last dollar to the blue team until Lieberman is expelled from the causus and someone more morally qualified is made head of the appropriations committee. which from the look of it is probably never.


Edward Virtually

Latest Month

March 2012
Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Tiffany Chow