Jonathon Chait defends Harry Reid, or, more accurately, attacks the Republican efforts to undermine Reid (see Jon Lauck below) in today’s LA Times. He references the “Daschle Treatment.”
Republicans carried out a nearly identical operation to drive up antagonism against Tom Daschle, the previous Democratic Senate leader, who was also inconveniently mild-mannered. Republicans sent out talking points, and in short order conservatives everywhere found themselves deeply vexed by the previously inoffensive, low-profile South Dakota senator. Rush Limbaugh, taking the demonization campaign a tad too literally, began calling Daschle "El Diablo." Perhaps now, with the devil himself already having been used, Limbaugh is thumbing through "Paradise Lost" looking for lesser satanic figures after which to name Reid. (My money's on "Beelzebub.")
Chait is upset that Republicans are demonizing the mild mannered Harry Reid, proving the Republicans don’t really want bi-partisanship or to “change the tone” in Washington. Chait concludes:
The real
reason Republicans object to Reid is that he's a Democrat who disagrees with
key points of Bush's agenda. Of course, you can't very well whip the Fox News
audience into a lather by pointing at Reid and shouting: "He's a Democrat,
and he's voting against us! The nerve!" Hence the need for insults like
"obstructionist" and "partisan" — another favorite term of
abuse against both Reid and Daschle — which are merely ways of making
membership in the other party sound like some kind of affront.
This kind of transparent propaganda is, sadly, a normal function of political
parties. But if you get gulled into believing it, or repeating it, you're
either a dupe or a partisan hack.
First, note the tired derision of the Fox News
viewership. When will that get
old? Probably about the time SNL stops
the “Bush is dumb” gags. Chait is
certainly correct that Republicans are exaggerating Reid’s record to make him
look worse than he is. Well, Mr. Chait,
welcome to politics. Please take off
your diaper now. But, as I look at my
copy of the 2004 Almanac of American Politics (eagerly awaiting my new
edition), I see that in 2001 Harry Reid scored a 100% from the liberal
Americans for Democratic Action, and in 2002 he scored an 85%. His National Journal ratings for 2002 had
him 90% liberal on economic issues, 62% liberal on social issues, and 70%
liberal on foreign policy. Reid may be
mild mannered, but he is moderate only compared to Ted Kennedy or Howard Dean.
Does mild mannered Harry Reid announce that Clarence Thomas writes terrible opinions (while Reid struggles to find an example) or rule any reform of Social Security out of bounds, or say that George Bush's budget is "immoral"? Chait and Reid must remember this: it was not Rush Limbaugh who beat Tom Daschle. Limbaugh's impact here was zero. Daschle lost because as Democratic leader he had to defend liberal positions that are unpopular in this state. The Thune campaign and the blogosphere did a good job of informing the voters that Daschle would say one thing in DC and another here, making Daschle look duplicitous. If Harry Reid isn't careful, he'll suffer the same Daschle fate.
Recent Comments