Home / harryreid
Showing posts with label harryreid. Show all posts
Showing posts with label harryreid. Show all posts
Some dumb political quotes from 2011

Some dumb political quotes from 2011

Here are some of the dumber quotes:

1) "Our assessment is that the Egyptian government is stable." Hillary Clinton, 18 days before Mubarak stepped down. January 25, 2011
2) "They have acted like terrorists." Joe Biden on Tea Party Republicans. August 1, 2011.
3) "What we're trying to do is save the world from the Republican budget . . . . We're trying to save life on this planet as we know it today." Nancy Pelosi discussing John Boehner's Debt Ceiling bill. July 28, 2011
4) "Millionaire job creators are like unicorns. They're impossible to find and don't exist." Harry Reid asserting that there aren't any jobs created by millionaires. December 12, 2011
5) "Look, the Taliban per se is not our enemy." Joe Biden, December 19, 2011
Did Harry Reid's campaign engage in illegal activity?

Did Harry Reid's campaign engage in illegal activity?

Hans von Spakovsky has this:

Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., may have beaten back challenger Sharron Angle and retained his post as the majority leader, but his campaign and one of his biggest supporters may have violated federal law to do so.
As National Review reported earlier this week, the Reid campaign sent a desperate e-mail to the senior vice president for government relations at Harrah's Casinos asking the company to pressure its employees to get out and vote for Reid. The campaign even offered to have Reid call Harrah's executives to help give "the backing" needed to get the company working on this.
The Reid staffer involved told Harrah's it needed to "put a headlock" on its supervisors "to get them to follow through."
This plea was distributed to senior executives throughout the company by a Harrah's vice president, Marybel Batjer. Batjer demanded that those executives "do whatever we need to do to get the supervisors to know that there is NOTHING more important than to get employees out to vote. Waking up to a defeat of Harry Reid Nov 3rd will be devastating for our industry's future."
Harrah's did just that, getting headcounts and insisting that supervisors explain why their employees had not yet voted. They also coordinated with employee unions to get buses and shuttles to take the employees to the polls. . . .
Both the Reid campaign and Harrah's may have violated federal campaign finance law that prohibits in-kind corporate and union contributions to, and coordination with, political campaigns. Corporations and unions may spend money to run ads in support of or opposing a candidate, but they are not allowed to make direct or in-kind contributions to federal candidates. . . .

Insider Trading Washington Style


Whoever said that working for the government was a financial sacrifice? Given the amount of money given out by the Federal government, stock prices must be hugely affected. From the WSJ:

Chris Miller nearly doubled his $3,500 stock investment in a renewable-energy firm in 2008. It was a perfectly legal bet, but he's no ordinary investor.

Miller is the top energy-policy adviser to Nevada Democrat and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who helped pass legislation that wound up benefiting the firm.

Jim Manley, a spokesman for Reid's office, initially defended Miller's purchase of shares in the company, Energy Conversion Devices Inc. He said the aide had no influence over tax incentives for renewable-energy firms, and that other factors boosted the stock.

But on Sunday, Manley added: "Mr. Miller showed poor judgment and Senator Reid has made it very clear to Chris and all his staff that their actions must not only follow the law, but must meet the higher standards the public has a right to expect from elected officials and their staffs."

Miller isn't the only Congressional staffer making such stock bets. At least 72 aides on both sides of the aisle traded shares of companies that their bosses help oversee, according to a Wall Street Journal analysis of more than 3,000 disclosure forms covering trading activity by Capitol Hill staffers for 2008 and 2009. . . .

A few lawmakers proposed a bill that would prevent members and employees of Congress from trading securities based on nonpublic information they obtain. The legislation has languished since 2006. . . .
Senator Harry Reid's son disowns Obamacare that his dad pushed through the Senate

Senator Harry Reid's son disowns Obamacare that his dad pushed through the Senate

Rory Reid (D), candidate for Nevada governor, says that Obamacare could cause Medicaid rates to go up substantially. Harry Reid's own son says that Obamacare has a real potential of increasing costs. Possibly this should be used as an ad against Harry Reid in his Senate race.

"The law that was passed gives time for the new system to go into effect, but there is potential for it to put significant pressure on states because Medicaid rates could go up significantly."
Just out of curiosity, why do the Dems think that convincing a journalist not to run the Reid "Negro" quote was so plausible?

Just out of curiosity, why do the Dems think that convincing a journalist not to run the Reid "Negro" quote was so plausible?

Why do these guys think that they could have convinced the reporters not to use the explosive quote? How would they have convinced the reporters not to use it?

On Friday at 10 p.m. — half a year after the interview — The Atlantic’s Marc Ambinder e-mailed Reid’s staff with questions about a “light-skinned” candidate without a “Negro dialect.”

In the second-guessing that followed, Capitol Hill veterans said there was no way that such inflammatory words from a Senate majority leader would remain off the record, even if that had been the arrangement.

But because Manley had not sounded an internal alarm, he and the rest of the damage-control squad were caught flat-footed by Ambinder’s e-mail, several people close to the situation told POLITICO.

“They could have had weeks to prepare for this or to try to convince Halperin not to run it,” said a Democrat who participated in some of the damage control.
Politicians on Trent Lott and Harry Reid

Politicians on Trent Lott and Harry Reid

Former Mississippi GOP Senator Trent Lott. Mr. Lott found himself in trouble after praising fellow Republican Senator Strom Thurmond (once a segregationist) at the late South Carolinian's 100th birthday.

"I want to say this about my state. When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We're proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years either."


Everyone knew that Trent Lott was just trying to be nice to an old man on his 100th birthday. There was no mention of any particular part of Thurmond's platform that he supported, and I assume that if someone had asked Trent Lott right at that moment if that meant that he had supported segregation, Trent Lott would have recoiled in horror. Was it a smart thing for him to say? Hardly. But did he same that he supported segregation? No. So how did the Democrats respond to Trent Lott's apology? Note that it took over a year for Reid to make his apology.

Obama

“It seems to be that we can forgive a 100-year-old senator for some of the indiscretion of his youth, but, what is more difficult to forgive is the current president of the U.S. Senate (Lott) suggesting we had been better off if we had followed a segregationist path in this country after all of the battles and fights for civil rights and all the work that we still have to do,” said Obama.

He said: “The Republican Party itself has to drive out Trent Lott. If they have to stand for something, they have to stand up and say this is not the person we want representing our party.”



Nancy Pelosi, December 10, 2002 (thanks to Kerry Picket for point to this):

"He can apologize all he wants. It doesn't remove the sentiment that escaped his mouth that day."


The media firestorm was incredibly intense. Virtually no one defended Trent Lott. At the very least, those who demanded that Trent Lott be demoted should be asked by the media why they are not holding Harry Reid to the same standard.

Al Sharpton NOW AND THEN

In 2002, Sharpton had this to say about Trent Lott:

Well, I think that the fact is that he didn't just make an off-color remark. People are trying to act like he just said something out of line. To say that he wished the country had elected a segregationist ticket ... and then sit at the head of the Republican Party -- the majority party in the Senate that will review U.S. attorneys being confirmed -- is a frightening occurrence for those of us that had parents that in 1948 couldn't even vote and had to sit in the back of the bus.

This is not just an off-color remark. We're talking about somebody in power ... he can't say he didn't say it. You have the tape that shows that he said it. You also have the tape that shows that he said it before. You can go to any local penitentiary, and any crook will say, "I didn't mean it, I'm sorry." But you still pay for what you do.

Mr. Lott said it, and he said it again. He ought to pay for what he said. He should step aside. No one is saying that if the people of Mississippi want to elect him to the Senate that they don't have the right to do that. But to be the head of the party in the Senate, given the sensitivity of that position, if the Republican Party wants to sincerely reach out to people as they claim they have, and as you almost nightly claim they want to, they certainly have an opportunity here by saying, for the interest of the country and the party, Mr. Lott should step aside since he either has very segregationist views or he at least has a repeated problem of being misunderstood when he endorses segregationists.


Now for Reid this is what Sharpton has to say:

I have learned of certain unfortunate comments made by Senator Reid regarding President Barack Obama and have spoken with Senator Reid about those comments. While there is no question that Senator Reid did not select the best word choice in this instance, these comments should not distract America from its continued focus on securing healthcare or creating jobs for its people. Nor should they detract from the unquestionable leadership role Senator Reid has played on these issues or in the area of civil rights. Senator Reid's door has always been open on hearing from the civil rights community on these issues and I look forward to continue to work with Senator Reid wherever possible to improve the lives of Americans everywhere.
Reid made 'Negro dialect' comment

Reid made 'Negro dialect' comment

So if Reid is saying that Obama has "no Negro dialect unless he wanted to have one," does that mean that he goes around saying that other blacks have a "Negro dialect"? Would an apology be enough to get a Republican excused for saying this? Will all the Democrats on the Sunday talk shows tomorrow be asked about this? Will they be pressed for a comparison with Trent Lott being removed from his leadership position? From the AP:

The top Democrat in the U.S. Senate apologized on Saturday for comments he made about Barack Obama's race during the 2008 presidential bid.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada described then-Sen. Barack Obama as "light skinned" and "with no Negro dialect." Obama is the nation's first African-American president.
"I deeply regret using such a poor choice of words. I sincerely apologize for offending any and all Americans, especially African-Americans for my improper comments," Reid said in a statement released after the excerpts were reported on the Web site of The Atlantic.
"I was a proud and enthusiastic supporter of Barack Obama during the campaign and have worked as hard as I can to advance President Obama's legislative agenda." . . .


Just out of curiosity, why did it take over a year to issue this apology? Didn't Reid know in 2007 that this was the wrong thing to say?

A new survey in Nevada shows:

52 percent had an unfavorable opinion of Reid, 33 percent had a favorable view and another 15 percent said they're neutral. In early December, a Mason-Dixon poll put his unfavorable-favorable rating at 49-38. The lowest Reid's popularity had slipped before in the surveys was 50 percent -- in October, August and May of 2009, when Mason-Dixon started tracking the senate race for the Review-Journal. . . .
Pork and more pork in the health care bill, no wonder the Democrats want to do all the negotiations in secret

Pork and more pork in the health care bill, no wonder the Democrats want to do all the negotiations in secret

The Freedom Project has a lot of links that it has put together on pork given out in the health care bill. Senator Schumer claims: “Every state got something [in the health care bill]," but it looks to me that Democrat Senators got a lot of pork. Senator Harry Reid "said that if a senator didn't get his state "something" in the health-care "reform" package, then that senator wasn't doing his or her job," though Reid apparently didn't get anything for Nevada. Note that this fits in with the pork given out in the Stimulus, where the money didn't go to states with the most unemployment or other problems, but tended to go to more Democratic states. I have already put up links to many of these points over time, but it is still useful to put them all together in one place. If this doesn't convince the Democrats to have some transparency, I am not sure what will.

The Wall Street Journal calls it "special-interest discrimination" [Transfers to Longshoremen Union] that demonstrates "how all health-care choices will soon be made as Washington expands its political control over one-seventh of the U.S. economy." Here are some of the lowlights:

Pork greased reform's passage: "With the bill hanging in the balance, [Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE)] won a provision exempting his state from paying the usual share of costs for new Medicaid patients. The deal critics have dubbed the Cornhusker Kickback is expected to cost the federal government $100 million over 10 years." (Politico)

The $300 million Louisiana purchase: "Sen. Mary L. Landrieu, Louisiana Democrat, provided one of the last two votes needed to bring the government health care takeover to the Senate. She didn't even blush about selling her vote. 'I am not going to be defensive. And it's not a $100 million fix. It's a $300 million fix,' Mrs. Landrieu bragged on Nov. 21. This gross windfall will flood into her state through added benefits in the health care bill. This is government at its worst." (Washington Times)

Mmmmm, Pork: "Buried inside Senate Maj. Leader Harry Reid's 12/19 manager's amendment was a mysterious $100M for an unspecified 'Health Care Facility.' It was confirmed by ABC News' 'The Note' and AP that Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) inserted the following paragraph into the health care bill on behalf of his home state…" (National Journal)

Republicans Take Aim at Deal-Making: "Several states -- including Nebraska, Vermont and Massachusetts -- won deals for more generous federal payments under the Medicaid program. 'Who will pay for these special deals?' Sen. Orrin Hatch (R., Utah) asked his colleagues. 'The answer is simple -- every other state in the union.'" (Wall Street Journal)

Cost-control and taxes for some, but not for others: "White House budget director Peter Orszag has claimed that the bill's 40% excise tax on high-cost insurance plans is key to reducing health costs. Yet the Senate Majority Leader's new version specifically exempts 'individuals whose primary work is longshore work.' That would be the longshoremen's union, which has negotiated very costly insurance benefits. ... In other words, controlling insurance costs is enormously important, unless your very costly insurance is provided by an important Democratic constituency." (Wall Street Journal)

Concessions lawmakers won in the health bill: "SEN. BILL NELSON, D-FLA., pushed a provision he said will let about 800,000 Florida seniors enrolled in private Medicare Advantage plans keep their extra benefits. … Elsewhere, Medicare Advantage patients risk losing benefits because the private plans are a major target of planned cuts to Medicare." (Associated Press)

Senate's Deal: Compromise or Corruption?: "Democrats shrugged off questions about the one state deals - saying this is how you get to 60 votes.' That's what this legislation's all about - it's the art of compromise,' Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said. Republicans called it the art of corruption." (CBS News)
Whatever you call them – the Cornhusker Kickback, the Louisiana Purchase – these massive giveaways are simply wrong and emblematic of a bill that has been negotiated behind closed doors and away from the watchful eyes of the public and the media.


That's why House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) and Republicans are calling on the president and his allies to "scrap the bill" and start over with a better plan – like the Republican solution that would lower premiums and cut the deficit – and to start conducting major legislative negotiations out in the open.
Copy of Harry Reid's version of the Senate Health Care Bill is available here

Copy of Harry Reid's version of the Senate Health Care Bill is available here

A copy of the new Senate health care bill is available here.

From the WSJ:

Among other things, the Senate legislation would create a new government-run health insurance plan to compete with private insurers, while allowing states the option not to participate. . . .


If someone believes the CBO cost estimate, I have a bridge to sell them.

The $849 billion figure and the prospect of deficit reduction cheered Democrats. . . .
Democrats will strip out the Stupak amendment if the health care bill goes to reconciliation

Democrats will strip out the Stupak amendment if the health care bill goes to reconciliation

From the Politico:

Democrats will almost certainly kill the anti-abortion Stupak amendment in the process if they go to Plan B on passing health care -- using a filibuster-proof reconciliation bill -- budget experts say.

"There is no way on God's green Earth that the Stupak amendment would pass muster in a budget reconciliation bill," says Bill Hoagland, an insurance lobbyist who was the top GOP aide on the Senate Budget Committee for two decades and served as then-Majority Leader Bill Frist's budget guru.

Democratic budget experts in Congress and the administration who asked not to be quoted on the record agree with Hoagland's assessment. . . .

Democratic leaders would like to bury the Stupak amendment, which is at odds with the pro-choice position of most Democrats and which abortion-rights advocates say is a dangerous encroachment on the rights of women.

But it's a tricky proposition in a floor-vote scenario because a number of Senate Democrats, including up-for-election Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) could have trouble voting against what proponents say is a simple extension of a current principle -- that federal funds shouldn't be used to pay for abortion -- to a new health insurance marketplace.

If Reid chooses to go the reconciliation route, he can rely on the rules to quash Stupak's amendment, budget experts say. . . .


UPDATE: From Fox News on Sunday:

White House Senior Adviser David Axelrod suggested Sunday that President Obama will intervene to make sure a controversial amendment restricting federal funding for abortion coverage is stripped from final health care reform legislation.

In doing so, the president would be heeding the call of abortion rights supporters like Planned Parenthood that have called the White House their "strongest weapon" in keeping such restrictions out of the bill.

The abortion amendment was tacked on to the House health care bill and was a key factor in securing the votes of moderate Democrats before the bill was approved by a narrow margin last weekend. The amendment, authored by Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., went beyond preventing the proposed government-run plan from covering abortion to restrict federal subsidies from going toward private plans that offer abortion coverage. . . .
Obnoxious behavior by Senator Harry Reid in threatening Las Vegas Review-Journal

Obnoxious behavior by Senator Harry Reid in threatening Las Vegas Review-Journal

From Fox News:

The publisher of the Las Vegas Review-Journal on Sunday accused Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat, of "bullying" his newspaper by telling an employee he wants the Review-Journal shut down. . . . .

"No citizen should expect this kind of behavior from a U.S. senator. It is certainly not becoming of a man who is the majority leader in the U.S. Senate. And it absolutely is not what anyone would expect from a man who now asks Nevadans to send him back to the Senate for a fifth term," he wrote. "So today, we serve notice on Sen. Reid that this creepy tactic will not be tolerated."
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)