T Nation

Reid Sinks to New Low

“Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid took his GOP-blasting rhetoric to a new level Monday, comparing Republicans who oppose health care reform to lawmakers who clung to the institution of slavery more than a century ago.”

Reid: “Instead of joining us on the right side of history, all the Republicans can come up with is, ‘slow down, stop everything, let’s start over.’ If you think you’ve heard these same excuses before, you’re right,” Reid said Monday. “When this country belatedly recognized the wrongs of slavery, there were those who dug in their heels and said ‘slow down, it’s too early, things aren’t bad enough.’”

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/07/reid-compares-health-care-reform-foes-slavery-supporters/

Supporting Whackjob Obama drove him nutz, I guess.

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
… to lawmakers who clung to the institution of slavery more than a century ago.
[/quote]

Yes, those lawmakers were called “Democrats”.

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
… to lawmakers who clung to the institution of slavery more than a century ago.
[/quote]

Yes, those lawmakers were called “Democrats”.[/quote]

You beat me to it.

I thought this was about his standing in the Polls. He’s hitting a new low there also.

[quote]hedo wrote:
I thought this was about his standing in the Polls. He’s hitting a new low there also.

[/quote]

This is true, he is losing by a double digit margin in his native Nevada, where Sue Lowden (Republican) is leading in the polls, with Danny Tarkanian not far behind.

When your at the bottom how do you go lower?

[quote]pat wrote:
When your at the bottom how do you go lower?[/quote]

By not having a spine.

[quote]pat wrote:
When your at the bottom how do you go lower?[/quote]

He has hit rock bottom and is proceeding to dig.

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
… to lawmakers who clung to the institution of slavery more than a century ago.
[/quote]

Yes, those lawmakers were called “Democrats”.[/quote]

You beat me to it.[/quote]

As if on cue…

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703558004574583980985617954.html

Harry Reid’s History Lesson

Harry Reid compares the fight for health-care reform to the emancipation and women’s suffrage movements.

By JOHN FUND

Majority Leader Harry Reid tarred opponents of his health care bill yesterday as the equivalent of those who opposed equal rights for women and civil rights for blacks.

Historians also faulted Mr. Reid’s curious reference to the Senate civil rights debates of the 1960s. After all, it was Southern Democrats who mounted an 83-day filibuster of the 1964 Civil Rights Bill. The final vote to cut off debate saw 29 Senators in opposition, 80% of them Democrats. Among those voting to block the civil rights bill was West Virginia Senator Robert Byrd, who personally filibustered the bill for 14 hours. The next year he also opposed the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Mr. Byrd still sits in the Senate, and indeed preceded Mr. Reid as his party’s majority leader until he stepped down from that role in 1989.

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

Yeah, but “Democrats are the Civil Rights party; Republicans fought against civil rights, Republicans oppressed blacks in the Southern states” is a meme that will never be stamped out, but shall mindlessly propagate forever and dominate the voting “thought” of vast portions of the population.

Watch Reid do a bait and switch with this health care bill should he get the 60 votes. I am calling this right now.

I cant wait til he starts calling on the legacy of great leaders like Abe Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt to add fire to his diatribes. I forget, what party where they from>?

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

I’m not saying Reid isn’t a jackass. I think he’s stupid. BUT. The parties have switched names over the decades. Sure, Lincoln was called a Republican, but he wanted a strong central government AND the civil war was more about State’s rights than it was about slavery. Which means that Lincoln held the ideals of the current Democrats. So he doesn’t fall into the same party as the current Republicans. It is much easier to think of this in terms of ‘conservative’ and ‘liberal.’

Also, “southern democrats” were about as conservative as you can get. States Rights, low regulations, proponents of Christian faith in the laws(scopes, anyone?), etc.

That being said, it doesn’t relieve the failings of the democratic party. And comparing slavery to covering a minority of the population with health care is completely asinine.

[quote]pushharder wrote:
I enjoyed watching him and Schumer standing side by side delivering a health care speech today. Cheech and Chong of the Senate.[/quote]

More like, Chooch and Dong.

[quote]blake2616 wrote:
That being said, it doesn’t relieve the failings of the democratic party. And comparing slavery to covering a minority of the population with health care is completely asinine. [/quote]

The only reason Democrats are against slavery is because they don’t want private citizens to own slaves-- it would compete with government slavery.

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

[quote]blake2616 wrote:
That being said, it doesn’t relieve the failings of the democratic party. And comparing slavery to covering a minority of the population with health care is completely asinine. [/quote]

The only reason Democrats are against slavery is because they don’t want private citizens to own slaves-- it would compete with government slavery.[/quote]

Government slavery in the way of public poverty by taxing the shit out of citizens.

My dad had a saying, “The government stays up all night, to find a way to screw you during the day.”

[quote]blake2616 wrote:
I’m not saying Reid isn’t a jackass. I think he’s stupid. BUT. The parties have switched names over the decades. Sure, Lincoln was called a Republican, but he wanted a strong central government AND the civil war was more about State’s rights than it was about slavery. Which means that Lincoln held the ideals of the current Democrats. So he doesn’t fall into the same party as the current Republicans. It is much easier to think of this in terms of ‘conservative’ and ‘liberal.’

Also, “southern democrats” were about as conservative as you can get. States Rights, low regulations, proponents of Christian faith in the laws(scopes, anyone?), etc.

That being said, it doesn’t relieve the failings of the democratic party. And comparing slavery to covering a minority of the population with health care is completely asinine. [/quote]

But, you also have to realize terms like conservative and liberal are as relative and party labels. A conservative in a communist country would be the opposite of a conservative in an anarchist country.

Even being pro-fed or pro-state is a little short sited when dealing with the absolutes of a party or politicianâ??s actual philosophy.

For example, if we look at Hamilton (though never president) vs. Jefferson. If I held the exact idea of federal/state power of either of them, today Iâ??d probably end up voting libertarian (I donâ??t say conservative here, because their ideas would require vast change to the current system which is technically anti-conservative). Yes, Hamilton was pro-federal authority, in respect to his day, but he was arguing for things like the ability of the fed to maintain a standing army. You can apply the same type argument to guys like Lincoln. He may have been “pro fed” in his day, but his platform today is still closer to the republican party (even more ironically, to the far far “right” of modern republicans). So even in that respect, the republicans are the political descendants of the abolitionists.

The left is finding out 2 can play the race game.

http://www.thefoxnation.com/michael-steele/2009/12/09/steele-gets-heated-over-you-people