From the "Give 'em hell, Harry" file.

The Majority Leader…

“The Senate GOP has had a love affair for many years now with Grover Norquist — they will not touch any new revenues.They are not in touch with reality or their own constituents. But they are in touch with Grover Norquist.”

On the other hand…

…Harry Reid offers some hope with a welcome blow for liberty. Via Joan McCarter…

Sen. Harry Reid is blocking the National Defense Authorization Act over provisions it contains that seek to direct how the government deals with Al Qaeda prisoners captured by the military. He explained his objections to the provisions in a letter to Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin and ranking member John McCain.

Reid's letter specifically objects to three sections of the 2011 Senate bill: one making explicit the president's authority to hold terrorism suspects indefinitely; another directing that terror suspects affiliated with Al Qaeda or supporting forces be placed in military custody unless a national security waiver is invoked, and a third making permanent certain limits on transferring prisoners out of Guantanamo Bay.

The ACLU applauds…

“There is no reason why, particularly ten years after 9/11 and with bin Laden dead, anyone in the Senate should want to give the president the martial law authority to have the military capture and imprison civilians around the world — including American citizens on American soil — based on suspicion alone," the ACLU's Chris Anders said. "Sen. Reid is saying that kind of proposal does not fit in the Senate’s defense authorization bill.”

Me too.

From the "Why I'm a Democrat" file.

House Republicans voted to gut the NLRB with their Outsourcers Bill Of Rights.

On the other hand…

Harry Reid does not plan to bring the bill to a vote in the Senate.

That's one reason why, and damn near reason enough on its own.

Yep.

If not for heaven's sake, for ours. Harry Reid...

"I mean, for heaven's sake, we need a few short-term games around here."

From the "Known knowns" file.

Harry Reid…

We all know Republicans dislike organized labor. We know they disdain unions because unions demand fairness and equality from the Big Businesses Republicans so often shield at all costs.

Sure, we all know it, but it always bears repeating.

Give 'em hell, Harry!

From the "Wild about Harry" file.

The Senate Majority Leader...

The Republican plan to end Medicare and immediately raise prescription drug costs for seniors in order to pay for millionaire tax breaks will never pass the Senate.

Sic 'em, Harry!

Wild about Harry…

…yet? 'Cause c'mon, you gotta like this...

...we need to think about what we’re cutting, and make sure those cuts aren’t counterproductive. We need to pay attention to the quality of these cuts, not just the quantity.

After all, you can lose a lot of weight by cutting off your arms and legs. But no doctor would recommend it.

The Majority Leader, on the other hand, sounds more and more like just what the doctor ordered.

From the "Give 'em hell, Harry!" file.

Via brooklynbadboy...

"As long as I'm the Majority Leader, I'm going to do everything within my legislative powers to prevent privatizing or eliminating Social Security," Reid said. "I'll simply say it's off the table."

He's got an ideologically diverse caucus full of prima donnas to run, but his legislative powers are pretty imposing just the same.

Something tells me Harry's really going to come into his own as Majority Leader in the next couple of years. I'm guessing some folks will be suprised at how happy they are with the result.

Cause...

Effect...

All Democratic senators returning next year have signed a letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., urging him to consider action to change long-sacrosanct filibuster rules.

Picture of the day.

Via digby...

That's Harry Reid giving Dan Choi his West Point ring back, which he promised to do when the repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell was passed.

It does, indeed, get better.

Break out the "Clean Plate Club" stickers…

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC...

When it's all going to be said and done, Harry Reid has eaten our lunch.

Burp.

From the "Wild about Harry" file.

The Majority leader make's 'em think it's Hell on the Senate floor today. via AMERICAblog…

In just a few minutes we're going to proceed to the START Treaty. I'm told the Republicans are going to make us read the entire treaty in an effort to stall us from passing it. Isn't that wonderful?

That piece of -- that treaty has been here since April or May of this year. Plenty of time to read it. These are additional days of wasted time we could be using to pass legislation to get home for the holidays, yet some of my Republican colleagues have the nerve to whine about having to stay and actually do the work of the American people.

We make large salaries, Madam President. We could work as most Americans do during the holidays. Perhaps Senators Kyl and DeMint have been in Washington too long because in my state, Nevadans employed in casinos and hotels and throughout the state of Nevada, on ranches, basically every place, have to work hard on holidays, including Christmas, to support their families.

The mines don't get shut down on Christmas. People work. They get paid double time a lot of times when they have good contracts, but they work on Christmas holidays. Most people don't get two weeks off on any time, let alone Christmas week. And these people who are lucky enough to have a job in these trying times need to work extra hours to make ends meet. So it's offensive to me and millions of working Americans across this country for any Senator to suggest that working through the Christmas holidays is somehow sacrilegious.

They decide to work with us, we can all have a happy holiday. If they don't, we're going to continue until we finish the people's business.

Madam President, I move to proceed to Executive Session to Calendar Number 7, the START Treaty. I ask for the yeas and nays.

Damn straight, Senator.

When she's right…

…Maria can be "very very" right. Like this…

In the caucus meeting, Reid discussed DREAM Act, and according to a Democratic source, Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) was "very very vocal" in telling the other lawmakers that they need to make the vote a priority.

Thanks, Senator.

From the "Me too" file.

brooklynbadboy...

Reid's frontal assault on GOP racism isn't textbook DLC "be like a Republican" stuff or even textbook Obama "let's all get along" stuff. It is old school, hardball, walkin-around money, ward boss "whose side are you on?" kill-the-enemy Democratic politics. I love it. God help me, I love it.

God (any god) help me too, because, well, me too.

From the "Yes, but…" file.

Yes, mastermix is right,it probably does go "...without saying...

....but running for Senate isn’t the same as running for Sparkly Pony Princess BFF of America.

…but I'm glad it was said anyway. A hearty Heh™ from here.

One of these things is just like the other?

Not hardly. Joan Walsh in Salon...

One guy is talking, perhaps inelegantly, about why he's wholeheartedly supporting our first black president; the other is wishing the country had elected a racist. That's exactly the same thing!

It's hard to believe we're still talking about this, but I've noticed some commentary from folks I assumed would know better buying into the notion that what Harry Reid said was a racist comment because he used an antiquated word. On closer examination, there seems to be something of a generational divide. Being an antique myself, I remember the word from its time of common usage, and it was not one of the many words that actual racists used to the folks who now prefer black, African-American or Afro-American. A lot of folks a couple decades younger than I am have only been exposed to the word in a historical sense, and it hearkens back to a time less enlightened in many respects, perhaps giving it a negative associations.

I'm from the "call people what they want to be called" school myself, but Senator Reid didn't call anyone anything. He used a term that's generally obsolete among folks under, say, 50, to refer to a characteristic dialect. The fact that the term isn't completely obsolete is demonstrated best by its continued descriptive value. While most of us wouldn't say it exactly the same way, everyone understood what Reid said, and every honest observer would agree that his usage and intent was completely non-racist.

Not only non-racist, but not "offensive," either. Words can't be offensive unless there is an offended target, and Harry and Barry are cool.

It's another ginned up Republican controversy, another fogbank to disguise the actual racists and racism they not only tolerate, but cultivate. Don't fall for it.

Hat tip to jnfr.

Yep.

Pretty much. Gordon's got a few years on me, but I'm geezer enough to feel mostly the same way, I guess...

'Negro' is now considered by some to be an ethnic or racial slur. Not by me. I see it as archaic, but I see nothing wrong with it, though I don't use it much anymore.

Context and intent matter here, just as they do when black folk I know use the word sarcastically, with an exaggerated first syllable, or institutionally, as in the United Negro College Fund. More than a few older black folk use it formally and proudly, remembering a day when to be called a Negro was a victory in a hard fight against the denigration of real hate language, just as many of their parents saw "colored" as a step forward, and their children demanded to be called black.

Besides, if Barry's over it, we can all get over it.

Quotable...

Harry Reid...

It is about people. It’s about life and death in America. It’s a question of morality, of right and wrong. It’s about human suffering. And given the chance to relieve this suffering, we must take it.

Matt Yglesias...

It’s fine not to be satisfied with this legislation, but it’s perverse not to be happy about it.

jnfr...

I am a leftist too...And I am very happy that the Senate has passed a health care bill.

Goldy...

You want Obama to fail? Reject health care reform. You want the Democrats to lose a ton of seats in 2010? Reject health care reform. You want to stop insurance companies from denying you coverage due to pre-existing conditions, or dropping your coverage once you get sick? Well, even the sucky Senate bill does that.

Jonathan Chait...

What has emerged from that machinery is not merely “better than nothing” or “a good start.” It is the most significant American legislative triumph in at least four decades. Why can so few people see that?

Good question…

…from John Cole.

Now that Lieberman clinched the Monday morning headlines and will get the most attention on Morning Joe, what will drama queens John McCain and Ben Nelson do to get back in the news?

I dunno, but I'm sure they'll find a way, as will any number of Senators on the other side of the health care issue. Senators are like that. Even the most junior minority backbencher in the US Senate is, by virtue of the position itself, an important and powerful person, with the capacity to make news and a sense of entitlement to a certain amount of deference and attention. The afore-mentioned are simply exemplars of the unpleasant reality that the most effective way to fulfill that expectation of attention is to position yourself on the extreme side of an issue, though most will disguise that extremism under the cloak of moderation.

There's nothing moderate, of course, about the threat to join a Republican filibuster of an important Democratic policy initiative. To do so is to make common cause with the extremist obstructionists of the Republican Party, which is unified its desire to damage Democrats politically regardless of the costs or consequences for America or Americans. Questions of rational governance are irrelevant to a party whose political strategy calls for the failure of government as a first principle. No moderates there, and nothing moderate about helping them to implement that strategy.

The other, our, side is hardly silent, of course, but the voices we hear the most are from "mavericks" like Russ Feingold or non-Democrats like the independent socialist Bernie Sanders. If a Democratic Senator wants to make the papers, the suggestion that they might vote against final passage of health insurance reform that doesn't include a public option. There's a difference, of course, since they don't, as a rule, threaten to actually join a Republican filibuster, but the threat of any kind of dissension is usually enough for an enhanced degree of media attention.

The real story, of course, isn't Joe Lieberman or Ben Nelson (President McCain is in a different category, nor is it Russ Feingold or Bernie Sanders. The story is Republican extremism that has given Harry Reid they Sisyphean task of finding sixty votes for permission for the majority of the Senate to work its will, and the story can't be told without the word extremism. Not moderation. Not conservatism. Extremism. I suppose that's one reason the story isn't being told - the media seems to think calling extremism by its name is, well, extremist.

Quote of the day.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid…

"Ted would be happy."

Me too.