The other day Democratic Senate Majority Leader said the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Marine Corps General was "incompetent" and, according Politico.com, he "made similar disparaging remarks about Army Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq."
Ok. Harry Reid is a worm. We know that. He once told a group of high school students in Nevada that President Bush was "a loser." And just a couple of weeks ago he proclaimed the war in Iraq to be "lost."
So, if he wants to go to the Senate floor and stand up and say things like that about two highly regarded Generals, then he certainly has the right to do that, no matter how much we might disagree with him.
But Reid didn't stand up like a man on the floor of the Senate. He said those things, according to Politico.com and other sources, in a "private phone call" to a group "of liberal bloggers" leaving behind him not an official record, but a trail of slime like the garden slug he is.
Dear Mr. Mullings:
Are you just about done?
No. I'm just warming up.
If you are looking for a true political leader, you can just pass right over Harry Reid. He is perfectly willing to give aid and comfort to the enemy - likely putting American soldiers at greater risk by his comments - for political gain.
Reid has told his caucus that he is planning to make Republicans vote and vote again on Iraq because, according to the Associated Press "While the measures are unlikely to pass, the announcement comes as party leaders are under fire by many liberal supporters for passing legislation that funds the war through September."
Harry Reid is not acting like a Majority Leader of the United States Senate. He is playing the role of water-boy for the Liberal wing of the Democratic Party; a puny shadow of the real players, embarrassing himself by begging for approval from the MoveOn.org wing of his party who are calling the plays.
Maybe Harry Reid has a stellar military record. But when I Googled it I got this:
Your search - "Harry Reid" "military experience" - did not match any documents.
Harry, according to his bio, was born in 1939 which would mean that he was prime draft bait during the Viet Nam era but he missed that particular war. He was in college, in law school and then got appointed as a Capitol cop which, back in those days, was a purely political plum.
So, while the Viet Nam war was raging, Harry Reid served bravely guarding the House and Senate office building parking garages which, in turn, might well have served the purpose of keeping him out of Southeast Asia.
Last week the Senate made a big deal about trying to bring a vote of "no confidence" against Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to the floor - at which Reid also failed, by the way.
Republicans should attempt to bring a similar vote against the Democratic Majority Leader - no confidence in a man who would put politics ahead of national security.
As of this writing only two Republican Senators - John Warner (R-Va) and John McCain (R-Az) have spoken out and even at that were fairly tepid.
Warner said the effect on troops in Iraq of Reid's remark was "a factor I hope (Reid) weighed before making that statement."
McCain's statement, according to the AP was that Reid's comments "can only be described as highly inappropriate and regrettable."
The chairman of the RNC, Mike Duncan said that Reid's remarks were "reprehensible" and that "there are some lines you just don't cross."
But at least they said something.
The rest of the Senate Republicans, including RNC General Chairman Sen. Mel Martinez (R-Fl) must have missed Reid's comments because there has been a thunderous, and shocking, silence from the GOP.
Don't blame this one on a national press corps with a Liberal bias. The lack of outrage is a sure sign of why the Republican Party is in its current shape. It has given Harry Reid a pass.