It's pretty clear to me that Harry Reid knows less about the PR game than he does about how to be a successful majority leader. So I am launching a new feature here, where in I shall endeavor to take Harry's garbled, long-winded mutterings and translate them into easily understood arguments. Along the way I'll also give him some helpful hints on strategy. Feel free to play along in comments.
One hopes that he will be able to take constructive criticism, though I suspect I hope in vain.
So let's get started.
Just today, it appears that the
WH is still insisting that the Senate confirm uber-douchebag author of the torture memos Steven Bradbury and won't strike a deal on other nominees unless Reid agrees to let chimpy recess appoint him.
Here's what Reid said on the floor today:
"He said that unless I would agree to allow him to recess appoint Steven Bradbury, he wouldn’t make a deal – he didn’t care if that meant no one got confirmed. He was willing to forgo the 84-plus nominees and the offers of recess appointments if he couldn’t install Mr. Bradbury.
Weak!
Here's what Reid should have said privately:
Bite me.
I always feel concision is best. And here's what he should have said publicly.
The president is holding the nomination process hostage over the torture memo guy. The senate does not negotiate with terrorists.
See? that wasn't so hard. Call his bluff. Tell him to fuck off and die.
Believe me, the public will be on your side.
Let's try another one (isn't this fun?). Today
G.O.P. Senators Block Democrats’ Stimulus Plan because dems added benefits for seniors, the unemployed and disabled veterans.
Here's what Harry said (and did) today.
The majority leader, Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, had signaled that Democrats were prepared to force a showdown with Republicans over the $204 billion Senate stimulus package and would not bow to pressure to simply make modest changes to a less expensive plan that was approved by the House last week.
“We should go for the whole package,” Mr. Reid said at a news conference on Tuesday. He waved off assertions by some Republicans that he was bluffing. “Wait until we have this vote, and they’ll find out,” he said. “I am not much of a bluffer.”
Well, no, you're not much of a bluffer. In fact, you suck ass at it. As the article says, you were only able to muster 58 votes, so you let it go with a "paper filibuster."
What he should have said privately to Mitch McConnell:
Bite me, you asshole.
And what he should have said publicly:
"50 votes is a pass. If you don't like it, I suggest you get your wrinkly asses up here on the senate floor and start filibustering. In the meantime, we'll tell the American people how you hate old folks and the unemployed. Have fun!"
None of this is rocket science. And I'm serious as a heart attack about the public language.
Speak clearly, concisely and on point. Show some balls, be right, and the public, as well as the press, will reward you. And hell, the country will be better off too! Imagine the possibilities.