Senate majority leader Harry Reid’s dirty hands caught in Obama seat cookie jar

The plot thickens:

Days before Gov. Blagojevich was charged with trying to sell President-elect Barack Obama’s U.S. Senate seat to the highest bidder, top Senate Democrat Harry Reid made it clear who he didn’t want in the post: Jesse Jackson, Jr., Danny Davis or Emil Jones.

Rather, Reid called Blagojevich to argue he appoint either state Veterans Affairs chief Tammy Duckworth or Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan, sources told the Chicago Sun-Times.

Sources say the Senate majority leader pushed against Jackson and Davis — both democratic congressmen from Illinois — and against Jones — the Illinois Senate president who is the political godfather of President-elect Barack Obama — because he did not believe the three men were electable. He feared losing the seat to a Republican in a future election.

Blagojevich spokesman Lucio Guerrero confirmed that Reid (D-Nev.) and U.S. Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) — the new chief of the Senate Democratic political operation — each called Blagojevich’s campaign office separately Dec. 3. Sources believe that at least portions of the phone conversations are on tape.

Before their contacts, Obama’s chief of staff Rahm Emanuel called Blagojevich to tell him to expect to hear from Senate leadership because they were pushing against Jackson and others, according to statements the governor made to others.

Do you know what this means? Of course, not only is the Senate Majority’s leader, who has gone on record along with many other Senate Democrats in warning Blago not to appoint anyone, now caught with his dirty hands personally in the middle of the “who’s gonna get Obama’s seat” drama/scandal, but this also means that – at least according to Rep. Rush’s standards – Reid is …

… a racist! Reps. Danny Davis and Jackson, and State Senator Jones are all black. The two Reid would have liked to see were either Madigan, who is white, or Duckworth, who is of Asian descent.

Where’s the outrage?

(*ST continues to hold on to the big stir stick in order to keep stirring the pot …)

19 Responses to "Senate majority leader Harry Reid’s dirty hands caught in Obama seat cookie jar"

Great White Rat says:

January 3, 2009 at 11:06 am

Maybe I’m missing something here – but I don’t see the problem.

Seems to me that all Reid did was get on the horn to Blago and tell him “Listen, moron, any of these three clowns will cost us a seat in 2010. Stay away from them.” It’s the sort of thing politicians of both parties get from political advisors all the time.

Now, if Blagojevich demanded a payoff from Reid to go along with the advice, and Reid opened the checkbook to get the Senator he wanted, that’s different. But I didn’t see anything in the story to suggest that.

To me it looks like in this case Reid isn’t caught up in Blagojevich’s corruption – just reasoning that since Blagojevich is determined to make a tainted appointment, let’s try to minimize the damage.

(Me defending Harry Reid? It must be a new year. Hopey Changemas!!)
Severian says:

January 3, 2009 at 11:08 am

Most ethical congress evah!
Anthony (Los Angeles) says:

January 3, 2009 at 11:13 am

I agree with GWR, Reid (D-Dummy)was just engaging in normal politics. As leader of his party in the senate, he has every right to call Blago to express his opinion on the choices, even it’s to say “Don’t appoint any of these schmucks.” I have nothing but contempt for Reid, but I don’t see what he’s done wrong, here.

On the other hand, race baiters like Rush are sure to exploit this news for all it’s worth, which should be an immense political headache for Harry. That, I like.
Sister Toldjah says:

January 3, 2009 at 11:39 am

I’m not saying Reid was guilty of legal wrongdoing, but instead that for him, like Obama, his revealed involvement – no matter how innocent and normal – is going to give him a big headache and increase the scrutiny on the Dem party, and perhaps distract the leadership from their liberal agenda, if only for a short time. None of us believe Obama was guilty of any legal wrongdoing, either, but years of Democrats – including Obama and Reid – trying to paint Republicans as “evil” even by the thinnest of associations have come back to bite Democrats in the a**es. Not to mention the racial angle that has cropped up in this drama, courtesy of Rep. Rush. You reap what you sow, and frankly I’m enjoying the show.

We should take our victories where we can get them. These days, the pickin’s are slim.
Desert Rat says:

January 3, 2009 at 11:58 am

One of these days, our African-American citizens will wake up to the fact that the Democrat Party is only interested in keeping them on the plantation.
Great White Rat says:

January 3, 2009 at 12:54 pm

I love schadenfreude as much as anyone, ST. But for this to be anything more than that, there has to be a willingness to use it at the critical time. I’m not sure whether anyone in the GOP leadership has the inclination to launch a full-scale “culture of corruption” type assault during the 2010 midterm election campaign. Yes, the Reid-Pelosi Congress is setting a new low standard for ethics. But if you don’t hammer that point, it doesn’t help you. There was a wealth of information about Obama’s unsavory connections with the Chicago political crowd on hand last year, but the McCain organization decided not to use it. You saw how much good taking the high road did them.

But if they do plan to use it, I hope someone is building an arsenal of all the video clips, news summaries, and sound bites they can use in 2010. And then find a GOP equivalent of Carville or Axelrod to implement it.

As for the racism angle, that will go nowhere, I’m afraid. Like sexism and terrorism, racism is always overlooked as long as the perpetrator is on the left. We can point out the hypocrisy, but until the black population is willing to recognize it and vote against it – and all indications are that they’re not – it’s a one-day story, nothing more.
Harry Reid Told Blagojevich Not to Appoint Jesse Jackson Jr., and Other Blacks : Stop The ACLU says:

January 3, 2009 at 1:05 pm

[…] Sister Toldjah wonders where is the outrage? […]
Dana says:

January 3, 2009 at 1:13 pm

Our hostess concluded:

ST continues to hold on to the big stir stick in order to keep stirring the pot â€¦

Unfortunately, with the size of this pot, a swizzle stick will be sufficient. Anyone can offer advice, and without some sort of quid pro quo blatantly offered, the media will not allow this story to fester and grow. Our friends on the left and their willing accomplices in the professional media will keep this a Blagojevich story, period.
Dana says:

January 3, 2009 at 1:19 pm

Mr Rat wrote:

I’m not sure whether anyone in the GOP leadership has the inclination to launch a full-scale “culture of corruption” type assault during the 2010 midterm election campaign.

Considering that our friends on the left have been rather successful with the “corruption is a republican problem” meme, I doubt that the GOP would want to go there.

There are plenty of corrupt Democrats out there, Democrats who have made the news by being criminally charged and in some cases convicted, but, at the moment, the majority of corrupt congressmen in recent years have been Republicans: Mark Foley, Bob Ney, Randy Cunningham and ted Stevens. To find a majority of corrupt Democrats, you have to go to state legislatures (Senator Vincent Fumo, D-Philadelphia), mayors (a bunch of them) and gubernatorial seats (Mr Blagojevich).
Shocker: Scary Harry Reid Says, “We don’t want no Darkies in our Senate!” | Political Byline says:

January 3, 2009 at 3:10 pm

[…] Hot Air, NewsBusters.org, Don Surber, BLACKFIVE, RedState, Macsmind, Stop The ACLU, Sister Toldjah, Gateway […]
Sister Toldjah says:

January 3, 2009 at 3:57 pm

I guess conservative bloggers and pundits should stop writing about Rahm Emanuel’s contacts with Blago, too, even though it appears that no quid pro quo was involved there, either? We’ve all gotten a big kick out of the headaches this scandal has caused the Obama administration, an administration that rode in on a promise of “cleaning up the same ol’ same ol'” in Washington, only to find out that right off the bat, even though there was (as it appears) there was no legal wrongdoing, the repeated contacts between Emanuel and Blago/Blago’s reps indicated that the interest was more than just “casual” and “unrelated to the Senate seat.” Reid’s been sitting there in Congress acting like a sanctimonious jacka$$ as it relates to Blago but when it came right down to it, he pushed hard on Blago, too, to make a pick he wanted on the basis of “electability.”

The last several years have shown us that if we wait for the GOP leadership to take the bull by the horns as it relates to Dem shenanigans, we’ll be waiting forever. The Reid story is just part of a pattern of say one thing, do something different with the lot of the left in DC. I’m glad to see that John Coryn is asking questions, even if most of the rest of the GOP are not:

“For the last several weeks, Senator Reid has led the charge to deny the people of Illinois a voice in choosing their next U.S. senator in a special election” Cornyn said in a Saturday afternoon statement. “Now we learn that Senator Reid also took the extraordinary step to lobby against two sitting U.S. congressmen and the state senate Majority Leader in Illinois, and instead told Governor Blagojevich that he supported an appointment for an individual [Duckworth] who recently lost a U.S. House election.”

“The people of Illinois deserve a simple explanation from Senator Reid – why does he believe these three Illinois officeholders are â€˜unelectable’ to the U.S. Senate?” Cornyn added.

Heck, for that matter, even Chris Bowers at Open Left smells a rotten egg:

[..]Further, if Reid and Senate Democrats are motivated at least partially by “electability,” to what extent is that “electability” based on fear of Illinois not backing another African-American, even after Barack Obama and Carol Mosley Braun previously held this seat? It is fairly obvious that played a role. Yet further, to what extent was Madigan’s attempt to remove Blagojevich from office based on her personal Senate ambitions? It is also kind of funny that Reid considered Tammy Duckworth more “electable,” even though she couldn’t win a Democratic-leaning congressional district in Illinois despite receiving more DCCC backing in 2006 than any other Democratic candidate. She barely even won her primary.

One of the major problems here is the corruption associated with the concept of “electability” itself. Not only is it anti-democratic, but in truly retrograde fashion it reinforces oppressive cultural perceptions–such as African-Americans being unelectable, and Democrats needing to turn to veteran’s in order to shore up foreign policy credentials–rather than challenging them. To a large extent, the Constitutional method of appointing Senators, rather than holding special elections, is itself to blame. Additionally, the lack of intra-party democracy and top-down elitism of our political process is also to blame. None of these problems would have occurred if we had simply held an election, and engaged in the radical experiment of letting the people decide.

Concepts like “electability” are part of a broader corrupting system. Selling Senate seats for cash may be obviously corrupt and illegal, but using political leverage to clear primary fields and rule out entire groups of people from holding office isn’t much better.

AllahPundit makes a good point here, as well, as it relates to the race angle:

Shed no tears for Dingy Harry over the demagoguery to come. He sowed the wind; let him reap the whirlwind.

He’s exactly right. Reid tried to paint the GOP’s connecting Franklin Raines to Obama as “racist” – so if Bobby Rush (and other race baiters in the Democrat party) goes after Reid for wanting to exclude the three black candidates on the basis of “electability” I’m going to relish their questioning him on it and write about it, with interest. Dems eating their own over an issue that normally they tie Republicans in knots over? I’m all for it.

As the last several decades have shown us, we can’t rely on the mainstream media to do their part, either, so it’s up to primarily the conservative media (bloggers, pundits) and Fox News to keep the fires on legitimate stories like this one burning. If it helps keep this story out there, that’s great, if not, at least we can’t say we didn’t try. Stories like this are ones that will keep the Democrats off their game and give the GOP a bit of an edge (whether or not they’re willing to work for it) as the new Congress prepares to be seated for the first time next week. We need whatever traction we can get.
Trish says:

January 3, 2009 at 4:27 pm

Dana–
That is exactly where the GOP should want to go.

I am from Illinois, and I can tell you for a fact that there are far more corrupt Democrat congressmen than Republican congressmen. The Democrats don’t get exposed, because of the work of the political machines and the MSM, and the corruption of those who do is downplayed.
It’s time to lift that rock and bring some light to what’s living underneath it.
DE says:

January 3, 2009 at 10:09 pm

One sentence taken out of context at a 100 year old politicians bithday party sent the MSM into a feeding frenzy of racism charges against Trent Lott. He then gave up his position as Senate Majority Leader. Reid has been caught on tape trying to suppress a Black from becoming Senator, saying in public that he would block Buris from the capitol steps, yet not a peep from the MSM. But that is what you can expect from a liberal press and their love of the Democratic party that glorifies a murderer (Ted Kennedy) and longtime KKK member Robert Byrd.
Tim Jeffers says:

January 4, 2009 at 1:55 am

First of all, even though I do not like Majority Leader Reid and disagree with his politics, he would be foolish not to have called Blagojevich. That’s the way the system was designed. As long as no deals were made or money exchanged, Reid was within his political boundaries. Second, it is ridiculous to assert that Reid is a bigot. He tried to encourage Blagojevich to appoint an electable person (in 2010) to that seat; smart politics. Third, Reid and the U.S. senate have a right to refuse to seat an appointee if they think that person’s ability to serve is tarnished by one’s own deficiencies or if the appointment is deemed disqualified due to non-compliance with ethical standards by the appointer (Blagojevich). While Mr. Burris’ may feel slighted, he has no legal recourse to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. The U.S. is a Republic with a representative government, not a democracy. A special election is extremely costly. If the electorate feel they are not being duly represented, they have the opportunity to kick the bum(s) out during the next general election.
Leslie says:

January 4, 2009 at 11:02 am

I agree with those commenters here who think this is all much ado about nothing. It’s just politics as usual. Reid’s not a racist; he did nothing wrong.

I find no source of amusement here.
Anthony (Los Angeles) says:

January 4, 2009 at 11:44 am

Third, Reid and the U.S. senate have a right to refuse to seat an appointee if they think that person’s ability to serve is tarnished by one’s own deficiencies or if the appointment is deemed disqualified due to non-compliance with ethical standards by the appointer (Blagojevich).

On the contrary, I don’t believe Reid and the Senate have any recourse but to seat Burris: the precedent of Powell vs. McCormack (1969) seems clear in this case. They can try to expel him after he’s seated, but that creates its own problems.
Great White Rat says:

January 4, 2009 at 10:36 pm

ST says:

I guess conservative bloggers and pundits should stop writing about Rahm Emanuel’s contacts with Blago, too, even though it appears that no quid pro quo was involved there, either?

Come on, ST…you know Anthony, Leslie, and me better than that. Of course you shouldn’t stop working that angle. The difference betweeen that and the Reid issue is that Obama and his gang immediately started lying about Emanuel’s contacts with Blago. A cover-up is certainly worth writing about.

The current Congress and the next administration will give us plenty of opportunities to show them as the corrupt charlatans they are…witness the Richardson and Clinton problems you’ve already noted. And if you wanted to show what the Democrats think of, say, paying taxes, you couldn’t come up with a better poster boy right now than Charlie Rangel and his current problems with the IRS. We conservatives should hammer every such opportunity mercilessly.

Is Reid a hypocrite on this? Of course. I’d expect nothing more from the left. It’s part of their DNA. But it’s not the same as having “dirty hands in the Obama seat cookie jar”. That implies a lot more – I read it as putting him in the same gutter as Blagojevich. By all means, let’s enjoy their predicament, but understand that what Reid did wasn’t wrong per se.

The Obama campaign howled about racism almost every time anyone dared oppose him. I don’t want us to turn into a distorted mirror image of that, finding wrongdoing in everything the other side does. By 2010, I’d love to see all the left’s doubletalk rolled up into a hard-hitting media campaign, but that should be a tasty side dish. The main course should be the Rezkos, Hsus, Blagojeviches, Rangels, Dodds, Franks, ACORNs, etc. That is how we can defeat them.
Great White Rat says:

January 4, 2009 at 10:39 pm

I don’t believe Reid and the Senate have any recourse but to seat Burris: the precedent of Powell vs. McCormack (1969) seems clear in this case.

I think Anthony is correct on this. The Senate is the judge of the election of it’s members and can refuse to seat an elected member if they question the results. They did that, if I recall, regarding a Senate seat in NH in the 1970s. However, it doesn’t appear that that power extends to appointments.

Any lawyers who know this terrain better?
Aakash says:

January 5, 2009 at 1:32 am

Regarding the comment from Trish above (in response to others’ comments), I thought I should share this pertinent piece, that I created (based on an info piece from the Illinois Republican Party), back in August 2002. [This was shortly before the big Illinois Democrat victories of November ’02, on the heels of the George Ryan scandal… I’ve revised it some since then, but still only including material from before that year. (In the meantime, of course, there has been a ton of new stuff, among them IL Dems! ]

Putting Things in Perspective: Which is the party of corruption in Illinois?

Comments are closed.