Posted on 05/16/2005 10:01:43 PM PDT by CHARLITE
Clint Eastwood's movie character "Dirty Harry" Callahan was clean compared to Dirty Harry Reid, the Senate Democrats' minority leader. Callahan may have roughed up the bad guys but Senator Dirty Harry Reid smears anybody for any reason.
While Senator Reid's cheap shot that President Bush was a "loser" -- a strange label for someone who has beaten Reid's party twice -- got a certain amount of notice in the media, a far worse remark by Senator Dirty Harry is that Michigan judge and federal judicial nominee Henry Saad has some things in his FBI file that should give Senators pause before confirming him.
What makes this dirty is that FBI files contain anything that anybody has said about you, whether it is true or untrue. That is why FBI files are confidential, because they include unsubstantiated statements that have not been evaluated by anybody.
Most Senators -- including Dirty Harry Reid -- have not and cannot see what is in the FBI file on Judge Saad because only members of the Senate Judiciary Committee are allowed to see that file. If any member of that committee said anything about that file to Senator Reid, that member violated confidentiality.
Even Judge Saad himself cannot see the file, so he has no way of knowing what Senator Reid is referring to -- and therefore no way to defend himself against whatever unknown statement may be there. Nor is there any way for him or us to know whether whatever is in the file is serious or trivial.
We have only the word of Senator Dirty Harry Reid.
It so happens that my own FBI file, compiled back in the 1970s when President Ford nominated me to the Federal Trade Commission, contains a claim that I was a Communist. Not even the people who were opposed to my nomination took that seriously. But anonymous statements to the FBI are a way to knife someone in the back.
Obviously the statement about me was made by someone who was both hostile to me and ignorant enough of my politics to think that this charge would fly. That narrows down the suspects and I have a pretty good idea who it was.
But the point here is that anybody can say anything to the FBI during one of these investigations, which is why the files are kept confidential, leaving things in them to be evaluated later on by a few authorized people. The statement against Judge Saad might easily have come from someone who lost a case in his court.
Why is Senator Reid making insinuations about unknown and unsubstantiated statements in Judge Saad's confidential FBI file? Because Dirty Harry is desperate.
It is not just that a showdown on judicial nominees is pending in the Senate. Senator Reid's Democratic Party has been losing elections consistently in the past few years.
In the 2000 elections, they lost the White House during peace and prosperity, which is usually a slam dunk for the party in power. They even lost Congressional seats in 2002, a midterm election in the midst of a controversial war, both of which usually mean that the opposition party picks up seats.
After the most recent elections last year, the Democrats ended up a minority party in both Houses of Congress, with Republicans controlling not only the White House but most of the governorships and state legislatures across the country.
It is desperation time for the Democrats and Dirty Harry Reid is just one of those who is showing it. Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean's denunciation of the President as "despicable" is just one of his bright sayings that recalls his famous primal scream during the Democratic primaries last year.
Senate Democrats' threat to obstruct the normal functioning of the Senate if Republicans stop them from filibustering judicial nominees is another sign of their desperation -- and the venom to which desperation often leads.
Even to threaten to obstruct the operation of the Senate during a war is something that boggles the mind, whether or not the threat is actually carried out. It also boggles the mind to see liberals defending filibusters, whose best known use in the past has been to block civil rights legislation.
What they are really defending is the right of those who lost an election to prevent those who won from governing. Dirty Harry Reid is the right man for that kind of job.
Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305. His Web site is http://www.tsowell.com.
He's like a cheap whore pretending to be a queen.
Other than my own brilliant self :-), Dr. Sowell is the first I have seen recognize the true purpose of the Democrats - to prevent the Republicans for getting meaningful legislation passed on SS, tax reform, more tort reform, etc., as well as the judicial nominees passed.
What they are really defending is the right tyranny of the minority of those who lost an election to prevent those who won from governing.
Right. Up until now, we have allowed them to do it effectively. RINOs and spineless Republicans have let this happen. Frist is finally stepping forward and making a move to twart this crap. Let's see what kind of support he gets.
I thought everybody knew that obstructionism is now the Dems' sole reason for existence.
Thomas Sowell is indespensible. He's a pure gem and such a genius!
He and Walter Williams prove affirmative action is bunk sicne they obviously didn't need it!
If luck works in our favor, Sowell calls in to the Rush show when Williams is guest hosting. They could talk for hours and I'd never be bored!
I once caught them going on a full hour on Rush's show and it was nirvana.
Yup...the Dems are in trouble.
And Reid has just never struck me as bright/capable enough to pull them out of their nosedive. HAW!
Maybe I have been living in a cave or maybe everyone just knew and didn't have to say it. Regardless, I am glad.
"He's like a cheap whore pretending to be a queen."
I keep telling Freepers, as a Nevadan, Harry is vicious but inept, he will be the gift that keeps giving by being so over the top.
Thomas Sowel, brilliant as ever. Great article!
REALLY? MY NOMINATION FOR THE “LEAKER”: SENATOR (sadly from my state—but only for 10 more days) “DEPENDS”?
WOULDN'T YOU JUST LIKE TO WIPE THAT SMIRK (NOT NICE TO SAY "BITCH-SLAP, IS IT LOL) OFF HIS SUPERCILIOUS, SHALLOW, SELF-OBSESSED, EGOCENTRIC, RIGHTEOUS, FACE?
HAS THE REPUTATION OF BEING THE "MEANEST, NASTIEST, BACK-STABBING, RECALCITRANT, SOB-SENATOR IN CONGRESS--BY BOTH REPUBLICANS & DEMOCRATS!
Actually, Bush has beaten Reid's party four times in a row, twice in Texas and twice nationally. If you count his coat-tails in the last off-year congressional election, that would be 5 times in a row. What would Bush have to do to be considered a "winner" by Reid -- nuke them?
The judge should demand that Reid state specifically what it is that is in his FBI file...
Either way, Reid would be screwed... If he says he was just bluffing, then he's shown as nothing more than a lying character assasin. If he answers that he can't say, since the information is confidential, then he opens himself up to legal action, since he didn't have legal access to the files. Plus, I believe that leaking the confidential information from an FBI file is a crime itself.
Not that it would matter, since the MSM won't say a word about this.
Mark
No, just unconditionally surrender to them... According to dems and the MSM, the only good republican is a RINO, or one who's gone over to "the dark side." Look at how quickly the MSM switched from lauding Jeffords as "a man of conviction" to completely ignoring him, once he was no longer needed by the dems. And then compare the MSM's treatment of him to Zell Miller. Talk about character assasination!
Mark
Reid and the Dem's promise to "shut down the Senate" is all the more reason to excercise the nuclear option. If they do it, the Dems will catch hell from ordinary voters. If it's a bluff, they'll look like fools and catch hell from their leftist base.
a Representative and a Senator from Oregon; born in Wichita, Sedgwick County, Kans., May 3, 1949; attended the public schools of Palo Alto, Calif.; A.B., Stanford University 1971; J.D., University of Oregon Law School in Eugene 1974; director, Oregon Legal Services for the Elderly 1977-1979; public member, Oregon State Board of Examiners of Nursing Home Administrators 1977-1979; elected as a Democrat to the Ninety-seventh and to the seven succeeding Congresses, and served from January 3, 1981, to February 5, 1996, when he resigned, having been elected to the Senate; elected to the Senate in a special election on January 30, 1996, to fill the unexpired portion of the term ending January 3, 1999, left vacant by the resignation of Robert W. Packwood, and took the oath of office on February 6, 1996; reelected in 1998 and in 2004 for the term ending January 3, 2011.
http://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodisplay.pl?index=W000779
Bob Packwood was hounded from office and replaced by a Democrat Ron Wyden, still the incumbent in that senate seat. Bob Packwood's "crime" was being a boorish lout who aggressively kissed women in his office.
Harry Reid is guilty of insinuating that he committed a felony. He has no business knowing what's in a judge's FBI file, and his speech indicates that he has looked at one. That is on its face grounds for expulsion from the Senate - and if Nevada fills that senate seat with a Republican (the governor is a Repubican), why then that is just too bad.
But of course we know that nothing will come of this. We know that because Reid is a Democrat, just like Bill Clinton. And Bill Clinton's White House illegally accessed 2000 FBI files - 2000 counts of the same felony that put Chuck Colson in the slammer for a year and helped force Nixon out of the White House - without so much as having to finger an aide for having hired Craig Livingstone - and without his Justice Department's even having to prosecute Mr. Livingstone himself.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.