From a Town Hall article, Harry Reid's transformation :
Harry Reid's transformation [/] Tony Snow [/] September 26, 2005WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Harry Reid was a famously nice guy before he became the Senate Democratic leader. Although reliably partisan, he built a well-earned reputation for playing the role of nice guy, the man of genial calm.
No more: The senator this week made official his descent into the Moonbat Grotto by issuing a lame rebuke of John Roberts, the president's choice to become the next chief justice of the Supreme Court.
Reid said he couldn't vote for Roberts because the nominee as a young attorney once used the phrase "illegal amigos" in a memorandum prepared for the Department of Justice. Reid considered this an insensitive way of describing people who steal over our borders, often bearing drugs, guns and contraband.
Note that Reid and his colleagues had access to 80,000 pages of documents dating back to Roberts' first federal employment as a twentysomething staff attorney at Justice, along with 50 or so opinions written as a federal judge. Despite having access to the largest-ever trove of nominee information, the "illegal amigo" quip was the worst Reid and his phalanx of opposition researchers could find. This could make Roberts the cleanest nominee in American history -- but not good enough for the New Harry.
Reid's performance raises an interesting and vital question: What on earth would persuade a naturally nice man to behave in such an inane manner -- and why would a majority of Democrats join him in voting against John Roberts, who may be the strongest high-court nominee in a century?
Here is the two-word answer: McCain-Feingold. The McCain-Feingold campaign-finance reform bill, designed grandly to "take money out of politics," predictably produced the opposite effect. It sucked in a flood of cash, gutted the major political parties and made poseurs more unaccountable than ever before.
The old villain, "soft money," merely changed names under McCain-Feingold. Lawyers now call it "527 money." Wealthy activists can spend like crazy through 527s, but with one significant difference from the old days: Before "reform," political parties could marginalize lunatics. Now, plutocrats rule without restraint from political pros.
Democrats find themselves beholden to a batch of petulant billionaires, led by George Soros, Peter Lewis and Steven Bing. That trio alone contributed nearly $65 million to Democratic candidates and causes during the 2004 election cycle.
All told, Democrats raised more than $318 million in 527 money between 2002 and 2004, while Republicans lagged far behind at $206 million.
These figures don't include presidential expenditures, which again show a huge advantage for the Plutocrat Party -- $182 million for Democrats; $64 million for Republicans.
[…] Their efforts failed because they offended people. As Americans shelled out millions of dollars to help victims of Hurricane Katrina, for instance, MoveOn broadcast ads that made George Bush the Satanic heavy for bad weather and poorly constructed levees. The spots reflected George Soros' apparent belief that his spite was more compelling than Katrina victims' plight.
Similarly, the raging plutocrats are underwriting the likes of Cindy Sheehan, who showed solidarity with hurricane victims by demanding the removal of all federal troops from New Orleans, and Michael Moore, who plans to produce a crockumentary on Hurricane Katrina.
Thus, the solution to our conundrum: Harry Reid has to act like a nut in public because money talks. As Senate leader, Reid has to tilt at every windmill, charge into every fusillade and dip his head into every wood-chipper just to please his billionaire bosses.
He's not alone. While the Senate approved Justice Antonin Scalia by a vote of 98-0 and Ruth Bader Ginsburg (with arguably the dottiest paper record of any recent court nominee) sailed through by a 96-3 tally, Roberts will be lucky to break 70 votes. Worse, Democrats have all but promised to subject the president's next high-court nominee to an exuberant character assassination, likely culminating in a filibuster.
This is what McCain-Feingold has wrought: Nasty commercials, incoherent attack politics and ill will on Capitol Hill. The eccentric rich call the shots. Mild-mannered politicians behave like Batman villains -- and none of it will improve until Congress finally declares that it's time to un-reform the reform before someone really gets hurt. [Ellipses and emphasis mine.]
