I have a bone to pick, but not with the many people who voted for Harry Reid because they agree with his principles. That’s a choice of conscience, and I respect that. Rather, I wish to criticize those who might have voted for Sharron Angle—probably even would have—but were swayed by Reid’s negative campaigning.
Are you happy now? Since November, Reid’s two biggest missions have been starting a crusade against rural brothels, and using his platform in the Senate to champion federal funding for cowboy poetry. Always good to see real leaders, men with their priorities straight.
And why is our time being wasted on such embarrassing trivia?
Because you voted for Harry Reid.
Reid had some of the lowest approval ratings of anyone, ever. Angle had very high poll numbers. But as the campaign drew to a close, the Reid machine launched an all-out professional assault on Angle’s character. And you bought it.
Should his tactics have been surprising? No, of course not. We all knew his staff would hit Angle with something, and hit hard—and yet, even knowing what to look for, you swallowed his whole story. You bought it. And now we’re all paying.
“Angle thinks ‘second amendment remedies’ are legitimate? We should be shooting people we disagree with? That’s crazy! She wants to outlaw all abortions, including for rape! She thinks some Hispanic kids look Asian! What a nut!”
For what it’s worth, she was criticizing those who think violent actions are an option, not endorsing them; even if she did want to ban all abortions, it’s not like there’s any chance of that happening; and playfully bantering with people about a resemblance between ethnicities is hardly evidence of…whatever it was that was supposed to be evidence of.
In just half a year’s hindsight, the gross exaggerations about Angle seem so silly. Sure, you could disagree with her fiscal and social conservatism, but how does this make her “extreme,” as she was so belligerently branded? Angle has served in public office for years, with a consistent and squeaky clean record. She’s hardly a dangerous unknown.
That being said, much of the blame for her loss falls on Angle herself, who unbelievably failed to advertise that reputation, who failed to counter the attacks reasonably (despite her strong showing in her televised debate with Reid), and whose lachrymose campaign seemed determinedly mired in moribund neutral from day one. Hopefully she learns from that and runs a more proactive campaign next time.
So good luck to her in her new campaign for Dean Heller’s congressional seat.
And heaven help us from any more of Harry Reid’s winsome charity.
Gently Hew Stone 
She ran a weak campaign. She deserved to lose,
Politics is a blood sport. Forget that at your own peril. Anyone in the game knows it.
Your gal lost. Get over it. Its not the end of the world.
As I said, yes, she ran a weak campaign. Everybody knows it.
I’m certainly “over it;” my point here is just that an awful lot of people voted against how they wanted to or would have because they fell for the Reid camp’s snide implications about her character, implications that were irrelevant and demonstrably untrue. When will we learn to screen campaigning more wisely?
Okay, here’s a direct quote from Harry Reid, as quoted by The Hill’s Floor Action Blog:
So you see that “Cowboy Poetry” was just a side issue picked by his opponents. The real issue is that NEH brings jobs to Nevada, and he’d be a lousy NV senator, if he didn’t defend funding for that.
As far as Second Amendment remedies, when you have professional soldiers repeating over and over that they have sworn an oath to uphold the Constitution by “any means necessary”, and when guns and Revolution are mentioned in the same context and talk of 2nd Amendment remedies abound, it does sound to me like inciting armed rebellion.
BTW, don’t those soldiers still also swear to not bear arms against a legitimate U.S. government.
Plus, having a Bachelor’s in economics gives me a better angle than “stop spending”. There are times when governments can indeed spend themselves out of a deficit, and if the Federal government really “stopped spending” it would plunge the country into a deep depression. Plus, the only ways to really “stop spending” is to stop declaring new wars and trying to get out of the ongoing ones, and cut Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.
But then, that wouldn’t make the biggest voting group (the Boomers) happy, now, would it?
The real question is, why are you getting stuck on Cowboy Poetry? Is it because any cowboy who does poetry is a pansy, and you know what “the guys” usually do with such? No, I’m just kidding, but really you know about the cowboy poetry because it’s a good way for a wingnut to try to make a Dem look ridiculous.