It’s not the policy of this blog to rip out an entire piece and re-run it. But for some reason I do not think the writer will care much. Apparently the biggest paper in Nevada is going after the biggest US Senator (its own) in DC. FUN!!
This newspaper traces its roots to before Las Vegas was Las Vegas.
We’ve seen cattle ranches give way to railroads. We chronicled the construction of Hoover Dam. We reported on the first day of legalized gambling. The first hospital. The first school. The first church. We survived the mob, Howard Hughes, the Great Depression, several recessions, two world wars, dozens of news competitors and any number of two-bit politicians who couldn’t stand scrutiny, much less criticism.
We’re still here doing what we do for the people of Las Vegas and Nevada. So, let me assure you, if we weathered all of that, we can damn sure outlast the bully threats of Sen. Harry Reid.
On Wednesday, before he addressed a Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce luncheon, Reid joined the chamber’s board members for a meet-‘n’-greet and a photo. One of the last in line was the Review-Journal’s director of advertising, Bob Brown, a hard-working Nevadan who toils every day on behalf of advertisers. He has nothing to do with news coverage or the opinion pages of the Review-Journal.
Yet, as Bob shook hands with our senior U.S. senator in what should have been nothing but a gracious business setting, Reid said: “I hope you go out of business.”
Later, in his public speech, Reid said he wanted to let everyone know that he wants the Review-Journal to continue selling advertising because the Las Vegas Sun is delivered inside the Review-Journal.
Such behavior cannot go unchallenged.
You could call Reid’s remark ugly and be right. It certainly was boorish. Asinine? That goes without saying.
But to fully capture the magnitude of Reid’s remark (and to stop him from doing the same thing to others) it must be called what it was — a full-on threat perpetrated by a bully who has forgotten that he was elected to office to protect Nevadans, not sound like he’s shaking them down.
No citizen should expect this kind of behavior from a U.S. Senator. It is certainly not becoming of a man who is the majority leader in the U.S. Senate. And it absolutely is not what anyone would expect from a man who now asks Nevadans to send him back to the Senate for a fifth term.
If he thinks he can push the state’s largest newspaper around by exacting some kind of economic punishment in retaliation for not seeing eye to eye with him on matters of politics, I can only imagine how he pressures businesses and individuals who don’t have the wherewithal of the Review-Journal.
For the sake of all who live and work in Nevada, we can’t let this bully behavior pass without calling out Sen. Reid. If he’ll try it with the Review-Journal, you can bet that he’s tried it with others. So today, we serve notice on Sen. Reid that this creepy tactic will not be tolerated.
We won’t allow you to bully us. And if you try it with anyone else, count on going through us first.
That’s a promise, not a threat.
And it’s a promise to our readers, not to you, Sen. Reid.
Sherman Frederick (sfrederick@reviewjournal.com) is publisher of the Review-Journal and president of Stephens Media.
Found by Keith Ray.
Good for the ReviewJournal. Kudos.
I always though Reid ate little children too.
He needs to go. Pelosi next.
And then the rest of the nuthouse in 2012.
Must be some Schneider’s weiner DNA in there someplace . . sheesh
So now we’re concerned about arrogance? Why wasn’t arrogance a concern previously?
Recall this? (See http://bit.ly/1WtFEI for an article by the author of the following email.)
From: “Bill Hangley, Jr.”
Subject: His Gift To Us
Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 19:05:38 -0400
So when the President was here on July 4, I had the opportunity to shake his hand. I wasn’t sure if that was a good idea or not but I did it anyway, and said to him, “Mr President, I hope you only serve four years. I’m very disappointed in your work so far.”
He kept smiling and shaking my hand but answered, “who cares what you think?” His face stayed photo-op perfect but his eyes gave me a look that said, if we’d been drinking in some frathouse in Texas, he’d’ve happily answered, “let’s take it outside.” A nasty little gleam. But he was (fortunately) constrained by Presidential propriety.
But that was the end of it, until I turned away and started scribbling the quote down in my notepad, so as to remember The Gift forever. When he saw me do that he got excited and craned his neck over the rubberneckers to shout at me, “who are you with? Who are you with?” People started looking so he made a joke: “make sure you get it right.” But he kept at it: “Who do you write for?” I told him I wasn’t “with” anybody and pointed to one of his staff people, who knows me a little, and said, “ask him, he’ll tell you.” Then I split.
Half an hour later, my boss (who had helped organize the event we were at) came up to me and said, “did you really tell the President that he was doing a ‘lousy fucking job’?” No way, I said, I was very polite, I just told him what I thought. Fortunately, he believed me. He wasn’t happy with me, but he believed me.
But anyway, if you ever wondered if the Prez really was kind of a jerk, I’m here to tell you, he is, and I got The Gift to prove it. I’m thinking of making up t-shirts so we can share The Gift with everyone:
“Who cares what you think?”
– President George W. Bush, July 4, 2001
***
I’m no fan of Harry Reid, and no fan of Obama. Of course I wasn’t a fan of the Dim Son occupying the White House the previous eight years either. I’m also not a fan of partisans who express faux outrage at other partisians who do and say things that exactly mirror what their own favored politicians and parties do and say. (Of course when their guys do it, it’s just because they care, or are true patriots, or are protecting our freedom, or were perfectly justified…or some other horse manure like that.)
I don’t care the political party, we will always have to be vigilant against any damn politician who wants to suppress the Bill of Rights, particularly the 1st Amendment.
You can’t hide from the sunshine Senator…and while we’re at it, smile for the camera. What a sourpuss!
“Most” (meaning the majority) do want Health Care, ‘Fred.
Really. It’s been in the newspapers.
It’s amazing to me that he thinks it’s his decision.
What’s worse, he’s got political power and could use it to crush a private business that he chooses to.
The only people who should have that power are their readers. Loose them and they go under.
Who does this guy think he is? Apparently not a public servant, but a master deciding who should thrive and who shouldn’t.
# 4 mr. show said,
“I don’t care the political party, we will always have to be vigilant against any damn politician who wants to suppress the Bill of Rights, particularly the 1st Amendment.”
The only thing working to protect the first is the second.
Buy guns and ammo and be prepared for the coming zombie apocalypse,
#7 Hehe that’s a good one! A politician having a beef against a newspaper is all well and good but when they want to use their power to stifle opposing views is where I have a problem.
Sometimes I think the zombies are upon us and they started in DC. Maybe they won’t move beyond the Potomac? Anyway, keep your provisions ready and watch out for brain-eaters!
VOTE ALL INCUMBENTS OUT OF OFFICE!!!!!
What #9 Bobbo said
In that photo.. He looks like he’s about to deliver another one of his own babies.
i’ll trade ya quebec for texas
Pelosi is just as big an ass. I don’t think even Cindy Sheehan would disagree with me on that.
The guy who got his feelings hurt by Senator Reid got his revenge. Whoever buys ink by the barrel usually gets the last word in.
Not only that,popular blog sites are now propagating the generalization that Reid is uniformly arrogant. OUCH ! Take that creepo for insulting a guy with a pen!!
Politicians are slimy creatures that shouldn’t be given a lifetime ride on the US taxpayer. We get better government when they are required to return and live in what they create for the rest of us.
Agree with bobbo on this one – it’s time to take out the garage.
I publish two newspapers in Virginia so I am a big fan of the first amendment.
I don’t know this paper at all and I have never met Sen. Reid but from over here based on what I read in this piece it sounds like Mr. Reid was simply exercising his first amendment freedoms as does the paper.
A newspaper is free to go after a politician and a politician is free to say, “Nobody should advertise in that rag!”
Readers aren’t stupid. They can usually sort it out.
That said, Reid isn’t stupid either and may have been egging them on. Now when the paper criticizes him he can say “Well their publisher has printed personal attacks on my character in the past so they aren’t a credible source.”
That op-ed was probably a bad idea.
As one of the 70% of Americans who seek reform of health care INSURANCE let me ditto the statements that Reid and Pelosi are among the greatest impediments to Democratic party success.
#17–Dan==thanks. Before I write whatever is to come, let me seriously ask you: How much would it cost to get an editorial saying its time to: VOTE ALL INCUMBENTS OUT OF OFFICE! with whatever other stones you’d like to ad?
With interest, I could even ask if an editorial to the opposite view would be in order? But anyway, the question advanced is
Should (not can) a public servant be hostile to the interests of specific citizens for whatever reasons?
Dan–if one of your employees said the same thing to you, how long would it take to fire that employee? That employee has all the same free speech rights as the Senator and the rest of us. Yes, what you as a First Amendment Advocate reveal is you don’t view our elected representatives as public servants. What do you view them as???????
In the main, the headline has it nailed. This is NOT AN ISSUE of free speech rights, its about ARROGANCE in public office serving ITSELF not the public.
When our political and our opinion leaders get it wrong, what help to Hecuba?
# 17 Dan McDermott said
“That op-ed was probably a bad idea.”
Maybe – maybe not.
So is showing your frustation at “town hall” meetings. Those guys are elected not annointed.
The point with which I agree totally with Mr bobbo.
VOTE ALL INCUMBENTS OUT OF OFFICE!
VOTE ALL INCUMBENTS OUT OF OFFICE!
This is a great idea on general principles and I’m totally in favor of wild and crazy anarchy but privately I have to wonder, how many of the replacements will be improvements and how many replacements will be detriments?
Instead of VOTING ALL INCUMBENTS OUT OF OFFICE, why don’t you simply lengthen their terms in office but restrict everyone to a single term? That way you save a bundle of money, too.
Most of the problems do seem to be caused by the repeat offenders, do they not?
#22 VOTE ALL INCUMBENTS OUT OF OFFICE!
THAT WON’T WORK — WE’LL JUST GET A NEW BATCH OF INCUMBENTS! WE THE PEOPLE HAVE TO PROPERLY SUPERVISE THE POLITICIANS WE HAVE NOW. SWAPPING THEM OUT WON’T WORK.
#4
Not comparable to Reid. In your post, Bill was a prick to the President, to his face, in a crowd and was then shocked the President responded. In Reid’s case, Reid himself instigated the confrontation.
#22–hot and oily==awwww c’mon Mr Diesel==we agree on practically everything. Rare for you to post your agreement. I know. Many are niggardly with their comments.
#23–Weary==playing within the system is not anarchy, just the opposite. won’t work the first 2-3rd time, the anointed ones will think we aren’t serious now that they are in office. No, it will take a while, but all within the current rules. Given that ALL the current scum are detriments, its a positive sign and supportive for you to wonder how many will be an improvement===thats the whole point. What can we do for a positive change?
I agree, single term has many benefits, but it requires a rule change that won’t ever happen. You see, I am not only logical, beneficent, but also practical.
I think our current mess is caused by a disconnect with the voters and a connection with big money. Thats why in step two, we vote against the encumbents and for whoever has the least big money behind them==again, all within the rules.
#24–Phydeau==VOTE ALL INCUMBENTS OUT OF OFFICE, and properly supervise them while they’re in. I don’t actually know or can imagine what you mean by supervision, but am pretty sure that VOTING ALL INCUMBENTS OUT OF OFFICE is no inhibition for that program to work. What is in fact the final supervision except to VOTE ALL INCUMBENTS OUT OF OFFICE?
OOOOOOHHHH if I could only get elected to one 20 year term as Dictator in Office. There would be some sweet changes.
bobbo, it does the country no good to have inexperienced politicians running the country. If you owned a business, would you fire the CEO every year just so he wouldn’t get corrupt?
We have a big, complicated country, and we need smart, experienced people to run it. Not rank amateurs every election cycle who take their first couple years learning the ropes and then are promptly removed by term limits.
And by “supervision” I mean paying attention to current events, knowing what position your elected representative takes, and letting him/her know frequently thru letters, phone calls, etc., what your opinion is, and if you disagree with them, let them know you’ll vote against them, and follow through and actually VOTE on election day. This is work, and it’s what we’re obliged to do if we want to have a representative government. If we can’t be bothered to do this, then we don’t deserve representative government.
This guy does not even care about the people that elected him. Its all about Reid. Good old Harry needs to go along with Pelosi who is just about as stuck up. Why American’s elect these people into office shows just how little voter’s actually look into the people they vote for. The vote purely on looks and personality and of course promises. They do little to seek out their true colors. Barack Obama was I believe elected on this same miss fortune. Too many voted because he was Black or they believed his promises or that he looked handsome. Yet we bashed Sarah Palin who may not be the sharpest candidate but was paraded around as just another pretty face. That was her fault for not proving everyone wrong!. Barack on the other hand convinced enough Black people that America needed a Black president regardless of what he believed in.
We must not forget that this was not a blowout election by any stretch and it shows even more how undivided American’s are about our path.
Our next election should be about new blood and not about old farts promising change. Give someone else a try!
I forgot one of the most important parts, get big money out of the election business. Stop treating big corporations as people with “rights”. A corporation is a legal construct, it doesn’t have “free speech” rights.
If you don’t get big money and its corrupting influence out of politics, not much else is going to make a difference. 🙁
#4, your analogy is inapt. The president didn’t start it, and he didn’t threaten anybody.
It’s also hilarious that you are so un-selfconscious about the personal cowardice revealed by your anecdote – do you REALLY think anyone who gives you the stink eye is going to kick your a$$? Yes, indeed, it’s a good thing for you that scary, scary man was restrained by presidential propriety! LOL.
btw, I don’t much like the guy either. I did vote for him in 04 but that’s only because the Dems choice of Kerry was just a freakishly bad one, yes even worse.
I still wish we’d gotten Bradley in ’00.
You were certainly well within your rights to make the comment you made, and to conclude that he’s a jerk, although I don’t share that conclusion. But I hope you can see the difference- TFA is not re: being a jerk.
#27 Phydeaux
you might find this paper interesting:
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=916963
It’s by Ilya Somin, who blogs at volokh.com
Fascinating subject.
Reid is not the cause but a symptom I am afraid. Despite almost everyone disapproving of congress as a whole, when you get right down to it, they hate all of congress, except the ones that represent them. After all they bring home the pork. That’s why their will never be some kind of incumbent revolt like Booboo wants.
Everyone thinks that the problem with congress is everyone else, not them. Yet they never realize that the problem is not people like Kennedy, Palossi, or Reid, the problem is the voter themselves, who keep reelecting the same idiot over and over, all the while complaining how bad of a job Congress is doing.