SHERMAN FREDERICK: Enough is enough, Harry – Opinion – ReviewJournal.com
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.




  1. Weary Reaper says:

    #26 bobbo

    Given that ALL the current scum are detriments…

    Agreed. That’s because no-one who actively seeks power over other people should ever be allowed to have power over other people. It simply doesn’t make any sense. It never has and it never will. Those sick enough or crooked enough to seek power should be automatically disqualified.

    What can we do for a positive change?

    I think we should just stick pins in telephone books and force the unfortunate people thus selected to serve a term in power as their civic duty.

    People worry about ‘inexperience’, which is something of a joke. Our current politicians are experienced? Experienced at what?

    With the pin system, not only would we suddenly end up with a vast majority of honest people in power, the average intelligence of ‘elected representatives’ would easily double.

    That’s why in step two, we vote against the incumbents and for whoever has the least big money behind them

    Since corporations can easily purchase candidates from both parties as soon as they’re announced, I still say sticking pins in telephone books to select legislators makes a hell of a lot more sense.

    Of course, there are many more problems I recognize, like keeping the corporations and the insanely wealthy away from persons in government but pins in telephone books are at least a starting point.

    Monkeying with the current system will get you all the way to exactly where you are now.

  2. Buzz says:

    Are we talking about the arrogance of the article that fails to note the specific points of contention between Reid and the Journal, or the arrogance of Reid for hoping that the contentious and often misleading stands the Journal has made will lead to naught?

    Pick your arrogance. There’s plenty to go around.

  3. Phydeau says:

    #32 *snort*

    Sure, I’ll trade you one George Soros for a dozen right-wing billionaires like Scaife. I’d come out ahead of you if we got rid of all the billionaires trying to influence the system. Most of them are right-wing nuts like Scaife.

    #31 Yes, he says any individual has so little chance of influencing politics, so we should all just give up. Charming.

  4. lou says:

    He just looks like a crusty old asshole.

  5. sargasso says:

    It is fun to watch two pompous buffoons squaring off for a fight. The Primadonna Journo vs. “Mr. Connected”. When it’s over, I want Frederick’s toupe, that little sucker must have cost a grand..

  6. Mondain says:

    Old media (newspapers etc) are in their death throes and they don’t have to agree, like it or not its happening. Embrace the future / change or die. I have one thing to state about Sen. Reid (from two personal experiences), contact him and he will get back to you with help.

  7. m.c. in l.v. says:

    As a SoCal transplant stuck here in Vegas, from what I’ve read and seen in the RJ and what I’ve heard from friends and co-workers the Review-Journal is a very pro-Republican newspaper and the smaller Las Vegas Sun it’s opposite. I’ve stop subscribing because most of it’s content is crap.

  8. Dogdriver says:

    This blog has turned into a right wing whine page. I use to enjoy reading the unusual posts and strange stories but now it’s a place for the bigots, birthers and death panelist to complain about the last eight months as They suffer from amnesia and denial for the previous eight years. I’ll say goodbye to Dvorak’s blog as I’m sure it has lost most of it’s readers with any common sense and won’t survive. All you so called conservatives need to remember… “In the land of the blind, the one eyed man shall be their King”.

  9. cornholer says:

    This bastard is toast. He will not be re-elected.

  10. bobbo, its so clear to me says:

    #27–Phydeau==”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?” /// Just the opposite: It CLEARLY does no good to have EXPERIENCED politicians running the country==my LORD, there is nothing but corruption and self interest. That comes about by the power of incumbents needing to be gotten into bed. Re firing the CEO, different animal and different controls possible, but failing all else==yes, thats exactly what I would do if the last 20 CEO’s all became corrupt after the first 4 years.

    #29–nothing wrong with getting the money out at the same time. Lots of solutions should be tried.

    #34–Weary==Yes, Pin Theory should also be tried. Again, that would require a rule change of unlikely success.

    What can any INDIVIDUAL ACTUALLY DO IN 2010 to actually vote for change?????? Thats right:

    VOTE ALL INCUMBENTS OUT OF OFFICE.

  11. noname says:

    # 21 pedro,

    “#15 Seems that, whatever you were taking yesterday, wore off. Too bad.”

    Again, as usual and on cue, your school yard rantings makes you sound like a immature, insecure child. Grow Up!!!!

    Most people agree that what # 15 Dallas said was reasoned and not worthy of your immature, insecure childish rantings.

    “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!!”

  12. Phydeau says:

    #45 there is nothing but corruption and self interest

    You exaggerate greatly. There is corruption and self-interest but there are decent people working to get the job done too. We need to reward these ones by re-electing them.

    But as it has been pointed out many times, everyone thinks their congresscritter is ok, it’s all those other congresscritters that should be run out of office.

    Just for the record, bobbo, do you vote against the incumbent every time you go to the polls? And does it bother you two years later when you vote against the guy you voted for last time, just because he’s an incumbent?

    You have a dismal view of human nature. If everyone was so corrupt as you seem to think, this country would be a banana republic like Mexico. Now that’s a corrupt country.

  13. bobbo, its so clear to me says:

    #47–Phydeau==you have my position exactly. And if we had enough time, I could help you remove the blinders as well. The attitude you post is exactly captured by the other thread about the majority wanting to vote all of Congress out.

    I strongly suspect YOU think “doing a good job” means bringing pork to his district?

    If those you admire are doing a “good job” well, by my lights their good job is simply just not good enough. I think the good ones don’t raise money ((describing exactly zero percent of those in Congress)) and don’t get re-elected. You play the corrupt game, or you lose.

    Further, the INSTITUTION won’t change if all the participants don’t have the FEAR OF THE ELECTORATE put into them. To the degree there are any innocents there, call it a public sacrifice for the public good.

    I have NEVER voted ‘for’ any of these slimy politicians, only against the worse ones. Sadly, I’ve never been surprised===just look at Obama. He still talks the same good game–he just ain’t doin’ shit.

  14. Jim says:

    What’s the big deal all politicians act this way. Hell, people act this way in business dealings! And don’t get on your high horse saying that you are above this kind of thing, because you know you’re not! I say the paper is doing the right thing, throwing it back in Reid’s face in hopes of denying him the continuation of his present job! Will it work? No, the voters are too afraid of change and they won’t even take the time to learn the issues before they vote.

  15. Phydeau says:

    #48 bobbo, I have no interest in your utopian solutions. Wherever there is power, there is the possibility of corruption. That’s human nature. For you to be so disappointed that corruption exists is shockingly naive. It exists, get used to it, and we have to work with a system that takes it into account. You can vote out incumbents every election and corruption will still exist.

    And furthermore, the FEAR OF THE ELECTORATE is not just communicated at election time. As I said before, so few people communicate with their congresscritter that 100 letters is considered a landslide of public opinion. If more people wrote to their congresscritter and expressed their opinions, on an ongoing basis, I think they would be more responsive.

    The problem is, we’ve taken good government for granted and have stopped paying attention. And when you stop paying attention to what your employees are doing, they’re going to get in trouble.

  16. muddauber says:

    Hey, Reed is onto something!!! If we can get rid
    of the newspaper, it would be MUCH easier to censor and monitor public opinion with the web as the main communication tool. Once we get the newspapers out of business, we’ll be in utopia.

    No more discussion, arguing and discontent within a democratic country. If people get a little out of hand or write about unpopular or controversial issues, they could easily block those ideas.

    Think about how easy it would be to shut down Dvorak Uncensored.

  17. bobbo, its good to share perspectives says:

    Gosh Phydeau. Wake up on the wrong side of bed? Sadly, everything you post is demonstrably wrong, I’ll just take the first paragraph due to length:

    1. #48 bobbo, I have no interest in your utopian solutions. /// There is nothing Utopian in using what tools are already provided and working within the present system while knowing it would take more than a few years to have effect.

    Wherever there is power, there is the possibility of corruption. /// Yep.

    That’s human nature. /// Yep.

    For you to be so disappointed that corruption exists is shockingly naive. /// Disappointed?? I’m outraged!!! I don’t find it sophisticated to think the EXCESSIVE CORRUPTION evidenced today should be condoned/ignored as part of reality we are supposed to accept.

    It exists, get used to it, /// No.

    and we have to work with a system that takes it into account. /// Thats what I’m doing.

    You can vote out incumbents every election and corruption will still exist. /// Of course it will, but hopefully at a lower acceptable working level.

    Seems like the only difference between us is you set the bar for action higher than I do. Evidently, bankrupting our country and saddling our kiddies with massive debt while devaluing the working class and our money is not sufficient to rouse your attention. Heh, heh. You might at least think about not getting in the way of people working to save your ass. But that might indeed be too Utopian. I accept the great wash of sheeple are happy enough with what is not poking them in the butt right now.

  18. Phydeau says:

    #52 bobbo, I write my congresscritter regularly, as well as my senators and the president. Why would you assume otherwise? Perhaps you are confused… when I say “get used to the fact of corruption” I’m not saying “just lay down and accept it”. I’m working within the system, exercising my privilege and duty to let my elected officials know what I want, since they work for me. What are you doing? Besides screaming VOTE ALL INCUMBENTS OUT OF OFFICE, I mean.

    (BTW, If you think we live in an era of EXCESSIVE CORRUPTION you haven’t read much history. Corruption has been far worse in our past. Look up Tammany Hall on wikipedia, for example.)

    You said this:

    There is nothing Utopian in using what tools are already provided and working within the present system while knowing it would take more than a few years to have effect.

    But screaming VOTE ALL INCUMBENTS OUT OF OFFICE is not using all the tools already provided and working within the system. It’s a brute-force, crude, clumsy tool that ignores the good legislators who exist. It’s throwing the baby out with the bathwater. It’s assuming that ALL legislators currently in office are hopelessly corrupt and that somehow, the new batch sworn in will “get the message” and not be as corrupt. That’s Utopian, it’s clueless, it’s naive.

    Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty. VOTE ALL INCUMBENTS OUT OF OFFICE does nothing to remove corruption. The next batch will be just as corrupt if we don’t pay attention to what they’re doing. The problem isn’t incumbents, it’s lazy Americans who don’t take their duty as citizens seriously. VOTE ALL INCUMBENTS OUT OF OFFICE is a shortcut that achieves nothing.

  19. bobbo, the devout evangelical anti-theist says:

    #53–Phydeau==well, I can see it would take a little time and a few beers. You keep misstating what I say, perhaps for more purchase, or you have just contested beneath your weight class too often?

    1. #52 bobbo, I write my congresscritter regularly, as well as my senators and the president. Why would you assume otherwise? /// I didn’t assume anything, never mentioned it. My opinion though is that letters from constituents mean next to nothing compared to the official lining his own pockets or currying the favor of people with money. You keep acting as if I say ONLY “vote the incumbents out of office.” Nothing wrong at all at doing all possible things and I have said that repeatedly. Keep writing your letters. Every little bit helps.

    2. “What are you doing? Besides screaming VOTE ALL INCUMBENTS OUT OF OFFICE, I mean.” /// Well, nothing. Heh, heh. But I’m just as effective as you in bringing real change. (joke)

    3. “Corruption has been far worse in our past.” /// Agreed. Because long sitting multi-term office holders lead directly to excessive corruption. Action can be the clarion call when it gets bad enough to raise the horn==it doesn’t have to be worse than its ever been. Your logic is a bit defective.

    4. “It’s a brute-force, crude, clumsy tool that ignores the good legislators who exist.” /// Huh? Its a vote expressing the will of the people. You recommend term limits. What else is my position but term limits that otherwise will never see the light? Good legislators?? By what definition?? As stated, they are part and parcle of an entirely too corrupt a system. The broom sweeps broadly.===But again, same as term limits.

    5. “It’s assuming – – – that somehow, the new batch sworn in will “get the message” and not be as corrupt. That’s Utopian” /// How many times have I stated it will take years before they get the message?? No quick fixes. Politics is a tough slog.

    6. “The problem isn’t incumbents” /// I think it is very much a large part of the problem. You disagree.

    One of my favorite quotes and real insights: “Most people think our elected officials mean well but are just a bit incompetent or out of touch. The truth is just the opposite.”

    HL Mencken is laughing in his grave: “Some of our leaders aren’t corrupt all the time. Lets keep them.”

    Hah, hah. Naive. Yes.

  20. Floyd says:

    I’m a longtime Democrat and a former Nevada resident. I also don’t like Harry Reid. The guy has passed a number of laws that were intended to keep himself in office (many Nevadans were in favor of these acts), but which were bad for the country in general.

  21. BigBoyBC says:

    # 27 Phydeau said, “bobbo, it does the country no good to have inexperienced politicians running the country.”

    You mean like the freshman Senator from Illinois, who is now our President?

    YOU ARE SO RIGHT!!!

  22. cornholer says:

    this stupid bastard thought that he could win a pissing match with a newspaper? And you “demotards” want to turn over your health care to this dumbass?

  23. Phydeau says:

    #54 My opinion though is that letters from constituents mean next to nothing compared to the official lining his own pockets or currying the favor of people with money. You keep acting as if I say ONLY “vote the incumbents out of office.” Nothing wrong at all at doing all possible things and I have said that repeatedly. Keep writing your letters. Every little bit helps.

    Writing letters and following it up with voting in the elections can be a powerful tool. If we let the politicians know we’re watching them, and if they cross us vote them out of office, you’ll have a lot more attentive legislators. But that takes energy and discipline and an attention span, which we the people don’t seem to have too much of.

    And let me get this straight… out of, what, 535 or so Reps and Senators you think that each and every one is corrupt and should be voted out of office? And that will somehow, some way persuade whoever gets elected next to not be corrupt? A decade or two of one-term Reps and Senators will automagically result in honest politicians? All righty then. If that’s what you believe, that’s what you believe. How strange to have such a hatred of incumbents, since that’s what each and every politician becomes once elected. Maybe you just hate politicians in general???

    BTW, I don’t agree that term limits are a good thing. The only term limits on Congress should be when the constituents vote them out.

  24. Phydeau says:

    #57 BigBoyBC, you wingnuts don’t have the slenderest leg to stand on, criticizing Democrats when the most recent Republican president was so staggeringly incompetent.

    But hey, you probably didn’t worship Bush, not at all. Right. I get that a lot from wingnuts: Bush? Never heard of the guy. Who was he? President? Huh, how about that.

    What a sorry-ass load of hypocritical BS you wingnuts wallow in.

  25. noname says:

    # 61 pedro,

    There you go again with another one of your BUSHISMs, calling/labeling reasonable people (#60) lame.

    Grow up, not everyone agrees with you. You rant like a annoying immature child. Your come-backs (if you can call them that) fall outside of any mature or seasoned reasoning.

    Is it genetic or you just a child?

  26. BigBoyBC says:

    #60 Phydeau,

    Don’t go flaming me because were hoist upon your own petard. You made the statement, I was just agreeing with you.

    You better grow a thick skin dude, and learn to deal with taking a little of the crap, you guys had been dishing out for the last 8-years.

  27. Phydeau says:

    #63 You wingnuts take every opportunity to bash Obama for things you didn’t utter a peep about regarding Bush. You have zero credibility in criticizing Obama. You’re haters and hypocrites. If Obama claimed the sun rose in the east you’d deny it.

    There are plenty of reasons to criticize Obama (and us liberals have been doing it all along) but you add nothing meaningful to that discussion. Yapping little Obama haters. 🙂

  28. LibertyLover says:

    #60, What a sorry-ass load of hypocritical BS you wingnuts wallow in.

    Up until this asinine statement, I was pretty much in your court. So, let’s talk hypocrisy.

    Would you choose to let 10 people die to save your wife’s life?

  29. Phydeau says:

    Well well never thought I’d agree on anything significant with a libertarian. 🙂

  30. noname says:

    # 65 LibertyLover

    Please explain the point, if any, your trying to prove, with such an extreme nonsensical hypothetical??

    “Would you choose to let 10 people die to save your wife’s life?”

    It almost sounds like your a fan of Joseph Stalin’s infamous quote “One death is a tragedy; a million is a statistic.”


2

Bad Behavior has blocked 6837 access attempts in the last 7 days.