[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 2]
[Senate]
[Page 1623]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                         DEFENDING SENATOR REID

  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, Barry Goldwater was a proud, conservative 
Republican. Many credit him as being the father of the modern 
conservative movement in this country.
  He defended his conservative ideas and ideals vigorously. But he 
didn't attack his political adversaries personally. And he didn't like 
it when others did.
  Barry Goldwater once said of the radical right, ``If they disagree 
with you one bit, you're a no-good S.O.B.'' That is Barry Goldwater's 
world.
  Something tells me Barry Goldwater would dislike very much the 
character-assassination campaign being waged by the Republican National 
Committee against the Democratic leader of this Senate, Harry Reid.
  This morning, the Senate began debate on a controversial plan 
proposed by our Republican colleagues, under a time agreement 
negotiated by Senator Reid--Democrats are not filibustering this 
proposal. We came to work this morning to discover this article.
  The lead story in this morning's Roll Call is ``RNC Turns up Heat on 
Reid.''
  The RNC is sending out a 13-page ``research document'' on Senator 
Reid to 1 million journalists, donors, and grassroots activists'' 
accusing Senator Reid of obstructionism and other imagined grievances. 
Despite the fact that every nominee of the President has gone through 
this Chamber, and I believe we have only had two record votes and both 
of those cleared the Chamber, they are arguing that Senator Reid is 
guilty of obstructionism.
  The RNC Communications Director is quoted as saying, ``This is the 
initial salvo in the upcoming discussion that we are going to be having 
with Senator Reid.'' This is not a discussion they're planning. This is 
an effort to try to intimidate political opponents into silence--and it 
is shameful.
  Harry Reid is the walking definition of moderate. I have served with 
him in the House and Senate.
  Why is the RNC doing this now? Because they do not want to debate 
their radical proposals on the merits.
  They don't want to debate their radical proposals on the merits. They 
don't want to talk about the details of Social Security privatization, 
which is becoming increasingly unpopular in America. They don't want to 
talk about the budget they released today, which will make deep cuts in 
health care, veterans care, and education. They want to silence 
everybody and anybody who dares to question any part of the agenda.
  That is not what America is about. It is not the way this Senate is 
supposed to work.
  I say to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, is there one 
amongst us who could withstand this type of withering scrutiny and 
criticism? I think, frankly, my friends should stop and realize we have 
2 years ahead of us in this session. We need to work with one another. 
We have and we will. Starting with this approach is bad.
  I call on Senator Frist to call the Republican National Committee the 
first thing in the morning and tell them that they have to suspend this 
personal attack on Harry Reid. If we are going to work in a cooperative 
bipartisan fashion, this attack is going to poison the well.
  There is another element here, too. I have some rules in my life that 
are hard and fast when it comes to politics, and one rule is that I 
never attack my opponent's family. Never. There have been ample 
opportunities when some relative of my opponent did something very 
embarrassing or I could have issued a press release and taken advantage 
of it. I never did it because I never want people attacking my family.
  The Republican National Committee starts off their campaign by 
attacking Senator Reid's family. I think the hottest ring in hell is 
reserved for politicians who attack their opponents' families, and I 
hope Senator Frist believes that, too.
  In 1962, Jack Kennedy and Barry Goldwater thought they would probably 
face each other in the 1964 Presidential race. As different as their 
politics were, they respected one another, and they respected the 
American tradition of government and debate. They hoped that if they 
did face each other in 1964, they would be able to hold a series of 
debates around the country on the big issues of the day.
  That is how politics was going to be waged in 1964. That is exactly 
how it should be waged today. Let's not make this the politics of 
mudslinging and the politics of personal attack. Let's, early on in the 
session, say that we are going to address the great issues that face us 
in a responsible manner. We should make a bipartisan pact at this time 
that there will be no more politics of personal destruction.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.

                          ____________________