What if Sen. Harry Reid is right and senile? The 77-year-old Washington Post columnist David Broder has been widely denounced as senile for calling 67-year-old Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) a "bumbling" "embarrassment" for his recent anti-war remarks.
But what if Broder is wrong about the war, but right about Reid? A person who knows most of the Senators, but, as far as I could tell, doesn't have strong partisan biases, told me that Reid appears pretty ga-ga. Reid, who was once an amateur boxer, is, I'm told, very dependent on his aides to keep him on track and feed him his lines. My source thought it was time for somebody to mention in public that Reid seems more senile than anybody else in the Senate.
Now, I just have one source for this, and I don't know (or care) enough about political personalities to be able to evaluate this claim, so don't take this too seriously ... unless more evidence turns up. Perhaps, I'm wrong and I'm baselessly slandering this poor man. On the other hand, Reid is the Senate Majority Leader and, in exchange for his enormous power, he can put up with with some perhaps overly-skeptical inquiry.
If true, this would mostly be an issue for the Democrats to worry about, not the public at large. Originally, I had incorrectly assumed that Reid, as Senate Majority Leader, is third in line behind Cheney and Pelosi to succeed to the Presidency, so this would be an issue for the whole country. But, I was wrong. Instead, the succession falls upon the Senate's President Pro Tempore, who, by custom, is the senior senator in the majority party. So, third in the chain of succession is 89-year-old Robert C. Byrd, who, I'm told, is quite sharp compared to Reid.
This ends my rare attempt at reporting/gossip-mongering. Back to my regularly scheduled sourceless opinionizing...
My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer
Posts
