I can’t quite see what Senator Reid and the Democrats get out of complaining about Republican criticisms of him as an obstructionist. The criticisms almost all strike me as fair: Most of what the RNC did was to quote the man. He did say that the president’s Social Security plan was DOA before Bush even gave his State of the Union address. Calling that obstructionist is accurate. But Reid and the Democrats are complaining that it’s terribly unfair for Republicans to beat up on Reid. All the Senate Democrats signed a letter to the president asking that the criticism stop.

Various Democrats–Schumer, Durbin–have been quoted saying that Democrats made a mistake in not defending Tom Daschle when Republicans attacked him. I seem to recall that same fits being thrown about Republican criticism of Daschle, actually. But whoever’s recollection is correct, what’s the theory here? Does Dick Durbin really believe that he could have saved Daschle’s seat if he had just said more nice things about him?

The Reid Democrats risk looking like whiny losers–which, whatever else you think of him, Howard Dean rarely does. They have already drawn more attention to the RNC’s criticism than it would otherwise have received. They have in no way reduced the Republicans’ willingness to criticize Reid in the future.