Pity poor Harry Reid. Was anyone ever as inept with rhetoric forced into a position of national leadership? The same man who called George Bush a “loser” and Alan Greenspan a “hack” — the same man who tried surrendering to al-Qaeda from the Senate floor — has now compared Senate cloture motions to aggravated assaults by stabbing:

Reid and Democrats have pointed to the 72 cloture motions — which cut off debate and require 60 votes — as “filibusters.” Republicans say these are not true filibusters, since many of the motions pass overwhelmingly.

Nonetheless, Reid says Republican contentions that they’ve only forced 65 or so cloture motions proves the point. Here’s the stabbing quote:

“Is it 72; is it 65? It’s like you’re charged with aggravated assault and the complaint says you stabbed somebody 72 times and you say no, it’s 65 times,” Reid said.

Reid liked the analogy so much he used it again on a follow up question. “The picture is clear what the Republicans have done. Whether the stab was 72 times or 65 times — a lot of filibusters,” Reid said. “The American people see what’s going on.”

So does this mean Reid admits to stabbing qualified judicial nominees to the federal bench in the back by forcing cloture votes on confirmations? When the Democrats used filibusters in this area in an unprecedented attack on presidential bench selections, they claimed the use of the filibuster as an honorable way to constrain the majority. Reid didn’t make these kind of analogies when the Democrats were in the minority.

Here’s the video:

Reid’s construction here entirely relies on the notion that a filibuster is bad, when he has often argued exactly the opposite. No one would argue that a stabbing every once in a while helps to keep Senate business on track, for instance. Yet that’s essentially the argument one has to derive from Reid and his history with using filibusters for his own purposes. He’s not opposed to stabbings, just the overuse of them.

Hint: Next time, try donuts.