The most unethical Seanate?
 

An interesting article from the LA Times details some of Harry Reid's shady land transactions:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-reid28jan28,0,26787,full.story?coll=la-home-headlines

A deal in the desert for Sen. Reid?
A bill he wrote could have affected the friend who sold the land.
By Chuck Neubauer and Tom Hamburger,
January 28, 2007

BULLHEAD CITY, ARIZ. — It's hard to buy undeveloped land in booming northern Arizona for $166 an acre. But now-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid effectively did just that when a longtime friend decided to sell property owned by the employee pension fund that he controlled.

In 2002, Reid (D-Nev.) paid $10,000 to a pension fund controlled by Clair Haycock, a Las Vegas lubricants distributor and his friend for 50 years. The payment gave the senator full control of a 160-acre parcel in Bullhead City that Reid and the pension fund had jointly owned. Reid's price for the equivalent of 60 acres of undeveloped desert was less than one-tenth of the value the assessor placed on it at the time.

Six months after the deal closed, Reid introduced legislation to address the plight of lubricants dealers who had their supplies disrupted by the decisions of big oil companies. It was an issue the Haycock family had brought to Reid's attention in 1994, according to a source familiar with the events.

If Reid were to sell the property for any of the various estimates of its value, his gain on the $10,000 investment could range from $50,000 to $290,000.

It is a potential violation of congressional ethics standards for a member to accept anything of value — including a real estate discount — from a person with interests before Congress.
.....

The pot calling the kettle black?

Huh? Are you saying the LA Times is unethical...or black?

That's such an old scheme it hardly even counts any more. In Caro's biography of LBJ, he tells about when Lyndon Johnson asked his investors, I mean supporters, to provide him with some financial security, Brown & Root sold him a plot of undeveloped Austin, Texas land. B&R graded the land and put in roads at their own expense and sold the land to LBJ at a slight profit over what they bought it for a few years earlier but not nearly what the land was really worth. And they sold it to him on terms he could aford - little down and the rest due when he sold the property.

You might have heard of Brown & Root recently. They now go by the name KBR. They're a subsidiary of Haliburton. The subsidiary of Haliburton that does overseas government contracting. Like no-bid contracts in Iraq.

$50,000 to $290,000 is chump change
and nobody got hurt

try and find something like 3000 plus dead kids
based on lies and how much to Haliburton on no bids?

Yes, how many attacks on civilian targets has Harry Reid ordered?

I suspected as much...not a single defense...and another attempt to change the subject. It is amazing how there are always apologists for unethical behavior of Democrats. I wonder If someone stole $290,000 from them...they would still call it "chump change?" IMHO, if he stole a candy bar...it would make calling him part of the "most ethical" Senate in history laughable...as it clearly is.

Fint, it's ok if a Dem does it. Remember the huge flap when Newt Gingrich's book came out around 1995? People pitched such a fit because he stood to earn so much money. Did anyone make such a stink about Hillary Clinton's book which came out while she was a sitting senator? In fact, I believe she made far more on her book than Newt did on his. But it's ok, because she's a Dem.

First of all, we don't know what Harry Reid stole, since there's been no court case.

We do know that George W. Bush has ordered the targeting of civilians in Iraq, since he stated he'd done that on National TV.

How did I know this would turn to Bush and Iraq in a cocaine heartbeat?

nothing was stolen
a BS deal sure
but a chump change deal all the same
the nation will survive just fine
and just who got hurt NOBODY!!!!

what percent is that of bushist war no bids deals
sent to his VP CORP? 0.0001% or way less?
and what has that funded?
where did the money go
show me the money trail

Because referring to someone as 'unethical' over some land deal is madness when you have a maniac in the whitehouse who is responsible for the death of tens of thousands of innocent people.

Enjoy your kool-aid boys.

"You're a Poo Poo Head."

"No, YOU'RE a Poo Poo Head!"


Whichever party is in power, the opposition will always claim that "THOSE BASTARDS" are so much worse than we are. Has this ever NOT been the case?

You can all relax, there is plenty of financial impropriety, sexual scandal and overall nogoodnik-ism on both sides of the aisle that we'll all be calling each other poo poo heads for the rest of our lives. Neither party has cornered the market on this.

I don't believe there's ever been a single criticism of a Dem's behavior here that did not get turned into a Bush/Iraq thread while no one bothered to defend the Dem. Unreal. What are the Bush haters gonna use as a defense for everything once he's out of office?

+1

Oh yes, and for the record, fint and rick are definitely poo poo heads.

:D :D I used to work with two guys that were friends but they played a game for awhile where they'd come in every morning and greet each other with a progressivly worse and worse and more imaginitive bad name.

The one that caused me to blow my morning drink out my nostrils was, "Good Morning Sphincter-face".:D :D

HA! Even the liberals know they have elected the most unethical Senate of all time! Their only defense is to call people poo-poo heads.

geez fintpaste, regardless of the shortcomings of the Dem lead Congress, you are showing some serious cut-and-paste prowress. Pat would be proud.

Actually, the most unethical senate was the 109th. Bye bye.

CC, that's only beause we're less than a month into the newest Congress. But they have shown plenty of promise.