It is well known that both parties abuse the campaign finance laws; some just get caught. Shouldn't Reid be placed under the same standards as Foley and Abramoff? Not only because he violated the law but he violated the trust of his electorate who put him into office as a leader and the Dems who trusted him to be the Minority Leader?
2006-10-17 06:36:30 · 20 answers · asked by Jim from the Midwest 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Absolute power corrupts absolutely
the only answer is have Term limits To end the career politician's careers
2006-10-17 06:51:03 · answer #1 · answered by TEXAS TREY 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
your desperation is showing! This at best is a minor violation of campaign law and could be an accounting error not a great conspiracy. This will be handled by putting that money back where it belongs. The bonus's paid through some other fund. It rates at most an apology and maybe a financial watchdog to look over his accounts for a while. BIG deal.
2006-10-17 15:05:14 · answer #2 · answered by brian L 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You could fall asleep before getting interested in this minor 'who owned what when" then follow the trail to some low level person getting a Christmas bonus from the wrong account. Reid wishes he had the money and access that the Abramoff scandal generated. At best, its a wee tiny scandallette. It isn't a patch of Foley and that Pennsylvania Rep who tried to strangle his mistress. Though to be fair not much has been printed about that one.
2006-10-17 14:08:56 · answer #3 · answered by justa 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
You bet, all of the corrupt people that are caught in both party's should face the law. If found guilty they should be punished. I think the reason that so many are against and point out the Repuglicans is because they run their campaigns on moral issues. Come to find out they are no more moral then us democrats.
2006-10-17 14:45:25 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
well... the difference seems to be that Reid's issue was a legal gray area... apparently it's not exactly illlegal, but a panel said "eh, I wouldn't do that in your situation"...
where the abramoff and Foley issues were clearly illegal and malicious...
but your point about both parties being dirty has been proven over and over again... and clearly both are...
2006-10-17 14:12:31 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Both parties are made up of individuals, some good some not so good. The difference between the parties is how they treat their members when they do something wrong. The Republicans boot them out of office and the Democrats support and defend indefensible behavior.
2006-10-17 13:47:08 · answer #6 · answered by Ron H 2 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Did you also know that four of Harry's kids were congressional lobbyists who lobby (you guessed it) Harry Reid? Horrors! Shades of Tom Delay (who at least had the decency to resign when the Dems ran his dirty laundry up the flagpole).
2006-10-17 14:18:30 · answer #7 · answered by Mad Roy 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
It is really not that one party is dirty or that they equally share in dirt. People are capable of great evil and party affiliation has nothing to do with it.
2006-10-17 14:18:19 · answer #8 · answered by davidscottwoodruff 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
You see harry was giving bonuses to the little people so that crime can be excused while getting entrapped by a bunch of homophobic pages so you would send them lewd emails, well according to the current delusional behavior of the socialists, that is a crime.
Lets see stealing money is okay, like dollar bill jefferson, but writing obscene emails is not, gee what logic.
2006-10-17 13:54:24 · answer #9 · answered by rmagedon 6 · 2⤊ 3⤋
You obviously know nothing about campaigns. Their only source of income is through donations, however they still have employees and good employees should be rewarded with bonuses, there is nothing immoral or unethical about that.
Now if he had used public money for that, that would be a different situation. Get your diversions straight.
2006-10-17 14:04:33 · answer #10 · answered by Fire_God_69 5 · 1⤊ 3⤋