Consumer Homes.

Question:

"Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid collected a $1.1 million windfall on a Las Vegas land sale even though HE had NOT personally OWNED the PROPERTY for three years, property deeds show." "In 2001, Reid sold the land for the same price to a limited liability corporation created by Brown. The senator did NOT DISCLOSE the sale on his annual public ETHICS REPORT or tell Congress he had any stake in Brown’s company. He CONTINUED TO REPORT to Congress that HE personally OWNED the land." "Senate ethics rules require lawmakers to disclose on their annual ethics report all transactions involving investment properties _ regardless of profit or loss _ and to report any ownership stake in companies. Kent Cooper, who oversaw government disclosure reports for federal candidates for two decades in the Federal Election Commission, said REID’s failure to report the 2001 sale and his ties to Brown’s company VIOLATED SENATE RULES." "Reid hung up the phone when questioned about the deal during an AP interview last week." http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/10/11/D8KMJ8I00.html

Response:

If he violated some ethics rule, then he should be reprimanded. However, it’s not clear to me what Reid did wrong?  He reported the sale in 2004 when he got the money. I say that this is another right-wing attempt to smear a good man. This article makes it sound like it’s a crime to make a triple-fold profit on a land deal.   Anyone living out west knows that this has happened a lot recently. Mr Soul

Response:

The AP’s John Solomon, the go-to guy at the Associated Press for any anti-Democratic efforts, and this piece is absolute crap. The crux of the claim: Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid collected a $1.1 million windfall on a Las Vegas land sale even though he hadn’t personally owned the property for three years, property deeds show. Actually, he did own that land. It just so happened that three years ago, he transfered the property from his own personal name to that of an LLC. It’d be kind of like me selling Daily Kos, and someone claiming I reaped a windfall from it because I "sold it three years ago". I didn’t. Daily Kos became an LLC. As did Reid’s piece of land. And btw, this was all disclosed to the ethics committee. The place were things got sloppy is that Reid continued to disclose ownership of the land as a personal asset rather than ownership in the LLC which owned the land. But that’s it. Fact is, the LLC had no other assets other than this piece of land, and Reid disclosed ownership of the piece of land. Solomon is either being dishonest or an idiot. But watch the wingers and GOP try to gain traction off this story to divert from their coddling of a sexual predator. suggest that Reid used his position of authority to boost the value of the land. That would be troublesome. As it is in NC-11 where Rep. Charles Taylor (R) used earmarks to line his pockets: New Report Shows Taylor’s Earmarks Benefit Land he Owns. According to a new report by the Wall Street Journal, Charles Taylor, a wealthy businessman and banker, was able to get millions of dollars in earmarks for his district to improve land where Taylor owns thousands of acres and where he has even developed. The report shows that Taylor owns at least 14,000 acres of prime land in his district, some of which is near the main highway in Maggie Valley which, last year, received $11.4 million in federal dollars. Taylor’s companies own thousands of acres near the highway and had already developed a subdivision called Maggie Valley Leisure Estates. Another earmark last year sent $4.8 million to widen a highway through timber tracts that Taylor’s companies own. He also got millions for a loan for long-time contributors and millions more for improvements to a park that sits directly in front of his flagship bank in the district. Or, let’s shoot even higher: House Speaker Dennis Hastert denied Thursday that he pushed for federal funding for a proposed highway in northeastern Illinois so he and his wife could reap about $1.8 million from land deals near their home in Kendall County. The Sunlight Foundation, a newly created group whose declared aim is to inform the public about what members of Congress do, has accused Hastert of not divulging connections between the $207 million earmark he won for a highway, the Prairie Parkway, and an investment he and his wife made in nearby land. There are others — Reps. Jerry Lewis, Richard Pombo, and Gary Miller for starters. This isn’t a case of "everyone does it". It’s a case of projection — accusing Reid of doing something Republicans have made a habit of doing. That they got the gullible or ideologically compromised Solomon to bite on the non-story was a nice touch, but has no bearing on the reality of the matter.

Response:

>If he violated some ethics rule, then he should be reprimanded. >However, it’s not clear to me what Reid did wrong?  He reported the >sale in 2004 when he got the money. >I say that this is another right-wing attempt to smear a good man. >This article makes it sound like it’s a crime to make a triple-fold >profit on a land deal.   Anyone living out west knows that this has >happened a lot recently.

This whole attempt to divert attention from the fact that today’s GOP is the most corrupt and amoral American political party in living memory has been debunked pretty comprehensively here: <http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/10/11/175829/67> That stink wafting on the wind is Republican flop sweat — for every dubious Dem there are at least a dozen GOPers as bad or worse.  It took the Dems four decades to go power- and money-mad, today’s Republicans have outdone them by light years in only a dozen years.  I’m not saying the Dems are anywhere near perfect, but compared to the GOP they look to be damned near Demosthenes or Cicero these days — and when you can make the likes of Robert "King of Pork" Byrd and Rahm "Richard Daly is my role model" Emanuel look good, you’re big-time bad!

Response:

courageously avow: >That stink wafting on the >wind is Republican flop >sweat >And the stink in AGA is John Wheaton denial sweat…

That or him shitting himself every time he’s caught in a faux pas. — Ken Wilson

Response:

John, It’s ok. He is a Dim. Clarke – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> "Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid collected a $1.1 million windfall on a > Las Vegas land sale even though HE had NOT personally OWNED the PROPERTY for > three years, property deeds show." > "In 2001, Reid sold the land for the same price to a limited liability > corporation created by Brown. The senator did NOT DISCLOSE the sale on his > annual public ETHICS REPORT or tell Congress he had any stake in Brown’s > company. He CONTINUED TO REPORT to Congress that HE personally OWNED the > land." > "Senate ethics rules require lawmakers to disclose on their annual ethics > report all transactions involving investment properties _ regardless of > profit or loss _ and to report any ownership stake in companies. > Kent Cooper, who oversaw government disclosure reports for federal > candidates for two decades in the Federal Election Commission, said REID’s > failure to report the 2001 sale and his ties to Brown’s company VIOLATED > SENATE RULES." > "Reid hung up the phone when questioned about the deal during an AP > interview last week."http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/10/11/D8KMJ8I00.html

Response:

UGH, put your clothes on

Response:

> >That stink wafting on the >wind is Republican flop >sweat > And the stink in AGA is John Wheaton denial sweat…

There are a couple more stenches here: sniff ass has an awful smell of puke from his drooling and fluffy has the odor of a unhygienic vagina. Phew…

Response:

Yes – I assumed that there was an explanation for all this & the article points it out.  Somebody from the right-wing contacted the AP & got them on this story.  The problem is that Reid hung up on them, so it gives fodder for the right. Mr Soul

Response:

Instead of spewing new garbage, why don’t you finish the other thread you started? Chop, chop, give us a link that proves your claim that Monica Lewinsky was 19 when she had her fling with Clinton, even if it IS a ‘blog’. OK? Then you can follow up with a copy of the law that shows that the Government has a law similar to the one the Military has regarding relations between members. You’re very big on demanding that others provide proof, and yet you seem incapable of doing likewise.  There’s a term used to describe this…  Hypocrite  : ) We’ll be waiting.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > Instead of spewing new garbage, why don’t you finish the other thread > you started? > Chop, chop, give us a link that proves your claim that Monica Lewinsky > was 19 when she had her fling with Clinton, even if it IS a ‘blog’. OK? > Then you can follow up with a copy of the law that shows that the > Government has a law similar to the one the Military has regarding > relations between members. > You’re very big on demanding that others provide proof, and yet you > seem incapable of doing likewise.  There’s a term used to describe > this…  Hypocrite  : ) > We’ll be waiting.

Yeah, Weenihead wants me to provide proof that Foley *confessed* and was *accused* of child molestation. By doing a google search with those 2 key words, I couldn’t come up with anything from the corporate media or right wing "news"/propaganda sites. And it seems Foley did not literally "confess" and no one has formally accused him literally except on non-righty blogs. But I thought if I quoted one of the blogs (many are opinionated and not really news anymore than Fox), Weeniehead would reject it. I just wish the talkers on Air America would provide their sources. Hell, I even checked out ABC’s site and there’s nothing definative with Foley literally "confessing" or being "accused", but it’s plenty obvious that is the case. He did resign because complaints were made about his molestation. Duh

Response:

> If he violated some ethics rule, then he should be reprimanded. > However, it’s not clear to me what Reid did wrong?  He reported the > sale in 2004 when he got the money.

"In 2001, Reid sold the land for the same price to a limited liability corporation created by Brown. The senator did NOT DISCLOSE the sale on his annual public ETHICS REPORT or tell Congress he had any stake in Brown’s company. He CONTINUED TO REPORT to Congress that HE personally OWNED the land." "Senate ethics rules require lawmakers to disclose on their annual ethics report all transactions involving investment properties _ regardless of profit or loss _ and to report any ownership stake in companies. Kent Cooper, who oversaw government disclosure reports for federal candidates for two decades in the Federal Election Commission, said REID’s failure to report the 2001 sale and his ties to Brown’s company VIOLATED SENATE RULES." "Reid hung up the phone when questioned about the deal during an AP interview last week." http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/10/11/D8KMJ8I00.html

Response:

> The more the Republicans go down the hole, the more desperate Wheaton’s > dishonest posts become.

Why lie so blatantly? My post contained direct quotes, and I included the link so that NO ONE could honestly contest the accuracy of what I posted. Oops! I forgot that you aren’t honest in your posts! I post clips and links and if I ever pull from any site that is inaccurate, I correct the record as soon as I become aware of it. Those kind of attempts at honesty and accuracy are quite rare in this forum.

Response:

> Instead of spewing new garbage, why don’t you finish the other thread > you started? > Chop, chop, give us a link that proves your claim that Monica Lewinsky > was 19 when she had her fling with Clinton, even if it IS a ‘blog’. OK?

There are many, and again, as soon as you provided a clip with link, I corrected the record. > Then you can follow up with a copy of the law that shows that the > Government has a law similar to the one the Military has regarding > relations between members.

Done in the other thread. > You’re very big on demanding that others provide proof, and yet you > seem incapable of doing likewise.  There’s a term used to describe > this…  Hypocrite  : )

That is pixie in spades.

Response:

> Yeah, Weenihead wants me to provide proof that Foley *confessed* > and was *accused* of child molestation. By doing a google search > with those 2 key words, I couldn’t come up with anything from the > corporate media or right wing "news"/propaganda sites. And it seems > Foley did not literally "confess" and no one has formally accused him > literally except on non-righty blogs. But I thought if I quoted one of the > blogs (many are opinionated and not really news anymore than Fox), > Weeniehead would reject it. I just wish the talkers on Air America > would provide their sources. Hell, I even checked out ABC’s site > and there’s nothing definative with Foley literally "confessing" > or being "accused",

Bingo! Up to this point, you have corrected the record, and we are square. but it’s plenty obvious that is the case. > He did resign because complaints were made about his > molestation. Duh

You went and used that "M" word again, so please provide verification!

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Yeah, Weenihead wants me to provide proof that Foley *confessed* > and was *accused* of child molestation. By doing a google search > with those 2 key words, I couldn’t come up with anything from the > corporate media or right wing "news"/propaganda sites. And it seems > Foley did not literally "confess" and no one has formally accused him > literally except on non-righty blogs. But I thought if I quoted one of the > blogs (many are opinionated and not really news anymore than Fox), > Weeniehead would reject it. I just wish the talkers on Air America > would provide their sources. Hell, I even checked out ABC’s site > and there’s nothing definative with Foley literally "confessing" > or being "accused", > Bingo! Up to this point, you have corrected the record, and we are square.

So you are relying on semantics to deny reality? That’s really a sick and pathetic approach to living. It’s amazingly petty of you too.        it’s plenty obvious that is the case. > He did resign because complaints were made about his > molestation. Duh > You went and used that "M" word again, so please provide verification!

You mean to tell me you haven’t read any samples of his IMs? You never read any reports of the complaints of the pages? I don’t have to provide you anything if you prefer to bury your head up your ass.

Response:

> You went and used that "M" word again, so please provide verification! > You mean to tell me you haven’t read any samples of his IMs?

Yes, and while they are sick and earning expultion from the Congress, they still do not fit the definition of that "M" word that you keep throwing around. > You never read any reports of the complaints of the pages?

Harassment and molestation, like crank calls vs rape, are two different issues. > I don’t have to provide you anything if you prefer to bury your > head up your ass.

You ignorantly throw words around like you know what they mean. Foley did sick, demented things and he deserved to be removed, but there has been NO evidence of what you have claimed.

Response:

> Why lie so blatantly?

Good question. Why do you lie so blatantly?

Response:

> If he violated some ethics rule, then he should be reprimanded.

On that we agree. > However, it’s not clear to me what Reid did wrong?  He reported the > sale in 2004 when he got the money. > I say that this is another right-wing attempt to smear a good man.

"Stanley Brand, former chief Democratic counsel of the House of Representatives, said Reid should have disclosed the 2001 sale. Former FEC official Kent Cooper, who oversaw federal disclosure forms for two decades, says, "Whether you make a profit or loss, you’ve got to put that transaction down so that the public, voters, can see exactly what kind of money is moving to or from a member of Congress." http://www.investors.com/editorial/editorialcontent.asp?secid=1501&st…

Response:

> > John, why do we never see any outraged posts from you regarding Jack > Ambramoff and his dealings with Republicans?  Why is that, John?

Because you are either entirely lacking a memory or entirely lacking any integrity. When the Abramoff story broke I repeatedly stated that anyone that broke the law, should be punished. Oops! More of those fact thingies that you Lefties refuse to let influence your views, or posts.

Response:

>>Harassment and molestation, like crank calls vs rape, are two different >issues. > Sexual harrassment is a crime. >Foley did sick, demented things and he deserved to be removed, but there >has >been NO evidence of what you have claimed. > It’s interesting that you are so willing to give Foley the benefit of the > doubt even though it is now common knowledge that his harrassing behavior > has been going on for years.

Ah another Lefty that wants to hang all Repubs, THEN look for some evidence. If you can find a story of Repubs knowing about any Foley messages stating ANYTHING sexual and doing nothing, POST IT.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->>Harassment and molestation, like crank calls vs rape, are two different >>issues. > Sexual harrassment is a crime. >>Foley did sick, demented things and he deserved to be removed, but there >>has >>been NO evidence of what you have claimed. > It’s interesting that you are so willing to give Foley the benefit of the > doubt even though it is now common knowledge that his harrassing behavior > has been going on for years. > Ah another Lefty that wants to hang all Repubs, THEN look for some evidence.

Ahh, paranoia and persecution complex’s are such sad emotional states, aren’t they? Nowhwere does the poster say anything about ‘all Repubs’, John boy.  : ) You outdo yourself on every post!

Response:

> > Instead of spewing new garbage, why don’t you finish the other thread > you started? > Chop, chop, give us a link that proves your claim that Monica Lewinsky > was 19 when she had her fling with Clinton, even if it IS a ‘blog’. OK? > There are many, and again, as soon as you provided a clip with link, I > corrected the record.

Well, if there are ‘many’, you should have no problem linking to a few, right?  : ) > Then you can follow up with a copy of the law that shows that the > Government has a law similar to the one the Military has regarding > relations between members. > Done in the other thread.

Bullshit, but that’s to be expected.  You’ve provided nothing to substantiate your claim that there are rules forbidding contact between government employees like those of the Military. > You’re very big on demanding that others provide proof, and yet you > seem incapable of doing likewise.  There’s a term used to describe > this…  Hypocrite  : )

 It’s your hat, you wear it!

Response:

Breaking an ethics rule is different than breaking the law.  Hopefully even you can see that. Again – did Reid actually sell the property to the LLC?  If he did & if he should have reported it, then he broke a rule.  Let’s let the Senate ethics committee deal with that though. This is different that Bob Ney & Abramoff who broke bribery and other laws. Mr Soul

Response:

> Breaking an ethics rule is different than breaking the law.  Hopefully > even you can see that.

Why the ignorant response? If you would care to read the header it does NOT say law, it says "Dem Leader’s ETHICS Problem". > Again – did Reid actually sell the property to the LLC?  If he did & if > he should have reported it, then he broke a rule.  Let’s let the Senate > ethics committee deal with that though. > This is different that Bob Ney & Abramoff who broke bribery and other > laws.

DUH. That is why the header does NOT say LAW, it says ETHICS. Oops! I forgot that ethics lapses aren’t a problem for you as long as it is a Dem with ethics problems. Frankly, I would like ALL of the scum removed from Congress, but I seem to be a lone voice in the wilderness since most everyone else here only wants the other side’s problems addressed.

Response: