What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The Media Scandal

Stephanie

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2004
Messages
70,230
Reaction score
10,860
Points
2,040
Posted by JED BABBIN | E-Mail This | Permalink | Email RCP
Why is it that none of the major television networks or newspapers have managed to pay attention to the biggest real scandal of the 2006 campaign season, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid's real estate shenanigans? According to yesterday's AP report, Reid pocketed a $1.1 million windfall on the sale of some Las Vegas property he didn't own at the time of the sale. This makes Hillary Clinton's futures trading venture look like amateur hour. And it's time for conservatives to act because the biggest scandal is that the media are burying the story.

According to the AP report, the deal was put together by Reid's longtime friend Jay Brown, "...a former casino lawyer whose name surfaced in a major political bribery trial this summer and in other prior organized crime investigations." Apparently Brown structured the deal so that Reid could transfer his ownership interest to Brown without disclosing it to the public. And here's the kicker: Reid didn't disclose the sale on his financial disclosure forms filed with the Senate.

Not to make too big a deal of this, but falsifying that report - as Reid apparently did - is a federal crime. Under Title 18 US Code Section 1001, it's a false official statement. For which Reid could be sent to jail. If you're looking for this on tonight's network news or on the front page of tomorrow's New York Times (next to the newest revival of the Foley minutiae) you won't find it. There's ample time for Mark Foley, the discredited generals' revolt, and even the comprehensively discredited Lancet report on civilian casualties in Iraq. But cover a real scandal, with real misconduct that's punishable under federal criminal law?

Just imagine if this were Bill Frist, not Harry Reid. Calls for his resignation from Senate leadership (probably the Senate itself) would be loud and long, the Senate Ethics Committee would have already convened an investigation, the FBI would have been called in to verify the deeds and signatures and the 527 Media carrion crows would be in full cry. There would be front-page stories about connections to organized crime and lead items on the evening news about how this will sink the Dems' chances in November. But it isn't Frist, or any other Republican. It's Reid, on the verge of what the media hope is his tenure as Senate Majority Leader. So there's no reason to cover the story, right? The media culture says that's so.

Every talk show host should be booking the editors of the NYT, WaPo and LA Times, the news directors of CBS, ABC and NBC to ask why they aren't covering this story. Every columnist should be calling them for interviews. Just ask, "why aren't you covering this story?"
http://time-blog.com/real_clear_politics/2006/10/the_media_scandal.html
 

dmp

Senior Member
Joined
May 12, 2004
Messages
13,088
Reaction score
746
Points
48
Location
Enterprise, Alabama
Liberals tend to HATE Truth. :(
 

nt250

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2006
Messages
1,013
Reaction score
72
Points
48
This subject, the liberal bias of the media, is probably the biggest reason why I can't stand liberals so much. It is SO obvious to anyone who has two brain cells to rub together, but yet liberals all deny that the MSM has any liberal bias at all, and they hate Fox News with such a passion that it's comical.

It's truly bizarre. I read the news everyday at iwon.com, which gets most of it's stories from the AP and Reuters, and most of their stories about politics read like editorials. They are so biased towards the left that it's blatant and obvious. The Foley story is just the latest example. Memogate, the Switftees, the fact that Bill Clinton is never referred to as being impeached.

It's really unbelievabe how slanted the MSM is towards the left, but liberals just can't see it. They have no problem seeing bias on Fox News, but they just can't see it on MSNBC. Why? Because to them it's true, so it can't be considered bias. Liberals really do think that way.
 

MissileMan

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2004
Messages
2,939
Reaction score
223
Points
48
What's it going to take for people to figure out that Liberal or Conservative, Democrat or Republican, professional politicians are the lowest form of life on the planet.
 

Mr. P

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2004
Messages
11,329
Reaction score
622
Points
48
Location
South of the Mason Dixon
What's it going to take for people to figure out that Liberal or Conservative, Democrat or Republican, professional politicians are the lowest form of life on the planet.

It will take removing “Professional” from “Politician” with term limits. IMO
 

nt250

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2006
Messages
1,013
Reaction score
72
Points
48
It will take removing “Professional” from “Politician” with term limits. IMO

I don't agree with term limits at all. I think they're unconstitutional. Especially with representatives. These people have to run for re-election every two years, and even in a totally politically corrupt and jaded state like Rhode Island, we've managed to kick the bums out of office more than once.

And you never know, another George Mitchell might come along, and somebody like him can serve in the senate 'til he dies and the country would be better for it.
 

manu1959

Left Coast Isolationist
Joined
Oct 28, 2004
Messages
13,761
Reaction score
1,651
Points
48
Location
california
can you say mafia
 

Mr. P

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2004
Messages
11,329
Reaction score
622
Points
48
Location
South of the Mason Dixon
I don't agree with term limits at all. I think they're unconstitutional. Especially with representatives. These people have to run for re-election every two years, and even in a totally politically corrupt and jaded state like Rhode Island, we've managed to kick the bums out of office more than once.

And you never know, another George Mitchell might come along, and somebody like him can serve in the senate 'til he dies and the country would be better for it.

How?
 

Mr. P

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2004
Messages
11,329
Reaction score
622
Points
48
Location
South of the Mason Dixon

dilloduck

Diamond Member
Joined
May 8, 2004
Messages
53,240
Reaction score
5,795
Points
1,850
Location
Austin, TX
It will take removing “Professional” from “Politician” with term limits. IMO

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Mr. P again.
 

trobinett

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2004
Messages
1,832
Reaction score
162
Points
48
Location
Arkansas, The Ozarks
So, where, exactly is Jimmy Hoffa again?

:boohoo:
 

nt250

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2006
Messages
1,013
Reaction score
72
Points
48


Because I think term limits void one of the basic ideas that this country was founded on. Just because a politician has been in office for so many terms, does not mean he/she doesn't deserve to get elected again.

It also violates the concept of innocent until proven guilty. Not all politicians become corrupt assholes once they get elected. OK, most of them do. But not all of them.
 

Mr. P

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2004
Messages
11,329
Reaction score
622
Points
48
Location
South of the Mason Dixon
Because I think term limits void one of the basic ideas that this country was founded on. Just because a politician has been in office for so many terms, does not mean he/she doesn't deserve to get elected again.

It also violates the concept of innocent until proven guilty. Not all politicians become corrupt assholes once they get elected. OK, most of them do. But not all of them.

No, no...you said " I think they're unconstitutional.".
How?
 

nt250

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2006
Messages
1,013
Reaction score
72
Points
48
No, no...you said " I think they're unconstitutional.".
How?


Because it's against what's in the Constitution?


Help me out here. What exactly are you looking for? I think it's obvious so I'm not sure why you are even bothering to ask.
 

Mr. P

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2004
Messages
11,329
Reaction score
622
Points
48
Location
South of the Mason Dixon
Because it's against what's in the Constitution?


Help me out here. What exactly are you looking for? I think it's obvious so I'm not sure why you are even bothering to ask.

Specifics. You say it is against the Constitution. I just wonder what part in your opinion.
 

musicman

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2004
Messages
5,171
Reaction score
533
Points
48
Location
Ohio

jillian

Princess
Joined
Apr 4, 2006
Messages
85,463
Reaction score
17,710
Points
2,220
Location
The Other Side of Paradise
It will take removing “Professional” from “Politician” with term limits. IMO


You mean like "stop us before we vote again"? lol....

I figure if people are still voting for someone then it isn't government's job to tell us we can't. Personally, I think we should get rid of term limits for president, too. Then we can run Bill against George and put the thing to rest once and for all. ;)
 

Redhots

Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2006
Messages
507
Reaction score
36
Points
16
Except a lot of it comes down to who has the deepest pockets.

Its lack of term limits that give them a reason to cover for each other too.
 

Mr. P

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2004
Messages
11,329
Reaction score
622
Points
48
Location
South of the Mason Dixon
Except a lot of it comes down to who has the deepest pockets.

Its lack of term limits that give them a reason to cover for each other too.

Exactly.
 

nt250

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2006
Messages
1,013
Reaction score
72
Points
48
You mean like "stop us before we vote again"? lol....

I figure if people are still voting for someone then it isn't government's job to tell us we can't. Personally, I think we should get rid of term limits for president, too. Then we can run Bill against George and put the thing to rest once and for all. ;)


I actually agree with the two term limit for president, even though I'm against term limits for other elected offices.

It's a hard thing to describe, and I'm not sure I can without sounding like a hypocrite. But the best reason I can give is that we don't have royalty in this country. Limiting a president to serving only two elected terms just seems like the right thing for the country.

I think it was in the movie The Way We Were where there is a scene where the characters are talking about the death of FDR. One of them says "I can't remember a time when he wasn't President" or something to that effect. That's not something this country should be about. No matter how beloved, or great, any one president is.

The president is not King. It's just different.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$145.00
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top