Yet another one...OT

Yep, but if they investigated Clinton, Cunningham, Whinestein, Pussilosi etc, they'd find just as much, but the media is giving them a free pass.

Charles of Schaumburg

This is a good thing. Matter of fact, I think we should permit the NSA to legally monitor one special group of U.S. citizens: Politicians. Every phone call, e-mail, text message. Everything they purchase, bigger than a pack of gum, should be reported. New car for the kid? Where's the money come from? I've heard that when you join the military, you lose certain rights afforded to civilians. Politicians should understand that they have no privacy while in office. Who pays for their meals? Their golf games? Their travel?

I know - that's the info posted in the thread's first message. Why did you post it? It's what we're already talking about.

Yep,

That goes without saying.

Pelosi's son, for example. Anyone who really cares can have a look at his latest job, and how he got it. Funny stuff.

This

Total transparency should be required if you're in office.

So what did shummer and the democrat lynching mob find him guilty of?

There are two major players in the story. Which "him" are you referring to? Use a name to describe who you're talking about.

Nope. He's a Republican. I don't take sides when it comes to corruption.

Cunningham deserved his fate. So did Rostenkowski. So do Pelosi, Feinstein, Reid, and countless others on both sides of the aisle.

In case you missed my recent post, only 7 representatives have no requested earmarks.

Seven out of hundreds. Pathetic.

Pelosi, Feinstein and Reid - so far - aren't under investigation for any actual corruption.

Duke and Rostenkowski - sure, take 'em down.

However, your assortment of characters appears a bit lopsided.

In any event, some ear-marking is probably not a bad thing and a natural part of politicking. I wouldn't say it was yet under control but I'd also expect a Congresscritter from State A to have a better understanding of what State A needs than the Congresscritters from State B - and to work for it.

The problem with ear-marking in the recent past (and, perhaps this has not been dealt with definitively, as Pelosi promised to do), is that the process has been entirely secret and prone to further corrupting influences. Bills mysteriously get altered when nobody's looking. Nobody knows who's responsible. Then the leadership rams the vote through and these ear-marks were not scrutinized as part of the process. That's just wrong.

The Alaska Congressional delegation appears to be doling out millions in exchange for campaign contributions. That's just wrong, too.

Not at all. Maybe those cited, but I don't care what party they're in. Corruption is corruption. And those three have enough stink on them to warrant investigations. Have a look at Pelosi's son, and how he got a cush job at $180,000 per year, and doesn't have to quit his current full-time job as a mortgage consultant.

Nice gig.

Check Feinstein's husband's company. Look at how it got a half-mil contract from her committee.

Reid's land deals are almost legendary.

Very true. Just as true for W. Virginia. The Byrd Bridge, Highway, Radio Telescope, etc.

But should be subjected to Competency tests...

Gosh, if Pelosi, Feinstein and Reid are all that dirty, where's the US Attorney General on this? Is he too busy lying to Congress to prosecute criminals?

Can you say "non sequitur"?

I can but it doesn't apply.

Congressional corruption, versus someone ALLEGEDLY lying.

Hmmm. Okay.

The point is that Gonzales could use all the points he can get at the moment. Why not go after people like Pelosi, if she's really so dirty?

Good idea. I'm sure when he does that, NO ONE will accuse him of trying to deflect attention from his own problems, or being vengeful.

Right.

They should first get her before a grand jury and ask if she's ever eaten sarmalute cu mamaliga. Whether she says yes or no, she'd be lying, because she probably has no idea what it is. At that point, they've got her for perjury.

We've seen this before.