To wit, her ownership in a union-free upscale hotel, yet not a peep from the union?

Of course not, now we know why: What’s a few hundred employees compared to hundreds of thousands potential new members that her San Francisco Values would bring. Especially if she takes the reins from the GOP after the election.

I just read yesterday’s WSJ about the upcoming crackdown on port security is expected to affect 100K + truck drivers who are illegal immigrants working for $8/hr – I haven’t seen $8 since the mid 1980s. I would have thot truckers make at least $14/hr. But anyhoo, if illegals get amnesty, there’s a ready segment ripe for recruitment by the unions. And Walmart is the boogeyman for paying $10/hr w/o a union?

There’s more, but she’s not in my State (Whew!!), not in my district (Thank God!) and I’ve got better things to do. I’m just gonna cross my fingers and hope enough people will hold their noses and come out to vote against donks

I don’t know if Reid is squeekly clean, but everything you list here has been badly distorted and over-hyped. And virtually all of these “allegations” are the handiwork of John Solomon of the AP who has some sort of weird obsession with Reid and is apparently willing to go to press with any stupid charge RNC oppo researchers can dredge up, no matter how trivial and distorted.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200610180011

Naturally, George Soros (sorry, Media Matters) would like to have corruption charges against a Republican played up and charges against a Democrat played down. Let him buy the network, drop all pretense of objectivity, and write his own copy.

Yeah, except there is such a thing as objective truth. In the case of Weldon, there is an actual federal investigation going on. And the charges are serious. Corruption, bribery, abuse of power, etc. In the case of Reid, there is nothing but an allegation of improper reporting of ownership. That is, at worst, an minor ethics violation, not a crime. That’s just a fact. That’s not me playing anything down. There’s not even an allegation that Reid improperly used his power.

I realize there is spin on both sides, as always, but at the end of the day, not all allegations of impropriety are created equal and deserve equal billing.

To wit:
1) Historically, incumbents trending less than 50% in polls lose. Mendez, Stabenaw & Bean, altho they are leading, they are trending below 50%. Looking at those numbers humbly submitted by MM, having between 14% & 17% undecideds is not a good sign for an incumbent, especially if the mood is to throw the bums out. This qualifies as being vulnerable.
2) Gizi also showed that historically, appointed incumbents lose. MM is too lazy to show why this is disputeable. Wait a minute, Mark already said ‘lazy’.
3) Come to think of it, Gizi gave all the reasons to support his assessment, yet all MM can do is point to disparate polls and talk about the fact their guy ‘leads’. And to date, Soros has won how many elections with an upset? Talk about a lazy & lame counterpoint.

Attention to all nutroots, call me when you really have won something significant and I’ll re-evaluate. bwhahaha