Las Vegas Sun

April 19, 2015

Currently: 80° — Complete forecast | Log in | Create an account


Little new in Harry Reid, Sharron Angle debate to sway undecided voters

Reid, Angle stay on their messages, continue attacks on each other in sole TV debate


Sam Morris / Las Vegas Sun

Sharron Angle and Sen. Harry Reid take part in a debate moderated by Mitch Fox at the Vegas PBS studios Thursday, October 14, 2010.

Reid Angle Debate - Oct. 14 2010

Sharron Angle and Sen. Harry Reid exchange pleasantries after their debate, moderated by Mitch Fox, center, on Thursday at the Vegas PBS studios. Launch slideshow »

Reader poll

Who do you think won the debate?

View results

U.S. Senate candidates Sharron Angle and Harry Reid had clear-cut strategies in their lone joint appearance before an audience of mainstream voters this campaign.

Angle, the Republican, sought to use Thursday’s televised debate to buck the constructed image of her as an extreme conservative. Reid, the Democratic Senate majority leader, sought to convince voters he understands their economic plight, and defend the policies that so far have failed to generate a significant recovery in Nevada.

Neither candidate, analysts agreed, was able to deliver that perfect message capable of wrenching away their opponent’s supporters or moving undecided voters into their column.

“I wish I knew how undecided voters are thinking right now, but I just don’t think this debate moved anybody off the fence,” Republican strategist Robert Uithoven said. “I don’t think she made any catastrophic mistakes and I’m not so sure he did either.”

In a scene more reminiscent of a presidential debate than a U.S. Senate contest, more than 100 reporters from six countries crowded the studio. Almost every radio and television station in the state broadcast it live. Organizers estimated a half million people tuned in, including a nationwide audience via C-SPAN.

The candidates, who for weeks have been at each other’s throats via the airwaves, continued their lines of attack during the debate, drawing significant distinctions on nearly every policy issue.

• On immigration: Reid wants comprehensive reform including a pathway to citizenship; Angle said “illegal aliens” need to be dealt with aggressively and the borders fortified.

• On taxes: Angle wants the Bush tax cuts extended and refused to acknowledge that extending them would expand the deficit; Reid wants the cuts extended for the middle class and stopped short of calling for a repeal of the cuts for “billionaires.”

• On Social Security: Reid believes the program is financially sound for decades; Angle wants a “personalized account” system.

The debate’s tight format — candidates had only 60 seconds for responses — allowed little leeway to stray off message and into gaffe territory.

Both candidates did, however, attempt flashy one-liners, although Angle relied on them more often than Reid.

“Man up, Harry Reid,” Angle exclaimed when Reid refused to acknowledge the financial challenges she said are confronting Social Security. “You need to apologize,” she said, after Reid deflected a question about whether his comment that the Iraq war was lost had demoralized the troops.

Angle’s one-liners were reminiscent of former Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin’s strategy in her 2008 debate with Vice President Joe Biden.

“But she didn’t deliver them quite as well,” Democratic strategist Dan Hart quipped.

Angle had the more aggressive strategy, including seizing an opening to accuse Reid of growing rich on his salary as a senator. “I’d like to know — we’d like to know — how did you become so wealthy on government payroll,” Angle said.

Reid seemed prepared for that line of attack, dismissing it by referring to his time as a “very successful lawyer” in the private sector.

Hart noted that Angle’s aggressive tactics could have come across as “desperate.”

“She certainly was taking more chances than Sen. Reid,” he said.

Reid remained mostly calm through the debate, opting to speak directly into the camera, rather than address Angle.

Even upon entering the studio before the debate, Reid concentrated almost exclusively on his notes. Angle at one point stared at Reid for about half a minute, appearing as if she expected him to look back at her.

Only when the 10-second countdown began did Reid look up. He turned his head to Angle, flashed her a smile, then stared straight into the camera.

Uithoven noted Reid appeared to remember halfway through the debate that his aim was to paint Angle as unacceptable to voters.

“They both seemed uncomfortable at the beginning, but I think they settled into their messages,” he said. “Harry Reid probably remembered 15 minutes in that he needed to say ‘extreme’ a little more than he had.”

Both candidates missed key opportunities, analysts said.

Reid fell short of targeting some of his most important constituencies: senior citizens, Hispanics and veterans.

Angle failed to drive home her central campaign theme: that Reid is responsible for Nevadans’ economic suffering.

The issue that emerged as the central sticking point of the night was health care. Of all the Democratic initiatives, Reid spent the most time defending the new health care law, returning to clarify his position on the third-rail issue when he could grab an extra second as the conversation ricocheted from the Iraq war to taxes.

“We had to do health insurance reform to maintain competitiveness in the world economy and create jobs,” he said.

Angle deflected Reid’s accusation that she opposes mandated coverage of illnesses such as breast and colon cancer and autism by saying she believes the free market would “weed out” those insurance companies that did not offer coverage demanded by consumers.

To which Reid responded: “Insurance companies don’t do things out of the goodness of their heart. They almost destroyed our economy.”

All in all, analysts said Angle succeeded in undermining Reid’s portrayal of her as too “extreme and dangerous,” by avoiding some of the sharper rhetoric that characterized her efforts in the GOP campaign.

“Anyone who had bought into that narrative could not have come away tonight believing she is an extremist,” Uithoven said.

And Reid, his supporters said, demonstrated a “fire in the belly” they thought has been lacking in his performance so far this campaign.

“That is about as good as I’ve seen Harry Reid,” Assemblywoman Sheila Leslie, D-Reno, said. “He had a sparkle in his eye and he was articulate. He was so into this debate.”

Sun reporters Karoun Demirjian and Delen Goldberg contributed to this story.

Join the Discussion:

Check this out for a full explanation of our conversion to the LiveFyre commenting system and instructions on how to sign up for an account.

Full comments policy

Previous Discussion: 25 comments so far…

Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy. Additionally, we now display comments from trusted commenters by default. Those wishing to become a trusted commenter need to verify their identity or sign in with Facebook Connect to tie their Facebook account to their Las Vegas Sun account. For more on this change, read our story about how it works and why we did it.

Only trusted comments are displayed on this page. Untrusted comments have expired from this story.

  1. The more you view Angle the slicker she gets. After learning for the first time that both her and her husband have supported their lifestyles thru government jobs I'm not sure she's the one to lead us away from an ever expanding government bureaucracy. As the saying goes, a tiger can't change their stripes.

  2. It was very apparent who had a full grasp of the facts, appeared knowledgeable and thoughtful, and who cares deeply about Nevadans...Harry Reid.

    Sharron Angle showed herself to be exactly what we thought she was; argumentative, shallow, filled with memorized (if hard to recall sometimes!) Rovian talking points, and desperate to fill the electorate with hot air.
    I'll take the representation & "juice" of Harry Reid on November 2nd, thank you very much!!!

  3. We have Angle on tape telling Scott Ashjian that if he drops out of the race she'll give him access to the Republican leadership. Now we have Angle on tape in the debate saying she was offering Ashjian the same access as any Nevadan.

    Angle is demanding a pretty hefty quid pro quo to get access to the Republican leadership. "And thou shalt take no gift: for the gift blindeth the wise"

  4. "'I wish I knew how undecided voters are thinking right now, but I just don't think this debate moved anybody off the fence,' Republican strategist Robert Uithoven said. 'I don't think she made any catastrophic mistakes and I'm not so sure he did either.'"

    This comment is very revealing.

    It shows that within the Nevada Republican Party ranks, the crack is widening between the extremists, the ultra righties, the moderates, the Tea Party, and the traditional Republicans. Very recently, they all seem to be pushing, pulling, tugging and yanking on the strings to get things their way, while someone else counters them.

    It's like they are starting to admit they picked an incredibly bad candidate to oppose Senator Reid, without thinking it out, deciding to just do knee jerk reactions, not looking at offering a candidate that is worth a damn, choosing rather to let blind hatred steer their decision.

    And this policy has caused rifts. Differences are so bad that top leading Republicans, ones who actually think with clear minds and put Nevada first over party politics, have left and back Senator Reid. God bless them for thinking of Nevada.

    Bring on November 2nd. My vote goes for Senator Reid.

    The glaring fact that should be learned from all of this is that Republicans need to fix their house. They probably need to tear it down and start over. Because the way they are going right now is madness; remaining unmarketable and unelectable. They are slowly being relegated to selling themselves off as a political entity of no consequence. Especially here in Nevada.

  5. Truly, there was nothing new in the debate. Sharron Angle revealed, even with all her slick "Rovian" make-over, her unvarnished stupidity, hypocrisy and silliness. She spouts off statistics without the foggiest idea what she is talking about. Does she have anyone fooled? How can we Nevadans forfeit a senior statesman like Harry Reid for the likes of this fundamentalist, reactionary kook? She offers us nothing and knows nothing about the reality of government "by the people and for the people." How could continued Bush-era tax breaks for the wealthiest of the wealthy help our economy? These folks are not hiring now (according to Sharron because they are "unsure" about the regulatory climate). In reality, they are not hiring because they don't have to and could care less about the common folk. Her mantra about "Obamacare" is a big fat joke. While certainly not perfect, at least the government is attempting to protect people from the insurance company stranglehold on our healthcare and millions of Americans will have access to health insurance which they do not have now. She is contemptuous of the very government she would purport to join. She is pathetic and so will we be if she somehow becomes our senator. Wake up, Nevadans. The democrats are not perfect but at least they are trying to address what clearly the market cannot.

  6. there's an absurd 'throw them out' sentiment among voters, republican driven because they cannot say anything positive about their own accomplishments. the idea, of course, throw out everyone, or at least the dems, and replace them with uneducated tea party types who couldn't cite a single major piece of federal legislation, much less draft a bill.
    Republican campaigning has reached the height of absurdity, ignoring comparative questions of the intentions of each party, just 'throw 'em out', worry about the right's own machinations later, huh? Good polling questions, 'Do you honestly believe that the Republican tendencies towards fascism and away from constitutional rights, is good for the US? 'Have ya forgotten the illegal tactics of the Bush administration, the abuses, and the disrespect for the law?'
    It's been a quiet couple of years of progress in the White House, a fact obscured by absurd Republican antics and criticisms. Americans haven't seen a George Bush figure promising to 'smoke 'em out', ignoring the constitution, or declaring victory, just an honest and capable man doing a good job of helping the people. The Republicans, by contrast, have, e.g., voted against legislation designed to prevent child abuse on the grounds that it wasn't business friendly (Wisconsin), sought to insert a supposedly 'lost clause' into the constitution trying to remove President Obama for accepting the Nobel Peace Prize (Iowa), asked to repeal federal income tax and allow citizens to interpret the constitution with the same authority as the Supreme Court (Montana), opposes hate crime legislation, (Wyoming, x-ref the Matthew Perry torture and murder) and created the Tea Party, the Republican Party's latest alias, which favors, among other things, a state's decision to ignore federal law when it disagrees with the federal government's exercise of power, shades of the Civil War. Exceedingly poor judgment by the Republicans, all in all, ya have to wonder what they'd do if they came to power again, obviously haven't developed any sophistication or thoughtfulness since Bush, may have even taken another step backward, hard as it is to believe. They're a tragic party, a national disaster waiting to happen, and they should not gain a single seat this year in the elections.

  7. Harry Reid's upbringing will not let him be as aggressive against a woman as one would like to see him be. He really is a very poor speaker and he has trouble bringing things across stronger than his opponent did last night. However, I'll take him just the way he is over Angle any day. How he talks in public and how he manages the Senate is good enough for me. It shows the world how smart he really is..................

  8. Enjoyed your post, e99999999. It outlined stuff the combined idiocy of the Tea/Republican Party would like everyone to conveniently forget. They don't want you to remember the past. They find it more advantageous for you to believe that President Obama and his administration, in just a span of less than two years, is responsible for all the ills of America. In their view, the history of how it got to be is somehow not important. ANYTHING they can do to point fingers at President Obama is the sole goal; a goal to get more knuckleheads in power that don't deserve it.

    And I agree with you totally, azstripper1. Senator Reid's style is soft spoken. Although sometimes it appears he has a hard time getting the word out there right, the delivery can be easily overlooked because of his rational decision making and past successful record of superb service to Nevada.

    That kind of shows the sad state of affairs of "shock politics" nowadays that has been hijacked by conservative radio/television.

    If you are looking for that BOO YAH! IN YOUR FACE! moment with Senator Reid, look elsewhere. He don't resort to that stupidity. That junk is suited for use by a mentally challenged and incredible inferior candidate like Sharron Angle. And it's a guarantee it won't get her anywhere...because the apparent lack of substance to anything she says, combined with constant complaining, but no solutions...will proclaim that she is pretty much insignificant and unelectable.

  9. So if you happen to work for the government you're not allowed to be conservative? You folks act like an aging Roberto Duran down on points on all cards with thirty seconds left in the fight flailing helplessly with wild incoherent punches lashing out in futility trying to score a knockout and you want the referee to stop it and declare Duran the winner. Heck, even Ralston knew who won and he's not exactly the bastion of conservative thought.

  10. Quiet couple of years in the WH? Yesterday our President, the man who two years ago couldn't see a called the electorate....tribal. I don't know about you but I don't appreciate being compared to something ripped from Apocalypto.

  11. Couldn't see a "black or white America"....sorry, a little quick on the post button.

  12. I want to know why Reid referred to Hoover Dam as "Boulder Dam". Yes, I know it was called that in the beginning, but it was changed back to the *original* name some time ago.

    Just like he said multiple times that Social Security is sound for 35 - 40 years when SSA itself says the trust fund will run out in 2037.

    The "English is already the official language" gaffe in response to a yes/no question was telling, too.

    Is Harry going senile?


    I thought Ensign was a terrible embarrassment that everyone who voted for him regretted. But too many of my fellow Nevadans are swept up in a rhetorical tsunami, a feeding frenzy of critical nonsense!

    It's so easy to be hypercritical of any legislator. Small parts of big bills are blown out of proportion, some efforts from gov't don't work all the time, some gov'ts waste money - IT'S EASY TO FIND THE FAULTS. What about the freeway widenings, what about our new bridge, what about our jewel of a federal park at Red Rock? All federal projects - all huge successes! Please don't get swept up in a national push to oust the Senate leader and make the terrible mistake that so many of us are considering!

    How can anyone vote for a person who doesn't believe in mental illness (prisoners get treatments for relaxation and her derogatory line about autism - Scientologists don't believe in mental illness), who believes that our founding fathers were the most conservative leaders ever - SHE SAID THAT! Franklin, Jefferson, Payne - none of them Christians, all of them fought to keep God out of the Constitution and they adopted an equality for all men which was at a time of kingdoms and monarchies! Our founders as uber-conservatives is simply the dumbest thing that I've ever heard!

    She doesn't know what she wants to do with Social Security, she has no legislative successes at the State level to point to, she is so unimpressive that she runs (literally) from questions, and she admitted to a laughing Fox Newsy reporter that she only speaks to friendly media.

    WAKE UP NEVADA!!! PLEASE!!! All Angle has going for her is that she's not Harry. If his opponent were a criminal in prison you wouldn't vote for either candidate, right? So you do have a line that you wouldn't cross in the "Anyone but Harry" battle cry, right? She had her little Palin-esque moment of "man up, Harry" but that's all she's got and that's not POLICY and right now we need help!

  14. I want to know why Angle has referred to Sharia law in "Frankford, Texas." Frankford was annexed by Dallas in 1975, and all that remains are a church and a cemetary. I know it existed in the 70's, but it was annexed some time ago.

    Just like when she tried to block flouridated water while she was in the state assembly, wildly claiming it would poision us with "lead, arsenic or mercury."

    When she gave two wildly different figures for the social security trust. First, it was 2.5 trillion, then she got confused and immediately "corrected" herself, overexaggerating it by saying 25 trillion and finally settling back on 2.5 trillion while wildly flinging her hands in the air.

    Is Sharron going senile?

  15. I wonder if Angle was referring to this story when she asked Reid where his money came from:

  16. I wonder if boftx is going to do any better than digging up debunked non-stories from four years ago.

    The myth of this has been debunked since 2006.

    Update those talking points, boftx. Maybe Angle's supporters are just as foolish and gullible as she is... JUST A QUESTION.

  17. One thing new is that we got to REALLY see who is the more intelligent of the two. Angle knows the meaning of a "YES-OR-NO" answer. Reid, the MAJORITY LEADER OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE does not.

  18. Point to a retraction or something similar by AP. If the facts of the story are accurate, and those facts raise questions, then so be it.

  19. "Point to a retraction or something similar by AP. If the facts of the story are accurate, and those facts raise questions, then so be it."

    I pointed to some clear debunking of the piece you posted. If you have no rebuttal to the FACTS at hand, that's fine, you obviously can't stand behind the article you posted from four years ago...

    But, to date, there have been no ethics charges brought against Reid about this, no criminal investigation, etc. Much ado about nothing, boftx.

    Yet again, Angle's supporters rely on innuendo and cherry-pick facts that suit their argument, rather than an argument which suits the facts. They mislead people with questions that they don't answer... because the answers close the door on the nontroversy.

    That's Glenn Beck 101, folks. "I'm just asking questions!" Boftx, where's your chalkboard?

    We get it: you hate Harry Reid. Criticize him for the things he deserves criticism for, but this blatantly misleading character assassination is pitiful, boftx.

  20. Clear debunking? Like Reid debunked the moderator's figure of HCR adding $100M to Nevada's Medicaid burden by saying "You're facts are wrong?" (Even Rory admits that claim is true and used it to attack Sandoval the other night. So at least one Reid is confused.)

    Or how Reid debunked a Channel 8 reporter who quoted Pew figures to him about illegal workers in the workforce by saying "That might be true elsewhere but not here in Nevada" when Pew said Nevada had the highest percentage of illegal workers in the country?

    Or maybe you mean how Reid debunked a simple yes/no question suggesting we need to make English our official language by saying it already is when a) it is not, and b) he has voted in the past against a bill that would have made it so.

    Reid sure debunked any claim that Social Security is in trouble by saying it is sound for the next 35 - 40 years. I guess he hasn't read reports from the SSA or even Peter Diamond (remember him, the Nobel prize winner Obama wants in the Fed?) that say the trust fund will be exhausted by 2037 and after can only pay out about 75% of the benefits people expect from payroll taxes received.

    And since questions are being asked, are those criticisms deserved?

  21. "Like Reid debunked the moderator's figure of HCR adding $100M to Nevada's Medicaid burden by saying "You're facts are wrong?""

    The addition burden to Medicaid is due to the HOUSE amending legislation in May, not because of health care reform that became law two months earlier, in March:

    "Last-minute amendments to legislation approved by the U.S. House of Representatives last Friday [May 28] will create a nearly $100 million hole in Nevada's budget -- a hole that could force a special session of the Legislature this summer."

    Did evil scary "Obamacare" add $100 million to Nevada's Medicaid burden? No. Health care reform was passed and signed into law before this OTHER bill and it's amendments were considered.

    "Or how Reid debunked a Channel 8 reporter who quoted Pew figures to him about illegal workers in the workforce by saying "That might be true elsewhere but not here in Nevada" when Pew said Nevada had the highest percentage of illegal workers in the country?"

    That's an interesting quote, but contrary to your use of quotation marks, you got the basic wording wrong. The words he actually used were: "I think that any information you have in that regard is absolutely without foundation." "That may be someplace, but it is not here in Nevada." If you're going to use quotations to denote his actual words, have the integrity to look them up.

    Further, you have a history of taking that quote and twisting it into claiming that Reid said there are no illegal aliens in Nevada! You've done it before, you'll do it again. It was dishonest then, and it's dishonest now.

  22. "Or maybe you mean how Reid debunked a simple yes/no question suggesting we need to make English our official language by saying it already is when a) it is not, and b) he has voted in the past against a bill that would have made it so."

    How do you debunk a question? That's right, you don't. English is the prevailing language in the United States. It's clear that's what the Senator meant, and it's clear he doesn't support a useless and xenophobic constitutional amendment. He respects the intent of the founders... something Sharron Angle needs to learn!

    "Reid sure debunked any claim that Social Security is in trouble by saying it is sound for the next 35 - 40 years."

    More dishonesty? C'mon boftx, have some integrity. Reid acknowledged, more than once, that social security will need, in his own words, "tinkering" and reforms moving forward and that he's committed to seeing it through. As it stands, it's able to pay out 100% of liabilities until about 2040, and has been estimated to be able to pay 75% of liabilities through 2080... statistics he actually mentioned during the debate.

    Contrast that with Sharron claiming the system is broke and saying she wants to either eliminate it or privatize it.

    I implore you to double-check the stuff you post, boftx.

  23. I just had the misfortunate to read the pack of lies that aBadReid posted earlier.

    "Here are some interesting highlights that occurred during the Reid/Angle debate:"

    No. Your views are not interesting. They are blatantly one sided with some kind of extreme Tea Party rhetoric.

    "Reid looked tired and frail."

    Of course he is tired. Tired of the crap that Sharron Angle keeps shoveling at him left and right. And all of it is completely false.

    "Reid was vague on a lot of issues..."

    He had facts. Sharron Angle, on the other hand, didn't have to prepare at all. She just relied on tiresome Tea Party talking points that are overused, pointing fingers and complaining, but producing nothing with the slightest solution at all. If you say Senator Reid was vague, then the moon is made of green cheese.

    "Reid continued to state that the social security program was well funded for a long term, when it is clearly stated that this will be the first year that it will pay out more than it is taking in!"

    During this debate, Senator Reid proclaimed a fact that Social Security is fine. And will be fine for years to come, as long as there is maintenance of it. Even after 35-40 years, Social Security is predicted to pay 75 percent of what it needs to. He explained this not once, not twice, BUT THREE TIMES! Sharron Angle (and you) are basically card carrying members of the Flat Earth Society. Not able to comprehend the truth. Not able to check facts.

    "Reid could not answer a simple YES or NO question with a, well, YES or NO!"

    You fail to mention the fact those questions were based upon some fallacy, very very vague. Senator Reid is only guilty of pointing out the accuracy of American policy. He doesn't have the luxury to make things up. Facts speak for themselves. You can't just shrug it off and wave a hand and say yes or no without some explanation.

    "Reid actually had the nerve to state that Obama Care would REDUCE the deficit! Yikes!"

    Over a period of time, it is guaranteed to lower costs. But it will take time. But the accounting is that it is guaranteed that the winners will be the American people...along with the Government.

    And I want to point out your vernacular. "Obamacare." Only narrow minded righties, Tea Party and Republicans use that term. President Obama is only guilty of signing this law into effect. And I am very sure that he is not interested in owning it; he would proudly proclaim the American people who benefit from it own it. Just another tiresome stupid word the righties like to use to make it sound bad. Sort of like when you emphasize President Obama's middle name; as if to imply he is an Islamic terrorist. And not what he is; a popularly elected official who became President of the U.S.A. So, knock it off, aBadReid! Anyways, it makes you sound even more stupid.

    (Forgive me, but I have to use another post to refute all the diarrhea spouted.... To be continued....)

  24. This is the second part of continuance talking about aBadReid's flatulent post from earlier:

    "Reid touted some legislation that was a drop in the bucket with the money dedicated to helping foreclosure victims, and continued the BLAME BUSH rhetoric for all of our current problems!"

    The truth hurts, don't it. This current administration, only in less than two years, is only guilty of trying to fix the prior eight years of Republican incompetence.

    "Pretty arrogant, especially coming from a Senate Majority Leader who was in command at the time the housing collapse was happening!"

    You paint a picture that he was in charge of it all. He wasn't. The Republicans are guilty of all of this due to de-regulation and their total inability to lead and govern.

    "Angle even had to ask Reid to MAN UP in admitting the problem with social security at one point!"

    Again, false. Refer to my prior comment.

    And this stupid gender specific slap at Senator Reid was uncalled for. It was a cheap shot. Only intended to play to the Tea Party base. Low on substance, but more emphasis on insulting to get votes. Really dumb. People see through this.

    "Angle stated Reid should apologize for stating that the war in Iraq was lost, which demoralized our troops."

    Taken out of context. Senator Reid explained this during the debate, but you seem to like to point it out only for dumb propaganda value.

    "Reid confused the Department of Education with the Department of Energy at one point in the debate."

    He did. When he first stated it. But then, later, when he referred to it again, he corrected it. Cheap shot, aBadReid. Shows you place more emphasis on pounding out an agenda. And not the truth.

    "Reid skirted the issue of continuing the Bush tax cuts..."

    Because those tax cuts for the very rich WILL end. Period. Because it's the right thing to do.

    "...touting how we would need more money to be incorporated into the federal deficit (probably because they keep spending money)!"

    Stupid statement. More propaganda that has no basis in fact at all.

    "Reid claimed to make all of his money via being a successful lawyer and investing, but he only practiced in the late 60s for a few years, plus put his kids through school."

    More propaganda. To suit your narrow minded view that fits an agenda.

    "How in the world could he have made his millions then and not while in the Senate?"

    The truth is he actually was already a millionaire before he was elected. You conveniently seem to overlook that.

    And lastly.

    "Bad Reid...Bad Senator"

    That really sums up the whole impetus of what you are pounding out with this post. You want to sell your stupid website that only deals in untruths, fabrications, lies and vague generalities...all with an eye to fit your Tea Party/Republican world. And you want to make money off of this idiocy too.

  25. e69+1,
    If you would know what the Conservative (TeaParty) campaign is about, read the Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights. And pay particular attention to the 10th Amendment: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

    I know Liberals chafe at the strictures of the rule book, but it's the only thing that prevents people like Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and Pres. Obama from mandating 'ex cathedra'.