Look Up Scandal in the Dictionary: You'll See Harry Reid's Picture

The Harry Reid scandal: More lapses
Pittsburgh Tribune Review ,Editorial
Wednesday, October 18, 2006

Forgive us for using the name "Harry Reid" and "ethics" in the same sentence. But it's the only way we can address the former's lack of the latter -- for the second time in four days.

On Sunday we editorialized on the Senate minority leader's smarmy Las Vegas land deal in which he pocketed a cool $1. 1 million for the sale of property he hadn't personally owned for years. Mr. Reid will be "amending" his financial disclosure forms, don't you know.

Now comes word that Mr. Reid illegally has been using campaign money to mete out Christmas bonuses for staffers at his tony Ritz-Carlton condo. He calls it a "clerical error," don't you know.

These aren't the first ethics questions for Harry Reid, always quick out of the starting blocks to offer sound bites about the Republicans' "culture of corruption. " The Los Angeles Times and New York Post have reported on another questionable Nevada land deal.

Oh, and Reid implies that The Associated Press, which broke the latest stories, somehow is working in concert with Republicans. The Associated Democrat Press? Please.

As Ralph Waldo Emerson once wrote: "We must hold a man amenable to reason for the choice of his daily craft or profession. It is not an excuse any longer for his deeds, that they are the custom of his trade. What business has he with an evil trade? "

Well, Harry Reid, what's your answer?

Here's More Harry --

Orlando Sentinel, OpinionTuesday, October 17, 2006
Our position: The Democratic leader's ethical breach deserves a U. S. Senate probe.
Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada has been one of his party's most aggressive stone throwers in the rhetorical battle over scandals in Washington. He needs to spend more time tending to his own glass house.

Allentown Morning Call, OpinionMonday, October 16, 2006
What was Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid thinking when he gave an inaccurate accounting to Congress about a 2001 property transfer that later resulted in a $1. 1 million sale and a $700,000 profit? The Nevada Democrat has been out front pointing fingers at Republicans for ethical breaches, including the scandals of lobbyist Jack Abramoff and Rep. Mark Foley, even as he was involved in a series of shady decisions himself.

Las Vegas Review-Journal, Opinion Sunday, October 15, 2006
Sen. Reid on the hot seat
All this raises the question: How does a savvy political operative such as Sen. Reid make a bush-league error and find himself ankle deep in the manure pit? For the past few years, Sen. Reid has been railing about a Republican "culture of corruption" -- and has eagerly sought to exploit the Foley mess for his party's political gain. Oops.

Perhaps after Sen. Reid scrapes the dung off his shoes, he'll tend to the egg on his face.

Washington Post, Opinion Friday, October 13, 2006
Mr. Reid's Nondisclosure
"Everything I did was transparent," Mr. Reid said at a news conference Wednesday, after the story broke. "Everything is fully disclosed to the ethics committee and everyone else. As I said, if there is some technical change that the ethics committee wants, I'll be happy to do that. "

Mr. Reid's professions of transparency and full disclosure are transparently wrong. His investment was not reported in a manner that made clear his partnership with Mr. Brown.

Philadelphia Inquirer, Fri, Oct. 13, 2006
Practice what you preach
So the Senate Democratic leader engaged in a seven-figure handshake and didn't feel the need to disclose all the details...."Americans have been shocked and even disgusted by revelations of corruption in our current system by Republican lobbyists, senior Bush Administration officials, members of Congress, and former congressional staff," Reid said in March. "The scandals have shown that some outsiders and insiders believed they could act with impunity."

That's how this case looks, too. Unless Reid comes up with a better explanation for this lack of disclosure, Democrats should not keep him as their leader in the new Congress in 2007.