http://www.capitolweekly.net/article.php?_adctlid=v|jq2q43wvsl855o|x4qkjhxlldwn 8k&issueId=x48gnuowgqsg6o&xid=x4ptlrmv0w0r6x

I suppose I shouldn't be surprised that someone in Congress can't manage money well, but it seems extra lame for our own leaders to be part of the problem with the housing market meltdown.

I just wanted to respond to this rep comment:
Small picture man. Ask yourself what drives these politicians (including her runoff opponent) to go so far in debt to get these positions. We're lucky if love for country comes in a close second.

Call me cynical, but I think it's clear where the monetary motivation is. Lobbyists spend millions of dollars a day lobbying Congress. She will certainly come out ahead.

Either way, the hundreds of thousands in debt has nothing to do with her running for Congress. She loaned herself $60,000 for her Senate run, at the same time that WaMu was taking a $200,000 hit on her foreclosure sale.

She even walked away from $9,000 in property taxes. She gets to dodge her taxes, but wants us to pay her out of tax money?

While it's the same story we're seeing across the nation (and around the world) with people walking away from their financial obligations, I would not want any of those people running the government either. If you can't even run your personal finances, you aren't qualified to have a hand in running the country's.

It does seem hypocritical of the congress woman to me.

I'm not sure if we're talking over each other or not from your response and I'm going on 4 hours of sleep, sorry.

The I-can-write-off-my-debt-mentality, huge salaries, etc. these people have are a symptom, not the disease. Lobbyists lobby because government wields so much power over our lives, much more than I think they have shown a competency to wield frankly - and with one party entirely and the other majority-wise fighting to increase that power they have, we're fucked.

Don't blame the lobbyist though, they're doing a Constitutional right that is needed.

I'm not sure if we're talking over each other or not from your response and I'm going on 4 hours of sleep, sorry.

The I-can-write-off-my-debt-mentality, huge salaries, etc. these people have are a symptom, not the disease. Lobbyists lobby because government wields so much power over our lives, much more than I think they have shown a competency to wield frankly - and with one party entirely and the other majority-wise fighting to increase that power they have, we're fucked.

Don't blame the lobbyist though, they're doing a Constitutional right that is needed.
I disagree vehemently about the current net-good of lobbyists, but that's not really the point here (and I'll probably start a thread about that sometime).

The current net-good of lobbyists? I'm not sure there is one at the moment, though the NRA did seriously put the hurt on Democrats' and their agenda of anti-gun. Case in point, it's not NRA's fault. Politicians should never have been given the go-ahead to think they could so thoroughly trample a Constitutional right. Had they never done so, the NRA would hardly exist.

Like I said, we can get into that can of worms on another thread.

I don't see what that has to do with the fact that this person is less responsible with her finances than you or I, yet now holds one of the highest offices in the land. Her irresponsibility cost WaMu $200,000. I don't see how her loaning herself $60,000 (for her own personal gain in the end) should mitigate that.

If anything, that just goes to show that she had cash on hand and had no legitimate reason for reneging on her obligation to the bank.

To show my genuine ignorance of Congressional ins and outs, I will ask would this situation not be one thaat would qualify for review by the Congressional Ethics panel, or whatever they call themselves this decade?