[Mr 5 0]

Sorry but this doesn't wash with me for a host of reasons.

First, there is no attribution to these 'statistics' and no date and those facts, alone, make the information suspect, at best. The House of Representatives turns over half it's membership every two years so these numbers could refer to a lot of now long-gone Congressmen. Second, I see a lot of use of the word: 'accused' in these 'statistics'. Well, you can be accused of anything. Were the Congressmen accused in Court, in the press or by someone yelling at them on the street? It doesn't say. Lets move on.

"117 have directly or indirectly bankrupted at least 2 businesses".

What businesses? Major industry players or a Mon & Pop operation? When? 20 years before they were elected or the year before? Doesn't say, making the 'statistic' rather suspicious.

"21 are currently

(when is 'currently') defendants in lawsuits"

Meaningless. You can be sued for anything by anybody and again, no details. Sued for what? An auto accident or for something more sinister? No details, of course, making the 'statistic' meaningless.

The 'arrested' numbers are interesting (drug charges and DUI) but once more, no details. Was any Representative or Senator actually convicted for any of these crimes, drug-related or otherwise? Who knows? No details are given, of course.

3 have 'done time'. Who, when and where? 25 years ago a 10-day sentence for a bar fight or recently and for a longer stretch? Makes a huge difference, obviously, and this piece says nothing about when and for how long much less gives us any details or names.

"71 cannot get a credit card due to bad credit"

Really? It's easy to mess up your credit and this statistic tells us nothing as to why '71' cannot qualify for a credit card.

Look, I'm certainly no fan of Congress and some of it's members are idiots and frauds, maybe even criminals in some sense, granted, but this is simply a smear piece with no specifics, no details and most of all, no names rendering it mostly useless and frankly unfair to members of Congress. It might be true that some past and even current members are not credit-worthy, have been sued and maybe even arrested for something or other, once.

"America", Mark Twain once said,"is a nation without a distinct criminal class - with the possible exception of Congress." He was probably right then and that may still be right now but this kind of broad-brush attack is unfounded and far too full of holes, including the lack of a date and names, to be anything less than useless.

It's not scary but it is a bit unfair and undocumented, for the most part. Fun to read but I have to dismiss it as unsupported by facts and documentation and thus, while probably partly true, not useful or anything I would use to make a point with.