The matter is now your attacks on me by implying that I am going after the senator because she is a woman. I am not willing to let that slight go. You are trying to duck the issue because your action was dishonorable and you know it. I want a full explination of your reasons and the appropriate actions taken.
I am not trying to duck any issue.
What is the issue, Don Roley?
You attacked Senator Cantwell. But, you never explained why.
If you do not like my interpretation of what I think you are attacking - I offered several, in fact, a fellow poster commented on all of the possibilities to which I responded (
Holy Non-Sequitur, Batman).
One of my interpretations of your possible attacks is that she is a Democratic Senator .... you are perfectly willing to let that go, be it a slight or not.
What is the issue, Don Roley?
You can of course, let your black dot focus on one of my suppositions consume you. Or you can talk about what you hoped to talk about when starting this thread - provided you can enlighten us to what that is.
Or maybe, that is what you wanted to do when you started this thread. Maybe you wanted to pick a fight with me. I don't know.
What is the issue Don Roley?
That more than six years ago, before Senator Cantwell was a senator; before they lobbyist was a lobbyist, the two entered into a loan agreement. Then when the Senator became Senator Cantwell, but before the lobbyist became a lobbyist, she started working for the benefit of her constiutents - but the loan wasn't repaid. Somewhere along the line, the lobbyist became a lobbyist, the Senator was still a Senatory, and the loan still wasn't repaid. Wait - there's more - then the lobbyist became a client for the companies for which the Senator already had taken actions with, for the benefit of her constituents.
But obviously, that sneaky loan from seven, eight, or more years ago was the direct influence on the Senator's actions toward the legislation that is going to provide clean drinking water to her constituents, restore salmon habitat, and provide local control over those resources.
Is the issue you want to discuss, Don Roley?
You said that the Senator's spokespersons defense is the reason you don't trust any politicians to work for the whole of America. But what does that mean exactly, Don Roley? That locally elected representatives are not able to work for the people that put them in places of power? Did you rail against the redistricting plans of Tom Delay, when he gerrymandered Texas so that those local representatives would be predominately from one political party? Was that for the benefit of the whole of America?
What is the issue here, Don Roley?
You see, without you clearly defining what the issue is ... you know the 'ethics scandal' of which you accuse Senator Cantwell ... I am left to my own interpretations. I offered several - I can see you didn't like my guesses.
You have the opportunity to enlightment not just me, but others who read this board.
What is the issue, Don Roley?
