Via The Washington Post (and AP):
OLYMPIA, Wash. — Democrats stepped up their pre-emptive campaign against potential Republican Senate candidate Dino Rossi on Thursday, alleging that delinquent property taxes owed by his business partners show poor ethical standards on his part.
Rossi, a two-time gubernatorial runner-up, is mulling a possible run against Democratic Sen. Patty Murray. Rossi dismissed Thursday’s Democratic attacks as inaccurate “sleaze” and said he has no direct ties to the property in question.
The dustup previews a bruising fall campaign if Rossi enters the race, and reveals how nervous Democrats are about the prospect of a challenge from the former state senator.
Read the full story, right here.
April 29th, 2010 at 3:41 PM
And people ask what is wrong with our political system. This is as petty as it gets. Patty you are better
than this.
April 29th, 2010 at 5:03 PM
Apparently, she is not.
April 29th, 2010 at 9:23 PM
LB - I’ve decided that you’re not very civil. Even if the person doesn’t read this, you’re mean-spirited and I think that violates the overall principle of this blog. From now on, if this continues I’ll kill the posts and, eventually, I’ll just ban you. That means you just won’t be able to read it, because that’s the current ban function. For any blog addict it’s a horrible punishment, and I hate to use it - but you’re not really providing anything that people enjoy to read and I’ve received so many complaints about you over the years that, frankly, it’d just be easier.
Instead, I’d rather give you a chance to stop walking such a fine line of the rules and embrace the point of this blog - to have real community conversation that is on-topic and meaningful. The next time I read a rude post about some politician or some county official that you don’t personally like I’m going to be very, very put off.
In other words, please consider this a final notice.
April 30th, 2010 at 5:22 AM
http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/Mr_Smith_Comes_To_Washington.htm
“My creed is that public service must be more than doing a job efficiently and honestly. It must be a complete dedication to the people and to the nation with full recognition that every human being is entitled to courtesy and consideration, that constructive criticism is not only to be expected but sought, that smears are not only to be expected but fought, that honor is to be earned but not bought.”
Margaret Chase Smith United States Senator
Ms Smith made the List, Patty didn’t?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Presidential_Medal_of_Freedom_recipients
The Declaration of Conscience was a speech made by Senator Margaret Chase Smith on June 1, 1950. She stated the basic principles of “Americanism” were:
The right to criticize;
The right to hold unpopular beliefs;
The right to protest;
The right of independent thought
Of course your Golden Rule must match Patty’s, worship the golden image!
Ban Me, I’d be Honored!
April 30th, 2010 at 7:43 AM
There is no honor LB. Just silence, irrelevance, self doubt, and frustration that can leave you with remorse or spewing defiantly into the void. No one is going to be pining for your return. No one will stand by your side. Time will just move on and your participation will be a fleeting memory. Plus since they don’t have internet sites where you live, you can’t even read unless you drive to town or a friend’s house. Take my word for it, I have some experience here.
Also, I doubt Margaret Chase Smith would side with you on your treatment of a fellow Senator, when so much of her quoted statement speaks against the kind of smears that lack constructive criticism that you and some of your fellow “critics” love to toss Murray’s way. It doesn’t make one look clever, or insightful or even informed.
Also, who is going to leave us scratching our heads in wonderment at times?
April 30th, 2010 at 8:02 AM
This is a pretty feeble “best shot,” I’d say.
April 30th, 2010 at 8:37 AM
Well the right of Internetism is to stay on topic and follow the rules of the private blog that you’re participating on, LB. I’m not the government, and that’s what the Constitution is about. Protection from them.
Not me.
April 30th, 2010 at 9:18 AM
As our forefathers knew, man is not perfect therefore our constitution is about the reasonable limitations of government, whereas the forefather (soon to be real daddy!) of our blog also knows; man is not perfect therefore he has reasonable limits for his blog!
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
April 30th, 2010 at 10:05 AM
As far as potentially damaging opposition research goes, the DSCC’s smear job is the rough equivalent of scuffing Rossi’s wingtip.
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/2932000/seattle_seahawk_2010_nfl_draft_grade.html?cat=14
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
April 30th, 2010 at 12:21 PM
LB may be mean spirited and vicious, but I have to admit her posts are incoherent.
Good riddance.
April 30th, 2010 at 12:58 PM
I had not ever read Senator Chase’s words.
The words are inspiring.
Thank you LB for bringing them to our attention.
I wish more politicians uttered words like Senator Chase,
instead of the partisan bile that has become so common.
Senator Chase’s words obviously are evidence of her statesmanship,
her leadership, and her deep understanding of American values.
Senator Murray simply, has not risen to this level of statesmanship.
April 30th, 2010 at 1:05 PM
Something for Patty:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJRIdeoceh4&feature=player_embedded
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
April 30th, 2010 at 1:15 PM
She is a he, for those who don’t pay attention.
April 30th, 2010 at 1:31 PM
Ms. Margaret Chase Smith,…
… is a he?
April 30th, 2010 at 1:40 PM
I believe Shaun is referring to LB.
April 30th, 2010 at 2:16 PM
Ms. Lb, …
… is a he?
April 30th, 2010 at 5:37 PM
I enjoyed that link AFY. Thanks!
May 3rd, 2010 at 7:05 PM
From Liz Mair, today:
http://lizmair.com/blog.php?Index=602
“But according to a source intimately familiar with Rossi’s business dealings, the DSCC, too, has a big, glaring problem in making that allegation. Specifically, the $20,000 tax problem that the DSCC says “Dino Rossi’s firm has” is in fact one belonging to a totally different entity. Whereas the $20,000 debt is owed by a firm called Coast Equity Partners I, which owns a property in respect of which a tenant that went bust was supposed to pay these taxes, Dino Rossi is a partner in Coast Equity Partners II. Get it? They’re two different firms. And the one that Dino is involved with doesn’t own the property. So they aren’t responsible for the back taxes. So Dino Rossi isn’t a big tax cheat with ethics problems, like the DSCC wants you to believe.
The DSCC says “We look forward to hearing [Dino's] explanation on why he does not think the rules apply to him.” Well, this may not be Dino’s explanation, but it’s mine: The “rules” don’t apply to Dino because under our system of law, people aren’t responsible for taxes on things they don’t own. I’m not responsible for my neighbor’s property taxes; you’re not responsible for your best friend’s income taxes; the DSCC isn’t responsible for DCCC payroll tax contributions (even though those two committees, kind of like Coast Equity Partners I and Coast Equity Partners II, have similar names, do similar things, and probably have a whole slew of advisers in common)… You get the idea.”