October 03, 2006
Cantwell divorce file resealed by court, yet to be explored by mainstream press

The Cantwell divorce file was resealed yesterday. Dotzauer's attorney argued that the pro-tem commissioner who unsealed it last week at my request was out-of-line. It's also clear from yesterday's filing that somebody had been trying to unseal the file before I came along (see the letter dated 9/21).

Today's Everett Herald has an article about the controversy. Somehow, it avoids reporting what the file actually contained or why I think it's significant. (The same reporters reported in detail on McGavick's DUI police report).

I told the Herald this is an important story because (not in any particular order) --

1) The pre-wedding fling reveals Cantwell's poor judgment.

Any fool knows that's a bad move to sleep with somebody a few days before their wedding to somebody else. This behavior can have harmful consequences for everybody involved. At the time of the incident, Cantwell was already an elected official, in her 2nd term as a member of the state House of Representatives. I think most people expect better personal judgment from their elected officials.

2) There's a reasonable question whether Cantwell properly reported the loan to Dotzauer.

The $15,000-$50,000 loan was reportedly extended in 1999. It has been disclosed in Cantwell's Senate financial disclosures since 2001. Except for 2000, when Cantwell disclosed an interest payment of $2,500-$5,000, I've seen no record that the loan principal or interest has been paid (if any interest has been paid, it could only be less than $201 in any year) If this were a bona fide loan (and not, say a gift or payment for services, which would have different tax consequences) one would expect to see more of a record of interest payments.

3) This story further reveals the extent and closeness of the Dotzauer/Cantwell relationship and the potential conflict of interest when Dotzauer and his firm lobby Cantwell on behalf of their clients.

And if the loan is indeed a bona fide loan, then Cantwell expects to be paid back (and it doesn't appear that she has been getting paid back), then she has a stake in Dotzauer's financial success (i.e. in the success of his lobbying business)

4. Cantwell markets herself as a protector of women in abusive relationships, supporting the "Violence Against Women Act", and introducing an amendment to regulate mail-order brides. Cantwell's feminist supporters might ask why she would retain as her campaign consultant someone who was charged with assaulting his wife and jailed for failing to meet his financial obligations to his ex-wife and their child.

The other comment I made to the Herald was that I prefer to see campaigns be about issues (I cited the specific example of energy policy in this race). But since many voters and journalists (e.g. those who looked at McGavick's divorce records and obsessed over his DUI) also like to discuss a candidate's personal life, it makes sense to get this out there so the voters can make up their minds.

Various news organizations are interested in examining the Dotzauer divorce file. Hopefully they'll obtain and reveal more information than today's Herald did. Snohomish County Superior Court Judge Thomas Wynne has scheduled a hearing for Tuesday, October 10 at 9:30am.

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at October 03, 2006 04:21 PM | Email This
Comments
1. No need to attack Cantwell on her personal life. Her public record is clear enough. She is a party hack who doesn't care about Washington State. She doesn't believe marriage is an institution worth defending (her public statements are clear about that) and she doesn't believe in defending the "little guy" unless they are lobbyists or Democratic operatives.

Stefan, I admire your detective work but frankly, I don't care for it. Yes, liberals and their ilk like to dig up dirt and toss it about carelessly. We certainly have justification to point out the cesspools and the dead bodies to the public in that regard. But I don't think it is good nonetheless. We should stand apart and play a different game, even if it means it is harder to play that game and win.

Posted by: Jonathan Gardner on October 3, 2006 04:18 PM
2. Do as I say and not what I do.

I am surprised even Postman is silent but I think he has orders from headquarters to avoid this issue.

Democrats have a different standard than Republicans I am sadly finding out.

Stefan, you bring up some good points here. Also, circumventing child support- i.e. loan and not income- may have ramifications. Cantwell would have been a knowing party to this.

Posted by: swatter on October 3, 2006 04:19 PM
3. I think most people expect better personal judgment

In matters before the legislature the people expect good judgement from their representatives.

In matter of the heart between consenting adults during their personal time?

Well Stefan, what would you know about such things?

Posted by: Jimmy Blue on October 3, 2006 04:21 PM
4. Jimmy Blue doesn't expect his legislators to exercise good judgment outside of the Capitol rotunda.

Kinda says it all, doesn't it?

And the argumentum ad hominem thrown in at the end was sadly typical.

Posted by: Larry on October 3, 2006 04:34 PM
5. Actually I appreciate Stephan doing this detective work. Our local media are willing to delve into every aspect of McGavick's life - DUI and divorce especially, yet they aren't interested shenanigans of Cantwell. Pointing out the double standard is what Stephan has done very adeptly!

Cantwell can't stand on her record, she also has no claim for moral superiority with her continued association with Dotzauer whether it be financial or sexual. She has shown a lack of truthfulness about the money he owes her and the lobbying that he does to her. I find it objectionable that she had a sexual relationship with a lobbyist representing clients that benefit from her work in the Senate.

Thanks Stephan, I hope at least a few of the local PAID journalist show a bit of curiosity and ask about Cantwell's actions after being scooped by you.

Posted by: Skeptic on October 3, 2006 04:34 PM
6. "In matters of the heart between consenting adults..."?

Boinking somebody who's due to marry in a few days, or doing so when you're due to marry in a few days, has nothing to do with the heart. Look lower down.

People who are unable to govern themselves have no business governing someone else.

Posted by: sr on October 3, 2006 04:37 PM
7. I agree with Stefan. If Dems are going to focus on side issues with republicans and even fabricate lawsuits against them for no really good reason except for poltical smearing, then it's fair game to question a Senator who slept (sleeping?) with a lobbyist whose marriage she helped break up and who she made loans to and is currently funneling federal projects to and who happens to owe her money. Couldn't be more obvious. MSM, get on it. The people should at least have the info to decide, since their tax dollars are involved, and since they want to make judgments about the judgment of someone who wants to represent them.

Posted by: Misty on October 3, 2006 04:38 PM
8. Jimmy (#3):

You demonstrate the disconnect in liberals' minds on the issue of character. You seem to think that a politician can be one person in private, and another in public - and that as long as one votes "correctly" on the issues, personal lapses of character don't really matter. This was amply demonstrated throughout the Clinton/Lewinsky scandal.

I do not accept this false distinction between "private" and "public." One's true character is known by what one is willing to do out of the public eye, believing no one is watching.

Posted by: Patrick on October 3, 2006 04:46 PM
9. I only wish the Democrats can see the hypocrisy of their double standard. If a truce could be called as a result of this, great; if not, we don't have much of a politicial system.

And Jonathan, good points and I agree with them. Israel does the same thing and look what happens. The US funds the United Nations and look what happens.

You just don't bring a peashooter to a knife fight.

Posted by: swatter on October 3, 2006 04:48 PM
10. Out of curiosity, is it usual to seal court files in a divorce case? Is there a specific list of conditions that must be met, or is it just a request based system?

Posted by: SouthernRoots on October 3, 2006 04:50 PM
11. Stefan-is it not a little strange that one judge--and only one judge--has been asked to keep jurisdiction over this matter? I don't want to jump to conclusions--but could it be that this judge is sympathetic to Dotzauer/Cantwell and doesn't want this info to get out until after the election?

Posted by: Patrick in Capitol Hill on October 3, 2006 04:57 PM
12. Yup Misty, Cantwell is paying back someone she lent money to. Its ingenuous really. Give someone money, then give them favors in exchange for the privilege of loaning them money.

I am really not so sure what it matters that Cantwell may have harmed this guys marriage. Its about as relevant as McGavick's relationship with his kids. I also highly doubt Cantwell cared enough to bribe him with money or contracts to keep it a secret. Most people in Washington don't really care about politicians personal lives and those that do aren't likely to voting for Cantwell anyway.

However with regard to the DUI Mike! made it an issue. He put it out there and tried to spin it as a character building experience. In the process he lied about it. Thats called hypocrisy my friends. You can also make the case that breaking the law and endangering others lives represented a different kind of failing them a problematic personal relationship.

Posted by: Giffy on October 3, 2006 04:57 PM
13. Judging from the 'style' of the last post methinks Giffy might actually be Goldy in drag.

What do you think?

Posted by: bigbyrd on October 3, 2006 05:13 PM
14. Giffy, she's mixing her "personal" problems with taxpayer $$. It matters, alright. And yes, I think it does matter that she had sex with a guy a week before his wedding to another. Pretty hostile act on her part toward the bride, no question. And I really do have to question her judgment on choice of men. Really.

Posted by: Misty on October 3, 2006 05:17 PM
15. One's true character is known by what one is willing to do out of the public eye, believing no one is watching.

I guess you shouldn't vote for Mike McGavick then. Remember Mike's mistake? How's the Libertarian candidate looking? I'm sure you won't go near the Green.

Posted by: Jimmy Blue on October 3, 2006 05:20 PM
16. It's fair game. If progressives like Goldy are going to use this tactic, then fight fire with fire. If Maria Cantwell didn't want this to come out in public, then she should have chosen differently. This happened after she started her political career. David Postman is a coward if he keeps ignoring this story. Postman on Politics, unless the powers that be disagree.

Posted by: Jeff B. on October 3, 2006 05:40 PM
17. Oh, Jeff, that is a lovely attitude. If the Democrats do it, the Republicans can? That is exactly why the GOP is not successful in this state. They think they can get away with doing anything the Democrats do, just because it rights them a moral blank check. Ridiculous and depressing. No wonder suburban moderates have recently swun to the Democrats.

Posted by: Alcon Nighthawk on October 3, 2006 05:48 PM
18. Postman should not ignore this one much longer - the local newspapers don't deserve to exist if they stay away from this story. The partisan bias reeks like the dead fishwrappers they have become.

Now, this is almost on a par with David Irons allegedly hitting his mother (not sure I believe that to this day), that Goldy vetted and the Times and Pee-Eye were all over it. This story should get out there - be it on radio, TV or whatever. The Dems deserve to get the stench thrown back at them. The WSRP should also stay out of it, lest they once again be chumps !

Posted by: KS on October 3, 2006 06:05 PM
19. "all's fair in love & war"--Stefan's work be praised! the lazy-azzed "professional" journalists should be skulking with embarassment-
their bosses should be evaluating what they are REALLY getting for those journalists' salaries and so-called "digging." MSM on the downslide.

Posted by: jimmie-howya-doin on October 3, 2006 06:45 PM
20. Congrats Stefan.
I thought you were too much of a wimp to actually report something like this.
I would have jumped all over it too...plus I would have had help from Joel Connelly, Robert Jameson & the whole P-I staff.
This would be on the headline until election day.
Frankly, I'm quite jealous of your find.
PS--
I agree with you folks that the issue is an UNREPAID LOAN FROM AN ELECTED OFFICIAL TO A FEDERAL LOBBYIST.

PSS--
The Everett Herald did you a favor by even covering this Stefan. You should thank them....even though they tried to turn the tables on you.
It's still 2+ weeks until ballots go out.
Others like Fox News will certainly pick up on this. It's way too juicy!
Damn, I'm jealous@!
I had my fun with Iron & McGavick....but this is awesome@!

Posted by: Goldie on October 3, 2006 06:45 PM
21. "the local newspapers don't deserve to exist if they stay away from this story"

I don't totally agree. The sports sections, cartoons, and classified ads are probably still useful. And they could actually save a lot of printing cost by getting rid of the pseudo news and editorial sections. As I understand it, they really need to eliminate the fat to stay afloat.

Posted by: RBW on October 3, 2006 06:47 PM
22. Goldie @ 20

Like the REAL goldie would praise Stefan.

I love your email address though... g@g.com

Can we call you GG now??

Just wait till someone reposts your Praise at HA.......LOL I am laughing now.

Posted by: Chris on October 3, 2006 06:51 PM
23. In the "order to re-seal" Cynthia First is mentioned on the last page. She is Dotzaur's present wife

Posted by: seamen 1st class on October 3, 2006 06:54 PM
24. Ron Dotzauer is brother to drug man Al Dotzauer who I think may still be in prison for a 60's or early 70's drug and or possable murder conviction. I ran into Ron while skiing one time and asked him how Al was... The color ran from his face and he went pale as a ghost. I'll ask again, HOW'S YOUR BROTHER AL RON? What goes around comes around slime ball.

Posted by: seamen 1st class on October 3, 2006 07:11 PM
25. How can someone's current spouse be attorney of record for them on a family law matter? A party's spouse would have testimonial knowledge of things such as their personal behavior, parenting ability, the behavior and parenting ability of the party's spouse, the income and resources of the party, and that of the party's spouse. If the family law case were to involve any dispute over child support, parenting of the children, or practically anything else, the party's spouse would have testimonial knowledge relevant to the case. This would generally prohibit the attorney spouse from representing the party under Rule 3.7 of the Rules of Professional Conduct.

Posted by: Richard Pope on October 3, 2006 07:15 PM
26. PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT? Who's? certianly none here.

Posted by: seamen 1st class on October 3, 2006 07:19 PM
27. The bigger question is why is the only televised debate going to include the Libertarian, and not the Green candidate.

Hmmm, maybe it's because the Libertarian is more likely to hurt McGavick, and the Green is more likely to hurt Cantwell.

I don't know about you, but Republicans should demand that if the Libertarian (polling at 1%) is going to be included, that the Green (polling at 3%) should also be included.

Posted by: Anon on October 3, 2006 07:30 PM
28. Think many of you already knew, but Goldie at #20 spelled his username different than Mr. HA who spells it Goldy. He was an imposter and an Leftist operative like he would never give credit to the other side, its much too honorable.

Posted by: KS on October 3, 2006 07:41 PM
29. I think I've figured out why none of the MSM is jumping on this--none of them have had access to the actual divorce file--and they are waiting to get it before reporting. It does make sense that they would want to hold off on reporting until they can confrim the details--and the only way to do that since Dotzauer and Cantwell aren't taling, is to get ahold of the file.

The real question is whether the file will ever be unsealed--and if it's not, what the MSM will have to say at that point.

Posted by: Patrick in Capitol Hill on October 3, 2006 08:10 PM
30. Ya know, the "real" golden showers is creepy enough. Why on earth would anyone intentionally want to fake it?!

Posted by: alphabet soup on October 3, 2006 08:11 PM
31. Maria Cantwin

Posted by: jeff on October 3, 2006 08:27 PM
32. I understand two Americans just won the Nobel prize for their new theory about the Big Bang. Apparently, they've discovered that where a politician causes immeasurable pain to another by having sexual relations with that person's fiance the week of their wedding AND that person is a Republican then it is a crime against society worthy of front page coverage and dismissal from their elected chamber BUT if that politician is a Democrat then the issue enters something called the BLACK HOLE of Seattle journalism never again to see the light of day. Further, they've found that a certain percent of the population will become delusional to the point of condemning whatever light in fact escapes, in the form of revelations from bloggers, from the Black Hole and that these delusional people begin identifying the light as the problem rather than the injury-inflicting self-absorbed politician.

Posted by: Stephen Hawking on October 3, 2006 09:13 PM
33. I'm also jealous of that loser troll, Ron Dotzauer. How can that little goober get a babe like Maria the Ice Queen in the rack?
I've tried a couple times...but for some reason she declined my advances. Heck, I wasn't even married or dating anyone. I was single. Could I get into her Senatorial britches? Nope.
Guess she only likes Federal Lobbyists the week before their wedding.
I also tried to hit her up for a small loan. As a radio personality, I figured that would be easy.
Wrong again. FYI...She only loans money to Federal Lobbyists who's marriages she destroys (and is threatened by the scorned ex-wife).
Wow, that sounds like extortion and a pay-off.
I wonder how much more money Maria gave to Ron....or to Ron's scorned ex-wife?? Probably a lot. I'm dying to know.
Wait, I forgot, Maria's a Democrat.
She's one of my "home-girls"!
Never mind.

Posted by: Goldie on October 3, 2006 10:03 PM
34. I wonder if Rob Glaser...the Real Networks guy who made, bought and paid for Maria Cantwell, is involved in any pay-off stuff?
Goldie may be right here.
Perhaps some additional payments by Cantwell or her surrogates went to Dotzauers ex-wife or other family.
Would be very difficult to prove.
Has anyone contacted Dotzauer's ex-wife for comments on this?
Sounds like Ron burned her pretty bad.
Perhaps it would be therapuetic for her to tell all about how Ron treated her, what Maria's character really is (character does matter in many folks election decisions)?
So many questions.
So few answers.
Maria seems to have tape over her mouth (like the babes in the previous thread).
My guess is there is more to come.
Where there is smoke, there is fire.

Posted by: jimbob on October 3, 2006 10:11 PM
35. "I thought you were too much of a wimp to actually report something like this.
I would have jumped all over it too...plus I would have had help from Joel Connelly, Robert Jameson & the whole P-I staff.
This would be on the headline until election day.
Frankly, I'm quite jealous of your find.
PS--
I agree with you folks that the issue is an UNREPAID LOAN FROM AN ELECTED OFFICIAL TO A FEDERAL LOBBYIST."


Well, that certainly tell us a LOT about the bias of the press now doesn't it?

Posted by: pbj on October 3, 2006 10:17 PM
36. Oh yes, these consenting-adult relationships are so important to you voyeurs on the right. You'd think you'd have enough on your hands monitoring the behavior on these "family values' hypocrites of your own ilk but I guess not.

Posted by: skagit on October 3, 2006 10:19 PM
37. Jimmy @ #15: "Mike's little mistake"? Oh, you mean the one that he chose to openly discuss even though no one else appears to have had any knowledge of it? Again, your sense of moral relativism and equivalency is revealed. There's a world of difference between a private citizen who decides to run for public office and in the course of the campaign chooses to reveal past mistakes, and an elected official with personal and financial ties to a lobbyist who hides behind the sealed records of a divorce proceeding. This difference also says something about character.

Posted by: Patrick on October 3, 2006 10:25 PM
38. Democrats are deviant and this crap only solidifies their deviant base. Cantvotewell is a shoe in now.

Posted by: Chappaquiddick Teddy on October 3, 2006 10:29 PM
39. The mainstream media has linked to this story:

Josh Feit at SLOG in The Stranger:

http://www.thestranger.com/blog/2006/10/cantwell_the_other_w.php

Chris Grygeil at Strange Bedfellows in the Seattle P-I:

http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/seattlepolitics/archives/107262.asp

Jeff Haley & Jerry Cornfield at The Herald:

http://www.heraldnet.com/stories/06/10/03/100loc_b1file001.cfm

Posted by: Luigi Giovanni on October 3, 2006 10:30 PM
40. Uhhh Patrick, I think you might have a point... had Mike! not lied about his DUI. What he portrayed as a ciation he got for having a couple beers, turned out to be an arrest for blowing a rather impressive .17.

A calculated political half-truth designed to control the narrative of an event is a sign of poor character. The fact that it failed/actually made things worse is a sign of poor planning.

I'll take some who has made some poor relationship choices over a drunk driver any day. Only one of them kills people.

Posted by: Giffy on October 3, 2006 10:49 PM
41. Posted again for your reading pleasure:

The libs obviously believe that it's OK for someone about to be married to have sex with someone other than their future spouse a few days before their marriage.

So I conducted a poll, and here are the results. Click below to hear comments from people who wouldn't mind their fiancée having sex with someone else.

Sex With Others Is OK

Posted by: Obi-Wan on October 3, 2006 10:51 PM
42. Giffy--
Again is mischaracterize what Cantwell did.
She loaned $$ to a Federal Lobbyist and has yet to be repaid. That is called a gift, payola or something.
The timing of the loan is tied to Dotzauer's divorce.
This is WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY more than merely a poor relationship choice.
Unseal the records and let the voters decide.

Posted by: dude on October 3, 2006 10:52 PM
43. Character hell! What no one seems to understand is the concept of ETHICS. The notion that a person does the right thing, every time. Not even considering whether any one is watching, listening, OR caring. Y'all sound like a bunch of senators, arguing about who's going to get more PORK! Send 'em all to eye rack.

Posted by: JT on October 3, 2006 11:04 PM
44. Some perspective here, since most of you haven't been arond or paying attention long enough to have the backstory.

This isn't about a loan, or about a federal lobbyist with undue influence. To focus on just that is to miss the forest because you are looking at the smallest trees.

Ron Dotzauer and Maria Cantwell have a two-decades plus professional and sexual relationship, that both have used for mutual benefit while also screwing the taxpayers.

Ron made Maria, in more ways than one, and she has dutifully returned the favor, in more ways than one. Ron had a political consulting and state lobbying firm. Maria was his first hire.

After their sexual relationship had begun, he helped get her elected to the state House. She was quite helpful to Ron during her six years in the House- and he was not bashful about helping her political career. She emerged as a committee chair when Ron's ally Joe King- also of Vancouver- rose to the Speakership of the state House.

Loans in later years, and favors to a federal lobbyist, come late in this sordid history.

It is over twenty years of corruption that needs to be explored, not just a single jump in the sack a week before a second marriage's start or a single loan. It is the relationship between a politician whose career has been intertwined with a lobbyist- a lobbyist who has a history of having to be bailed out of financial difficulties by his elected clients. Maria isn't the only one to have to give or loan Ron money- big money.

The reality is- let Maria Cantwell stay in the Senate, and she will have a career that will make Ted Stevens and Robert Byrd look like the most tight-fisted, fiscally responsible senators to ever get near a pork barrel. At least Stevens and Byrd ladle out the pork to help their states- not to do favors for their former bedmate.

Posted by: Captain Wierd on October 3, 2006 11:46 PM
45. Jeff @ #31:

You stole my line. *chuckle*

Yes, it is now Maria Can'twin.

Posted by: Sakaki Onsei on October 4, 2006 12:50 AM
46. I went on this woman's campaign website and it says "Maria....will not be bought."

That's very interesting. I then thought about the way she "hired" her former campaign opponent, Mark Wilson, ending his campaign right then and there. And then I thought about Eric Earling's story about Aaron Dixon being promised a big fundraiser for his organization, with innuendo that all he'd have to do is drop out of the senate race.

Could her slogan be "Maria will NOT be bought. But by golly she WILL BUY off."

Posted by: Misty on October 4, 2006 01:30 AM
47. So lets see Dude, your theory is that she, the senator, loaned money to a lobbyist then what. She shockingly supported an environmental action he was involved in. A democrat supporting the environment, must be payback? they never do that. She also voted AGAINST his big lawsuit bill and only supported it when others lobbied her after he was no longer involved. SHOCKING. You only have a point if it went the other way. You know like Delay, or the Dukester.

Senators are allowed to have friends and are allowed to help their friends out financially. They are even entitled to have sexual relationships. Find some evidence that he actually gave her money, or that she did something out of character to support his interest and you start to get something.

Posted by: Giffy on October 4, 2006 06:05 AM
48. BUT.... think of the Childern. LOL

(-:

Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on October 4, 2006 06:17 AM
49. these consenting-adult relationships are so important to you voyeurs on the right

Mrs. Dotzauer was not a consenting party to her husband banging the congresswoman. The taxpayers of Washington are not consenting parties to her paying hush money.

Posted by: Michael on October 4, 2006 06:39 AM
50. On comment way above- Stefan has a ton of documents from the proceedings. He will share those with MSM.

Second, someone should also investigate the relationship with "homey" Ron and "homey" Wynne. Pretty corrupt politics up in Snohomish County.

Posted by: swatter on October 4, 2006 07:07 AM
51. Someone out there knows whether or not Maria attended Ron and Angela's wedding, sent a present, acted the part of the supportive friend to Angela, etc. I hope they come forward soon.

Those trying to use the opium mantra of "consenting adult" to somehow wash Maria clean of the filth covering her are misguided, not to mention ethically crippled. If, as is apparent, Maria and Ron consented to hurt Angela Dotzauer in the horrendously Jerry Springer manner they did, then they deserve the full measure of condemnation from Washington's entire consenting adult population possible. Read Angela's declaration; she was devestated and they were pigs. And pigs of this degree have no business occcupying a position of trust.

Regarding the money, it is laughable to say that she supported all of Dotzauer's clients anyway therefore there's no corruption. If that's the case then she should have informed Ron's clients they were wasting their money on Ron. Griffy, enter the real world.

Posted by: Weddings by Maria on October 4, 2006 07:08 AM
52. Giffy- she doesn't support all of Ron's clients. There are those clients Ron rips off by touting his- or his firm's- access to Maria, all the while knowing she won't vote their way.

But she'll give Ron meetings, so he can pocket the client's money, and look like he's trying.

This corrupt duo needs to be retired from the stage...

Posted by: Captain Wierd on October 4, 2006 07:54 AM
53. How can it be the Cantwell "divorce file" when Maria has never been divorced?

Posted by: michael on October 4, 2006 08:06 AM
54. Who broke up Mike!s first marriage? Maybe Mike!?
Has anyone here considered that Mike! doesn't want to play around with Dotzauers divorce papers because he doesnt want his looked at?????
Hmmmmmmm?

Posted by: sendpoly on October 4, 2006 08:12 AM
55. If Washington's last Gubernatorial election left any doubts in anyone's mind regarding what the Washington Democrat machine considers within acceptable limits it is "whatever one can get away with," in other words what your supporters find acceptable behavior. The left not only accepts Cantwell's personal behavior as normal and acceptable a majority of the Democrat constituency actually celebrates these behavior patterns and considers them a manifestation of just another of many various "lifestyle choices."

Posted by: JDH on October 4, 2006 08:15 AM
56. If this short article does not explain it nothing will

Foley Shames Republicans, But Would Do Democrats Proud
Townhall

The Democrats finally have their issue. Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL) resigned his seat in the House of Representatives on Friday, September 29, after news leaked that he had sexually harassed an underage male Congressional page. Foley repeatedly e-mailed and instant messaged the page, revoltingly asking him to undress, to measure his genitals with a ruler, to list details regarding frequency and method of masturbation, and to tell Foley when he was aroused. "[I'd] love to slip [your shorts] off you and [grab] the one-eyed snake," Foley messaged the teen.

Why repeat these perverse details? To demonstrate that House Republicans were not simply negligent in failing to investigate allegations regarding Foley's pedophilia -- they were downright malfeasant. When a 16-year-old page informed top House Republicans that Foley had e-mailed him and asked for a picture, the Republicans did nothing. When Republican officials confronted Foley over the e-mails, Foley explained that they were innocent mentoring -- and Republicans did nothing.

Trusting Foley at his word was inexcusable. If Foley had contacted a female page asking for her picture, there is no doubt he would have been grilled. House Republicans should have known better than to trust Foley here. Foley has been accused of closet homosexuality since his entry into politics; studies show that homosexuals are disproportionately prone to pedophilia. The fact that Foley had contacted a male page for his photograph should have set warning bells ringing across Capitol Hill.

But Republicans did nothing. Perhaps it was out of a sincere hope that Foley was not a closet homosexual; perhaps it was out of a disreputable hope that Foley's sickening behavior would go unnoticed until after the 2006 midterm elections. In either case, this information should have been investigated months ago -- and Foley should already be sitting in a jail cell.

Democrats are surely correct to bludgeon House Republicans with the Foley scandal. Nonetheless, their outrage seems somewhat incongruous when we take into account their moral belief system. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), who labeled House Republicans' behavior here "abhorrent," is a vocal opponent of parental consent laws with regard to abortions for underage girls. This is the same Democratic Party that repeatedly endorsed homosexual page-molester Rep. Gerry Studds (D-MA), even after his affair with a 17-year-old male page had been revealed. This is the same party that consistently defended Bill Clinton, calling his affair with White House intern Monica Lewinsky a private matter.

Democrats cannot condemn Foley for his proclivity for 16-year-old boys; they are the party that supports both homosexuality and reduced age of consent. Democrats cannot condemn Foley for his exploitation of Capitol Hill employees; they are the party that calls such exploitative imbalance-of-power situations "matters of personal choice."

On what moral basis do Democrats condemn Foley? They have no basis for moral outrage, since they have championed the destruction of traditional morality for decades. Instead, they condemn Foley and the Republicans for hypocrisy. Foley, when he wasn't spending his time molesting teenage boys, pushed for legislation to crack down on child pornography. House Republicans, when they weren't busy ignoring Foley's scummy behavior, pushed for legislation to uphold traditional values. The big sin here, according to the social left, is that Foley and the Republicans tried to bolster antiquated sexual mores while simultaneously bucking them in personal life. Were Mark Foley a liberal Democrat from San Francisco, liberals would be hard-pressed to spot a problem with his behavior.

But Republicans should not have been. The Republican Party is the party supposedly dedicated to those antiquated value systems that made this country great. It should not have been difficult for Republicans to identify the problems with Foley's behavior: pedophilia, exploitation, and yes, homosexuality. And yet, because the Republican Party has become infected with either the unchecked will to power or the milquetoast tolerance of the social left, House Republicans did nothing. Shame on them.

Posted by: JDH on October 4, 2006 08:21 AM
57. Look at the time & date Barry Jenkins, gov't employee, is posting on Postman's site:
Comments: More on Guthrie's $1 million debate ticket

Crafty. Sounds like something the BIAW would endorse. I bet if you checked it out, there's some builder money in all those new donations pouring in.

Maybe the builders are changing their focus from the courts to the senate?
Posted by bamajenk at 09:27 AM, Oct 03, 2006

Barry Jenkins. Public Servant
Bust him

Posted by: abc on October 4, 2006 08:43 AM
58. One might safely conclude that Dotzauer was "on crack" when he received that loan.

Posted by: jimbob on October 4, 2006 12:33 PM
59. Stephan,

You should look into the divorce file of a Barbara Peterson in Clark County, an attorney who was running for superior court. She was the annointed candidate for the position and the Columbian asked for her divorce file to be unsealed. What you will find interesting is that the Columbian knew exactly what was in it before the file was unsealed.; information that the Columbian could twist to her opponets advantage.

The judge who unsealed it was the alcoholic Judge Robert L. Harris, and did so on the basis that Peterson was a public person running for public office and the public had a right to see it. This is the exact same situation as Ms. Cantwell. BTW, Ms Peterson was not screwing some other person's spouse.

Ms Peterson appealed the decision to the state supreme court. Good luck trying to find the decision in that case. Ms. Peterson lost her appeal, which was not heard by the entire bench.

Posted by: Don on October 4, 2006 12:52 PM
60. jimbob--
That's funny stuff.
I hope for the sake of his sanity Dotzauer wasn't actually "smoking crack" to get that loan from Cantwell.
Ewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww...
I shudder at the mere thought.
Although leave it to the Democrats to come up with some "partial truth" defense like:
"Yes, Ron did receive a loan from Maria that was never to be repaid.....but please understand and be sensitive that Mr. Dotzauer suffers from a very rare addiction to a specific brand of "crack"!

Posted by: Goldie on October 4, 2006 12:59 PM
61. Perhaps Dotzauer can hire fellow "consultant" Paul Berendt to help Dotzauer perfect his crying methodology (including the blubbering schtick) when Dotzauer makes his stunning CRACK ADDICTION public confession.
"As I humbly stand before you today, you can clear see I am no longer on the crack that I used to be obsessed....errrrrr rather "addicted" to."

Posted by: jimbob on October 4, 2006 01:28 PM
62. i see another Whitewater pooh pooh talking point hatching--"it wasn't a lot of money anyway--don't we have more substantive issues to talk about instead of ethics & integrity?"

jimbob--where is that anti-crack rehab center? Castro district SF?

Posted by: jimmie-howya-doin on October 4, 2006 02:20 PM
63. @54- Mike!'s divorce file has already been scrutinized- Postman covered that on September 12th. He basically said the file was boring.

@59- as the Seattle Times has been pointing out in recent monhs, court files are not supposed to be routinely sealed. Ms Peterson is just going to have to deal with the fact that her file probably should never have been sealed, and will now be opened.

Posted by: Captain Wierd on October 4, 2006 03:18 PM
64. Re #63

Captain Wierd,

Peterson's file was opened years ago. My point was, someone who did not like the thought of Peterson being a superior court judge told the Columbian what was in a sealed file. If Peterson's file was required to be opened, there is no basis for any judge to do anything but keep Cantwell's file open.

Posted by: Don on October 4, 2006 03:36 PM
65. Do you mean Postman the hypocrite or another one?

Posted by: swatter on October 4, 2006 03:41 PM
66. Has anyone looked into the strange marrage between Cynthia First and Ron Dotzauer. First was a commisioner at Snohomish PUD and Ron worked out alliances with other power company's while she was there. Was First using public money to hire her husband Ron? Or did Ron donate his time? Someone needs to dig deep and look at First (Ron's third) wife.

Posted by: seamen 1st class on October 4, 2006 05:02 PM
67. Has anyone looked into the strange marrage between Cynthia First and Ron Dotzauer. First was a commisioner at Snohomish PUD and Ron worked out alliances with other power company's while she was there. Was First using public money to hire her husband Ron? Or did Ron donate his time? Someone needs to dig deep and look at First (Ron's third) wife.

Posted by: seamen 1st class on October 4, 2006 05:02 PM
68. The Herald article quotes McGavick attacking his party organization for publicizing Stefan's work on Dotzauer's divorce: "I immediately had our campaign call the senatorial committee and tell them to knock it off, and I've already received an apology from them," he said. "It's inappropriate. I think it has no place in this campaign."

Even Mike! has more ethics than Stefan.

Posted by: Bruce on October 4, 2006 08:25 PM
69. "Even Mike! has more ethics than Stefan."

And any Dhimmicrat would have to stand on their tippy-toes and strain to reach the underside of his shoes.

Posted by: alphabet soup on October 4, 2006 08:43 PM
70. Gee Bruce you dumba$$--
If you haven't noticed, Mike is the guy running for office...and Stefan ain't!
Besides Goldie has set the low-bar standard for sh*tbombs. Look at how he treated Ironsand McGavick. Pretty "ethical" huh, dumba$$!

The problem you have Bruce is that Stefan merely posted PUBLIC RECORDS! The rumors Goldie posted about Irons were despicable.

I hate you.

Posted by: dude on October 4, 2006 08:45 PM
71. Dude, I'm sorry to hear about your anger issues. And to express personal hatred toward a mere commenter like me says a lot about your sense of perspective.

Your point about Goldie is an Own Goal. Goldie's posts were about candidates McGavick and Irons. If Stefan has something to post about Cantwell and he makes a case that it's relevant, fine. But he's decided to attack Dotzauer -- who's not a candidate, has never been one, and gives no indication of becoming one.

I credit McGavick with one thing in this race -- asking to avoid personal attacks -- and Stefan is undermining that. Way to go, Stefan!

Posted by: Bruce on October 4, 2006 09:07 PM
72. Bruce--
Just because to say & wish something often enough does NOT make it so.
The deep tie-in between Dotzauer & Cantwell is irrefutable.
More to "come" Bruce.

Posted by: dude on October 5, 2006 05:28 AM
73. A rally in the Treasury market has sent bond interest rates tumbling to seven- month lows, bringing mortgage rates down as well and giving the languishing housing sector a blip up. debt policy [URL=http://oldweb.uwp.edu/academic/business/news/articles/debt-policy.html] debt policy[/URL] http://oldweb.uwp.edu/academic/business/news/articles/debt-policy.html Commitment Caps Restrictive Covenants

Posted by: debt policy on October 26, 2006 09:48 PM
74. On this path, you can apply for a closed-end home equity loan in which the bank pushes the entire loan amount across the counter at a fixed interest rate. cost of debt and money Closing Statement Sheriff's Deed Appraisal Report

Posted by: money on October 28, 2006 01:29 PM
75. Combining debt through home equity loans can be your ticket to better FICO scores. variable rate mortgage [URL=http://idea.zanestate.edu/wordpress/articles/variable-rate-mortgage.html] variable rate mortgage[/URL] http://idea.zanestate.edu/wordpress/articles/variable-rate-mortgage.html mortgage payment estimates washington mortgage rates bank of america my mortgage

Posted by: variable rate mortgage on November 1, 2006 04:27 AM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?