- Thread starter
- Banned
- #41
Why doesn't Dodd need to go?
Can some Dem explain why Rangel goes, but Dodd stays?
Anyone?
OK, first of all, Frank, you're standing up for Rangel, an obviously corrupt POS, for political gain. Specifically to attempt to divide your political opponents over race.
Now, I don't know about anyone else, but to me that reflects quite badly on YOU.
But to answer this post, if there is clear evidence of corruption in Dodd's case, he should face the same consequences.
I think you'll find, however, that if you open up the can of worms that Dodd is an example of, you'll be prosecuting half of congress, including I suspect an equal number of Republicans as Democrats.
Not that that would be a bad thing. I'm with you on that. I support rooting out all government corruption, especially the rash of corporate payoffs that are rife in today's federal government.
However, you should realize that this tactic will not help your political aims. And from your tone, I'm pretty sure that is the point of your line of debate here.
Last edited: