Weetabix wrote:
I don't know of your personal dealings with Kim and Connie, and I'm not going to ask.
Virtually all of my dealings with them took place on the open forum, or in blog comments. If I had to guess at what pissed him off, I'd say it was my comments in response to his blog gloating over the charges that were brought against Ted Stevens. As we know now, those turned out to be false, and politically motivated, but they were instrumental in getting Alaska to send the deciding vote for Obamacare to the Senate.
But I will say that Connie wrote me personally around that time and warned me about continuing involvement with Chris. She didn't give details, but she said they had been wronged in some fashion by him. (ETA - I only just rememberd that email when you mentioned them.) She had only good things to say about CC.
As I said, my issues with those two were my own, and had nothing to do with Chris. Considering the messenger, I probably would have ignored any such warning had I received it.
I subscribe to the old idea that holding on to anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned.
My dad used to say something very like that too. But he followed it with the observation that payback is another matter.
Not that his qualifying statement is really applicable here (although funny), since everybody involved is lessened by the situation.
