I can’t remember the question, but it’s being treated as a launching pad for Coats’ final statement. Apparently, he considers being a lobbyist a private matter like sex or something, and Ellsworth’s drumbeat a virtual invasion of privacy and very unseemly.
Ellsworth sez the record and resumé are among the issues, and Coats’ resumé is a legitimate issue. Then he ticks me off by saying that lawyers advocate for whoever pays the bill, eliding lobbying and lawyering. Unless my profession is less popular than I think, he just blunted his mantra of “lobbyist, lobbyist” by making it no more noxious than the honorable job of an attorney.
Sink-Burris, too, makes a closing statement.
All things considered, war is a big enough issue for me that Sink-Burris gained a touch of favor. Postscript: her position on marriage, too, may be the ultimate compromise we collectively reach.