Study in contrast: The Columbian's editorial take on the Mielke victory.

.
As I have pointed out, in this cycle, the Columbian acted as if they were an arm of the Democrat National Committee. They endorsed democrats and democrats only for every open seat in every partisan race this election, from president on down, trashing Mielke like he was the political equivalent of a child molester.

In part, they wrote (October 10):

By contrast, Mielke is more of an obstructionist and a contrarian. His public service is lackluster at best.

Despite serving eight years as a state representative, Mielke in a recent communication with The Columbian could only list two relatively insignificant personal achievements in the Legislature. One was the Interstate 5/Northeast 219th interchange (although he voted against the nickel tax that funded it). The other was a process for a Clark County resident to inspect and bring automobiles to Washington state — not exactly milestone legislation.

He wants a third bridge, thinks we have “a perfectly good bridge” and opposes the proposed replacement bridge “with six lanes” (it’s proposed to have 10-12).

Mielke is a two-time loser to Democrats in runs for county commissioner, falling to Morris in 2004 and to Stuart in 2005. (We’ll give him credit for running close races, though, receiving at least 48 percent of votes each time).

That Mielke's legislative career closely mirrored Boldt's, whom they endorsed as an incumbent (Boldt's second endorsement from the Columbian in, I believe, 6 elections, and his first against a democrat) seemed to make no difference. They "liked" Marc and "hated" Tom, although they are very closely aligned on a broad spectrum of political issues; they gave credit to Pam for having held two file-clerk level jobs in local and federal government positions as if that qualified her for Commissioner, and they implemented that mindset and institutional obtuseness in their editorial policy that has helped lead them down the road of bankruptcy. And how's that working for them?

Brokaw was as qualified to be a county commissioner as she is to be, well, an editorial or newspaper editor... maybe more so, since she also did stints as Columbian and Reflector reporter. But she had no elective experience of any kind, no military service, no government background in any policy-making position.

That is, she wasn't qualified at all. But she was a democrat in the Columbian's pro-democrat crusade, so she got the nod and these people trashed Mielke like a rented step-child... because facts aren't at issue when, first, you have an agenda and second; you're going to do absolutely everything you can to see that agenda through, including trashing anyone who gets in the way.

All of that is the set-up for today's editorial on the Mielke victory.

More of a plea than a simple acknowledgment, they hope for Boldt to move left and to begin the process of implementing the Columbian agenda.

First, they attempt to remove the conservative and party element from the equation:

There’s a more dramatic element in this story than political parties, however, and there might be a more significant player than Mielke. The GOP majority probably doesn’t warrant heavy attention because of the axiom that, the more local the politics, the less partisan it becomes. City councilors in these parts don’t even run as party candidates, and county commissioners typically are more tied to issues of growth, jobs and quality of life than to the influences of political parties.

If only that hadn't endorsed democrats in every single open race, this might have had at least a grain of credibility. Unfortunately, they did and this observation, correspondingly, doesn't.

They do, however, acknowledge one of the more politically amazing aspects of this stunning outcome:

If anything, the party angle to this story is interesting because Mielke managed to win despite a shift to the left by Clark County voters in this year’s presidential race. Locally, Barack Obama won by 6 percentage points in a county that had twice voted for George W. Bush. And yet Mielke withstood that shift, overcame a sizeable campaign funding disadvantage and emerged the victor.

Based on the numbers, this shows that something on the order of 2/3rds of that 6% (something on the order of around 6700 voters out of the 168,000 votes) proceeded to vote for Mielke after they voted for Obama... literally, since Obama was first on the ballot.

This "Rudy-like" story is worthy of it's own mini-series, at least. Tom had no right to win this: almost EVERYTHING was against him, from Brokaw's money and Barnett's corruption to the local media to a fractured local GOP; a result of a well-populated primary. and Tom's small, all-volunteer army.

The Columbian goes on to say such NICE things about Tom. The irony about this is that these "things" were just as "nice" back when they trashed Mielke.

Although The Columbian did not endorse Mielke, it’s easy to ascertain his attributes. He is a former four-term legislator and, with Boldt (who served five terms in Olympia), he understands state government. Also, Mielke adamantly opposes the proposed Cowlitz casino because, according to his campaign Web site, “the many negative impacts and the cost to the actual taxpayers” serve to make “opposition to this project an absolutely critical and continuing goal of government at all levels in the affected area.” However, he leaves the door open by opposing the casino “until all legitimate issues raised are adequately and realistically addressed.”

It’s also to his credit that Mielke promises to focus on job creation, aiming to make Clark County “the business magnet of the Northwest.” On the issue of growth, it’s good that Mielke believes: “Protection of open space and agricultural land along with our responsibilities to wildlife and our environment are a major priority.” Whether that commitment will be sacrificed on the altar of his less-government pledge remains to be seen.

All of these facets were in place and generally well-known before this paper choose to ignore them all in favor of, relatively speaking, the threadbare resume' of Pam Brokaw.

Why? Well, again... Brokaw is a democrat. If the shoe were on the other foot, so to speak, Mielke's legislative career and accomplishments would have received a glowing review as they endorsed HIM.

So, why the gracious acknowledgment/plea?

Is it because they fear their access to county government might be restricted as a result of their agenda-driven reporting, as opposed to fact-based driven reporting?

Could it be?

The paper then goes on to remind us all of one of the top issues that enabled a Mielke victory, the moronic I-5 Bridge replacement issue.

Clearly, the Columbian's secondary reason for endorsing Brokaw is that she was a rabid supporter of the Columbian's bridge toll/bridge replacement/light rail agenda. They properly saw Mielke as a huge threat to their agenda, so they made a decision at least in part to trash Mielke because of his party and that position.

It's simple, really. Brokaw falsely claimed that she hadn't taken a position on bridge tolls or the megacasino that this newspaper rails AGAINST.

She wrote:

The opposition misleads
Unfortunately my opponent's party is running a commercial about me that's just not true. The ad infers that I support bringing a casino to Clark County as well as tolls.

Truth is I have not taken a position supporting the casino. I've advocated having an agreement in place with the Cowlitz Tribe in case the federal government approves the proposal. The agreement needs to protect our community in a variety of areas including public safety, the environment, and transportation.

As for tolls, I haven't agreed to anything save for considering them as a possible funding component down the road. Know that fair, affordable government is core to my beliefs.

Yet, one need look no further than her list of campaign contributors to see, well, something quite different.

David Barnett of the Barnett/Harju/Mohegan/Paskenta mob sure liked her "non-position." He dropped $76,500 in the last few days of the election hoping to give the job, again, to yet another "I haven't taken a position on the casino" county commissioner.

PAC 48, the political arm of Portland's Local 48 Electrician's Union, would have gotten the gig to wire the new megacasino. They seemed to believe that Brokaw's "non-position" was worth a paltry $15,000.

Odd, isn't it? Barnett and PAC 48 sure seems to believe that Brokaw had "taken a position."

And Brokaw's support for this bizarre, unneeded and unnecessary bridge replacement, which is being done entirely to bring light rail to Clark County (Odd, isn't it, that the Downtown Mafia would waste $4 billion on a bridge replacement to spend $700 million on starting their multi-billion dollar light rail project) was well known.

Equally well known is the fact that to pay for this bridge, tolls would be mandatory.

Tens of thousands of those least able to afford it would suddenly find themselves on the receiving end of a $1200 or so tax in the form of bridge tolls so they could continue their privilege of driving to the Portland metro area to go to work.

Simply stated, you can CLAIM you "haven't taken a position." But any amount of critical thinking shows that by lacking the guts to take public positions on these huge, countrywide level issues, when combined with "following the money" and Barnett's last second, amateurish corruption efforts certainly don't stop one from "taking a position" in private.

To that end, the endorsement of Brokaw was not so much a result of doing what was right, endorsing the most qualified, or reflecting the needs of the county as a whole.

No, that endorsement was a result of Brokaw's absolute water-carrying of the Columbian's light rail agenda, combined with her party affiliation.

And only time will tell if this editorial "bridge-building" will have the desired effect.

I, for one, hope it does not. Clearly, the Columbian's endorsements were shown to be irrelevant (Just ask Kos Kid David Carrier) and reducing their access to county government because of their biased-driven agenda reporting might give them pause and move them back towards fact-based reporting, instead of this Pravda-based effort that has led them to the precipice of economic disaster.


Editorials
In our view Dec. 10: Changes at County
Mielke defied local trends to win election; Boldt could become the swing vote
Wednesday, December 10 1:00 a.m.

Next month the Board of Clark County Commissioners will settle into its first Republican majority in 32 years. On Monday, Tom Mielke was proclaimed the victor over Democrat Pam Brokaw after a recount left the Republican ahead by 209 votes.

There’s a more dramatic element in this story than political parties, however, and there might be a more significant player than Mielke. The GOP majority probably doesn’t warrant heavy attention because of the axiom that, the more local the politics, the less partisan it becomes. City councilors in these parts don’t even run as party candidates, and county commissioners typically are more tied to issues of growth, jobs and quality of life than to the influences of political parties.
Outgoing County Commissioner Betty Sue Morris, whom Mielke replaces, is a Democrat, but that hardly ever has seemed to matter during her productive and influential time on the board.

If anything, the party angle to this story is interesting because Mielke managed to win despite a shift to the left by Clark County voters in this year’s presidential race. Locally, Barack Obama won by 6 percentage points in a county that had twice voted for George W. Bush. And yet Mielke withstood that shift, overcame a sizeable campaign funding disadvantage and emerged the victor.

More:
.