The basis for the Biden Administration:
“Necessity is the plea of every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.” – William Pitt.
The blog that NOBODY reads... but everyone gets upset about. The stories we want to read the least... but the ones we need to read the most.
People still don't know or understand that Slade Gorton endorsed Herrera because the guy running her campaign asked him to... and he used to work for Slade back in the day.
Well, here's the high quality former chief of staff to Slade, putting the screws to the GOP Senate hopefuls generally and Dino specifically by HOLDING A FREAKING FUNDRAISER FOR PATTY MURRAY.
Yeah. That endorsement is looking real good about now, ain't it, Jaime?
Join the informed, opinionated journalists of The Times' editorial staff in lively discussions at our blog Ed Cetera.
Wait, say that again. Tony Williams, chief of staff to Republican Sen. Slade Gorton for many years and a member of the Dino Rossi brain trust, is really out there prominently displayed in the Oregonian, spouting what sounds like a scripted campaign line for Democrat Patty Murray.
"She's obviously getting lots of things done for the state," Williams told the Oregonian.
In a subsequent interview, Williams told me he still really likes Dino Rossi and thinks the world of him but this time he is on board with Murray.
Williams, a public affairs consultant and lobbyist, decided to back Murray a couple of years ago. Williams' firm clearly needs connections with politicians on both sides of the political aisle.
I get that, but still this is a bit unusual, especially with Rossi contemplating a run this election against Murray.
If Rossi does decide to run for U.S. Senate, it will be a different team behind him.
Another member of Rossi's inner circle, who was a key player in the 2004 and 2008 gubernatorial races, Jay Vanderstoep, also does not plan to be part of the Rossi campaign, if there is one. Nothing personal. Quite the opposite. Vanderstoep just wants to work on other things.
. Since I became an area resident some 22 years ago, Vancouver has never stopped being the focus of amazement and derision.
They've managed to be stuck on stupid in so many instances; from electing Tim "The Liar" Leavitt to their biggest hobby; passing out hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal settlements and fees.
So now, to join with that ever lengthening list, we have the case of one Kurk Kirby, who, in the midst of exercising his 2nd Amendment and open-carry rights, was moronically ticketed by a Vancouver police officer for carrying a .45 in plain sight.
As a Combat Commander owner myself, I have an affinity for the weapon. But that is neither here nor there.
The agreed on facts of the matter seem to be that he did nothing with the weapon in question, save to carry it. And for that, he was cited.
Enjoy, and shake your head in amazement as the City has managed to set itself up for yet another spurt of large amounts of cash into an individual's pockets.
. I don't have much good to say about David Letterman. I don't watch his show anymore. Like many leftists, morality doesn't play much of a role in his life, and his sexual exploitation of the women on his staff should have resulted in his show being yanked off the air. But that seems to be both typical of the lamestream media and the subject of another post.
Given Letterman's avowed fringe leftism, I was mystified as to how he would have someone in the Tea Party leadership (Pam Stout of Idaho) on. I recognize that since Leno went back to the 11:30 slot, he's been crushed in the ratings, but still, the only motivation besides ratings I could think of was for Letterman to make Pam out to be some sort of idiot.
. How about a massive reimbursement for a total waste of money?
We already know about Herrera's SEIU hi-jinks. We know about her efforts to help the democrats blow $229 million to help them with their new spending. But do we remember her managing to burn her way through almost $500 in meals in 3 days?
No?
Well, here's s brief reminder.
Who here isn't familiar with the Sellers debacle?
Sellers, who, at the time was mayor of Washougal, felt compelled to go to Vegas on "official business." While she was there, she decided that the taxpayers of the city of Washougal should pay for her alcohol, and some high priced meals.
Stacy Sellers is having a tough week. Perhaps she deserves one, since, according to the local version of Pravda, Sellars charged, among other things, a "...$57 'surf and turf' dinner. An $88 bottle of wine. A $72 bill at the Eye Candy Lounge & Bar." while on some sort of "official trip" to Vegas.... although why a trip to Vegas for the mayor of Washougal would be official is, perhaps, a subject for another post. (Take some time and run a google search on the "Eye Candy Lounge & Bar" for pictures of others engaging in some distinctly "non-mayor" like activities. I guess what happens in Vegas is reported in the Columbian.)
Just yesterday, KOIN 6 reported on Brian Baird's abuse of the travel system where he decided he needed to spend a fortune to go on vacations masquerading as a "fact finding trip," a trip that a local travel agent booked for roughly one half the cost charged by Baird.
Erstwhile political opportunist Jamie Herrera seems to share the traits of both Baird and Sellers.
In August of 05, Herrera went on one of these "fact finding trips" to Spokane, where Congresswoman Cathy McMorris Rogers (R-WA05) maintains a district office.
Instead of sending one of her own staffers already in Spokane for this "fact finding," McMorris-Rogers instead seems to have sent Herrera. That sending Herrera was apparently a complete waste of money is a subject for another post. That issue aside, here is the rather disturbing travel voucher, filled out by Herrera and signed off on by her boss and mentor, Congresswoman McMorris-Rogers.
Now, the questionable aspect of this trip aside, where the main issue of concern for me comes to the fore is here:
Somehow, Herrera managed to spend $475.48 for meals on a 3 day trip to Spokane... and her boss, McMorris-Rogers, approved that cost!
Are you kidding me?
I used to LIVE in Spokane. That much money would feed a family of four for three weeks, and Herrera went through that BY HERSELF, in THREE DAYS?
Shades of Stacy Sellers.
And, just like Jon Russell, who approved Seller's charges since he was in overwatch of the credit cards for Washougal, McMorris Rogers approved this outrageous charge paid for by the taxpayers of the United States.
It seems to me that Sellers and Baird and Herrera are all the same... and Russell and McMorris-Rogers blow off this kind of stuff all the time.
As for me, I don't want any of them either in my government... or in elective office.
Because if any of them gave a damn about us... we wouldn't have heard about any of this.
. I've been reading, off and on, Liz Mair's blog. She's occasionally right in her observations, but her frequent bias towards Herrera calls into question her credibility as some sort of arbiter/reporter of the goings on here in the Washington 3rd.
It became most notable with her bizarre column on Castillo's robo call:
The race to succeed retiring Rep. Brian Baird in Washington’s third district has taken a sharply negative turn with David Castillo, one of two leading Republicans vying for a spot on the November ballot, taking a proverbial hatchet to the other, State Rep. Jaime Herrera, in a robocall that has caused tempers to flare among political insiders in Southwest Washington. The robocall, narrated by a female voice who identifies herself only as “Susan” and put out on Thursday, attacks Herrera for taking money from labor union SEIU and for traveling to Washington, DC for events held that same day.
Herrera was in the nation’s capital on Thursday for fundraising and meet-and-greet events hosted by her former employer, Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers and high-profile Herrera endorser former Sen. Slade Gorton.
A representative of the Washington State Legislature with whom I spoke today confirmed that none of the committees on which Herrera serves met on Thursday; nor were any votes taken in the Washington State House of Representatives on that day. That, specifically, has one prominent Republican in the district outraged at Castillo’s attack.
However, the robocall has caused other tempers to flare, too. It emerged today that the Castillo robocall has even prompted one former Castillo endorser—Shannon Barnett, a candidate running to replace Herrera in the Washington State House of Representatives— to drop his support altogether. According to Barnett (with whom I spoke earlier), Castillo spending money on the call constitutes a waste of campaign resources. Furthermore, Barnett says, it evidenced an unwillingness on Castillo’s part to stick to a key campaign pledge made months ago to Barnett. Per Barnett, Castillo promised to focus his campaign on talking about issues that unite Republican voters in the district. Hal Palmer, an advisor to Barnett, added that he was “appalled at the distorted attack on Jaime Herrera.”
The robocall has also elicited some strong pushback from Keath Huff, a self-described Tea Party organizer and long time conservative activist who published an open letter to third district conservatives at his site LibertyTeeth on Friday. In that letter, Huff says he too was “appalled by the recent voice mail I received about my friend Jaime Herrera.” He goes on to blast Castillo for pushing out a “phone call” containing “blatantly false accusations” and employing “propaganda.” and urges recipients to support Herrera.
Meanwhile, multiple, additional third district Republicans are complaining that the Castillo campaign is violating the 11th commandment, misrepresenting Herrera, and improving Democratic chances of holding the third in multiple emails obtained earlier and reportedly sent to the Castillo campaign.
One prominent Washington State Republican who is neutral in the battle between the two candidates takes issue with the attack on Herrera relating to SEIU contributions, and believes this comes close to Castillo throwing stones in a glass house. Setting aside the robocall content, Castillo aides and supporters have been keen to assert connections between her and the union, with Castillo himself and new media consultant Patrick Ruffini tweeting on Friday about a post by Warner Todd Huston entitled “Washington State’s SEIU Bought Republican.” That post, and one other from last week, highlight SEIU’s endorsement of Herrera. Herrera opponents also frequently cite her vote for legislation backed by the union.
However, says the same Washington State Republican raising red flags about Castillo’s SEIU attack, that’s a description that voters may find better fits Castillo’s former boss, House Minority Leader Richard DeBolt, a prominent Castillo endorser. While Herrera did take $500 in August 2008 from the SEIU PAC, a search of Washington’s Public Disclosure Commission website shows that DeBolt in fact took in $3200 from various SEIU entities during the 2008 cycle alone. (An OpenSecrets.org search shows that neither Herrera nor Castillo has taken money from individuals employed by SEIU in the course of their congressional races as of the last filing period with the FEC.)
Moreover, a source tells me, Herrera’s support for legislation also backed by SEIU had nothing to do with alleged “connections” to SEIU. Rather, some providers of children’s care in her legislative district were speaking out ahead of that vote in favor of the legislation Herrera supported. A source who personally affiliates with Herrera and who has personal knowledge of the difficulties such providers were expressing around that time told me several weeks ago in relation to this point that this was one instance where employers were seeking a standardized employment contract, just as SEIU was. This source indicated that a standardized employment contract—something the legislation would have facilitated—was crucial to obtain from the providers’ perspective. Long-running problems involving individual employees asking for astronomical pay increases that could not be met had, in this person’s view, been evident, and this was something a standardized contract might have avoided. This, in turn, was connected in several instances to employees walking off the job with no notice, thus jeopardizing operations. This person wondered at the time how Castillo would have voted in the same circumstances, given his branding as a candidate.
Others see Castillo’s attacks—including the robocall—as a sign of desperation more than a possible misunderstanding. One Republican source pointed to the comparative advantage in fundraising already being experienced by Herrera. Herrera, who formally entered the race midway through December, raised $55,775 in what her campaign says was just about two weeks during 2009. By comparison, Castillo, who entered the race midway through 2009, raised $104,172 during the entire year.
One well-regarded politico with extensive, firsthand knowledge of Washington and national politics who is not connected to either the Herrera or Castillo camp says "Castillo had months to lock this down and make inroads with Republicans in the third. He didn't do it. This is like the guy in the bar who talks to a girl for three hours, fails to interest her enough for her to give her number out, and then gets pissed off when someone else buys her a drink."
However, not everyone takes issue with Castillo’s attacks. According to Kathy McDonald, a well-known Republican consultant from the third district unaffiliated with either campaign, “It looks like David Castillo is calling a spade a spade. The facts are Jaime was back in DC for a fundraiser, the fact is Jaime took money from the SEIU; the fact is she went before the legislative session was over. If she had waited 2 weeks until session was over this fundraiser would be a mute point.”
Perhaps in a sign that this robocall being put out has been a “no win” for both candidates, both the Castillo and Herrera campaigns declined to comment on this post. The DCCC has previously indicated that the contest between Castillo and Herrera to win over Republicans in the third district will be “divisive and messy,” and features the race on its Palin’s Primaries microsite.
This not even thinly veiled effort to rehab Herrera's tattered image was a crap-pile from the get-go. For example, what Richard DeBolt did or did not do concerning SEIU is completely irrelevant. Why mention it... except DeBolt had endorsed Castillo?
Reading carefully, a pattern emerges. It's a pattern she uses frequently in support of Herrera. It's the pattern of the "unnamed source."
Knowing that Mair had been contacted and provided additional information on issues concerning this race in the past (Such as Gorton's endorsement of Herrera because his former Chief of Staff is running her campaign) which she did not use; her reliance on "unnamed sources" to attack Castillo; her failure to address the facts of the call by informing the reader that every syllable of this call was accurate as a conclusion outside of McfDonald's position; her mentioning Castillo's endorsements while simultaneously trashing him:
In the last week, I've written two posts that note former Sen. Slade Gorton's endorsement of Jaime Herrera. But I would be remiss if I did not also take a moment to note David Castillo's endorsements, many if not all of which were obtained before I really started covering this race in any meaningful sense.
So here you have it: Per Castillo spokesman Bill Lohr (via the Columbian), Castillo has been endorsed by Attorney General Rob McKenna, someone of whom yours truly thinks very highly, and 13 House Republicans. Says Lohr on the subject of the respective endorsement tally between Castillo and Herrera, “I think it’s more telling that of her own colleagues in the state Legislature, more of them have endorsed David."
This is an interesting point, because on the one hand, yes, Herrera's colleagues in the legislature are the ones who know her best and who you might expect to be the most eager to jump on board her proverbial train. That being said, it is of course worth also mentioning that often, the earlier entrant to a race locks up support from big names in his or her party faster than a late entrant does-- and Herrera is a late entrant. Herrera entered the race very late in 2009; Castillo told me in my interview with him that he began running in June. So maybe yes, maybe no-- but worth pondering.
What I think is more noteworthy, overall, here is that each of these candidates has a big dog in the fight, and in their corner: McKenna for Castillo, Gorton for Herrera. As I've said before, this is going to be an interesting race to watch, and the split of big names between each camp only underlines the point. Stay tuned.
UPDATE: A reader emails "Castillo was also chief of staff to the House Minority Leader in Olympia...so a respectable list of endorsements from House Republicans is rather logical for him. He has probably known more of them longer than Herrera, even though she serves with many of them." Good point!
Is it REALLY a"good point?"
Of course not, because the following is true:
Most of those in the House endorsing Castillo have had the opportunity to work with both Herrera and Castillo.
They made their decision to stick with Castillo, Herrera's efforts to peel them off notwithstanding; shortly after Herrera's announcement, she systematically called those endorsing Castillo to break their word to him by demanding that they peel off him and endorse her.
Some, like Shannon Barnett, claimed to have continue to endorse Castillo with the integrity-worthless "dual endorsement," (which was nonsense; Barnett's now famous fund raising letter for Herrera that went out for Christmas made it clear that he had completely committed to Herrera, in ways that I found, well, disturbing) so that his bizarre lies and trash included in his post robo-call rant were pure garbage.
But keeping on track, the point of this post is that Liz Mair is writing for Herrera like she's on the payroll.
It's one thing not to report those things you don't know. It's quite another to fail to report those things you do know.
Using "unarmed sources" you can justify or write anything... even the completely nonsensical idea that telling the TRUTH about another candidate is somehow wrong, or can be/should be used for a justification to pull support from a candidate.
Because when true conservatives find out that Herrera co-sponsored and voted for an SEIU bill that requires collective bargaining for daycare workers or that she voted against her own caucus and with the democrats to help them spend $229,000,000 for their new programs in the midst of this horrific recession... they drop her like a bad habit.
Mair, of course, notes that the robo call mentions Herrera SEIU efforts, but then proceeds to write up a bunch of damage control crap from miffed Herrera supporters who are not thrilled to have these facts pointed out.
While *I* do not use "unnamed sources." Her columns speak of a "representative of the Washington State Legislature with whom I spoke;" (but did not name) and "one prominent Republican in the district (but did not name) "multiple additional 3rd District Republicans are complaining (but not named) "One prominent Washington State Republican who is neutral" (but not named) "the same (not named) Washington State Republican raising red flags about Castillo" and "Moreover a (not named) source tells me" and "Others (not named) see Castillo's attacks" (even the use of the word "attacks" is a defense of Herrera) and "One (unnamed) Republican Source," and "One well-regarded (but unnamed) politco." And on.... and on.... and on.
It's as if Mair simply couldn't find ANYONE besides Kathy McDonald in the face of this veritable but unnamed regiment of people who condemned Castillo's phone call which was the absolute truth, as a good idea. And it's equally strange that while Mair was incapable of finding any of the rest of us who appreciate hearing the truth about Herrera; the one person she DID find (Purely for purposes of balance, I'm sure) was named... while most of the others were not.
Because, this effort to shift the focus to the messenger instead of the message is nothing BUT damage control. At the end of the day, had Herrera not ditched us to go to a fund raiser in DC, it wouldn't have been the basis for a robocall. At the end of the day, had Herrera not supported SEIU, they wouldn't have endorsed her or given her money. Mentioning these FACTS in the call?
That's just coincidence, right?
And then, of course, we come to Mair's latest Herrera campaign piece:
Here's a belated update on some news related to the WA-3 race from last week:
Jaime Herrera announced the endorsements of former Rep. Linda Smith and the Cowlitz County GOP. Smith, readers will recall, was the last Republican to hold the third district; she lost a Senate bid against then first-termer Patty Murray back in 1998. The Cowlitz County GOP endorsed Herrera unanimously; readers will remember that back in February, Herrera won a Cowlitz County GOP straw poll.
David Castillo's campaign seems to have committed something of an own goal in the wake of the health care vote last weekend. On Tuesday night, his campaign sent out a statement titled "Heck Takes Position on Health Care Bill-- After the Vote." The problem? Heck's website indicates that on March 20-- i.e., the day before the House voted on health care-- Heck announced that "at this time, if I were a member of Congress, I would be voting YES on this legislation." Is the Castillo campaign arguing that Heck backdated that item? Or did they just not notice it? Or were they aware, but decided to issue an attention-grabbing attack release anyway? Sources inside the district say that Castillo almost certainly would have known of Heck's positioning ahead of the vote. Reportedly, Heck had been touting his support for the bill at events in the district for several days before the actual vote. Furthermore, one Washingtonian who keeps tabs on Heck for professional reasons that I spoke to indicated receipt of a Google alert pointing to the Heck website item on Saturday night. And, one Republican who attended a Lincoln Day dinner the night before the vote at which Castillo was reportedly present says that Heck's endorsement of the bill was mentioned during a speech there.
Besides Mair's continuing use of the unnamed source dodge, a campaign mistake of such a low level of significance is hardly worth mentioning; and it's not as if Mair has focused on the multiple "own goals" committed by Herrera.
In my inbox this morning is an email announcing that on February 25, Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers and former Sen. Slade Gorton will be hosting a fundraising breakfast here in DC for Jaime Herrera-- one of the big names competing to succeed Rep. Brian Baird in representing Washington's third district in Congress.
The breakfast will take place on the Hill from 8-9AM. Herrera should walk away from it with a bit of money to line the campaign coffers: Attendees are being asked to cut a check for $250 (if an individual) or $1,000 (if a PAC).
I wouldn't be terribly surprised to see David Castillo knock Herrera for raising money in DC (he's already poked her for seeking support from folks outside the third district). I also fully anticipate the DCCC will blast her for taking PAC contributions (because Democrats never, ever do that).
Personally, I don't think anyone's going to fault Herrera's former boss (McMorris Rodgers), who is of course also from the Evergreen State, for wanting to help her out-- and McMorris Rodgers, like most federal-level elected officials, is in DC on Thursday mornings. Furthermore, I maintain that Slade Gorton's backing is going to be very helpful to Herrera-- as will any money she takes away from this event.
Here, we agree, Ms. Mair. It's pretty clear you don't think.
As one of Herrera's unfortunate constituents, I was offended by her decision to ditch us much like I was offended by her decision to allow others to vote for her while she was making fund raising calls so she wouldn't appear to be blowing off her job to, you guessed it, fund raise.
That Herrera is stuck on stupid (as are her handlers) is evidenced by this moronic play to bail during session to go to a fund raiser that easily could have waited. You know, one of those "own goals?" You remember... something you strived to do pre-damage control over?
That Mair not only gives her a pass with this but tries to sell it?
Well, that all speaks for itself.
All of this calls into question her false pretense of fairness. It's not that Mair can't be a Herrera supporter. Many have drank that Kool Aid, and supporting any candidate is her right. But she should at least admit it to provide the reader with some prospective instead of hiding behind this false facade of journalistic integrity.
But then, when you're "on the payroll" so to speak, this kind of thing is to be expected.
. Last evening I was one of two people (with 3 others being cc'd), who received an email from the Chair of the Pacific County GOP. In the email (which I felt to be kind of strange, upon reflection) I was notified that the Pacific County GOP (Relatively speaking, both members) had drank the Herrera Kool Aid and joined with the Cowlitz whack jobs in endorsing Herrera.
I'm not particularly sure why the 5 of us received such an email; that is, I'm not sure why the sender felt compelled to share this little vignette with the other 3 recipients, or even to send it to me. I know of the sender, but the sender has no impact on me or my county, and frankly, I am not at all concerned about what the Pacific County GOP (or their chair, for that matter) does or does not do or say.
I will, however, respect the sender's position as a GOP Chair, and because I have not received explicit permission to post the email in question, I am choosing not to do so.
While I simply cannot understand why anyone would support a fake Republican cardboard cut out of a representative, I get that some fair amount of people have been hoodwinked into viewing this empty suit as the second coming.
She's not.
That said, this was my response, sent from my Droid. Unlike Lew's fine effort, it is not measured, considered or polished. But it is precisely how I see this situation.
I appreciate your position in all of this but please do not misunderstand me... I have beaten on Herrera like a drum and I will continue to do so as long as she remains in politics.
If we are unfortunate enough that she is in the top two, I will endorse her opponent as a former executive director of the WSRP and I will do everything I can to defeat her.
She is a political menace not deserving of consideration as a congressional candidate and that suddenly, magically, doesn't stop if she is in the general or even if she wins.
This isn't about "party". I will not support a corrupt candidate who sells out to the unions no matter if mcmorris[sic] is jerking her strings or not.
At the end of the day, your county may feel free to join with that kind of candidate if you like. But hopefully, she will be exposed for what she is, and your county's endorsement will be meaningless.
But as long as I live and she is in politics, I will be devoted to her political defeat.
My blog isn't posturing. I am not politically attacking her as part of any other campaign. It is because Baird at his worst is better than Herrera at her best. And I am not going to settle for mediocre corruption and a congressional annointment[sic] based on interference from outside influences EVER.
Thank you for contacting me, but in all honesty, that Herrera is even considered to be a serious GOP candidate makes me ashamed to be part of such an organization.
On a direct level, the hypocrisy shown by Herrera supporters has sickened me, and that includes the snivelling over freedom works Castillo endorsement. And your rt [sic - rt meaning "retweet"] of that in the face of gorton[sic] doing the exact same thing gives me pause.
I have been actively working to get Republicans elected since Herrera was in elementary school. But after this election (because I'm on campaigns now), I'm done.
If this is the new face of the GOP, I want no part of it.
That I am simply incapable of grasping why anyone would waste their vote on an vacuous pretty face with no experience, no integrity, no understanding, no vision and no independence in thought or deed has shown that my education, experience, and work to elect genuine Republicans has simply been passed by, and that I am so far out of touch that I can no longer stomach this kind of corrupt, suspend-disbelief crap the Herrera supporters are pushing.
That has been my position. That will BE my position. And it will not stop until the people wise up and vote her into the well-deserved oblivion her record demands, and she and her handlers (McMorris, Gorton, et al) personally deserves.
A quick review shows that Pacific County is one of the deepest, darkest, bluest counties in the state, with no GOP representation at any level for any legislative or local office. Perhaps that's a reflection of the judgment of the local GOP organization. Because that is certainly the kind of judgment they have shown here.
. I used to blog about the manifold number of lies by the empty-suited, anti-American racist bigot that is our president, but frankly, THAT became a full time gig because his idiocy was so omni-present, and his communications plan was so full of lies that even his teleprompter revolted.
Monday, March 29, 2010
BARACK OBAMA
A Long Post: The Complete List of Obama Statement Expiration Dates
By popular demand, a comprehensive list of expired Obama statements...
HEALTH CARE MANDATES
STATEMENT: “We've got a philosophical difference, which we've debated repeatedly, and that is that Senator Clinton believes the only way to achieve universal health care is to force everybody to purchase it. And my belief is, the reason that people don't have it is not because they don't want it but because they can't afford it.” Barack Obama, speaking at a Democratic presidential debate, February 21, 2008.
EXPIRATION DATE: On March 23, 2010, Obama signed the individual mandate into law.
HEALTH CARE NEGOTIATIONS ON C-SPAN
STATEMENT: “These negotiations will be on C-SPAN, and so the public will be part of the conversation and will see the decisions that are being made.” January 20, 2008, and seven other times.
EXPIRATION DATE: Throughout the summer, fall, and winter of 2009 and 2010; when John McCain asked about it during the health care summit February 26, Obama dismissed the issue by declaring, “the campaign is over, John.”
RAISING TAXES
STATEMENT: “No family making less than $250,000 will see any form of tax increase.” (multiple times on the campaign trail)
EXPIRATION DATE: Broken multiple times, including the raised taxes on tobacco, a new tax on indoor tanning salons, but most prominently on February 11, 2010: “President Barack Obama said he is “agnostic” about raising taxes on households making less than $250,000 as part of a broad effort to rein in the budget deficit.”
RECESS APPOINTMENTS
STATEMENT: Then-Senator Obama declared that a recess appointment is “damaged goods” and has “less credibility” than a normal appointment. August 25, 2005.
EXPIRATION DATE: March 27, 2010: “If, in the interest of scoring political points, Republicans in the Senate refuse to exercise that responsibility, I must act in the interest of the American people and exercise my authority to fill these positions on an interim basis.”
BORDER SECURITY
STATEMENT: “We need tougher border security, and a renewed focus on busting up gangs and traffickers crossing our border. . . . That begins at home, with comprehensive immigration reform. That means securing our border and passing tough employer enforcement laws.” then-candidate Obama, discussing the need for border security, speaking in Miami on May 23, 2008:
EXPIRATION DATE: March 17, 2010: The Obama administration halted new work on a "virtual fence" on the U.S.-Mexican border, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano announced Tuesday, diverting $50 million in planned economic stimulus funds for the project to other purposes.
GUANTANAMO BAY
STATEMENT: Executive Order stating, "The detention facilities at Guantánamo for individuals covered by this order shall be closed as soon as practicable, and no later than one year from the date of this order." January 22, 2009.
EXPIRATION DATE: November 19, 2010: "Guantánamo, we had a specific deadline that was missed."
MILITARY TRIBUNALS
STATEMENT: “Somebody like Khalid Sheik Mohammad is gonna get basically, a full military trial with all the bells and whistles.” September 27, 2006
EXPIRATION DATE: Ongoing. “President Obama is planning to insert himself into the debate about where to try the accused mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, three administration officials said Thursday, signaling a recognition that the administration had mishandled the process and triggered a political backlash. Obama initially had asked Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. to choose the site of the trial in an effort to maintain an independent Justice Department. But the White House has been taken aback by the intense criticism from political opponents and local officials of Holder's decision to try Khalid Sheik Mohammed in a civilian courtroom in New York.”
Unfortunately, I cannot find it within myself to be any more concerned about his problems than he is about ours... or the problems his herpes-on-our-economy will cause... which is not at all.
Thanks to the anon poster who provided this information... otherwise, it might have got past me. Publish Reject 1
So: Megacasino developer has happen to him what he... (1) http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/20... http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2011454345_barnett27m.html
A developer who wanted to build a 6,000-home community near Lake Roesiger in rural Snohomish County is in default on his property.
A notice posted last week at the 2,600-acre commercial forestland, owned by Shoreline developer Dave Barnett, says he owes $15.6 million on the property and must pay within 30 days or the bank, First Citizens Bank and Trust Co. of Raleigh, N.C., will move to foreclosure.
Taft gets it in a way Herrera can never even dream of. She tries to get her to understand, but Herrera is a fake conservative of the old school.
That anyone could or would support a fake Republican with no depth, vision or experience for Congress is the kind of thing that resulted in a Barack Obama as president.
And Jamie, by the way? It wasn't the $200,000,000 you claimed, it was, in fact, $229,000,000. It's nice to see your finger so tightly on the pulse of $29,000,000.
. Well, I don't know if "highlights" is the right word.
She has, she tells us, for the "...last 3 years... represented" us.
Like the rest of her exaggerations, that is false as well. While this will be her third SESSION, she is several months short of "3 years." But then, Herrera has been factually challenged from the moment she came back here after her 10 year absence.
"It has been the most tremendous honor, it really is."
Much like the lie she blithely told the commissioners already scammed into appointing her long before the actual meeting, when Herrera lied to them by telling them that there was "not being a job she'd rather have" (since she's running for congress)" it hasn't been an honor. How she got this gig and her actions since have been something less than "honorable."
Did she talk about the issues confronting us?
No.
Did she talk about security? Jobs? The economy? Did she have any specific proposals?
No, no and.... no.
Did she talk about any qualifications she might have to be elected to Congress?
No.
There was a massive amount of verbiage where she attempted to explain to US "what America is about."
As if we already didn't know.
As our representative, she "fought against tax increases. and she's signed the taxpayer protection pledge."
Oddly, she didn't speak about her sponsorship and vote for an SEIU bill that would force daycare workers into collective bargaining, a horrific bill that will hurt those who needed her help the most. She remained silent in the face of her plans to empty out the state reserve fund to the tune of $229,000,000, which she did a few days ago.
No. Nothing about that.
She closed with the unfortunate news that Linda Smith had endorsed her, while again lying about her involvement in Smith's campaign in 94... "we remember the fight to get her there" Really? "WE" remember that fight?
YOU weren't there.
I was. But you weren't.
And then that nonsense about her non-existent "independent, hard-working spirit."
"Independent?" If Cathy McMorris stopped suddenly, your entire head would disappear up to your shoulders.
"Hard-working?" There, I have to agree. Few have worked harder in their fund-raising efforts, to include screwing us by ditching us to go to DC during session, or having your seat mate vote for you in your absence so you could make those fund raising calls.
"Hard work" indeed.
And, of course, she will "stand with the people of Southwest Washington."
All while taking her orders from the congresswoman representing Spokane.
"It's going to be our year, folks."
True enough. But it ain't going to be yours.
The speech was, essentially, worthless. It was one huge generality filled with platitudes, and it provided exactly zero justification to support Ridgefield Barbie.
Herrera has no experience in any element that makes up what most sane people would consider to be a solid foundation to serve in congress.
She hasn't lived here for 11 of the past 13 years, which is reason enough to oppose her. She has no private sector experience. She has never owned a home. She has no experience in the military or defense. She has never owned a business.
She has done nothing in any of the areas where she CLAIMS she wants to help US.
And while that makes sense to the fringe right CowlitzKool Aid drinkers, it's not going to make sense to the rest of us.
All and all a pathetic, worthless effort that provided no one with anything along the lines of a justification to support this empty suited, vacuous cheerleader to do anything but be a secretary in a congressional office.
. The rank hypocrisy of the self-flagellating Herrera supporter is beyond belief.
As those paying attention know, FreedomWorks rightfully endorsed someone who wasn't Jaime Herrera, thank God.
Well, all the local Herrera Herd immediately ran off the cliff like the lemmings they are, whining that they allegedly hadn't bothered to talk to Herrera.
Exclusive of the fact that it wouldn't have made any difference if they had, given what a train wreck Herrera is as a candidate, I have to ask: where were these moronic hypocrites when Slade endorsed Herrera?
That answer?
Easy. They were nowhere.
Rank hypocrisy is easily overlooked when it's your candidate. Not ONE of these clowns complained when Slade did Vander Stoep and McMorris Rogers' bidding and endorsed Ridgefield Barbie who he otherwise wouldn't have known if she had bit him.
That's the curse of having a non-existent resume' like Herrera, who is no more qualified to be a member of Congress then she is to pilot an F-22.
Otherwise sane people have lost their collective minds over this empty suit. Otherwise smart people who would demand depth, experience, vision and a mind of her own in a normal candidate can't seem to get beyond.... well.... something.... because it isn't her dismal legislative record (made worse today by her efforts to help the unions blow another $229 million of our money against her caucus... again...) and it isn't her record in the private sector: being a career intern shouldn't be that impressive.
And whining about how any organization chooses to endorse someone when others made THEIR endorsement decision the SAME WAY... well, that shows a series of thought processes that are frightening in their stupidity.
You can tell a lot about a candidate by the type of people they attract. And the typical Herrera supporter seems to view her as some kind of cult leader, someone they follow and fall on their swords for her not because she rates it or deserves it, but because, well, she is who she is, as if that's a reason to vote for anyone.
These cults of personality have resulted in other stellar political leaders. Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Obama come immediately to mind. And you'd think these alleged Republicans would know better, since we just got done electing the worst president this country has ever seen; a president much like the candidate they so slavishly support.
The bill transfers $229,000,000 out of the reserve account, effectively emptying it so her buddies can spend it. The bill passed with a 69 -28 vote, with Herrera AGAIN joining her fellow leftists.
As previously mentioned here, I will not buy government mandated health care insurance; I will not pay fines; I will not send the IRS more money to pay for it.
In short, if they want me, they're going to have to come and get me.
McKenna, being the only elected official speaking for the people statewide, has bitch-slapped our worthless waste of skin governor, who has thrown her own hissy fit because Rob didn't get what amounts to her permission to sue... not that he needed it.
Gregoire, to our shame our current governor and a former AG herself, obviously knew before she threw her tantrum that McKenna could do whatever he wished here, with or without her support.
And in response to your moronic question that you're so clueless that you don't know "who he represents," I would offer this:
He represents the vast majority of us who do not want this. He represents those of us who view the Constitution as something more then an a series of suggestions.
McKenna is right. The worst that can happen is that he loses. But if he wins, then that means the moron running this state would have cheerfully wanted us to live under unconstitutional laws that SHE supports. And to that, I say: drop dead. .
. Barnett's keepers sent out this totally bizarre press release.
Barnett’s Convention Appearance and Campaign Kick Off Barely Exceeds His Low Expectations!
The combined campaign kick off and convention appearance for Shannon Barnett, Neo-Conservative Candidate for 18th District House of Representatives, completely met his low expectations. With the unsurprising Cowlitz County Republican’s unanimous endorsement today, based on the fact Barnett owns these people; and only $2,000 in donations at the Campaign Kick Off on Thursday, there is obviously a lot of grassroots momentum building for the front runner, Ann Rivers.
“In spite of the fact that Ann Rivers was the highest vote getter for 18th District Delegate to the state convention, getting over 80 out of 91 votes on the first ballot In Clark County, we feel really good about our little effort,” Barnett said. “My message of Less Government, Lower Taxes and More Freedom is resignating[sic] with 27 people in our community.” Barnett added, “For the small number of PCO’s in Cowlitz County to vote unanimously to endorse me is expected, since I was their past chair. Who else would they vote for? In fact, it’s kind of like a union voting to endorse their union president for some office. And while I recognize it’s a big whoop for everyone else, I actually have to treat it like it means something… which it doesn’t."
Campaign Manager Hal Palmer also added, “We are underwhelmed with the show of support from the community. We condemn all other candidates who get donations from outside the district, like Jamie Herrera, Joe Zarelli and Ed Orcutt, each of which having received tens of thousands of dollars from across the country and way outside the area.
"For example, since we can’t raise any money, we have to attack the front runner by lying about the amount of money she’s received and where she’s received it from. We can only envy the fact that she believes in herself enough to loan herself campaign money while also getting huge $800 checks from Omaha and New York that we can only dream of, since we haven’t received any checks like that from anybody.”
Palmer added, “99.9% of the few donations we’ve received are from right here in the district, and fully 30% are from Barnett's members. It’s unfortunate that we have no momentum of any kind rolling in our direction, because if we did, the people smart enough to donate to Rivers would be donating to us, instead."
"Resignating."
Kinda sums up his entire campaign.
No. This is not a press release Barnett’s Winged Monkeys sent out, but it is a parody of their moronic effort of whining and sniveling because they can’t raise money and can only envy the front runner, who can. And, of course, to attack the front runner for doing what the incumbents in those offices do every election is the kind of hypocrisy Barnett is known for.
Part of being a state representative is to be an adult. Clearly, neither Barnett nor the goons surrounding him share that particular attribute. Engaging in the same kind of scum-throwing politics they complain about others allegedly using shows the despicable kind of desperation that Barnett and his supporters are known for. And now the reader knows it as well. .
. While I understand the desire to get elected to the House or any other seat, it's fairly clear that it's time for the weak candidates in the open 18th primary to get out of the race.
As I look at the PDC's, and for most, the numbers are disappointing, and in some cases, down right pitiable.
Shannon Barnett's numbers are pathetic. Based on a look at his PDC's, he can't even get a donation from his employer, Storedahl (You've got to wonder who their money is going to) and no one has maxed out to him... PLUS, 30% of his money comes from his own relatives, because he obviously can't raise the money he needs from anyone who'll take him seriously... odd for a former GOP chair, particularly when the current GOP chair is so sadly unethical as to have abandoned any pretense of fairness by endorsing Barnett and acting as if the entire county GOP hierarchy belongs to him.
Even with those built-in advantages, his efforts to date are particularly wretched.
No other Republican has raised over $1500, except, of course, for the one who will eventually win.
These pitiable efforts by those who should know better speak for themselves. They do themselves a disservice by facing their impending humiliation; they put the seat at risk due to the top two primary system we have now, and some engage in hypocritical attacks (Barnett) because he's too pitiful to stick to the issues.
It's just sad, really. And they ought to clear out... and do it now. .
. Baird knew he was damaged goods from the moment he relied on a bogus death threat as a reason to avoid facing his constituents.
But we all knew that when push came to shove, Baird would be a solid "yes." on the Obama socialized medicine bill, particularly since his vote has been so easy to buy in the past.
The question for us now is this: what is the impact of his political treason to his district?
Well, he was already counted in the "yes" column for this leftist political sepukku. But the focus now shifts to the rather gutless Denny Heck.
Heck, who apparently failed to learn from Brokaw's cowardice in failing to take positions in the commissioner's election back in 08, has refused to tell us what his vote on this abuse of the people would actually be. And his cowardice equates to a "yes" vote... and his "yes" vote equates to political suicide.
State Senator Craig Pridemore (D-Communist) is already a political dead man walking because of his "pour-gasoline-on-himself-and-light-it" rabid leftist vote which bears no resemblance to what the people of this district want. Combining stupidity with an inability to raise money isn't a career enhancing move.
But now Heck is showing the kind of cowardice he would show in the unfortunate event he were to win this seat. And what we don't need is a clown who lacks any political courage holding this seat.
After all, that's what we've got now... and why would it make any sense to elect two sellouts in a row?
David Castillo, I am sure, thanks Brian Baird for helping him win this district. Heck.... not so much. .
. As our local government clowns have wasted 10's of millions of dollars; as our despicable rag of a paper has attempted to jam this thing down our throats as those who've lied to us (Tim "The Liar" Leavitt) and those corrupted (Steve "Cold hard cash, Mr. Barnett" Stuart) have taken it upon themselves to ram all of this down our throats without our say.
Well, this November, we will get out chance. I directly discussed this situation with Clark County Commissioner Marc Boldt and he agreed to put a non-binding, county-wide advisory vote on the ballot this November as part of the general election.
This is great for two huge reasons: first and foremost is that the people... the people who will actually pay the bills, will FINALLY get a say.
But second: every candidate and incumbent running this November (You listening, Steve "Unmarked bills, Mr. Barnett" Stuart?) will have to take and defend a position that so far, they haven't had to take or defend.
I look forward to the reaction from the various people who, while not having to pay the tolls this project will bring, want to ram this down our throats and the throats of the 65,000 commuters who WILL have to pay this price. I'm sure it will be classic. .
. "I don't belong to any organized political party... I'm a Republican."
That could have easily summed up today's effort by the Clark County GOP.
They live in terror of the Ron Paul types who, apparently, "took over" the 49th District in '08. As a result, they slipped in a change to the rules that served to silence the delegates at the convention from running any resolutions from the floor.
"Time" was the excuse given. But at the end of the day, "time" is no excuse for silencing the bedrock of the local GOP.
The convention "HAD" to close at 5:00 PM sharp, we were told. So, therefore, in the interest of "time," we had to silence the delegates. That wasn't the main excuse, of course, but it was the excuse given.
I pointed out that one way to fix that would be to find a facility that DIDN'T have to close at 5:00 pm, because doing the same thing over and over while expecting a different outcome is, well, you know.
So, I made an effort to amend the rules. I made a motion to strip out the language limiting resolutions to those submitted in writing prior to March 13... and I was hammered.
Later, I was told by the chief tool of the hammering that it was because I had, they thought, thrown my lot in with the Paulinista's. That was wrong on so many levels, but because of their fear, I was turned into collateral damage by people who could not and would not tolerate any agenda that did not closely dovetail with their own.
Then, the candidate speeches started.
Herrera got up and did a Barbie cheerleader speech typical of someone with cardboard depth and a vacuous grasp of the issues. Here's clue, Jaime: we don't care that you used to be able to play basketball. The president can do that, and look at what a total moron he is.
Doug Simpson, speaking for Clint Didier, got up and went off script, losing Didier the few votes he had in the room. Benton did his usual fine job, polished by years of experience and a deep passion for the job; David Castillo got up and actually made sense; the newest candidate (who's name escaped me) got up and talked about the things important to him, but didn't do to well due to his lack of experience. A large group of candidates spoke to a surprisingly small number of delegates, considering.
When I've had the chance to review the speeches, I'll critique them here, and folks can draw their own conclusion.
I then went in search of Herrera supporters who, could explain to me what they could possibly see in Ridgefield Barbie to support her.
I couldn't find one who could articulate it.
We split off into districts to elect delegates to the state convention.
I have actually run a state convention (Spokane in 2000) and attended a National Convention (Philadelphia in 2000) and I, personally, would rather dive into a pool of burning hydrochloric acid then do either again.
But others wanted to. We were, as I recall, supposed to elect 30 delegates and 30 alternates. I only knew 8 people on the list I could support, and I added 2 who said they were veterans. So, I voted for 10. I didn't know or care who was elected for either the rest or the the alternates.
For the 18th District, it took about 3 hours to get the delegates and the alternates voted in. So, we started on the platform and resolutions two hours late.
My resolution from the caucuses, to require a county wide vote on the horrific waste of money known as the I-5 Bridge/Loot rail project, was adopted.
I discussed the issue with Marc Boldt. Boldt pledged to me that he would support putting the question onto the November ballot this year.
I will hold him to his word, because I already know that Tom Mielke will support putting the question to the people in an advisory vote scenario, which is what Marc agreed to as well.
So, we should hopefully see that coming up soon.
Anyway, it ended. The Benton Bars (Chocolate and maple bars, a Benton tradition) vacuumed up, the various cookies and gallons of coffee, the every-two-year fix for folks to hear themselves speak; the announcement by Jim Dunn that he was going to run again... the massive and unrelenting egos and the typical lack of competence.
What I've come to expect every county convention. .
.
I consider the source as I post this. I also consider how terrified the left is of losing the USS Patty Murray, as reliable a solcialist vote/earmarker as ever lived for the past 18 years, spending our money much faster than it's even possible to print.
But if this leftist and now-going-viral article is correct, then Dino would have a very difficult time getting elected to anything.
State Republicans talk tough about taking out U.S. Sen. Patty Murray in what’s shaping up to be a tough year for incumbents, but time’s running out to field a credible challenger, and those WSRP faithful -+holding their breathin anticipation of two-time gubernatorial loser Dino Rossi jumping into the breach are likely to have their faces turn blue long before Washington turns red.
While Rossi would no doubt like to be elected Senator, insiders say he’s not so keen on the idea of running. Nor is serving in the other Washington all that appealing.
The governorship is only as hard a job as you want to make it to be, and Olympia is but a short drive from Rossi’s Sammamish home. But the U.S. Senate is a full-time gig that requires tons of travel and the uprooting of one’s family, and that’s not exactly what Rossi signed up for when the WSRP’s second-choice (Dave Reichert was the inside favorite until he opened his mouth) accepted his party’s gubernatorial nomination back in 2004.
But perhaps the biggest reason why you won’t see Dino Rossi’s name on the “Prefers GOP Party” ballot anytime soon, is that the post-economic-collapse political climate and the financial scandals that precipitated it have virtually assured that Rossi’s own business dealings would be exposed to the kind of public scrutiny he managed to mostly avoid in 2004 and 2008. And it’s not so clear that Rossi’s reputation would hold up so well under such circumstances.
Of course there’s Rossi’s close business relationship with his longtime mentor Mel Heide, who pleaded guilty to bilking millions out of clientstwo years before Rossi finally severed their ties, not coincidentally in the middle of Rossi’s first political campaign. Heide’s shady real estate dealings have been reported at length, but Rossi’s own business practices while in Heide’s employ have never been fully
investigated.
Again, we need to consider both the source and their institutional, fringe-leftist bias. But would this kind of thing stand up to the microscopic scrutiny that would result from a Rossi candidacy?
Murray would make this the focus of any Rossi campaign, since she could not win on the issues... her waste of billions in pay for play... her support of that empty suited moron running the country... her lemming-like efforts on the Health Care/Student Loan rip off.
But she COULD win on a corruption platform aimed right between Rossi's business dealings.
. Gee, Ridgefield Barbie REALLY got stung by lying about having others vote in her place. SO stung, in fact, that she throws a genuine hissy-fit in today's letters to the editor in The Olympian, who rightly popped her upside her vacuous little head for ditching her job and having others vote for her while she was out making fund-raising calls. In fact, here's her whining little hair pulling screech of a letter, hot off the web site:
I am disappointed that this paper chose to restate untrue allegations to single out my voting record in the editorial “Voting for others in the House is unacceptable. The source this paper quoted is not exactly a nonpartisan source — until recently Rep. Deb Wallace was my opponent in the 3rd Congressional District election.
I don’t disagree with the editorial’s call for procedural reform. I would like House leadership to better organize vote timing so that the procedure of voting for others can be changed, and legislators won’t have to miss any votes at all.
What I take issue with is the restated claim by Rep. Wallace that I have been away from the House floor “for hours at a time” during votes this year. That is false. I have one of the best voting attendance records in Olympia. In three years, I’ve missed only 10 out of 1,863 possible floor votes, and all were before this year.
When I am not on the floor, it is typically because I am honoring a constituent’s request for a meeting. As an assistant floor manager, I must also move around the floor to work with legislators about to speak, or attend leadership meetings in the wings. Involvement in the legislative process does not equal hours away from the floor during votes.
I stand behind my voting record, available at washingtonvotes.org, and I stand behind my hard work and service to the people of my legislative district.
But in THIS case, what washingtonvotes.org has isn't YOUR voting record. What it's got is the voting record of YOUR voting BUTTON. And what it DOESN'T tell us is who was PUSHING THAT BUTTON.
Man, it wasn't that long ago. You remember the stupidity of the Kool Aid drinkers supporting her; the screeching, whining, moaning and wailing at the very THOUGHT that Ridgefield Barbie would allow someone to vote for her... in her absence... so she would actually appear to be there and voting... was simply, in their minds, untrue.
“Deb has no credibility, she has no proof,” Herrera said.
She said that as deputy floor leader for the House Republican caucus, she was busy last week organizing testimony in opposition to suspending Initiative 960, a voter-approved measure that requires a two-thirds vote of each chamber to raise taxes.
“I have missed 10 votes in my entire time as a legislator here,” she said. “I haven’t missed any votes (by being) off the floor this session. I’ve been on the House floor fighting for I-960. As a floor leader, part of my responsibility is to manage the floor debate.”
That said, Barbs was not, as it would seem, denying that others had voted for her in her absence... au contraire, mon ami.
No, what Barbs was doing was quibbling about just how long she was off the floor, and what she was doing while she was gone.
Now, using the Liz Mair dodge, unnamed sources have verified to me that democrat State Representative Deb Wallace's allegations that Herrera both allowed others to vote in her place AND was making campaign fund raising calls while she was absent from the floor is true.
Of course, the way to solve this problem is to FOIA Herrera's phone records from her office... and ask her to produce her cell phone records... while looking to see the number of times she, say, called McMorris during session to nail down the arrangements for her DC special interest fundraiser... or check to see if those calls were to, say, one of the 8 people who provided the large bulk of her money for the December 31 FEC reporting cutoff... you know, to make arrangements for yet another fund raiser she bailed on us for, this one in Seattle that had lobbyist Slade's fingerprints all over it.
If only Ridgefield Barbie was an adult.
Remembering that old saw about Winston Churchill and the Madam at the party:
Churchill: Madam, would you sleep with me for five million pounds? Socialite: My goodness, Mr. Churchill! Well, I suppose – we would have to discuss terms, naturally.Churchill: Would you sleep with me for five pounds? Socialite: Mr. Churchill, what kind of woman do you think I am?! Churchill: Madam, we’ve already established that. Now we are haggling about the price.
So, when it comes to the matter of others voting in Herrera's place, we've established who and what she is.
Now we're just haggling over how much time she was spending off the floor.
