Monday, March 01, 2010

The Jaime Herrera FAQ

I've been hearing, quite indirectly, that it is simply beyond understanding why I so stridently oppose Ridgefield Barbie.

So, for those of you wondering, I thought I'd take a minute or two to explain it. How it happened... and how events influenced me to do all I can to acquaint anyone interested with our local version of the empty suit that is Obama, albeit at a somewhat more local level.

1. So, what's the problem?

It's simple, really. Jaime Herrera is neither qualified by experience, education or temperament to serve anything but coffee in the House of Representatives.

2. OK.... how do you figure?

What has she done to EARN election to Congress?

Absolutely nothing. Never owned a home, until, figuratively speaking, about ten minutes ago. Never ran a business. Never employed anyone. Never worked in the private sector. She's had about 60 seconds (well, 3 legislative sessions) of experience. In fact, for 11 of the last 13 years, she hasn't even lived here.

I was stunned that this girl, who had accomplished absolutely nothing worthy of appointment, was the beneficiary of a corrupt process at the behest of Cathy McMorris Rogers to secure that appointment through the efforts of a local county commissioner.

Yes, I know she was re-elected. And by a large percentage.

But these same people re-elected others just because they claimed to be a "R's" and look what that's got us.

She lies; she exaggerates; she claims to be a "friend to organized labor" (how REPUBLICAN of her) she's even lied about her job title.

3. Is that all? I mean, doesn't that describe a lot of members of Congress?

Actually, no. Most Members of Congress actually earn it.

For example, let's take a look at Cathy McMorris Rogers record.

Cathy was the first in her family to attend and graduate from college. She worked her way through Pensacola Christian College in Florida and later earned her Executive MBA from the University of Washington.

She served five terms as a citizen legislator in Olympia eventually being elected to minority leader. When the legislature was not in session Cathy worked in her parents’ small business, Peachcrest Fruit Basket, near Kettle Falls, Washington.


Let's compare that to Ridgefield Barbie's:

Jaime attended the University of Washington, earning her Bachelor of Arts degree in Communications. As a college student, she had the opportunity to intern in both the Washington State Senate and in Washington, D.C. at the White House Office of Political Affairs. From 2005-07, Jaime worked in Washington, D.C. as Senior Legislative Aide for Congresswoman Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Spokane). Jaime served as the Congresswoman’s lead advisor on health care policy, education, veterans’ and women’s issues.

As Senior Legislative Aide, Jaime helped draft proposals for Congresswoman McMorris Rodgers, including a health information technology bill and an education-based competitiveness bill. Both measures passed the U.S. House of Representatives overwhelmingly.

Now then. On one hand, we have Cathy McMorris Rogers. Five times elected; legislative staff experience, Washington State House Minority Leader and Co-Chair of a committee or two. Holds an Executive MBA from the UW. Worked in her family's business for decades. No matter how misguided her efforts to interfere in an area on the other side of the state from her own district, it is an undeniable record of accomplishment and achievement.

On the other hand, we have Ridgefield Barbie. A career intern and minor staffer for McMorris, there's no hint of either accomplishment OR achievement. No graduate degree. No private sector experience. No success as a legislator... and in fact, the House minority leader today, Rep. Richard DeBolt, refuses to endorse her.

So, what does that all mean?

To me, when combined with her absence from the area for more than 10 years, it means she's no more qualified to represent this area in Congress than she is to engage in brain surgery.

4. So, how is it that she seems to have pulled all this off? She must have SOMETHING on the ball.

My pet Cavalier Spaniel could have picked up the appointment and re-election with all the grease Herrera had.

NONE of this happened because of anything she did or made happen. In short, her ONLY qualification was in the eyes of McMorris, and that was her slavish loyalty to, well, McMorris.

Had Herrera not poured coffee for McMorris as a low-level staffer; had she not sworn complete allegiance to McMorris, then we never would have heard of her.

5. So, why is McMorris doing all this?

Politics and nature both abhor a vacuum.

As it is right now, there is no major player of any stature on the National political scene from Washington State.

Doc Hastings seems to have gone as far as he's willing to go. He seems to have reached the pinnacle of his political desires.

Cathy, on the other hand, I believe, has visions of if not achieving the Presidency, certainly achieving the level of following in the now quasi-legendary footsteps of Jennifer Dunn.

Unlikely to engage in the personal peccadilloes that kept Dunn from rising to the very top; McMorris, I again believe, wants to become President of the United States.

Now, I freely admit that these are just my conclusions, and your mileage may vary.

But at the end of the day, McMorris is spending an incredible amount of time, energy and effort screwing around here, on the other side of the state.

There can only be so many reasons for her interference in local politics. It's as if she feels that those of us actually inside the district can't make a decision for ourselves without her efforts, aided and abetted by hacks like Slade, to ram this empty suit down our throats.

6. So, what's with the "empty suit" gag?

With the election of Obama, haven't we suffered enough by electing a pretty face with vapid space between its ears?

The 3rd Congressional District needs someone who won't sell us out the way Herrera sold us out by co-sponsoring and voting for SHB 1329, an SEIU bill to force child care workers into unions; a horrific idea that will cost those who can least afford it the most and result in one of two outcomes, or maybe both: dramatically higher costs passed along to the consumer and/or dramatically higher taxpayer-paid subsidies for low-income day care, paid for by jacking up our taxes even higher.

And the incalculable stupidity of bailing on session a few days before it ends to Coakley special interest money at the trough set up by McMorris and Slade. She didn't have the sense to wait until session was over?

What kind of a moron would hand an issue to her opponents... both R AND d?

Not only is Herrera an empty suit, she's a DANGEROUS empty suit, who has no vision or ability to look at anything farther down the road then one of those meals she spent $500 over a 3 day period to eat.

7. Is that all?

No, not by a long shot.

Herrera and her keepers have drawn around them some of the worst, most low-life, scummy support I've ever witnessed in my 22 years of active politics, and 10 years of party politics and consulting.

Not all of them are, in fact, scum. But those who focus on people instead of issues certainly come under that heading... so if the shoe fits, wear it.

"Dual endorsements" from people lacking integrity to keep their word to ONE candidate.

Efforts made to peel off major figures from other candidates.

Supporters engaging in character assassination and down right lies in support of this manikin.

And you can tell a lot about a candidate by the people supporting them. And in this case, they seem to be the politically ignorant and cowardly.

If you have to lie in support of a candidate, you probably shouldn't support them. And the response to the Castillo robo call, which was accurate and factual in every detail, tends to show that those supporting this cardboard cut out of a candidate have lost any shred of integrity or dignity.

Just like the candidate they support.

8. So, if Herrera is elected... what are you going to do?

Use my First Amendment rights to politically pound her like a drum, thus my reason for setting up .

I will be the opposition to her as long as she's in politics... which, with any luck at all, won't be much beyond this November.

But my blog isn't going anywhere. And those who come here to read it from around the country will know anything and everything I can find so they remain informed about this misbegotten, horrific effort to corrupt our election at the behest of interests that don';t live here, but who have no trouble whatsoever telling us how to vote, what to think, and how to think it.

9. What if you're wrong about any of this?

Any time, any one or any group believes I am wrong, they certainly have the privilege of the blog to contact me, point out any inaccuracy, PROVIDE EVIDENCE of said inaccuracy, and I will publicly acknowledge my error and allow those making the allegation an entire post without edit or comment from me.

Now, in the past, I've been approached and told that I was in error about a post; specifically that I was wrong about the massive waste of taxpayer dollars when Jaime Herrera, reminiscent of the politically late and unlamented Stacy Sellers, burned her way through almost 500 taxpayer dollars for meals on a 3 day boondoggle trip to Spokane from DC and back... a feat I simply couldn't duplicate and believe me, I CAN eat.

I told her to email me the evidence in question and, I would, you guessed it, publicly withdraw my post and apologize for it.

That was several weeks ago... and I'm still waiting for the evidence in question.

In closing, that offer still stands. Those of you supporting Herrera who believe I'm wrong about any of this, feel free to contact me and I'll address that concern.

Meanwhile, thanks for stopping by. We have a long way to go until election, and a lot can happen in that time.

But my blog isn't going away. And mine, of course, isn't the only one.

Cross posted on Jaime Herrera Watch.

1 comment:

Lew Waters said...

One of the most remarkable quotes I've seen from her lately was near the bottom of the National Journal article, Herrera Plays Insider, Outsider Cards.

The quote, "My husband and I rent," she said. "We both drive used cars. We're not your typical Republican conservative."

I'd like to know just what her idea of a "typical Republican conservative" is.

Does she assume we are all wealthy and rich fat cats?

My truck is 12 years old, my wife's car 10. I have spent more time in my life renting than buying a home, with my current home being quite small.

My wife and I consider ourselves to be conservative and Republican.

Can she really be that out of touch with the voters who support her?