Failed Candidate Jon Russell puts his hypocrisy aside: now says he'll support Briggs on Washougal Planning Commission.

.
Was it just a week ago that I nailed Russell by the shwantz for his rank hypocrisy in publicly attacking Mike Briggs?

Russell set new boundaries of hypocrisy by claiming that Briggs had "...made 'disparaging remarks' toward the mayor, City Council and developers in local blogs and media."

Russell's horrific state representative campaign, which followed his equally horrific congressional campaign, clearly showing that he would take ANY political job to get out of Washougal, was replete with lies, exaggerations, insults and everything sleazy about politics.

How HE could accuse anyone ELSE of something he, himself was so over-the-top guilty of is simply beyond belief.

And this is one of Russell's MANY problems: he refuses to hold himself to the same standard he applies to everyone else. And it's this kind of megalomaniacal narcissism that makes him unsuitable for any elected position, anywhere.

So, imagine my surprise when I read the following:

Washougal councilman changes opposition to potential planning commission appointee

Council decision is expected during Monday meeting

By Dawn Feldhaus

Tuesday, November 30, 2010

Washougal City Councilman Jon Russell has announced a change of heart regarding the potential appointment of Mike Briggs to the Planning Commission.

Russell mentioned by email late Monday night he plans to drop his opposition and vote to confirm Briggs at the council meeting next week.

Leave it to Russell to publicly pummel a political opponent, just to respond to the obvious pressure heaped on him by many, including myself... so he can have yet another opportunity to scam some earned media holding himself out as some sort of heroic figure.

That said, of course, the presence of Mike's wife at the workshop, a lawyer, may have been sobering enough to slap some sense into Russell's head... and cause him to reconsider his opposition.

Russell went on, leading with that nonsensical "person of faith" dodge, that he whips out whenever the mood strikes or whenever he wants to fool people who don't know any better.

“As a person of faith, it is important for me to practice what I preach and bless those who curse me,” Russell said. “I believe Mike has written untrue personal attacks in the paper about me and other council members. I also disagree with most of his politically progressive views on development."

What makes this sheer, unadulterated garbage is that, presumably, Russell was this same faux "person of faith" when he trashed Briggs in the first place.

One has to wonder.

If Russell is such a "person of faith," then why did he feel the need to trash Briggs last week? Why was it OK then... but not so OK now?

His fake "person of faith" shtick is just one of the reasons why he's so objectionable to me as a politico.

And of greater interest is the fact that Russell ladled out this "person of faith" crap by email. Why not call her... if he had to say anything at all? Why did he have to go to the press with this? Is it so he could have another bogus "person of faith" moment for public consumption?

Could it be that Russell was afraid to answer questions? How better to control the outcome then to control the medium?

There's much more in the article, but you get the gist of it: this brouhaha was Russell being Russell.

And that's not a great place to be.

Cross posted at Jon Russell Watch.
.