Today's Democratian mystery article: who cares what Brian Baird has to say?

Baird, who's tenure was marked at the end by his own cowardice and hypocrisy (Not mentioned by the Columbian... you ever notice how those clowns always dredge up crap when they're writing about their legion of enemies?) over his fake death threats and his own decision to avoid town hall meetings through his use of the Nazi slur "Brown Shirts" towards those wise enough to oppose his leftists bent...

...no longer even lives here, let alone serves in political office.

So, why did the rag bring him down here to spew his partisan crap?

While we would expect the democrat daily to fail to mention Baird's own little town hall problems, because, after all, Baird IS a democrat, and like Jim Jacks, revisionist history and omission of uncomfortable facts is all-too-typical for the rag.



Yes, I am appalled at our own current Congresswoman's cowardice in refusing to hold open town hall meetings.... and have an ample amount of scorn built up for her over that issue, believing that her lack of guts is based on a dull-normal mentality and a lack of intelligence that keeps her handlers from allowing her to face the "unclean masses," namely us... unless, of course, you've got a checkbook in hand.... and I have said so, many, many times.

But for Baird, who used a fake death threat to do the exact same thing to say this:

Former 3rd District Rep. Brian Baird said on Friday that he's unsatisfied with the Democratic candidate running for his old seat and that he doesn't approve of his Republican successor's abandonment of traditional town hall meetings.

While visiting The Columbian on Friday afternoon, Baird, a Democrat, said U.S. Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler, R-Camas, shouldn't have been scared off by the raucous town hall she had last spring.

When he not only doesn't live here; if memory serves, he lives in an area north of Seattle (Edmonds); which for most intents and purposes might as well mean on the other side of the planet, makes all this a mystery.

Not his perspectives.  After all, anyone living here has greater relevance then this has-been.

His perspectives have no more relevance than those of my Cavaliers, who at least live here and have to pay taxes here (in the form of bones, of course) and, in fact, are perspectives based not on living these situations he's babbling about but are, instead, perspectives based on what he's been told or read, most likely in the very fish wrapper he's whining to.

Look, we all know the main reason he bailed was because he would have been slaughtered at the polls.

But then, towards the end, his supply of courage was right up there with his supply of common sense.

Missing.

While I'm reasonably sure it gratifies his ego and those of the democratian who tried to rehab his image before the writing on the wall became too much to ignore and he bailed, why does it mean any more than any other democrat's?

Baird's babble on Zarelli's exit:

Baird said the way Zarelli left office last month was damaging to the democratic process.

Shortly after 5 p.m. on May 18, the final day of candidate filing week, Zarelli said he would not seek re-election to his 18th District job. He then resigned on Thursday, setting in motion an appointment process to pick his replacement.

Zarelli said he wants the Republican already running to replace him, state Rep. Ann Rivers, to have the appointment.

Baird said that would give Rivers the incumbent advantage in the November election. He said Zarelli pulled "the old switcheroo" and essentially "selected a successor. We don't do that in America."

Baird said he would like to see the candidate filing system reformed in a way that would extend the filing period if an incumbent makes a last-minute announcement about not seeking re-election. Baird said he announced his plan to retire a year ahead of time, giving potential candidates plenty of time to prepare a run for his seat.

Reeks with irony.

That's as idiotic as the democrats claiming they don't sanction anyone who disagrees with them... and it's as much a lie.

First of all, it doesn't do nearly as much damage "to the democratic process" as even one bill he voted for, The Obama Socialized Medicine "We have to pass the bill to see what's in it" Bill scam, about to be declared unconstitutional, a particularly hypocritical move in the face of his vote FOR that bill after his whining over a 72 hour rule that he, himself, never lived up to.

Second, the democrats are, in fact, running a candidate in the Senate race in the 18th.  It's not Zarelli's fault the guy has no chance.

Third, nothing kept Baird from moving HIS cowardly butt back down here and running against Herrera, except for the foregone outcome.

So, for Baird to complain about what happened in the Zarelli thing as "damaging to the democratic process?"

Sheer, unadulterated hypocrisy.

And this garbage:

"There is an attitude, more prevalent on the right, that they are right about everything and compromise is a dirty word," Baird said

What makes this garbage, and it's a question the D toadies failed to ask, is this:

You people controlled the entirety of government for 2 years... and Congress for four.

How come you didn't get anything done during that time period?

You know, the kind of question an unbiased reporter would ask?

I must have missed it.

There's more, of course.  And that's the kind of thing that makes both Baird and his PR arm, aka The Columbian, so slimy.