The Brent Boger bail out.

I'm still digesting this.  The timing of this announcement is suspect, it easily could have waited until Wednesday.

I've known Brent for a long time, now.  At least 15 years.  I believed in him enough to work for nothing on his campaign for prosecutor, but that didn't work out all that well for a wide variety of reasons I could, but won't, go into.  I, personally, defended him and fought for him against the voice of record, for the very people who are wearing out kneepads in front of him now.

Boy, was I a sucker, or what?

In fact, multiple sources have told me that Brent was practically despondent a few months ago that no effort was made to get HIM the appointment to the vacant 18th District seat.... months after the Party acted against Boldt.

Odd, isn't it?  A few months ago, Boger was desperate to become a state representative under the same banner he's now pissing on, and the Boldt situation had no impact on his considerations... THEN.... so why engage in this kind of crap NOW?  A deal of some sort, perhaps?  Jockeying for a presumed McKenna appointment of some sort?

Like myself, Boger was a target of the left, including this very newspaper.  Now that he's effectively turned his back on anyone to the right of Lenin, of course, he'll be resurrected in their eyes.  Fellow leftist Larry Smith, for example, babbled:

Larry J. Smith · Top Commenter · Council at City of Vancouver

Thanks Brent for being honest and candid.

Reply · 9 · Like · Follow Post · 2 hours ago

If Brent came out in the other direction, does anyone reading this think it would even have been a story?

And more importantly, would democrat Larry Smith have called  his position "honest and candid?"

Of course not.  It's only "honest and candid" when people like Smith agree with it.

Boger's had a tough couple of years, in a lot of ways.  But he's lost touch with what Republicanism is, and his departure is probably right for all concerned.

Here, I'll take a moment to point this out: Boger has not come close to being treated as harshly as Marc Boldt... even thought Boldt has deserved everything he's received and a great deal more for the corruption he's engaged in as commissioner.

Even so, Boldt at least makes the effort to stick with the GOP... even when it's a GOP that's made it clear they don't want him.

What does that say about Boldt?  But more importantly, what does it say about Boger?

Much of the GOP hates me as much as they do anyone who doesn't see eye-to-eye with the establishment... an establishment that produces leftists like McKenna, Dunn and Finkbiener.  Clearly, Boger believes that we must support any and every candidate, regardless of how liberally unresponsive they are... no matter how much they mirror democrat party planks in their philosophy as they effort a campaign designed to out-democrat the democrats (and how, for example, has that been working out for McKenna?)  as long as they have an "R" after their name.

Brent and I have done battle with each other over that issue.  In the article, Brent asks "'What makes you the repository of Republican orthodoxy?"  I ask him the same question.  he obviously believes he is.

The result?  He picks up his football and goes home, failing to stay and fight it out for what he believes in.

Staying and fighting takes courage.  It takes integrity.  It takes guts.  It's hard work.  It's can and frequently is quite painful.  And the end result?

There isn't a day that goes by when I do not despise those who view their judgment as superior to our own... or the corruption that can and does bring.  My faith is in the people... not the arrogance of the establishment that Boger has been a part of for long past a decade.

And now, these things, which are quite cyclic in nature, seem to be turning against him.  So, what does he do?

Brent Boger is a symptom of the Mainstreamer disease... and contrary to the democrat thrill that Brent achieved tonight along with holding Marc Boldt absolutely unaccountable for turning his back on his constituency... as if he actually "had obligations outside the Republican party," and those "obligations" and Republicanism are somehow mutually exclusive; like Boldt's efforts to silence us on the CRC and ram this scam down our throats was one of those "obligations" instead of a democrat tenet... where his Republican base is not only to be ignored, but to be pitied.

Brent's actions tonight just go to provide justifications for the PCO insurgency... as Boger is, apparently, everything they say he is.  Is that what he's set out to do?

Mainstreamers are, essentially, democrats.  The dichotomy here, however, is that Brent Boger has abandoned the GOP that he had so long failed.  He was enamored of the GOP enough to run under it's banner just two short years ago... when it suited him... and to be furious that he hadn't achieved the appointment to the Legislature (One wonders: would he have been "principled" enough to make this stand if he HAD been appointed?  I doubt it.) but now?  Well, he doesn't need us, and he's got that non-partisan gig going on, so what better time to dump those of us who busted our asses to get him elected in the past?

So, Brent, thanks.  Thanks for proving me right about you and your sort.

Enjoy your life of avoiding taking principled stands as you sink into the existence of political anonymity you so richly deserve.