Yawn: the Columbian continues to both lie and endorse democrats Boldt and Tanner.

(FULL DISCLOSURE: I have not and likely will not be endorsing in this race. I freely admit that I am totally opposed to Marc Boldt's re-election since he's completely sold out to the left, forgotten/ignored GOP principles, supports the CRC scam in it's entirety and wants to hang tolls around our neck for the next several decades that will destroy a great deal of small business in Clark County as a result.

NO candidate or campaign or anyone involved or in any way concerned with any candidate or campaign was aware of or approved or had input into this post.

Further, Marc Boldt is my brother in law, and I worked for him as his legislative assistant for 6 years while he was in the state house.)

It's interesting to note that the rag has once again avoided even mentioning the CRC in yet another set of democrat endorsements, Marc Boldt and Joe Tanner.  I've got to wonder: why is that?  Could it be that mentioning Boldt's slavish devotion to their rip off would hurt his chances of re-election?

The CRC scam is the biggest rip off known to this corner of the country.  The rag has done nothing to even try and get the people of Clark County a voice in this theft, and as always, when they endorse, they meet the criteria they've set forth in all of their competitive endorsements:

1. Is the race competitive?

2. Do they support the bridge rip-off?

3. Are they democrat?

Clearly, the democratian's hatred for either Mielke or Madore has led them to a decision-making process wherein they concentrate on pounding those two because they're the wrong party and, of course, unlike the two democrats, they remain steadfastly in opposition to the democratian/CRUDEC/Chamber of Hrros?Dowtown Mafia agenda of the CRC scam, a complete, Al Capone-like theft of the people's money while simultaneously ignoring... and avoiding... the will of the people on that project.

In keeping with the despicable, leftist nature of the rag, those items that are a credit to those they would endorse are ignored in those they would oppose, engaging in their legendary double standard and situational lack of ethics:

Two skills essential for a successful county commissioner are a willingness to listen to innovative solutions (even when they come from members of the other political party) and a meticulous understanding of how counties and the Legislature can succeed as partners. Marc Boldt and Joe Tanner have mastered both skills. Each served in the Legislature years ago and each is adept at striking productive agreements, even across party lines. Boldt and Tanner have drawn The Columbian's endorsement for the two county commissioner races in the Nov. 6 election. (Ballots will be mailed on Oct. 15.)

I looked very carefully... very carefully... and I failed to see mention of this very paper's demand that Marc Boldt resign from that very legislature... during a time where they repeatedly endorsed his opponents.

Odd, that.

Boldt served in Olympia as a conservative... and typically, the rag would trash him and his efforts during that service.  But in the spirit of their situational revisionism, Boldt's service is now characterized as being "adept at striking productive agreements."

In fact, in that whack job Tom Keonninger's demand that Boldt resign, he led off with this:.

"THREE NUTS AND A BOLDT"? THE REAL ISSUE IS COMPETENCE

The Columbian (Vancouver, WA)

June 22, 1997 | TOM KOENNINGER | Copyright

COPYRIGHT 2007 The Columbian.

Marc Boldt is an embarrassment to Clark County. The Republican state representative from the 17th District has abused his office, using it as a club for personal causes.

It's strange. In person, Boldt projects a boyish innocence with his mild-mannered, low-key, friendly approach. He glows in the aura of a blueberry farmer turned legislator, just your average Joe.

Boldt's actions, however, are anything but blueberries and cream. They are at times rude, crude, mean and nasty. They display an abuse of authority and a readiness to use a baseball bat where a feather would do. The problem is a rube reputation that spins off inside and outside Clark County. In Olympia …

And now, this same waste of wood pulp endorses him.

What's the difference?

Back then, he staunchly opposed the leftist agenda of this despicable rag.

Now, he fully embraces it.

Fascinating what sins, real or imagined, that these clowns will forgive when someone totes their water.

It's just a shame the democratian can't cut the crap.  I could, possibly, respect Brancaccio and the rest of the leftist scum down there if they could just... tell... the truth.

You know, come out with an endorsement like this:

"We're a democrat-leaning newspaper.  Our default position is to endorse democrats and to endorse fake democrats as long as they support the CRC.

As a result, that's why we hate Tom Melke and David Madore.  Both are unabashed conservatives, staunchly opposed to our fringe-left agenda and the unnecessary waste of billions and economic enslavement of future generations with ever-increasing tolls.

So, to get our guy elected, we'll lie.  We'll distort.  We'll exaggerate.  We don't care, as long as our guy benefits.

So, we use terms like "striking productive agreements" which is code-speak for "do what we... and the democrats... want."

That's why we're endorsing two democrats for commissioner: we don't want any Republican serving on the commission.  We don't want anyone to interfere with our agenda.  We don't want the majority of the population of this county represented on the commission or in the legislature.

As a result, Boldt and Tanner get the nod."

It's not that democratian endorsements mean all that much: after all, if they had that much of an impact, Marc Boldt would have never been elected to anything.  

The rag calls Marc a "Republican;" yet oddly, democrats are running his campaign, funding his campaign, and will, no doubt, support his campaign, thus causing Boldt's imminent failure of the Duck test.  

That Boldt refuses to call himself a democrat doesn't make it any less so.  

That the Downtown Mafia and its groups support democrat Boldt is much more important as an excuse to oppose Madore then it is a reflection of popular sentiment.  The rag simply doesn't understand that the special interests who own Boldt are not a reason to vote for him.  On the contrary, they're a reason to vote against him.  

Boldt may win this.  But if he does, he'll just be another democrat vote on the council, engaging in "striking productive agreements" that ALL just happen to go the democrat's way.  

What a coincidence, that.