Wednesday, July 24, 2013

Vance at the Reflector blows it.

I was struck by the bizarre message that Ken Vance, a democratian alum if memory serves, was sending in his editorial "The lone voice of dissent."

In his editorial, this self-proclaimed Republican oddly hits all the local democrat/leftist themes in his effort at supporting both Adrian Cortes and leftist democrat candidate Mike Dalesandro, whose pampers positively overflowed at the resolution just passed in the city council over the issue of how the deputy mayor becomes the mayor.

In his bizarre effort, he manages to smack both the county commission conservative majority AND the county GOP as examples of what's wrong with the political scene around here.

Sounding not unlike his former boss, Michael "Porn King" Heywood, failed city council candidate, fired-for-watching-porn-at-work democratian editorial page editor, objectifier of women AND the current Clark County democrat chair, Vance takes the opportunity to recite leftist talking points like they were paying him.

Calling himself a Republican in this instance makes as much sense as Marc Boldt, who looked, acted, voted like and was massively SUPPORTED by the democrats, to include endorsements from Steve Stuart and other democrats including several past commissioners; insisting that he was a Republican: even though he was in opposition to almost every local GOP theme and position in existence.

Nailing your own political coffin shut isn't easy, but Vance pulls it off brilliantly:
"It seems far too often in local politics that councils or boards are consistently divided in the same way with small groups or pairs of members always voting the same way, regardless of the issue. The current Clark County Board of Commissioners feels that way, at least since the last election, as Steve Stuart has often found himself out-voted 2-1 by Tom Mielke and David Madore. In this past year, I believe I’ve earned more respect for Stuart  than in all his previous time as a commissioner."
Where was his concern when it was democrats Stuart and Boldt always voting against Mielke?

Unfortunately, Stuart, from his bogus allegation of collusion used to fire up the lynch mob he helped to organize after the Benton hiring to his rabid support of the CRC Scam mixed with his efforts to kill either an advisory vote on that rip off and, again joining with his fellow democrat Boldt in killing the county charter effort when HE didn't like it, has done nothing to earn respect.

On the contrary, from his lies to get re-elected, specifically, on his promise to have a vote on the latest CTran scam in Nov. 2011 to his petulant efforts to be a jerk since his buddy, Boldt, was crushed by Madore, Stuart has done nothing to "earn" our "respect."

Reading the writing on the wall, Stuart is a desperate man staring at Marc Boldt's fate when it's his turn to get kicked out next year. County wide, Stuart's rabid and unfathomable support of both the Ballpark Scam and the CRC Scam make him radioactive. That's the ONLY reason he's trying to get the commission organization changed, a democrat project that never would have seen the light of day if they had kept the majority with Boldt's re-election.

Many of us were born on a Saturday... but not LAST Saturday. And that over the past several years, whenever a conservative has been on the commission by himself, his lack of concern over THAT outcome is noted.

My admiration doesn’t have anything to do with idealogy[sic] or party affiliation. I don’t mind saying that I’ve always leaned a little to the right and have always considered myself a Republican. However, I strongly believe that political affiliation has no place in local politics. That’s why I found the entire fiasco among Clark County Republicans over former Commissioner Marc Boldt to be ridiculous.
Vance's "strong belief" is irrelevant: party affiliation IS a "part of local politics."  His ignorance over the justified expulsion of a democrat from GOP ranks, which is what happened to Boldt and what SHOULD happen to Kimsey is completely irrelevant.

For me, it cheapens the value of his observations on the local political scene.

If someone plans on claiming a party affiliation, they would be best served by observing and following the tenets of that affiliation.

The democrats have no trouble whatsoever  burning democrat Sens. Tom and Sheldon in effigy because of their positions and stances: Sheldon has been a target of that sort of thing for years.

For Vance to claim that ALL political races ("local," whatever that means) should be, in effect, non-partisan, is certainly his opinion.  But there's no ground swell or political mainstream of support for that position.

Meanwhile, I would suggest that if Vance is going to write about someone tilting at a windmill, he should stick to that instead of crapping in his own nest.

Just sayin.

Meanwhile, the people will have the final say in this issue as they do in all issues: if they don't like the change... then they can vote those who supported it out.

Oddly, Vance didn't seem to mention that.


Anonymous said...

Interesting Post. Call me old fashion or just an old son-of-a-bitch leatherhead but I did not get the message you conveyed when I read the Editorial by Kenny Vance in the current Reflector concerning the backroom deals that Mayor Walters and Deputy Mayor Bowman constructed (and neither did many of my neighbors). The Editorial (along with the other corresponding article about the local governance change in my city) did leave me and others I know with the following impression. Mayor Walters continues to be worthless and corrupt (just like her personal life). Deputy Mayor Bowman orchestrated a political power play to "gerrymander" his Mayor-ship. He is no different than Vancouver Mayor Tim Levitt. And my support (along with my neighbors) for for councilmember Cortes has only gotten stronger. Kudos for him speaking out and standing strong. Horah!

David Johnsen, BGSD teacher and retired Crp USMC

Just a guy said...

Here's the message, perhaps refined.

1. Don't use the alleged acts of others to beat up on your targets and then claim you support the organization that supports those you're attacking.

2. Don't sound like a democrat while claiming to be a Republican. Every attack Vance used was right off the democrat talking points.

My brother-in-law tried that. His name is Boldt.

How'd that work out for him?

3. Don't ladle lip stick on to the pig that is Steve Stuart and expect him to look like anything but a pig, albeit with a nice shade, perhaps, of lips.

4. As I pointed out, ultimately the voters of Battle Ground will decide: if those who voted for this change are thrown out of office, how long will it take for this policy to be thrown out with them?