If you felt the earth shifting on it's access, that was me partially agreeing with the Lazy C.

In politics, one takes positions when positions are a reflection of your views.

One opposes positions when those positions run counter to your views.

I did not vote for David Madore in the last election.  The choice was between Madore and my brother-in-law, Marc Boldt, who was also my former boss in the Legislature for 6 years.

That I could not vote for Marc last time... or this time... was a reflection of what I considered to be the abysmal job he was doing of acting, for the most part, like Steve "I only speak for Steve" Stuart's faithful lackey.  I see nothing to indicate that he's learned a damned thing from his tenure.

I was not the only one to feel that way; Boldt was kicked out of the local GOP for completely forgetting that he worked for the people instead of the downtown mafia and his fellow democrats.

So, I voted for neither.

For the most part, Madore has stood strong and made the right decisions. But this time... this most critical time in the run up to the primary, Madore has screwed up big time and the paper fairly points that out.

You cannot... you CAN NOT... threaten action against anyone or any agency without following through.

It's why I despise the GOP leadership of the US House.

You CAN NOT threaten to shut down government and then fail to follow through only to cave at crunch time.

On the matter of the pass-thruough funding to CREDC, I believed Madore was right.

I defended him and his ideas on that to anyone who would listen.

CREDC has always been a rogue agency; they DO support the CRC/Light Rail scam and they certainly support the rip off of the economic transportation balck hole on the project list of the CRC related and entirely unnecessary rebuilt of a perfectly good intersection on the I-5 freeway that will inhale the vast majority of available transportation dollars for an unneeded and unwanted project.

And the lies they distributed in support of the ballpark scam?

Please.

Their support of that project and the CRC generally disqualifies them from getting any taxpayer dollars.

Madore came out swinging.  He stood up to them and stood up for a principle that could have well served as a precedent in the future, an example of how extra-governmental agencies dependent on our money had better behave.

The problem with that is simple: if you're going to draw a line in the sand, then you'd BETTER be willing to defend it instead of wilting like a flower left out too long without water.

The rag, of course, will usually always support higher taxes, bigger agencies, more bloat... exactly like they supported the ballpark rip off, loot rail and why they continue to support replacing a paid for, functional bridge.  They either will benefit directly or indirectly, but it usually ALWAYS involves spending other people's money.

I try to keep in mind that the rag's hatred of Madore has so colored their perspective that if Madore came out in favor of sunrise, they'd argue against it.

But this time.... this time... he screwed up.

Like John Boehner, he threatened an action publicly that he was unwilling to carry out.  And how'd that work out for us?

Why?  Why bother?

People who supported that position (and believe me, we're out here) immediately picked up the gauntlet and fought the battle Madore started.  No, he didn't ask me to do that, I was foolish enough to do it on my own.

But NOW the question has morphed into this:  when is David Madore serious about his positions?

How do we know if he is or isn't?  I just stupidly presumed he was serious.  Now?

Not so much.

And I can't have that.  I can't listen to the man state a position or a vision and then ask myself, "Gee.... does he really mean it, this time?"

I agreed with David Madore's position on CREDC and the Chamber.  I don't believe they should get a damned dime from the taxpayers.  Mike Bomar, whoever, didn't do anything but whine, and this is the result.  Madore got nothing he was looking for, except to get crushed by this issue.

But I will not and cannot support someone who either intentionally or accidentally but ultimately, incompetently plays this kind of game.

Had he opposed the pass through like he was indicating he would, I wouldn't have written this because then, even if he'd come out on the losing end, he would be standing up for principle.

But he didn't.  And those of us defending his positions found ourselves leading with our chins as a result.

I will not vote for David Madore in the upcoming election.

To me, the choice is clearly between Tom Mielke and Jeanne Stewart... and I am leaning Mielke... FWIW.

I wish that they had voted against the pass through as well.  But neither one of them declared a position on the matter... and then backed off of it.

I'm sorry this happened.  But the political pressure brought to bear by those who had no business speaking to the matter publicly, namely, the legislators involved, should have had no bearing on the ultimate outcome.

Political pressure should never trump people pressure.  And that it appears to have worked shows a weakness I didn't know existed for certainly until the time I was told about his vote.

And we need strong leaders, not the malleable variety who can be pushed into voting for something they disagree with.

The left does that every day.  And I'm sick of it.