Sunday, October 04, 2015

The truth comes out: Why Battle Ground Deputy Major Phil Johnson defends Sen. Ann "Gas Tax" Rivers so strongly.

I wondered about that at the time.  Why does he have a dog in the fight?

Why would he care so strongly about a Senator getting elected who lied to make that happen?

Perhaps.... it's because he appears to be guilty of the exact... same... thing?

As readers know by now, Sen. Gas Tax" ran on a pledge of opposing gas tax and tab fee increases. This screencapture  from her campaign web site tells the tail:

On Lew Water's far superior effort to that of my own meager attempt to comment on politics, Lew put up the video Gas Tax had made to try and (quite unsuccessfully, I might add) stem the flow of political blood from her entirely unnecessary and self-inflicted wound of lying to get elected.

By now, those following closely know that most of what Rivers had to say to excuse her betrayal won't pass the straight-face test.  She's in serious, serious trouble and she knows it, so you can expect more of this sort of thing.  Bringing in bread crumbs in exchange for yoking a county for $700 million in taxes and fees you'd promised to oppose can do that to a politician.

In fact, I urge readers to review that video production and read the comments below Waters' effort, where Deputy Mayor Johnson made clear that he didn't care that Rivers lied; particularly since Battle Ground was a recipient of Rivers' generous largess... with the money of the taxpayers she betrayed in this legislative district and this county.

I freely admit that I got this information out of the local democratian, which has seen fit to make mention of the allegation that he ran for office on the exact, same type of platform Rivers used to get elected.
One thing that bothered Bonneville was that Johnson ran his first campaign promising not to increase taxes. But council minutes show that Johnson voted in November 2014 to increase property tax collections by 1 percent and in December 2014 to increase utility taxes by 2 percent.
That clears it up for me.

Of COURSE someone who did the same type of thing as Rivers is going to defend her betrayal... since they're just as guilty of lying to get elected as she is.

I guess I just missed the part in any of this where he acknowledged that he apparently lied as well. Must be because it isn't there.

Philip Johnson
July 10, 2015 at 6:49 PM
There is a car tab fee in BG, because if we don’t fix our own roads, who will? There is also money in the transportation bill to fix STATE HIGHWAYS 502/503 here in BG. The question again is: if they (the state) will not fix their roads who will? God bless Sen. Rivers for thinking about us in the 18th. Our other representatives decided that they would sit this out and spout lofty ideals on how they see the government working. If it is the job of our reps. to represent their district then Messers. Vick & Harris, and Mrs. Pike and Wilson must have decided that the folks in BG, Camas and Washougal had everything they needed in transportation services and that it was our duty to pay the tax, but not derive any benefit.

Thanks again Senator Rivers for thinking about us in BG, and helping us with other things as well as the transportation package, you delivered for us real benefits, not lofty ideals.

Yes... because telling the truth; making a promise... only to ignore all that once you get the title... is merely a "lofty ideal" for those who govern us... something to be ignored and castigated by someone guilty of the same lies for the same reasons: to get elected.

Johnson's position is as despicable as he appears to be.  I wouldn't be caught dead voting for him, and while I am no big fan of democrats, I would cheerfully cast my vote for Bonneville since, while she is a leftist... she doesn't seem to portray herself as someone she isn't... like Johnson... and Sen. "Gas Tax."

And, for your edification, where's the rest of the exchange between Deputy Mayor and Tax Liar Johnson, including a little input from Rivers buddy and part of the "Gang of Five" Brent Boger who has no problem with anyone he supports lying to get elected: Scott Weber was his creation, Ann Rivers in this comment, and now, Marc Boldt.

Gee.  Who'd think that Boger was a lawyer with situational ethics like this?
KJ Hinton - July 10, 2015 at 11:08 PM 
“Represent their district.” 
The district, of course, is far more than Battle Ground. Clearly, some believe that it begins and ends there when, of course, it does not. 
In this case, “represent their district” means to do only what the select few want them to do. It means ignoring what the rest of the people in the district want. 
Philip got his rice bowl filled from the state trough… that WE will get to pay for without being asked… while the rest of the district got screwed sideways. And he’s grateful that River’s did HIS bidding. 
I’m not. 
I have a different view. A view that asks a lot of questions but doesn’t come up with very many answers. 
But then, Rivers didn’t give a damn what I thought. She, quite apparently, did what Johnson wanted. 
It’s just a damned shame for her and Battle Ground that the district is much bigger than both of them. 
Those who voted against this idiocy… those who made a serious effort to put a referendum clause on this… those who were opposed to the bogus emergency clause put on it… those who actually listened to the people… those who did not make a campaign pledge to not vote for gas tax increases and then break it… those who saw it for what it is… mere crumbs from Inslee’s table… 
They are the ones who have my gratitude. 
No one is more sorry than I that it turned out this way. That a very few people in BG are giddy over this betrayal? 
Well, I sincerely hope you choke on it.
Philip Johnson - July 11, 2015 at 4:00 PM

Mr. Waters, I appreciate you giving Senator Rivers a spot on your blog to explain what she thought was best for us in the 18th district. I also appreciate you posting my comments about her actions. You understand that good, sincere honest people can disagree,

No sir Mr Hinton, I believe it will go down easy.You state she acted against the wishes of her district and I against the wishes of BG. How do you know this? Are you privy to some polls of the 18th district? If so, produce them and lets see what the people say.

Ms. Pike, whom I like, you seem to adore, I feel is not representing our district in a way that is beneficial to our district and you imply that I am Judas like because this go around I agreed with Sen. Rivers. Then of course you ride Mr. Vick like a rented mule most days, but this one vote and by God, it’s like you went to high school together as best buddies. Of course next week he’ll do something you disagree with, and he’ll be back to being a tick on a dog’s scrotum. Make up your mind sir, which is he?

At various public meetings you have called for a vote of the people on if I understood you properly, most everything. Yet when we do have these votes you kvetch about the outcome. One that comes to mind was the Hockinson levy, may have been a bond. The people spoke and you belly ached about it, or the marijuana initiative, the people spoke and you yammered on how we were all mislead. May have been mislead, if so certainly wasn’t the first time in the history of the Republic the people were mislead, but it still passed and you go on and on. Seems you want votes, but if they go against you, then you question the legitimacy or mechanics of the vote.

We just disagree on the fact that if the street in front of your house, is just this side of going back to dirt, that we run an referendum to ask the folks on whether we should fix it. Or if property taxes need to go up, or water rates need to go up, we need to run an election. Don’t need to, we run elections in BG every other November to ask folks if there is someone in the city that you trust to act on your behalf to do what is required to keep the city moving forward. We adhere very closely to representative governance, so there is no need to run a vote of the people each and every time. We do have at all of our city council meetings a time for public comment on each and every item that may affect one’s wallet. Very rarely is anyone present, and as for car tabs the three folks who came were in favor, because they realized that something had to be done, and we did it.

I’m up for re-election this year, guess we’ll see if the people of BG are happy with what I have done this last 3.5 years. Win or lose, I know that I have done my very best, if that is not good enough for you sir, that’s just another point we’ll just disagree on.
 KJ Hinton - July 12, 2015 at 7:39 AM - my response.
Cute, Mr. Johnson. But before I shred your adoration of Sen. Rivers, two quick questions: 
1. When Sen. Rivers pledged as a part of her campaign for her election to the senate that should would not vote to raise gas taxes… was she lying? 
2. Does it matter to you that she did lie, or is telling the truth just one of those “lofty ideals” you so despise?
Philip Johnson - July 12, 2015 at 3:37 PM - Johnson's rejoinder

Yes Mr. Hinton, it looks like she broke a campaign promise on raising gas taxes. If you and I and others look at this one broken campaign promise outside of the rest of her work in Olympia and judge her on that, then sir get the wood and matches, and light the heretic on fire. Most folks though will look at the totality of her work and others in our district and will judge the big 8×11 issues picture, not just the wallet size picture you cling to.

As to your second question sir, you don’t know me, and what I hold important. You and I share, more than you probably know in the way of ideals. Like you, I spent time in our Army, didn’t do anything heroic, just did my duty. Still hold on to some of those ideals, like: when push comes to shove, no one is in it for the big picture, but for the guy to my left and right. So I don’t walk away from my friends when they disappoint me, because the day will come when I do the same to them. Corny as it seems now, I still hold on to all those things I learned in scouts. You know trustworthy, loyal, helpful…, but hell no one cares about that quaint crap now. Everything is viewed through a political prism, either you are with me or against me, and by God if you aren’t with me then the withering fire begins, and Katie bar the door this is a no holds barred event.

So you know what I despise? People who look at me at one moment in time and make a judgement that in that one moment I was not in tune with them and their thoughts on that one subject and I am deserving of their scorn. So as simple as it is, I have tried to pattern my political life after a song I loved in high school by Dave Mason. “There ain’t no good guy, there ain’t no bad guy, There’s only you and me and we just disagree.” It has served me well, might work for you.
KJ Hinton - July 12, 2015 at 7:03 PM - me, in turn.
The "poll" I used came from Sen. Gas Tax's husband, Fred, who estimated that a gas tax increase, if put to a vote, would get a 65% "no" vote.
OK. So, you acknowledge that she “broke a campaign promise on raising gas taxes..”
That's called "lying," by the way, even though for now obvious reasons, Johnson refused to acknowledge it.
How people react to that is up to them. I personally find it abhorrent WHENEVER someone lies to get elected… whenever a campaign lies to get an initiative passed… No matter who, or how. You, on the other hand. do not care how much we’re lied to. The only thing that matters to you is the vote.
I wonder if he would be so accepting if Rivers had lied to him about voting "yes" on something he wanted... like her gas tax scam... only to ultimately vote "no?"
That’s your privilege, of course. I merely point it out. 
But if you’re not willing to live up to your pledge, here’s a simple solution: 
Don’t make one. 
But if you DO make one: then LIVE WITH IT. Don’t ignore it. Don’t act like there was some magic and non-existent “changing circumstance.” Particularly when, in this case, there wasn’t. Nor was some sort of disclaimer used… as in, “in case of some perceived, nebulous changing circumstance, I reserve the right to bend you over and screw you sideways.” 
Because here’s the thing: If you… or her… or anyone else running for office makes a pledge like this and then breaks it: when are we to believe you? When are we supposed to believe ANYTHING you say? Where does honor and integrity fit in to your bizarre view of politics? 
You… or her… or anyone else… running for office who makes a pledge like this MUST live up to it to have any credibility. 
And I’ll take it a step further: 
Presuming she’d have survived the primary promising to vote for the biggest gas tax increase in our state’s history… (Unlikely she would have been voted into the House, let alone the Senate, making such a pledge) and promising to drop some cash on Battle Ground for what you think you need… and she didn’t do any of that, what you expect us to believe is that you wouldn’t be just as angry at her for breaking that promise as I am for violating the one she DID make? 
See, the fact is that, as I pointed out initially, you’re all about ignoring her lie because YOU (Meaning your city) got paid. 
If you DIDN’T, you’d think the same way about her as you do the rest that actually represented the people and voted “no.” 
And the rest of your verbiage notwithstanding, whether I know you or not, (Though you damned sure seem to think you know ME) is irrelevant. 
The questions were these: did she lie; and does it bother you that she did?
The answers to these questions were "yes," and "no."
The answer to the first, though you put it as politely as possible under the circumstances, was that we agree: she “broke a pledge.” I call it “lie.” But the outcome is the same. 
The second question involves something deeper. And when it comes to my lack of knowledge about you as an individual, what I know is this: BECAUSE you got what you, personally, wanted out of it at everyone else’s expense… because the entire state has to pay for what you want… because she broke a pledge… it doesn’t bother you in the least that she lied on this.
Even if, as it turns out the entire county is on the hook for $700 million for you to get what you want out of this... but given your own lies, apparently, to get elected, why am I now not surprised that you'd give her a pass?
Which makes me wonder: When DOES a politician lying bother you? 
Apparently not.
Not in the least pissed off by the “if you like your plan, you can keep your plan” scam, for example? 
Nah. You’re apparently not concerned in the least over politicians lying to get… or stay… elected. It’s just business as usual for you and your ilk. 
And the problem with Mr. Mason’s sentiment is that 1. He isn’t lying and 2. he isn’t running for office, and 3. his hand isn’t in my wallet 
Yours is. 
This has been an illuminating discussion, Deputy Mayor Johnson. To me, you represent the very worst politics has to offer. Situational ethics, a huge ego and massive arrogance that allows you to believe that hey, once you’re elected, you can just do whatever the hell you want… all without either asking the people or giving a damn what they want.
After all, you can be unelected if the people don’t like it… even if the damage you’ve caused can never by undone.
Of course, at the time, I was unaware of his own foibles when it came to getting elected.
And as I end my part in this discussion, I cannot help but think that government is absolutely full of politicians like you… who believe what you want is far more important than what the voter… what those of us paying the actual bills… might want. Reminiscent of the CRC/Light Rail wars as far as that goes. 
Thank you for your time.
At that point, the local RINO-in-Chief felt compelled to chime in:
Brent Boger July 12, 2015 at 8:46 PM

It was either Winston Churchill or John Maynard Keynes who said, “when the facts change, my opinion changes. What do you do sir?” Facts have changed: we have a governor who makes Christine Gregoire look like Laurleen Wallace and he proposes to impose cap and trade and carbon fuel standards by administrative fiat. The package prevents him from doing that is an example of how the package deals with a new fact. I don’t know where the idea comes from that a political officeholder can’t change their mind and can never compromise and if they do, they’re liars. I’m reminded of an event from Ronald Reagan’s first years as Governor of California. Reagan had fought against state withholding taxes. He argued that “taxes should hurt,” that withholding softened the blow, making it easier for politicians to spend more. He said: “My feet are set in concrete on this issue,”. When the state faced a serious cash-flow problem in 1971, he reversed himself and told reporters: “The sound you hear is concrete breaking up around my feet.” Was Reagan lying? What he did is not any different than what Rivers did. You frequently call people liars apparently for shock value, to offend, to entice or maybe its just anger. Whatever. I don’t think it is correct.
I could care less what Reagan did or why he did it.  And in direct answer to RINO's question, yes: If he ran on a platform that claimed he would not be moved from doing something (And that Boger CLAIMS he said something in 1971 that I can't verify as a part of his election to governor) and then he proceeded to do it, then OF COURSE he was lying.

How troubling that a lawyer seems to find it so difficult to tell the difference between a lie... and the truth.

But then, perhaps it just doesn't make any difference when you're making excuses for, and tossing your integrity out the window on behalf of a "friend."

At this point, with Inslee using his DOE to do what he, personally could not arbitrarily do... the very thing Boger tells us he could NOT now do... the very lie Rivers used to help explain her betrayal to this district and this county... her bogus excuses have gone up in smoke.

As I repeatedly stated it would be... since there was NOTHING in this scam that would keep this from happening through other means.

Apparently, like Rivers, you lied, Johnson.  And I reiterate: I hope that Candy Bonneville makes you choke on it.

No comments: