Response to Waters sychophantry in the 18th.

(Long, but forgive me. This will have to do for now)

Well, I went to a Mariner’s debacle yesterday in Seattle, but that’s likely for another post.

As I was coming home, I was texted a link with the question, “thoughts?”

The link, as it turns out, was Lew Water’s take on the 18th district legislative races that he knows so little about.

I read them… not particularly surprised at what he’d written, given how much he’s almost completely sold out to the RINO’s and how little honesty and intellectual integrity mean to him, and my first thought was this: Has Waters become gullible? Or is he so co-opted that lies, dishonesty and manipulation by our elected officials mean nothing to him?

I was, momentarily, surprised that he’s continuing to support Pike. After all, in the Rivers’ World of Hatred, Pike is persona non grata. Just like in Waters' world, *I* am.

Either way, I decided that his idiocy and self-delusion was worthy of a response, even though his intellectual cowardice makes responding on his blog verboten unless you slavishly agree with whatever he writes.

You see, in Waters’ World, anyone who disagrees with him is relegated to what he refers to as a part of the “party hierarchy” (of which I most certainly am not) or a part of the “fringe elements controlling the party,” (again disqualifying me.)

I have committed the cardinal sin of disagreeing with Waters. He refuses to discuss the issues I bring up, choosing, instead, to ignore them while his pit yorkie goes on the attack.

For the most part, Lew’s been a good foot soldier for the RINOs, even supporting C3G2 Hater Admin Carolyn Crain, who helps Chuckie Green run that leftist hate site... that leftist hate site that Waters himself isn't allowed to post at.... doing what he’s been manipulated into doing, allowing his hatred (or his “intense dislike” if “hatred” is too strong of a word) to drive his politics.

And that’s OK, as far as it goes. His blog, his rules. But I briefly lamented what happened to the man he was and grieved, also briefly, for the man he had become.

Meanwhile, he can have his own rules… and he can have his own blog… but he can’t make up his own facts. And in a few ways, easily illustrated, I can show here where, well, he has done just that.
You see, lying by omission is the same as lying by CO-mission.

There are a few things at issue here: first and foremost, he knows as much about the 18th District as he does brain surgery.

This is not his district: he has no vote here. And his façade that he knows these people so well is just that: a façade. He’s knows what they tell him. And foolishly enough, like his quasi-partnership with fake Republican Carolyn Crain, he’s self-delusional enough to believe it.

Let me set the table here, if I may.

First and foremost, no one knows Ann Rivers, politically, as much as I do.

No one.

We were in business together for a few years. I worked hundreds of hours on her effort to get the appointment to the House back in 2007 that Boldt screwed up by bending us over and sticking us with that worthless cardboard cutout of a congresswoman currently claiming to represent us in DC. The fix was in on that from the getgo. But it is what it is.

And when I say “no one,” I mean Lew Waters, who only shows his gullibility in his piece on who HE endorses.

I also worked hundreds of hours on other issues for Rivers, to the extent that for several years, she even paid for my cell phone... up until I shut it off after the gas tax debacle and got my own.

The nature of these issues were certainly not all political, but the hours spent and the nature of that effort speak for themselves.

I will not be voting for Rivers. The evidence is clear: she lied to get elected, she stuck Clark County with a $700 million dollar bill that Waters doesn't mention (and one must wonder why he doesn't say anything about it) and then lies about why she did it.

I will not vote for a proven liar. Waters, because he’s a Rivers' bud, is not that constrained when it suits him.

He goes so far as to point out that Rivers received 68% or so of the vote when she was elected to the Senate. Which she did. But that, of course, was before she became a known liar.

But Waters doesn't happen to mention in passing what the likely outcome would have been if, instead of lying about her support of THE largest gas tax and tab fee increases in this state’s history AND her efforts to make sure that we weren't allowed to vote on that tax increase, she had ran on a platform to do that very thing. Does anyone reading this believe for a second that she would have been elected to anything involving the 18th District had she run on a platform of jacking our gas taxes up by the largest increase in this state's history?

In fact, purely in the interests of telling ALL of the truth, Waters seems to have left out any mention of the gas tax increase and Rivers’ part in that of any kind, anywhere, in anything he wrote.

Now… why do you suppose that is? It's not like he doesn't want to talk about it or anything... is it? And why wouldn't he if it were such a swell thing for Rivers to do?

Waters goes on to point out that Rivers' opponent’s web site is “short on where he stands on the important issues.”

When last *I* looked, Rivers’ web site says absolutely NOTHING of substance about the “important issues.” She makes no pledges, no promises and shows no plans.

Waters doesn't seem to notice that. And why is it that Rivers’ web site has a lot of words but nothing of substance?

It’s because THE last thing she wants is to be held accountable for her promises to those voting for her.

She certainly hasn't been thrilled about being held accountable for her pledge to oppose gas tax and tab fee increases... only to vote for them when the time came.

At best, this is Waters being disingenuous. At worst, he’s simply lying through his oversight, either deliberate or inadvertent.

Further, Waters of course makes no mention of the ongoing investigation of Rivers’ decision to lie, by in excess of $150,000 in her campaign account (that she didn't have) for over a YEAR… an investigation which has been going on for several months and for which, she has zero acceptable or believable excuse.

But those are the facts of the matter.

And as much as I viewed Ann Rivers as closely as a sister in the past… she has proven herself just to be another political hack and she is unfit for public office: because she has sold us out for hundreds of millions of dollars and then lied about it.

And that’s reason enough, no matter what the letter is after her name.

Now, when it comes to Vick, I've wondered why Rivers recruited a candidate to run against Pike, but not Vick. After all, he, too, voted against the gas tax that Waters DOESN'T EVEN MENTION in his sycophantic effort.

Buy 20 gallons of gas today, and $2.40 cents of what you pay is a DIRECT result of Ann “Gas Tax” Rivers’ efforts to screw us.

In Waters' world, it’s like it doesn't even exist. But that he doesn't mention it?

That speaks volumes. Volumes that say he wants you to forget about that as much as she does.

I disqualify Vick because of first, Waters’ lie about his absolutely do-nothing effort in his first term. Vick accomplished nothing that my cavalier spaniel couldn't have done had he been sitting in that chair.

Waters falsely claimed that Vick sitting there like a hood ornament when he was elected was what Waters NOW calls a “good move.”

Odd, that. I don’t recall him ever mentioning what a great move it was for Vick at the time, or that anyone ELSE elected to the legislature should take the first year off… just Vick. But he needs that blather to fit the meme of his now, so voila’! He produces it.

Secondly, Vick was THE worst liar of the 2014 cycle, trying to engage in damage control for his do-nothing tenure by claiming he was on SIX different legislative committees…. When both Vick and I knew that was a façade and, once the next session started, he’d be lucky to be on 3. I was right about that, of course, and for most of the session, he was only on 2.

But he kept hammering that particular drum and even the Democratian picked it up when they endorsed Vick… completely bogus as it was.

I will never vote for Vick for the same reason I am not voting for Rivers. He lied. And in lying, he manipulated the voters. That ain't happening for me.

It’s unacceptable to lie to get elected and those who do so should be held accountable for it.
And that leaves us with the last race, Rep. Liz Pike.

Again, I have stated and will continue to state that Rivers was instrumental in Bowman running against Pike. Bowman, effectively, killed himself politically by actually advocating a 15% food sales tax to pay for the McCleary decision (a decision I've repeatedly shown should be ignored) notwithstanding, I know for a fact that Rivers DID recruit Bowman.

Waters, of course, was moronic enough to swallow their denial, hook, line and sinker:

"Some of the more fringe element of the Clark County GOP," Waters wrote "claims that Bowman has been recruited to oppose Pike due to friction between her and Ann Rivers. Having spoken with both Bowman and Rivers, I find that claim incredulous and false."

See, this is additional proof: disagree with Waters and, by golly, you’re to be discredited as a fringe-element of the Clark County GOP. You know, the GOP I haven’t been a member of since 2012?

THAT GOP?

So, Lew has “spoken with both Rivers and Bowman.”

He finds the claim “incredulous and false.”

Well, here’s the thing. I have a source. The source has confirmed it. The source is a highly placed elected official who I have known and voted for over a period of many, many years. That aside, I suspected it was true because when Bowman announced, he indicated that he had little trouble with most of Pike’s positions, but that Pike was, effectively, to be condemned for ACTUALLY REPRESENTING HER DISTRICT AND OPPOSING THE GAS TAX!

Who knew? Rivers. Who else hammered Pike for doing that?

Rivers.

And kids, 25 years plus or so in this business has taught me a lot. And the first thing it's taught me is that in politics, there ain't no coincidences.

And how many people are going to launch a campaign that has precisely ONE THING in common with Ann “Gas Tax” Rivers without her involvement?

How many of them are going to sound EXACTLY like Rivers on that issue if she had zero involvement with their decision?

What *I* find “incredulous and false” is that Waters was gullible enough to believe them.

If Lew were sitting across from me at my desk, I’d look at him right now and ask, ”Lew… seriously: WHAT THE HELL DID YOU EXPECT THEM TO SAY??

YEAH? You were right? Of COURSE I recruited Bowman?”

Good God. Apparently, Waters actually expected them to admit it if they had done what he knows they did do, but refuses to write.

Waters, dealing with a proven liar, simply buys off on her claim that Bowman, ON HIS OWN, simply decided to challenge an entrenched incumbent merely because they disagreed on an issue, ONE issue, an issue that would not have profited Battle Ground or anywhere else ONE ADDITIONAL CENT EVEN IF HE HAD WON?

That seems like an awful lot of effort to go through for one fit of pique.

This, you see, flies in the face of the Lincolnesque axiom: while you can’t fool all of the people all of the time, you sure can fool Lew Waters when he wants to be fooled.

Of COURSE Rep. Liz Pike is the only choice here. And that’s why Waters endorses her… because he knows that politically, Bowman has as much chance of winning in the 18th as he does mastering the art of levitation.

And, naturally, the easiest way for Rivers to clear her name on this is simply to come out and endorse Pike while condemning Bowman’s effort… and hold a fundraiser for her or appear at one and speak for her… you know, like she did for that idiot Crain the other day?

But how likely is that to happen? I have, I would say, a better chance of winning the lottery.

With Bowman’s obvious upcoming destruction at the polls, she might… MIGHT… do it now to provide herself with political cover.

But I wouldn't hold my breath.

You see, if Rivers was GOING to do it… she’d already have done it.

Pike is the only Republican I will be voting for legislatively and above.

But that’s just me. And if you've made it to this point, I look forward to taking on all comers. But they likely won’t include Waters, Rivers (Who hasn't even answered my now over 4 month old email asking her to clarify her idiotic, $7 BILLION response to what would have happened if she had voted ”no” on the gas tax… after all, I’m just a constituent she disagree with, no need to respond to ME.) Vick or Bowman.

Because in their world?

Disagree with them, even if, allegedly, they either WANT to work for you or actually already work for you?

You're not worth talking to.