Saturday, July 28, 2012

So, why did NBC edit out the commemoration of the London terrorist attacks of 7 July 1985 from the opening ceremonies?


The 2012 Olympics opening ceremony included a beautiful tribute to the victims of London's 7/7 Islamic terrorist attacks. But if you were watching the opening ceremony in the United States, you probably didn't see it.

NBC chose to omit the tribute for an interview with Michael Phelps.

http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/213069.php


Cory Barnes of the PCO Alliance swings by... I respond.

I appreciate Cory coming by.  It's not easy to stick your face in someone else's fan and I give him props for doing so.  The rest of this is in response to an earlier post, here:

Cory Barnes said...
I'm sure everyone is voting for me based on my political convictions and that they know I am shamelessly willing to stand up for the idea that the Republican Party leadership should be inclusive to political activists, the shoulders of whom the future Party rests.

We must reform back to an organization that facilitates conservative political engagement, rather than one that demands submission to backroom-brokered deals with personalities representing pretty damn close to nothing.

Example: McKenna vs. Hadian
It's being borne out just how portly McKenna represents the Republican persuasion, yet our local leadership is obsequiously bound to the you-know-who liberal force of Esser-esque evil.

Your post illustrating my unlucky collection of minor traffic indiscretions is meaningless in the face of unsolved issues that have left the CCRP operating by archaic tribalism favoring top-down control over independent grassroots involvement.

Any power the PCO position affords, I will fight to have retrieved from the dying-grasp of the CCRP board and back to the activists and numerous conservative organizations that still appreciate young, new faces... The young folks who are of the persuasion that even despite personal indiscretions, it has been left to them to salvage an American standard of living and way of life that Party-induced political cronyism has threatened to destroy.

There is always the choice of voting for the continued lack of leadership represented by the numerous incestuously-approved opponents of Liberty PCOs, many opponents whom graciously had help sending their precincts postcards informing voters of absolute subservience to Party candidates. The record shows that is a falsehood proven by the forgotten conservative leaders all shunned pre-primary to make way for progressive cronies. Every time this bias happens, I blame the GOP for leaving voters without political differences to choose from.

I have filed for PCO as representative of an ideology that favors a strong bottom-up organized Party and that promotes representative candidates in a fair and transparent way. Until someone comes along to represent my stances as PCO, I'll have to keep filing to declare the contrasts of my views with the current popular insanity. PCOLA has a disclaimer posted clearly online stating our affiliation is purely position based, for the presumable purpose of changing a majority of the central committee's leadership ideals. It's up to voters to establish trust with their distinct neighborhood candidates to determine elegibility, and PCOLA sees it the same way.

It is the voters' choice: vote for me, I'll set you free. Vote for my opponent, same sucks don'it?
To which, I responded:
Blogger
Just a guy said...
One of the very problems that I have with you, Cory, is your chronic disregard for the law.

Every other element aside, that you only obey the laws you want to, when you want to, shows me that you're unfit for elective office.

You've been busted so many times, I find it hard to believe you can even begin to afford car insurance.  (Added here) In fact, I find it hard to believe you're even close to having a license.

You ARE insured, aren't you?  (Added here) You DO have a license, don't you?

That said, how many times have you been popped since the word came out last year that you viewed the law as an annoyance more than something to be followed?

I see at least 7 different citations since then. And it makes me wonder: if you can't even follow the law in what you call "minor traffic indiscretions," then what other laws do you blow off when you feel like it?

So, as *I* am a strong conservative who has been fighting the establishment at ALL levels, including locally for at least a decade; feel free to explain why your group has targeted me.

We both know it's my outspoken opposition to Ron Paul.

You complain about the Party leadership. There is room for improvement, to be sure, but who are some of those who've been there the longest and who, as I understand it, are not being challenged for PCO positions?

The Millers.

Deb Peterson.

Why did they get a pass, since they've been members in good standing of the local GOP leadership for years?

Seems your group can be quite selective in targeting the "establishment." And your recitation of the talking points in no way makes them true or accurate.

"Young, new faces?" Many of those who got a pass as PCO's are even older then I am. Many of those running are, you guessed it, even older than I am.

So now that we've established that it's who you know; that youth, in reality, has not one damned thing to do with it... what about the truth.... for once.

Whatever you do, don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining.

Outcomes in politics are the only thing that matter. In the end, with the group in charge (of Clark County GOP) now, we're likely to have 12 out of 15 legislators representing this county in the GOP, and likely 2 out of 3 commissioners in the GOP.

How, exactly, do you believe you can do better?

"Glittering generalities" don't cut it. NONE of the reasons you cite show any great vision or system to come up with more Republicans, or more wins... or how to "turn around" a Party that by any measure doesn't NEED to be "turned around."

And that's because this isn't about that. It's about somebody trying to take over the entirety of the party apparatus. It's about power.

The rest of this crap is smoke and mirrors... and my contempt for the effort is that you all lack the guts to tell the truth about it, because you know that chances of voting for you if you DID tell the truth would be precisely zero.

Much like, come to think of it, chances of you getting elected to PCO if your record went out in a mailer.

But that's not up to me. It's not my precinct you're trying to scam; and frankly, I just don't care enough to make it happen.

But we both know I'm right. And if the people of your precinct elect you, Cory, well, then, they'll certainly deserve you.

When they hate you, they hate you: Redux - the democratian's campaign for Boldt takes a nasty turn.

Because their guy, Marc Boldt, has run a really terrible campaign and hasn't been raising any money, the democratian has taken it upon themselves to drag him over the finish line in spite of themselves.

How do they do that?

By attacking Boldt's biggest political threat: David Madore.

That this materially contributes to my contempt for this despicable rag isn't based on opposition to Madore; I'm not particularly thrilled with his election either; after all, his posse is doing the best they can to get rid of me.  It is, instead, based on the complete abandonment of anything approaching fairness or even-handedness or, as they like to delude themselves, non-partisanship.

Among the politicians here locally, there are, effectively, two parties.  Not democrat or Republican; those labels are long since tired and RE-tired.

No, they are, instead, those who support the scam of the CRC and those wise enough not to support it.

In an election anywhere near competitive, the default position of the rag will be "is the candidate CRC-friendly?"   Followed secondarily by "are they a democrat?"

I used to believe at the local level that being a democrat was the key to the rag's support.  But that has been supplanted by the scam of the bridge and light rail... the scam the cancer on our society won't even write about, because, well, it's a major credibility issue to be foaming at the mouth in support of what the Oregon Supreme Court referred to as a rip off, so to speak.

The democratian's solution to that little problem?

Just don't mention that particular "inconvenient truth."  No problem.

Want to see how I got there?

As of this writing, the democratian has made 13 endorsements in the primary.

Of that 13, 12 strongly support the CRC, the whole package.  And that, of course, includes Marc Boldt.

The exact same Marc Boldt from whom this very rag demanded his resignation.  That, of course, was back in the halcyon days when he was a conservative Republican instead of whatever it is he is now.

Marc, of course, continues piling up his fellow democrat endorsements:  Stuart, Leave-it, Betty Sue, Burkman, Tanner, Joe King, Brian Wolfe, democrat mayors and a wide variety of others supporting this most massive rip off.

What he's NOT doing is piling up campaign cash.... and it will take a lot... a lot more... than he's putting together to get up on TV, radio and to match the blizzard of mailers of David Madore.

So, the rag decides to pick him up and do everything they can for him... because, well, he's their guy and they hate Madore for the threat he seems to represent to their agenda.

Not because he's trying to take over the GOP.  Not because he's not a nice guy.

But because he's been militantly opposed to the CRC scam.

Marc, who has done everything he can to ram this down our throats, is militantly in support of the CRC scam.

Connect the dots.  It's not hard.

When they hate you... they hate you.  And clearly they both hate... and fear... David Madore.

What's your charity? (My apologies. I've spent most of the last two days working on the American Diabetes Association Tour de Cure out in Hillsboro.)

What's your charity?

It's been reasonably hard work for the last two days; a few hundred miles on the road, setting up signs and taking them down, using "spray chalk" (which is really rather cool, when you think about it) to reinforce the directions by spraying color codes and arrows for the 5 or so different courses...

Hundreds turned out, dozens volunteered to do road patrols looking for mechanical breakdowns and so forth, manning the rest stops and the like to make sure they had food and healthy beverages to fuel these fantastic, giving people.

I owe the ADA a lot; their research helped to discover medications that helped me cope with Type 2 diabetes until I could get my weight under control (drop around 90 pounds or so, in other words) and now, no longer required to take pills for this killer, this is my 5th or 6th year of doing first, the Mt. Hood version and then, the one run out of the Hillsboro Stadium.

Those of you who ride bikes ought to consider it for next summer; the people, facilities and scenery are beautiful, and worth the trip.

Later next month, Danielle and I will be doing the American Cancer Society Relay for Life at Battle Ground Stadium in honor of Luke Jensen, a fine young man of 9 who fought Leukemia bravely and well, but ultimately was taken from us some two and one-half years ago.

We've also signed up the infamous Red Dually to hall the trailer for a local food bank on a substitute basis here beginning this upcoming week; they need to look it over for the connections and so forth to assure that it's fully compatible.

If you are fortunate and can give of your time, effort, energy and even, occasionally, money, please do so.  It's worth it, and you get much more out of it then you ever have to put in.

That said, I really do apologize for not blogging.  And that leads me to the next post, below.

Let me explain how commenting works. Again.

Rule One: unless someone has a gun to your head or that of some other hostage, no one is forcing you to read any of this.  If you don't like how, what or when I write around here, then don't read it and don't come back.

This blog isn't here for your edification and I'm not interested in writing to satisfy anyone's point of view but mine.

It's been the policy of this blog for the past several years that when a mistake is made, the individual in question may make a correction.

That is, for example, when I make a statement, or issue an opinion, and that statement is in error, the individual in question may correct that error by contacting me directly. 

Those who disagree get one... ONE bite at the apple.  But I do not have to do and will not do anonymous posts... nor will I be a piƱata for anyone, particularly anyone I don't know and who does not know me.

The fact is that I and I alone am responsible for the content of this blog of opinion.  Everyone out there knows who I am, but few of you actually know me.

Some of the comments I receive reach the level of death threats.  That's OK, that kind of blow-hard crap is why I'm always armed.

Others out there believe I can be brow-beaten or coerced... or, in the case of one elected official, undergo a serious effort to have me fired from my employment.

Typically, I will post almost anything.  Almost.

But those who believe they can threaten me, manipulate me or insult me or come after me?

Not so much.

I hold no illusions about the Paulbot's efforts to remove me as PCO: that's the system in place and they're welcome to it (Though my guess is that it's going to Boldt... after all, his other many failings notwithstanding, the people at least know his name) and frankly, as I've pointed out before, I just don't need this gig enough to fight for it.  My reason for even becoming a PCO, Jon Russell, has moved away and poses no threat to us any longer.

Those peeing their collective pants over this post are all deliberately choosing to miss the point.  Well, bully for them.

Those who have a problem with it, like always, can contact me directly.

But please understand that I really don't give a crap what any anon poster writes here.

You're not that clever, you're not that insightful, you're not that great and none of you, know me, either.

So, there you have it.  As always, if you don't like what I write, the simplest POSSIBLE solution:

Don't read it.

If I have made any kind of mistake on this blog, NO ANONYMOUS POST WILL EVER GET IT FIXED.

And a post from the source, as always, will be posted in it's entirety, unedited by me... like it ALWAYS HAS BEEN.

Feel free to ask any questions, but I leave you with this:

I actually am, "John Law;" a work of art.  But please, don't believe for a moment that I otherwise give a damn WHAT you think.

Thursday, July 26, 2012

Clearly, the PCO "Alliance" doesn't vet their candidates:

Cory Barnes (Running for PCO in 913) is one of their guys: he's spending more time in court then many lawyers, starting with a juvenile record and as recently as 2 months ago:
96 Barnes, Cory J

Defendant Cowlitz District LON003000 05-05-2012

97 Barnes, Cory James

Defendant Camas/washougal 58685 07-02-2010

98 Barnes, Cory James

Defendant Clark County Dist 114112 09-10-2007

99 Barnes, Cory James

Defendant Cowlitz District XY0451201 09-23-2010

100 Barnes, Cory James

Defendant Clark County Dist 157302 11-10-2010

101 Barnes, Cory James

Defendant Camas/washougal 109986 01-18-2011

102 Barnes, Cory James

Defendant Clark County Dist 1Z0016612 01-25-2011

103 Barnes, Cory James

Defendant Clark County Dist 9Y6298431 11-03-2009

104 Barnes, Cory James

Defendant Clark County Dist 1Z0405889 07-18-2011

105 Barnes, Cory James

Defendant Clark County Dist 1Z0532789 08-01-2011

106 Barnes, Cory James

Defendant Clark County Dist 110364 02-25-2011

107 Barnes, Cory James

Defendant Clark County Dist 673624 02-26-2007

108 Barnes, Cory James

Defendant Cowlitz District 1Z0423692 06-10-2011

109 Barnes, Cory James

Defendant Cowlitz District 1Z0402587 06-16-2011

110 Barnes, Cory James

Defendant Camas/washougal 23569 05-10-2012

111 Barnes, Cory James

Defendant Camas/washougal 59262 05-10-2012

112 Barnes, Cory James

Defendant Camas/washougal 1Z0671434 10-02-2011

113 Barnes, Cory James

Defendant Camas/washougal 1Z0671433 10-02-2011

114 Barnes, Cory James

Defendant Clark County Dist 2Z0379960 05-31-2012

115 Barnes, Cory James

Defendant Clark County Dist 2Z0379961 05-31-2012
Respect for the law should be a big part of this, don't you think?

And, of course, the guy running against me:
3 Byers, Gary

Defendant Clark Superior 03-2-05247-1 10-09-2003

4 Byers, Gary

Defendant Clark Superior 07-2-02680-4 05-18-2007

5 Byers, Gary

Defendant Kcdc-so Div (auk) 992314 05-11-1999

6 Byers, Gary A

Defendant Clark Superior 03-2-05370-1 Available 10-17-2003

7 Byers, Gary A

Defendant Clark County Dist 310850-06 09-04-2007

8 Byers, Gary A Jr

Respondent Clark Superior 09-3-02330-9 10-06-2009

9 Byers, Gary Alan Jr

Defendant Clark County Dist 260203-04 10-14-1998

10 Byers, Gary Alan Jr

Defendant Clark County Dist 294117-03 11-18-2004

11 Byers, Gary Alan Jr

Defendant King County District 7Y5034523 12-24-2007

12 Byers, Gary Alan Jr

Defendant Kent Municipal Court K00078783 10-06-2009

13 Byers, Gary Alan Jr

RESPONDENT Clark Superior 02-2-06020-3 08-05-2002

14 Byers, Gary Alan Jr

Defendant Clark County Dist 235331 02-18-1997

15 Byers, Gary Alan Jr

Defendant Cowlitz District C00187998 03-21-2000

16 Byers, Gary Alan Jr

Defendant Skamania District L00025896 09-03-1997

17 Byers, Gary Alan Jr

Defendant Battle Ground Muni 2Z0339806 04-09-2012

18 Byers, Gary Alan Jr

Defendant Battle Ground Muni 2Z0339807 04-09-2012

19 Byers, Gary Alan Jr

Defendant Clark County Dist 6625259 04-06-2012
Remarkable.

So, exactly what is a Republican?

In the midst of this election, exactly where does the issue of parties and labeling fall in consideration?

When is that put aside?  When does it mean something?  DOES it mean anything?

The Washington State Republican Party has endorsed Rob McKenna for governor.  At a political level, McKenna has been the disappointment I believed he would be; but he knows people.  He's been around.  He shows up.  And in politics, those are the critical elements.

At this point, it would seem that Inslee and McKenna share many more perspectives than those that seperate them... and most of those perspectives are directly out of the democrat play book and platform.

So... why do Republicans support McKenna?

Is it the "R" label, which has undergone massive rehabilitation thanks to the pathetic empty suit running the country?

Is it because democrats and their meme are so damaged by their incompetence and horrific handling of both foreign and domestic policy?

Is it maybe because, as a people, we've become hypnotized by labeling and all that it means?

The parties, of course, all want us to vote for their guy (Or woman, in the interests of PC'dom) based on, if NOTHING else, the label... the letter after their name.

But with that label comes an expectation that it's supposed to mean something.  The association is supposed to link you, as a democrat or Republican or Libertarian or what-have-you with a general set of ideals and concepts.

What if, for example, referring to McKenna, your candidate has little to no connection or resemblance to GOP ideals?

What if, for another example, referring to Reagan Dunn (Running for Attorney General), he not only doesn't resemble a Republican, his overt pandering to the gay marriage lobby is an embarrassment?

What if, your vote when you were in the Legislature to strengthened the gay lobby and, like Bill Finkbeiner, you're also a big gay marriage supporter?

Those are not core Republican ideals. 

There are other examples, but you get the gist.

These are cornerstone issues.

Here locally, Marc Boldt votes to increase our taxes, votes to take our weapons away if the commissioners feel like it, votes to gerrymander taxing districts to exclude tens of thousands of us from having any say but not from paying their taxes, votes to support a bridge, tolls and light rail that we don't want, don't need and cannot afford... all without asking us.

At the local level, those are not core Republican ideals either.

So, when do we put aside loyalty to a label and look deeper?  When do we hold the individual accountable for what they actually are instead of hoping for a non-existent "best" by virtue of voting for a label by using our ballots?

As someone who served the state GOP in the position of Executive Director in 2000, and someone who has served in dozens of campaigns and consulted on many, I have seen just about every imaginable side.

There's a school of thought, both here locally and perhaps nationally, that those who don't act like sheep and who question how Republican someone is or if they are actually even a part of the GOP beyond their label are somehow "bad."  They're attacked.  They're censored.  Efforts are made to silence them.

I despise RINO Rob McKenna.  There are others running as Republican; I have voted for one, in fact; a fellow named Hadian.

But I also have been personally attacked because I don't support McKenna or other leftists since he's the Party's guy and that I have the temerity to speak out against him... even in a primary scenario where opposition to any one candidate used to be perfectly OK.  Why vote for a fake democrat when, if you lean left, the real thing is available?  Just for one example, notice how McKenna shares many of Inslee's and the democrat's positions but Inslee doesn't share any of McKenna's and the GOP's?

Who's in control in that race?

How McKenna can't see that is a mystery to me.  But the question here is "How is any of that Republican?"

Democrats are just as bad; they're famous for their litmus tests for their candidates.

What happened to those 3 democrat senators who joined with the GOP in their effort to rein in our state government's budget?

It's a good thing they were wearing political kevlar.

The Madore-financed effort to take over the local party here (The so-called PCO Liberty Alliance), along with the effort to get a Paulbot elected as a write-in in the 18th district are where all of this comes into play.

The fact is that regardless of if he is successful in this effort (You only have to walk upright to get Madore's and the bizarro PCO Liberty people's support ) there will be no real change in the PCO make-up around here: 80% of the legislators in Clark County are likely to be GOP (3 dem and 12 GOP)  2/3rds of the commission (1 dem and 2 GOP) WITHOUT a Paulbot take-over and the very idea that any organization by anyone at the county level could do any better is absurd.

It's outcomes that should matter.  For many here, they don't.

So, Those who claim to be Republican (Romney, Herrera, McKenna, Finkbeiner, Dunn, Boldt, Silliman, Byers for PCO (Actually, in a genuinely bizarre move, Boldt was redistricted into my precinct and HE is running against ME) who's positions or governance prove they are anything but did not and will not get my vote.

Those who claim to be Republican but have a really hidden agenda (Madore and Silliman) did not get my vote.

Those who lie about their motives (The PCO Liberty scam) will never get my support and will, in fact, only get my opposition.  Anyone connected with them or to them will have that connection forever; they will not ever be able to run from it and I will use that connection to hammer them like I hammered Russell... regardless of what label they use to lie about who they are.

Nor will they.

But that decision isn't particularly because of the labeling they use as a mere cover: Boldt has publicly admitted that he's never read the GOP platform... which seems to me to be something of an indictment of the value of the party to begin with.

More questions.  Few answers... but here's one:

I don't care if you're a member of the Drunk Orangutan Party: if you're the best candidate and you're on the ballot, you're going to get my vote.

But you'd better be a conservative who is in office for the right reasons, without a hidden agenda or corruptive influence calling your shots.

Herding cats: the 18th District House appointment process.

"There are two things that people don't want to see being made: sausage and legislation." Otto von Bismark.

To that, I would add the issue of appointments for vacant State House seats.

Here in the 18th District, we were offered 4 choices for consideration: Liz Pike, Brandon Vick, Peter Silliman and Dale Smith.

The candidate running for this seat and endorsed by the GOP, Brandon Vick, could only manage 14 votes out of 37 on the first ballot, a surprisingly weak lack of confidence in his abilities reflective of both his disastrous tenure as local party chair and his last second, spur of the moment impetuous decision to run in the first place.

Peter Silliman, the Paulbot candidate, came in second with the Paulbot block remaining in lockstep throughout.

Liz Pike came in third and Dale Smith, fourth.

Pike and Smith had the most experience, political and elective.  Vick's candidacy for state representative was as disastrous as his party chairmanship tenure.

Silliman is absolutely unqualified to be a state representative, either by experience or temperment.

It took 3 ballots for Brandon to finally achieve the 50% plus one vote he needed.  He was followed by Liz Pike, who gave an exceptional presentation and who should have been number one, and anti-public education father of 12 Paulistinian, Peter Silliman.

The meeting was in the far-too-small and apparently not air conditioned GOP headquarters, where the gathered PCO's and observers sweltered as we crawled through the process and arrived at a conclusion.

The irony of all of this is now these three have to face the combined county commissioners of Clark and Cowlitz.  Brandon Vick, who was running the local GOP at the time, has to face democrat Commissioner Marc Boldt, who was expelled from the local party as a result of his leftward bent on his votes.

Wonder how that's going to go?

It's going to be tough for Vick; although the commissioners usually go with the first name on the list: under these circumstances, it would be easy for Boldt to drop to the second place on the list and name Pike.

Silliman, who is as far right as any other Pauler, has no chance and is not likely to get a single vote due to his extreme positions... and his limited base of support.

It could go either way: Vick or Pike.  And in this instance, given Vick's history with Boldt, I wouldn't bet on Vick.

Expect some effort at rapprochement by the GOP to get Marc on board with Vick.

Just sayin.'

Tuesday, July 24, 2012

When the Columbian hates you, they hate you.

(FULL DISCLOSURE: 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.)

"Hate" is a pretty strong word to throw around, even these days.  I make no bones about it; I actually do hate the Columbian and everything they stand for, since everything they stand for are lies of omission and commission, while completely obliterating any concept of fairness or integrity... while they strive to inflict tremendous damage on this community.

In this upcoming election, they hate Tom Mielke and David Madore, period.  Neither Tom nor David are "their" guys; both stand steadfastly against the fringe-left agenda of the local democrat daily and both are steadfastly opposed to the massive, almost unfathomable pile of waste and incompetence known as the CRC scam.  Thus, if you campaign against their agenda, they do all they can to flatten you; fairness be damned.

I know from first hand experience the sting of their lies, exaggerations, fabrications and outright falsehood... and I've been hammering these scum for over a decade.

Things are not going well for their boy, Marc Boldt.  Marc is, essentially, broke.  He's got a campaign manager who seems to be working for free (SOMEBODY is paying her, it just ain't Marc) and he's close to flat broke.  Marc's opponent, David Madore, is up on TV and is doing multiple mailings that Marc cannot respond to.

However, with the democrat daily in your pocket, you don't need to... since they're doing Marc's campaign for him.

Today's hit piece, along with that of their recent hatchet job on Tom Mielke, both by that waste of skin Stephanie Rice, go to the heart of the matter.

Boldt lied through his teeth on his mailing... and not a peep out of the democratian.

Why?  Because he's their guy and it's perfectly OK for THEIR guy to lie.

In fact, when was the last time they made any effort to hold any of their leftist buddies or causes accountable to the truth?

Lew Water's lays it all out in his own, inimitable way, right here.  Go check it out.

(UPDATE:) McKenna: snatching defeat from the jaws of victory; down 7 to Inslee. (Elway)

(UPDATE: Yesterday, I indicated that McKenna was down 5 when he was, in fact, down 7.  I regret the error.)

Earlier this year, back when he was campaigning like a competent reasonably Republican candidate, RINO Rob McKenna had as much as a 9 point lead in the polls.

So, what have his efforts to out-democrat the democrat accomplished?

The most recent Elway Poll has him down 7, 43-36.

Showing the genius of pandering to every special interest group in the state; public employee unions, gays, tribes and the like; having hammered the GOP base with his fringe-left absurdity, McKenna is getting clobbered.

And he should.

I'm not ever voting for him... for anything... and clearly, more and more people are beginning to ask the same question I've been asking for the past several months:

Why vote for the fake democrat (McKenna) when you can get the real thing? (Inslee.)

I expect that the usual suspects will win in the statewides.  My fellow Republicans see it as blaspheme that I oppose McKenna; but I see it as blaspheme that they're only concerned about a label over the substance.

But RINO Rob is reaping what he's sown, and he's got no one to blame but himself.

UPDATE: Why is Marc Boldt lying in his mailer? And who'd vote for anyone endorsed by that slimeball Tim Leave-it?

(FULL DISCLOSURE: 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.)

Is it desperation?

Is it self-delusion?

Up until now, Marc at least has been reasonably honest, but this mailer is over the top.


Not only has Boldt NOT "fought for our right to vote," he has gone so far as to publicly OPPOSE a county WIDE vote on the CRC:




Photo by Troy Wayrynen

Passengers board a Tri-Met Max light rail train at the Delta Park/Vanport light rail transit station.

By Stephanie Rice

Columbian Staff Reporter

Originally published March 31, 2011 at 12:26 p.m., updated March 31, 2011 at 7:47 p.m.

On the Web:

“Advisory Vote Smackdown.”

In an exchange that played out over email on Thursday, two of three Clark County commissioners shot down a suggestion by 18th District legislators on how the county could legally craft an advisory vote on the Columbia River Crossing.

A few weeks ago, lawmakers from the 17th District asked commissioners to put an advisory vote on the November ballot, and commissioners said they could not legally have an advisory vote on a matter over which they lack the authority to decide.

This time, Commissioners Steve Stuart and Marc Boldt made it clear they did not even care if what the 18th District lawmakers were suggesting was legal. They went so far as to make fun of the idea and ask if lawmakers, facing the worst state budget crisis in decades, didn’t have better things to do with their time than to send a letter seeking a meaningless vote.
It's despicable that any elected official would call any vote "meaningless." But that Marc Boldt calls it that is just another symptom of his full left tilt.  But to claim, in the face of his efforts to silence us and exclude 100,000 of us through the gerrymandered taxing district that he voted for that HE fought for US?

Hardly.  In fact, that's actually a lie.  And who could forget this master stroke, all, of course, as he fights for us by supporting and campaigning for another tax increase...


I can't speak to anything called "the economic development alliance," because, frankly, I've never heard of it.  What I know is that the unemployment rate for Clark County has been double digit for, literally, years.

And his claim about "holding property taxes below 1%?"

Marc raised property taxes the maximum amount for years.  And in this case, the maximum amount you CAN increase property taxes is 1%, and Boldt increased them by that amount MANY times.

So... why is he claiming that he didn't?

I freely admit that I oppose Marc Boldt's re-election, just like he's opposed Tom Mielke's election.

There's a reason Steve Stuart and Betty Sue Morris have endorsed him.


And that reason is why I oppose him... like I would any other democrat running for commissioner in these perilous times.

And when I look at the list of those endorsing him now, they're the Who's Who of those scamming us on the bridge, loot rail and tolls:

Jaime Herrera, all the democrat mayors and CRC scammers jamming that crap pile down our throats  and Jerry Nutter... who is also supporting and fund raising for Tim Probst against Republican Senator Don Benton (R-17).

And, of course, who Marc Boldt has endorsed:



Note the similarities between those on the list endorsing Stuart and those endorsing Boldt.

Just the kind of endorsements I WON'T support.

Another example of faux democrat tolerance: Pro-life democrat congressional candidate barred from forum.

Was it that long ago the democratian and their local democrat masters wept crocodile tears over the local GOP kicking Marc Boldt to the curb?

What is it the made-up, unnamed democrat said?
A Clark County Democrats official said Thursday the party does not sanction elected officials.
Apparently, that doesn't apply to candidates.
Pro-life Democrat congressional candidate barred from forum, forced to leave building
Democrats in Michigan are facing criticism from pro-life advocates for silencing a pro-life candidate wanting to participate in a candidate event.
On July 16, Right to Life of Michigan PAC-endorsed candidate Bob Costello was prevented from speaking at a forum for congressional candidates in the 14th Congressional District and was forced to leave the forum after attempting to speak. The forum was supposed to be an open forum for the Democratic congressional candidates of the 14th District but Costello (who is one of the five Democratic candidates on the ballot) wasn’t invited.
As RLM indicates, “Costello, a prolife Democrat, was one of four congressional candidates who attended the event even though he was threatened with arrest if he attempted to speak at this event by the president of the Grosse Pointe Democratic Club. Costello believes his pro-life beliefs were the reason he wasn’t invited to the event and was prevented from speaking.”
“The main focus of Costello’s campaign is the protection of religious freedom which Obamacare’s HHS mandate violates by forcing religious institutions which operate schools and hospitals to violate their beliefs by providing coverage for services they object to,” RLM said. “The other candidates who attended the forum (Gary Peters, Mary Waters and Brenda Lawrence) remained shamelessly silent as their co-candidate was prevented from speaking.”

Haugen lost 3 votes here today.

Look, I admit it: Jaime Herrera is a disaster as a representative in Congress, much like she was in the legislature.

Her pro-bridge/light rail tolls shtick will hurt this area for decades, sucking $100's of millions of dollars out of our local economy in tolls for a bridge replacement, light rail and tolls that we do not want, do not need and cannot afford.  There is no way I would ever vote for her for anything except, perhaps a "guilty" verdict.

So, along comes Jon Haugen, democrat (this time) the only one with the guts to take Babs on.  His positions on the CRC scam are music to a conservatives ears.  I was going to vote for him, as was my wife and kids.

The operative word being "was." 

And then, today, I find out he's got a screw loose.

In an email unsolicited exchange between Haugen and Retired Navy Commander Larry Patella (Haugen, too, is a retired Navy Commander) he lifted the mask and showed a true, genuine, whack job:
From: Jon Haugen [mailto:jthaugen@yahoo.com]


Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2012 8:33 PM

To: Local Mailing List

Cc: WA-03 N David Madore; WA-03 V MOAA BETH BROWN; Clark CC Tom Mielke; WA-03 N Columbian Stevie Mathieu; MOAA Shoemaker; JT Haugen; judgejohnwulle@comcast.net

Subject: WA-03 Larry Patella, bigot

Sunday, 22 July 2012

Hi Larry,

I know you are bigoted toward our President probably because his skin color is not white. You had a letter published in The Reflector claiming Barack Obama was a Muslim when you knew he was not, you lied.

I do not know you well but I have not attended local Military Officers Association of America (MOAA) because of your association with that group.

I hate to say that a fellow retired Navy Commander is a bigot but you have proven your self to be a bigot.

Please remove my name from your mailing list. I do not wish to be associated with you.

Jon Haugen

Commander, Naval Reserve, Retired.
As a former commissioner Army officer, I am embarrassed that this kind of political bigotry can be expressed by some one who makes such a big deal, not only about his service but the service of others not even running.

That said, one may have the opinion that Obama is a muslim without being a bigot in any way.  One can have the opinion that Obama and his policies have been a disaster that will take generations to recover from without care or concern over Obama's half-white heritage... and one can feel free to oppose him entirely for political and philosophical reasons, much like I've opposed democrat morons of the past like the previous worst president in the history of this country,. the lily-white Jimmy Carter.

But one can't do and keep MY vote is attempt to brand someone and label someone for an opinion that wasn't apparently, expressed directly to Haugen but instead, through a newspaper (I can't find the article in question) as if the First Amendment was the First Suggestion.

If opposition to the sheer, unadulterated idiocy of that empty-suited, anti-American racist bigot occupying the White House just nowmakes me a "bigot", then I guess I'll have to live with it.  But in this instance, that opposition is not because of the color of the source of that idiocy but because of the idiocy and incompetence itself.

That Haugen is so twisted that he either doesn't know or cannot differentiate the difference disqualifies him for consideration for election to anything... including dog catcher.