Wednesday, October 12, 2016

Watch the hypocrisy of the left and the RINOs: Obama makes Trump look.... presidential.

We've been treated to the faux outrage of the left and the RINO contingent over a video 11 years old: scum, the lot of them.

Well, now we have video of Obama, taken in 2008 on a campaign plane, where he's showing off his penis, covered as it may be, to the female reporting staff on his campaign aircraft.



Think these same scum are going to condemn Obama?

Think Hillary or any of her minions are going to beat the hell out of the president for doing far worse than Trump?

Hell, no.

This has been up for over 7 years... and not one of these same scum have a problem with it.

You see, it's not just the issue: it's the rank hypocrisy those attacking Trump have when this sort of thing happens.

The result?

Clearly, Obama makes Trump look "presidential" in comparison. 

Uh, Oh... Crain, Boger and the other fake Republicans got a lot of 'splainin' to do: Boldt endorses Sam Kim.

About every democrat alive has endorsed Republican/Democrat (depends on the day, I guess) Sam Kim against Vicky Kraft in the 17th District.

Imagine my non-surprise when my democrat brother-in-law endorsed county employee and Republican/Democrat (depending on the day) Sam Kim.





I know Kim. I worked with him while I was a consultant for the Battle Ground School District. I also know why he switched to democrat after hooking up with the fake Republican RINO element.

Kim's sister is a democrat state representative.  I suppose it would have been a bit embarrassing for the sister to have to keep explaining why her brother ran as GOP.

That's not the real reason, of course: the real reason is they made him an offer he couldn't refuse involving dollars.  And those dollars... in the high 5 figures for his campaign, was the weight that pulled him over the side.

THIS Sam Kim is completely different from that one.  THAT one would have walked through fire for his principles.  This one?  Well, they had a 5 figure price tag.

But that's neither here nor there.

What THIS post is about is that the RINOs who backed Marc Boldt over a conservative seem to be silent over Boldt's decision to endorse a democrat over Vicki Craft when the balance of House control is hanging by a thread.

Boldt, whose investigation for making $5000 disappear from his 2012 campaign account continues and is under review by the Attorney General's office as this is written... has made his hatred for anyone to the right of Mao crystal clear. 

This seems to be the Jim Mains puppet-master "Boldt is a tool" influence.  Marc doesn't go to the can without getting instructions from Mains... so the impact is rather clear.

Where's Crain?  Where's Boger?  Are they publicly taking my fake Republican brother-in-law to task for this idiocy?

Of course not.

Isn't it odd that Boldt would seem to have so much more in common with his fellow leftists than he did with the Republicans... fake, like Carolyn Crain and Brent Boger... and otherwise... who got this clown elected?  Does Mains have some sort of leash on this guy?

THIS is the kind of thing I warned everyone about back when it mattered.  Boldt votes left, his politics are left and he would do all he could to keep the Legislature out of GOP hands because, well, that's what democrats in this state do.

Right, Marc?

Tuesday, October 11, 2016

The oddity of endorsements: People, generally, can think for themselves when we think at all.

OK. I admit it.  I'm a Trump supporter.

I support Trump for one simple reason: of the two possible winners, the alternative nightmare is unthinkable.

As the RINOs out themselves by recoiling in much more horror over an 11-year-old tape than they ever expressed, say, over the slaughter of 4 Americans in Benghazi... by withdrawing their "endorsements," I began to ponder what that means...

Our increasingly worthless waste of skin congresswoman, a complete puppet owned and operated by Cathy McMorris, (Herrera was something of a party-girl herself, back in the day, or so I'm told) used this as an excuse to do the very thing she hopes and prays that her own increasingly restive GOP base will not do to her... join me in voting for someone else... and I wondered: short of outing herself as yet another establishment RINO... what did her hissy-fit accomplish?

So, when the local GOP takes a hard look at kicking her out (which, to my great disappointment, they did NOT do...) the leftists and the RINOs and that moron running the democratian threw a fit.

But let her engage in this establishment cowardice... (And brighter RINO lights such as Brent Boger have joined her in her faux outrage) and that's all good.  Hypocrite, much?

My question here is this: who is left on this planet that actually votes for anyone based on what someone else thinks?

Here, the standard isn't who to vote FOR, it's who to vote AGAINST.  And I provide the salient facts to back my position.

When the democratian endorsed Lou's buttbuddy Rivers, did they mention she lied to get elected?  Did they mention her pledge not to support gas tax and tab fee increases?  Did they mention her lies cost us $700 million dollars, including $500 million sucked out of our pockets for projects in Spokane and, of course, King County?

Nope. Can't do anything to injure the meme.

*I* mention these realities because they're true.  Truth is a typically foreign concept to that despicable rag; As shown here the rag will endorse anyone that Lou drinks with or who kisses his ass or the ass of the rag's agenda.

As I pointed out earlier, there was no question, for example, that Lefty Lou was going to endorse Wilson.  After all, the with the rag circling the drain, he's got to keep those ad buys from DeWils coming in, right?  A deal's a deal, ain't it?

That, of course, is one of the main reasons endorsements are utterly worthless from other politicians and from the media.

Endorsements can be, and obviously have been, bought for good, American cash money.

They can also be bought by kowtowing to the king, so to speak... or at least the "king" in his own mind.

In this instance, we are best served by voting for everyone the democratian opposes.

Generally, that's what I do.  Almost all of my ballot will be covered with the opposite vote from the one Lefty wanted.

For my part, unlike the rag, I actually urge prospective voters to dig deep and research their choices.  Find out what these people are made of.  Email them questions (every once in a while, they may even deign to respond to your questions, though most won't (Note the counter in the left column here... today is the 248th day that Gas Tax Rivers has ignored my request for her to explain her lies in the town hall meeting she held on January 9th in Battle Ground) )

In the interim, I again urge you to blow past what ANYONE says, INCLUDING me.  Do your own research.  Ask yourself: do these people who want us to elect them give a damn about us?  Do they vote their own agendas or do they actually represent their district?  Have they lied to get elected?  Are they lying now?  Are they making any promises?  If so, what are they?  If they aren't, why aren't they?  If they aren't, then why should we vote for them?

That those endorsed by the rag or other politicians have received that accolade because they bought somebody off, made the deal that sold us out, carried the rag's water like Gunga Din, drink with Lou, or any other reason can NEVER be a substitute for your due diligence and your own research.

And if you're unwilling to do the work?

Do us all a favor: don't vote.

Leave it to those who actually care enough to matter.  For God's Sake, don't just sit there with a voter pamphlet and make a decision off of that: Greg Kimsey showed how criminal those lies can be and we've been moronic enough to keep him in office for years.

Do the work.  Leave your biases and emotions out of it.  Look at where we are, how we got here and where we're going.

Are you better off now than you were 8 years ago?

That anyone would vote for this witch is a mystery to me.

The RINO scum bailing on Trump (as if they were ever there) would have this be president because Trump said something 11 years ago that they don't like now.





Monday, October 10, 2016

Not surprising that Lou endorsed Rivers, being buds and all. But leaving out the lie?

As expected, Lou endorsed another RINO for election,  In fact, it's not surprising at all, given that once Lou loves you...

Meanwhile, THE most bizarre element of Lou's love note was this passage:
For example, Rivers voted in favor of an increase to the gas tax in 2015, a bill designed to raise $16 billion for transportation projects. While it might have been politically expedient to oppose any tax increase as a matter of principle — as some Republicans from Southwest Washington did — Rivers understood that climbing on board would help deliver construction projects for her district. She demonstrated the kind of pragmatism that is beneficial to her constituents.
Odd.  Lou doesn't mention that Rivers bailed on her promise to oppose the gas tax the rag is so proud of her for ignoring.


He doesn't mention that 75% plus of her district OPPOSED the gas tax she betrayed us for... and got elected TO oppose.

They don't mention our net $500 million LOSS thanks to her.

They don't mention her lies and excuses at her town hall meeting of January 9 in Battle Ground, where she indicated that she could be replaced by an accountant, since it was all a "business decision."





(Credit Lew Waters/Brent Boger for handing me this particular rhetorical club)


Of course, the democratian's got some strange ideas as to what integrity and honor really are, so that's not terribly surprising.

I will be voting for Eric Holt.  I don't particularly agree with his politics, but I would rather have a full-blown Democrat who tells the truth, than the fake variety like Rivers who lies to us... repeatedly... and often.