From the Right Corner: There are lies, damned lies and the Clark County Democrap website.

Whoever runs that website for the Clark County democrats is the prototypical, lying weasel of the moveoff.org variety.

Reduced to begging for help from a moveoff.org/Howard Dean offshoot known as “progressive majority” out of Washington, DC, the despicable actions of the losers of the left speak for themselves.

Just a few snippets of their ripe, reeking hypocrisy:

First of all, the ludicrous claim that Mielke is “running behind.”

The true test of perception about who is “running behind” is in the pudding of the mailings and other media a campaign relies on. While obviously ignorant, the idiot running the website for the Clark County democraps should know that the farther behind you are, the more negative you must go if you are to have any hope of catching up.

Thus, Stuart’s mailings have become uniformly negative.

He cannot talk about himself, so all his mailings puke out are lies and innuendo about Tom. Clearly, Stuart is taking full advantage of the Appeals Court decision allowing the opening of the flood gates of lies and invective to ratchet the wide open flow of filth coming from the Stuart campaign (If you want to call it a “campaign”) and his ally, the progressive majority.

If you haven’t noticed already. Stuart is, essentially, broke. He hasn’t done any radio, because first, he can’t find a viable station to run any ads and second, he couldn’t afford any ads even if any station worth a damn would run them.

So now, he’s reduced to begging from his masters in Washington, D.C., an ultra-leftist group made up of the Jane Fonda-Streisand types infesting the American political scene. PM is picking up the slack because Stuart is a part of their deep bench. He’s a fringe leftists with a far-left background and agenda, so they’re dumping a ton of money into this race to protect their investment.

Lie number two.

Responding to the lies and filth of scumbags like the one who wrote the democraps article on their trash site is something that unfortunately must be done.

I believe Tom wanted this to remain a race on the issues. Stuart, knowing he was falling farther and farther behind, resorted to the first round of vicious, unprincipled and false push-polling calls in mid-September. That’s when the gloves came off.

Engaging in push-polling is the FIRST symptom that you know you’re behind. Stuart has at least TWICE resorted to that despicable tactic.

Hypocrisy number 3

Democraps are whining about Tom getting late developer money. Where was their sniveling about the around $110,000 in developer cash Stuart has raked in?

This hypocrite condemns Tom for taking developer money but gives Stuart a pass FOR DOING PRECISELY THE SAME THING?

Hypocrisy/Lie Number 4

Democraps are whining that Tom is caving Stuart’s ass in over his push polling…. THEN THEY FEEL COMPELLED TO LIE ABOUT TOM DOING THE SAME.

Push-polling by and or for Stuart is an establish, absolute fact. YET THESE CLOWNS ARE NOW REDUCED TO CLAIMING THAT TOM IS DOING THE SAME THING?

Stuart denies it, of course. But that he lies like most people breath is a fact. Because the one thing we CAN be sure of is that he’s done NOTHING to stop the push-polls on his behalf. He’s done NOTHING to condemn the process.

That’s all I need to know. You ain’t push-polling, Stuart? Then why haven’t you condemned the practice? Well, we all know the answer to that, don’t we?

Hypocrisy number 5

Democraps are whining about Tom’s plans for developers… yet they say nothing about Stuart, bought and paid for by a select few developers himself. Why aren’t they as concerned about HIS plans?

Hypocrisy number 6

Democraps act like the hiring of a single consultant determines everything about a campaign, yet this clown cites exactly ZERO instances of any mailing with specific inaccuracies.

Lie number 6.

Democraps claim Stuart opposes the Megacasino because he SAYS so.

But the FACTS tell a different story.

The ONLY question here is this:

What has Stuart DONE to oppose the megacasino?

It’s easy to SAY you “oppose” something. But what has he DONE?

Nothing. No letter to the BIA condemning or protesting the development. No action to get rid of the MOU. No public condemnation of the idea. Nothing.

The FACTS speak far louder then his words. In this case, since Stuart has done NOTHING to oppose it, clearly, he supports it.

Hypocrisy/Lie number 7

Democraps give Stuart a pass on his push-polling. Stuart has engaged in push-polling… in mid September. Tom has NEVER engaged in push-polling during the entirety of his political life.

Tom has specific instances with actual questions, such as:

“Would you vote for a former state representative if you knew he had voted to allow women to throw their babies into dumpsters?”

Stuart and the democraps? Nothing.

Hypocrisy/Lie number 8

Democraps claim that “: Tom Mielke has no plan to take our community into the future or how to pay for it.”

A simple visit to Tom’s website shows that for the lie it is. But what does a trip to Stuart’s website reveal?

Nothing. Absolutely nothing.

If you go over to Stuart’s site… you’ll find:

home
events
Navigation
Endorsements
Events
image galleries
rsvp

But… where’s his platform? Where’s HIS vision? What’s HIS plan for Clark County?

I can’t tell. He doesn’t have a PAGE for it, like Tom does. Why not? What does he want to keep us from knowing?

Stuart has been endorsed by every left-wing whack job outfit in existence. He’s getting a ton of money from a huge leftist-fringe outfit out of Washington, D.C.. He’s fallen behind in the contribution race, as the public has voted with their checkbooks. He’s owned by a select few developers and a nationwide Deaniac outfit that’s trying (badly, as it turns out) to save him from himself, a fact this idiot completely ignores in his rampant hypocrisy.

But that is the level of delusion we’ve come to expect… both from Stuart, and the Clark County democrap website.

Stuart blows it again.

So, the Commissioners are going to pass a resolution against the CRC scam.  Well done.

Stuart throws a hissy fit, and babbles:

All three Clark County commissioners hold a seat on the nine-member C-Tran board. But any statement the county makes alone won't have an effect on the CRC, Stuart said.

"The county commission has no legal authority over this interstate project. Period," Stuart said.

How long have we been hearing that local officials have no say?

Long enough to question yesterday's idiocy from Tim "The Liar" Leave-it?

Strange, isn't it?  The democratian and their allies, like Stuart and Leave-it, keep telling us there's nothing that can be done at the local level... it's all out of their hands, the commissioners, for example, have no say.

So, what does Leave-it do?  You know, one of the guys that allegedly "have no say?"

And why is Stuart so upset about this if, in fact, it's as meaningless as they would like us to believe?

Here's the thing:  Stuart, obviously, will be a "no."  But all of that begs the question: if this resolution will have no impact... then why are the CRC scammers like Stuart so upset about it?

Why do they want to stall it?

Stuart whines:

Commissioner Steve Stuart said he learned of the resolution this morning only after Madore's request by email -- and Mielke's agreement by phone -- and believes the public should have been involved in the process.

"I'll keep fighting to make sure open and transparent government is more than just a talking point," Stuart said.

Did we not have an "open and transparent" election last November?

Did the two most strident opponents in government win by large margins?

Did the commissioner objecting the longest and loudest get 21,000 more votes then the now former commissioner who was so loudly in favor of this scam... not unlike Stuart, come to think of it?

The people HAVE spoken through a VERY "transparent process."  CRC scammers like Stuart and Leave-it just don't want to listen.

Stuart wants a large room full of his buddies... the unions, the CRUDEC/Identity Vancouver/Downtown Mafia types to come in and lie while he continues to ignore the FACTS behind his perfidy: that, according to the Oregon Supreme Court and the CRC itself, this whole scam is for loot rail and they had no intention of ever listening to the people.

Well, guess what?

That blithering idiot in the White House was right when he said that elections have consequences.  And they do.

But they also have consequences down here: and down here, Steve, your side of this rip off is getting hammered like a nail.

I have no problem with Commissioners Mielke and Madore passing this, and doing it now.  Stuart would waste everyone's time and turn this into a Nazi-like show-trial, where his side could stand up and beat their breasts and whine and moan and complain while they CONTINUE to ignore us, CONTINUE to ignore the facts and CONTINUE to lie.

And Commissioner Stuart, if you don't like it, then vote "no."  In fact, I would ASK you to vote "no," because if you're still here two years from now, this is the kind of vote you'll be hearing a lot about as you are dismissed from office the same way Boldt was.

Meanwhile, if, in fact, as Stuart says, the commissioner's have "no legal authority" in this matter.... then why does he care WHAT they do?  Why doesn't he say something like "sure, go ahead.... won't matter anyway, but hey, if that's what they want to do...."

Because we all know it DOES matter.  It sends another message to Washington, DC, and it might actually force that simple idiot in Congress to actually DO something to spike this thing instead of just doing her nails.  But Stuart's complaint's tend to cast doubt on the idea that this is meaningless.

Just sayin'.

Lefty Lou uses Steve Stuart's cowardice to hammer Madore and Mielke.

Stuart's "tail-between-his-legs" departure gave Lefty Lou all the excuse he needs... as if he ever needed one... to hammer Madore and Mielke for the hundredth time or so over the past 18 months.

His column this weekend is a recitation of lies, start to finish, top to bottom.  That he likely believes this tripe is the thing, it shows the level of self-delusion he's known for.

From the first line he wrote ("Well, OK, I didn't see that coming.) to each and every word after it, he indicts himself and cements the conclusion that he has no fricking idea what's going on outside that democratian cocoon he's buried himself in.

Anyone who knows local politics knew Stuart wasn't going to run.  Committing political suicide at this point of his career isn't resume' enhancing, and that's what he was looking at.

Further, was it all that long ago that Lefty wrote:

January

County Commissioner Steve Stuart — beaten and battered in 2013 by Commissioners David Madore and Tom Mielke — opts not to run for re-election.

He didn't "see" the obvious coming... but less than a month ago, wrote that he did.

Shades of John Kerry.

It was likely he was going to be out since he perhaps, was paid off for his CTran vote with TriMet that screwed the people of this county sideways and violated his promise to exercise the county veto on that agreement.

It was likely he was going to be out since he babbled the words that would have haunted him into his political grave:

"And I've said it before: I don't speak for the people... I will NEVER speak for "the people," I speak for Steve and some of you are going to agree with me and some of you aren't."

Most of us, it turns out, don't.

Lefty's delusion in this piece knows no bounds.  The idea that merely, magically, announcing his reelection effort would ultimately result in a different outcome than the one Stuart is now orchestrating is the thing.

There are two reasons Stuart isn't running again... one guaranteed, one extremely likely.

1.  He can't win. (Guaranteed)

2.  His protestations notwithstanding, he's likely got a cush gig lined up because of his betrayal vote.

He's not only got a gig like that lined up, he's asked himself if the aggravation of getting his ass kicked at the polls to get to where he's going is worth it when he, in the alternative, can control his own exit.

Lefty, who has no more idea about political reality than he does quantum mechanics, can only make the leap from Stuart running to Stuart winning.  In this instance, that would only apply if he were running unopposed.  A blind man could see that in a minute.

Naturally, Stuart's departure causes Lefty to run through his hatred bullet points about how every ill known to man here locally is the fault of everyone BUT Stuart.

Well, we all know that Lefty ran his newspaper into bankruptcy... so, off hand, I'd have to say that when it comes to leading, Lefty should probably take Madore's seminar to find out how it's done.

Lefty went on to spew this nonsense:

Stuart said because the freeholder process has begun to change the way county government runs, that's a direct indication the M&M boys have lost.

For those of you not paying attention, 15 freeholders were elected in November to write a county constitution. If voters OK it, that could result in lessening the power any two county commissioners would have.

The lie to this is obvious: the charter movement was alive and well when the two democrats, Stuart and Boldt, were running the show.  The lie here is that, of course, "the freeholder process" has changed absolutely nothing.  The other truth, covered up by Lefty like so many other truths he finds inconvenient, is that this self-same Stuart and this self-same Lefty Lou Brancaccio are the ones who killed the then hated, now loved, charter movement.

Whatever the freeholders come up with has to pass before ANYTHING "changes."  And weakening the power of the conservatives on the CCoB is likely to cause it to fail.

Just because a coward like Steve or a coward like Lou claims Madore and Mielke lost in no way means that they have.

In fact, these two are the losers and the advisory vote where most everything Stuart and Brancaccio supported was crushed at the polls is what spelled out the certain defeat that's causing Stuart to slink away, tuck-tailed and cowed.

Well, I told Stuart, others will feel you're not running because you knew you couldn't win re-election.

"Without being cocky, I think I'd win. It would be a battle, for sure — it always is — but I think I'd win."

"Others" being primarily me. 

What else do you expect him to say?  "Yeah, Lou, I'd have been killed out there?"

Of COURSE he'd say "I think I'd win."  But there's absolutely NOTHING to support his self-serving conclusion.

He could NOT win... and neither can any other democrat.

Stuart barely won against a non-working candidate back in 2010.  Given his incessant support of the CRC Scam, his betrayal of the people of this county with TriMet, his rank "Steve is my only constituent" rap?

Steve Stuart had no chance.  Lying about it doesn't change it.  My Cavalier could have beat his ass with his tail tied behind his back.

And then, Lefty hammers Madore with this stupidity:

I had the opportunity to ask Madore if it made him happy that Stuart will not run. Madore didn't directly answer that question.

"It's an exciting opportunity for the people to choose a new leader, and that's always an exciting thing. But I can work with anyone."

I tried asking the question a different way. Did Madore consider Stuart a thorn in his side?

"No. We certainly had our differences."

My take? Madore is happy to see Stuart go, and he does consider him a thorn in his side.

With the reality that run or no, he would be gone, I'm reasonably sure that Madore doesn't care one way or the other.  And given Lefty's hatred of Madore, Madore's best response to this and any other question from the democratian SHOULD be "no comment."

It's this kind of garbage that makes the rag... and Lefty... worthless.

We don't NEED your take on a Madore answer to a question, Lefty.  We don't CARE what "your take" is.

In the end, I'm glad Slimeball is going to be gone.  Ultimately, he'd have been gone if he HAD run for re-election. Leftists seem to have a hard time grasping that reality.

He's through in local politics because of his arrogance, his demonstrated lack of integrity, his betrayal of the people of this county, and his politically-fatal-for-life declaration that his only constituency is, well, Steve.

While that might play well in the 49th District Soviet, it doesn't play well anywhere else.

And no amount of damage control or image rehabilitation can fix those... or make him saleable to anyone living east of the 205 or north of 39th.

So, yeah: in direct answer to the question

Is Steve Stuart out forever?

Around here he is. He might do an Inslee and go scam someone else, somewhere else, but his political future locally is as dead as Marc Boldt's... who, come to think of it, was the roadmap for Stuart's own political demise.

The usual leftist morons will flock to Brancaccio's pigeon-feed like breadcrumbs in a park.  But it won't change anything: Stuart is going to be gone, and we will all be better off for it.

So now we get the first in the series of Columbian campaign pieces for Stuart

Their editorial today proves beyond doubt that the Columbian has joined the campaign organization of Steve Stuart.

Well, here's ANOTHER perception that they haven't talked about:

Bill exempts urban candidates
Funding cap on campaigns doesn't apply to a few major counties, ports
KENNETH P. VOGEL; The News Tribune - Apr 19, 2005

Steve Stuart probably would have been required to give back most, if not all, of $40,000 in campaign contributions under a bill being considered in the Legislature.

But Stuart's friend and predecessor as Clark County commissioner, Sen. Craig Pridemore (D-Vancouver), made sure that wouldn't happen.

Pridemore removed a provision from a bill that would have limited contributions to candidates running for county offices in Pierce, Clark and Spokane counties as well as the ports of Tacoma and Seattle.

....

For Stuart, who received four $10,000 contributions this year for his special election in November, the original bill would either require him to spend or return at least $37,300, the amount that's in excess of the proposed $675-per-election limit.

Stuart was appointed in December to the Board of Clark County Commissioners to fill a seat vacated by Pridemore, who left the three-member panel when he was elected to the Senate.

Stuart's only declared opponent, Republican Tom Mielke, said Pridemores amendment smacks of special-interest lawmaking.

Stuart said he talked to Pridemore about the bill, but didn't ask him to propose the amendment, which was added earlier this month in the Senate Government Operations and Elections Committee.

(THEN WHY DID HE TALK TOP PRIDEMORE ABOUT THE BILL?)

And Pridemore said the amendment wasn't about Stuart, whom he recommended for the $93,000-a-year county post.

(RIGHT. IT WAS SHEER COINCIDENCE THAT STUART TALKED TO PRIDEMORE ABOUT THE BILL, IT WOULD COST STUART $40,000 IF IT PASSED, AND PRIDEMORE KILLED THE BILL. NONE OF THOSE THINGS HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH STUART'S CONVERSATION WITH PRIDEMORE.)

"I know it would have effected him," Pridemore said, but he added "my concern with it was a generic thing. Very frequently, having some large donors is a good thing."

(ESPECIALLY WHEN ONE OF YOUR BUDDIES BENEFITS, RIGHT, CRAIG?)

More...

Pridemore, of course, claims his move wasn't about Stuart. Pridemore is a liar. The article speaks for itself.

I actually do agree with the Columbian on this much, though: the perception DOES count. And in the midst of this blatant power-play, where Stuart let the money of his multi-$10,000 donors talk, what perception are we to gain from this effort?

Stuart sees Pridemore. Pridemore removes provision of bill that would have cost his buddy Stuart $40,000. The perception of that is this: Stuart is all about the money and screw the people.

In the interest of fairness, I'm wondering when we're going to see the Columbian's editorial about THIS? When hell freezes over?

Will done, Steve. I hope you choke on it. But don't expect us to buy into any idea that you're some kind of paragon of virtue, because you ain't.

And the Columbian's bogus crap about a bus tour... A BUS TOUR... doesn't provide you with any cover. Their bizarre editorial was done entirely to pump you up while they slam Boldt. If Environmental groups want to put on a bus tour, then they, the environmental groups, should organize it, just like the BIA organized theirs.

On the Bridge/loot rail project: Clark County's Clueless Commissioners.

.
Long time readers of this blog are well aware of my brother-in-law, County Commissioner Marc Boldt's decision to lie to me, directly to my face, about holding a county-wide advisory vote on the bridge/loot rail project that he assured me would take place this past November.

Fellow democrat County Commissioner Steve Stuart has leapt out of my corruption frying pan into a fire of arrogance.

For years, I had portrayed Stuart as the most corrupt local official in government by virtue of the largess he had received from David Barnett, megacasino developer, which had enabled him to get elected back in 2005 the first time. From the "what have you done for me lately" file, when push came to shove, Stuart voted to sue... which earned him a return trip back from the particular purgatory.

Yet now, Stuart is unapologetically setting up legal government extortion in the form of his rabid support for a bridge to replace the paid for one we have now so he can pay off his union buds and bring loot rail into Clark County... two transportation events we do not need or want or can afford.

Stuart nearly lost his last election because of his position on the bridge/loot rail issue; a position that ignores the will of the people he would govern... a position that saddles 65,000 Clark County families with a thousand dollar plus per year fee, in addition to the Oregon State Income Tax they already pay, but he lucked out by facing a wholly unprepared candidate who, while having substantial political backing, had no professional guidance or clue when the backing he was receiving insisted on taking the advice of people who have no clue, no history of success and who, frankly, don't know what the hell they're doing.

The man providing that backing, David Madore, is getting a seat at the table at Princess Ridgefield Barbie's table when the Camas Manikin brings a transportation dog and pony show to town on Monday.

Madore, who will, one day, come to figure out that while it's OK to kill the King, you'd better make sure he's dead; managed to get a seat at the table to express the position of the majority of the people of Clark County: that we do not need, cannot afford and do not want this project; that we have wasted in excess of $100,000,000 and have precisely zip to show for it, that neither the people nor our local economy can afford the billions in tolls Stuart and his ilk, and by extension through his inaction, Boldt, want to extort for the people of Clark County.

Instead of having the maturity to respect the opinions of his constituents, Stuart has done nothing to seek those opinions out, since he's well aware his actions are in direct opposition to those he would govern.

Madore nearly took Stuart out. Had he known what he was doing, he would have. But because he missed when he pulled his political trigger, we get this kind of crap from a punk who happened to be re-elected to the county commission, to our lasting regret:

Commissioner Steve Stuart, who beat a Madorista last fall, questioned why Madore was on a list of "local transportation experts and stakeholders" that includes Clark County Public Works Director Pete Capell, Larry Paulson, executive director of the Port of Vancouver and Paula Hammond, secretary of the Washington State Department of Transportation.

"He doesn't know anything," Stuart said of Madore. "He didn't even know the I-205 bridge had federal funding until I told him last summer."

"Madore is a crackpot," said Stuart, who was admittedly cranky because he'd just had a root canal and hadn't taken any painkillers.

Well, the answer is two-fold: First, getting a toady like Stuart up there to just agree with everyone else sitting up there to orally stimulate their bridger/looter position is a waste of time, effort and energy. Everyone knows Stuart would run over his own relatives to get this built.... why give him yet another in the unending series of platforms to spout the same lies, over and over? Madore, who provides jobs for the private sector, is arguably the head of the only organized opposition to the steaming pile Stuart is attempting to jam down our throats with the assistance of Boldt. Clearly, Stuart doesn't want anyone outside of his little circle of fascists to know how despised, hated and unwanted this project actually is. Madore will provide a glimpse of that opposition. And those who despise their constituency... like Stuart... don't want the massive opposition to become known to those who can, hopefully soon, kill this deal.

Second, Madore has contributed more in value to this county in one year than Stuart has in the entirety of his life. That said, Babs is as fixated on Madore's checkbook as anyone else. Perhaps in that dimbulb brain of hers, she realizes that if she crosses Madore, he won't hesitate to hit her over the head with it.

Meanwhile, Steve, get a grip. What you have to say on the subject isn't any more important then what my cocker spaniel... or Madore... has to say. So, if you want to testify, submit it in writing... you know, like the rest of us?

And then Boldt's take on all of this:

Commissioner Marc Boldt said the hearing is going to be more than Herrera Buetler bargained for when she arranged a "listening session."

"I told the congresswoman today, 'This won't be the last time you screw up,'" Boldt said.

Kinda like you, eh, Marc?

The thing is that as clueless as Herrera is... and that's a pretty big subject... the idea that any elected official would call a "listening session" a MISTAKE is, well, just sickening.

I have no problems with Madore's effort to turn out the anti side: after all, the clowns we've elected... who won't have to pay this fee they're imposing on the rest of us... don't listen to us and even, as in the case of Boldt, lie to people to their faces about this issue.

Because Babs refuses to take a position on this... or much of anything else, for that matter, it's fairly obvious that nothing good will come out of this hearing.... only because what the PEOPLE want doesn't seem to make any difference to the clowns running the show.

Right, Steve?
.

A brief reminder of Craig Pridemore's corruption that the Columbian doesn't care about:

Here's a close look at Sen. Craig Pridemore's previous efforts at campaign reform from a few years back... it's a moldy oldy, but much closer to his reality.

So now we get the first in the series of Columbian campaign pieces for Stuart

Their editorial today proves beyond doubt that the Columbian has joined the campaign organization of Steve Stuart.

Well, here's ANOTHER perception that they haven't talked about:

Bill exempts urban candidates

Funding cap on campaigns doesn't apply to a few major counties, ports

KENNETH P. VOGEL; The News Tribune - Apr 19, 2005

But Stuart's friend and predecessor as Clark County commissioner, Sen. Craig Pridemore (D-Vancouver), made sure that wouldn't happen.

Pridemore removed a provision from a bill that would have limited contributions to candidates running for county offices in Pierce, Clark and Spokane counties as well as the ports of Tacoma and Seattle.
....

For Stuart, who received four $10,000 contributions this year for his special election in November, the original bill would either require him to spend or return at least $37,300, the amount that's in excess of the proposed $675-per-election limit.

Stuart was appointed in December to the Board of Clark County Commissioners to fill a seat vacated by Pridemore, who left the three-member panel when he was elected to the Senate.

Stuart's only declared opponent, Republican Tom Mielke, said Pridemores amendment smacks of special-interest lawmaking.

Stuart said he talked to Pridemore about the bill, but didn't ask him to propose the amendment, which was added earlier this month in the Senate Government Operations and Elections Committee.

(THEN WHY DID HE TALK TO PRIDEMORE ABOUT THE BILL?)

And Pridemore said the amendment wasn't about Stuart, whom he recommended for the $93,000-a-year county post.

(RIGHT. IT WAS SHEER COINCIDENCE THAT STUART TALKED TO PRIDEMORE ABOUT THE BILL, IT WOULD COST STUART $40,000 IF IT PASSED, AND PRIDEMORE KILLED THE BILL. NONE OF THOSE THINGS HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH STUART'S CONVERSATION WITH PRIDEMORE.)

"I know it would have effected him," Pridemore said, but he added "my concern with it was a generic thing. Very frequently, having some large donors is a good thing."

(ESPECIALLY WHEN ONE OF YOUR BUDS BENEFITS, RIGHT, CRAIG?)

More...

Pridemore, of course, claims his move wasn't about Stuart. Pridemore is a liar. The article speaks for itself.

I actually do agree with the Columbian on this much, though: the perception DOES count. And in the midst of this blatant power-play, where Stuart let the money of his multi-$10,000 donors talk, what perception are we to gain from this effort?

Stuart sees Pridemore. Pridemore removes provision of bill that would have cost his buddy Stuart $40,000. The perception of that is this: Stuart is all about the money and screw the people.

In the interest of fairness, I'm wondering when we're going to see the Columbian's editorial about THIS? When hell freezes over?

Will done, Steve. I hope you choke on it. But don't expect us to buy into any idea that you're some kind of paragon of virtue, because you ain't.

And the Columbian's bogus crap about a bus tour... A BUS TOUR... doesn't provide you with any cover. Their bizarre editorial was done entirely to pump you up while they slam Boldt.

If environmental groups want to put on a bus tour, then they, the environmental groups, should organize it, just like the BIA organized theirs.
____________________

Yeah, the selective memory of the democratian is a thing to behold.

Since "Slimeball" Stuart has no integrity; naturally, he's a "no" on the Integrity Resolution.

Democrat soon-to-be-former county commissioner Steve "Slimeball" Stuart is used to two things: Ignoring the will of the people and having it all his own way.

The latter went up in smoke when fellow democrat and Pro-CRC Scammer was destroyed in the last election by his polar opposite: Republican and Anti-CRC Commissioner David Madore.

The irony of all of that?

Stuart had been effectively ignoring the lone Republican on the Commission, Tom Mielke, for the entirety of his first 4 years on the CCBOC.

And now?

The shoe, to put a point on it, is on the other foot.

To leftists, that's a horrific turn of events.  To me, it's poetic justice... and just the first instalment at that.

Anywho, because Slimeball sold the entirety of this county out to TriMet along with the other CRC pimps, Commissioner Madore felt compelled to run a resolution expressing the county's outrage and apologizing to the people Stuart and his fellow slime have screwed so royally.

Stuart, best known for telling those he'd govern to fuck off when he uttered this at the close of a commissioner meeting last week:

"And I've said it before: I don't speak for the people.. I will NEVER speak for "the people," I speak for Steve and some of you are going to agree with me and some of you aren't."

Yeah, Steve... we get it.  Just like Joseph Stalin.

Naturally, those scum shilling the CRC are doing all they can to trash the vote of the people that made our position clear enough that even Stuart should have picked it up... and felt ashamed of screwing 400,000 of us.

Madore, of course, is kinda the anti-Slimeball.  He, in fact, DOES speak for the people.  The voice of the people DOES mean something... and unlike Stuart, Madore is going to do all he can to make sure it's both heard... and followed.

Stuart, who has made it clear that the will of the people is worthless, believes the overwhelming vote against his pet scam is meaningless.

Stuart, who has no power on the county commission, can feel free to bring his own resolution forward if he doesn't like Madore's.  That's his right.

Stuart, who knows he's up for a Boldt-sized ass-whooping in November of next year, broke new records in ironic, one-sided hypocrisy today when he babbled thus:

When Madore used the phrases "giving away the farm" and "selling out" to describe the situation, Stuart again took issue.

"(That language) is impugning the motives of people who are our colleagues," Stuart said. "And I'd appreciate it if you'd stop it."

The problem here with Slimeball is that he demands an end to that which he himself engages in every day... every time he opens his mouth when he speaks top, or about, David Madore.

In fact, what is it that oozed out of Stuart earlier in this same meeting?

At one point during the hours long discussion on Clark County Commissioner David Madore's "integrity resolution" on Tuesday, Commissioner Steve Stuart asked Madore if he was seeking "a pound of flesh" after a C-Tran vote didn't go Madore's way.

"That's what you want," Stuart said. "You want your pound of flesh."

The comment was one of the more tense moments during the four-hour meeting of Clark County commissioners. The meeting was intended to be a discussion on Madore's apologist resolution over a recent C-Tran vote authorizing a funding plan for a potential light-rail line in Clark County.

That's the kind of playground bullshit that proves Stuart is unfit for office.  Slimeball can bitch about Madore "impugning the motives of people" while he does precisely the same thing... all the time... which is OK when his target is Madore... right?

Well, that and his bizarre concept of governance where what the people demand doesn't matter.

Pridemore's campaign bill is kind of strange, considering his history. (Originally posted October 4, 2005)

.
Here's a close look at Sen. Criag Pridemore's previous efforts at campaign reform from a few years back... it's a moldy oldy, but much closer to his reality.

So now we get the first in the series of Columbian campaign pieces for Stuart

Their editorial today proves beyond doubt that the Columbian has joined the campaign organization of Steve Stuart.

Well, here's ANOTHER perception that they haven't talked about:

Bill exempts urban candidates

Funding cap on campaigns doesn't apply to a few major counties, ports

KENNETH P. VOGEL; The News Tribune - Apr 19, 2005

But Stuart's friend and predecessor as Clark County commissioner, Sen. Craig Pridemore (D-Vancouver), made sure that wouldn't happen.

Pridemore removed a provision from a bill that would have limited contributions to candidates running for county offices in Pierce, Clark and Spokane counties as well as the ports of Tacoma and Seattle.
....

For Stuart, who received four $10,000 contributions this year for his special election in November, the original bill would either require him to spend or return at least $37,300, the amount that's in excess of the proposed $675-per-election limit.

Stuart was appointed in December to the Board of Clark County Commissioners to fill a seat vacated by Pridemore, who left the three-member panel when he was elected to the Senate.

Stuart's only declared opponent, Republican Tom Mielke, said Pridemores amendment smacks of special-interest lawmaking.

Stuart said he talked to Pridemore about the bill, but didn't ask him to propose the amendment, which was added earlier this month in the Senate Government Operations and Elections Committee.

(THEN WHY DID HE TALK TO PRIDEMORE ABOUT THE BILL?)

And Pridemore said the amendment wasn't about Stuart, whom he recommended for the $93,000-a-year county post.

(RIGHT. IT WAS SHEER COINCIDENCE THAT STUART TALKED TO PRIDEMORE ABOUT THE BILL, IT WOULD COST STUART $40,000 IF IT PASSED, AND PRIDEMORE KILLED THE BILL. NONE OF THOSE THINGS HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH STUART'S CONVERSATION WITH PRIDEMORE.)

"I know it would have effected him," Pridemore said, but he added "my concern with it was a generic thing. Very frequently, having some large donors is a good thing."

(ESPECIALLY WHEN ONE OF YOUR BUDS BENEFITS, RIGHT, CRAIG?)

More...

Pridemore, of course, claims his move wasn't about Stuart. Pridemore is a liar. The article speaks for itself.

I actually do agree with the Columbian on this much, though: the perception DOES count. And in the midst of this blatant power-play, where Stuart let the money of his multi-$10,000 donors talk, what perception are we to gain from this effort?

Stuart sees Pridemore. Pridemore removes provision of bill that would have cost his buddy Stuart $40,000. The perception of that is this: Stuart is all about the money and screw the people.

In the interest of fairness, I'm wondering when we're going to see the Columbian's editorial about THIS? When hell freezes over?

Will done, Steve. I hope you choke on it. But don't expect us to buy into any idea that you're some kind of paragon of virtue, because you ain't.

And the Columbian's bogus crap about a bus tour... A BUS TOUR... doesn't provide you with any cover. Their bizarre editorial was done entirely to pump you up while they slam Boldt.

If environmental groups want to put on a bus tour, then they, the environmental groups, should organize it, just like the BIA organized theirs.
____________________

Yeah, the selective memory of the democratian is a thing to behold.
.

A tale of two endorsements: The Columbian blows the call – In our opinion – Keep Steve Stuart.

Yesterday, The Columbian endorsed Edri Gieger for the Vancouver School Board.

I have no problem with that. Wouldn't know Edri Geiger if she bit me. I’m not in the Vancouver School District, and, up until this endorsement, I’d never heard of her.
Today, the Columbian endorsed Steve Stuart. I’ve come to know a great deal about Steve Stuart… his background, his experience, and his education.

That’s really not the point of this essay. The point is to illustrate how the criteria the Columbian uses for their endorsements is, well, extremely flexible.

Yesterday, in granting Ms. Geiger their endorsement, The Columbian told us that it was a matter of experience:

“Geiger's opponent in the Nov. 8 general election is Mark Stoker, an attorney with a business background who has prepared well for the campaign. But he clearly lacks the experience in education that Geiger brings to this race.”

Now… I fully grant the idea that experience should play the most important part of the endorsement process. In this instance, Ms. Geiger’s experience clearly trumped her opponent’s education and status as a practicing attorney “…with a business background who has prepared well for the campaign.”

Now, in reviewing the Columbian’s pre-ordained endorsement of Stuart, it’s pretty clear that Tom Mielke’s ten years of government service, 8 of which involved serving as an elected state representative, had no impact on the Columbian’s endorsement process.

Instead, we’re told,

“It has been said that the recipe for good government begins with a diversity of opinions.”

Yet… one wonders: was that philosophy at play when the Columbian endorsed either Craig Pridemore or Judie Stanton for Commissioner? They were pretty much in lock step for their perspectives.

Odd, isn’t it, that “diversity of opinion” rates as some sort of reason to endorse someone THIS year… but it's had so little impact in the past.

Of course, it’s also odd when the person being endorsed is being paid off for special consideration by “progressive developers” who stuffed $88,000 into Stuart’s campaign…. $88,000 that his buddy, Craig Pridemore, arranged for him to keep. It’s VERY odd, given all that blather about a bus tour, that the shiny image of Steve Stuart, so carefully polished and enhanced by confirmed Mielke-haters of the Columbian editorial board (In 6 elections… guess how many times they’ve endorsed Mielke?) has yet to be tarnished by these self-righteous, “unbiased” scribes. The information is out there… why didn’t it make any difference to the Columbian, hhhmmmm? Maybe that “diversity of opinion” doesn’t include the opinion of honesty and character, eh?

Be that as it may, when it comes to elected office, Tom Mielke has more then 10 times the experience of Stuart. When it comes to “diversity of opinion,” it’s pretty clear to anyone who bothered to look that the part of the developer community that dropped almost $90,000 into Stuart’s campaign are hoping for something entirely different then the Columbian appears to believe Stuart will produce.

Odd also that the Columbian felt compelled to comment on Tom’s campaign manager’s former connection to Storedahl, without commenting that Stuart’s campaign manager stands to benefit directly if the megacasino is built at the 319th and La Center exit of I-5.

Yup… you guessed it. Salvador Madrigal, who has come out in writing SUPPORTING the megacasino, is Steve Stuart’s campaign manager’s father. Why would he do that? Because of the proximity of land that he owns next to the proposed megacasino site on NW 44th Ave in Ridgefield… that would be a prime, target for expansion… huge dollars to the Madrigals. Why is it that Steve Stuart has done nothing to keep the megacasino from being built? Why is it the Madrigals want Stuart to win so badly?

Gee… I dunno. Sounds kinda tough to me. Why is it the Columbian remains silent about all of this? Do you think, for one minute, they’d keep their traps shut if Stuart was a Republican?

The Columbian refers to Mielke’s rating by the Washington Conservation Voters, a group of extreme character… used by David Barnett of the Cowlitz Tribe to launder money for a Richard Curtis hit piece in the last election, as “scary.”

Given the fact that the WCV can be bought so easily, the Columbian’s reliance on their judgment for anything is the scariest part of all of this. Certainly, the Koenninger influence shows both his continuing gullibility of believing anything a leftists tell him while simultaneously cementing the "neo-comm stooge" role the Columbian loves to play.

And, of course, the most laughable crap of the endorsement of all was their characterization of Stuart as “…not a political bomb-thrower.” Since almost anyone with political awareness knows Stuart is behind, including Stuart himself, he’s done little else BUT “throw bombs.”

During the debate, Stuart’s fake hurt at Tom’s inoculation piece, which was a direct result of some of the most vicious push-polling I’ve ever heard of, was just the start. He continued by distorting Tom’s population projections, when he lied about “getting legislation passed,” and the crap about Tom’s campaign manager. That was “bomb-throwing” of the highest order.

In the end, for the Columbian, experience is meaningless. They like you… or they don’t. I wonder what BS Morris's endorsement looked like when she, you guessed it, ran for county commissioner while a state representative? I will bet you cash money that the Columbian was very big on her legislative experience as a reason to vote for HER.... just not for Tom. Just ask Don Benton, where, in the last election, they endorsed a clown that didn't even live here, or Marc Boldt, who's managed to be endorsed precisely once in the entire time he ran for office (since 1994) and even then, just against another Republican. And you can bet here that when Boldt runs for re-election, the Columbian will have forgotten ALL about “diversity of opinion” as a reason to endorse anyone.

Madore: Paul Harris to run for Steve Stuart's commission seat.

According to Commissioner David Madore's facebook page, State Representative Paul Harris (R-17) has announced he is running against Commissioner Steve Stuart (D-District 3).

Since chatting with Commissioner Stuart during canvassing board sessions and discovering that Stuart had been named to Gov-Elect Inslee's transition team, I've thought that he would likely be the recipient of an offer for a high-level post in an Inslee Administration.

Stuart denied such a possibility, unequivocally, but I had to ask myself: why would Inslee want Stuart... due to, if nothing else, the lack of geographical proximity... it's a long way to Olympia... unless it was to check him out for such an offer?  They're likely both a good fit with common ground: both former jocks (Stuart was an all-state ball player in high school and Inslee was a state champion basketball player and quarterback for Ingraham in Seattle) with some commonality in a variety of areas.

So now, let's look at the bidding.  Marc Boldt was crushed at the polls for mirroring Steve Stuart's voting record.  Not good. A D vs. R race would likely have a similar outcome as the Mielke-Tanner race, although Harris would likely, if nothing else, be able to match Stuart's funding if Stuart stays to fight it out.

Stuart will likely not be satisfied with the permanent position of "county commissioner" as the nadir of his political career.  His problem?  The 3rd Congressional District is so reliably GOP that even a complete moron like Jamie Herrera can get the gig and likely keep it... until her unbridled, screw-her-constituency ambition forces her to move on and put us, thankfully, in her rear-view mirror.

So, with that door, effectively, slammed shut; and a year's-long legacy of ignoring his own constituency on the loot-rail scam combined with unfulfilled campaign promises... what's Steve Stuart to do?

Gamble on a sketchy-at-best re-election bid that first, he's likely to lose and second, wouldn't improve his station in life even if he won?

Or grab an offered brass ring if Inslee holds one out there (And rumors abound that such is the case) and move up to the state's power center?

Stuart can vault from Olympia to a US Senate run down the road, after he develops some statewide chops and uses his position to go around the state and set up political alliances.

Can he realistically do that from Vantuckey?

No.

Now Paul Harris has some baggage of his own, truth to tell.  I was disappointed to find out that he was the highest rated Republican House Member by the Washington State Labor Council, AFL-CIO.

That kind of thing makes me question his "conservative cred" and moves him perilously close to RINO-land.

But if, as the Madore announcement states (And such an announcement this early is only being done in an effort to scare other GOP'ers circling the carcass away) Harris is "....a strong critic of the CRC Light Rail Tolling project," AND HE HAS THE VOTING RECORD TO PROVE IT, then that would make him the leading contender to fill Steve Stuart's commissioner seat whether Stuart's still sitting in it... or not.

The increasingly bizarre reactions to Stuart's impending departure.

Since I've made my perspective clear concerning Commissar Stuart, it might come as some surprise to readers that I am not overjoyed at his departure.

Like daylight and darkness, I accepted it as a fact of life that Stuart would conclude he had as much chance to win re-election as he did to mastering the art of levitation.  Thus, I have no particular joy or sadness over this any more than I do the tides.

I would have looked forward to Stuart's destruction across this county, and the humiliation of the moron the democratian hauled out that showed rank stupidity when she stated:

And while that was a vote of just city residents, and not inclusive of the steadfastly conservative rural lands of the county, Long believes the results say something about which camp is currently enjoying a groundswell of support.

Clearly, the basis for that question was an analysis of Stuart's chances.  It is, perhaps, the most moronic pap I've ever read from a "professor," even one with a leftist bent.  Giving Stuart some modicum of credit, he was much smarter in the end than the woman with the letters after her name.

Stuart, being a petulant jerk... something of an overgrown adolescent, will attempt (and fail) to do as much damage as possible on the way out.  He'll do it to the cheers of the fringe-leftists operating on a bizarre form of political hatred unseen since the days their hero, Che Guevara, was beating people to death with a baseball bat when he wasn't having them shot.

Given Stuart's reckless political behavior, his decision was foregone.  The level of delusion and hatred shown by his fellow kool-aidists is only moderately surprising given their self-delusion and inability to analyze the reality of politics in this county over their own, self-emboldening conclusions that bear no resemblance to reality.

The responses from those leftists who are reading this funeral dirge are hilarious.

It's the verbal equivalent of these idiots gathering themselves in a circle in Esther Short Park, pouring gasoline on themselves and lighting it.

They wrote a variety of things that defy belief.

Because of their ability to delude themselves (Why else would they be leftists?) they express all this concern over Stuart's cowardice.

One dolt wrote:

Very sad news for Clark County! I feel for the Steve...if I had to work besides Mielke and Madore I would bail out too! Thank you for your service Steve.

That's the theme, of course: it's not Stuart's cowardice... it's the other two commissioner's fault.  It's like Stuart is incapable of making a decision on his own, forgetting all along that he is exhibiting that same lack of integrity that lead to him bending this county over for TriMet.

Odd that none of these people expressed any concern when Mielke was by himself against two democrats, Stuart and Boldt.

But then, hypocrisy is part and parcel of their meme.

None of those babbling like those knows either Commissioners Madore or Mielke.  They just act as if they do, because the politics of those commissioners is at cross-purposes to their own.

The excuses they make for Stuart's lack of testicular fortitude... their completely inaccurate description of Stuart's "representation," since Steve has made it clear that he only represents Steve, the ashes... the sack cloth... the whaling... the gnashing of teeth... the self-flagellation.

It's as if Stuart has become something of a political martyr... all because he's too much of a coward... or too much of a realist... to run for re-election.

Pathetic.

Next up?  Which democrat are these suckers going to shove out there to get clobbered?

"Guilt by association?" The curious case of Jon Russell... and Steve "Easy Money" Stuart

.
What's wrong with this picture?

In a political world where likes attract, here's the curious case of Jon Russell and Steve "I can be bought" Stuart.

Now, the scummier elements touting both Russell and Herrera generally, but Russell specifically, TRIED to run the scam that one of Russell's many political opponents was only masquerading as a Republican and that, in fact, she was a democrat. Russell's slithering lackey, Gary Wiram, was particularly fond of lying that way.

Well, imagine my surprise when I found out that Russell had given at least three of his 4X8 sign locations and frames to Steve "Unmarked bills, Mr. Barnett" Stuart... democrat... who proceeded to put his signs directly over the top of Russell's.

(Note the first layer of corregated plastic behind Stuart's sign. That's Russell's sign.)

No hypocrisy there, eh, Gary? Where's your sniveling about that?

Stuart, the most corrupt elected official known here locally today, who holds his office by virtue of a little $100,000 "gift" bundled through Progressive Majority (Not unlike a $40,000 gift bundled through "Unite Here", likely from the same source for Tim "The Liar" Leavitt. (Never forget: "Cash" Stuart was a major player in Leavitt's campaign)) from Cowlitz Casino developer David Barnett; Stuart is one of the people making a serious effort to saddle 65,000 commuters with a thousand dollars or more in tolls per year to screw them to pay for a bridge and loot rail system Stuart wants, but certainly won't have to pay for.

That brings me to the Russell-Stuart connection.

Jon Russell Watch is devoted to the fact that politically, Russell isn't anything close to the act he puts on. So now, I've got to ask: why is Russell doing Stuart this particular favor?

Now, I get that Stuart is terrified. There's enough money being put together out there to end his political world, especially now, where Stuart is caught up in having the decidedly wrong brand (democrat) and the decidedly wrong plan (hurting tens of thousands of county voters for his own agenda.)

Stuart is pro-abortion, pro tax, pro big government.

So, how is it that he's been given at least 3 prime Russell sign locations to the extent that all he had to do put his own signs up directly over Russell's?

Is this what David Madore had in mind when he maxed out to Russell?

I don't think so.

Is it possible that Stuart is just taking the sign frames without Russell's knowledge or permission?

I don't think so.

All of which begs the question:

Why would Jon Russell allow Steve Stuart to do this? I mean, all of TeacherJudyBanks' followers were/are leftists, save one... but this is ridiculous.

Inquiring minds want to know.

Cross posted at Jon Russell Watch.
.

Steve Stuart's bachelor party? I'm surprised it wasn't sponsored by David Barnett and the Paskenta/Mohegan/Cowlitz Mob.

.
So, two of Tim the Liar Leavitt's biggest supporters are going to merge their operations.

Steve "$100,000 in cold hard cash" Stuart is getting married. And in keeping with their position as the local democrat newsletter, the local rag has to tell us about it.

Steve's a bright guy. Like that empty-suited, anti-American racist bigot in the White House, ol' Steve graduated from law school. Course, he never passed the Bar... but at least he graduated from a school.

Steve is a Clark County Commissioner. Now, the ONLY reason he's a Clark County Commissioner is because one David Barnett illegally laundered $100,000 through a fringe democrat front group, one Progressive Majority, who then illegally spent almost $90,000 of it getting Stuart elected back on 2005.

Now, I'm given to understand that Stuart knew that Barnett was going to be bundling this illegal cash for what is SUPPOSED to be an "independent expenditure" in August of that year. Barnett cheerfully gave up that, to him, minor amount of cash; because he, Barnett, knew that Stuart's then opponent, now Clark County Commissioner Tom Mielke, would do everything he could to keep the organized crime project then known as the Barnett/Mohegan/Cowlitz megacasino from being built and injuring our economy, overloading our infrastructure and screwing up our community.

Stuart, on the other hand.... not so much.

Now, Barnett has a history of attempting to buy politicians. In his ignorance (and for a guy with so much money, his political ignorance is frightening) Barnett gets hosed by consultants, has no sense of timing, and is dramatically unconcerned about a few mundane issues like election laws.

The first effort Barnett made to buy an election was with our own, inimitable, Pam Brokaw, back in the 2004 cycle.

Richard Curtis was running against Brokaw in the 18th District. Brokaw had no experience or qualification to be a state representative... just like she had none to be a county commissioner... but she was running for an open seat and the local newspaper only endorses democrats in open seats.

It's their history and an editorial policy or something.

Curtis was, at the time, strongly opposed to the criminal enterprise on the drawing board for the LaCenter exit of I-5. Brokaw never stood a chance, since in addition to her myriad of other talents, she supported gay marriage and partial birth abortion, two non-starters in the heavily conservative 18th.

Towards the end of her inevitable political demise, David Barnett swoopes in and dumps a cool $25,000 or so into an "independent expenditure" through Washington Conservation Voters, of all people, who then did a rather pathetic mailer accusing Curtis of supporting I-892, an initiative that would have started the process of ending the tribal gambling monopoly had it passed.

Washington Conservation Voters, like Progressive Majority, is a leftist front group that can be bought when the price is right... like Barnett bought them here.

Barnett has a LOT of money... so, he likes to "buy" things... "things" like politicians and groups, typically portrayed by media (How many times as our local stain on journalism relied on the WCV for quotes, positions and bulletins?) as having some level of worth or stature that they are wholly undeserving of.

Barnett's political ignorance showed. This time, he left an easily discovered paper trail, and his efforts to buy Brokaw blew up in his face, and Brokaw was blown out in the general.

But for Barnett, it was a teaching moment. He knew he had compromised his effectiveness in buying a candidate by doing it in such a way that his paper trail could be discovered and used both as proof of his efforts to corrupt OUR election, and that a politician had been bought.

So, in 2005, Stuart was up in a special election. Stuart had been appointed to replace Craig Pridemore who, in a stunningly moronic move, gave up his commissioner's seat to become a state senator... a position that earned half the money and ten times the frustration.

Stuart, the democrat, ran against Mielke, the Republican. Tom ran a solid campaign, and was ahead on points... when Barnett's $100,000 hit... $100,000 that Stuart KNEW was going to hit, months before.

Barnett knew that Mielke was a threat to his plan to screw our community, so $100,000 was chump change to buy a commissioner and eliminate an enemy. And it worked like a charm, THIS time, because he laundered his money through an out of state organization, with completely different reporting requirements. In fact, it wasn't until December of that year that it could be proved that Barnett had bought and paid for Stuart by laundering tens of thousands through Progressive Majority.

The $100,000 bought Stuart a series of mailers full of lies, half truths and exaggerations... and Stuart barely won.

Had Barnett not corrupted our election, Stuart would be pumping gas in Oregon, or something, instead of raping us on the unneeded and unwanted I-5 Bridge replacement/loot rail scam.

He also wouldn't be doing all he could to get that casino in here, like he did with that bogus rescission resolution that made the Cowlitz thug squad so positively giddy.

Barnett, not having learned his lesson the first time, tried to stop the bleeding again with Brokaw; a candidate who went around saying that she would kick Mielke's ass since she had it all her way.

She had a HUGE fund raising edge (something like 4 to 1) and a leftist tide sweeping the land as Obama easily won Clark County.

What she DIDN'T have was an anti-bridge/tolls/loot rail/casino position. She was owned by the unions and by the casino.

Fortunately for our community, Mielke had all of those things, so thousands who voted for Obama then turned around and voted for Mielke.

And they voted for Mileke in spite of Brokaw arranging to have Barnett dump almost $80,000 into the last 72 hours or so of the election.

You would have thought Barnett would have known better.

But then, it had worked with Stuart... so why wouldn't it work with Brokaw?

So, congratulations to Steve Stuart and what's her face. May Stuart's corrupt political career end as soon as possible, and may you both find happiness in whatever Stuart's next career is going to be... pumping gas in Oregon, or whatever.
.

Memo to Marc Boldt and Steve "Unmarked Bills" Stuart.

.
Dear Marc and Steve,

It has come to my attention that you, Mr. Stuart, seem to be rather unhappy about my blog posts concerning you.

And it has come to my attention that you, Mr. Boldt, feel compelled to threaten others in an effort to control me.

Well, this is my response to that.

I don't give a damn that what I write makes you unhappy, Mr. Stuart. And I don't fricking threaten, Mr. Boldt.

Either one of you have a problem with me? Then do what you have to do. Either one of you think that I am controlled? Then you've got a f&*king screw loose. Either of you have a problem with me?

Then grow enough testicles to contact me directly. But don't you dare threaten anyone I know in an effort to silence me.

When it comes to what I write, there is really, at base, only one question: am I telling the truth when I write?

Take Mr. Boldt, who is my brother in law.

The Marc Boldt of today bears only a passing resemblance to the courageous conservative legislator who would cheerfully tilt at windmills every hour on the hour when he felt the cause was just or the principle was right.

Now, Marc just does what Stuart tells him to do. And that's why Marc lied to me about holding an advisory vote on this horrific loot rail/bridge replacement project this November.

Marc portrays himself as a Republican. Yet, he endorses Steve "Plain Envelope" Stuart for election... again.

Did I mention that Stuart is a democrat?

By endorsing Stuart, Boldt is endorsing everything Stuart stands for, including bridge tolls for 65,000 people. He's endorsing the corruption that Boldt himself told me about the August before Stuart's first election.

Stuart, on the other hand, apparently hates it that I point out that he was the beneficiary of $100,000 in cold, hard cash from tribal casino developer David Barnett when it was laundered through Progressive Majority. Stuart isn't thrilled that I remind the world that he scammed a deal with Craig Pridemore during session a few years back that allowed Stuart to keep some $60,000 in campaign contributions by pushing the application of legislative donation limits, in place now for Clark County, to another year... and another election.

Stuart isn't particularly fond of my frequent reminders that he was a major part of Tim "The Liar" Leavitt's campaign... which explains both the bogus, lying strategy that fooled people into believing that Leavitt opposed tolls and the fact that having used it to get elected, he could then flip, counting on a short attention span by the voters.

So what does Marc do? Marc calls another candidate, and warns them that Steve "Check, please!" Stuart might "get involved" in that candidate's campaign, both as if it would make any difference and as if that person actually controlled what I write or when or how I wrote it.

Please remember as you read this that while Marc Boldt has TOLD people he's "talked to" me about my blog, he has NEVER discussed it with me, EVER. So, when he's told Jamie Herrera, who would have been no where without Boldt's "help", that he's "talked to him" about the blog, that is a flat out lie.

In fact, when he talks to ANYONE about "talking" to me about this or any other blog, he is lying about that.

Well, here's the deal.

I spent 6 years overseas in defense of my country in part so I could do this very thing.

I wore the uniform for 14 years total, in all components, so I could, in part, do this very thing.

The question is this:

Do I cede to Marc Boldt or Steve Stuart any ability to censor me or silence me? Do I run away because these people, or anyone else, is mad at me?

Do I?

"You have enemies? Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life." - Winston Churchill

Hell no, I don't. And there is much more to come.

If any of you don't like what I have to say, then the simple solution is to avoid reading it.

But don't even think about threatening those around me, ESPECIALLY when you lack the balls to confront me directly.

And an additional memo to Ann Rivers: don't even think about trying to control what, when or who I write about. And to those who think you can control me by attacking her?

Well, we saw how well that worked with Herrera's winged monkeys like Keath Huff, didn't we?
.

My testimony on August 5 against Steve Stuart's I-5 ballot scam.

My name is Kelly Hinton and I’m here to testify in opposition to Commissioner Stuart’s effort to have a vote on the I-5 Bridge scam.

Back when it mattered, Commissioners Stuart and Boldt denied us the opportunity to have a say.  They, along with the rest of the CRC Scammers didn’t want to hear it.

Back when it mattered, Commissioner Stuart told us that an advisory vote would, in fact, be a “fake vote”  (March 31, 2011 “Boldt, Stuart reject call for advisory vote on CRC) but now, all of a sudden, it wouldn’t be “fake?”

Back when it mattered, Commissioner Stuart REJECTED the effort to have a Charter Vote.  Now, with his impending defeat looming ahead next year, it’s suddenly a great idea?

Back when it mattered, Commissioner Stuart firmly opposed a vote on the CRC Scam.  Now, with his political career hanging by a thread, I see no point in tossing him or any of the rest of the downtown mafia a life line in an effort to keep his floundering political career afloat.

The writing is on the wall.  By November of next year, the people of this county will not have forgotten Commissioner Stuart's efforts to ram the CRC Scam down our throats and his repeated denials of our requests for a vote on this project, as he joined with the local disgrace of a newspaper in belittling and insulting those of us who demanded such a vote over a period of many years.

This is a desperate attempt for Commissioner Stuart to salvage a political career that’s on the rocks.  In everything from his fake allegations against his fellow commissioners for collusion back when he was running the lynch mob during the meeting on the evening of May 7 to his sudden “come to Jesus” effort to NOW put a charter vote on the ballot after rejecting it just two short years ago when he had a democrat majority on the commission… along with the democrat party effort to expand the commissioners to five…. All of that is about Stuart’s effort to resurrect a failing political career in an effort to avoid the inevitable outcome suffered by Marc Boldt last November.

This is Commissioner Stuart’s effort to avoid the same fate as Marc Boldt… for the same reasons.

You had your chance, Commissioner Stuart… and you blew it.  When we needed you to lead, you turned a deaf ear.

But next year is looming large, and Commissioner Stuart is doing all he can to avoid Commissioner Boldt’s fate…  and I see this as a part of that.  So, no… I see no need to reward Commissioner Stuart or any of the other winged monkeys of the CRC Scam by allowing them another bite of the apple… when now, finally, it DOESN’T matter.

How would Commissioner Hinton deal with Commissioner Stuart?

Ever since being informed of the impending hire of Sen. Don Benton as County Environmental Services Director, Commissioner Steve Stuart has not only shown himself to be unfit for the Chair of the Board of Clark County Commissioners, he has shown himself to be unfit for elective office period.

Regular readers know the story, so I won't rehash it.  The question now is this: what to do?

1.  Yesterday ended any effectiveness Stuart may have had during the 19 months he has remaining in office.

If he's moronic enough to run for re-election, he should already know that the outcome for him would be the same as the outcome for fellow democrat Marc Boldt: in short, he will be crushed.

2.  Stuart's disrespect and hatred of both Mielke and Madore know no bounds.  His petulant announcement that he had personally seen Commissioners Madore and Mielke discuss the issue of changing the agenda around before the meeting and that he, Stuart, was going to file an ethics complaint against the both of them was both unforgivable and unnecessary, and was only done to further inflame the mob he and the Columbian had worked so hard to whip up.

3.  Combined with his childish behavior and profane outburst when he was informed of the Benton hiring, and further combined with his idiocy of using his Facebook to publicly humiliate his fellow Commissioner, he has shown a distinct lack of any ability to leave his partisanship behind and his inability to even act like an adult confirms that he not only shouldn't be a county commissioner, he shouldn't be allowed in the county building.

A.  As a county commissioner, I would move to remove Stuart form the chairmanship of board.  His actions over the last week have shown him incapable of leading a boy scout troop.

B.  And as a county commissioner, I would strive to work with my fellow commissioner to insure that Commissioner Stuart never had another piece of legislation or policy decision passed again.  During his remaining time on the Board, I would interact with this clown character as little as humanely possible.

C.  I would do everything legally and ethically possible to insure his departure as soon as possible.

And I would take these steps immediately.

Stuart started this idiocy, and I would finish it.

As I look into the mechanism of filing an ethics complaint against Stuart myself, I would urge Commissioners Mielke and Madore to file a complaint against Stuart immediately, and take all of the other steps outlined above.

It's bad enough that Stuart lies during his campaign about a CRC vote.

It's bad enough that he's willing to sell out 400,000+ citizens of this community on the CRC Scam:  but his childish behavior, his requests that OTHERS act childishly and his failure to control the meeting last night?

There's no excuse for that.

It's not that I believe that Stuart does not have the right to oppose this hiring: that's his privilege, and as partisan as Stuart is (Would he have objected to the hiring of any of his fellow leftists?  Of course not) it goes without saying that he'd put his childishness and political hackery ahead of his duty as a commissioner and Chair of the Commission Board.

But that does not give him the right to act like a street thug, an out of control punk who slanders people at the drop of a hat, lying about them in an effort to further inflame the mob that he has so eagerly sought... even if it's for nothing... as his tantrum here will most certainly be.

And in the words of the late, unlamented Tom Koenninger to Marc Boldt back in the day:  "He should resign now, before his constituents throw him out."

Koenninger, of course, was as much a moron as his replacement.  And he was as right about Boldt as Stuart is about Benton.

That's how I see it.  I look forward to sharing this with Commissioner's Mielke and Madore.  One can hope they'll take it to heart and implement it as soon as possible.

Steve Stuart's transparent effort to dilute conservative power fails... for now.

Look, we all know that democrat Commissioner Steve Stuart's political career is on the ropes.  His slavish devotion to the massive waste and 40+ years of $8+ tolls to the commuting public in the CRC Scam; his lie about the loot rail vote to get re-elected, his dismissive arrogance over an advisory vote on the CRC Scam, his Ballpark Fetish where he wanted to have his little baseball field to enrich the Yakima Millionaires by forcing the 400,000 of us who would have never set foot in the ballpark to pay for it by getting stiffed with a tax every time we went to a movie, the fair, the amphitheater, played golf or what have you; his bizarre, totally untrue and unsubstantiated allegations against his fellow commissioners during the "bread and circuses" meeting immediately after he teamed up with the democratian over the Benton hiring, his support of fellow democrat Marc Boldt (and how'd that work out for Marc?) all combine to arrive at this conclusion:

Stuart is over... Unless.

Unless he can manipulate the useful tools into setting up a re-organized county government that would enable him to run in a district only commission.

The leftists of the 49th would elect a child molester if he was a democrat.  After all, look at the three stooges they've elected to the legislature now.

The useful tools of ClarkBackward, a primarily RINO and leftist-inspired effort to keep Stuart's political career afloat, is all about that.  The left hated the outcome of the last election: hell they hate having elections when they can avoid them, because the last thing they seem to want is an accurate measure of the will of the people when that will may conflict with their agenda.

For example, a few of the leftist whack jobs out there... like Mike Briggs and that ilk, fresh from getting their political asses kicked on the CRC Scam, are looking at ways to reduce the conservative influence on the Commission... such as expanding the number of commissioners from 3 to 5.

At this point, the likely outcome of such an effort would be a 4 to 1 conservative advantage on that commission, but the leftists are so filled with rage and hatred of David Madore that they don't care that they're tightening the noose around their own necks in the process... or that the primary driver for this effort is Steve Stuart, saving his own ass.

Stuart went over the edge in this exchange, reported in the Daily Democratian:

After Madore and Stuart bickered a bit over the scope of the light-rail vote, Stuart said he had "one more advisory vote we can notice." 

"There's a petition going around to move from three to five commissioners and we can put that on the ballot ourselves," Stuart said. "So why don't we notice that? I mean, since it's five to seven thousand dollars, it's cheap right? We should trust the people." 

The petition for additional commissioners has mostly been discussed by individuals frustrated with Madore and Mielke over recent actions, including the appointment of state Sen. Don Benton, R-Vancouver, to the director position of the county's environmental services department. 

Stuart, a Democrat, saw his suggestion fall on deaf ears from Madore and Mielke, both Republicans, who both said the freeholder process was now the proper arena for voters to change the makeup of the board. 

"I wouldn't want to pre-guess the freeholders," Mielke said.

Well, naturally Stuart is "frustrated" by the fact that he's now being "Mielked."

But given that just last year, Stuart trashed the idea of both an advisory vote on the CRC AND in 2011, the charter vote, this kind of reeking hypocrisy doesn't go all that far in furthering his own political future.

Those following this slimeball should not be fooled: this isn't about what's best for the people.  Instead, it's about what's best for Steve Stuart.