Besides their rabid support of SEIU, what do Patty Murray, Harry Reid and Jaime Herrera have in common?

The same people are donating to their campaigns!

I THOUGHT there might be something a little fishy when some outfit like "The Frozen Food PAC" would donate a dime to a nobody like Herrera.

But then, I found THIS intriguing connection:

HERRERA, JAIME LYNN VIA JAIME HERRERA FOR CONGRESS

03/29/2010

2000.00

10930502369

And this one:

MURRAY, PATTY VIA PEOPLE FOR PATTY MURRAY

11/30/2009

1200.00

10930492581

And THIS one:

REID, HARRY VIA FRIENDS FOR HARRY REID

07/20/2009

2500.00

10930492579

Why am I not surprised?

Co-sponsors and votes for leftist SEIU legislation; then gets money from people who also support Patty Murray and Harry Reid?

This one ought to make Shannon Barnett's head EXPLODE!

Not only has Herrera taken money from special interests (Like the SEIU) but she has taken money from pro-leftist PACs AND Washington, DC, DURING SESSION! (All without a peep from Barnett, of course. Can let a little thing like hypocrisy stand in the way of attacking others, eh?)

Why, whoda thunk it?

I would. That's why I looked.

So, I gotta wonder: where's Herrera on the Arizona Immigration issue?

It is, perhaps, the latest political red herring by the "don't-care-about-the-law left."

As the federal government, going back decades (Making this both a left AND a right issue of failure) fiddles while this nation generally and the border states particularly "burn," the fed does, relatively speaking, nothing.

I say "relatively speaking" because they DO pay lip service to enforcing the law. But that's all they do, as the government goes about its business which consists of reducing "problem noise" to a bearable level but never solving ANYTHING.

I would ask the reader: when has government EVER solved ANY problem?

I remember illegal alien amnesty under Reagan. Reagan was a solid, even brilliant president on many things, but his illegal alien amnesty program will stand as his greatest policy failure... by far.

THAT abortive effort was SUPPOSED to SOLVE the problem, right?

Well, how's that working out for us?

Now, even almost 9 years after 9/11, our border and ports are STILL a sieve. Promises made to keep us safe haven't been enhanced by the efforts of our last two presidents when it comes to border security, and now crime in that region is frequently rampant, drug cartels spread their influence, violence and intimidation almost without visible fear of retaliation or retribution.... in THIS country.

It's such a joke that when WE finally act to do SOMETHING about it, the President of Mexico has the GALL to issue a travel advisory to MEXICANS going to Arizona.

This from a country where THEIR immigration policy appears to have been written by Heinrich Himmler; where non-citizens have NO right to protest, and where the cruelty of Mexican security forces on their southern border is legendary.

The left, of course, having nailed down the fraud vote, is throwing a tizzy. But what they're FAILING to do is to offer any viable alternative.

The Constitution isn't a death warrant. It cannot be used as some sort of shield to allow or continue policies that are spilling American blood in our streets because the fed lacks the balls to do what has to be done. To that end, I applaud the legislature and governor of Arizona; they have gained my respect and admiration, something I certainly cannot say about MY legislature and MY governor, who have earned neither.

To the nay-sayers throwing such a tizzy, I say this: Unless you can come up with a viable, immediate policy that will secure our borders, make us safe and rid us of the scourge of law breakers, then STFU.

To the illegal aliens getting ready to do what could possibly get us shot in Mexico for doing it, namely protest against government policies that you violate, I say this: Everywhere there is ANY protest, ALL protesters should be rounded up and processed to see if they are, in fact, illegal aliens. If they are, then shove them ALL back over the border.

And to the fringe-left nutters "threatening to file suit" over this law; stop "threatening" and DO IT.

And by all means, the moment you get past your open borders mentality and begin to deal with the real world by coming up with some OTHER solutions to these problems... feel free to stop whining and sniveling... and let us know, won't you?

You see, I would have no problem implementing Mexico's own immigration laws against illegal aliens. After all, do we REALLY need to think real hard what would happen if Americans were protesting all over Mexico about THEIR immigration laws?

All of that aside, what I HAVEN'T heard from is our own, inestimable representative of the 18th District. Given her leftist support of unions generally and the SEIU particularly, it would be nice to know, wouldn't it?

So tell us, Jaime: What's YOUR position on this?

And, no cheating! THIS time, your position can't be a mirror image of your keepers.

Ah, hell, we know it will be, if you have the guts to put out a position at all, but it was worth a shot, wasn't it?

The truth about the so-called "On The Radar" list.

So, Jaime Herrera made a really BIG deal out of getting her name on the "On The Radar" list at the NRCC.

I thought it was odd that such a weak candidate, given her inside pull and baby-sitting by McMorris Rogers and Slade and all that, someone with no experience, someone with less credibility, someone who hadn't even lived in the district for 11 out of the past 13 years... someone who had never worked in the private sector, someone lacking in education or what I would like to think was "congressional-level intelligence" and someone with such a weak fund raising quarter and so on, rose to the level of any particular of listing by anyone... let alone the NRCC.

But of course, the reason for such an asterix after her name is McMorris-Rogers, who Jaime poured coffee for (relatively speaking) as a low level staffer in McMorris's office for a couple of years.

Or so I thought.

But as it turns out, the real deal is this:

Republican operatives are quick to point out that their third-tier "On the Radar" candidates need to meet only very basic goals -- for example, build a website, have a Federal Election Commission reporting system in place, have available a very basic media package, etc. -- and that candidates in this category don't necessarily have a path to victory yet.

I had no idea that the criteria was, politically speaking, that you could walk upright and chew gum and make that list.

Until now.

Combining this with her Obama-like campaign:

...the young legislator came across as super-serious, self-possessed and somewhat
scripted. She brought to mind memories of Tracy Flick, the student body
politician played by Reese Witherspoon in the movie "Election."

Herrera used the word "prioritize" several times, talked vaguely about "changing directions", and used such timeless Republican bromides as: "An effective jobs program is not going to come from Washington, D.C.

Where she tries to sell herself is on personality alone (of course, missing the big picture, since she has no personality) without specifics. And between her total lack of any appreciable qualifying background and her penchant for speaking only in glittering generalities, why, we have...

Obama lite.

Maybe not in her political view, which is entirely what McMorris Rogers wants it to be, but in the idea of electing an empty suit that has no clue what she's doing, save for what she's told to do.

As it turns out, under the criteria set to make this "list," David Castillo should also have been included. Here, the influence of McMorris-Rogers can be clearly seen as there's no mention of Castillo anywhere in NRCC land; not because he doesn't merit said mention, but because, like her appointment to the 18th District seat, an appointment fixed almost from the very beginning; the fix was in to put Herrera on the list and to keep Castillo off it.

You truly do learn something new every day. Like it isn't nearly as big of a deal as Herrera and her cult-followers have made it out to be.

One of many problems facing Herrera is that she will be crushed in every debate she goes to by David Castillo. He is going to become like a shock collar to her, where every time she opens her mouth, some one's going to press the button and her face will screw up like she's just bit into a lemon. She will come to find out that charm and personality (of which she has neither) will take you only so far before you become a political footnote.

And with any luck at all, come August, that's what she will be.

For Herrera, it was the Lameness in Longview.

I'd heard that Jaime came across utterly clueless at the Longview forum, much like she had at the WTP vetting on Tuesday... but I hadn't seen any credible source that wasn't a Herrera kool aid drinker comment or write about either the vetting or the Longview forum.

Herrera was awful at the vetting. She lied about her support of the SEIU bill and lied about her support of democrat efforts to strip out the last remaining $229,000,000 from the emergency fund while she was babbling at Harney.

While I have briefly commented on that, I'll let the video do the talking when it comes up.

Meanwhile, another source has commented on Ridgefield Barbie's poor performance at the Longview forum. The comments?

Denny Heck and Dennis[sic] Castillo, representing different parties and differing views of government, sat next to each other and dominated the first candidate forum in wide open 3rd Congressional District race.

"Dominated." As we knew Heck and Castillo would.

Heck's main competition on the d-side is a fringe left whack job named Craig Pridemore. The fringe left has no chance in this race, so I won't waste my time even discussing him.

That leaves the top two Republicans in the 3rd CD, Castillo and Herrera.

Castillo, of course, is superior in every way to Herrera. He has superior education (He has a Master's Degree, she a Bachelors) Castillo has private sector experience (Herrera has precisely zero) in addition to experience as a legislative staffer and chief of staff, besides stints as a deputy assistant secretary in Veterans Affairs; Intergovernmental Affairs Officer at Labor, Director of the Homeland Security Information Network and is a veteran of the Navy.

Herrera.... doesn't. She's not a Veteran (although she rather stupidly looked me in the eye while she told me that her work as a low-level staffer and career intern was the same thing as "being in the military") she's never worked in the private sector; she's done a few week stints as intern here and there, and she was a low-level staffer for Cathy McMorris Rogers... and she can't even tell the truth about that.

But he (Castillo) was by far the most articulate and engaging of GOP candidates on stage Thursday night. Specifically, Castillo repeatedly articulated a less-government philosophy.

Castillo, of course, has a clue. Herrera, the local version of the Teleprompter in Chief, never had an original thought in her life.

Castillo described the country as being run by "a cabal of big government leftists who are more concerned with power than the American people," and said of one signature Obama program: "The only thing the Stimulus did was to stimulate the imagination of bureaucrats who think they know better."

All true, of course.

And even though some morons in DC see Herrera as all that and a bag of chips,

...the young legislator came across as super-serious, self-possessed and somewhat scripted. She brought to mind memories of Tracy Flick, the student body politician played by Reese Witherspoon in the movie "Election."

"Somewhat scripted" being the understatement of the decade.

Herrera used the word "prioritize" several times, talked vaguely about "changing directions", and used such timeless Republican bromides as: "An effective jobs program is not going to come from Washington, D.C.

Intelligence, vision and grasp of the issues are not strong suits for the frequently-absent-from-the-floor-for-fund-raising-while-someone-else-voted-for-her representative from Washington, DC.

She must know that this kind of dullard performance simply won't do.

And unfortunately for her, it was the best she could do... and her best was as pathetic in Longview as it was at Harney Elementary.

Castillo took out after the Obama administration's plan to curb Wall Street excesses. "We do not need a consumer protection agency as another layer of bureaucracy," he said.

True enough. What about doing a good job with the laws we have?

Herrera seemed to say that Congress should be Wall Street's watchdog. "I think there is a difference between congressional oversight and regulation," she added. "The answer is not more regulation and handing off authority to a non-elected body like the Fed."

Idiocy.

Congress is not an enforcement arm, and someone who hung around there for a day or two should have known that.

Castillo said the next Congress should "repeal, reform and replace" the health care reform bill just signed into law.

Herrera, on the other hand, again lacking an original thought, babbled: "We have to start over."

While these quotes and observations are the product of a democrat columnist, they dovetail completely with the available information about the candidates. Quotes are quotes, regardless of who records them.

Clearly, Herrera is outclassed, out-experienced and this August, out the door.

Fascinating reading over at Red State: a response to a Jaime Herrera lackie.

There's someone who's set himself up as the self-anointed reporter of what goes on at the Harney Elementary We The People vettings.

__________________________________________________

He reported on Jaime Herrera's abysmal performance as if he hadn't been there. He frequently mislead, absolutely misquoted, and generally wrote as if Herrera was paying him. The problem he has, besides being completely in the tank for Ridgefield Barbie is this:

Herrera lied.

I understand that he either doesn't know, or doesn't care about the facts. If he did, he'd most likely have a different petrspective... if he wasn't in the tank for Herrera because he was Jon Russell's failed campaign manager, and Russell has endorsed Herrera. But here they are:

On the SEIU matter:

One child receiving state subsidies would have required all workers to be represented for collective bargaining by the SEIU.

Herrera didn't mention that.

Whern the bill came up for a hearing, contrary to Herrera's assertions that private day care owners "asked" her to co-sponsor this SEIU bill, not one private entity testified in favor of the bill in the House.

Not one.

Herrera didn't mention that.

Odd, isn't it? They allegedly wanted this bill, but the only private entities showing up to testify for the bill testified AGAINST it.

On the SEIU matter:

One child recieiving state subsidies would have required all workers to be represented for collective bargaining by the SEIU.

Whern the bill came up for a hearing, contrary to Herrera's assertions that private day care owners "asked" her to co-sponsor this SEIU bill, not one private entity testified for the bill in the House.

Not one.

Let's see who testified FOR it.... shall we?

SEIU. American fed. of Teachers. Washington Educators for Early Learning. League of Education Voters and the famours Washington Education Association.

Odd, isn't it? They allegedly wanted this bill, but the only private entities showing up to testify for the bill testified AGAINST it.

Love and Laughter Learning Center; Kid’s World Childcare; Little Orca Learning Center; Country Kids Playhouse; Middleland Kiddie Korral; Washington Parents for Safe Child Care. Also opposed were Washington Child Care United; Washington Child Care Alliance; YMCA of Washington.

Where were all those fake child care centers that allegedly called the cardboard cut out up and asked her to co-sponsor this bill?

No where. Because it never happened.

Here's Lew Water's excellent run down of the bill in question, and the evidence that Herrera was making it up.

While Herrera managed to mention that "4 out of 7 in leadership voted for the bill," she neglected to mention that EVERY OTHER REPPUBLICAN VOTED AGAINST IT.

You couldn't know, of course, but a little research would reduce your level of ignorance... although based on the research Lew has done about you, it wouldn't do anything to improve your veracity.

http://lewwaters.wordpress.com/2010/03/18/russell-campaign-caught-lying-about-castillo/

And, as for the $229,000,000, she again voted against her caucus, as she joined 2 others in selling us out while again, the rest of the caucus voted against the bill. Why? She claimed it was to stop a tax increase. What happened?

Most of our taxes went up anyway. My B&O tax went from 1.5% to 1.8%. Man, it's a good thing she sold us out. Otherwise I REALLY might have been hurt.

Lies and deceit are never good campaign tactics. Herrera's verified support for the SEIU is a red flag to everyone paying attention. But then, I have to ask: considering what a great job you did as Jon Russell's campaign manager... what would you know about it anyway? Her appearence at Harney was a disaster for her. Her sell out to the SEIU will cost her not only this election but any election to a Republican spot, anywhere.

Let's see. Russell's campaign, which you ran, was a disaster. Russell bails, endorses Herrera and you do this misleading garbage puff piece for Herrera.

Your failure to mention these two little facts seems just the tinist bit odd... wouldn't you agree?

Nope. No bias there.

The unbearable arrogance of Jaime Herrera

So, I sat through the usual Herrera dog and pony show tonight as part of the local vetting process.

As usual, there was no lie she would not tell; no clue she would not miss.

Her arrogance extended to her refusal to tell us "which 3 federal agencies she would close," her insistence that she would "vote HER gut," as if HER gut was somehow superior to the judgment of the people she would represent. Why replace Brian Baird with another Brian Baird? After all, didn't HE vote HIS "gut?" And where did that get us?

There's a video of the whole mess that will be up in a day or two, but suffice it to say that the crowd at Harney Elementary wasn't too impressed with someone who was bought by SEIU for only $500... an observation many made to me after I questioned her early sell out to special interests.

I, personally, was singled out as being "one of the few people in the district who doesn't support my candidacy" by Ridgefield Barbie. I would venture to say that, after her abysmal performance here tonight combined with her lies about her sponsorship and support of HB 1329, the mandatory SEIU child care worker representation bill, that the number has grown substantially.

The key to success for David Castillo is to attack this empty suit for her support of SEIU-ACORN. Whenever conservatives are told about her political expediency, they turn away in droves.

More to come on this when the video is posted.

(UPDATE: I've come to find out that all of the WA03 vids will be going up at the same time. I'll post this one here when they come out.)

Herrera staffer-at-large Liz Mair was quick to nail Benton over his Rossi positions... what about Cornyn?

Yes, it didn't take long for the self-described "snarky bitch" to come out swinging when Benton had the temerity to call it like he saw it.

God forbid that ANYONE question the judgment of the kool aid drinking supporters of Saint Dino or Saint Jamie.

That's HERESY, by God! Burn them at the stake!

Mair, so completely in the tank for Herrera that this self-styled "expert" has become something of a self-styled "embarrassment," spewed a rant of invective that excoriated Benton a week ago for coming out and telling the truth: that Rossi's complete and inexplicable failure to announce makes him no longer viable for the seat.

As it turns out, Benton isn't the only one.

The chair of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, US Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) said much the same thing yesterday, according to The Hill:

Cornyn said Rossi has only a few more weeks to decide whether to challenge
Murray, the Senate’s fourth-highest ranking Democrat, whom polls show could be
vulnerable to a Rossi campaign.

I've been watching carefully this morning, waiting for the column of invective against Sen. Cornyn for essentially saying the same thing. So far, all I get is cricket chirp.

My guess is that such is all we WILL get back... since Mair isn't all that big about hitting people that can hit back... and Sen. Cornyn can DEFINITELY hit back.

A brief reminder of the Jamie Herrera of November, 2007.

Jaime Herrera said a lot to get herself appointed to the vacant 18th District seat back in November, 2007.

And just as a friendly reminder, I thought you'd all like to see that article, in it's entirety, from the Columbian of November 30 of that year, so you'd be able to see if she's kept all her promises.

Excepting for a little highlighting, this is the article in it's entirety, unmodified by me in any way.

18th District seat filled by young conservative


Friday, November 30, 2007
BY MICHAEL ANDERSEN, Columbian staff writer

A young "family values" conservative with a glowing résumé was named Thursday to succeed former Rep. Richard Curtis in Washington's 18th Legislative District.

Four of the six commissioners in Clark and Cowlitz counties voted to appoint Jaime Herrera, 29, a Prairie High School graduate working as a legislative aide for U.S. Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-Colville.

"Every step I have taken since high school has been preparing me for this," she said at Thursday's hearing, her voice cracking slightly. "There is not a job in the world I would rather have."

Herrera, who said she has always kept her official residence at her parents' Ridgefield home, had also been the top choice of her district's Republican precinct officers. She will represent the west and north part of both counties, including every city in Clark County except Vancouver.

She will be one of just 35 Republicans in Washington's 98-member House of Representatives.

Commissioners passed over the district's second and third choices, Camas city councilman Scott Higgins and La Center political consultant Ann Rivers.

Each received one vote from the commissioners' panel: Higgins from Clark Commissioner Steve Stuart, and Rivers from Cowlitz Commissioner Kathleen Johnson..

Rivers said Thursday evening she hadn't ruled out running for Herrera's seat when Curtis' term expires in 2008. Higgins said he would not do so.

Herrera said she decided she was a Republican after leaving home to attend the University of Washington and reflecting on the values she said she'd learned in her small-town family of six children.

"I do believe in smaller government, less government at every possible turn," said the former White House and legislative intern. "People in Olympia have really good ideas. All the time, they have really good ideas. But good ideas aren't always really what we need."

She told commissioners that she opposes almost all abortion rights, that she preferred a 60-percent supermajority rule for school levies and would have opposed last year's law extending legal partnerships to some same-sex couples.

Schools, she said, should "refocus on basic education" instead of following the "latest and greatest" recommendations from Olympia.

She said she supports "common-sense" measures to fight global warming, but wouldn't make them a priority.

"I spend my time on education and health," she said. "Social services. That's where my heart is."

Standing before the group of five Democrats and one Republican Thursday, Herrera occasionally sounded like a Democrat.

She said she would support a gas tax hike if there was a "consensus" that it would be needed for a new bridge over the Columbia River.

The sister of a would-be electrician, she said she would "work to be a friend" to organized labor.

And Herrera, who said her parents adopted three of her cousins as their own after the cousins' lives were "impacted by" methamphetamine, touted the benefits of treatment for drug addicts, as opposed to tougher law enforcement.

"Neither political party has all the answers," she said. "My ear is open and my heart is open to both Republicans and Democrats."

Herrera's father is of Mexican descent. She will be among a handful of Washington legislators with Latino backgrounds, and the only one from Clark County.

Herrera's predecessor, La Center Republican Richard Curtis, resigned Oct. 31 under pressure from GOP leaders after a police account of his tryst with a male porn model during a Spokane legislative retreat was made public.

The man, Cody Castagna, told police that Curtis offered him $1,000 for unprotected sex. Paying for sex is a misdemeanor under state law. Curtis, however, said he offered Castagna only $100 for gas money and has denied doing anything illegal.

All commissioners had praise for Herrera during Thursday's six hours of interview and deliberation.

"We are going to need a person who will work with the other side of the aisle," said Commissioner Marc Boldt, the panel's lone Republican.

Commissioner Betty Sue Morris said Herrera reminded her of herself.

"What I saw you do today was be pleasant and politic and then suddenly hold your ground very well," she told Herrera.

Cowlitz County Commissioner Axel Swanson, a Democrat, said he felt odd to be asked to choose the best Republican for a political job. But he decided to follow the opposing party's preference.

"That's what I would want someone to do if the shoe were on the other foot," he said.

Kelly Hinton, 52, a Hockinson Republican, said he'd driven up to Kelso to oppose Herrera. He said she didn't seem to know much about local issues.

"She doesn't have an apartment," he said. "She doesn't have a house. What she has is a voter registration card."

Several times during Thursday's interview, Herrera confessed ignorance of various issues, saying for example that she hadn't known that Cowlitz County is not subject to the state's Growth Management Act.

Like the other two candidates, she struggled to name every city in the legislative district in response to a pop quiz from Morris - though Rivers forgot only Ridgefield.

"I have a lot to learn in life as in the legislative process," Herrera said. "But I believe I am as well-prepared as anyone I know."

After the Thursday afternoon vote, Cowlitz County Auditor Kristina Swanson immediately swore Herrera into office. Herrera then raced to Olympia, where legislators were already meeting in special session.

At the Capitol, Herrera was swept into a meeting with House Republican leader Richard DeBolt for a quick tutorial on a bill to provide property tax deferrals to moderate-income homeowners. Republican lawmakers were uniformly opposed to the Senate bill.

Herrera was greeted with hugs by staff members who had worked with her during her internship with Sen. Joe Zarelli, R-Ridgefield.

"I'm excited," said Herrera, who admitted that she had not eaten all day. "I'm ready to get to work."

Well, there you have it.

The problem, besides her complete lack of accomplishment or qualification, is that she not only "sounds like a democrat," but she acts like one, thinks like one, and votes like one as well.

Why Herrera supporters would saddle us with a "confessed ignorant" RINO is beyond me.

The delusion that is Jaime Herrera.

A few minutes ago, I just saw this pollute my twitter screen:


It's really a problem when you're a poor candidate.

But it's a disaster when you're a delusional candidate on top of that.

Did most of Herrera's corruption money come from SW Washington? What about thanking the special interests that gave you cash in Washington, DC? You know, the ones you ditched us for when you left during session to attend your fundraiser set up by your boss, Cathy McMorris and Lobbyist Slade. What about thanking them?

Herrera has been all agog over her handlers putting $140,000 together for her in this most recent reporting quarter. She calls that "strong."

Well, here's the genuine article. If you're reading this blog, then you probably know of a true candidate who will do us proud in the House, unlike SEIU Rep. Jaime Herrera: LTC Allen West.

THIS is "strong."



Let's see. An $838,450 quarter or a $141,000 quarter.

LTC West, who doesn't have a puppet master working for him in DC, puts Herrera to shame in fund raising. Given all the grease that McMorris is applying for Herrera, her effort in Q1 was a disaster... and SHE calls THAT "STRONG?"

That's like Jaime telling us that she really DOESN'T want us to believe she's a "friend to organized labor." You know, like she said in her interview in the Columbian back on November 30th in the Columbian? Right after she told the commissioners that when it came to being a state rep, ""There is not a job in the world I would rather have."

Yeah. Right.

You know.... like that?

She made less than half the cash of the leading democrat. She made a sixth of the cash of LTC West.

That's not strong. That's a disaster.

And self-delusion isn't one of the traits I want for someone in Congress representing me.

And by the way? I bet that LTC West wouldn't view your professional internships and complete lack of private sector experience for the 10 years you were gone from here or SW Washington before your appointment as the same thing as "being in the Army."

You know... like you told me?

So, what do the numbers in the 3rd Congressional mean?

Well, we've seen all the numbers in the 3rd in the fund raising race, and there were no real surprises.

Heck is vacuuming out most of the leftist money; after all, money attracts money, and writing yourself a quarter million dollar check to start, while really odd for a job that doesn't pay all that much net that such an expenditure would be worth it to anyone except those possessed of the biggest ego, is something of a money magnet.

But adding $300,000 to that figure is very impressive indeed.

As I've pointed out, Pridemore's candidacy is a joke, and he's spinning his wheels in ways that just astound. His many fringe left, hypocritical bouts (The voting for a budget he'd condemned as being balanced on the backs of the "poor and the powerless;" his corruption in cutting his buddy, Steve "I can be bought if the price is right" Stuart a sweet deal on campaign finance; his rabid support of the union welfare project known as the I-5 Bridge /loot rail project that most in the region hate, and his unbridled desire to stick a $1300 per year toll down our throats will make him the laughing stock) combined with an almost pathetic inability to raise money, even when he portrays himself as Obama light, will make him the answer to a political trivia question 10 years from now... but it won't make him a congressman.

On the right, the likely eventual winner had a respectable quarter and as time goes on and more people discover how slimy his main opponent in the GOP really is, we can expect her money to dry up even more, and his money to start rolling in.

David Castillo has run a solid campaign and will continue to do so. And while the special interests who own SEIU Representative Jaime Herrera have tossed a few bones her way, as more and more find out about how very little background, education, vision and independence that slimeball has, they'll desert her in droves.

She touts her $140,000, provided by Cathy McMorris Rogers, her keeper and boss through her contacts, as some big accomplishment. Considering how much time she spent off the floor fund raising instead of being on the floor representing US, and considering the horrifically stupid idea of ditching us during session so she could make a fund raiser with the special interests who already own her in Washington DC, this is a HORRIFIC number... less than half of the cash donated to the democrat who will be in the general, Denny Heck.

The others running on the right are fine, quality people. I've listened to Castillo and David Hedrick, who championed the cause of the people against Cowardman Brian Baird last August. Castillo's qualifications far exceed anyone else running in the 3rd, but Hedrick isn't far behind and I hope that this doesn't represent his only foray into politics.

Ultimately, I believe this will become a Heck-Castillo showdown, and it's the wrong year for the democrats.

Herrera's abysmal fund raising has to hurt: the anointed one's lack of performance is puzzling.

Given all the time that Herrera spent off the floor fund raising while others voted for her... and ditching us, her constituents, so she could make a fundraiser in DC set up by her keepers, Slade and McMorris, she has GOT to be upset about her massive under-performance in fund-raising.

Only $140 K? You kidding me?

3.5 months in, spoon-fed essentially unlimited pre-greased contacts (do you think anyone would have given her a dime if they hadn't been leaned on by McMorris and Gorton first?) hours off the floor during session while others voted in her place to make it look like she was actually there... and THIS was the best she could do?

The only effort more pathetic was Craig Pridemore. But the SEIU bling hanging around Herrera's neck, along with her moronic tax and spend vote to strip out $229 million from the the emergency fund have doomed her candidacy and made her a political dead man walking, thank God. This November, she'll be out of politics altogether, and she can go back to bringing McMorris her coffee or whatever it is she did back there.

Ridgefield Barbie couldn't even send out a press release without scamming a quote from her keeper in it. And that is pathetic for the "independent voice" that will represent McMorris instead of us in Congress.

Craig is, of course, a political dead man walking. No one wants or will vote for a fringe leftist in the 3rd, and only his delusional fellow fringers seem to think he has a chance. But so far, his almost retarded effort at fund raising shows that he's not even in the ball park.

Best known for voting for a budget he had condemned for being "balanced on the backs of the poor and the powerless, Pridemore has also gerrymandered a tax district to pay for his unwanted and unneeded loot rail; demands that the families of the 65,000 or so commuters suffer as a result of the tolls he wants to impose, while demanding that loot rail be jammed down our throats: and cut Steve "Easy money, Mr. Barnett" Stuart a sweet deal so Stuart could keep 10's of thousands in campaign donations.

Both Pridemore and Herrera voted to rip off the state emergency fund as well, showing once again that Herrera has more in common with Pridemore than she does us.

Will Shannon Barnett attack Herrera AGAIN over money?

On March 22, Shannon Barnett, who has had major difficulties raisng money, attacked Ann Rivers, who has met with somewhat more success, for accepting donations from outside the district.

Shannon Barnett's startling attack against Jaime Herrera: this must be read to be believed!

Right from the Clark County GOP's Own Web Site!

I get that if he ever had an original thought, it long since died of loneliness; and I also get that this is a rip off of the Evergreen Freedom Foundation's fine efforts.

But his attack against Herrera? Why, that's unbelievable!

"What better day to discuss out of control spending than on tax day. I’m looking forward to unveiling my support for the ten point plan and I appreciate Lars letting me do it on his show." Barnett added "The tax and spend liberals in our legislature are directly responsible for the fiscal mess we find ourselves in. They control the purse strings; they decide what gets funding and what does not. It’s time for new representation and people will agree that I’m the right one to help facilitate these changes once they learn how committed I am to reducing the size and scope of our government’s spending."

Obviously, when Barnett is demanding "new representation" it's because he didn't think all that much of the pro-SEIU, tax and spend representation which we suffer for now.

And who is providing that representation?

Why, Jaime Herrera.

So, on one hand, I can finally agree with Barnett. Herrera proved herself to be so far over her head that when it comes to representation, I'd MAYBE hire her for the only thing a review of her qualifications shows her to be capable of doing: answering the phones at the 4th floor reception desk of the O'Brien Building in Olympia.

But I disagree that Barnett, who has yet to come up with an original thought, plan or vision and who finds himself reduced to aping the efforts of others like the Evergreen Freedom Foundation; is the one to represent me in anything.

However, I applaud his belated efforts to acknowledge how ineffective and expensive Herrera's recent tenure has been; after all, voting with the democrats to strip out our last $229 million dollars out of our state emergency fund to help them waste these hundreds of millions of dollars certainly nails her as one of those tax and spend liberals Barnett claims to hate.

Combine that with her co-sponsorship and vote for the SEIU mandatory representation bill for day care workers, and, by golly, you've actually got Jim Moeller Light. And I can certainly see where that would make Barnett just the tiniest bit cranky.

But considering how he's carried her water like Gunga Din, attacking her incompetent tenure in the State House is something of a surprise, at least to me.

Cross posted at Clark County Politics.

The startling comparison between Castillo and Herrera

Lew Waters put up a great comparison piece between David Castillo and Jaime Herrera.

The piece shows the startling differences in education, public and private sector experience and very importantly, Herrera's complete and total lack of any experience or clue concerning Defense, Security or Military issues, the kind of experience that would otherwise matter to sane people.

I would love to see why, when comparing Castillo to Herrera, ANYONE could possibly support the empty suit that is Jaime Herrera.

Go on over and check it out, and thanks to Lew for doing this public service of providing this comparison.

Cross posted at Clark County Politics.

How the SEIU sees their "white union members." And Herrera supported THESE people?

SEIU Union Chief Gerry Hudson: My White Union Members "so f***ing rabidly racist"...

VIDEO (**** WARNING: HARSH LANGUAGE ****):



Tends to speak for itself, don't it?

Major H/T to Orbusmax.

Cross posted at Jaime Herrera Watch.

More evidence Mair has joined the Herrera staff.

As I pointed out, Mair's been writing like Herrera has been paying her directly.

More evidence of that is available here.

And my response to Liz is "so what?"

Cross posted at Clark County Politics.

Lew Waters: Whisper Campaign Against David Castillo Continues

Lew nails it far better than I. The cult-like following, unjustified by talent, accomplishment, capability, vision or grasp of the issues surrounding Jaime Herrera remains the biggest political mystery of my professional life.

There's no there, there. And otherwise sane people have lost their collective minds over this girl for reasons that quite simply escape me.

Please read Lew's take on this if you haven't already. It's a sad commentary on a segment of political support that is shameful in every respect.

Cross posted at Clark County Politics.

Do we EVER see principle, integrity and Herrera in the same room?

As previously shown, Jaime Herrera has the political sense of a board fence. Her idiotic co- sponsorship of the now infamous SEIU bill Herrera then voted for that would force day care workers into collective bargaining; her campaign's deliberately false and misleading defense of that vote; her equally clueless support of democrat efforts to increase spending by striping out what little is left in our state emergency fund, and now her failure to, literally, stand up for an amendment to a bill that would have resulted in legislators sharing our pain.

Talk, as Herrera shows us, is cheap.

Cutting state employee in the midst of a horrific recession makes sense. But that means ALL "state employees," including state representatives, should take a hit.

So, here's the call by the Tacoma News Tribune Friday's article:

Also rejected was Williams’ amendment to lop lawmakers’ own expense reimbursements in the same proportion as the mandatory worker layoffs are expected to hit legislative staffers – costing potentially more than $1,000 next year.

The “per diem” expenses amendment failed, and Williams initially failed to win a roll call vote on it because only 13 members stood to demand one. Republican Rep. Jaime Herrera of Camas was among those who argued that lawmakers should share in the pain but did not stand to insist on the recorded vote; Hunt and Republican Rep. Gary Alexander of Thurston County did stand with Williams.

So, what we've got here is the good Representative speaking out and taking a position. But when the time came, literally, to take a stand for her views, what did Herrera do?

Nothing.

She sat it out.

Now, to me, the problem wasn't her position on the issue. To me, the problem is that when the time came to take a stand, Herrera, who had so eloquently spoke about "sharing the pain," was no where to be seen.

How can anyone speak for a bill, or an amendment to a bill, and then disappear when it might matter; in this case, to secure recorded votes on the amendment instead of a voice vote that killed it?

Why didn't she stand?

What's the point of this kind of political cowardice?

Cross-posted on Clark County Politics.

The "intellectual dishonesty" and cowardice of a Herrera supporter: Keath Huff fails to address the issues.

.
Yesterday, Keath Huff posted this gobbledygook in defense of Ridgefield Barbie. Why he lied about the bill and who did what is any one's guess, but he did. and I will use this space to point out each and every falsehood Huff relies on in his slavish efforts to defend the indefensible:

Memo: Jaime Herrera and SEIU

KeathHuff

Below is the memo from Casey Bowman, the campaign manager for Jaime Herrera, explaining the “Pro Union Vote” Herrera was supposed to have taken.

I certainly understand her vote, trying to get fair reimbursement for small business owners who are getting short changed by the State of Washington. It is not unlike the poor reimbursement rates that doctors receive from Medicare and other “state run” health insurance. In the end the average consumer pays more to cover the real cost of care.

So, here we have a situation with a bill that does this:

"Collective bargaining" by it's very nature means higher costs. That means that both the taxpayer, who will have to pay the higher subsidies the bill mentions and the customers who are not subsidized will have to do what?

Pay.

More.

Money.

Any time SEIU gets involved in a bill, it's never in the taxpayer's best interests. It's only in THEIR best interests, no matter how much it costs US.

And Herrera didn't know this when she co-sponsored and voted for this monstrosity? And Huff doesn't know it now?

Of course he does. But at the end of the day, it just doesn't matter to a member of the Herrera Herd, who's slavish devotion to this empty suit is simply unfathomable.

More than a few Conservatives voted for this bill in the House and Senate, they tried to right a wrong, which is more than some have
done.

This is a flat out lie. First of all, there wasn't a vote on this bill in the Senate. There was a vote on the Senate version, a bill that, among others, was amended to kill by making it a study. THAT is the bill voted on in the Senate. (Of course, we've already been through Herrera's efforts to throw Benton under the bus for voting "for this bill," which he had not done.)

In the House, the vote on this bill was 62 to 35

"More than a few conservative in the House?" Let's see.

Conservatives like Jim Moeller voted for it. Another conservative, Mary Lou Dickerson voted for it. Is this part of the "few" Huff was talking about? No?

Except, those two; of the many democrats who voted for this bill, are hardly "conservative." They are, in fact, as far to the left as the political spectrum allows in the United States today.

In fact, I could only find TWO Republicans who voted for this garbage heap in the House: Herrera and Skip Priest. Herrera's seat mate, Ed Orcutt?

Why, he was a "no."

So.... where's this "more than a few" thing Huff was babbling about?

This was NOT a great bill, but that is often the case we you are trying to get something done while a bunch of liberals have the majority. We can fix that by electing more Conservatives like Jaime Herrera!

With "conservatives" like Herrera, why not just vote leftist democrat and be done with it?

Calling this "not a great bill" is like calling the Titanic a "small boating accident."

As always Jaime is a candidate with a voting record, you can see what she has done and will do for yourself. Her voting record can be found here: washingtonvotes.org

Huff babbles this one a great deal. The only trouble with this garbage is that what washingtonvotes.org records is what happened when the buttons are pushed. Unfortunately for those of us in the 18th, OUR "representative" was frequently gone, out fundraising for her congressional run and ditching us, her constituents.

So, yeah. There's a voting record. And it certainly keeps track of the votes from the button in question. Unfortunately, it's close to worthless here because Ridgefield Barbie has admitted that she's had others vote in her place while she is gone. Here's the whiny, sniveling little "Memo" in question:

From: Casey Bowman, Campaign Manager, Jaime Herrera for Congress

Memo: Jaime Herrera and SEIU

It won’t shock you to learn that there’s a false accusation being made in the race for Washington’s 3rd Congressional Seat, but you might be surprised at just how off base the claim is that Rep. Jaime Herrera is a big union supporter.

It might shock you to know that even Herrera refered to herself during the appointment process as a "friend to organized labor."

Just exactly what was that supposed to mean?

I KNOW! I KNOW! It means she'll co-sponsor and vote for SEIU-backed legislation!

In 2008 Jaime was endorsed by every major business group in Washington state, including the Association of Washington Business, NFIB, Independent Business Association of Washington, Washington Restaurant Association and others. She has never supported compulsory unionism and never will. She is a strong opponent of “card check” because she has seen the excesses of union leaders and is fully aware of the threats and intimidation that card check would inflict on workers.

HHHmmmmm..... I missed the part about any legislation in this state concerning card check, or any vote on that subject. Why mention it here, except to deflect from the issue at hand?

And had they known of Ridgefield Barbie's SEIU affiliation, as they'll know now, would they be so quick to endorse? I think not.

To prove the false claim that Jaime is a big union supporter, her detractors point to legislation, HB 1329, she supported involving child care centers. Their claim is that the legislation forced “compulsory” unionization of child care workers. That simply is not true.

So, was Herrera lying THEN when she called herself a "friend to organized labor?" Or is she lying NOW?

I dunno. That's a toughie, given her bizarre co sponsorship and support of SEIU legislation.

What to think.... what to think....

Here are the facts:

Let me help you with that. "Here are the 'facts'" SHOULD read: "Here are SOME of the 'facts.' We left out the ones we don't like."

Fact One. Jaime Herrera COSPONSORED THIS SEIU BILL.

Odd, isn't it?

Neither Huff NOR Bowman included THAT fact.

I wonder why?

· Washington state reimburses child care centers for care of kids under the state’s sponsorship. Many of these business owners believe that they should receive a better reimbursement rate from the state for caring for the most vulnerable children.

Many others exercise their right to refuse children who cannot pay whatever they charge. It's called "choice."

What "choice" did Herrera give us? You know, the ones paying the bills?

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that collective bargaining WILL make child care MORE EXPENSIVE.

So, if Herrera's efforts had been successful (They weren't, thankfully) the costs of daycare, along with the subsidies for day care that WE pay, would have gone up with the wages.

That means taxpayers would have to pay more for subsidizing day care, and those using NON-subsidized day care would be out of pocket more.

If those running day care centers don't like the subsidized rate, they can always refuse the kids in question.... right?

· The bill allowed child care center owners and workers to choose to have SEIU represent the business in negotiating better reimbursement rates from the state.

Another flat out lie, since day care owners ALREADY HAD THAT ABILITY BY BECOMING UNION SHOPS.

Here's the language from the bill summary:

“Solely for purposes of collective bargaining, child care center directors and workers are ‘public employees’. The directors and workers are employees who work on-site at licensed centers that have at least ONE SLOT filled by a child for whom they receive child care subsidies. as well as owners who work on-site at these centers.”

Do you see anything about "choice" in there? I don't.

. The bill said nothing about unionizing the workforce. Child care enter workers wouldn’t pay union dues or fees and wouldn’t be forced to join a union, at any time. The bill was at the request of the small business owners of day care centers.

Which explained perfectly why so many of those day care centers were so opposed to this, right?

Those are the facts about this legislation. Again, Jaime has never supported compulsory unionism and never will. That is why she is such a fervent opponent of card check. If the facts don’t sound anything like the claims of those attacking Jaime and her voting record, then you should ask them why they are spreading these false claims.

OK... I'll bite. Why ARE you spreading these "false claims?"

Under the bill in question day care centers with ONE CHILD getting state subsidies HAD to be represented by the SEIU.

Look. I'm always willing to be corrected... so feel free.

Just provide me with the language allowing day care centers with subsidized kids in them to opt out of this bill, and we can take the mandatory unionization off the table.

For a much more technical and complete recitation of all the lies this "memo" contains, I invite the reader to head on over to Lew Waters' blog. He nails it.

In closing, what neither the "memo" OR Huff do is mention that Herrera COSPONSORED THE BILL. An oversight?

Hardly. Nor do they mention any of the carefully researched aspects covered by Lew on his blog.

There's a reason these people don't want you to know the WHOLE truth.

Cross posted at Clark County Politics.

“Solely for purposes of collective bargaining, child care center directors and workers are ‘public employees’. The directors and workers are employees who work on-site at licensed centers that have at least ONE SLOT filled by a child for whom they receive child care subsidies. as well as owners who work on-site at these centers.”
KeathHuff Says:
April 2nd, 2010 at 11:06 am

Your a funny guy Hinton. I can’t believe that you want the state to limit who and how a small business is represented!

Having SEIU represent small business owners at the state is like having Hugo Chavez represent the U.S. at the U.N.

However, I support the right of small business owners to dictate who and how they want to be represented. For the state to decide who and how a business owner can be represented is statism.

This was not a great bill and I fault nobody who disagrees with the vote. That said, nobody can fault Jaime for the vote, the attempt to give small businesses the right to choose their representation or the attempt to make sure small businesses are treated fairly and compensated fairly.

Even more importantly, you can disagree with the bill, but you cannot use it as an example of Jaime being “pro union”, a big “union supporter” or a non-conservative. To do so is intellectually dishonest.

David must really be worried if this is the best you all have.

KeathHuff Says:
April 2nd, 2010 at 11:12 am

I do appreciate the mental gymnastics needed to give Benton a pass on supporting the “amended” bill. LOL!

K.J. Hinton Says:
April 2nd, 2010 at 2:14 pm
You mean, like I can’t believe that you, as a fake conservative, could support Herrera, a fake Republican?

Using your bizarre reasoning (”I can’t believe that you want the state to limit who and how a small business is represented!”) we should force ALL small businesses to be “represented” by a fringe left wing, In-The-tank-For-Obama union.

And like your failure to mention Herrera’s CO SPONSORSHIP of this SEIU bill, you ALSO fail to mention that under the terms of the bill, SEIU representation is REQUIRED if 1 child in the day care receive state money.

From the bill:

“Solely for purposes of collective bargaining, child care center directors and workers are ‘public employees’. The directors and workers are employees who work on-site at licensed centers that have at least ONE SLOT filled by a child for whom they receive child care subsidies. as well as owners who work on-site at these centers.”

Did you ever even bother to READ the bill, Huff?

Of course not. Here’s the bill summary: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/billdocs/2009-10/Pdf/Bill%20Reports/House/1329%20HBR%20WAYS%2009.pdf

Clearly, to be a Herrera supporter is to be deliberately delusional.

“However, I support the right of small business owners to dictate who and how they want to be represented. For the state to decide who and how a business owner can be represented is statism.”

Nonsense. Any business that wanted to be “represented” by SEIU could easily have done so by ASKING them.

This bill wasn’t ABOUT “asking.”

You keep telling us that “this was not a great bill.” In fact, the bill, thankfully killed by Benton and Zarelli, was a HORRIFIC bill that would have hammered the taxpayers by INCREASING subsidies on the part of those who receive them as a result of these agreements, while jacking up the costs to those non-subsidized day care patrons who do not.

It was a typical, leftist, screw people out of more money bill. But then, what do I know? I only READ the damned thing.

“Nobody can fault Jaime for he vote?”

You really have lost all perspective.

ANYONE who opposes the SEIU, what they stand for and what their goals are, can EASILY “fault” Ridgefield Barbie. *I* “fault” her. Lew Waters “faults” her. Run a web search, Huff…. PLENTY of people “fault” her.

Those who, for whatever the reason, have signed on to her worthless cult of personality believe her to be perfect and simply will brook no disagreement, no criticism, no effort to point out that she’s about as conservative as Jim Moeller (who also voted for this bill along with the rest of the democrats) and Patty Murray.

She ditched her caucus on this bill, and she would, in the unfortunate event she were doing anything in Congress except pouring coffee, do it to us there, as well.

So, I cannot use this as an example of someone who, during the course of the appointment process, openly declare that she “would be a friend to organized labor” IS a “friend to organized labor?”

Why can’t I, Huff? What’s wrong with you people that pointing out what this woman says and does is somehow bad?

Nothing is EVER “intellectually dishonest” when it’s the truth… except when you’re part of the Herrera Herd.

As for what David is, or isn’t, I wouldn’t know. I haven’t discussed this with him, but your bizarre statement about his level of worry is just that, given YOUR efforts to spin Herrera’s union leanings into something else.

So, yeah. SOMEONE seems to be “worried” here.

But it doesn’t seem to be Castillo. Otherwise, you wouldn’t have again shown your massive ignorance by walking into this fan and shilling her propaganda.

That you fail to understand that what Benton did turned the bill into a study goes to confirm your lack of political depth.

Killing a bill by using the “study approach” (which also involved Zarelli, I might add) is a time-honored legislative tradition.

The only “mental gymnastics” involved is the fact that you can’t wrap your head around it.

And I only know you by reputation as well. And in this case, the reputation is based on your support of someone in the tank for an alleged “Republican” who COSPONSORED AN SEIU BILL.

Thrill us, Keath. Please explain why you failed to mention Haerrera’s co-sponsorship of this SEIU bill?

And yes, you made a fool out of yourself over FreedomWorks by implementing, allowing and excusing the double standard the Herrera Herd lives by given that Lobbyist Gorton was as guilty as FreedomWorks in not talking to any other candidate; you hammered on the robo-calls because they beat Herrera like a drum (since they were completely truthful)and you people simply cannot stand ANYONE pointing out what an empty suit she is.

I am proud that Lew shares my perspective about the empty suit that you’re attempting to foist on us, a woman no more qualified or equipped to be a member of congress than she is to perform brain surgery.

Keep dancing for Herrera, Keath. Using your platform as another way to prove she’s unfit for election to anything just spreads the word that much more.




Oh yeah, Huff... I know the drill.

You're taken to task for leaving just a few minor, but nevertheless important facts out of your bizarre defense of the indefensible, and as a result, you display the same thing you accuse others of engaging in:

"Intellectual dishonesty."

"I am not trying to sell anyone on the bill or justify the vote, just passing along the campaign memo and giving my thoughts."

Your ongoing defense of Herrera and her utterly indefensible cosponsorship and support of both this bill and the SEIU thugs behind it does the very thing you claim you're not doing.

So yeah, your actions do speak for themselves.

Good luck with that. And feel free to come on over to my meager little effort where my response to you and your efforts to avoid the issues raised is posted in its entirety for everyone else to see that are so inclined.

And I never knew that hypocrisy was a characteristic of a "true conservative" until this very second.

None of this is particularly about the bill. What it's about are the indisputable actions of someone you call a "conservative" when a true conservative wouldn't be caught dead co-sponsoring and then voting FOR an SEIU bill. But this is a woman quoted in the Columbian as calling herself a "friend to organized labor," certainly the hallmark of the "true conservative."

The kind of mentality that can do such a thing is not "conservative." It's Brian Baird in a skirt, because NO other candidate running for Congress in this district as a Republican would do such a thing. In fact, even Ed Orcutt voted "no" on both the SEIU bill AND the bill to empty our emergency fund to allow the democrats to spend us into fiscal oblivion.

Things like that are supposed to matter to conservatives, Huff. Odd that they neither matter, not are used as an indicator of Herrera's complete lack of conservatism to you and the rest of the Herrera Herd.

These are the actions that speak loudest about you, Huff. Your failure to address the issues I brought up; your failure to justify any of this, and your bizarre declaration that you are "not trying to sell anyone on the bill or justify the vote," when that is both what YOU are trying to do, and what Bowman is trying to do with this "memo."

And good luck with that.

KeathHuff Says:
April 2nd, 2010 at 2:34 pm

You know the drill Hinton….call names, get nasty, get deleted. You can call names on your site.

Tell us why you disagree with the bill… fine. I don’t like it either. I understand why she supported it though. I also take into account her hundreds of other votes. She is not evil, not a fake conservative, not an idiot and not a SEIU supporter, that is spin by an out of control opposition campaign.

I am not trying to sell anyone on the bill or justify the vote, just passing along the campaign memo and giving my thoughts.

I disagree with some very fundamental actions of Castillo (he has no votes to judge, which is not a negative per say), but I do not assume to call him a fake Republican or fake Conservative. I disagree with many of your actions and deeds, but I will not personally attack you.

My actions and work for the Conservative movement speak for themselves.

“I won’t be wronged, I won’t be insulted, and I won’t be laid a hand on. I don’t do these things to other people, and I require the same from them.” – The Duke

K.J. Hinton Says:
April 2nd, 2010 at 5:06 pm

Oh yeah, Huff… I know the drill.

You’re taken to task for leaving just a few minor, but nevertheless important facts out of your bizarre defense of the indefensible, and as a result, you display the same thing you accuse others of engaging in:

“Intellectual dishonesty.”

“I am not trying to sell anyone on the bill or justify the vote, just passing along the campaign memo and giving my thoughts.”

Your ongoing defense of Herrera and her utterly indefensible cosponsorship and support of both this bill and the SEIU thugs behind it does the very thing you claim you’re not doing.

So yeah, your actions do speak for themselves.

Good luck with that. And feel free to come on over to my meager little effort where my response to you and your efforts to avoid the issues raised is posted in its entirety for everyone else to see that are so inclined.

And I never knew that hypocrisy was a characteristic of a “true conservative” until this very second.

None of this is particularly about the bill. What it’s about are the indisputable actions of someone you call a “conservative” when a true conservative wouldn’t be caught dead co-sponsoring and then voting FOR an SEIU bill. But this is a woman quoted in the Columbian as calling herself a “friend to organized labor,” certainly the hallmark of the “true conservative.”

The kind of mentality that can do such a thing is not “conservative.” It’s Brian Baird in a skirt, because NO other candidate running for Congress in this district as a Republican would do such a thing. In fact, even Ed Orcutt voted “no” on both the SEIU bill AND the bill to empty our emergency fund to allow the democrats to spend us into fiscal oblivion.

Things like that are supposed to matter to conservatives, Huff. Odd that they neither matter, not are used as an indicator of Herrera’s complete lack of conservatism to you and the rest of the Herrera Herd.

These are the actions that speak loudest about you, Huff. Your failure to address the issues I brought up; your failure to justify any of this, and your bizarre declaration that you are “not trying to sell anyone on the bill or justify the vote,” when that is both what YOU are trying to do, and what Bowman is trying to do with this “memo.”

And good luck with that.

Herrera's support of SEIU begins to bite: Kool Aid drinking supporters are running scared.

Jamie Herrera is a tool for the SEIU. In her "defense," there's a blog post that has a copy of some sort of nonsensical wimpy attempt to excuse or justify this quite indicative sell out that Ridgefield Barbie, the fake Republican running in the 3rd Congressional District, actually did something that made sense.

It didn't.

Herrera cosponsored and voted for a bill that will unionize child care workers. For reasons I've already set forth, that is one of the worst imaginable ideas concerning the issue of day care, period. Further, she also VOTED AGAINST HER CAUCUS (The vote was 62 to 35 and most of those 35 were, well Republican... much like almost all of the 62 were, well, democrats)

But there is no excuse for cosponsoring a SEIU bill if you are to refer to yourself as a "conservative."

That any conservative would even consider voting for this cardboard cutout in the face of her support of SEIU... the same group supported by such luminaries as Barack Obama; Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Patty Murray, Barney Frank and the like supports... is admittedly a complete and total mystery to me.

Those people have something in common with our fake Republican. And what that "thing" is stands as a reason for her to never gain election to even the position of dog catcher.

Calling someone who would co-sponsor the SEIU bill a "conservative" is moronic. Deliberately failing to mention that little factoid as a part of your efforts to defend the indefensible?

That's something else. That's sordid. That's cowardly. That's fraud. And that's what Herrera supporters who either agree with her actions or support them while THEY masquerade as "conservatives" could fairly be labeled.

As a conservative, just ask yourself this:

Would YOU co-sponsor and vote for a SEIU bill?

If you haven't eaten yet, feel free to head on over to this bogus effort to defend this clueless empty suit's support of SEIU.

Don't do it if you have eaten, though. Because you won't be able to keep it down.

As far as that goes, the one thing that amazes me the most is how many leftists votes Herrera takes that the Herrera Herd just goes along with.

The lie then, is in referring to this fake Republican as a "conservative."

What both Huff and this Bowman guy deliberately left out is that not only did Herrera VOTE for this what you admit to be "not a GREAT bill;" the simple idiot co-sponsored it.

Co-sponsored, Huff. She co-sponsored an SEIU bill, and then voted for it.

Much like she voted for stripping out the $229,000,000 from the state's emergency fund to help the democrats with their massive spending increases this session, "conservatives" would neither COSPONSOR A SEIU BILL, VOTE FOR THE SEIU BILL, NOR VOTE AGAINST HER CAUCUS TO EMPTY OUT THE STATE RAINY DAY FUND.

I have to wonder: what leftist cause, bill or series of causes or bills would it take for the Herrera Herd to get that she's as conservative as my cocker spaniel?

And by the way, Huff? Your constant whine about checking "her voting record" is even more proof that there is nothing this woman can do to get you to wake up:

What washingtonvotes.org HAS is a record of how her voting buttons were pushed. It doesn't have a record of WHO PUSHED THEM the dozens of votes she MISSED VOTES so she could go out and fund raise.

I get that the SEIU thing is causing her problems. No true conservative would consider voting for a so-called Republican who not only voted for SEIU legislation, but COSPONSORED THE BILL.

And no amount of spin from you, or Bowman, or anyone else can make up for the fact that she sold us out to the SEIU here, just like she ditched us to go to a DC special interest fund raiser during session; and just like she voted to help the democrats rape us financially just a few short days ago.

NO other GOP candidate in this district would CONSIDER carrying the water for the SEIU. Her vote there makes her unfit to hold the office she has now, let alone go to congress to do anything but answer phones at a receptionist desk.

I'm just astounded that you people have, apparently, drank enough Kool Aid to fill an Olympic Swimming pool.

Unbelievable. If you people believe her to be a conservative, then I'm ashamed to call myself one.

Cross posted at Clark County Politics.