KeathHuff Says:
April 2nd, 2010 at 11:06 am
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.
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.