Monday, June 21, 2010

So, Herrera is ASHAMED of being the establishment candidate?

One of the many reasons to detest Jaime Herrera's candidacy for anything north of dog catcher is her inability to accept responsibility for what she's done... and who she is.

Take this little tidbit in the Seattle Times:
But both (Castillo and Herrera) also tout tea-party backing and reject any notion they're an establishment candidate — a label that's spelled trouble for some candidates elsewhere this election season.
Earlier, Ridgefield Barbie was described in this same article thusly:
Herrera, 31, has the backing of several top Republicans, including former Sen. Slade Gorton.
Odd that none of those "top Republicans" don't live here, isn't it? Of course, the Times either doesn't know or wouldn't publish that Gorton only endorsed Herrera because Vander Stoep is on her campaign... and that Gorton endorsed Herrera without ever talking to Castillo.

Was it that long ago that Herrera's Hypocrites whined us a river over the FreedomWorks endorsement of Castillo? No Matter.

Herrera has been built from the outhouse up by the oh-so-establishment Cathy McMorris Rogers. She ditched us during the legislative session to go to a DC special interest fund raiser. She hasn't even lived here for 11 out of the last 13 years. She's been listed in the "If you can stand up and chew bubble gum while breathing" young gun list, while Castillo, who matches her achievement for achievement needed to get on that list, has been excluded.

So, while Herrera has MUCH to be ashamed of, she should just acknowledge that sher is the establishment candidate and move on.

Because Tea Party members with two functioning neurons who come to find out that the SEIU and other unions have funded Herrera; that SEIU has cosponsored and voted for a bill that would force people into collective bargaining while forcing their BOSSES and BUSINESS OWNERS to pay THEIR DUES; that she voted AGAINST THE REPUBLICAN CAUCUS to strip out the last $229,000,000 from this state's emergency fund.... well, they're much less likely to think she's worthy of their consideration.

In the end, Herrera is the establishment candidate. And given her history and that of her winged monkies, I can certainly understand why she would run away from the truth. But run away is what she's doing.

And cowardice, opportunism, with zero qualifications... something of an Obama Lite, is not what we should want representing McMorris (OOooppps... I mean, "us") in Congress.


  1. Who are you for?

  2. Although they don't amount to much, having received 3 endorsements of establishment county parties and the stealth establishment support she continues to receive, she is very much the establishment candidate, not to mention SEIU favored.

    Should the establishment succeed in getting her nominated, we may as well congratulate the Democrats for their win in November.

    And, of course, David Hedrick deciding to remain in, as if he has any chance, just draws votes away from Castillo, which will give the establishment candidate an in.

  3. Who am I for?

    I'm for the one the most qualified. I'm for the one who has actually sacrificed to serve their country. I'm for the one with private sector experience. I'm for the one who has served in a position that helps to make this country safe... while taking care of someone besides them self.

    I'm not for someone who Co-sponsored SEIU legislation forcing child care workers to unionize while forcing the business owners to pay their union dues. I'm not for someone who helped the democrats blow $229,000,000 taxpayer dollars while the rest of her caucus voted against that particular strategy.

    There. Does that help?


Let's keep it civil, people.