In honor of the GOP expense in LA: What do Jaime Herrera and the money reimbursed by the GOP for the strip club reimbursement have in common?

How about a massive reimbursement for a total waste of money?

We already know about Herrera's SEIU hi-jinks. We know about her efforts to help the democrats blow $229 million to help them with their new spending. But do we remember her managing to burn her way through almost $500 in meals in 3 days?

No?

Well, here's s brief reminder.

Who here isn't familiar with the Sellers debacle?

Sellers, who, at the time was mayor of Washougal, felt compelled to go to Vegas on "official business." While she was there, she decided that the taxpayers of the city of Washougal should pay for her alcohol, and some high priced meals.

Stacy Sellers is having a tough week. Perhaps she deserves one, since, according to the local version of Pravda, Sellars charged, among other things, a "...$57 'surf and turf' dinner. An $88 bottle of wine. A $72 bill at the Eye Candy Lounge & Bar." while on some sort of "official trip" to Vegas.... although why a trip to Vegas for the mayor of Washougal would be official is, perhaps, a subject for another post. (Take some time and run a google search on the "Eye Candy Lounge & Bar" for pictures of others engaging in some distinctly "non-mayor" like activities. I guess what happens in Vegas is reported in the Columbian.)

Just yesterday, KOIN 6 reported on Brian Baird's abuse of the travel system where he decided he needed to spend a fortune to go on vacations masquerading as a "fact finding trip," a trip that a local travel agent booked for roughly one half the cost charged by Baird.

Erstwhile political opportunist Jamie Herrera seems to share the traits of both Baird and Sellers.

In August of 05, Herrera went on one of these "fact finding trips" to Spokane, where Congresswoman Cathy McMorris Rogers (R-WA05) maintains a district office.

Instead of sending one of her own staffers already in Spokane for this "fact finding," McMorris-Rogers instead seems to have sent Herrera. That sending Herrera was apparently a complete waste of money is a subject for another post. That issue aside, here is the rather disturbing travel voucher, filled out by Herrera and signed off on by her boss and mentor, Congresswoman McMorris-Rogers.



Now, the questionable aspect of this trip aside, where the main issue of concern for me comes to the fore is here:

Somehow, Herrera managed to spend $475.48 for meals on a 3 day trip to Spokane... and her boss, McMorris-Rogers, approved that cost!

Are you kidding me?

I used to LIVE in Spokane. That much money would feed a family of four for three weeks, and Herrera went through that BY HERSELF, in THREE DAYS?

Shades of Stacy Sellers.

And, just like Jon Russell, who approved Seller's charges since he was in overwatch of the credit cards for Washougal, McMorris Rogers approved this outrageous charge paid for by the taxpayers of the United States.

It seems to me that Sellers and Baird and Herrera are all the same... and Russell and McMorris-Rogers blow off this kind of stuff all the time.

As for me, I don't want any of them either in my government... or in elective office.

Because if any of them gave a damn about us... we wouldn't have heard about any of this.

Cross posted at Clark County Politics.

Liz Mair joins the Herrera campaign.

I've been reading, off and on, Liz Mair's blog. She's occasionally right in her observations, but her frequent bias towards Herrera calls into question her credibility as some sort of arbiter/reporter of the goings on here in the Washington 3rd.

It became most notable with her bizarre column on Castillo's robo call:

Tempers flare in Washington's third as Castillo takes a hatchet to Herrera

February 27th, 2010 15:37 ET

The race to succeed retiring Rep. Brian Baird in Washington’s third district has taken a sharply negative turn with David Castillo, one of two leading Republicans vying for a spot on the November ballot, taking a proverbial hatchet to the other, State Rep. Jaime Herrera, in a robocall that has caused tempers to flare among political insiders in Southwest Washington. The robocall, narrated by a female voice who identifies herself only as “Susan” and put out on Thursday, attacks Herrera for taking money from labor union SEIU and for traveling to Washington, DC for events held that same day.

Herrera was in the nation’s capital on Thursday for fundraising and meet-and-greet events hosted by her former employer, Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers and high-profile Herrera endorser former Sen. Slade Gorton.

A representative of the Washington State Legislature with whom I spoke today confirmed that none of the committees on which Herrera serves met on Thursday; nor were any votes taken in the Washington State House of Representatives on that day. That, specifically, has one prominent Republican in the district outraged at Castillo’s attack.

However, the robocall has caused other tempers to flare, too. It emerged today that the Castillo robocall has even prompted one former Castillo endorser—Shannon Barnett, a candidate running to replace Herrera in the Washington State House of Representatives— to drop his support altogether. According to Barnett (with whom I spoke earlier), Castillo spending money on the call constitutes a waste of campaign resources. Furthermore, Barnett says, it evidenced an unwillingness on Castillo’s part to stick to a key campaign pledge made months ago to Barnett. Per Barnett, Castillo promised to focus his campaign on talking about issues that unite Republican voters in the district. Hal Palmer, an advisor to Barnett, added that he was “appalled at the distorted attack on Jaime Herrera.”

The robocall has also elicited some strong pushback from Keath Huff, a self-described Tea Party organizer and long time conservative activist who published an open letter to third district conservatives at his site LibertyTeeth on Friday. In that letter, Huff says he too was “appalled by the recent voice mail I received about my friend Jaime Herrera.” He goes on to blast Castillo for pushing out a “phone call” containing “blatantly false accusations” and employing “propaganda.” and urges recipients to support Herrera.

Meanwhile, multiple, additional third district Republicans are complaining that the Castillo campaign is violating the 11th commandment, misrepresenting Herrera, and improving Democratic chances of holding the third in multiple emails obtained earlier and reportedly sent to the Castillo campaign.

One prominent Washington State Republican who is neutral in the battle between the two candidates takes issue with the attack on Herrera relating to SEIU contributions, and believes this comes close to Castillo throwing stones in a glass house. Setting aside the robocall content, Castillo aides and supporters have been keen to assert connections between her and the union, with Castillo himself and new media consultant Patrick Ruffini tweeting on Friday about a post by Warner Todd Huston entitled “Washington State’s SEIU Bought Republican.” That post, and one other from last week, highlight SEIU’s endorsement of Herrera. Herrera opponents also frequently cite her vote for legislation backed by the union.

However, says the same Washington State Republican raising red flags about Castillo’s SEIU attack, that’s a description that voters may find better fits Castillo’s former boss, House Minority Leader Richard DeBolt, a prominent Castillo endorser. While Herrera did take $500 in August 2008 from the SEIU PAC, a search of Washington’s Public Disclosure Commission website shows that DeBolt in fact took in $3200 from various SEIU entities during the 2008 cycle alone. (An OpenSecrets.org search shows that neither Herrera nor Castillo has taken money from individuals employed by SEIU in the course of their congressional races as of the last filing period with the FEC.)

Moreover, a source tells me, Herrera’s support for legislation also backed by SEIU had nothing to do with alleged “connections” to SEIU. Rather, some providers of children’s care in her legislative district were speaking out ahead of that vote in favor of the legislation Herrera supported. A source who personally affiliates with Herrera and who has personal knowledge of the difficulties such providers were expressing around that time told me several weeks ago in relation to this point that this was one instance where employers were seeking a standardized employment contract, just as SEIU was. This source indicated that a standardized employment contract—something the legislation would have facilitated—was crucial to obtain from the providers’ perspective. Long-running problems involving individual employees asking for astronomical pay increases that could not be met had, in this person’s view, been evident, and this was something a standardized contract might have avoided. This, in turn, was connected in several instances to employees walking off the job with no notice, thus jeopardizing operations. This person wondered at the time how Castillo would have voted in the same circumstances, given his branding as a candidate.

Others see Castillo’s attacks—including the robocall—as a sign of desperation more than a possible misunderstanding. One Republican source pointed to the comparative advantage in fundraising already being experienced by Herrera. Herrera, who formally entered the race midway through December, raised $55,775 in what her campaign says was just about two weeks during 2009. By comparison, Castillo, who entered the race midway through 2009, raised $104,172 during the entire year.

One well-regarded politico with extensive, firsthand knowledge of Washington and national politics who is not connected to either the Herrera or Castillo camp says "Castillo had months to lock this down and make inroads with Republicans in the third. He didn't do it. This is like the guy in the bar who talks to a girl for three hours, fails to interest her enough for her to give her number out, and then gets pissed off when someone else buys her a drink."

However, not everyone takes issue with Castillo’s attacks. According to Kathy McDonald, a well-known Republican consultant from the third district unaffiliated with either campaign, “It looks like David Castillo is calling a spade a spade. The facts are Jaime was back in DC for a fundraiser, the fact is Jaime took money from the SEIU; the fact is she went before the legislative session was over. If she had waited 2 weeks until session was over this fundraiser would be a mute point.”

Perhaps in a sign that this robocall being put out has been a “no win” for both candidates, both the Castillo and Herrera campaigns declined to comment on this post. The DCCC has previously indicated that the contest between Castillo and Herrera to win over Republicans in the third district will be “divisive and messy,” and features the race on its Palin’s Primaries microsite.

This not even thinly veiled effort to rehab Herrera's tattered image was a crap-pile from the get-go. For example, what Richard DeBolt did or did not do concerning SEIU is completely irrelevant. Why mention it... except DeBolt had endorsed Castillo?

Reading carefully, a pattern emerges. It's a pattern she uses frequently in support of Herrera. It's the pattern of the "unnamed source."

Knowing that Mair had been contacted and provided additional information on issues concerning this race in the past (Such as Gorton's endorsement of Herrera because his former Chief of Staff is running her campaign) which she did not use; her reliance on "unnamed sources" to attack Castillo; her failure to address the facts of the call by informing the reader that every syllable of this call was accurate as a conclusion outside of McfDonald's position; her mentioning Castillo's endorsements while simultaneously trashing him:

Castillo endorsements

February 11th, 2010 19:31 ET

In the last week, I've written two posts that note former Sen. Slade Gorton's endorsement of Jaime Herrera. But I would be remiss if I did not also take a moment to note David Castillo's endorsements, many if not all of which were obtained before I really started covering this race in any meaningful sense.

So here you have it: Per Castillo spokesman Bill Lohr (via the Columbian), Castillo has been endorsed by Attorney General Rob McKenna, someone of whom yours truly thinks very highly, and 13 House Republicans. Says Lohr on the subject of the respective endorsement tally between Castillo and Herrera, “I think it’s more telling that of her own colleagues in the state Legislature, more of them have endorsed David."

This is an interesting point, because on the one hand, yes, Herrera's colleagues in the legislature are the ones who know her best and who you might expect to be the most eager to jump on board her proverbial train. That being said, it is of course worth also mentioning that often, the earlier entrant to a race locks up support from big names in his or her party faster than a late entrant does-- and Herrera is a late entrant. Herrera entered the race very late in 2009; Castillo told me in my interview with him that he began running in June. So maybe yes, maybe no-- but worth pondering.

What I think is more noteworthy, overall, here is that each of these candidates has a big dog in the fight, and in their corner: McKenna for Castillo, Gorton for Herrera. As I've said before, this is going to be an interesting race to watch, and the split of big names between each camp only underlines the point. Stay tuned.

UPDATE: A reader emails "Castillo was also chief of staff to the House Minority Leader in Olympia...so a respectable list of endorsements from House Republicans is rather logical for him. He has probably known more of them longer than Herrera, even though she serves with many of them." Good point!

Is it REALLY a"good point?"

Of course not, because the following is true:

Most of those in the House endorsing Castillo have had the opportunity to work with both Herrera and Castillo.

They made their decision to stick with Castillo, Herrera's efforts to peel them off notwithstanding; shortly after Herrera's announcement, she systematically called those endorsing Castillo to break their word to him by demanding that they peel off him and endorse her.

Some, like Shannon Barnett, claimed to have continue to endorse Castillo with the integrity-worthless "dual endorsement," (which was nonsense; Barnett's now famous fund raising letter for Herrera that went out for Christmas made it clear that he had completely committed to Herrera, in ways that I found, well, disturbing) so that his bizarre lies and trash included in his post robo-call rant were pure garbage.

But keeping on track, the point of this post is that Liz Mair is writing for Herrera like she's on the payroll.

Mair's failure to point out that Herrera's campaign is being ran by former Gorton Chief of Staff Jay Vander Stoep, for example, which anyone familiar with the situation would know was the basis for his endorsement, since, otherwise, he wouldn't have known Herrera if she had bit him; makes her entire shtick questionable.

It's one thing not to report those things you don't know. It's quite another to fail to report those things you do know.

Using "unarmed sources" you can justify or write anything... even the completely nonsensical idea that telling the TRUTH about another candidate is somehow wrong, or can be/should be used for a justification to pull support from a candidate.

Because when true conservatives find out that Herrera co-sponsored and voted for an SEIU bill that requires collective bargaining for daycare workers or that she voted against her own caucus and with the democrats to help them spend $229,000,000 for their new programs in the midst of this horrific recession... they drop her like a bad habit.

Mair, of course, notes that the robo call mentions Herrera SEIU efforts, but then proceeds to write up a bunch of damage control crap from miffed Herrera supporters who are not thrilled to have these facts pointed out.

While *I* do not use "unnamed sources." Her columns speak of a "representative of the Washington State Legislature with whom I spoke;" (but did not name) and "one prominent Republican in the district (but did not name) "multiple additional 3rd District Republicans are complaining (but not named) "One prominent Washington State Republican who is neutral" (but not named) "the same (not named) Washington State Republican raising red flags about Castillo" and "Moreover a (not named) source tells me" and "Others (not named) see Castillo's attacks" (even the use of the word "attacks" is a defense of Herrera) and "One (unnamed) Republican Source," and "One well-regarded (but unnamed) politco." And on.... and on.... and on.

It's as if Mair simply couldn't find ANYONE besides Kathy McDonald in the face of this veritable but unnamed regiment of people who condemned Castillo's phone call which was the absolute truth, as a good idea. And it's equally strange that while Mair was incapable of finding any of the rest of us who appreciate hearing the truth about Herrera; the one person she DID find (Purely for purposes of balance, I'm sure) was named... while most of the others were not.

Because, this effort to shift the focus to the messenger instead of the message is nothing BUT damage control. At the end of the day, had Herrera not ditched us to go to a fund raiser in DC, it wouldn't have been the basis for a robocall. At the end of the day, had Herrera not supported SEIU, they wouldn't have endorsed her or given her money. Mentioning these FACTS in the call?

That's just coincidence, right?

And then, of course, we come to Mair's latest Herrera campaign piece:

WA-3 roundup: Herrera endorsements; Castillo own goal

March 28th, 2010 13:12 ET

Here's a belated update on some news related to the WA-3 race from last week:

Jaime Herrera announced the endorsements of former Rep. Linda Smith and the Cowlitz County GOP. Smith, readers will recall, was the last Republican to hold the third district; she lost a Senate bid against then first-termer Patty Murray back in 1998. The Cowlitz County GOP endorsed Herrera unanimously; readers will remember that back in February, Herrera won a Cowlitz County GOP straw poll.

David Castillo's campaign seems to have committed something of an own goal in the wake of the health care vote last weekend. On Tuesday night, his campaign sent out a statement titled "Heck Takes Position on Health Care Bill-- After the Vote." The problem? Heck's website indicates that on March 20-- i.e., the day before the House voted on health care-- Heck announced that "at this time, if I were a member of Congress, I would be voting YES on this legislation." Is the Castillo campaign arguing
that Heck backdated that item? Or did they just not notice it? Or were they aware, but decided to issue an attention-grabbing attack release anyway? Sources inside the district say that Castillo almost certainly would have known of Heck's positioning ahead of the vote. Reportedly, Heck had been touting his support for the bill at events in the district for several days before the actual vote. Furthermore, one Washingtonian who keeps tabs on Heck for professional reasons that I spoke to indicated receipt of a Google alert pointing to the Heck website item on Saturday night. And, one Republican who attended a Lincoln Day dinner the night before the vote at which Castillo was reportedly present says that Heck's endorsement of the bill was mentioned during a speech there.

Besides Mair's continuing use of the unnamed source dodge, a campaign mistake of such a low level of significance is hardly worth mentioning; and it's not as if Mair has focused on the multiple "own goals" committed by Herrera.

When added to this crock:

McMorris Rodgers, Gorton hosting DC fundraiser for Herrera

February 9th, 2010 12:12 ET

In my inbox this morning is an email announcing that on February 25, Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers and former Sen. Slade Gorton will be hosting a fundraising breakfast here in DC for Jaime Herrera-- one of the big names competing to succeed Rep. Brian Baird in representing Washington's third district in Congress.

The breakfast will take place on the Hill from 8-9AM. Herrera should walk away from it with a bit of money to line the campaign coffers: Attendees are being asked to cut a check for $250 (if an individual) or $1,000 (if a PAC).

I wouldn't be terribly surprised to see David Castillo knock Herrera for raising money in DC (he's already poked her for seeking support from folks outside the third district). I also fully anticipate the DCCC will blast her for taking PAC contributions (because Democrats never, ever do that).

Personally, I don't think anyone's going to fault Herrera's former boss (McMorris Rodgers), who is of course also from the Evergreen State, for wanting to help her out-- and McMorris Rodgers, like most federal-level elected officials, is in DC on Thursday mornings. Furthermore, I maintain that Slade Gorton's backing is going to be very helpful to Herrera-- as will any money she takes away from this event.

Here, we agree, Ms. Mair. It's pretty clear you don't think.

As one of Herrera's unfortunate constituents, I was offended by her decision to ditch us much like I was offended by her decision to allow others to vote for her while she was making fund raising calls so she wouldn't appear to be blowing off her job to, you guessed it, fund raise.

That Herrera is stuck on stupid (as are her handlers) is evidenced by this moronic play to bail during session to go to a fund raiser that easily could have waited. You know, one of those "own goals?" You remember... something you strived to do pre-damage control over?

That Mair not only gives her a pass with this but tries to sell it?

Well, that all speaks for itself.

All of this calls into question her false pretense of fairness. It's not that Mair can't be a Herrera supporter. Many have drank that Kool Aid, and supporting any candidate is her right. But she should at least admit it to provide the reader with some prospective instead of hiding behind this false facade of journalistic integrity.

But then, when you're "on the payroll" so to speak, this kind of thing is to be expected.

Right, Liz?

Cross posted at Clark County Politics.

So, Pacific County did what?

Last evening I was one of two people (with 3 others being cc'd), who received an email from the Chair of the Pacific County GOP. In the email (which I felt to be kind of strange, upon reflection) I was notified that the Pacific County GOP (Relatively speaking, both members) had drank the Herrera Kool Aid and joined with the Cowlitz whack jobs in endorsing Herrera.

I'm not particularly sure why the 5 of us received such an email; that is, I'm not sure why the sender felt compelled to share this little vignette with the other 3 recipients, or even to send it to me. I know of the sender, but the sender has no impact on me or my county, and frankly, I am not at all concerned about what the Pacific County GOP (or their chair, for that matter) does or does not do or say.

I will, however, respect the sender's position as a GOP Chair, and because I have not received explicit permission to post the email in question, I am choosing not to do so.

The other recipient of the email was the other local conservative blogger, Lew Waters. His response, as usual, was much more measured and articulately presented then my own meager efforts here.

While I simply cannot understand why anyone would support a fake Republican cardboard cut out of a representative, I get that some fair amount of people have been hoodwinked into viewing this empty suit as the second coming.

She's not.

That said, this was my response, sent from my Droid. Unlike Lew's fine effort, it is not measured, considered or polished. But it is precisely how I see this situation.

I appreciate your position in all of this but please do not misunderstand me... I have beaten on Herrera like a drum and I will continue to do so as long as she remains in politics.

If we are unfortunate enough that she is in the top two, I will endorse her opponent as a former executive director of the WSRP and I will do everything I can to defeat her.

She is a political menace not deserving of consideration as a congressional candidate and that suddenly, magically, doesn't stop if she is in the general or even if she wins.

This isn't about "party". I will not support a corrupt candidate who sells out to the unions no matter if mcmorris[sic] is jerking her strings or not.

At the end of the day, your county may feel free to join with that kind of candidate if you like. But hopefully, she will be exposed for what she is, and your county's endorsement will be meaningless.

But as long as I live and she is in politics, I will be devoted to her political defeat.

My blog isn't posturing. I am not politically attacking her as part of any other campaign. It is because Baird at his worst is better than Herrera at her best. And I am not going to settle for mediocre corruption and a congressional annointment[sic] based on interference from outside influences EVER.

Thank you for contacting me, but in all honesty, that Herrera is even considered to be a serious GOP candidate makes me ashamed to be part of such an organization.

On a direct level, the hypocrisy shown by Herrera supporters has sickened me, and that includes the snivelling over freedom works Castillo endorsement. And your rt [sic - rt meaning "retweet"] of that in the face of gorton[sic] doing the exact same thing gives me pause.

I have been actively working to get Republicans elected since Herrera was in elementary school. But after this election (because I'm on campaigns now), I'm done.

If this is the new face of the GOP, I want no part of it.

That I am simply incapable of grasping why anyone would waste their vote on an vacuous pretty face with no experience, no integrity, no understanding, no vision and no independence in thought or deed has shown that my education, experience, and work to elect genuine Republicans has simply been passed by, and that I am so far out of touch that I can no longer stomach this kind of corrupt, suspend-disbelief crap the Herrera supporters are pushing.

That anyone could support someone with a track record of doing the democrat's bidding, of wasting hundreds of dollars on meal reimbursement as a staffer, of lying about her position on McMorris's staff, of cosponsoring and voting for ANY SEIU bill, of anyone who would throw someone else under a bus to save herself, of anyone who would ignore constituents, of anyone who hadn't even lived here for 11 of the past 13 years... of anyone who would liken there ten years of living away from home as a professional intern as the same thing as "being in the military..." is, and I do admit this...

Simply beyond me.

That has been my position. That will BE my position. And it will not stop until the people wise up and vote her into the well-deserved oblivion her record demands, and she and her handlers (McMorris, Gorton, et al) personally deserves.

A quick review shows that Pacific County is one of the deepest, darkest, bluest counties in the state, with no GOP representation at any level for any legislative or local office. Perhaps that's a reflection of the judgment of the local GOP organization. Because that is certainly the kind of judgment they have shown here.

Cross-posted at Clark County Politics.

The lie and the truth of the latest Herrera fund raiser invite.

This is a cut from the most recent swindle sheet Herrera has sent out to vacuum up the cash for her run for Congress.

Part of it is right on.... the part where it says she "will bring a rare combination of experience and energy to the U.S. Congress..."

And thank God for that.

Her complete lack of any appreciable experience either in Congress or as a legislator speaks for itself, as does her support of SEIU bills and emptying the state reserve to help democrats rip us off for their massive spending bills here in Washington State.

The lie part?

Once again, Herrera lies about her position as a low-level staffer effectively pouring coffee for McMorris.

As an "elected legislator," she has accomplished absolutely nothing except to help the fringe leftists spend our money.

And people support her.

And people will give her money.

And that makes no sense at all.

Cross posted on Clark County Politics.

Taft vs. Herrera: and the winner is?

(This link is to Victoria Taft's complete interview of Rep. Jaime Herrera on the 24th of March. This is a download of around 2.2 meg)

Listening to Ridgefield Barbie as someone actually holds her accountable for her votes in the Legislature reminds me of that color guy on ESPN: "Rumblin, stumblin, bumblin!"

Some of Herrera's votes have been absolutely mystifying in their breathtaking leftist inclination.

Sponsoring and voting for SEIU legislation; voting as she did a few days ago to clean out the better part of our emergency fund... to help the democrats spend more tens of millions on their pet programs... all of these are indications that her vote has been for sale here, and in the unfortunate event she's elected to Congress (God Forbid) it will be just as for sale their... also indicated by the her attendance at a fund raiser she ditched us to go to in DC during session.

Taft gets it in a way Herrera can never even dream of. She tries to get her to understand, but Herrera is a fake conservative of the old school.

That anyone could or would support a fake Republican with no depth, vision or experience for Congress is the kind of thing that resulted in a Barack Obama as president.

And Jamie, by the way? It wasn't the $200,000,000 you claimed, it was, in fact, $229,000,000. It's nice to see your finger so tightly on the pulse of $29,000,000.

HB 3197

Brief Description: Transferring funds from the budget stabilization account to the general fund.

Sponsors: Representatives Sullivan, Linville, Seaquist, Ericks and Haigh.

Brief Summary of Bill

Ÿ Directs the State Treasurer to transfer $229 million from the Budget Stabilization
Account to the state General Fund.

The more she talks, the worse it gets. The other candidates... almost ANY of the other candidates... look better all the time.

Cross posted on Clark County Politics.

Convention speech review highlights - Jamie Herrera

Well, I don't know if "highlights" is the right word.

She has, she tells us, for the "...last 3 years... represented" us.

Like the rest of her exaggerations, that is false as well. While this will be her third SESSION, she is several months short of "3 years." But then, Herrera has been factually challenged from the moment she came back here after her 10 year absence.

"It has been the most tremendous honor, it really is."

Much like the lie she blithely told the commissioners already scammed into appointing her long before the actual meeting, when Herrera lied to them by telling them that there was "not being a job she'd rather have" (since she's running for congress)" it hasn't been an honor. How she got this gig and her actions since have been something less than "honorable."

Did she talk about the issues confronting us?

No.

Did she talk about security? Jobs? The economy? Did she have any specific proposals?

No, no and.... no.

Did she talk about any qualifications she might have to be elected to Congress?

No.

There was a massive amount of verbiage where she attempted to explain to US "what America is about."

As if we already didn't know.

As our representative, she "fought against tax increases. and she's signed the taxpayer protection pledge."

Oddly, she didn't speak about her sponsorship and vote for an SEIU bill that would force daycare workers into collective bargaining, a horrific bill that will hurt those who needed her help the most. She remained silent in the face of her plans to empty out the state reserve fund to the tune of $229,000,000, which she did a few days ago.

No. Nothing about that.

She closed with the unfortunate news that Linda Smith had endorsed her, while again lying about her involvement in Smith's campaign in 94... "we remember the fight to get her there" Really? "WE" remember that fight?

YOU weren't there.

I was. But you weren't.

And then that nonsense about her non-existent "independent, hard-working spirit."

"Independent?" If Cathy McMorris stopped suddenly, your entire head would disappear up to your shoulders.

"Hard-working?" There, I have to agree. Few have worked harder in their fund-raising efforts, to include screwing us by ditching us to go to DC during session, or having your seat mate vote for you in your absence so you could make those fund raising calls.

"Hard work" indeed.

And, of course, she will "stand with the people of Southwest Washington."

All while taking her orders from the congresswoman representing Spokane.

"It's going to be our year, folks."

True enough. But it ain't going to be yours.

The speech was, essentially, worthless. It was one huge generality filled with platitudes, and it provided exactly zero justification to support Ridgefield Barbie.

Herrera has no experience in any element that makes up what most sane people would consider to be a solid foundation to serve in congress.

She hasn't lived here for 11 of the past 13 years, which is reason enough to oppose her. She has no private sector experience. She has never owned a home. She has no experience in the military or defense. She has never owned a business.

She has done nothing in any of the areas where she CLAIMS she wants to help US.

And while that makes sense to the fringe right Cowlitz Kool Aid drinkers, it's not going to make sense to the rest of us.

All and all a pathetic, worthless effort that provided no one with anything along the lines of a justification to support this empty suited, vacuous cheerleader to do anything but be a secretary in a congressional office.

Cross posted at Clark County Politics.

The Kool Aid drinkers supporting Herrera

The rank hypocrisy of the self-flagellating Herrera supporter is beyond belief.

As those paying attention know, FreedomWorks rightfully endorsed someone who wasn't Jaime Herrera, thank God.

Well, all the local Herrera Herd immediately ran off the cliff like the lemmings they are, whining that FreedomWorks allegedly hadn't bothered to talk to Herrera.

Exclusive of the fact that it wouldn't have made any difference if they had, given what a train wreck Herrera is as a candidate, I have to ask: where were these moronic hypocrites when Slade endorsed Herrera?

That answer?

Easy. They were nowhere.

Rank hypocrisy is easily overlooked when it's your candidate. Not ONE of these clowns complained when Slade did Vander Stoep and McMorris Rogers' bidding and endorsed Ridgefield Barbie who he otherwise wouldn't have known if she had bit him.

That's the curse of having a non-existent resume' like Herrera, who is no more qualified to be a member of Congress then she is to pilot an F-22.

So now, we get whining and sniveling not unlike the dog barf they spewed after Castillo's accurate robo-call went out reminding everyone what an SEIU sellout Herrera is, or that she was ditching us, her constituents, to do a special interest fund raiser in DC during session, HERE.

Otherwise sane people have lost their collective minds over this empty suit. Otherwise smart people who would demand depth, experience, vision and a mind of her own in a normal candidate can't seem to get beyond.... well.... something.... because it isn't her dismal legislative record (made worse today by her efforts to help the unions blow another $229 million of our money against her caucus... again...) and it isn't her record in the private sector: being a career intern shouldn't be that impressive.

And whining about how any organization chooses to endorse someone when others made THEIR endorsement decision the SAME WAY... well, that shows a series of thought processes that are frightening in their stupidity.

You can tell a lot about a candidate by the type of people they attract. And the typical Herrera supporter seems to view her as some kind of cult leader, someone they follow and fall on their swords for her not because she rates it or deserves it, but because, well, she is who she is, as if that's a reason to vote for anyone.

These cults of personality have resulted in other stellar political leaders. Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Obama come immediately to mind. And you'd think these alleged Republicans would know better, since we just got done electing the worst president this country has ever seen; a president much like the candidate they so slavishly support.

And it leads to crybaby whining like I have NEVER seen before. And otherwise honorable people engaging in rank hypocrisy like crybaby three year olds.

Double standards are what leftists engage in. One has to wonder: why are these people acting this way?

Cross posted at Clark County Politics.
.

Herrera ditches her caucus AGAIN: votes to clean out reserve.

State Representative Jaime Herrera (Fake R -SEIU) has once again ditched the Republican caucus and joined with her leftist buddies to empty out our state reserve by voting "yes" on House Bill 3197 "Budget Stabilization Account."

The bill transfers $229,000,000 out of the reserve account, effectively emptying it so her buddies can spend it. The bill passed with a 69 -28 vote, with Herrera AGAIN joining her fellow leftists.

Well done...

..if you're a democrat.

Herrera, best known for screwing us with her cosponsorship and voting for the SEIU bill requiring collective bargaining for child care workers, can now add this to her impressive list of leftist votes.

So, instead of sticking with the rest of the Republicans, Herrera bails AGAIN and gives the democrat money machine what they want.

Despicable.

Cross posted at Clark County Politics.

Herrera throws a hissy fit in the Olympian: stomps her widdle footsie.

Gee, Ridgefield Barbie REALLY got stung by lying about having others vote in her place. SO stung, in fact, that she throws a genuine hissy-fit in today's letters to the editor in The Olympian, who rightly popped her upside her vacuous little head for ditching her job and having others vote for her while she was out making fund-raising calls. In fact, here's her whining little hair pulling screech of a letter, hot off the web site:

Not off the House floor for hours

I am disappointed that this paper chose to restate untrue allegations to single out my voting record in the editorial “Voting for others in the House is unacceptable. The source this paper quoted is not exactly a nonpartisan source — until recently Rep. Deb Wallace was my opponent in the 3rd Congressional District election.

I don’t disagree with the editorial’s call for procedural reform. I would like House leadership to better organize vote timing so that the procedure of voting for others can be changed, and legislators won’t have to miss any votes at all.

What I take issue with is the restated claim by Rep. Wallace that I have been away from the House floor “for hours at a time” during votes this year. That is false. I have one of the best voting attendance records in Olympia. In three years, I’ve missed only 10 out of 1,863 possible floor votes, and all were before this year.

When I am not on the floor, it is typically because I am honoring a constituent’s request for a meeting. As an assistant floor manager, I must also move around the floor to work with legislators about to speak, or attend leadership meetings in the wings. Involvement in the legislative process does not equal hours away from the floor during votes.

I stand behind my voting record, available at washingtonvotes.org, and I stand behind my hard work and service to the people of my legislative district.

REP. JAIME HERRERA, 18th Legislative District

YOU were "disappointed?" Imagine how "disappointed" we, your constituents were, to find out that you had others voting for you... and then have you deny it? Imagine how "disappointed" we were to find out you were too STUPID to stay here and do OUR business, instead of waiting until after session was over to go slurp at the special interest trough your puppet-master McMorris and lobbyist Slade put together for you. As you may have guessed, that disappointed the HELL out of me.

And then this lie about your "voting record" at washingtonvotes.org.

Your voting record, which includes your co-cponsorship and vote for an SEIU backed bill requiring collective bargaining for day care workers, is nothing to brag about in the BEST of circumstances.

But in THIS case, what washingtonvotes.org has isn't YOUR voting record. What it's got is the voting record of YOUR voting BUTTON. And what it DOESN'T tell us is who was PUSHING THAT BUTTON.

Man, it wasn't that long ago. You remember the stupidity of the Kool Aid drinkers supporting her; the screeching, whining, moaning and wailing at the very THOUGHT that Ridgefield Barbie would allow someone to vote for her... in her absence... so she would actually appear to be there and voting... was simply, in their minds, untrue.

What was it she said to The Columbian?

Herrera, R-Camas, angrily denied that she was absent in order to campaign.

“Deb has no credibility, she has no proof,” Herrera said.

She said that as deputy floor leader for the House Republican caucus, she was busy
last week organizing testimony in opposition to suspending Initiative 960, a voter-approved measure that requires a two-thirds vote of each chamber to raise taxes.

“I have missed 10 votes in my entire time as a legislator here,” she said. “I haven’t missed any votes (by being) off the floor this session. I’ve been on the House floor fighting for I-960. As a floor leader, part of my responsibility is to manage the floor debate.”

Interesting. Our lying little cardboard cutout DENIES she was "absent in order to campaign," but mere days later, she ditches her constituents and her job, to, you guessed it, be absent from the House so she could campaign.

Of course, she didn't manage spit when it came to the floor fight, but that's for another post; and it's in keeping with her flair of being a drama queen and someone bent on exaggeration to puff up her paper-thin resume'.

That said, Barbs was not, as it would seem, denying that others had voted for her in her absence... au contraire, mon ami.

No, what Barbs was doing was quibbling about just how long she was off the floor, and what she was doing while she was gone.

Now, using the Liz Mair dodge, unnamed sources have verified to me that democrat State Representative Deb Wallace's allegations that Herrera both allowed others to vote in her place AND was making campaign fund raising calls while she was absent from the floor is true.

Of course, the way to solve this problem is to FOIA Herrera's phone records from her office... and ask her to produce her cell phone records... while looking to see the number of times she, say, called McMorris during session to nail down the arrangements for her DC special interest fundraiser... or check to see if those calls were to, say, one of the 8 people who provided the large bulk of her money for the December 31 FEC reporting cutoff... you know, to make arrangements for yet another fund raiser she bailed on us for, this one in Seattle that had lobbyist Slade's fingerprints all over it.

If only Ridgefield Barbie was an adult.

Remembering that old saw about Winston Churchill and the Madam at the party:

Churchill: Madam, would you sleep with me for five million pounds?
Socialite: My goodness, Mr. Churchill! Well, I suppose – we would have to discuss terms, naturally.Churchill: Would you sleep with me for five pounds?
Socialite: Mr. Churchill, what kind of woman do you think I am?!
Churchill: Madam, we’ve already established that. Now we are haggling about the price.

So, when it comes to the matter of others voting in Herrera's place, we've established who and what she is.

Now we're just haggling over how much time she was spending off the floor.

And frankly, knowing what I know?

My money's on Wallace.

Cross posted at Clark County Politics.

Herrera takes it in the chops again: FreedomWorks backs Castillo.

March has been a particularly bad month for Ridgefield Barbie.

Still stinging from the backlash of her co-sponsorship and vote for a horrific SEIU-backed bill to force collective bargaining on day care workers and businesses; hammered by an effective robo-call reminding everyone that Herrera wasn't even politically intelligent enough to wait until after session was over to ditch her job to bury her head in the special interest trough held up by lobbyist Slade Gorton and her puppet master, Cathy McMorris; getting positively bitch-slapped for having others vote in her place so she wouldn't be seen as absent, even though she WAS absent making fund raising calls... It has been a tough month for our own Little Miss Muffet.

FreedomWorks backing Castillo is something Barbs did NOT want to see. But in addition to House Republican Leader Richard DeBolt (The only elected official to work with both Herrera and Castillo) that Dick Armey and his Tea Party-aligned group came out in support of David Castillo HAS to hurt.

Combined with the endorsement of the Washington Republican National Hispanic Assembly's National Committeewoman, Milagros E. Rice - National Committeewoman, WRNHA (Thurston County) and you've got to wonder: are, as I suspect, the wheels coming off the cardboard cutout's campaign?

A lot of folks out there trumpet Gorton's endorsement of Herrera. But they either don't know or don't care that until Vander Stoep and McMorris made the ask, Slade had never heard of Herrera. Meanwhile, Herrera has the most vanilla endorsement list I've seen for a long time. And wasn't part of that McMorris directed buzz supposed to be that "young Latina" diversity bit?

As the campaign goes on, the endorsement of lobbyist Gorton will ultimately mean less and less as the people come to know what I know... and they will become to be as disgusted as I am.

Meanwhile, political alignments have put Castillo smack into the center of a resurgent GOP in the district in a way that can only make Herrera turn green with envy... in honor of St. Patty's Day, of course.

Cross posted at Clark County Politics.

The inanity of Ann Donnelly: a weekly column as campaign ad.

Ann Donnelly is the token Republican our local paper gives a platform to every now and then. She has done yeoman service to the GOP over the years, including a stint as chair back in the day.

Unfortunately, she has drifted leftward for quite some time... thus the justification the paper must have used to hire her as the token Republican in the sea of avowed leftists running the show.

So, it was not terribly surprising that she has joined the kool aid drinkers supporting SEIU activist Jaime Herrera.

What is a surprise was her use of her column as a not even thinly veiled campaign ad for Ridgefield Barbie, chock full of hyperbole and crap about the non-existent impact our local cardboard cutout of a state representative had when the democrats rolled us on getting rid of I-960 and then jacking our taxes up through the roof.

That Donnelly would stoop to such a moronic level is indicative of your basic Herrera supporter.

When asked why they would support someone of Herrera's ilk... someone who has lived here only 2 out of the last 13 years; someone who is proud of renting a house because she lacks the wherewithal to buy one, (and never planned on living here long anyway) someone who would ditch her constituents in mid-session to attend a lobbyist fund raiser in Washington, DC put on by her masters, McMorris and Gorton...

Someone who was obviously lying when she told the commissioners during the appointment process that "there is not a job in the world I would rather have," Herrera supporters typically have no answer.

Herrera only lacks the experience, the education, the character and the depth to be in Congress as anything but what she was: a minor-level staffer who even lied about that.

When the robo call went out from Castillo's campaign, accurately characterizing Herrera's malfeasance in office, Donnelly was among those who flipped. Many Herrera supporters, like Liz Mair, cobbled together loads of nonsense.

Keath Huff blew a gasket and ladled out a horrific load of crap. Calls were made by people who should have known better demanding to know the involvement of which people who had something to do with the call.

Well, between Herrera ditching her job of voting in favor of her fund raising calls and just plain ditching us altogether so she could bury her face up to her shoulders in the special interest trough held in place by her string pullers, something went wrong.

The loud and over the top response to the robo calls tells the story. Much like our resident whiny little punk's response to Wallace's allegations ("Deb has no credibility. She has no proof," hardly a denial.) and the failure of any of her colleagues to rush out to her defense (speak volumes, doesn't it?) shows that both Wallace's allegations and Castillo's robo calls have hurt HER badly, unlike the guck other bloggers have mentioned.

To use your column of alleged opinion to prop up a failing candidate by making outrageous and untrue connections between this political waste of skin and two of the giants of SW Washington political history... Williams and Smith... is simply beyond the pail.

In fact, it makes as much sense as comparing a Volkswagen bug with a turbocharged Ferrari.

It is, in fact, a despicable use of a column to shill for a candidate who has achieved a cult-like stature among some... people like Donnelly blindly supporting her but lacking any justification for that support when Herrera is compared to almost any of the other candidates running from either party, the majority of which having vastly more experience, judgment and actual time living in the district.

Herrera's campaign has taken on the stench of desperation. And Donnelly's middle-school effort to make Herrera shine just serves to re-enforce that smell.

Cross posted on Clark County Politics.

Jaime Herrera: Three lies in one.

Yes, ladies and gentlemen, it's Three Lies In One!



"Independent?"

Herrera is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Cathy McMorris Rogers/ Slade Gorton, Inc.

An SEIU supporter who voted for a horrific child care worker collective bargaining bill and then threw Senator Don Benton under a bus by lying when she falsely claimed he voted yes on the same bill, calling Herrera "independent" is like calling Stalin a democrat.

"Hardworking?"

Sure. She's working so hard fund raising that others vote for her in her absence while she's off the floor making those "dialing for dollars" calls of hers.

"Effective?"

Yup. If you're an SEIU thug, she's EXACTLY the one to call to help a leftist majority ram one of the components of YOUR agenda through! She was VERY "effective" doing that.

Yes... this is three lies in one.

If she was "independent," she wouldn't have done her Master's bidding by ditching me and the rest of her constituents in her "can't imagine doing any other job" district during session so she could go slurp at the special-interest, lobbyist trough McMorris and Gorton held up for her in DC.

If she was working hard for US, instead of working hard for HER, she would be doing all of her own VOTING, instead of bailing.

And if she was "effective," she actually would have got some sort of bill passed besides the "hand hold" bill that ALL new members get to teach them about the process.

The guy she replaced certainly did.

And now, she got hammered in the Chronline poll and the Columbian rightfully backhanded her when 60% of those responded questioned her "integrity" because she had been off the floor making fund raising calls while others voted in her place.

Not really all that comfortable, is it, Barbs?

Online poll

There are four front runners for the 3rd District House of Representative seat. Who would you like to be your next representative in Congress?

It's not looking good for Herrera blowing off her votes to fundraise.

.
So, first the Olympian newspaper an now even our local effort are allowing people to weigh in on Herrera's lack of integrity in allowing others to vote for her in her fund-raising absense.


Print this article .Comments

I was going to vote but had someone else vote for me because I am not here...LOL
teacher — March 8, 2010 at 10:09 p.m. ( permalink suggest removal )

That's too funny teacher! Great line!
lbrancaccio (Columbian Staff) — March 8, 2010 at 10:11 p.m. ( permalink suggest removal )

I agree, Lou, that was funny, teacher.

Humor aside, the Olympian published their take on it, http://www.theolympian.com/2010/03/07...

As for the allegation by Wallace, I can't help but notice the lack of fellow Republicans coming to Herrera's aid saying they do not press votes on her behalf.

If they are, I haven't stumbled across it.
LewWaters — March 8, 2010 at 11:47 p.m. ( permalink suggest removal )

As a rule, Herrera, arrogance is rarely a good campaign strategy.

Cross posted at Clark County Politics.

The Olympian nails Herrera: Voting for others in House is unacceptable.

Unfortunately for those of us suffering Ridgefield Barbie's representation, We are cursed with someone lacking depth, integrity or intelligence doing the job.

As I wrote before, Jaime Herrera has blown off her duties to her constituents here, much like she would in the increasingly unlikely and unfortunate event she were to actually win the upcoming election.

The Olympian has weighed in on her shameful conduct for what it is: an intolerable violation of the public trust.

Voting for others in House is unacceptable

THE OLYMPIAN • Published March 07, 2010

• Comments (15)

  Recommend (0)

A nasty snit between two southwest Washington lawmakers highlights a failure of leadership in the state House of Representatives.

Rep. Deb Wallace, D-Vancouver, has accused Rep. Jaime Herrera, R-Camas, of letting her Republican colleagues vote for her “for hours on end” over a two-week period.

A story in the Vancouver Columbian newspaper outlined the attack and counterattack.

Herrera is running for the congressional seat being vacated by Rep. Brian Baird. Until recently, Wallace was in the congressional race, too.

The Columbian quoted Wallace as saying that Herrera missed multiple House votes, but her colleagues were covering for her by casting votes on her behalf.

“Either (Herrera) is in the building fundraising, which is illegal, or she is off campus and she has not been excused,” Wallace charged.

Herrera fired back, “Deb has no credibility, she has no proof.”

Much more here:

Notice that the cluelessly despicable idjit doesn't DENY the allegation; she merely points out that Wallace "has no proof."

Honor and integrity should not require "proof." What it DOES require is that you admit your conduct. Then, it requires that you resign your seat in the House. Then it requires that you withdraw from running for Congress.

Since those concepts are so foreign to you, there's no chance that someone surrounding themselves with the Winged Monkeys drawn to you would ever consider doing what those particular tenets demand.

Cross-posted on Clark County Politics.

Lew Waters nails it: Why I Question Jaime Herrera’s Judgment

Lew Waters over at Clark County Conservative nails it. It's a good read and it serves to explain one of the major reasons to oppose Ridgefield Barbie's election to anything: her complete lack of judgment, personified in such idiocy as ditching session for a special interest fund raiser in Washington, DC.

Why I Question Jaime Herrera’s Judgment
By lewwaters

Ever since Jaime’s sudden and rapid jump into the Washington 3rd Congressional District race, less than 2 hours after Brian Baird announced his retirement this term, several less than complementary emails and comments have come my way because I dare to speak out against the one that appears to be the “party’s chosen one,” even though our primaries are still months away.

I’m not crying about the comments, mind you. I’m a big boy now and can take whatever is thrown my way, even if it is off base or over the top accusations. I mention them to show that perhaps those questioning my choice of candidate ought to be questioning theirs instead.

One of my main reasons I question her judgment has been and remains her co-sponsorship and voting twice for unionizing childcare centers in Washington State, HB 1329, that I have posted on previously HERE and HERE.

Much more available here.

Cross posted over at Clark County Politics.

Herrera supporters confuse me; Castillo calls nailing Barbie bad, bad; RNCC calls nailing Pridemore good, good.

Lately, there's been a massive brouhaha by Herrera's Kool Aid drinkers over the word-for-word accurate robo-call used by David Castillo to tell the 3rd Congressional District about our session-ditching, SEIU supporting, someone-else-voting-for her-while-shes-gone, slurping-at-the-DC-special-interest-trough-during-session-HERE, Ridgefield Barbie.

Man, the outrage, the over-the-top responses, the out and out lies and exaggerations Barbie supporters engaged in as a result of these calls... unbelievable.

As I pointed out with a word-by-word analysis, everything the calls said is true. Of major interest to me is the approach to their commentary.

Where this site, who opposes this cardboard cut out of a representative, questions the zombie-like response of the Herrera Herd, I did so actually posting the "offending" call in question.

Where the Herd bleated its fake anger, I was unable to find any of them who posted the call, and then disputed its contents. There's something quite sickening about that.

And here's where my confusion comes into play.

Apparently, Craig Pridemore's local political deathwish is to be an Obamaton.

That, of course, is his privilege.

Between his corrupt politics, his support of the horrific project known as the I-5 Bridge/Loot rail, his vote to trash I-960, and apparently being a complete Obama tool for health care, including the communistic public option, Pridemore has no chance. None.

To date, he hasn't been able to raise money, and the local fringe whack jobs supporting him, like the fringe whack jobs on the right supporting Herrera, tend to show proof of doom in the primary.

I get that he wants to lock down the fringe left. But to the 80% of the voters to Pridemore's right, positions like these:

"Let me be clear: I believe that Democrats in Congress should pass the bill, include a public option, and if necessary, use the reconciliation process to get it done," he said.

are simply out of the main stream. This sentiment serves to bury Pridemore and his fellow fringers even farther behind any chance of winning the seat.

Of course, if the GOP still had control of Congress and this was on a bill Pridemore didn't like, he'd be bitching like a cut cat if the Republicans were planning to do the same thing... and we can be sure his opposition to such a maneuver would be EVER so principled.

But not even THAT is the point. Pridemore's campaign will collapse soon enough without any particular help from me.

The point is that the Herrera Herd was positively GIDDY over the RNCC calls blasting the positions of the two leading democrats. Major tweeting, re-tweeting, etc.

And that's where I'm confused.

As I said, I posted the "offending" Castillo robo-call, in its entirety. I did that to show that everything in the call was completely factual. I pointed out where members of the Herrera Herd have lied and exaggerated about its contents, and even have gone so far as attack those wise enough to agree with the contents of the call... which are, after all, completely factual.

So, Castillo does a robo-call, factual in every way. The Herrera Herd wants to draw and quarter him as a result.

The RNCC does a robo-call, apparently not so factual, having rightly indicated that Heck is, apparently, "undecided" (which is a euphemism for being too cowardly to take a position on the issue, given its level of radioactivity in this area and his party's moronic support of the bill) while wrongly indicating the Pridemore was "undecided" in the face of his left-of-Lenin position on the matter.

The result?

The Herrera Herd dances around a rhetorical bonfire the size of Pittsburgh.

So, let me get this straight:

Castillo is savaged for doing a factual call accurately attacking Ridgefield Barbie.

The RNCC is applauded, cheered and generally worshiped for attacking Barbie's presumed democrat competition?

So, it's bad when some people do it, but good when others engage in the process?

So, I admit it. The Herrera Herd confuses me.

Crossposted at Clark County Politics.

The Jaime Herrera FAQ, Ver 1.1

.
In keeping with my policy of correction, the following change is made.

I've been hearing, quite indirectly, that it is simply beyond understanding why I so stridently oppose Ridgefield Barbie.

So, for those of you wondering, I thought I'd take a minute or two to explain it. How it happened... and how events influenced me to do all I can to acquaint anyone interested with our local version of the empty suit that is Obama, albeit at a somewhat more local level.

1. So, what's the problem?

It's simple, really. Jaime Herrera is neither qualified by experience, education or temperament to serve anything but coffee in the House of Representatives.

2. OK.... how do you figure?

What has she done to EARN election to Congress?

Absolutely nothing. Never owned a home, until, figuratively speaking, about ten minutes ago.

(This is changed. Lew Waters points out in the comments that Herrera brags about renting:

The quote, "My husband and I rent," she said. "We both drive used cars. We're
not your typical Republican conservative."

Lou goes on to rightfully ask

I'd like to know just what her idea of a "typical Republican conservative"
is.

Does she assume we are all wealthy and rich fat cats?

Showing, in addition to her other talents, that's she's something of a fiscal bigot. It takes utter cluelessness to brag about a lack of achievement that requires you to live this way, while bashing those of us who've worked our asses off and have something to show for it. The rest of the FAQ remains unchanged)

Never ran a business. Never employed anyone. Never worked in the private sector. She's had about 60 seconds (well, 3 legislative sessions) of experience. In fact, for 11 of the last 13 years, she hasn't even lived here.

I was stunned that this girl, who had accomplished absolutely nothing worthy of appointment, was the beneficiary of a corrupt process at the behest of Cathy McMorris Rogers to secure that appointment through the efforts of a local county commissioner.

Yes, I know she was re-elected. And by a large percentage.

But these same people re-elected others just because they claimed to be a "R's" and look what that's got us.

She lies; she exaggerates; she claims to be a "friend to organized labor" (how REPUBLICAN of her) she's even lied about her job title.

3. Is that all? I mean, doesn't that describe a lot of members of Congress?

Actually, no. Most Members of Congress actually earn it.

For example, let's take a look at Cathy McMorris Rogers record.

Cathy was the first in her family to attend and graduate from college. She worked her way through Pensacola Christian College in Florida and later earned her Executive MBA from the University of Washington.

She served five terms as a citizen legislator in Olympia eventually being elected to minority leader. When the legislature was not in session Cathy worked in her parents’ small business, Peachcrest Fruit Basket, near Kettle Falls, Washington.

Fascinating.

Let's compare that to Ridgefield Barbie's:

Jaime attended the University of Washington, earning her Bachelor of Arts degree in Communications. As a college student, she had the opportunity to intern in both the Washington State Senate and in Washington, D.C. at the White House Office of Political Affairs. From 2005-07, Jaime worked in Washington, D.C. as Senior Legislative Aide for Congresswoman Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Spokane). Jaime served as the Congresswoman’s lead advisor on health care policy, education, veterans’ and women’s issues.

As Senior Legislative Aide, Jaime helped draft proposals for Congresswoman McMorris Rodgers, including a health information technology bill and an education-based competitiveness bill. Both measures passed the U.S. House of Representatives overwhelmingly.

Now then. On one hand, we have Cathy McMorris Rogers. Five times elected; legislative staff experience, Washington State House Minority Leader and Co-Chair of a committee or two. Holds an Executive MBA from the UW. Worked in her family's business for decades. No matter how misguided her efforts to interfere in an area on the other side of the state from her own district, it is an undeniable record of accomplishment and achievement.

On the other hand, we have Ridgefield Barbie. A career intern and minor staffer for McMorris, there's no hint of either accomplishment OR achievement. No graduate degree. No private sector experience. No success as a legislator... and in fact, the House minority leader today, Rep. Richard DeBolt, refuses to endorse her.

So, what does that all mean?

To me, when combined with her absence from the area for more than 10 years, it means she's no more qualified to represent this area in Congress than she is to engage in brain surgery.

4. So, how is it that she seems to have pulled all this off? She must have SOMETHING on the ball.

My pet Cavalier Spaniel could have picked up the appointment and re-election with all the grease Herrera had.

NONE of this happened because of anything she did or made happen. In short, her ONLY qualification was in the eyes of McMorris, and that was her slavish loyalty to, well, McMorris.

Had Herrera not poured coffee for McMorris as a low-level staffer; had she not sworn complete allegiance to McMorris, then we never would have heard of her.

5. So, why is McMorris doing all this?

Politics and nature both abhor a vacuum.

As it is right now, there is no major player of any stature on the National political scene from Washington State.

Doc Hastings seems to have gone as far as he's willing to go. He seems to have reached the pinnacle of his political desires.

Cathy, on the other hand, I believe, has visions of if not achieving the Presidency, certainly achieving the level of following in the now quasi-legendary footsteps of Jennifer Dunn.

Unlikely to engage in the personal peccadilloes that kept Dunn from rising to the very top; McMorris, I again believe, wants to become President of the United States.

Now, I freely admit that these are just my conclusions, and your mileage may vary.

But at the end of the day, McMorris is spending an incredible amount of time, energy and effort screwing around here, on the other side of the state.

There can only be so many reasons for her interference in local politics. It's as if she feels that those of us actually inside the district can't make a decision for ourselves without her efforts, aided and abetted by hacks like Slade, to ram this empty suit down our throats.

6. So, what's with the "empty suit" gag?

With the election of Obama, haven't we suffered enough by electing a pretty face with vapid space between its ears?

The 3rd Congressional District needs someone who won't sell us out the way Herrera sold us out by co-sponsoring and voting for SHB 1329, an SEIU bill to force child care workers into unions; a horrific idea that will cost those who can least afford it the most and result in one of two outcomes, or maybe both: dramatically higher costs passed along to the consumer and/or dramatically higher taxpayer-paid subsidies for low-income day care, paid for by jacking up our taxes even higher.

And the incalculable stupidity of bailing on session a few days before it ends to Coakley special interest money at the trough set up by McMorris and Slade. She didn't have the sense to wait until session was over?

What kind of a moron would hand an issue to her opponents... both R AND d?

Not only is Herrera an empty suit, she's a DANGEROUS empty suit, who has no vision or ability to look at anything farther down the road then one of those meals she spent $500 over a 3 day period to eat.

7. Is that all?

No, not by a long shot.

Herrera and her keepers have drawn around them some of the worst, most low-life, scummy support I've ever witnessed in my 22 years of active politics, and 10 years of party politics and consulting.

Not all of them are, in fact, scum. But those who focus on people instead of issues certainly come under that heading... so if the shoe fits, wear it.

"Dual endorsements" from people lacking integrity to keep their word to ONE candidate.

Efforts made to peel off major figures from other candidates.

Supporters engaging in character assassination and down right lies in support of this manikin.

And you can tell a lot about a candidate by the people supporting them. And in this case, they seem to be the politically ignorant and cowardly.

If you have to lie in support of a candidate, you probably shouldn't support them. And the response to the Castillo robo call, which was accurate and factual in every detail, tends to show that those supporting this cardboard cut out of a candidate have lost any shred of integrity or dignity.

Just like the candidate they support.

8. So, if Herrera is elected... what are you going to do?

Use my First Amendment rights to politically pound her like a drum, thus my reason for setting up JaimeHerreraWatch.blogspot.com .

I will be the opposition to her as long as she's in politics... which, with any luck at all, won't be much beyond this November.

But my blog isn't going anywhere. And those who come here to read it from around the country will know anything and everything I can find so they remain informed about this misbegotten, horrific effort to corrupt our election at the behest of interests that don';t live here, but who have no trouble whatsoever telling us how to vote, what to think, and how to think it.

9. What if you're wrong about any of this?

Any time, any one or any group believes I am wrong, they certainly have the privilege of the blog to contact me, point out any inaccuracy, PROVIDE EVIDENCE of said inaccuracy, and I will publicly acknowledge my error and allow those making the allegation an entire post without edit or comment from me.

Now, in the past, I've been approached and told that I was in error about a post; specifically that I was wrong about the massive waste of taxpayer dollars when Jaime Herrera, reminiscent of the politically late and unlamented Stacy Sellers, burned her way through almost 500 taxpayer dollars for meals on a 3 day boondoggle trip to Spokane from DC and back... a feat I simply couldn't duplicate and believe me, I CAN eat.

I told her to email me the evidence in question and, I would, you guessed it, publicly withdraw my post and apologize for it.

That was several weeks ago... and I'm still waiting for the evidence in question.

In closing, that offer still stands. Those of you supporting Herrera who believe I'm wrong about any of this, feel free to contact me and I'll address that concern.

Meanwhile, thanks for stopping by. We have a long way to go until election, and a lot can happen in that time.

But my blog isn't going away. And mine, of course, isn't the only one.

Cross posted on Clark County Politics.
.