Why did Herrera lie to the Vancouver Business Journal?

Besides the fact that Herrera is an SEIU sell out and a massive spender (Helping the dems blow the last $229 million for no reason that makes any sense to a conservative) when combined with her more moronic hero-worship of Brian Baird:

“Not once have you heard me criticize Brian Baird’s performance in Southwest Washington,” she told the editorial board. “Linda Smith and Baird both have an independent streak.”

Herrera has, apparently, fooled the Vancouver Business Journal into actually believing she had any intent of running in this election before Baird bailed out. In a recent article, the writer incorrectly indicated this:

For Republican Third Congressional candidates Jaime Herrera and David Castillo, the race began in earnest even before Baird made the announcement Dec. 9 that he would retire after the completion of his sixth term in the House of Representatives later this year.

While an accurate assessment of Castillo's position... and also of Hedrick, both of whom announced before Baird withdrew, Ridgefield Barbie had no more intent to run for Congress this time around then she did to fly to Mars.

Yet the reporter (also the managing editor) responded with this when I pointed out the Herrera fallacy:

In our interview with Herrera, it was clear that she was seriously considering a run for the seat well before Baird announced his retirement.

Well, in reality, what was clear is that Herrera... again... lied.

Had Baird stayed in, no one except the poor schleps like me stuck with her in the 18th would have ever heard of this waste of political skin.

Herrera had done nothing about running for Congress. She may have FANTASIZED about it, but other then lying that she had been "recruited" by the NRCC to run against Baird (In reality, sources tell me that DeBolt was the one being recruited) nothing had been done to entice this pretender into running for anything. But let's remember: the cardboard cutout started out lying to the county commissioners during the appointment process when she babbled to them that

"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."

SO what's another lie to the Vancouver Business Journal?

Gee... I don't know... did her multiple short term internships, her failure to work in the private sector, her ten year absence from this area, her complete lack of knowledge about local issues.... did that REALLY "prepare" her for "this?"

And here we are, just 2.5 years later, and she obviously decided that, well, yeah, in fact, there WAS another "job in the world" she would rather have.

Those who appointed Ridgefield Babs to this position either didn't know... or didn't care... what monumental tools they were... and how badly they were used.

But then, that WAS the deal my brother-in-law set up with McMorris, wasn't it?

So, when she got the job, she lied to us; and then to dampen the "opportunist" fire, she lied to the VBJ... when the reality is that her complete lack of preparation, either before or after Baird's announcement, clearly shows that she had no such intention of running before Baird bailed.

But then, given her record, "lying" seems to be what Babs is best at.

Impressions of a 3rd District Congressional Forum

Yesterday's soiree was extremely well run and very well attended. Leadership Clark County and a local law firm, Miller Nash, were the cosponsors, I believe.

This, of course, had the same Jaime Herrera as we always have.

No specifics, no vision, no plan and no clue.

She spent a great deal of time telling us what we already know (Things are very bad) and very little telling us what she intends to do about it (since, frankly, she hasn't been told yet and certainly doesn't know on her own.) She lied about her legislative record, asking us to do what I have already done, in some detail: check said record. Checdking it, of course, made me recoil in horror.

Castillo, on the other hand, naturally had genuine proposals for addressing the economic doldrums including free enterprise zones for distressed counties (based on the unemployment rate) tax incentives for business and tax holidays for new employees so the money not going to government would be more likely to be spent in other local businesses.

Even Denny Heck was impressed with that plan.

Herrera, of course, offered nothing. Not unlike Jon Russell, she keeps telling us to look at her record, in her case, in the legislature. The problem is that her back-bench record in the legislature is not the kind of thing you'd really want anyone to look at if you mean to use it as a reason to be elected to anything.

It's this kind of thing that's straight from the bizarro zone:

“I am the only candidate who has a record of voting against wasteful government spending,” said state Rep. Jaime Herrera, R-Camas, the only candidate in the field who currently holds elected office. “We have got to stop the drunken-sailor, hand-over-fist spending” by the federal government, she said.

She's also the only candidate with a record of selling our Republican principles. She's also the only candidate to vote with the democrats and against her own caucus and her seat mate in the 18th while helping the democrats strip out our last $229 million from the State Emergency Fund.

If EVER there were a RECORD OF "WASTEFUL, DRUNKEN SAILOR GOVERNMENT SPENDING" that is certainly it.

Here's another paragraph that should have been mentioned in the paper, but wasn't (Since they no doubt will be endorsing Herrera for the primary, since they will also endorse Heck for the primary and the general.

So, why does Herrera insist on lying about herself that way? Is she, like Russell, a serial liar? Does it extend beyond her record of lying about her nonsensical "senior legislative aide" crap?

And when it came to the issue of "jobs," why didn't she brag about her forced unionization/business owner dues paying SEIU bill that she co-sponsored, voted for and then lied about?

Why has she run such a vacuous campaign?

Is there any doubt she's the GOP equivalent of Obama, who ran exactly the same campaign for president because he had nothing to offer, either?

I will always remain mystified by anyone who would support Ridgefield Barbie. I will always remain mystified as to why anyone would reward this empty suit with either their loyalty, or an acceptance of Cathy McMorris Rodger's interference in our political affairs.

All in all, it was another in a series of abysmal efforts by Herrera where it's clear she has no idea what to do or how to do it.

The people deserve better. And the lies and selling out to the left combined with McMorris Rodger's interference somewhere where what we do and how we do it is NONE OF HER BUSINESS are just a few of the reasons why I will NEVER vote for Herrera... for anything.
.

Recently, I was asked: If Herrera wins the primary, are you going to let up on her?"

Not only no, but hell no.

Folks, I believe there is a place for partisan politics. But as individuals, we must find the line between blind obedience to a party line and the suspension of common sense.

Party allegiance isn't a death warrant. At the end of the day, if Ridgefield Barbie and her keepers manages to fool enough people into voting her in, either through to the general or, God forbid, into Congress, what exactly does that change?

Will she somehow magically become honorable? Will someone install a knowledge chip that will give her a clue about any of the major issues confronting us? Will she suddenly stop lying to us, exaggerating her background, her knowledge and suitability to actually be IN Congress? Will she suddenly cease her betrayal of Republican principles like she did while in the legislature, becoming a Guardian of the SEIU and while spending our money like a drunken sailor to help her leftist buddies? Can we be sure that she'll betray us again, representing Cathy McMorris Rogers, who built her from the ground up, instead of us?

Will the mentality that allowed her to leave the floor of the House for hours at a time to fund raise; which allowed her to ditch us during session for yet another McMorris trough session in DC suddenly return to the level where her FIRST duty becomes us... instead of her?

No.

The despicable political cartoon that is Jaime Herrera will not mysteriously cease being the waste of skin she is. Concepts of honor and truth will remain as foreign to her if she wins as they are now.

There are no circumstances where I will not do all I legally can to keep her from winning any election.

Period. Ever.

For those wondering, I hope I've made my position clear.

Cross posted at Clark County Politics.

The growing List of Reasons to Vote Against Herrera

I make no bones about it: I despise Jaime Herrera.

Ever since Cathy McMorris Rogers made the deal with my brother-in-law, Marc Boldt, that got Herrera appointed to the open seat in the 18th District, I have despised this empty suited political manikin.

Herrera is the same kind of empty suit we elected as president.

She lacks the education, the experience, the vision, the courage, the intelligence and even the experience of living here to be our Member of Congress.

Clearly, if it weren't for McMorris Rogers' interference here locally and Boldt's desire to do McMorris' bidding, we'd have never heard of Herrera, a blank slate with leftist tendencies that I do not want to represent me in ANYTHING, let along Congress.

We just got rid of one leftist in the job. Why replace him with the fake variety she represents?

This blog, as of this writing, has 130 posts detailing her lack of experience, her lies, her efforts to ditch us during session, her support of the SEIU and her efforts to help the democrats to strip out the last $229 million from our state emergency account because she stupidly believed it would stop the leftists from jacking up our taxes.

Herrera has:

Lived outside the district for 11 of the last 13 years.

Equated her decade-plus absence, to my face, as the same thing as being in the military.

REPEATEDLY lied about her job with McMorris Rogers.

Lied about being "courted" by the NRCC to run against Baird.

Never worked in the private sector.

Never owned property.

Had her people throw a snit and lie about her loss of the FreedomWorks endorsement.

Ditched us during session to go to a special interest fund raiser in DC... put on by her keeper and master, McMorris Rogers.

Never served in the military and has no concept of their/our sacrifice or that of our families.

Cosponsored and voted for SEIU legislation (HB 1329) and then lied about why she did it.

Spent almost $500 taxpayer dollars for meals for 3 days while on a legislative staff boondoggle trip.

Left the floor of the House for hours at a time to fund raise for Congress, leaving her seat mate to vote for her in her place... and then lies about it.

Voted to strip out the last $229 million from the state emergency fund.

Received $5000 from her union buddies for her state house re-election bid in 2008.

Has become the undisputed establishment candidate because of McMorris-Rogers, who wants Herrera in Congress representing McMorris Rogers instead of the people of the 3rd District.

Has gained county GOP endorsements ONLY from the counties in the district that are DOMINATED by democrats and run by incompetent Republicans who frequently can't even get GOP candidates to run.

Herrera, or "Ridgefield Barbie" as I like to call her, lacks ANY record. It appears she got precisely one bill passed into law, the "give-the-new-guy-a-bill-to-teach-them-the-system" type bill that EVERYONE got passed.

She has been a waste of space in Olympia, and she will be a waste of space in DC.

How anyone could possibly support her as a conservative is simply beyond me.

Chris Boyd withdraws from WA03; endorses David Castillo.

Given Herrera's efforts through surrogates to keep Chris Boyd in the race to draw votes from Castillo, it comes as something of a blow to their camp that Chris ignored their efforts and withdrew today while on the Victoria Taft show (KPAM 860) as he endorsed David Castillo for Congress.

Boyd, a disabled combat veteran made a very tough call while ignoring the efforts of some in the Herrera camp to keep him in... efforts that included an offer to pay his filing fee.

Lew Waters has an excellent write up on this young man, who rose to the occasion once again in service to his country.

We will remember this selfless act.

Crossposted on Clark County Politics.

Herrera foolishly cements her cred as THE establishment candidate in the WA03.

Utilizing that political situational awareness of a board fence that the SEIU Queen is famous for, Ridgefield Barbie blabs out her establishment cred in an anti-establishment year:

You can read more about the event and the remarks of former U.S. Senator Slade Gorton, U.S. Congresswoman Cathy McMorris Rodgers and Senator Joe Zarelli at the link below.

Yeah, well, I read it all right:

The absurdity of Herrera "Staying true" to anything.

It wasn't that long ago that my senator, Joe Zarelli, was taking a very, very hard look at running for Congress.

His unemployment debacle has cost him any chance at higher office... anywhere... and that fact sunk in when he made the decision to avoid that kind of embarrassment and endorse his former intern-for-a-few-weeks for Congress.

In the paper, however, Zarelli made a curious observation so far from true that it strains additional credulity:

“She’ll go there carrying the banner of the Republican Party, but what is more important is that she will stay true to the party’s principles,” Zarelli said.

Really?

Do Republican principles include co-sponsoring and voting for SEIU legislation?

More:

Yes, there is no question that the empty suit known as McMorris's Puppet is a symptom of the disease known as old-school Republicans.

Let's not forget: McMorris Rogers was part of the crew that spent us into massive debt while the GOP controlled both the House and the Senate. And we want MORE of that, controlled by McMorris to boot?

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.

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.

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.