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 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?

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.

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 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.
.

The Jaime Herrera FAQ

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. 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.

The answer to the 9 am question.

Well, of COURSE Ms. Herrera was in Seattle attending another fund raiser arranged for her by those fine folks corrupting the 3rd Congressional race with special interest money... since she can't raise any on her own... instead of doing her job in Olympia.

You know... the job you're blowing off your oath to avoid doing?

See, Jaime... you should have resigned to go after your hobby. That way, you wouldn't have the embarrassment of supporting SEIU legislation that would effectively end low cost day care for those who need it the most; you wouldn't be dealing with the fall out of illegally having others vote in your place so you won't show up as absent; and maybe, just maybe, you might actually earn this gig on your own.

You won't, of course, because in doing the only job you could ever imagine having, you are doing a piss poor job of doing what you're SUPPOSED to do: representing us. Here. In THIS district.

In Olympia. Not in Seattle or Washington, DC fund raisers.

You put the "um" in scum... and you shouldn't be elected crossing guard.

Cross posted on Clark County Politics.

Just out of curiosity, Jaime, where were you at 9 am this morning?

Instead of working at the Legislature?

You know.... where you were elected to work?

It's bad enough that you couldn't wait until the end of session to bail on us.... and it's certainly bad enough that you have to dump us to go to DC for your filthy lucre of special interest money even before the election DURING session.... and it's bad enough that someone on the floor of the house is voting for you now in your absences... It's even bad enough that you seem to believe Jon "No Traction" Russell's endorsement is actually worth something....

But where were you at 9 am this morning? And why? Inquiring minds want to know.

Cross posted at Clark County Politics.

GWB weighs in on Slade's Herrera endorsement.

Cross Posted at Clark County Politics.

Liz Mair lets us know: Herrera has already started the process to sell us out in DC.

Hard on the heals of an abysmal fundraising report, Cathy McMorris Rogers and Slade Gorton (who most likely wouldn't know Jaime Herrera if she bit him, but who endorsed her because, well, Vander Steop asked him to) are stepping in directly to bail Ridgefield Barbie Jaime Herrera out.

Yes, she's already started the process of indebtedness to the special interests in DC by flying in ton pick up a bunch of checks; a feat she couldn't pull off here, apparently, because, well,she doesn't seem to have all that much support around here.

So, local political ace and blogger Liz Mair provides the vignette below:

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.

It looks like I'm just not "anyone."

Herrera is, to my lasting shame, my state representative. As I knew she would be when McMorris parachuted her in here with a scam deal involving a certain county commissioner, she has been worthless in representing us. And, by the way? I'm no part of the Castillo campaign.

I will always resent McMorris-Rogers for screwing around over here on the other side of the state in ways that have impacted me directly. But sending us such a pitiful, empty suit to represent me is absolutely unforgivable.

So yes.... I DO fault her for interfering, much like I fault Gorton for endorsing someone he didn't know and had never heard of.

But then, Slade is no longer a Senator... he, too, has become a lobbyist. And what does that tell you?

Cross posted on Clark County Politics.

The dirty little secret behind Slade endorsing Jaime Herrera.

I've been in this business a long time. I've seen a lot and done even more.

So, I had to ask myself: How is it that Slade Gorton could possibly endorse an empty suit with a paper-thin resume' for any elective office?

Then it hit me. The answer was so simple.

Besides Cathy McMorris-Rogers, who is calling the shots for Jaime Herrera in this race?

Why, it's J. Vanderstoep... of a certain firm somewhere.

And what does that have to do with it?

Why, he was Slade Gorton's chief of staff.

And when one looks at the others in this firm, almost every one of them used to work for, you guessed it, Slade Gorton.

So, getting Slade Gorton to endorse someone he most likely has never heard of?

Piece of cake.

As for Zarelli endorsing her, that's even more of a mystery.

Zarelli is quoted as saying:

"Just as we do in Olympia , Washington D.C. faces huge deficits that must be
corrected before they cripple us for generations,” said Senator Joe Zarelli.
“Jaime Herrera has demonstrated her commitment to fiscal responsibility in the
Legislature. We need more people like her in Congress.”

Seriously?

Well, gee... that certainly explains why Zarelli looked so hard at running for this position himself, right? I mean, after all, if Herrera could do such a bang up job, why would he even consider it?

Were those few weeks she spent as a coffee-gettin' intern in Zarelli's office way back when all THAT impressive?

And how does voting for and co-sponsoring fringe-left SEIU-supported legislation allowing child care workers to get collective bargaining show any of that "demonstrated commitment to fiscal responsibility" he was babbling about?

Endorsements of substance based on facts and history have some worth in the over all scheme of things. These two con jobs are worthless... and they lessen the value of the words of those uttering them.

Cross posted at Clark County Politics.