Posts tagged ‘Cathy McMorris Rodgers’

August 5, 2011

Dealing With “Crazies?”

by lewwaters

With all of her claims of once being a “Senior Legislative Aid” to congresswoman Cathy McMorris Rodgers, how could she have not known what negotiating was like in Washington D.C.?

Voting to raise the debt limit by the largest amount in history is not courageous, it’s caving.

June 2, 2010

Washington State GOP Courts the Tea Party, While Herrera Camp Seeks Distance

by lewwaters

It’s difficult to believe that any one seriously claiming to be a “conservative candidate” in today’s politically charged climate would seek distance from the Tea Party movement, but all appearances are that one candidate running for Washington 3rd Congressional District is doing just that.

As everyone who ever reads a paper, a blog or turns on any news at all knows, the Tea Party movement is a growing group of voters and taxpayers across the nation who are fed up with elected officials, Democrat or Republican, not giving us the representation we desire. All across America, the Tea Party has been making their voices heard and even affecting elections, seeking real conservatives to send to Washington D.C., not far leftists or fake Republicans who side with Liberal Democrats too often, while receiving no cooperation in return.

Such poor performance swept the Republican Party out of congressional power in 2006 and in 2008, gave the White House to Liberal Democrats. While it can be argued that conservatives staying away from the polls, due to not seeing any candidate worth voting for, handed Democrats power, it cannot be denied that the lack of conservative actions on the part of the GOP brought it on.

Tragically, such power in the hands of people like Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, Majority Senate Leader Harry Reid and the Puppet now occupying the Oval Office, Barrack Hussein Obama, has set the country on a course of destruction that will be very difficult to turn around.

But, it can be turned around by restoring strong conservative values in government and selecting the best elected representatives.

Enter the Tea Party movement, who has had their fill of what is going on.

The movement has been marginalized, ignored, demonized and compared to Nazi’s, lied about and even attacked. Yet, they continue to grow and have organized their own support groups for candidates wishing to win an election.

Party establishment candidates have not won many elections so far this year, voters opting for a Tea Party candidate over party insiders. Many in the GOP, while not initially attacking the movement, have been slow to realize that if they wish to remain a viable party, they will need to change their ways to accommodate the movement.

Recently, Luke Esser, chair of the Washington State Republican party sent an article out to County Party’s saying, Republicans & Tea Party Activists Are Natural Allies. In the short article, Esser proclaims, “While the Democrats are scurrilously claiming that Tea Party activists are racists and extremists, the Republican Party welcomes the active participation of these principled and committed citizens.”

Another article that first appeared in the Seattle Times, State GOP cordial to tea partyers quotes Esser as labeling the Tea Party as, “a very helpful development.”

Apparently, some in the GOP are waking up as to where their best hope lies, in conservative Tea Party people over moderate establishment Republicans who have alienated conservative voters.

Perhaps that is why I was somewhat amazed today, after writing of establishment GOP candidate Jaime Herrera’s $35 a plate breakfast held at the Vancouver Hilton, to read of one reporter who attended the event as he noted Herrera’s main handler, Spokane’s Cathy McMorris Rodgers calling Herrera, “The new face of the Republican Party,” after former State Senator Hal Palmer said he was frustrated with the Tea Party and that they were “taking momentum away from the GOP.”

3rd District Republicans Say Herrera—Not the Tea Party—is “The New Face of the Party.”

I recall when Pacific County GOP Chair, Nansen Malin, attempting to run cover for Herrera with a lame attempt a discrediting this blog and fellow blog, Jaime Herrera Watch wrote, “Grassroots and Tea Party members who attended the recent caucus and conventions in the seven counties that make up the 3rd Congressional District voiced their support of Herrera.”

In truth, it was only two Counties, Pacific and Cowlitz. None of the other 5 issued any such endorsement for any candidate.

And today, at the Herrera event linked above, we are told, “Tea Partiers line up behind Herrera’s opponent in the de facto GOP primary, David Castillo.”

Is this why the Herrera camp seeks now to distance themselves from the Tea Party, because in spite of earlier claims, Tea Party people are getting behind a true conservative and not the GOP establishment candidate, Herrera?

Possibly too, in the Seattle Times article above, former Senator Slade Gorton, a moderate himself said the Tea Party “movement looked a lot like past insurgencies that swept establishment Republicans out in favor of more conservative leaders such as Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan.”

He added, “The overwhelming new blood in the Republican Party always comes from the right,” and, “We didn’t really like some of those people very well — and we don’t now.”

Those in attendance this morning think that Herrera might bring party factions together, but it is clear to me that she would be the last person with the ability to do so, based upon her comment made to reporters back in February in Washington D.C., “My husband and I rent. We both drive used cars. We’re not your typical Republican conservative.”

Apparently, her idea of a “typical Republican conservative” must be more in line with the party establishment and not blue collar workers who comprise most of the Tea Party.

McMorris Rodgers tells us, “She’s a young, Hispanic female. She represents the new face of the party.”

An earlier Publicola comment today tells us, “Herrera has the nod from the GOP establishment. Her former boss, U.S. Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-5, WA), and former U.S. Sen. Slade Gorton (R-WA), are featured guests at Herrera’s event.”

Which way is it? Is she the “new face of the party” or just the same old “establishment candidate?”

With Herrera’s vagueness on important issues, skirting many specific questions posed to her and abandoning conservatives in the house to join with Liberal Democrats in support of some bills, it seems the Tea Party has already figured out who would the best bet for Washington States 3rd Congressional District.

And, it isn’t Jaime Herrera.

May 7, 2010

“Swiftboating” Jaime Herrera?

by lewwaters

While none are actually using the liberal pejorative misuse of the term “swiftboating” in regards to opponents of 3rd Congressional District candidate, Jaime Herrera, they may as well be with the loose talk of “lies” being told about her record.

I have noticed some Twitter claims floating around that say,

“I dont like Maddow, but i know @freedomworks lastest email is full of BS. Complete lies!! Shocking!!! So sad.” “Never thought I would see day @Freedomworks spread outright LIES against a GOP candidate.Complete LIES against @JaimeLHerrera.” And, “lame: @castillo_2010 can’t do big push w/out lying abt @JaimeLHerrera. latest Dick Armey email = laughable.”

Regular readers may recall how Herrera’s supporters were visibly upset that FreedomWorks endorsed David Castillo over Jaime Herrera, some setting out to literally trash FreedomWorks Dick Armey over the endorsement in spite of Herrera gaining endorsements from Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers, former Senator Slade Gorton and former Representative Linda Smith, as well as two county GOP’s endorsing her months before even the candidate filing deadline arrives.

It is disappointing to see Herrera supporters resort to such liberal tactics as this; basically themselves doing the very thing they accuse others of, instead of defending or supporting her voting record in her short two years in the legislature. But, that is also where I use the term “swiftboating” as liberals have tried desperately to make the word a pejorative meaning, “a strong pejorative description of some kind of attack that the speaker considers unfair or untrue,” when it reality it means, “To reveal the essence of a defective person. To reveal an inconvenient truth a politician desires to keep hidden.”

In light of that, let’s look at what they claim this “lame, laughable lie” is.

Having received a copy of the email, in actuality a plea for donations to the Castillo campaign just as is sent out for donations to Herrera by her supporters and endorsers, I first read,

“David has a long track record of fighting on behalf of lower taxes and limited government. Working as an assistant state director for Washington Citizens for a Sound Economy (the predecessor organization of FreedomWorks) in the late 1990s, David helped drive grassroots campaigns to stop tax hikes and curb excessive government regulation in Washington State.

As the son of a single mother with four kids, he also knows what it is like to have to stretch every dollar and believes that if their family could stick to a budget, so can Congress. He’s a true grassroots candidate who needs the support of his fellow Washingtonians today.”

No lies there.

I next read,

“His opponent, Jaime Herrera, represents more of the same big government power grabs and preferential treatment for special interest groups that are driving the tax and spend agenda. In contrast to David’s proven limited government track record, Jaime’s record is one of vote after vote on behalf of her union boss supporters.

Jaime has been endorsed by SEIU Locals 925, 775 NW, and 1199 NW for her past votes on behalf of forced unionization like HB 1329 in both 2010 and 2009 that called for the forced unionization of child care workers or H.B 1389, the unionization of nuclear power plants. Jaime is living up to her promise to be “a friend of organized labor” at the expense of being a friend to taxpayers who are forced to deal with the higher costs and limited opportunities that come with forced unionization.

The poorly named “Employee Free Choice Act” or card check is still a major initiative the Obama Administration would love to pass to thank their Big Labor friends and Jaime is a vote for forced unionization they would definitely like to have.”

Obviously, this is what has the knickers of Jaime’s supporters in such a twist. But, where are the “lame, laughable, lies?” What is written is harsh maybe, but it is also a series of inconvenient truths.

She was endorsed by the SEIU in her 2008 reelection bid. She did co-sponsor and twice vote for HB 1329 that would have forced childcare centers into public unions, had Senate Republicans not been successful in removing the mandatory clause and replacing it with a voluntary one and making it more of a study then a new law. Did Herrera Even Read HB 1329?

She did vote yay on HB 1389 that would have allowed unionization of Nuclear Power Plants, just as stated in the email and documented by me at Jaime “I’m not more of the same” Herrera.

Jaime did declare herself “a friend of organized labor” during the nomination process when she was won the nomination to replace Richard Curtis as he vacated the seat she now occupies.

Can anyone state for a fact that she might not once again abandon her party and side with pro-union liberal Democrats in Washington D.C. in a vote for the “Employee Free Choice Act?”

When called on these questionable votes, Jaime’s standard reply has been something along the lines of , “well, such and such did too,” showing much immaturity.

Left out of the email was her abandoning her party along with a handful of Republicans to side with Democrats in draining the rainy day fund of $229,000,000 this year and excusing it as desiring to stop tax increases. They raised more taxes anyways.

Others have described her as Washington State’s SEIU Bought Republican due to accepting a $500 donation from the SEIU and another $800 donation from the AFSCME in her reelection bid.

Overall, she might have a fair voting record on most matters, but how does she explain such obvious anti-conservative votes as these above? She doesn’t. Her campaign manager instead sends out a lame memo that was more of an effort At Damage Control than explaining why she has sided with liberal Democrats on some bills that have or would have hurt workers and taxpayers in Washington State.

If Jaime Herrera is the strong candidate some claim she is, shouldn’t she be able to stand on her record and strengths instead of allowing surrogates to continue to play the weak defenseless damsel victim card?

Crying “lies” all the time when claims have been documented time and time again will not enable her to stand up to such a formidable opponent as Democrat Denny Heck.

If these are “lies,” I challenge Jaime herself or her starry eyed supporters to present factual documentation of such “lies.”

Until such time, since I have documented as true the very claims her supporters cry are lies, I admit to “swiftboating” Jaime Herrera, even though her supporters have not used that term. I readily admit to “revealing the essence of a defective person and revealing an inconvenient truth a politician desires to keep hidden.”

If Jaime cannot stand on these votes and positions she has taken, she should drop out of this race and cease trying to fool blue collar workers, those Typical Republican Conservatives she says she is not one of, that she is their friend and will represent them.

A final note to those Herrera supporters. Republicans never win elections by whining like liberal Democrats and trying to play the victim or even the race card! They win by taking conservative stands as David Castillo continues to do.

February 10, 2010

A Phone Chat With Jaime Herrera

by lewwaters

I was quite flattered last evening, February 9, 2010 to receive a phone call from, Republican candidate Jaime Herrera, hoping to fill the seat being vacated by Democrat, Brian Baird for Washington State 3rd Congressional District. Flattered, because unlike a campaign call for donations from a staffer or volunteer supporter, it was a personal call.

In the past I have received contacts from candidates to either tell me off or set me straight, very amateurish on their parts I always assumed. But, that was not the tone of Jaime’s call; although she did say she wanted to “clear some things up.”

As any regular reader knows, I have been opposed to her candidacy and have stated why in my few posts. Perhaps that is why I initially ignored the call I saw on my home phone, assuming it to be a campaign call seeking donations or support.

But when my cell phone rang and I saw the same number, I decided to answer because I have never given that number out to any campaign, trusting very few to have it and thought it might be an interesting call. Later I saw that she had called my cell phone first and I had missed that call.

I was very flattered to hear her say she reads my blog and has seen several comments of mine in the Columbian and elsewhere and always felt I am fair, or at least try to be. But you know us older guys; we eat up flattery, especially from younger attractive girls.

At any rate, she asked me straight out just why I opposed her, also saying she in no way wanted to me to change my support from the candidate that I do back, but felt if she knew why I opposed her, I would give her a fair shot at explaining or discussing my opposition and to clear things up a bit.

Fair enough, I thought; even though I also thought that if she didn’t desire me to switch candidates, why bother calling me at all?

I mentioned I have more than a single reason and she replied asking me what do I consider the biggest reason. To me, although they carry equal weight, I brought up her votes to unionize childcare centers, mentioning how I felt it would cause undue financial hardship to single parent and low-income families with small children.

She attempted to explain her reasoning on the phone with me not quite grasping it. She kept saying she didn’t do it to gain any points, she was not in the unions pocket, it was a moral issue, needing to fix how we pay for childcare and such. As I said, I wasn’t really grasping it, so I asked her to email me her reasoning and I would gladly post her full and complete words, unedited, just as she wrote them and gave her my personal email.

Knowing how busy she is, I have not received it yet and honestly, would be surprised if I had. I am looking forward to receipt of the reasoning and as I said, will post her words in full without any changes or editing by anyone or me.

Of course, I don’t know that she actually will send it on, but have no reason to think she won’t at this time, either.

One thing that did trouble me in the conversation was when she said others I support voted for the bill too and named Senator Don Benton. Yes, I see that he did vote for it, but have not announced any support of his run against Senator Patty Murray yet. I am still undecided as to just who I will back in that race.

But, I did openly support Benton in 2008, which I see as having no bearing on today and frankly, thought it was sort of childish to drag Don into this to excuse her vote. Rest assured, before I announce any support of Don Benton, I will discuss the vote with him too.

Although I had no knowledge of it last evening when Jaime called me, yet another example of why I oppose unionizing childcare has come out. That being the KING5 article on the savage beating of a 15 year-old girl at a bus tunnel with 3 Security Guards watching, none raising a finger to stop it nor offering the young girl help as she lay on the walkway, within inches of one Guards feet.

Their reasoning? Their contract calls for them to only “observe and report.”

That I have been able to so far determine, the Guards are hoping to be represented by the same union, the SEIU, that desires to unionize childcare and whose members were responsible for the assault and beating of Kenneth Gladney last year outside of a St. Louis, Missouri town hall meeting. The same SEIU that contributed to Jaime’s campaign last time and she accepted.

If that is the attitude given members by contract, do you want them watching your children?

Yes, I have other reasons to oppose Jaime Herrera’s candidacy and I find myself in agreement with some reasons also listed here. Although his writing style is a bit harsher than my own, we share many of the same concerns, especially the efforts of Washington D.C. insiders drawing on special interest money from not only outside the 3rd District, but also outside the state to support her run.

I now await receipt of her reasoning by email and when and if I do receive it, I will post it fully for all to see, just as I told her I would. I think her reasoning for such a controversial vote is important for all to know. Should she not send it, I can only be left to assume her mentors, Washington D.C. insider Cathy McMorris Rodgers and Lobbyist, former Senator Slade Gorton have chastised her for calling me directly as she did and discouraged her from supplying her reasons.

UPDATE: October 6, 2010 and I have yet to receive the email Ms. Herrera said she would send me. A “memo” from a campaign manager in effect labeling me a “liar” months ago is not what she promised.

December 17, 2009

Jaime “I’m not more of the same” Herrera

by lewwaters

As we all know by now, Jaime Herrera, state representative for Washington’s 18th district, seems to have finally made up her mind and is solidly running for the seat Democrat Brian Baird intends to leave next year.

I say finally because Jaime initially announced she was running within 2 hours of Baird’s announcement, only to come out the next day saying she was “seriously considering” running. Tuesday, after spending at least the whole weekend “seriously considering” jumping in, she announced she was indeed going to run for the Republican nomination.

She says several people have been after her for some time to run, which I know is at least somewhat factual as many GOP party officials were asking her of her intent last spring after she won against Democrat VaNessa Duplessie to retain the state representative seat she had just been appointed to a few months earlier in December 2007. At that time, she let it be known she was not running, had just gotten married, happy in her job, all of the usual denials.

Jaime says of herself on her web page “I’m not more of the same.” An odd statement considering the speed her campaign being put together indicates to me that she is a favorite of party insiders all the way back to Washington D.C. as her entry into the race is the only one to merit any mention the Hill, “a congressional newspaper that publishes daily when Congress is in session, with a special focus on business and lobbying,” the ONLY announcement of her running that made no acknowledgement of others already in the race several months ahead of her.

Undoubtedly placed there by Jaime’s former boss and political mentor, Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Spokane.

But think a minute, when was the last time you heard any politician, Democrat or Republican running and admitting they actually were “more of the same?” Don’t they all claim to be “not more of the same” and if a challenger, saying something along the lines of “America is on the wrong track” and we need them to put us back on track?

Returning from her job with congresswoman Rodgers in Washington D.C. and winning the appointment to replace Richard Curtis after a 10 year hiatus from the state as rapidly as she did concerns me, though. Another local blogger who has been involved with Clark County politics several more years than I have been says he knows of some shaky dealings that won her the appointment. Although I attended the meeting where she initially won against several others, I had been a PCO only 2 days and do not have the behind the scenes knowledge he does.

I will be watching his blog, Clark County Politics as he reveals what he knows.

Still, I have some concerns of my own with Ms. Herrera, beyond the appearance of opportunism by jumping into the race so soon after Brian Baird announced he was not going to seek his seat again.

Looking over Interest Group Ratings for Jaime, we see she earned,

· 100 from the Washington Farm Bureau, 88 from the Association of Washington Businesses,
· 100 from the Washington National Federation of Independent Businesses,
· 33 from the Washington Conservation Voters,
· 71 from the Washington Children’s Alliance,
· ‘A’ from the National Rifle Association Political Victory Fund,
· 20 from the Washington State Labor Council, AFL-CIO.

Her voting record looks fairly conservative, which causes me concern seeing she has such a low rating from unions, yet supported and voted ‘yes’ on 2 Union supported measures, HB 1329, Providing collective bargaining for child care center directors and workers, HB 1389, granting employees of nuclear power plants a legal and binding document on interest arbitration and shortly after she was appointed to the state house, HB 2449, Providing collective bargaining for child care center directors and workers.

Collective bargaining is unionization, if you don’t realize it.

Both measures on child care collective bargaining were strongly supported by the SEIU, whose members in St. Louis, Missouri this summer were video taped beating up a Black man, Kenneth Gladney, who was in opposition to the health care reform bill, the Washington Education Association and American Federation of Teachers.

Opposition was from YMCAs of Washington; Washington Parents for Safe Child Care; Washington Policy Center.

Ms. Herrera also accepted campaign donation from the SEIU (Service Employees International Union) during her 2008 run. Her endorsement page lists SEIU Local 925, SEIU Local 775 NW and SEIU Local 1199 NW as endorsers in 2008, among several other Unions.

Did she vote with Unions in an effort to bring her Union rating up? Conservatives usually don’t fair well with Unions nor do they receive support from them usually.

She claims, “I’ve worked with both Democrats and Republicans on important issues.”

President George W. Bush went to Washington D.C. with a strong record of reaching across the aisle as the governor of Texas and we saw how much cooperation he received from Democrats over his 8 years as President, didn’t we?

Jaime is no doubt very attractive, but if a seasoned politician like Bush and many other conservative Republicans who have been sent to Washington D.C. couldn’t get cooperation back from across the aisle, how does she expect to as a novice?

Most people I talk to have told me they are tired of Washington Insiders, party favorites who say they will not follow the direction of party leaders, but owe party leaders and special interests for their office and end up doing just that.

The rapidness of Jaime’s ascension in the political hierarchy, as well as announcing within 2 hours of Baird announcing his retirement smacks of political opportunism. This is a large part of what the TEA Parties have been protesting against across America.

The speed with which the party seems to be dumping a strong candidate who has been doing the legwork, building his support across the district and preparing to break six figures in campaign funds troubles me greatly.

This is part of the very action that cost the party congressional control and the White House as conservatives abandoned the party.

We do not need another elected official who parrots the party line while saying they will not follow the direction of party leaders.