Archive for the ‘Herrera. McMorris’ category

>On Social Security, the two faces of Jaime Herrera.

September 23, 2010

>

.

Someone, I think it was Will Rogers, once remarked something to the effect that he hated to lie. As I recall the story, he said something like it “gives me too much I have to remember.”

As anyone looking at this blog knows, I do not support Jaime Herrera for Congress. In everything from her appointment to the House back in 07 through this campaign, she has shown a lack of integrity, knowledge or that she gives a damn about people. The vicious personal attacks her winged monkeys engage in, the fact that she’s the establishment GOP puppet combined with the fact that my pet cocker spaniel has spent more time in this area over the last 13 years then she has makes her absolutely unqualified to represent this district in Congress.

So, today’s story in the Bellingham Herald was not surprising or out of the ordinary for Ridgefield Barbie, perhaps the emptiest suit running for Congress in this country.

Babs claimed, at a forum in May, that she DID support privatization of Social Security. That, of course, was what she needed to say as part of her chameleon-like effort to advance in the primary. Now, when she needs to act a little more bi-partisan, well, it’s a different story. But then, with Barbie, it’s ALWAYS a different story.

And what *I* don’t want representing me in Congress is someone who needs training wheels. Herrera was all about having people look at her hair-strand thin “record” of selling us out in the legislature. So now, her claim that she’s “new to this” rings hollow.

Relabeling stupid doesn’t help you win elections. We are at war in a fringe-left economy crippled by stupidity and we don’t need to institutionalize that stupidity by sending cardboard cut outs of true representation to Congress.

But then, she’s told us from the beginning that she doesn’t “presume to pretend to know.”

How true that is.

As the Bellingham Herald puts it:

3rd CD: Herrera sets record straight on Social Security

$javascriptRequire = new miScriptScheduler(); $javascriptRequire.scriptCheck = window.mi_story_tool; $javascriptRequire.scriptPath = “”; $javascriptRequire.scheduleScript();

var addthis_title = document.title.replace(/\’/g,’\\\”).replace(/”/g,”\””); var addthis_url = location.href+’?storylink=addthis’;
Bookmark and ShareShare


Republican congressional candidate Jaime Herrera says she supports keeping Social Security intact and not changing the retirement age. Her campaign said this week she does not favor allowing private accounts for younger workers that could be invested in the stock market. But she does support incentives for people who open their own accounts.

Never mind that Herrera held up a sign at a Lewis County Republican Party candidate forum in May for saying “yes” to the private-accounts or privatization idea. Other Republican candidates in the 3d Congressional District race also held up “yes” placards during a “lightning round” of questions.

Social Security privatization is one of those issues that Democrats would like to use against Republicans in congressional races so it was not surprising that a source sent me a clip of Herrera and her “yes” sign. Denny Heck, her Democratic opponent on Nov. 2, has said Social Security is a highly successful anti-poverty program for the elderly, and he’s strongly opposed the shifting of any of its resources into private accounts.

But Herrera’s spokesman Casey Bowman says the video misstates Herrera’s real position and that she misunderstood the forum question.

Jaime misunderstood the question, which we realized in talking about it afterward. … Jaime understood the question as “should people receive additional tax incentives for investing in IRA’s or 401k’s?”— a concept that she strongly supports. She doesn’t support diverting any funds currently going to Social Security.



The actual question asked: “Do you believe that Americans should be able to use all or a portion of their Social Security taxes to invest in individually owned retirement accounts such as a 401K or an IRA?”

To be fair to Herrera, she has expressed support for retaining Social Security in its present form in several other venues. She also has said she wants to shore up its financing and opposes raising the retirement age to 70. Bowman sent an email with the following links to mainstream news reports that captured those sentiments – here in the Oregonian and here and here in The Columbian.

Bowman wrote that the verbal glitch is the reason Herrera’s campaign will “never agree to another ‘lightning round’ again.’ ” His email also said:

To be clear, Jaime does not believe in privatizing Social Security. We know her opponents will be looking for any daylight on this issue, but she has been consistent in this message, on record, throughout the campaign … she doesn’t believe the money that people pay into Social Security should be diverted elsewhere by the government. She strongly favors tax incentives to encourage families to save for their retirement through 401k’s or IRA’s in addition to, but not in place of, Social Security. … When she speaks to groups, she consistently encourages young people to invest in their own 401-k’s and IRA’s like she has done because overspending bills like Obamacare do threaten the future of Social Security. The only action in regard to Social Security she has posed on the campaign trail is shoring up its funding so that it’s there for our seniors, as promised.



I put in a question about the video to the Heck campaign, and spokesman Aaron Wasser sent this reply:

“Jaime Herrera can’t have it both ways. The question was clear. When asked directly whether or not she supported privatizing social security, Jaime Herrera said yes.”This forum happened months ago and Jaime never said she misheard or was confused by the question, she was perfectly content to let her answer stand until she was asked about it.”



I expect Democrats to use Herrera’s step-back in some fashion. It is the second time she has backtracked from a position she appeared to take in public.

At the 1:29 minute mark in this radio report Herrera advocated for 10 percent across-the-board cuts to the federal government, including agencies, Congress and the White House, saying:

“And boy, now more than ever do we need government oversight. I’m one that has said I believe that Congress, the federal agencies, the White House, they need to take a 10 percent across the board reduction in their budget.”

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and the Heck campaign have pointed out that would mean 10 percent cuts to veterans programs and perhaps Social Security. (Here is the link to the KIRO blog post about the interview.)

But Herrera says that she misspoke. Her real position on cuts is that members of Congress and federal-agency appointees should have their pay cut by 10 percent – something she sees as a symbolic act that would show some sympathy to Americans struggling through the recession.

In an interview earlier this week after her fundraiser in Lacey, Herrera explained the error saying: “I’m new at this.” Herrera also said state Sen. Joe Zarelli has pointed out the hazards of across-the-board cuts, which hit disabled people as hard as a tourism program, and “I very much see the wisdom of (avoiding) that. I meant keep everything on the table.”

She also said a pay cut would not erase the federal debt but sends a good message:

(R)emember how I said Congress lives in a bubble … I do think they need to live in the same world as everyone else. A pay reduction sends that message to the American people … We end the debt by getting the economy moving. We also have to stop digging. … Do I want to eliminate all of government? No.”



Heck has said since early July that he supports a 10 percent pay cut for members of Congress. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has pointed to this Columbian story that quotes Heck at a July forum in Vancouver and again here on Heck’s campaign blog.

Heck said members of Congress should take 10 percent pay cuts until the economic crisis ends.

Cross posted at Jaime Herrera Watch.

.

>Well, the Columbian gets it half right: they endorse Castillo…

July 25, 2010

>

.
… and then leave out Heck.

The also endorse Ridgefield Barbie… which is a decision totally without merit, given her utter vacuous positions, lack of knowledge, experience and vision.

For the primary, the top two candidates, by far, are Castillo and Heck. Babs has nothing to offer except to be a mouthpiece for McMorris… and do we need east side representation here on the west side?

The Columbian accurately wrote:

Castillo entered the race early, months before Baird retired, and wasted no time attacking both the incumbent and the Obama administration. His cut-spending, promote-the-private-sector platform is imbued with bedrock GOP principles, but he also proffers innovative ideas. For example, as reported in a recent Columbian story, he wants to replace the federal income tax with a flat tax and ultimately a national sales tax. His residence in Olympia will not diminish his eagerness to represent Clark County, he insists.

In writing about about Castillo’s positions, the paper left out his experience: a Veteran, a sub cabinet official with the Bush Administration, a former chief of staff to state House Republican Leader (and Castillo endorser) Richard DeBolt who worked with both Castillo and Herrera, a businessman and a financial advisor who holds a Master’s Degree.

And in writing about McMorris’s positions (ooops, I mean Herrera’s positions) They left out her INexperience: not a Veteran, poured coffee as a low-level staffer for McMorris, spent a few weeks as an intern for a couple of people; lied about her few-week job raising money for Bush as if she had anything of substance to do with it, and no mention of her sell out to the democrats with her vote to strip out the last $229 million from the state emergency fund.

Wow. Leaving that out is kind of bizarre in an endorsement where they write:

We’re concerned with whether Heck would be able to rein in spending, especially on the salaries, pensions and benefits of governmental workers.

So. The Columbian is “concerned” about Heck’s ability (or, presumably, desire) to “rein in spending.”

Then they ignore Bab’s record of wasteful spending, combined with her comment that she couldn’t find any reason to criticize Brian Baird, who voted for hundreds of billions in wasteful spending?

How…. bizarre. She has already shown herself capable of wasting hundreds of millions; and can’t find fault with the guy she wants to replace, who voted to waste hundreds of BILLIONS, and they believe Herrera CAN or WILL “rein in spending?”

Utterly bizarre.

Cross posted at Jaime Herrera Watch.

Enhanced by Zemanta

>Seattle Times endorses Heck…. and Castillo!!!!

July 23, 2010

>.
The true test of anyone’s intelligence is typically that degree to which they agree with you.

The Seattle Times passed over Ridgefield Barbie and endorsed Denny Heck…. and David Castillo!

This is a STUNNING blow to Babs, who seemed to think that Cathy McMorris’s effort to make her the “Anointed One” by bringing her corruptive influence to the other side of the state from her own district doesn’t, in fact, mean anything CONstructive as much as it has been DEstructive.

Running the empty suit like Obama doesn’t mean that people won’t see through that.

We’ve been there. We’ve done that. And we’ve got the t shirt, a horrific mountain of debt, Obamacare and a foreign policy that looks like an early Keystone Cops movie… all voted for by Baird, and none of which Herrera found fault with.

ONE incontrovertible truth about Washington’s 3rd Congressional District is it is a swing district in the fullest sense of the term. President Obama won there, as did President George W. Bush.

Whoever represents Southwest Washington in Congress must be an independent thinker willing to buck his or her political party. With that in mind, The Seattle Times endorses Denny Heck, Democrat, and David Castillo, Republican, to advance to the general election.

Both have worked in the public and private sectors and have a strong grasp of the challenges facing the district, most notably its unacceptably high unemployment rate. Both appear creative enough to tackle tough issues from an independent vantage point.

The need for jobs and an improved economy overshadow most other issues. Heck touts the need to proceed with a new Columbia River crossing as an economic stimulator and the need to keep Washington ports humming. Castillo emphasizes the needs to improve infrastructure, including flood areas along Interstate 5, and create enterprise zones to help economically distressed counties.

Heck began his political career at age 24, and was elected to five terms in the state House of Representatives. He served as House Majority Leader, and later, as chief of staff to Gov. Booth Gardner.

Castillo, too, showed early interest in public service and worked for George W. Bush, including a stint as a senior official at the Department of Veterans Affairs. Castillo is currently a financial adviser, and was the first challenger in the race, before the incumbent, Brian Baird, decided not to seek re-election.

Heck is an innovator as evidenced by the fact that he was an early investor in RealNetworks, a digital-entertainment company, and co-founded TVW, the C-SPAN of Washington state — a triumph of achievement for transparency in state proceedings.

Both men are levelheaded about wars America can no longer afford. Both realize the U.S. may not know what success looks like in Afghanistan, and if the vision remains too foggy, are willing to move to the end game.

On numerous issues ranging from financial reform to federal spending, Heck elevates the discussion with his vast knowledge and solution-oriented approach. Castillo wraps no-nonsense earnestness into conservative principles, which have room for compassion for people living in poverty. Childhood poverty is part of his own story.

This contest will be close. Voters would be wise to pick Heck and Castillo to clarify their strengths and weaknesses in the general election.

Cross posted at Jaime Herrera Watch.

>Iraq Veterans For Congress

July 19, 2010

>Please take a moment and watch this.

Here in the WA 03, of course, the GOP establishment candidate, Jaime Herrera, never served a thing but coffee.

Hat tip to This Ain’t Hell.

>Do we EVER see principle, integrity and Herrera in the same room?

April 4, 2010

>

.
As previously shown, Jaime Herrera has the political sense of a board fence. Her idiotic co- sponsorship of the now infamous SEIU bill Herrera then voted for that would force day care workers into collective bargaining; her campaign’s deliberately false and misleading defense of that vote; her equally clueless support of democrat efforts to increase spending by striping out what little is left in our state emergency fund, and now her failure to, literally, stand up for an amendment to a bill that would have resulted in legislators sharing our pain.

Talk, as Herrera shows us, is cheap.

Cutting state employee in the midst of a horrific recession makes sense. But that means ALL “state employees,” including state representatives, should take a hit.

So, here’s the call by the Tacoma News Tribune Friday’s article:

Also rejected was Williams’ amendment to lop lawmakers’ own expense reimbursements in the same proportion as the mandatory worker layoffs are expected to hit legislative staffers – costing potentially more than $1,000 next year.

The “per diem” expenses amendment failed, and Williams initially failed to win a roll call vote on it because only 13 members stood to demand one. Republican Rep. Jaime Herrera of Camas was among those who argued that lawmakers should share in the pain but did not stand to insist on the recorded vote; Hunt and Republican Rep. Gary Alexander of Thurston County did stand with Williams.

So, what we’ve got here is the good Representative speaking out and taking a position. But when the time came, literally, to take a stand for her views, what did Herrera do?

Nothing.

She sat it out.

Now, to me, the problem wasn’t her position on the issue. To me, the problem is that when the time came to take a stand, Herrera, who had so eloquently spoke about “sharing the pain,” was no where to be seen.

How can anyone speak for a bill, or an amendment to a bill, and then disappear when it might matter; in this case, to secure recorded votes on the amendment instead of a voice vote that killed it?

Why didn’t she stand?

What’s the point of this kind of political cowardice?

Cross-posted on Jaime Herrera Watch.
.

>What’s wrong with Dino? The impact of former Gorton staffers working for democrats and Patty Murray.

April 1, 2010

>.
It suddenly became clear yesterday why the former Gorton staffers coalesced around a fake Republican like SEIU-supporting Jaime Herrera.

It became clear when the word hit the Times that former Gorton chief of staff Tony Williams held a fundraiser for Patty Murray.

We all know by now that Lobbyist Slade Gorton endorsed Herrera. On the surface, that’s a huge get. But below the surface?

Gorton didn’t know Herrera from Adam. If she had bit him in the ankle, he wouldn’t have known her. Her legendary political insignificance, as illustrated by her monumental lack of accomplishment in our legislature would have buried her beneath any radar that Gorton was looking at back in DC.

So, along comes ANOTHER former Gorton chief of staff, one Jay Vander Stoep, who is now working to do the best he can to keep Herrera from coming across like a blithering idiot (and failing, I might add)

As the article points out, in the event Rossi can ever get past his ego and make public the decision he’s long since made as to whether he will run or not, he’s going to do so without the services of two Gorton stalwarts, Williams and Vander Stoep.

Apparently, either loyalty or adherence to alleged Republican principles don’t seem to be qualifications for a Gorton chief of staff, as amply illustrated by Williams.

But it is the CALIBER of these people that’s at issue.

Now, I freely admit that Williams is, of course, no longer a Gorton chief of staff or a Gorton anything.

But how could Gorton have hired someone with such obvious mercenary tendencies?

The article in question then alludes to Vander Stoep’s decision to bail on Rossi as well:

Another member of Rossi’s inner circle, who was a key player in the 2004 and 2008 gubernatorial races, Jay Vanderstoep, also does not plan to be part of the Rossi campaign, if there is one. Nothing personal. Quite the opposite. Vanderstoep just wants to work on other things.

So here, the deal isn’t that Vander Stoep has stopped being an alleged Republican. It’s instead that he just doesn’t want to work for Dino.

And folks…. this had to hurt.

The buzz out there has been stifling. Will he or won’t he? These two defections from the Dino camp; one the equivalent of political treason/mercenaryism of the highest order; the other a “blow off” of monumental proportions must cast doubt on Dino’s quality as a candidate and his viability in the election.

As I have pointed out before: there has never been any advantage in Rossi waiting to make a decision. In fact, his INdecision makes him look vacillating and unsure of himself while hurting other candidate’s chances to take out The USS Patty Murray.

Taking hits like these and his fellow Realtors endorsing our local dim bulb tends to show that Rossi is a mere mortal like the rest of those running. Combined with his two prior losses in state wide races… and, well, you can see the gist of the issue.

These two senior “Gortonians” voting with their collective feet and the bitch slap of the Realtor endorsement (hey, I admit it. The Realtor endorsement is like the Israeli ambassador endorsing Adolf Hitler, given the massive damage this woman has done and is doing to out economy, which, in turn, does tend to hurt Realtors) is causing a disturbing trend.

These defections are a crushing PR blow to The One. How does Rossi explain it?

Rossi lost my support with his moronic, politically stupid support of ignoring the vote of the people of Seattle when they came out swinging against using taxpayer dollars to pay off a scumbag to keep the Sonics here: $75 million in tax dollars to keep millionaires playing a game in Seattle, a moronic idea that Rossi wanted to use state dollars to make happen, and an idea that I condemned as having cost him the election, well, before it cost him the election.

The splash from this betrayal will reach a long way. And it should hit all of those whose campaigns are being run by those similarly qualified as Williams. And you know who you are.
.

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

March 27, 2010

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


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

And thank God for that.

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

The lie part?

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

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

And people support her.

And people will give her money.

And that makes no sense at all.

Cross posted on Jaime Herrera Watch.
.

>Taft vs. Herrera: and the winner is?

March 25, 2010

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

HB 3197

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

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

Brief Summary of Bill

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

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

Cross posted on Jaime Herrera Watch.
.

>Convention speech review highlights – Jamie Herrera.

March 24, 2010

>.
Well, I don’t know if “highlights” is the right word.

She has, she tells us, for the “…last 3 years… represented” us.

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

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

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

Did she talk about the issues confronting us?

No.

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

No, no and…. no.

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

No.

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

As if we already didn’t know.

As our representative, she “fought against tax increases. and she’s signed the taxpayer protection pledge.”

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

No. Nothing about that.

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

YOU weren’t there.

I was. But you weren’t.

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

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

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

“Hard work” indeed.

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

All while taking her orders from the congresswoman representing Spokane.

“It’s going to be our year, folks.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Cross posted at Jaime Herrera Watch.
.

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

March 23, 2010

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

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

Well done…

…if you’re a democrat.

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

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

Despicable.

Cross posted at Jaime Herrera Watch.
.