Showing even more inexperience than he has with his failures to provide proper oversight on the Washougal City Council, Jon Russell persists in acting like he has a chance in the upcoming election.
Apparently some local Ron Paulies have come running to his aid and helped stack an online unscientific poll to boost him to a second place position, just a hair under Republican opportunist, Jaime Herrera, legislative aid to Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, turned state representative.
The truth is shown in campaign funds raised, which places Jon in a distant third place, far behind every candidate except David Hedrick, who although not gaining any steam, displays more guts and honesty that Russell has to date.
That online poll stacking trick didn’t work for Ron Paul, but apparently they think it will help boost Jon, who really doesn’t stand a snowballs chance in this election as more people jump in.
All Jon stands to do now is split the GOP ticket, which just may enable the Democrats to finish in the top 2 primary positions.
Sorry Jon, one opportunist in this campaign is enough.
Showing even more inexperience, Jon now announces Seven Town Hall Meetings in January & February showing he actually doesn’t have a grasp on what town hall meetings really are or what function they serve.
“A town hall meeting is an informal public meeting. Everybody in a community is invited to attend, voice their opinions, and hear the responses from public figures and elected officials, although attendees rarely vote on an issue. In today’s heterogeneous communities with large populations, more often, town hall meetings are held so that people can influence elected officials in their decision making or to give them a chance to feel that their voices are being heard.”
What a town hall meeting is not is campaign event, which is what Jon is actually holding. The clever renaming to “town hall meeting” fools no one, as Jon holds no official power of any sort outside of one seat on the Washougal, Washington city council.
If Jon were holding real town hall meetings he might be faced with hard questions from constituents asking things like why, in his 2007 campaign for city council, did he pay a young single woman $700.00 over 2 months for “campaign consultant,” when the young lady lists her profession as an “Independent Beauty Consultant?”
We all know Jon likes to look pretty, but c’mon, $700.00 in 2 months for a small town city council seat?
Add that to Jon’s rush to throw a fellow Republican under the bus as he distanced himself from the scandal that sunk mayor Stacee Sellers re-election bid and his admission of failing to rally support amongst 6 council members to perform the oversight of the alleged misuse of city funds he claims she prevented him from doing, it becomes clear Jon is just another agenda driven politician trying to get on the fast track to that $175,000 a year salary and access to perks available to House members.
I think we’ve had enough of cheesy politicians whose main goal is to fatten their wallets and travel the world on our dime.
It’s time we had real representation in Washington’s Third Congressional District.
Pack it in, Jon. No one is falling for the snow job.
Tags: Brian Baird, Craig Pridemore, David Castillo, David Hedrick, Deb Wallace, Jaime Herrera, Jon Russell, Washington 3rd Congressional District
December 29, 2009 at 9:37 pm
If he is that Bad, Why are you so worried? Castillo should be able to lay this guy out and Herrera while he is at it. For someone you claim has no experience or abilities, you spend a lot of time bashing him. Lew, no one likes dirty politics, I suggest you stay to your high ground blog posts.
December 29, 2009 at 10:14 pm
Nice to see you again, Madam. Are you Jon’s official blog spotter or do you simply find me irrestible
Just kidding.
Just so you know, I’m not the least bit worried about Jon. I’m not running for office nor am I a part of any campaign. I receive no pay and ask for nor accept donations. I’m just another John Q. Public expressing my free speech on my blogsite.
If you think I’m harsh, you really should check out some other local blogs.
If you sought more than just keyword ‘Jon Russell’ you’d see that I cover a lot more of my opinions elsewhere and often.
If you are worried about “dirty politics,” you need look no further than Jon’s own dismal performance on the council and how rapidly he throws anybody near him under the bus to save face.
Now that is dirty politics.
Seems I recall too, someone attempting to make a fuss over a 10 year old bankruptcy where the COO did not point fingers at his partners or throw any of them under the bus, but liquidated all assets and went on to rebuild.
That was just a couple weeks ago. Do you recall who that was “seeking the high ground?”
I’ll also add, you never counter any information I post about Jon, just complain that I do.
If you look to the sidebar on the right, you’ll also notice I placed links to all 4 GOP candidates web pages, unlike Jon’s supporters who only link to him on theirs.
December 29, 2009 at 10:39 pm
I actually know Jon & Jaime. I know them both to be very upstanding and moral conservatives. You are right, I don’t respond to your criticisms because they are not important. You should spend some one on one time with each of the candidates and ask them about these charges you present. I plan to ask Castillo about his bankruptcy next time I have a chance to meet him in person. Just to have briefly met someone once or twice does not mean you know them or know the full story on anything. I admit I made a judgement call on Castillo and I was wrong to do so. You are just throwing rotten tomatoes to score cheap points for your candidate.
December 29, 2009 at 10:55 pm
I think it a good idea for you to address any concern you have over David’s bankruptcy 10 years ago.
Legitimate questions are not “rotten tomatoes.”
While you are at it, since you have such in depth knowledge of Jon and Jaime, ask about her $475 meal charge for a 3 day stay in 2005 and ask Jon about the $700 paid for Beauty Consultation in 2007.
Oh yes, your not “responding to my criticisms because they are not important” flies in the face of your stopping in every time to complain about them.
Unimportant things are ignored.
December 29, 2009 at 11:01 pm
Lew, why do you act like that? Why do you make assumptions about these two without calling them directly? They are very approachable people. You are making assumptions not asking legitimate questions? If you really cared about these issues you do your best to reach out before posting things.
December 29, 2009 at 11:19 pm
Sorry Madam, but I have copies the documents filed and signed by both. That hardly makes it assumptions.
I have Jon’s own quoted words where he threw Stacee and the Washougal City Council under the bus and his excuses as quoted by his campaign manager/blogger for failing to perform his elected duties.
Unless you are ready for more of the same, I’d think you would be curious too.
Jon and Jaime both are more than welcome to come in and explain their actions, if they desire. I have no one blocked here, it is open to all.
They’re also welcome to bless me out in email if they feel the need.
You of all people should also know that it is rare for me to edit or delete comments, save a few Ron Paul kooks.
December 30, 2009 at 12:46 pm
I agree with Lew’s assessment of Jon Russell; have had conversations with Jon and do not feel he is qualified to run for this position. I do have some questions re Jaimie Herrera. I have heard varying answers about her position with Rep. Rodgers. She must have begun as an intern, but was she always an intern or did she progress to legislative assistant and “senior” legislative assistant? When I worked on the Hill there was usually only one LA. It would be interesting to actually understand just what her duties were back there. I also question her lack of residency here in Washington. But do not misunderstand me; I do believe she is a delightful, charming and intelligent person. But I would like to know more details about her experience and why she was selected over several other potential candidates locally. Would also like to know when or if Zarelli is planning to run.
December 30, 2009 at 10:16 pm
“Apparently some local Ron Paulies have come running to his aid and helped stack an online unscientific poll to boost him to a second place position….”
How do you know? Are you sure? Maybe his own supporters are helping him. You seem to assume so much Lew. It is sickening. You also sound like a Ron Paul hater. Like a bigot. Like racist. No, you are a Paulist. Not a sexist, not an agist, you are a Paulist. Wow, it is impressive how much thinking outside of the box bothers you. That is why your candidates are always the same losers that have an R behind their names. Have you considered being more principled? These are not questions that I want answered. I know how you think and I don’t like it. YOU ARE NO CONSERVATIVE. You are a mainstream Republican. Shame on you.
December 30, 2009 at 10:31 pm
Feel better? Got it all off your chest?
Hate to tell you, but you do not own the term or definition of “conservative.” You can try all you want to redefine it to fit left-leaning liberatarianism, it isn’t going to work.
Hate Ron Paul? No, I don’t think enough of his whiny performances to hate him. I feel sorry for him and pity you glassy eyed, starry eyed misled groups that fall for his nonsense.
PrinciplednUSA? Principled in what, being led around by the nose by a senile old man who can’t even get his facts straight?
Oh yes, stacking those unscientific online poll sure got Paul elected, didn’t it?
I laugh at how you all fell for your own false propaganda.
Shame on you for falling into a cult.
December 30, 2009 at 11:05 pm
“a senile old man who can’t even get his facts straight?” Give me one fact of Ron Paul’s that is not straight and let me straighten it out in your eyes. If you can find just one that I can’t explain, I will go away.
Lew, why don’t you just let people running for office do what they need to, in order for the voters to make their own determination. You are trash talking people. I know it is your blog, but have you no shame? I don’t see you running for office. It is not an easy job and these folks certainly don’t need a know-it-all like you to tell them that they do or do not have a chance at it.
Shame on you.
December 30, 2009 at 11:37 pm
There’s a whole post and video above this one of Paul spewing his misguided crap. If you don’t want to see it, on the Dec 28, 2009 Larry King program he claimed, once again blaming America, that there are terrorists because we are occupiers.
Same old crap nonsense.
He goes on to claim the Christmas underwear bomber only tried the attack because of retaliation for the strike against Yemen that killed Al Qaeda members.
That’s where he screws up yet again. In his claim to give terrorists credibility, he failed to note that the terrorist purchased his airplane ticket to the US on December 16, 2009. The attack by Yemeni forces on Al Qaeda in Yemen did not happen until the next day, December 17, 2009.
Was he clarvoyiant and planned a retalitory attack BEFORE the attack in Yemen? If it was retalitory, why was it planned against the US when it was mainly Yemeni Military that staged it? We supplied a little air support.
So go ahead, set me straight on that.
As far as “trash talk goes,” I think Jon engaged in enough of that as he threw Sellers and the Washougal city council under the bus for his own failure.
Herrera too has a lot of unexplained matters she doesn’t seem willing to discuss, ot the least of which is her display of opportunism by so rapidly jumping in as a “rising star.”
I want good representation, not more of party machine manipulation from someone not ready to fill the seat.
As far as “let people running for office do what they need to, in order for the voters to make their own determination” goes, how do you expect voters to make their own determination if they don’t have all the facts?
Isn’t that how we continue to elect poor representatives?
Shame on you for wanting facts hidden from voters.
If any of these candidates can’t take the heat, perhaps they needn’t be in the kitchen. After all, I’m not National Media, just a small local blog. Not at all like others that do not allow comments contrary to the authors view.
January 1, 2010 at 5:15 pm
Herrera may have some proving to do, but she’s far from an “empty suit.” More appropriate might be “blank slate,” meaning she has only a short state legislative record.
The fact is, she has the most ELECTIVE legislative experience of any candidate in this race. Castillo was an appointed bureaucrat, and manager. Russell has some legislative experience, but in a small town council.
So, if not Herrera, who?
January 1, 2010 at 5:54 pm
I’m surprised, ziggy. I thought you all were tired of “more of the same” and party insiders.
Jamie is a nice person, but her entry into this race, as well as supporting Unionization of childcare workers, which would really hurt low income working familes and single Moms alone are enough for me to not wish to see her move ahead.
She has never faced a tough run for office, being elected in a heavily predominant Republican district.
But, ask yourself, just how is she came back to Washington, after a 10 year absence, and chosen over others who have been here all along and were actually up to speed as to what was going on here.
In your haste to label Castillo as an “appointed bureaucrat, and manager,” do you not realize you are aslo describing Jaime for her appointment in 2007?
I’m sticking with Castillo. He’s shown me he has the ideas, the knowledge and the courage for a tough run.
Jaime shows me she lacks much of the same.
January 1, 2010 at 10:41 pm
Happy New Year Lew. I was busy since I last posted, hence the delay in responding. I had a discussion with a friend about your question and I liked what he had to say:
‘Blaming America first’ is wrong, but so is adamantly refusing to ever even consider how one’s own behavior might be feeding into a tit-for-tat escalation of conflict. And Ron Paul does not even ‘blame’ America, anyway. He merely suggests that we consider not poking the snake pit, as a tactic to prevent snake bites.
Let’s say a friend is robbed in bad neighborhood. I find out that he was walking around with money hanging out of his pocket. Am I ‘blaming’ him for the crime if I suggest that he should have behaved more carefully? No, of course not. The muggers are responsible for the crime.
I am not trying to make a perfect analogy; just trying to demonstrate that the causes of things are not always black-and-white and one-sided.
There are nuances to life, Lew, and to foreign policy.
January 2, 2010 at 12:15 am
Happy New Year, PUSA.
We disagree on Paul blaming America. When he “nuance’s” an enemy like Al Qaeda, or any of the radical Jihadists, he is saying they only come after us because of our being there, or having been there in the past.
Any way you cut it, it places the blame on us, just as you do by saying we in essence are “poking the snake pit, as a tactic to prevent snake bites.”
By the same token, you could legitimize and give credence to the Japanese for Pearl Harbor since we were cutting off shipments of raw materials to encourage them to stop conquering Japan.
What I fail to understand in Paul’s call to “listen to them,” is why he doesn’t listen to their earlier cries of global dominance of radical Islam.
Alan Keyes addressed this subject just today at How Obama and Ron Paul demoralize America.
Nuance has a place in society, but not in war. At least, not if you desire to win it.