Thursday, July 15, 2010

Lew Waters weighs in on Russell's hissy fits.

Jon Russell’s “Fact Check” Not So Factual

Who knows.... maybe Russell will now include Waters' effort in the "Official Ann Rivers Attack Blog" status.


  1. I read the fact check blog and was puzzled.

    Jon forgets to mention that has has publically referred to his wife as a doctor, does not mention the fact that he is ignoring the PDC laws, and forgets the fact that his resume is as fluid as the Columbia River and changes more than the weather.

    He is bringing a knife to a gun fight and the problem is the truth is NOT on his side.

    I also see that he will not take comments - what a coward!

  2. I also find it quite odd that Jon allows no comments.

  3. I agree, what kind of blog doesn't allow comments? One that is written by a coward.

  4. I have posted questions several times on his blog. He continues to delete each one. He is an elected official as well as a candidate in my town. I feel he owes me the courtesy of an answer, even if he does not agree with me.

  5. I guess we shouldn't be too surprised that Jon doesn't allow comments. His former campaign manager, who has a blog at Red County and once told me how gifted he was in writing, posted against Dino Rossi recently as being the "Nominee-Apparent."

    Not that I have any particular draw to Rossi just yet, but this blogger, Gary Wiram, is a big Jaime Herrera supporter since Russell dropped out.

    Try leaving a comment on his blog pointing out his hypocrisy in instantly accepting Jaime as the "Nominee-Apparent."

  6. This blog doesn't allow comments either, talk about cowards...

  7. And precisely what blog are you referring to, Anon? YOUR comment is here, so they must be allowed.

    The fact is that the blog in question, that is, Russell's self-immolation blog doesn't even allow for comments to be made and moderated.

    That is, of course, a function of Blogger. Jon turned it off.... he can turn it back on.

    But being held to account for his observations is kind of like failing to mention this blog at all: inconvenient.

    Russell does not want to address either the issues or his documented lies and exaggerations. Thus, his failure to allow comments.

    I post comments from those who disagree with me, presuming they meet the civility standard. I also point out where those attacking me or this humble effort are frequently wrong.

    Like now.

  8. And I thank you for that. It just took awhile. Jon refuses to post or answer any questions as well as C/W blog. How boring to only read one side.....

  9. Writing as a union worker, I want to just say last year I worked a day care job that had gone union. Before it was a union job it was 3 dollars less an hour. I took the job because I had lost quite a few hours with my job. I am an educated employee with several years experience working with children. To say you cannot fire union employees who do not do a good job is a lie. The employer is responsible for hiring quality employees. They should be payed a living wage with benefits like any other job. If parents do not want to pay that amount I guess they should just stay home with the children.

  10. That, for me, is not the issue.

    If a group of employees WANT to become union, that is entirely up to them.

    This legislation removed that option, PLUS required the owner of the day care center to pay the worker's union dues.

    By "removed that option," I mean that SEIU representation would have been REQUIRED if even ONE child at the day care center received subsidized day care.

    As you pointed out, you were working for a wage that paid 3 dollars less. YOU made the decision, presumably, to leave that job and get a better paying one. That worked for you.

    But the idea that anyone should have to pay any particular wage to anyone, living or otherwise, is not anything a true Republican conservative would ever support.

    At the end of the day, no one forced you into day care work as a career choice... that was your doing. Forcing day care wages up would require increased day care subsidies which would require MORE tax dollars. And where are those going to come from?

    Taking it a step further, if you can't afford to have children, then DON'T have them and end day care subsidies as well.

    In short, this isn't about firing union workers.

    This is about a girl who scammed an appointment as a state representative because her congresswoman puppet master muscled it in for her; who then co-sponsored and voted for SEIU legislation while lying about her motivation for doing so. THAT is the issue here.

    Thanks for stopping by.