Can Lew Waters Define What "Fringe" Means?

Lew drops another turd of wisdom:


But what, we ask, does Lew mean by "fringe far right?"

Well, apparently anyone who disagrees with Lew.  This is why Lew NEVER engages in a forum where he doesn't control the microphone. Because then he's never trapped in uncomfortable situations like having to define his terms when he obviously has no coherent definition.  By remaining nebulous, he can sound authoritative, when he's actually on the verge of being incoherent.

So what does Lew consider fringe?

► Is it fringe to rewrite the county party bylaws to give more decision making power to the central committee and remove it from the executive committee?

► Is it fringe to challenge our elected officials to uphold the party's core principles* in their legislation?

► Is it fringe to challenge those officials who seem to caucus with the democrats in their votes to explain themselves?

► Is it fringe to be fiscally responsible with the party's treasury?

► Is it fringe to challenge the state party to not support or endorse one Republican candidate over another before the primaries, like what happened in 2012?

► Is it fringe to ask questions of candidates to establish their commitment to the party platform and core principles before endorsing them?

► Is it fringe to withhold campaign financing from faux republicans who do not espouse the party platform or uphold the party core principles?

► Is it fringe to hold our elected officials accountable when they vote or legislate in a manner contrary to the core principles and platform of the Republican party?

► Is it fringe to establish committees to vet potential candidates for suitability?  What kind of a moron endorses any candidate who chooses to hang an (R) after their name without getting to know them?  This is how you get leftists like John Blom calling themselves Republicans.

► Is it fringe to establish committees to objectively review and report on the legislative activities of our elected officials, so the central committee can make educated decisions?

These are the things that Lew considers fringe.  These are what the Liberty Alliance initiated in 2012 in Clark County, and what has been promoted since then, with one 2 year hiatus when we inadvertently placed the party in the hands of an irresponsible frat boy. It's unbelievable that Lew considers any of this "extremist" or "fringe".  The only excuse that he has for this silliness is that *gasp* some of the people who drove this change actually support Ron Paul!  Most didn't, but hey, facts never meant much to Lew.

So what kind of Republicans does Lew endorse?

► How about a Party Chairman who took the gavel of a vibrant, active party with overwhelming good will, and then proceeded to squander every shred of that good will by alienating the people who made the party what it is for the purpose of inviting a wider demographic who don't share the core principles or party platform?  Lew endorses this kind of behavior, because some of the people who were alienated once supported Ron Paul, for which Lew would happily put them against the wall and have them shot.

► How about a party chairman who unilaterally and against the bylaws made large expenditures from the party treasury without the approval of the central committee or executive committee? Fine with Lew, because he's the right kind of Republican.

►How about a party chairman who has admitted in open court documents to using illegal narcotics including cocaine while acting as party chairman?  Lew has no problem with this, because he the right kind of Republican.

► How about a party chairman who neglected to address legal issues accidentally incurred by the party, didn't lift a finger or even show up at the hearing where fines were levied against the party he was chair of, and then didn't do a thing to pay off even a dime of those fines, or negotiate a smaller settlement?  Fine by Lew, because he's the right kind of Republican.

► How about a party member who refuses entry to party members at a public event for which they have tickets because she doesn't like them?  Fine by Lew, because she's the right kind of Republican.

► How about a party member who creates a faux shadow party which cleverly rearranges the name to make it look to the public like the properly elected Republican party, and then proceeds to spend money to campaign for candidates that have note been endorsed by the Central Committee, and in fact some of whom were not even running as Republicans?  Fine by Lew, because she's the right kind of Republican.

► How about a divisive Party member who spends hours poring through the party's PDC filings to find the slightest irregularity, and then instead of bringing the matter to the treasurer to be resolved in-house, files PDC complaints which could end up costing the local party thousands of dollars in fines, all for the express purpose of embarrassing the Chairman who beat her for the post? Fine by Lew, because she's the right kind of Republican.

► How about a divisive Party member who finds unfortunate legal problems in the past of a fellow committee member which could be embarrassing to the party if publicized, but doesn't bring it to the attention of the chairman or the executive committee, but instead sits on this information until the time when it can do the most possible harm and cause the greatest amount of embarrassment for the individual and the party, and then deliberately leaks it to the local paper to ensure maximum distribution?   Fine by Lew, because she's the right kind of Republican.

Lew clearly doesn't know what "far right" or "fringe" even means.  He's driven by hate and prejudice, and has no grasp of the facts.  His worldview is shaped by the prejudices of those who whisper into his ear.  He's attended none of the many meetings he condemns, he doesn't personally know any of the people he hates so vehemently.  His ignorance is only overshadowed by his libelous vitriol.  The sorts of Republicans and self-proclaimed conservatives with whom he surrounds himself are self-indulgent narcissists who do not serve for the good of the community or the conservative movement, but only for their personal aggrandizement, at the cost of all else.  They would happily burn the party to the ground if they're not allowed to be in control.  This is the party Lew espouses, and thankfully, those voters in Clark County who pay attention don't agree with him.

If the party doesn't get rid of the sorts of Republicans Lew supports, it's doomed, because it becomes nothing but the right wing of the Democrat party.  When the voter is faced with a choice between liberal and liberal-lite, the liberal will always win.

If Lew can point to any action on the part of the local party since 2012 that he considers fringe or unacceptable, then I invite him to do so, and explain why he considers it so. This is a challenge for you to make sense for once old man.  Can you do it?

Let me hazard a guess that Lew will start off by decrying the abhorrent tactic of going out into the precincts and recruiting like-minded "fringe, extremist"people to fill vacant Precinct committee officer slots. Never mind that he can't point to a single action done in committee by any of the "fringe extremists" that's actually fringe or extreme.  Never mind that his own girlfriend Carolyn Crain did the exact same thing nearly two years ago with his full approval. Because she's the right kind of Republican.

Then Lew will go off on a ticker about how the fringe extremists set out to malign him, and point at this blog as proof positive.  Sorry, telling the truth and setting the record straight against a prejudiced, misinformed pundit with an axe to grind is neither fringe nor extreme. Most of the damage he's suffered because of this blog was self-inflicted, so that dog won't hunt.  Find something that the "fringe extremists" did in committee that materially harms the Republican brand.
______________________________
*The Clark County Republican Party has a set of core principles which are adopted by the Central Committee- that is, the elected precinct committee officers from throughout the county.  Adoption of a core principle requires a 3/4 majority vote, per the party bylaws.

Get a Clue, Lew

We're beside ourselves with joy that we're on Lew's mind.  Not really sure what he's trying to do, or start, or whatever, but he really seems to have gone around the bend. Now.  Outraged that we didn't say anything he could point at and lie about from yesterday's chiding, true to form, Lew insists on doubling down on stupid.

Why so sad, bro?  Surely you didn't expect us to turn this little truth site into a rant about the CRC, did you?  No one comes here for that.

Look at the title of this blog, old man.  It's not Jay Inslee Watch.  It's not CRC watch.  It's not the Clark County Conservative Establishment.  It's Lew Waters Watch.  It never pretended to be anything else, not a citizen's advocacy group.  Not a call to arms for conservatives to rally around.  Not a dump tank for whatever bug bear has our attention at the moment. 

The sole purpose of this blog is and has always been -- and we've said this many times -- to call bullshit on you when you go off the rails.  Why do we do it here?  Because you have always blocked, censored, silenced and defamed anyone who disagrees with you on any subject on any of the media outlets you control.  And you're conspicuously absent or silent on any media outlet where you don't control the mike.  You can't stand it when you don't control the narrative, or when your readers aren't fawning over you and telling you how wise and brave you are.

You want a discussion on the CRC outside of your pathetic shell of what used to be a pretty good blog, or your totalitarian controlled little echo chamber facebook group?  Then come on over to some other groups and join in where you're not an admin.  Unblock many of the dozens of people you've blocked, and if you apologize, maybe the dozens more who have blocked you might give you a second chance. 

Not gonna hold our breath.  Because Lew Waters NEVER engages when he can't control the microphone and silence dissent.  Historical fact.

Sagacious allegations?  No one made any sagacious allegations, you old fool.  Everything that this blog has ever published is right here for the cat to sniff at.  Every lie you told, we pulled back the curtain and revealed the truth.  Every voice you silenced on your web site, we gave voice to.  Every defamatory thing you tried to pin on the legions who have offended you, we have shown the truth.  No one ever accused you of any wrongdoing. We just repeated your own words back, verbatim, and showed them for the steaming pile of shit they were.

No one ever tried to make you say or think a certain way.  No one tried to silence you.  That's your thing, not ours.  Voicing disagreement, and showing why you're wrong, and embarrassing you for some of the stupid shit for which you should be embarrassed is not censorship, Lew.  It's free speech.  If you practiced it, this blog never would have been necessary.  If your opinion can't win the day in the marketplace of  ideas, there's no virtue in silencing those who show the true worth of your opinion. 

And no one has hitched their mule to anything on Lew Waters Watch, Lew, because you're just not that relevant. The conservative movement marches on, making sure that the power is retained by the grass roots, ensuring that even morons like Carolyn Crain get to have a voice in the local party.  Nobody has tried to exclude people from any meetings since your drugged up little butt-buddy Gellatly tried to make a closed meeting when he retaliated against board members who objected to his financial irregularities when he was chairman. When your girlfriend Carolyn walked precincts looking for people to run against conservatives, and then spent a considerable amount of money on campaign flyers to defeat those conservatives, we didn't hear a peep out of you about how unethical it was, which is the height of hypocrisy, considering that's exactly what you were screaming about when the liberty alliance was doing the exact same thing.

You giggled with glee when the local party incurred a PDC fine by following the advice they sought from the PDC office.  The then-chairman called the PDC and told them the numbers weren't all in, and asked if it was  better to file late with the correct numbers, or file on time and amend it. The PDC said better to file late with the correct numbers, and then fined the party for doing exactly that.  Did you get outraged at the PDC?  No!  You felt it was right and just because the chairman *gasp* supported Ron Paul once upon a time.  Your situational ethics are pathetic.

When your pretty boy Gellatly didn't lift a finger to try to reduce or negotiate the PDC fine, and didn't raise a dime to pay it down, you were silent.  But when the current chairman negotiates a probationary reduction in the fine and raises record funds to pay it off before donations are needed for next year's campaign season, you call him corrupt, and your girlfriend Carolyn Crain goes out of her way with a gotcha game to try to deliberately violate the PDC probation, just to make the current chairman look bad. God, you people make a person ill.

When Julie Olson and John Blom act and vote like the liberal Democrats they are, when they don't even pay lip service to the party core principles (principles - there's something you need to research.  Apparently it's an unfamiliar concept to you), you remain strangely silent.  And then you have the balls to call yourself some kind of conservative. 

Hell, Lew, if you spent half the effort actually attacking the liberals and Democrats as you do attacking people who actually share your political leanings, we might be able to take back the 49th!

So get over yourself.  If you want to review your record of nonsense, censorship, bullying, name calling, and outright lies, you've come to the right place.  If you want to actually have a discussion about the CRC, there's plenty of other places and venues where it's being discussed.  Go check a few out.  Hell, might even see you there.

Keep saying stupid stuff, and we'll keep pointing it out.  Because that's pretty much what we're here for, since you block, remove and censor anyone who does it anywhere else. We take no joy in it. Better for all, really, if it wasn't necessary.  We make no bones about it.  We're trolls.  Feed us and we get fat.  It's a little bit amusing, and a little bit sad that you can't see that, and you just can't help yourself, even when we tell you.  Stop hitting yourself in the head, Lew.  It's all right.  You can do it, even if it's us that ask you to.

Kickin' it Rent-Free!

Honestly, in between political campaign seasons, we here at LWW don't even think about old Lew very much.  He's got his meager little echo chamber soap-box over on Facistbook, now that he's removed everyone that disagrees with him and could embarrass him by pulling the curtain back on his hypocrisy and his tenuous grip on reality. He's really not in much of a position to actually do any damage to conservatism in SW Washington with his ignorant name calling and lies at this point int he campaign cycle.  It's not like the Columbian is picking up his lies and running them as a byline when they have Carolyn Crain feeding them whatever dirt she can invent about the Chairman who beat her for control of the party.  Honestly, we go months without even thinking about him, because we prefer to live in a nice world, where people can get along and exchange ideas freely.

But it was brought to our attention that we're apparently living rent-free in old Lew's head.  This just tickles us to no end, since we can get under the old fraud's skin without even doing anything!  So apparently Lew is concerned that we might have an opinion about the newly resurrected CRC.  We've been hearing a lot about this lately, but the strange thing is that never once did we think to ourselves, "I hope old Lew weighs in on this!"



Nope, Lew.  Not our circus, not our monkeys.  We have excellent people like John Ley who add a dash of reason to the insanity that is the CRC, so no effort is necessary on our part.  This is, in fact, a problem without a solution.  Adding new bridge capacity will do exactly zero towards relieving the congestion on the existing bridges, it will only increase traffic to newly opened commercial corridors wherever the new bridges land.  There's no acceptable design to replace the existing I-5 bridge, because the design requirements are mutually exclusive.  There are things that can be done to mitigate the existing traffic problem, but no one is interested in hearing those because they're not sexy enough.  There are some very good solutions, but they require thinking way outside the box, and have far too many unknowns associated with them to be acceptable to politicians.

There's the usual lies about the bridge being inadequate for a Cascadia earthquake.  Trust me, the I-5 bridge is one of the most solidly built structures in the area.  It's be the last thing standing when the big one hits.

Replacing the or correcting the design flaws of the bridge doesn't address the problem of inadequate highway infrastructure through downtown Portland.

But on the whole, they're gonna do what they're gonna do. They try to dress it up like a bridge, but in reality it's just a fleecing of the taxpayers. Lew Waters Watch isn't a community advocacy outlet.  Our sole raison d'etre is to heap scorn and ridicule on an old buffoon when he starts trying to do material damage to the conservative movement in Southwest Washington with his lies, ignorant prejudices and hate-filled propaganda.  On the whole, Lew does a pretty good job of highlighting things that citizens need to be concerned about; he's not all bad. On issues that don't involve local personalities who have at some time or another offended the old goat, he's usually spot-on.  If he could learn to distinguish friend from foe and get over the fact that just because people sometimes disagree with him doesn't mean that they're the anti-Christ, he'd be a positive voice for SW Washington.

But we're mighty glad to know the old fraud is thinking about us.  We've accomplished our purpose.