Aren’t you surprised?  Me neither.  But I have to comment. It smacks of superficial reasoning and faulty analysis.  So, lets play shall we?

We think she has been diligent in looking after the interests of the 5th District. She is a moderate who has not toed the party line in Washington, D.C., when she thought the GOP was making bad choices. 

She’s led political struggles to save staffing at Fairchild Air Force Base, the Veterans Hospital in Walla Walla and other interests vital to her constituents. She fought to prevent the administration from driving up energy rates in the Northwest and from zeroing out a rural health care program.

Ok, fair enough.  But so did every Democrat.  On similar issues in his district, so did Doc Hastings.  It’s their job.  Yet there is some contention over the very issues the Herald cites as her strong points.  As recent as last month, more jobs at Fairchild are slated to be cut indicating that this administration intends to whittle away rather than slash. Yet McMorris, being blind to her own parties idealism, continues to claim this as an accomplishment.  At the same time, Venterans services continue to scale down, and yet again, the Herald would consider her vote an accomplishment.  I asked the Goldmark campaign about this issue…

While Congress did increase funding for veterans, the quality of service for veterans in the district has declined. The Spokane VA Hospital cut urgent care services from 24/7 service to a 4:30 p.m. closing time. One unfortunate veteran of three wars practically died on the steps of the hospital five minutes after closing two weeks ago. Walla Walla’s VA has seen cuts in services and continues to face questions about what a new clinic will offer to veterans. Many of the veterans who have spoken to Goldmark have been extremely concerned and frustrated over the level of service they’ve received. Goldmark stated today in a radio interview in Spokane that the time to address veterans’ needs is before services are cut.

It appears there is more to this story the Herald chose to ignore.

It’s hard to argue with McMorris’ experience in the Washington State Legislature.  Her 10 years of service in the legislature is a good indication of experience for which the Herald cites Goldmark coming up short.  But it wasn’t just there McMorris gained her experience. Her educational background includes fundementalist Pensacola Christian College, an unaccredited Florida Baptist college offers an interesting view into her ideology and her willingness to follow the Bush agenda.  As well does her working background where no practical experience can be found outside of politics which consisted of a stint as a legal assistant and the owner of a… fruit stand.  While she did go on to earn her MBA at the UW, it pales in comparison to the education of Peter Goldmark.

Kidding aside, you don’t have to look far to find that her career has, aside from the fruit stand, been largely politically oriented.  Prior to her taking over Representative Bob Morton’s seat and winning subsequent elections, her only real achievement was as his legislative assistant.  Under normal conditions I would consider this commendable, but the light it sheds on her inability to shift her idealism is disturbing. While the Herald notes that her votes on the Iraq war were votes on her conscience and were also in large part not only the consensus of Congress, but the American people; moods have shifted indeed.  Yet McMorris has not.

The Herald does give the Goldmark campaign credit.  He is a first class candidate.  But they miss a valuable point…

Goldmark is a first-class candidate who is running a strong campaign against President Bush and the leadership of the U.S. House of Representatives.

But none of them is on the 5th District ballot.

While many democratic campaigns across the country can be seen as a referendum on the Bush administration and House leadership, it is sour grapes for the Herald to dismiss this race, even in part, on that basis.  Especially considering the complicity of the republicans in the house to the major points Bush policy.  And equally sad that they refuse to recognize that bringing home the pork is one thing, but being a responsible steward to the United States in a congressional seat is another.  McMorris has failed in that respect monumentally. 

But the final failure of the Herald in recognizing the failures of McMorris and this congress are abundantly clear.

But by no stretch is McMorris involved in the scandals rocking Congress. She should be judged on her own work, not the misbehavior of other members for whom she has no accountability and over whom she has no control.

This will likely be the same defense the Herald will use when they most certainly endorse Doc Hastings for yet another term.  That somehow our republican representatives are removed from these scandals, played no part and should be removed from all implications.  That may be one of our biggest problems.  This republican congress has created the environment we have now.  It has also, through it’s lax oversight into the personal and financial behaviors of its members, its willingness to turn a blind eye and accept money, favors and the absolutely flagrant abuse of it’s own power has created the environment.  This environment has brought us Mark Foley, Jack Abramhoff, Bob Ney, Duke Cunningham and all the rest, Democrat and Republican, through its willingness to turn the other way. 

Blogging is a funny thing.  The Netroots are clearing the way for people powered politics.  But with a difference.  Unlike conservative Internet pundits, we will not willing to stand idle and defend our leadership as they run this country into the ground.  It will not take a pedophile scandal to have us call improper congressional behavior to the floor.  In this mid term election, winning may be everything, but so will accountability once that win is secured. This election is about necessary change.  And it doesn’t look like the Herald truly recognizes that.

The Goldmark campaign makes it simple…

McMorris voted with the Republican caucus in Congress 98 percent of the time. Voters will have to decide whether voting a straight party ticket is in their best interest. And they’ll have to decide whether they want to re-elect a congresswoman who says she is not toeing the party line when in fact, she is. 

The choice is pretty clear.  Change, or the same old thing.  If you want change, please support Peter Goldmark on my Act Blue Page.