Is Endorsing Marc Boldt the Columbian’s Litmus Test for Candidates?

by lewwaters

The local newspaper of record, the Columbian, also known as the unofficial daily newsletter for the CRC & Democrat Party, continues to claim they are not biased in favor of liberals, but everyday reveals more and more of the leftward leaning.

Along with their bias comes their favored candidates and incumbents, nearly always a Democrat or supporter of the CRC and dragging Portland’s financially failing light rail into Clark County and sticking local citizens with massive taxes and tolls to pay for what they have not even been allowed to vote again to say whether they want it or not, being voted down 3 times in the past.

County Commissioner Marc Boldt was one who the paper used to demand resign, as they did in their past editorial, “Three Nuts and a Boldt.” But Boldt has become the Darling of the paper as he shifted left politically and began supporting the CRC.

We saw it the paper waited 4 months to report on Boldt’s being sanctioned by the CCGOP and only after successful businessman, David Madore, long hated by the paper, announced he would run against Boldt.

Indicating just how much of a darling Boldt has become, it now appears to be a litmus test for candidates on whether or not they support Marc Boldt for reelection.

Congresswoman Jaime Herrera Beutler made the news a couple times for saying she supported Boldt and when Boldt sent out a flyer claiming her endorsement. Constituents calling her office were met with a confusing statement on that claim.

The paper did not cover conflicting statement, so I went to her in person and asked and she does indeed endorse Boldt. But her support of Boldt is news.

That County Commissioner Tom Mielke declined to support either Boldt or challenger Madore was also news as it indicated Boldt’s challenger did not receive the endorsement.

And now, we see yet another article focusing on recently appointed 18th District Senator Ann Rivers saying she supports Marc Boldt.

Many will disagree with her, me included, but I will not raise any fuss over her endorsement. That is not really the issue.

What is at issue is why is her endorsement of Marc Boldt the only thing to make it to the article? Apparently she wasn’t asked about other candidates, such as Senator Don Benton, Paul Harris or even Liz Pike, just appointed to day to finish out Rivers’ term as she moved over the Senate.

No, the only focus was her saying she supported Marc Boldt.

Questioning whether it was now a litmus test the paper will use for other candidates drew a reply from editor Lou Brancaccio who did not seem to appreciate the question or even give an answer. I left the comment, “Keeping Marc Boldt on the County Commission and slamming the GOP seems to be the single most important issue for the CRC loving Columbian lately.”

“Will every candidate be gauged by a litmus test of whether or not they support Marc Boldt?”

Lou said, “So Lew it’s our fault for asking the question? You’re something else. Blame the messenger. It’s an age old trick that most readers are onto now. I give Ann credit for saying what she feels, not to be intimidated by folks like you.”

Strange, I didn’t realize asking if endorsing marc Boldt was to be a litmus test equated to my intimidating Ann Rivers, especially considering I said nothing about her endorsing him.

Lou also said, “Funny how my good friend conservative blogger somehow manages to drag the CRC and Columbian motives into a simple question we asked. Sweet Lew! You are quite the piece of work. Oh, you forgot to mention the person who actually made the endorsement Lew. Probably just an oversight , eh? Ann gets great credit for not being intimidated by heavy handed bloggers and commenters. But who still loves ya Lew? Me! Keep stretching buddy!”

And still, no word on why that single endorsement is of such great importance that few other endorsements are reported.

But we see three candidates so far being asked about endorsing Marc Boldt with no mention of any other potential endorsement to any other candidate.

Lou’s childish ad hominem is no surprise, either. While he may accuse me of attacking the messenger by asking, it’s obvious he has no problem attacking the questioner.

I have not condemned Ann nor will I over the endorsement. I disagree with it of course, but my support for her will not waiver, even though I cannot vote for her since I am in a different district.

But I am left with no other conclusion that to believe that every candidate will now be gauged on whether or not they support the Darling of the Columbian, Marc Boldt.

One Comment to “Is Endorsing Marc Boldt the Columbian’s Litmus Test for Candidates?”

  1. Looks like the “chosen one” has chosen one.

    Like

%d bloggers like this: