Dunn-Hammond the final bell
Good Morning
Let me start by saying I do not live in the 9th district.
So I don't have a vote in this race.The way that this
has all gone down is a contrast in styles.On the one hand
you have Steve Hammond who has handled it all with
class and dignity. Reagan Dunn on the other hand has
acted like a 3rd grader who can't have his way.
From the very beginning Reagan believed he had a divine
right to this position.The lack of character on his part is
appalling to date he has had 5 different reasons for staying
in the race.Reagan said he would run a clean campaign that
he wouldn't tolerate any mud slinging on the part of his
campaign.This is complete and utter nonsense from the
personal attacks on Steve Hammond and his supporters
To the endless cheap shots Reagan keeps taking at Steve
Hammond in the media.
Not to mention how in the tank the King GOP leadership with
the notable exception of Monica tracey and bob Strauss are
for Reagan dunn.What the king GOP leadership doesn't seem to
realize is they are causing serious damage to the future of this
county party.I believe should Reagan Dunn go on to win in the
primary that those on the south side that have supported Steve
Hammond will sit out the general election.Not because Reagan Dunn
won but because of the way he won.They don't believe they will
have a voice anymore.They already believe the king GOP isn't interested
in anything they have to say.
What this will do is cost David irons the election because he needs
the south side voters to put him over the top.Reagan Dunn still hasn't
said what it was Steve Hammond said or did to violate the 11th commandment.
I don't want to hear from any Dunn supporters about how Steve Hammond
pointed out how he is different from Reagan Dunn is being dirty.If the candidates
aren't able to point out differences between themselves and there opponents
then we are finished as a political party.
Cant you Reagan Dunn supporters see how transparent he is being.The timing
of the meth watch program and the rolling out of the rural bill of rights are just
to calculated.Why wait until now when Reagan could have introduced these ideas
months ago.If Reagan really cared about the citizens of district 9 he wouldn't have
waited until now to bring them forward.Proving that this whole thing was all about
Reagan Dunn.
Now I'm sorry for being hard hitting about this as I have but someone has to do it.
One more thing don't anyone try and convince me that what happened on
on up front with Robert mak was a debate.It was nothing more than 10 minutes
of softballs being lobed by mak.Well the final bell in this race is about to go off
who knows what will happen.
Coming this week (The Bellevue Mafia and how they screwed things up in the Washington Gop)
Let me start by saying I do not live in the 9th district.
So I don't have a vote in this race.The way that this
has all gone down is a contrast in styles.On the one hand
you have Steve Hammond who has handled it all with
class and dignity. Reagan Dunn on the other hand has
acted like a 3rd grader who can't have his way.
From the very beginning Reagan believed he had a divine
right to this position.The lack of character on his part is
appalling to date he has had 5 different reasons for staying
in the race.Reagan said he would run a clean campaign that
he wouldn't tolerate any mud slinging on the part of his
campaign.This is complete and utter nonsense from the
personal attacks on Steve Hammond and his supporters
To the endless cheap shots Reagan keeps taking at Steve
Hammond in the media.
Not to mention how in the tank the King GOP leadership with
the notable exception of Monica tracey and bob Strauss are
for Reagan dunn.What the king GOP leadership doesn't seem to
realize is they are causing serious damage to the future of this
county party.I believe should Reagan Dunn go on to win in the
primary that those on the south side that have supported Steve
Hammond will sit out the general election.Not because Reagan Dunn
won but because of the way he won.They don't believe they will
have a voice anymore.They already believe the king GOP isn't interested
in anything they have to say.
What this will do is cost David irons the election because he needs
the south side voters to put him over the top.Reagan Dunn still hasn't
said what it was Steve Hammond said or did to violate the 11th commandment.
I don't want to hear from any Dunn supporters about how Steve Hammond
pointed out how he is different from Reagan Dunn is being dirty.If the candidates
aren't able to point out differences between themselves and there opponents
then we are finished as a political party.
Cant you Reagan Dunn supporters see how transparent he is being.The timing
of the meth watch program and the rolling out of the rural bill of rights are just
to calculated.Why wait until now when Reagan could have introduced these ideas
months ago.If Reagan really cared about the citizens of district 9 he wouldn't have
waited until now to bring them forward.Proving that this whole thing was all about
Reagan Dunn.
Now I'm sorry for being hard hitting about this as I have but someone has to do it.
One more thing don't anyone try and convince me that what happened on
on up front with Robert mak was a debate.It was nothing more than 10 minutes
of softballs being lobed by mak.Well the final bell in this race is about to go off
who knows what will happen.
Coming this week (The Bellevue Mafia and how they screwed things up in the Washington Gop)
posted by phil spackman | 7:33 AM
13 Comments:
Bob Strauss also contributed financially to Dunn.
Republican in exile
all right strauss changed his mind
I guess I shouldnt be surprised.
This blog is so one-sided, it's not even funny. The reason that the Hammond supporters aren't focusing on the issues at all is because they know that Hammond will get creamed in that department. In just eight months on the Council, Dunn has had a much bigger impact than Steve Hammond has had in four years!
The C.A.O. was passed on Hammond's watch. He has fooled CAPR into believing that he is the champion of property rights. At least Reagan is trying to stop the bleeding of the CAO while also working just as hard to repeal it. His background as a land-use attorney makes him well-suited for this.
Dunn is simply more qualified for the job. The legislation that Hammond recently introduced concerning the arresting of looters during a natural disaster was laughable, and Dunn made sure to show the world on Robert Mak's show. You're right Phil, it was a softball show, and Hammond couldn't even defend himself there. He can't even write an ordinance correctly.
Your support of Steve Hammond is much like your support of Susan Hutchinson: blind and misguided. You have never given anyone a reason to support either of them, but all that you do is trash their opponents. To claim that his property bill of rights and meth watch was timed for the election is just sour grapes. Everyone who is voting in this election must sit back and ask themselves: "What has Hammond done lately on the Council besides let the CAO wreak havoc on his constituents?"
tim h
I guess I have to keep repeating
myself in regards to Susan.As I
have said before I have gooten to know susan pretty well.Remember
I am a conservative do you really
think I was support someone who's
views arent in line with my own.
When Susan is ready she will
state all of her positions
and most of you will not be
disappointed.
As far hammond is concerned the
democrats have the majority in
the council.Just what is he suppose to do
he voted no on the cao measure all the democrats voted for it.
You just insulted the members of
the CAPR.Thats right there all to
stupid to figure it out on there
own.The fact that you think one
man can sucker an organazation
of the size in is absurd.
I trashed no one I simply told the truth
about reagan dunn and mike mcgavick.I'm sorry you can't handle that.Sorry grapes reagan waited until right before the election
to introduce these things.Any rational person can see what he was
up to.Reagan wanted to draw attention to himself so he could get all
of this publicity right before
the election.
There was a majority on the council when the CAO was passed, but Hammond was extremely ineffective in working with the other side to weaken it. If I remember correctly, one of the amendments that he offered up for it was a rule saying that people living in Seattle were not allowed to mow their front yards. This sarcastic rhetoric and tone is both insulting to his constituents and the majority Democrats on the Council. Of course they are not willing to work with him.
And while we're on the subject of whose willing to work with Steve Hammond, let's think about that flyer that the Reagan Wing splashed all over their front page. The one alleging that other Republicans on the Council took part in redistricting to try to eliminate Steve Hammond. If this is true, which you believe, you should ask yourself why the other Republicans would want him to leave.
The answer is this. The minority Republicans on the Council are considerably weaker with him as our representative. He can't work with the other side, and his own side doesn't want him. They can't form their own coalitions. Reagan Dunn will bring a much more potent force to the Council. His presence, along with his ability to bring Democrats over to his side, will enable to the Republicans to finally gain some victories. Rural landowners should accept the fact that they will all be much better off without Hammond representing them. Dunn will get results for us that most of the Democrats will be unable to get for their constituents.
Tim H
They wanted hammond out because
he is a conservative.So before
he gets to much power they want
to get rid of him.
So the fact that David Irons is
endorsing hammond must make him
worth getting rid of to.That or
irons just as stupid as everyone
else thats supports hammond.Yeah
right.
The people in the original 9th
district supported steve hammond
because he worked hard for them
and they new he stood with them.
As far that flyer was concerned that was
actually put out by a capr member.
Whether you choose to believe it
or not is true.It can all be
backed up.Which should be very
alarming to most people.
Your very foolish if you think
the democrats are going to work
with anyone on the council that
doesnt share there beliefs.
The king county democratic party
fears steve hammond thats why
they couldn't get anyone to run
against him until the day
of there caucuses.It is also
why the teamsters unions back
hammond.Unlike you they realize
that steve hammond atracts
democrats because they like his
stand on property rights.
They want Hammond out because he makes all the Republicans weaker as a group. I don't know what you mean by Hammond gaining more power. I do know that the district is much more likely to elect Reagan Dunn over the Democrat in November.
Bringing in David Irons' endorsement doesn't help your case, because he has endorsed both Reagan Dunn and Steve Hammond. That's his way of staying out of this primary battle. He doesn't favor one candidate over the other.
You're typing circles around yourself. In one paragraph, you called me foolish for thinking that the Democrats will work with anyone that doesn't share their beliefs, but in the next paragraph, you said that Democrats like Steve Hammond because of his stand on property rights. If they liked Steve's stand on property rights, there would be no CAO.
I'm not calling anyone that supports Hammond stupid, but I do believe that the main reason that CAPR supports him is because that he was one of the founders of the group. I repeat though, he hasn't done anything to help landowners. Ask yourself the question, I challenge you to answer it Phil. What has Steve Hammond done lately to help landowners? If you answer that he has stood up for your rights, you're wrong, because during his tenure on the Council, your rights have been trampled on by Larry Phillip's and Ron Sims' boots.
I also challenge you to back up that flyer. You said that "it can all be backed up." Back it up. Show me proof that that flyer is accurate. You say that it is alarming, and I agree, but because if it's true, that just goes to show that other Republicans don't want a weaker member around when they can have someone much more qualified.
tim h
you misunderstand when I was talking
about democrats that back hammond I
meant the rank and file.Of course
the democrat leadership doesn't like
him.
Again How could steve hammond or
reagan dunn have stopped sims
or phillips from doing what they
did. They are in the majority and
these people do not compromise with
anyone.
Since you don't know anyone thats
part of the CAPR you don't have
the right to sit in judgement of
them.Why don't you ask one them
why they back steve hammond before
you make assumptions.
As far as the flyer is concerned
the biggest reason that all went
down is because jane hague was scared to death
of losing her seat.The whole idea
behind shrinking the size of the
county council was so the boundries
would be drawn fairly and the gop
could have a chance of having a
majority.
The whole idea behind the redistricting wasn't to give the GOP a chance, Phil. Why would the majority Democrats on the Council do that? With these new boundaries, they have assured themselves a 5-4 majority next year.
I ask you again, what has Steve Hammond done lately to help landowners? I also ask you to prove that flyer correct. You always say that you can back it up, but like your glowing admiration of Hutchinson and your criticism of Dunn, you have no arguments to support your claim.
Phil,
Seems like you got your wish. Dunn debated Hammond on Kirby Wilbur's radio show this morning. You always claim that he never would, but Dunn did that and more. Wilbur has openly endorsed Hammond, and the debate was held in Auburn, not part of the new 9th, but part of Hammond's current district. Dunn went into enemy territory and handled Hammond handily.
If you listened to the debate, you would have heard how uncomfortable and unqualified your candidate was. Dunn was extremely qualified and well-versed on the issues. One of the big points that came up was from the Q and A session. A question was posed to Hammond asking why he was the only Councilmember to vote against emergency medical funding. This was a bi-partisan effort from 2003. Both republicans and democrats voted for it, everyone except for Hammond. Hammond denied that he did this, but Dunn corrected him and stated that it was from a 2003 vote. Hammond flat-out lied.
After this debate, it is clear that Reagan Dunn is the candidate who should represent the newly-drawn 9th
District.
tim h
Sorry but that's not what I
mean when I say a debate.If
Reagan Dunn isn't willing to
debate in a setting where citzens
of district 9 are a able to ask
questions directly to the two
candidates without them being
screen ahead of time.To my way
of thinking there still hasn't
been a debate.
The one thing I haven't heard from
anyone is why Reagan Dunn broke his
promise to drop if he lost at the
convention.I know all the bs about
what hammond supposedly did.But
know specfics.
I don't know how anyone trust
anything Reagan Dunn says.The
man can't keep his word.
Read your guys' comments back and forth. Thanks for keeping it civil.
But after reading all this, I was left to wonder, "Who is the better leader?" Neither seemed to be leaders to galvanize the Rs and get them over the hump.
Why should I vote for anyone of the two?
Swatter
The main reason that I would vote
for steve hammond is he will do
this job until its time for him to
retire.Reagan Dunn on the other hand
is using this position as a stepping
stone to get back to washington D.C.
You may have trouble believing
this but its true thats all this
is to Reagan Dunn.I would also
advise you to look at Thereaganwing.com there is a letter
at top of the home page written
by bob strauss taking issue with
the hit piece reagan dunn just
put out about hammond.I think it
says volumes about who has character in the race.
Post a Comment
<< Home