I recently sat down with James Watkins (www.WatkinsForCongress.com) who is running for Congress in the 1st CD against incumbent Democrat Jay Inslee. I interviewed him for a couple of hours, one on one, to discuss his campaign.
(Full disclosure: I make no secret of my strong opposition to Inslee, who is seeking his seventh consecutive term in Congress. I was an early endorser of Watkins.)
IMPRESSIVE, ISSUES-BASED CANDIDACY
Ever since Watkins officially announced his candidacy back in November, I've been impressed with his campaign's ability to assemble an effective and substantial team of grassroots volunteers and activists. Watkins himself is a citizen activist, not a professional politician - I met Watkins in the fall of 2009 at a protest against the government takeover of the healthcare system.
Watkins is a solid advocate of fiscal responsibility and limited government, and he has an effective strategy to win over independents and disaffected, open-minded Democrats.
Watkins noted that Jay Inslee has had a close election over the past decade, and he has coasted to victory (with from 55% to 68% of the vote) ever since 2000 (after a razor thin victory over Republican Congressman Rick White in 1998). The first CD includes parts of King, Snohomish, and Kitsap counties, including part or all of a number of cities such as Shoreline, Redmond, Kirkland, Edmonds, Lynnwood, Bothell, Bainbridge Island, Mountlake Terrace, Mill Creek, Monroe, and Poulsbo.
WATKINS A COUNTERPOINT TO HYPER-PARTISAN INSLEE
But, Watkins told me, in 2010 there is an especially good political environment. "Voters want good government, not hyper-partisanship," Watkins says, noting that Jay Inslee votes with Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic Congressional leadership 99% of the time. Watkins says he is "getting a tremendous response" in the district, and that his candidacy is a perfect "counterpoint" to the 99% hyper-partisan Inslee.
According to Watkins, polling shows that 64% of the voters in the 1st CD consider themselves to be "fiscal conservatives" - see http://bit.ly/cZz7XO. Obamacare, the so-called "stimulus" bill, and cap-and-trade - all programs supported by Jay Inslee - are opposed by a majority, Watkins says, and this fits well with his major campaign issues. And above all, Watkins is a candidate of substance, campaigning on the issues:
ECONOMIC RECOVERY AND PRIVATE SECTOR JOB GROWTH
Watkins says government should promote an environment where "innovation, investment, and private sector job growth" are encouraged. "We need less bureaucracy, less burdensome regulation, and rational business taxes," Watkins told me.
That in turn, is key to combating the federal government deficit and paying off the national debt. According to Watkins' campaign website, "We need to do two things. First, responsibly reduce spending to sustainable levels and stop spending money we don’t have. Second, grow the economy to organically grow government revenue through new and sustainable economic activity. The only way to achieve both goals is through policies that encourage investment, hiring, and economic growth."
OPEN, TRANSPARENT GOVERNMENT - "TRUTH IN SPENDING"
Watkins says that "spending bills need to stand alone for an honest up or down vote in the light of day." He advocates "truth in spending," which his campaign website describes as follows: "spending bills should be limited in scope, limited in size, and be posted for public examination on the internet for at least 3 days prior to a recorded vote. No more 2700 page bills that nobody read, no more 400 page amendments filed hours before the vote, and no more hidden (and anonymous) spending."
He proposes other government reform measures, including zero-based budgeting which prioritizes each program, sunset provisions in all spending bills and budget authorizations, performance measurement (goals, metrics) for every federal program.
REAL WORLD EXPERIENCE CUTTING FEDERAL SPENDING
With regard to federal government spending, Watkins notes that he is the only candidate in the race who has actually cut spending at the federal agency level. Watkins showed me charts, spreadsheets, and memos regarding some of his accomplishments as a senior strategic planner at the FDIC in the 1990s: a reduction of staffing levels by 20% (from 12,500 positions to 10,000 positions) plus a 16% budget decrease from 1994 to 1995 (a savings of $288 million). Note well the word "decrease" - in these days, when most politicians talk about limiting the rate of growth, Watkins offers real-life experience at decreasing federal agency spending.
The secret to Watkins's success in cutting staff and expenditures?
"I made real cuts and real savings based on actual performance, almost like a business," Watkins said, "while maintaining core functions."
CONSTITUTION, LIBERTY, AND THE PROPER ROLE OF GOVERNMENT
Watkins is crystal clear about his vision of the issues facing America.
His campaign website issues section has a separate page just on the U.S. Constitution - see http://bit.ly/c6gts2. And this page is no cliche-filled template. Rather, it is a thoughtful and substantial exposition of Watkins' political philosophy and devotion to our nation's founding documents - he describes the Constitution as a "binding contract" between the American people and government. "We're at a crossroads," Watkins says. "It’s time to choose which path you’ll take and what you’re willing to do about it. My choice is simple. I trust the people, and I choose the Constitution."
With the rise of the Tea Party movement, townhall protests, and other grassroots pro-liberty efforts, healthcare reform - perhaps more than any other single issue - has been the focus of the political debate over the proper, limited role of the federal government.
Watkins says we need to "repeal and replace" Obamacare. In Watkins' view, "we missed a real opportunity for honest, open debate about meaningful health insurance reform" due to the partisan efforts of Obama, Pelosi, and Reid (supported by Inslee). Instead of a federal takeover of healthcare, Watkins advocates such measures as permitting purchase of insurance across state lines, lawsuit reform, portability, expanded use of medical savings accounts, and increased availability of lower premiums for catastrophic coverage.
Regarding the right to bear arms, Watkins is a lifetime member of the NRA, a certified firearms safety instructor, and a committed advocate of the Second Amendment. He's been endorsed by the Gun Owners Action League of America.
On the issue of border security and illegal immigration, Watkins is opposed to amnesty for illegal immigrants. He favors such measures as improving border infrastructure and making E-verify mandatory. Given the high level of unemployment among American citizens, and given the current record levels of wasteful spending, Watkins' strong stance on illegal immigration is particularly welcome.
Illegal immigration "has had a massive negative impact on local governments, taxpayers, and American workers," Watkins argues. "In addition, our poorly secured border puts us at risk for drugs, weapons, and terrorist smuggling."
A BREAKTHROUGH CANDIDATE IN A BREAKTHROUGH POLITICAL YEAR
Watkins' greatest strengths as a candidate are the clarity of his vision, the consistency of his platform, and his ability to put together a strong volunteer base. But there is also no denying that the favorable winds of 2010 are ideal for his candidacy.
STRONG FUNDRAISING
Watkins has proven to be an effective fundraiser, something which has been sorely needed in the 1st CD. In the 2008 Congressional race, incumbent Democrat Congressmen in our state faced the candidacies of six Republican challengers (including my own campaign!). None of us raised more than $79,000 over the course of the entire campaign.
This year, James Watkins has already raised $216,308 - and that's with four months to go in the campaign. He is one of four GOP Congressional challengers in the state to have raised $200,000 or more (the others are John Koster in the 2nd CD, Jaime Herrera in the 3rd CD, and David Castillo - also in the 3rd CD).
Watkins has already raised more than the 2004, 2006, and 2008 Republican 1st CD candidates combined, and more than any Republican challenger to Inslee since 2000.
The Watkins campaign has made effective use of the media, with two excellent radio ads http://bit.ly/cKRFUH, a presence on Twitter http://twitter.com/jamesWa
The district has been carried by Gore (53%) in 2000, Kerry (56%) in 2004, and Obama (62%) in 2008. But the proverbial political landscape has changed quite a bit. The infatuation with Obama no longer exists; instead the actual policies of the Obama administration and the Pelosi-Reid Congress (fully supported by Jay Inslee) are a negative factor for liberal incumbent Democrats.
ENDORSEMENTS
While the 1st CD went strongly for Obama (62%) on election day 2008, on that same day Attorney General Rob McKenna carried the district with 61% of the vote. That shows the potential for a strong candidate such as Watkins to replace Jay Inslee this year.
McKenna, by the way, is one of the endorsers of the Watkins campaign, and the campaign website features a YouTube video by McKenna regarding his endorsement. http://bit.ly/buSg0T
Other endorsers of James Watkins include Reagan Dunn, Kathy Lambert http://bit.ly/bjKcJi, Jane Hague, Kirby Wilbur, Toby Nixon, Dan L. Kennedy, Pastor Joe Fuiten, Suzanne Pak, Dan Michael, and many others. For a full list, see http://bit.ly/a0U9Tf
INSLEE DISTRACTED?
I mentioned above that Inslee is seeking his seventh consecutive term in Congress. But he also is seeking his eighth term in Congress, having served as Congressman from the 4th CD (Central Washington) for one term. He was elected in 1992, but defeated in the 1994 election by Republican Doc Hastings.
Seeking a more favorable political climate, Inslee left Central Washington for Bainbridge Island. Kicked out of Congress but still politically ambitious, Inslee sought the Democratic Party nomination for governor in 1996, but lost the Democratic primary to Gary Locke. There's little doubt that Inslee still has his eye on being governor.
In 1998, Inslee ran for Congress again, this time in the 1st CD. He received only 49.8% of the vote, but narrowly defeated Republican Congressman Rick White (44.1%) because of the presence of a third party candidate who took 6.1% of the vote. Inslee has been re-elected five times since then, but it is well known that he is considering a run for governor in 2012.
Inslee claims to be concerned about the federal deficit, national debt, and out of control spending - his online voters' guide statement complains about "ill-advised economic policies." But his record belies that concern. He voted for the so-called "stimulus" package. He voted for Obamacare. And while he voted against the TARP bailout in September 2008, he did so not because of concern about big government, but because he felt the TARP bill did not go far enough! http://bit.ly/aex5Oy
Despite his occasional rhetoric to the contrary, Inslee is no "deficit hawk." When he is outside of the 1st CD and inside the Beltway, he consistently and strictly follows the progressive agenda.
Also, earlier this year, there were media reports that the website domains jayinsleeforgovernor.com, jayinsleeforgovernor.org, and jayinsleeforgovernor.net have been secured by Christopher McCullough, a Democratic political operative who was Inslee's campaign manager in 2004 and 2006 (I verified this via searches at WhoIs.com).
Jay Inslee is out of touch with his district, with a diminishing link between the citizens and their Congressman. Increasingly distracted by his desire to be governor, Inslee is weak on traditional constituent services.
James Watkins, on the other hand, is just the type of leader the voters of the 1st CD need. Strong on the issues, energetic as a campaigner, and passionate about the Constitution, he'll be a great citizen legislator in the House of Representatives.
As he says in his campaign website article, The Constitution at a Crossroads, http://bit.ly/aj1mIX:
"[U]sing the Constitution as our guide, we can restore the proper role of government and trust the people once again. It’s time to choose which path you’ll take and what you’re willing to do about it. My choice is simple. I trust the people, and I choose the Constitution. And in November 2010, I believe a majority of Americans, Washingtonians, and voters in the 1st Congressional District will join me."
Comments
Well Said
Excellent article Steve. Watkins is a breakout candidate who will be an effective representative for the 1st CD. I met him at the same event where you met him, on a dismal drizzly afternoon where discouragement over the president's disastrous health care bill was lifted by the prospect of a viable candidate to face Inslee. Since then, Watkins has been consistently friendly, gracious and honest. I have never had the sense I was talking to a politician; just a neighbor who cares deeply about our wonderful nation.
His education (MBA from George Washington University), his experience managing a bank, working for the FDIC & as a business consultant uniquely qualify him for the historic economic challenges our nation is facing. Even so, he is always studying and learning more in order to be even better prepared for the he challenges he will face in Washington. Inslee sometimes sounds like he already has all the answers and he's not interested in our ideas. James, sincerely cares what we think.
I think you captured him very well in your article, Steve.
Thanks for writing it.
Jeanie
breakout candidate
Yes, Jeanie, I agree. James Watkins is a "breakout candidate" with an excellent chance to replace Jay Inslee in 2010. Thanks for pointing out additional aspects of his background and character.
Inslee's no Watkins
I remember when Inslee was elected to the 4th Congressional District in SE Washington. He ran as a strong second amendment supporter, but then after being elected, he voted for every gun control measure to come across his desk. Not surprisingly, hunting being popular in the SE part of the State, Inslee found his political career suddenly over there.
As congressman for the 1st CD, I've found Inslee to be a great politician, but a terrible representative. His office agreed to notify me when he has a local town meeting, but after showing up and challenging him on his liberal spending policies, I found I was no longer notified of scheduled town meetings. During debate on the health care reform bill, Inslee suspended traditional town meetings and held telephone town meetings instead, where his staff could prescreen questions. Cowardice is no way to represent your constituents.
I asked Inslee at a recent town meeting why he insists on voting for increased spending and taxes during a time of national and international economic crisis, Increasing the national debt and discouraging job creation, but he was unable to justify such reckless spending policies.
Unlike Inslee, a career politician who's never run a business, Watkins has professional experience in creating jobs and reducing waste. Rather than spend taxpayer money during an economic decline, he knows what needs to be done to restart the economy and create jobs. He's what we need to get Washington working again. Watkins will be a refreshing change to Inslee and a true representative of the people in the 1st Congressional District. I for one welcome the change.
insight into Inslee
John, I appreciate your insights about Inslee. And keep holding his feet to the fire!
Inslee is not for the people, he is for his own interests!
I lost all faith in Inslee when the first part of that stinky Obamacare came out. I downloaded the first 1000 pages to my computer and read through most of the first 600 or so pages (until it made me violently ill!). I copied and pasted sections of the bill with questions and sent them to Murray, Inslee and Cantwell. I posted the section where Congress and the House exempted themselves from the bill and asked them why. If it wasn't good enough for them, why was it "good enough" for us? All I ever got from all three of them was canned, "Isn't this bill just wonderful?" messages. Just before the voting, I asked them if they had read the bill. No answers except "this bill is SO wonderful!" If he can't be bothered to read the bill, or demand that the bill be posted for the five days Obama promised, then who is he really representing? I went to one of his town hall meetings and he glossed over concerns and questions from the crowd. he has lost touch with the people who voted him in, time for him to go. (as well as Murray in November and Cantwell in 2012.)
Remember in November!
Pat, the frustration and anger (and "violently ill" feelings!) you are experiencing with Jay Inslee, Patty Murray, et al are shared by millions of other citizens throughout the nation. Remember in November! (And, meanwhile, don't forget to vote for James Watkins in July or August! - ballots must be mailed by August 17).
Pat's Research
I am a retired government Program Analyst. I do not know Pat, but I also downloaded the full bills of house and Senate and spent hundreds of hours of analysis on those bills. I also marked up, commented on, and asked questions to Congressman Inslee and Senator Murray. The replies I received were generalities and stock answers (boiler plate) given to all constituents, and not one specific answer to any specific question. After doing this twice, I gave up that fruitless effort to help....and all I can do is offer my support and hope that we can elect someone who reads what we write and listens to those countrymen who elect them.
Inslee/Murray: arrogance
The arrogance of politicians like Jay Inslee and Patty Murray is a slap in the face to the citizens of this state.
Really??
Fundraising? I am a senior at UDub and I saw James Watkins and Matthew Burke debate there. I asked Mr. Watkins about his "fundraising". The author of this piece fails to point out that Mr. Watkins has put in over $150,000 of is own money and lumps that in with the "fundraising" amount. I know this because i asked Mr Watkins directly in front of the audience during the Q&A.
I've seen two debates and just heard John Carlson's radio debate. Matthew Burke destroys James Watkins the few times I've seen and heard. Watkins only speaks in generalities, platitudes and without specifics. Mr. Burke appears to be way more open, honest, and substantive. A couple classmates and I think Mr. Burke is much more competent. Did the author of this piece interview Matthew Burke as well? Interested to hear if you have done your due diligence in finding who the best candidate is before endorsing Watkins.
Your reasons may be based on electability like the Dino Rossi argument (Diddier's better, but Rossi is more electable). That's fine, I get that (i guess) but Watkins is just passionless, almost weak. I just see Inslee eating Watkins up and would prefer a substantive, passionate fighter. Thanks for letting me post.
John Carlson endorsed Watkins
David L., thanks for your comments. My support for Watkins is for the reasons expressed in the article - his strong conservative stance on the issues, his devotion to the Constitution, and his grassroots activism.
I've met Matthew Burke, chatted with him briefly about the campaign, and have heard him speak several times.
Regarding the John Carlson Show debate yesterday: I listened to the entire broadcast. While Burke was glib and fast on his feet, many of his comments were disingenuous and off-base. He did not focus on Jay Inslee, but rather aimed his fire at Watkins. And Burke, rather than candidly and objectively state his disagreements with Watkins, has wildly exaggerated and misrepresented several issues, falsely accusing Watkins of being a "progressive liberal." Burke also said that if Watkins advanced to the general election, he (Burke) would not support Watkins against Inslee. (Watkins, to his credit, said that he would support Burke against Inslee if Burke advanced to the general election).
John Carlson himself has endorsed James Watkins, joining other leading conservatives and Republicans such as Kirby Wilbur, Reagan Dunn, Rob McKenna, Kathy Lambert, Dan L. Kennedy (pro-life leader), Toby Nixon, Dan Michael (of the Puget Sound Conservative Underground), Alan Gottlieb (gun rights activist), Suzanne Pak (Tea Party activist), and Pastor Joe Fuiten. Watkins has also been endorsed by the Snohomish County Republican Party, the Gun Owners Action League of Washington, and the American Conservative Union PAC. Hardly the type of people and groups that would endorse a "progressive liberal."
Regarding fundraising, according to the FEC, through July 28, 2010, James Watkins has raised $239,013. Of this, the FEC says, $110,000 is from the candidate. Also, as of July 28, the Watkins campaign has $23,544 cash on hand.
The Burke campaign, according to the FEC, as of July 28, has raised $49,500. Of this amount, the FEC says that $27,000 is from the candidate.
In other words, 54.5% of the Burke campaign income came from Burke himself, while only 46.0% of the Watkins campaign income came from Watkins himself. So Watkins has raised more than four times as much money than Burke. And Watkins has self-financed to a lesser degree (percentage-wise) than Burke.
Also, as of July 28, the FEC says that the Watkins campaign has $23,544 cash on hand. But the report filed by the Burke campaign says that as of July 28 they are in the red - their own report says that their cash on hand is minus $5,212!
Who cares who has more money,
Who cares who has more money, since when are the seats for sale. How on earth did we ever get to the point where we decided that it was the mark of a "serious" or otherwise responsible candidate to quit his job in this kind of an economy to go on an interview (election).
The only thing that the "leaders" you mention support is slick presentation. They could not have done their homework AND chosen Watkins. IF they are TRUE "conservatives" they can't choose anyone except Burke. Watkins is NOT conservative, he is merely using the Republican label to get the office. I heard him say that myself, in private of course. Still, if you listen to what he says it is clear enough, he is one compromise toward liberalism after another. He is too much of a snake to be honest with the public or his supporters and tell them who he really is. Hopefully Inslee will bring it out and win. Then we can replace Inslee in 2012 with a REAL conservative.
defeating Jay Inslee
"Anonymous," you write, "Hopefully Inslee will bring it out and win."
My objective is to defeat and replace progressive liberal incumbent Democrats such as Jay Inslee, Patty Murray, Rick Larsen, etc.
Burke vs. Watkins
I agree. I too have seen them both speak. Infact, I have had the opportunity to know and work with both men so we have been in personal situations, and I have been absolutely SICKENED by Mr. Watkins shameful personal character, as well as his lack of actual knowledge. He has some folks who do decent research for him, be he is all fluff. Just like the puppets in WA DC, Watkins too is desperate to be in office and is happy to be owned by the PACs, get their money, and serve himself. Sick, sick sick! Shameful!
Although I consider myself a lifetime Republican, I will NOT support Watkins, I will cast my first vote for a Democrat in 40 years. I will also do whatever honorable things I can do for Mr. Inslee to do to keep Mr. Watkins, "The Snake" out of our county's seat! What makes me really sad is that there are so many Republicans all over the district who have not done their homework and have simply followed party leaders who are more focused on slick presentation than genuine conservative ideology. Mr. Burke would have been a far better choice. Instead these "leaders" of ours blindly follow Watkins, to our death I predict.
I should have gotten off my behind and worked for Mr. Burke, it is too late now and I have no one to blame but myself, and all the others who made the same summer 2010 choice I did. I just thought it was so obvious that Burke was a more conservative choice and that Watkins false front was so transparent. Well it won't happen again, next time I will be on my feet serving my country and my candidate.
vote against progressive liberal Jay Inslee
"Anonymous," you write, "I will cast my first vote for a Democrat in 40 years. I will also do whatever honorable things I can do for Mr. Inslee...."
I recommend otherwise. My goal is repeal and replace Obamacare, and to defeat and replace progressive liberal candidates such as Jay Inslee, Patty Murray, and Rick Larsen.
I urge you to reconsider.
Are you serious Steve?
Steve,
I was having a conversation with you on James Watkins facebook page, and was giving you my reason why I was supporting Matthew Burke, rather than James Watkins. You stated that you interviewed James for approx. 2 hours. Did you give Matthew the same courtesy? Apparently, James didn't care for my comments regarding why I felt that Matthew was the most conservative candidate against Jay Inslee, because he UN-FRIENDED me on facebook and removed my comment. Do you really want to support a candidate that doesn't like open and honest debate?
I, along with 30-40 other people were at a candidate forum a couple of months ago, where James Watkins was a guest. We asked very specific questions. I can tell you that NO ONE in the room was going to vote for James Watkins after the question and answer period. You quoted James as saying "I trust the people, and I choose the Constitution." We specifically asked James if he would support an unconstitutional bill. He said that if there was something in it that was beneficial to children, he would. Steve, James Watkins flat out stated that he would SUPPORT AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL BILL!!!! I can give you names and phone numbers of the people who heard him say this. So, did James have a sudden change of heart? Or is he waffling on this issue? I do not trust him to tell me the truth. Matthew Burke does not waffle on any issues. You know exactly where he stands. I cannot say the same about James Watkins. Do yourself a favor Steve, and have a 2 hour interview with Matthew Burke. For me, I vote principal, not party politics.
Watkins vs. Inslee
Adrienne,
I support James Watkins for the reasons discussed in the article. I also refer you to a new article posted by Watkins yesterday, here on RedCounty - see http://redcounty.com/content/good-government-real-issue-0
I have followed the 1st CD campaign to replace incumbent Democrat Jay Inslee since the fall of 2009, when Watkins campaign was just beginning. As I said in the article, "Ever since Watkins officially announced his candidacy back in November, I've been impressed with his campaign's ability to assemble an effective and substantial team of grassroots volunteers and activists. Watkins himself is a citizen activist, not a professional politician - I met Watkins in the fall of 2009 at a protest against the government takeover of the healthcare system."
I urge all RedCounty readers to judge for themselves. Go to the James Watkins campaign website at http://www.WatkinsForCongress.com and the Watkins YouTube page at http://www.youtube.com/user/jameswatkinscongress#p/a
Also, I urge people to look at the websites and videos of the incumbent Jay Inslee and the other candidates.
I am confident that the vast majority of people, looking objectively at the Watkins campaign website and videos, will have no doubt that he is a strong conservative, consistent advocate of liberty, and a defender of the U.S. Constitution.
That's why James Watkins has been endorsed by Bryan Suits, John Carlson, Kirby Wilbur, Reagan Dunn, Rob McKenna, Kathy Lambert, pro-life leader Dan L. Kennedy, Toby Nixon, Dan Michael, gun rights activist Alan Gottlieb, Suzanne Pak, Pastor Joe Fuiten, the Snohomish County GOP, the Gun Owners Action League of Washington, and the American Conservative Union PAC.
Adrienne, I understand that you support another candidate, and I respect your right to do so. I am familiar with Matthew Burke's candidacy, but he has not established himself as a viable candidate. According to the Federal Election Commission website, Burke has not raised much money, and in fact his campaign cash on hand is minus - in the red - to the tune of over $5,000.
Burke entered the race after Watkins had already established himself as a strong grassroots candidate - despite Watkins' conservative credentials, despite Watkins' proven ability to focus all his fire on the incumbent Democrat Jay Inslee, and despite Watkins' accumulation of a large volunteer base.
In the last days of the primary campaign, it has become even more clear that James Watkins is absolutely an excellent and superior candidate compared to Jay Inslee. And Watkins is properly and effectively concentrating all his efforts against the incumbent.
Although we disagree, I say go ahead and vote for the candidate of your choice. But then....
After the August 17 primary, let's all agree to unite behind whichever Republican candidate advances to the general election against Jay Inslee, even if he is not our first choice, and even if we don't necessarily agree with him on every issue.
Can we agree on that?
Absolutely NOT! Watkins is
Absolutely NOT! Watkins is NOT a conservative. Haven't you been listening. He is the worst kind of republican, fake. He only pretends to be republican, he's really a Watkininan, that is all for himself, not us! I would like to suggest you pay a bit more attention Steve to what the people are saying to you. Even after most of the results are in, I can honestly say I too will go to the other side and support a misguided democrat before I support a sneaky, republican liar.
don't vote for "misguided Democrats"
Jeanney K., you write, "I can honestly say I too will go to the other side and support a misguided democrat..."
You have the right to vote for Jay Inslee, but such an action is not consistent with sound conservative political strategy. You are right that the "other side" is "misguided," so it makes no sense to vote for them.
This year, we have a chance to win against such incumbent Democrats as Jay Inslee, Patty Murray, Rick Larsen, Adam Smith, etc. I strongly recommend that you reconsider your intention to vote for Jay Inslee.
Rather, I urge you to vote for James Watkins, even if he was not your first choice, and even if you disagree with him on some issues. Let's elect Dino Rossi to the U.S. Senate, and let's work to elect James Watkins, John Koster, Jaime Herrera, Dick Muri, and other conservative Republicans to the U.S. Congress this year.
Steve, The campaign is not
Steve,
The campaign is not $5,000 in the hole as you and other Watkins supporters have been stating. (Interesting, I wonder who is feeding multiple people that kind of information to post.) I asked our accountant when she filed why it said that. She informed me that it was simply taking into account expenditures vs intake in July without having June deposits in consideration.
Additionally, your response to Adrienne has absolutely nothing to do with her post. It is really just restating much of what you did in the article, not addressing what she has stated in hearing Watkins himself say that he would support an unconstitutional bill.
FEC report of cash on hand; general election
Jennifer,
I have obtained the cash on hand figure of "minus $5,212" directly from the FEC website's summary of the "pre-primary" reports (i.e., the reports covering donations, other income, and expenses from July 1, 2010 to July 28, 2010). I did this for all of the non-incumbent Republican federal candidates in our state for a note posted on Facebook on August 11. I have re-posted it on my Facebook wall just now for your reference.
It sounds like the campaign treasurer should submit an amended report. Any income (deposits) from June should have been included in the previous ("second quarter") report (covering April 1, 2010 through June 30, 2010). An amended report should clear up any erroneous information about the Burke campaign's actual cash on hand.
During the course of the campaign, I have enjoyed meeting you and Matthew, and wish you only the best.
I support James Watkins for the reasons stated in my article, and in my discussion thread replies. Long before Matthew got into the race, I recognized Watkins as a strong conservative candidate and therefore endorsed him early on. I have not had any reason to change my favorable opinion of James Watkins.
On August 17, the voters of the 1st CD will decide which candidate will be on the ballot in the general election against Jay Inslee. Of course, we all think our favored candidate is the most qualified and best on the issues, but the ultimate decision belongs to the people. Especially in the current pro-liberty and pro-conservative atmosphere, I am confident that the voters of the 1st CD will choose James Watkins as the best candidate to offer a sharp contrast to the progressive liberal incumbent Democrat Jay Inslee.
No matter what, in the general election I will support whichever Republican advances past the primary, even if he is not my first choice, and even if I disagree with him on some issues.
Can we agree on that?
Wrong again Steve. Folks
Wrong again Steve. Folks don't always simply prefer and support the candidate of their choice. I am actually a Schirle supporter, he is the REAL conservative in the crowd and he has the sense to stay away from any kind of party influence. However, Mr. Burke is a decent person with a good heart and he would SERVE the people. Mr. Watkins is simply a replacement for the problems we already have in WA DC, he is no different. The best thing about Mr. Watkins is his very pleasant wife. As for substance, he has none.
support the candidate of your choice
Jeanney K., in an earlier post you wrote, "I can honestly say I too will go to the other side and support a misguided democrat..."
You have the right to vote for Jay Inslee, but such an action is not consistent with sound conservative political strategy. You are right that the "other side" is "misguided," so it makes no sense to vote for them.
The dictionary definition of misguided is "led or prompted by wrong or inappropriate motives or ideals." So, if you vote for Jay Inslee, you are (by your own choice of words) allowing yourself to be "led or prompted by wrong or inappropriate motives or ideals "
don't take my word for it!
Don't take my word for it regarding James Watkins, Jay Inslee, and the other candidates.
As I said in one of my earlier comments in this discussion thread:
"I urge all RedCounty readers to judge for themselves. Go to the James Watkins campaign website at http://www.WatkinsForCongress.com and the Watkins YouTube page at http://www.youtube.com/user/jameswatkinscongress#p/a
Also, I urge people to look at the websites and videos of the incumbent Jay Inslee and the other candidates."
Also, for even further clarification and information, I refer people to the recent RedCounty article by James Watkins, entitled "Good Government is the Real Issue," available online at http://redcounty.com/content/good-government-real-issue-0
"It has been frequently remarked that it seems to have been reserved to the people of this country, by their conduct and example, to decide the important question, whether societies of men are really capable or not of establishing good government from reflection and choice, or whether they are forever destined to depend for their political constitutions on accident and force." - Alexander Hamilton, first paragraph of Federalist Papers #1. Source: http://www.foundingfathers.info/federalistpapers/
The Case of the Disappearing Comments on Watkins' Article
Steve,
I'm curious, what happened to all of the comments that had been posted on the Watkins' article? There were comments there, now all of a sudden this morning there were 0 comments. Quite questionable if you ask me. Reminds me of comments from his Facebook fan page that I have heard from people that were deleted when they began challenging him on his position on issues and the fact that he has said he would support an unconstitutional bill.
Watkins' Stifling Discussion/Debate
I now understand why Watkins' article showed 0 comments this morning. He deleted it, then re-posted this morning because he didn't like the debate that was going on where again his stance/waffling on the issues was being discussed. Even more so, I guess he didn't want the fact that he told a group that he would support an unconstitutional bill to get out. (Note, he deleted similar posts from his Facebook fan page.)
For someone who supposedly believes in free speech and who claims that he has the "courage to take on Inslee" to go to such drastic measures to silence opposition is beyond hypocritical. It is sad and weak. Venture over to Matthew's article and find the vile, some bordering on slanderous, comments that are being made about him. The difference? Matthew simply responds to them. He doesn't delete them as James Watkins has done. (Though I shouldn't be surprised at his cowardly response given the constant behind the scenes personal attacks that his supporters have done throughout the campaign to undermine Matthew.)
Going to DC to exact a real change in standing up to the radical, progressive agenda and attack on the very fiber of our nation is not going to be a cake walk. Given his response when challenged and called out on the issues, James Watkins lacks the integrity and strength to stand up to those who are systematically destroying our republic.
RedCounty.com "diary" and "commentary"
Jennifer,
I think it has to do with the technical side of the RedCounty website. The article was evidently moved from the "diaries" section to the "commentaries" section (putting the article in the "current feed" for the applicable counties). The discussion thread evidently was lost in the transition - no conspiracy involved. I'm sure the RedCounty technical people can verify this.
Interesting
So, was it a "technical issue" that caused Adrienne's comments to disappear from Watkins' Facebook page, too?
Steve
Steve,
I respect you opinion of James Watkins. Really, I do. Several times I have tried to debate you on issues regarding James Watkins, but I just keep getting the same old platitudes from you. Why won't you address my comments or concerns? You keep telling me that he is strong on upholding the Constitution, and I, along with 30-40 people heard him flat out state that HE WOULD SUPPORT AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL BILL. This is not the first time he has flipped on an issues and I have PROOF. Why would you support a person that does not have solid conservative values and waffles on the issues?
unity vs. progressive liberal Jay Inslee
Adrienne,
I have followed the James Watkins campaign from early on, and it is crystal clear to me that he is a strong conservative, and a strong supporter of the constitution.
Go to http://www.watkinsforcongress.com/issues/the-constitution an and take a look at his Watkins' article entitled "The Constitution at a Crossroads":
"The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution are the core documents I look to as the base of my political philosophy. But the Constitution - the original Contract with America – is the foundation of our governmental system. It’s a binding contract between the American people and our government. It recognizes our individual rights and freedoms and grants to government limited, yet specifically enumerated powers.
"The Constitution came out of the searing experience of the struggle for independence from the reign of King George III. Our Founders recognized the potential of centralized power to produce tyranny. And they did an amazing thing - they gave up an opportunity to consolidate their own personal power and impose a big, centralized government. Instead, they created a new form of government and crafted a divinely inspired document that’s a marvel of wisdom and balance...."
In the current political atmosphere, the voters are looking for pro-liberty, pro-constitution candidates. They are looking for an alternative to the progressive liberal incumbent Democrat Jay Inslee.
I believe the voters of the 1st CD will choose James Watkins as a strong conservative candidate who offers a clear alternative and stark contrast to Inslee. Watkins has proven to the voters that he is strong on the issues, and that he is a serious challenger who is totally focused on replacing Jay Inslee.
I understand that you feel differently about Watkins, but I think the voters will consider him a pro-constitution, pro-liberty candidate, and that they will vote for him in large numbers, sending him to the general election.
You and I disagree on choice of candidates, but on August 17 the voters will have their say in the only poll that matters.
After August 17, can you and I agree to work in unity to unseat the progressive liberal Jay Inslee by supporting whichever Republican advances to the general election (even if he is not our first choice)?
Steve, You Still Don't Address Adrienne's Point/Concern
Steve, I'm sure I can speak for Adrienne when I say you STILL do not address her comments or concerns. Referring to an article that Watkins wrote about the "Constitution at a Crossroads" is all well and good. However, those are just words on a screen. The point that you are not addressing is this, and I quote from Adrienne:
"You keep telling me that he is strong on upholding the Constitution, and I, along with 30-40 people heard him flat out state that HE WOULD SUPPORT AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL BILL. This is not the first time he has flipped on an issues and I have PROOF."
words on a campaign website
Words on a campaign website mean a lot. Each candidate should be evaluated on the totality of their campaign literature text, media appearances, TV/radio commercials, newspaper interviews, YouTube videos, speeches, one-on-one discussions while going door-to-door, campaign website content, and voters' guide statement.
I'm sure the thousands of voters who have heard the candidates, read their flyers, watched their videos, visited their campaign websites, and reviewed their voters' guide statements will formulate an overall opinion of each candidate (based on the totality of their interactions with the voters).
In my opinion, anyone who objectively and carefully reviews the totality of the campaigns of the various candidates will come to the conclusion that Jay Inslee is a progressive liberal, that James Watkins is a pro-constitution conservative, and that there is a sharp and stark contrast between the two.
To call James Watkins a "progressive liberal" and to imply that he is against the constitution is simply not credible. You are entitled to your opinion about Watkins' conservative credentials, but on August 17 the voters of the 1st CD will indicate their opinion of this matter. The voters will decide who they consider conservative and who they consider liberal. And the voters will decide which conservative candidate will advance to the general election.
After August 17, Republicans and conservatives should unite around the winning Republican candidate. We should work together to defeat the progressive liberal incumbent Democrat Jay Inslee. Sure, in any contested primary there will be disappointed candidates and disappointed campaign supporters. But let's not lose sight of the effort to gain a Republican majority in the U.S. House of Representatives, ousting Nancy Pelosi as Speaker, and strengthening the efforts to limit government, reduce spending, lower taxes, and repeal Obamacare.
As James Watkins says in the voters' guide:
"I'll bring common sense policies to Congress to boost job creation. And, I'll fight to stop spending money we don't have, streamline government, honor our veterans, and end the influence of special interests. I will work for you, not the lobbyists. I have the support of Attorney General Rob McKenna and thousands of Republicans, Democrats, and independents who want to create real jobs, respect Constitutional freedoms, and restore fiscal responsibility in Washington DC. With your vote, we can restore the promise of the American dream for our children and grandchildren."
Post new comment