State Rep Candidate, Ann Rivers, “Cleans Up” Her Act

“Troubling concerns” continue to surface regarding Ann Rivers, who is running for State Representative in Washington’s 18th Legislative District. Considering that Washington’s Primary Election is just one week away and that many (like me) have already mailed in their ballots, it’s a shame that these “troubling concerns” didn’t come to light earlier.

Lately, the “troubling concerns” that have come to light about Rivers mostly fall under the heading of “The Company She Keeps”, a topic I first addressed in an article entitled Ann Rivers – Republican or Democrat? – The Label Doesn’t Matter to Her – She Just Wants Her “Next Step”. Four days after I posted a follow-up article, The Columbian published a related article, entitled “Guilt by association?” Since The Columbian and the Author of this article, Lou Brancaccio, continue to endorse Rivers’ candidacy, this surprised me a bit. In retrospect, it seems to me that this was the result of a poorly devised attempt to put the most positive spin possible on the related disturbing revelations and perhaps, to diffuse some of the focus on these matters. In any case, Brancaccio’s article provided affirmation of the concerns I had raised, under the heading of “The Company She Keeps”. Although Brancaccio summarized that Rivers’ was only guilty of “a little naivete” and both he and The Columbian chose to continue their endorsement of Rivers, they followed up by running a poll, aimed at determining if this sort of “Guilt by association?” really mattered to voters. The latest results of this poll showed that 1096 votes had been cast and that 724 votes (66%) responded in the affirmative. In other words, “Yes, ‘The Company She Keeps’ does matter!”

Most recently, Brancaccio published a follow-up article, entitled “Creating distance from a problem”. I guess this is supposed to indicate that Rivers has responded to the related legitimate criticisms that have been leveled at her. In that article, Brancaccio states that Rivers’ most despicable associate had been “kicked to the curb”. His evidence of that? … Rivers stated that this “acerbic, controversial blogger would no longer be driving in her campaign’s parades” and that, on her Facebook page, she had unfriended “a fake name (he) used throughout his political operative work to attack those he doesn’t like.” As you might expect, many comments were left on that article, emphasizing the lameness of Brancaccio’s hypothesis. One of the best of these, mostly, reiterated what Brancaccio, himself, had said previously:

“Holy smoke, Lou! In your “Guilt by association” article, you concluded that Rivers was “naive.” I commented that, in Rivers’ case “naive” was a euphemism for “”disingenuous.” “Naive”, at least, applies to your conclusion here. I’m not sure what the right term is when you weave in what another Commenter said about you being “smitten with Rivers”, but combining that sense with the word “naive” seems like a more accurate term. You seem to be OK with the metaphor that “if you lay down with dogs, you are going to get fleas” being a fitting one for Rivers and her relationship with (him). Well, not only is it true that “(He) has a lot of fleas”, Rivers was laying there with him for a looooooong time. Do you, seriously, expect us to believe that (his) no longer driving in Rivers’ parades and her unfriending one of his alter egos on Facebook is a satisfactory enough “flea treatment” to merit your ongoing endorsement?!”

One thought I would add to that is this: In this same article, Rivers was quoted as saying she wouldn’t speak at all to her personal friendship, “What I do in my personal life is my business.” With that understood, I’d admonish anyone still considering voting for Rivers to also consider that, if this “Creating distance from a problem” fools enough voters to get her elected, you should expect that it wouldn’t be long before Rivers’ “flea infestation” returns.

Finally, since the “Creating distance from a problem” article appeared in The Columbian, someone with a hatred for Rivers’ current rival for State Representative, Jon Russell, has continued their sleazy attack. A few days ago, I was sent a link to an update on this – http://kellyhintonwatch.blogspot.com/2010/08/ann-rivers-dirtiest-campaign-attack-on.html. The Author asserts that this comes from Rivers’ campaign or from the associate she claims to have “kicked to the curb” or from Rivers herself. I don’t know the facts of who is behind this but, if you’re still considering who to vote for, as your State Representative in Washington’s 18th Legislative District, you should ask yourself, “Does it make sense to vote for someone who is OK with being associated with this sort of old-style politics instead of condemning it and doing all in her power to put it to an end?!”