1. What's the purpose of this drivel? You would have been better served just pointing out the connection with the smear campaign against pope, and Young and Stiletto's actions.

Posted by: swatter on October 9, 2007 08:57 AM

2. Is it just me... or do Doug and Richard Pope share a lot of the same qualities. Doug's two-faced vitriol is no better than Richard's incompetence and mental instability. He decries character assassination at one moment and engages in the lowest form at the next. No wonder Doug is standing up for Richard. Doug didn't ram through his extremist, asinine planks on the platform committee... thank God! We are all much better for it. Both Richard and Doug are wannabe politicians whose social skills leave a lot to be desired. They can rant and rave with the best of them but have never been able to convince more than a few crazies to join them. Go back to your prehistoric cave Doug and let Mr. Pope know he isn't welcome in either party.

Posted by: Marko on October 9, 2007 09:37 AM

3. I am not in your camp Marko.

While I decry those Reaganites, who claim to be Republicans but threaten those who don't agree with their philosophy, by not voting Republican.

I also think there is bad blood at the party level. The party leaders should not be castigating the Doug Parris' of the party. They should be embraced. I know it may be hard considering the obstinance and inability to bend, but still.

And marko, I will agree that it is funny you lumped a die hard Democrat- Pope- with a die hard Republican- Parris.

Posted by: swatter on October 9, 2007 02:23 PM

4. Why should Doug Parris be embraced? Everyone believes in pluralism, big-tent conservatism, etc. This is a nice, warm idea that there is room even for Doug Parris in the party. The problem is that he is not reciprocal. What if a miracle were to happen and someone like Doug would get elected to something (anything!). It's as crazy a scenario as any, I know, but if it were to happen he would be so confrontational and abrasive it would scare people away. And he would love it. Because he regards 90% of people in the party as RINOs because they don't adhere to his strict, personal interpretation of conservative orthodoxy. And anyone who disagrees with him on anything is immediately branded in his own mind as a liberal who's out to get him. Paranoia. Erratic behavior. Delusions of grandeur. Personal attacks. This is Doug Parris's MO. And, no, there is no room for that in the party. The party's collectively said as much, repeatedly. :)

Posted by: AD on October 9, 2007 06:36 PM

5. I don't approve of this piece by Doug for various reasons, but I did want to add that there is one clear misstatement of fact on the Truth On Pope site: In March of this year Richard claimed, "I warned Bush in January 2001 John McKay can not be trusted"

That links to a Sound Politics discussion in which Richard actually wrote: I warned Bush in January 2001 that Mike McKay could not be trusted. (emphasis added)

Very odd error.

Posted by: pudge on October 10, 2007 01:24 AM

6. I can't express how impressed I am with post #4 by AD. The intended meaning of literally every sentence is untrue.

Do you know how hard it is to write an entire cogent paragraph and have everything you say be false?

My hat is off to you AD.

You're new to me, "Marko." Have you posted under a different name? If not, that is a great first attempt. Did you use your mother's lighter on the family puppy as a child?

Posted by: Doug Parris on October 10, 2007 02:13 AM

7. Mr. Parris and I don't agree on much this election cycle, but in the past, I have always respected and liked opinionated and principled people. Goes for the other side, too.

You have to realize, too, that the Parriss' of the party are also the volunteers and hard-workers. If you alienate them, then you will have to volunteer.

Sometimes, and this may be one of them (I think it is), where the good of the country has to be put on hold to avoid a Democratic president.

Everyone puts up a good fight and at the end, we all work to destroy Democrats. At least during this election cycle.

Doug Parris, I read AD and don't think he told a lie( i.e. everything false) but just gave his opinion, but you need to reread your lead-in story.

Posted by: swatter on October 10, 2007 09:10 AM

8. Swatter, I've admired most of your posts and in general think you're a pretty smart guy. That's why I want to point out something you may not know about Doug Parris. He's the farthest thing from being a hard-worker and volunteer for the party. All I've ever seen him do is bad mouth other Republicans and do all he can to see that they're not elected. I'm not saying he likes Democrats anymore but he sure isn't one of those people who, although they may be uber-right, still does a lot of doorbelling, sign posting, etc. I'd be highly surprised if Doug has ever put up one sign for one of our major candidates (Rossi, McGavick, etc.)
He is an absolutely deplorable person and he has no place in polite society, let alone Republican politics. He's a violent, tax dodging, slum lord of the same vein as Pope (and on that, Marko, you are absolutely correct). I don't think Pope or Parris are Republicans or Democrats. They're just opportunists that want to see their names up in lights and enjoy causing commotion.

Posted by: WarmFuzzyPuppies on October 10, 2007 09:41 AM

9. WarmFuzzyPuppies Sometimes I think its a good idea
before we throw stones at someone else too look in
the mirror. Now I have known Doug Parris for several
years and he is not the person you described. If you
ever bothered to take the time to get to know him
you would see that.Instead what you have done is
engage in the kind of things you accuse Doug of.

What proof do you have that he and Richard Pope
are slum lords?Where have you observed Doug or Richard being violent? How do you know they are
tax dodgers?These are pretty serious allegations
that you have made.

As to Michael Young, Doug has written a number of
articles about Mr Young. Most of the comments I
have ever read regarding these articles don't ever
try and defend Michael Young. They simply attack
Doug, I have to wonder why that is?

Doug is not the one who tries to silence people that don't agree with him.Who was it that told
Phil Fortunato at the 2005 King Gop Convention
that he couldn't hand out a brochure that pointed
out the differences between he and Pete Von Reichbauer.That if he did hand it out that the
delegates would not be permitted to vote for him?

Who was it that told Edwina Johnston that if she
handed out a flier that spelled out what was wrong
with the King County council redistricting and who
she believed was responsible for it that he would
have her arrested or thrown out of the King Gop
2005 summer picnic? It wasn't Doug Parris that's
right it was Michael Young.These are just a couple
of examples. WarmFuzzypuppies you have know idea
what Doug does or doesn't do during an election
season so please stop acting like your some
authority about Doug's activities.

Marko and Warmfuzzypuppies I know what I'm about
to say will be a waste of time but I will say
anyway. What if Doug Parris is telling the truth?
What if he is? Then I sure wouldn't want to be one
of you.

Posted by: Phil Spackman on October 10, 2007 12:25 PM

10. Why did Parris choose to slam Young at this time? I see no overriding interest, except, perhaps, did Young authorize or was involved with the Pope smear, which I disagree with?

If so, why is a Republican siding with a Democrat?

And people wonder why having a moderate Republican is such a bad thing.

Posted by: swatter on October 10, 2007 03:13 PM

11. As long as it's your character he's assassinating Doug, I'll give him a pass.

I can't express how impressed I am with post #4 by AD. The intended meaning of literally every sentence is untrue.

Believe that if you like. Your undoubtedly diluted enough to do just that. But 90% of everyone who knows who you are agrees with him.

Posted by: cliff on October 11, 2007 10:56 AM

12. I can't recall the last time Doug Parris lifted a finger for a Republican candidate other than Reed Davis' failed bid against George Nethercutt in the 2004 Primary. Oh, and I think he tried to help Ruth Gibbs in one of her failed bids for King County Chairman. Other than those failed, lackluster attempts, Doug has done nothing but scourge and denigrate Republican candidates that don't partake in his rigid political philosophy. The Doug Parris' of this world sit on their ass and do nothing for the party but wail and moan over its lack of Nazi-like purity. We must differentiate between the conservative Christian wing of the Republican Party and the hate-filled, racist, purist buffoonery of Doug Parris republicanism, which is not welcome in our party.

Posted by: Marko on October 11, 2007 11:09 AM

13. Marko,

So here we go again, you site no proof to back
up what your saying about Doug Parris. With all
the races that were in contest how can you
possibly know what Mr Parris actually did?
How do you know he is a racist?Here you make no attempt
at defending Michael Young. Instead you launch
into this hate filled tirade against Mr Parris.

I would like for you and warmfuzzypuppies to
tell us all how you know things about Doug.
But I know you won't because you cant. One more
time instead of throwing stones at someone else
look in the mirror first.

Posted by: Phil Spackman on October 11, 2007 01:59 PM

14. Parris & Spackman hang out together so you can understand Spackman's spirited defense of him.

Seems like Parris is always trying to ascertain how many Republican angels can dance on the head of a pin and "purity of principles" is all he recognizes.

Posted by: John425 on October 11, 2007 02:25 PM

15. Don't you mean John 420?

Posted by: Doug Parris on October 11, 2007 05:25 PM

16. Doug and Phil and Ruth Gibbs and Pope are all fringe whack jobs with no tolerance of differing views, even if we work toward the same goal. All they ever do is attack Republicans and call for the destruction of the KCGOP. Here's an idea- why don't you focus your energies on electing R's who can win and maybe start hitting some D's. The KCGOP is doing this (their job, by the way) and the crazies lose their minds. Some more tips:

Phil - will you PLEASE learn to type like a normal person without the grammatical and spacing issues? Oh, and what ever happened to your sick fasination with Susan Hutchison? I've spoken with her about you... and she's pretty creeped out.

Doug - Find a new hobby. Your obsession with Pope (a DEMOCRAT) is a little odd, maybe you should ask him out, or would that go against your position on gentleman relationships?

Ruth - quit hanging out with these fools and leaking every happening of Executive Committee meetings to them - we all know its you...

Pope - try not to attack anymore women or hide your clear mental instabilty. I admit I checked out the cite and it all seems to be cited by a court or the newspaper - therefore true in my book.

Posted by: Ben Franklin on October 15, 2007 01:16 PM

17. Is Ben Franklin your real name? Strange, I don't remember a PCO or Executive Board member by that name. I wonder why you're afraid to use the real one? Might be held accountable for your fabrications or something?

Posted by: Doug Parris on October 15, 2007 11:48 PM

Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?