Ron Bemis is the challenger to long-time 7th District Stalinist Democrat Jim McDermott. McDermott has consistently refused to debate Bemis and the reason is very, very clear. It might tend to give the voters a choice. McDermott made the mistake of appearing side by side with Bemis in October on KUOW and Bemis – how should I put this? – Bemis broke McDermott into little pieces intellectually and then ground the pieces into a fine powder. [You can hear it (and the extraordinary KUOW left wing bias) here.] No problem in Soviet King County, however.
There is a controlled press.
The Seattle Times has literally refused to cover the Bemis candidacy (!!!). They couldn’t let word get out about a candidate that brilliant. To counteract the Times’ bias against him (they are, after all, just another wing of the Democrat Party), the Bemis campaign purchased a quarter page ad in the Times Sunday October 28 edition. [Why shouldn't the local propaganda rag profit from its own misdeeds? (and thanks, McCain-Feingold)]
And why should our anointed Congressman-for-life, while taking advantage of franking privileges and the prerogatives of media-bequeathed eternal incumbency, have to give up the limelight of a debate just because he (technically) has an opponent for the office? What to do?
Enter the Freedom Foundation.
On Thursday, November 1, 2012 the Freedom Foundation [formerly the Evergreen Freedom Foundation], through its offspring, the Student Freedom Project (SFP) will host a McDermott “Debate.”
But to Save Dr. McDermott* the indignity of having to face his opponent, Ron Bemis will not be invited.
*(Dr.? Yes, Martha, he’s a psychiatrist – just look at that picture).
Bemis not there? Who is really running the event? If the McDermott campaign is in control the question would be where could they get someone to prop up the image of a “debate?” I mean, they couldn’t exactly get away with pretending Bemis was invited and forgot to show up, could they? And it couldn’t just be anybody… it had to look like there was an opponent. Who could do it?
Let’s see… someone who looks like he is capable of debating a Congressman who’s been in office long enough to have done favors for the Soviet Union… but who won’t put up much resistance.
If the McDermott campaign is in control they would need someone who has constructed a conservative image but can be relied upon to throw up the white flag when the going gets serious… you know, a political pleaser who can talk the talk, but an appeaser, someone who’s never mean to liberals and never found a real conservative candidate he wanted elected…
A difficult Rx to fill,without a doubt, O’ shrink extraordinaire. But Dr. McDermott isn’t stupid.
The record will show Medved is at least as interested in defeating a candidate like Bemis (who would hold the Federal Reserve accountable) as McDermott is. The chances that anything coming out of a debate with Medved would accrue to votes for Bemis are collectively ZERO.
Medved is perfect.
The original SFP description of the event said it was:
“… a lively discussion about issues that will directly affect college students and recent graduates… the tough questions about taxing the rich, the cost of college, and creating jobs.”
No mention of any election. Absolutely not. People might begin to realize there is a McDermott opponent missing.
The Reagan Wing wondered who was really in control and how a “Student Freedom Project” could be roped in to helping one of Freedom’s greatest American enemies. (In one statistical analysis of of 3,320 Congressman since 1937 on their support of freedom McDermott came out 3,276th).
On October 15, Rebecca Phillips, the SFP (Student Freedom Project coordinator), was asked by a Reagan Wing reporter about the event with Michael Medved and McDermott – specifically why a “nonpartisan organization” was sponsoring a clearly partisan event – a “debate” where McDermott’s opponent was excluded. Here is what we learned:
1) Was Bemis invited?
No- the goal was first to focus on the issues specifically out of the context of the political races… [emphasis added]
2) How were the debaters selected?
It was clear Rebecca did not know. She expressed surprise that McDermott was eager to participate. [!!! Editor's note: this is past unbelievable. Rebecca obviously doesn't know Medved in particular or politicians in general.] She said SFP wanted to leverage the elective season but not endorse anyone. She acted as if inviting Bemis was like an endorsement but inviting McDermott wasn’t. She said SFP did not want to have a “candidate forum.” [That, obviously, would have necessitated inviting the victim.]
3) We asked if featuring only McDermott wasn’t an implicit endorsement.
No- he was invited as a sitting Congressman, not as a candidate. [I guess SFP was previously unaware that there was an election.] SFP wanted a debate on the Free Market vs. Government and they wanted people who could represent the extremes of both sides. [but they somehow settled, instead, for a socialist who is an apologist for the Federal Reserve and a radio talk show host who is a Federal Reserve apologist.] SFP wanted a “known quantity” [just as McDermott wanted] and Phillips stated they were planning “really difficult questions”and would be pushing both of them pretty hard. [Editor's note: Medved has never been a true economic conservative. He is a Keynesian who supports Bernanke, and every tax and spend Republican the Establishment puts up, while Bemis is a Constitutional conservative who inclines to the Austrian economic perspective, exactly the kind of candidate Medved consistently torches.]
After being questioned by our reporter the SFP added this to the description of the event for students, as if they had suddenly realized there was an election under way:
“Even if you’re interested in this election, it’s hard to find time to get all the information you need in order to cast an informed vote. And it’s especially difficult for college students who are juggling exams, work, and a social life. So we’re bringing the information to you!”
Obviously, at least at the student level, SFP had begun to comprehend the significance of the debate – it would be used by voters to make up their mind – Bemis was still excluded. And Ron Bemis was simultaneously making his case directly to the Freedom Foundation.
Last Friday (Oct. 26th) our sources say the Freedom Foundation Leadership admitted that there was a problem and announced that they would make a decision by Monday (the 29th).
Monday the 29th they told the Bemis campaign that they had decided to invite Bemis, but that they would, of course, have to discuss the change with the McDermott campaign since he had never agreed to participate under those terms. But, they said, if McDermott did not agree, they would cancel the event. Wow.
Who is really in control?
The Reagan Wing knew there was no chance McDermott would agree to the debate. There was much more to lose from being humbled in a Bemis debate – that could go YouTube viral – than there was in cancelling it, particularly since the McDermott campaign could claim to have been the victims of a last minute bait-and-switch. But we were impressed with the Freedom Foundation finally being willing to do the right thing. We were poised for this article to extol their decision to stand on principle – even at some cost – the loss of the debate and the promotional work and expense already completed.
Yesterday was judgment day. October 30.
Congressman McDermott, the Doctor of Despotism, will appear at the debate.
Michael Moderate will be there too.
Ron Bemis will not be invited.
The “debate” will not be cancelled.
Jim McDermott, for at least one brief shining moment, is running the Freedom Foundation.
24 years ago a brilliant young conservative candidate appeared on the election scene from nowhere. Because he was allowed to speak to the conventions, he stole the heart of the Party of Reagan, and dominated the Washington State Republican Convention, to take on an entrenched liberal Democrat icon incumbent. And at the peak of his candidacy he was treated abominably by those in charge of his debate with the Incumbent.
And now, all these years later, the same thing is happening to another brilliant conservative newcomer to the political arena. Only this time it is not Bob Williams. And this time it is not the League of Women Voters cheating him in the debate. In fact, this time it is the formerly conservative institution Bob Williams, himself, founded – the formerly Evergreen Freedom Foundation, cheating the brilliant newcomer, Ron Bemis.
Somehow they lost the “Evergreen.”
Somehow they lost Bob Williams.
It’s definitely not the same freedom foundation.