Can You Believe the Liberal Attack Network? – “We don’t really care what the letter is after somebody’s name, right”

When it comes to telling out-and-out lies about everything from Republican candidates to the need to raise taxes to even the mission of his own organization, few liberals are as brazen as Aaron Ostrom of Fuse Washington. Of course, that’s why he’s been one of the Democrats’ go-to attack dogs for the last decade.

His willingness to ignore the truth was on full display when he tried to convince Austin Jenkins, the public radio reporter who outed the Democrats’ permanent campaign attack machine last week, that Fuse is non-partisan. He actually said that “we don’t really care” whether a candidate has a D or an R after their name on the ballot, although even he had to add the qualifier “right” at the end of his statement, perhaps to finish it with a straight face.

Of course, anyone paying attention to politics knows that Fuse exists only to help elect liberal Democrats, primarily by focusing on trashing Republican candidates with lies and half-truths. That’s why Ostrom’s organization was the first group funded by the shadowy “Progress Alliance of Washington”, though of course it probably didn’t hurt that his then-wife Sarah Jaynes was the person handing out the Progress Alliance’s checks.

Ostrom’s “non-partisan” claim about Fuse and the Progress Alliance looks even sillier when combined with the statement from Dana Laurent, the head of the Win/Win Network and presumptive favorite to be elected leader of the State Democrat Party on Feb. 1. Win/Win is another “investment” of the rich liberals who secretly fund the Progress Alliance, and Dana claims that her group doesn’t care about party affiliation, but she wants a “functional majority” in the Washington State Senate.

Of course, there is a very functional bi-partisan majority running the state Senate right now – protecting all of us from the billion-dollar tax increases favored by the Progressive Alliance and Democrats in office in Olympia – but to Dana, evidently, “functional” means only “liberal” control of the state.